e all right it's 1:30 what's it called the meeting to order we've got a quorum um everybody look at the minutes do we have a motion motion to approve or to receive the minutes of the April 18 2024 meeting okay motion on the second C your boes all right minutes are received uh sending we got request to defer two items item number 27 case number 15594 is deferred till May 16th 24 and item number 28 case number 15595 deferred till May 16th okay anybody here on those two items okay I think we're ready for a motion then motion to defer case numbers 15594 and 155 95 to the May 16th meeting okay got a motion in a second C your notes all right those two items are deferred do we have any requests to continue or defer from the public no consent dockets sendy I think we're ready to call the first case okay we have item number one case number 1560 a request of edou on behalf of prayer the faith World Outreach for a variance to minimum lot size located at 5601 to 5 801 South Anderson Road come on M hello everyone uh my name is Danny Jennings I'm from poola I'm here as the official representative of Mr Ed Dow who is the official or the applicant for this variance request Mr D is our pastor uh the United uh United Church of God the Oklahoma City congregation and I currently serve as Deacon in that congregation I'm joined today by Mr Adam Dilly who uh he's actually the current owner of the the two properties that are involved uh just to give a brief background we've uh rented a property at 5601 South Anderson Road uh the white building there for a better part of a decade probably 15 closer to 20 decade or two decades and we've recently began the process of purchasing the building uh but during the out survey it was revealed that the actual property line was not where the two parking lots buted together and not only that but there was also a large uh uh fire department water tank that supplies water in case of emergency um for the 5601 U building uh We've applied for this variance to address these two hardships the completion of the sale of the property is dependent on the approval of the variants and to provide adequate car parking for the 5601 building and also uh for the fire department water tank access in case of emergency thank you for your consideration in this matter okay anybody have any questions questions from the board I don't have anybody signed up to speak on this one is there anybody wants to address the board on this application okay I think we're ready for a motion there motion to approve case number 1560 for the purposes that it meets the statutory requirements or the requested variance got a motion in a second cast your votes you're approved outstanding thanks very much will there be uh any kind of documentation or anything I'm not sure where I will pick that up or today or within 10 days you'll get within 10 days fantastic okay well thanks very much everyone thank you item number two case number 15605 request of sha and Lindsay Presley for a variance to standards for accessory buildings in the ra District located at 21229 Southeast 99 Street hello we are requesting um wait a minute give me your name and address so we get it in the record sure Lindsay Presley 21229 Southeast 99th Street Newalla Oklahoma 74857 okay we are requesting relief of the 25 foot requirement to 10 feet to build an accessory building in our backyard for shop building um we have traditional lateral lines that take up a lot of our backyard and so adhering to the 25 ft kind of puts this in a close to those seat any questions or comments from the board have have you talked to the neighbors yes and they're okay with it yes there's no here nobody signed up to speak so anybody want to address the board on this application okay I think we're ready for a motion then we excuse me I'm sorry I move that we approve case number 15605 for a special exception on the ground that it meets the um oh I'm sorry variance for a variance on standards that it meets the requirements of a variance I'll second Motion in a second okay to votes thank you well we have to have three okay they were three okay one okay okay you're approved okay thank you item number three case number 15584 request of dbg construction Fair variance to limitations on dumpsters located at 1071 North Council Road good afternoon give us your name and address Taylor Smith with dbg construction uh address is 1301 Cornell Parkway Oklahoma City Oklahoma uh the property we're discussing is actually 10701 North Council Road okay uh we we requested uh a variance um on the limitations of the dumpster uh I think city code States um three CB or over two cubic yards has to be behind the front face of the main structure of the building um ours is actually located in front of the building in the parking lot um it's easier access for the the trash trucks uh our initial permit review by the city uh this site plan was approved and then later found out that it was in the uh incorrect location that's why we're sorry that's why we're here today any questions or comments from the board I don't I don't have anybody signed up to speak on this one does anybody want to address the board on this app okay guess we're ready for a motion then motion to approve case number 15584 for the purposes that it meets the statutory requirements for the requested varing we have a motion in a second you're approved all right thank you item number item number four case number 15490 is request of starter Investments LLC for a variance to limitations on dumpsters located at in the R4 General residential district at 3317 Southwest hello my name is alen lson I'm representative starter Investments I'm also here for dumpster variance um we've been here several times now um talking about the dumpster variance on this spe uh specific property and um since the last time we spoke some of the recommendations were to talk to try and talk to the neighbors hire some translators see if we can get neighbors on board see if we can get a revocable permit approved which was previously denied um we were able to get a revocable permit um approved for the front um left left side of the uh the parking lot where the dumpster currently sits um and in addition to that we were also able to get a translator to speak to the neighbor on the other side of the parking lot where we were suggesting putting the a dumpster enclosure um and they've signed off as well as their landlord has signed off on us putting a dumpster enclosure there um so today I'm here requesting in in our first position to keep the dumpster where it's at and and build a fence with our revocable permit I don't have anybody signed up to speak on this one um any questions comments from the board I like the idea of putting it where it was sitting originally and and in the revocable easement so um I I would love to tell you that it is it's it's not exactly where it was close enough but it's close yes I think we're good anything from the board I think we're ready for a motion motion to approve case number 15490 for the purposes that it meets the statutory requirements forther requested variance I second Motion in a second cast your vote you got it thank you for your efforts was that approved yeah you got it you w so much everyone thank you thank you item number five case number 15607 is a renewal application of Randy Smith of Smith Holdings to allow Home Sharing located at 1138 Northwest 34th unit 1 good afternoon my name is Christy finnel I live at 3842 Northwest I am here on behalf of Randy Smith who is the owner of Smith Holdings um actually here on the next four applications uh we run a there it's a fourplex that he owns that is run as an Airbnb and we are here on the renewal of our um license that was approved last year anything from the board these units are one bedroom one bath we have two that are we have two one bedroom one bath and two that are two bedroom two bath or no I'm sorry two bedroom one bath and the parking is in the rear yes each unit has one parking spot in the back and then there's also on street parking in the front with doors in the back of the property there's doors to each uh each unit all four units and then in the front there is a main entrance that has entrance to the front of each unit okay I don't have anybody signed up to speak on this one is there anybody want to address the board on this application okay I'd be more inclined to allow this to have a maximum of two guests with a one bedroom this first one is a one-bedroom okay um in the well in in both of the one bedrooms we have pull out couches which is why we we offer four but we're willing to do whatever you guys need us to do anything else from the board I guess we're ready for a motion how big how big are the units um square feet square footage I I don't know talking are we packing them in when we put four let's say it's four adults in in the unit I mean are we is it so in in each bedroom we have or like in the one bedrooms we have a queen-sized bed in the bedroom and a queen-sized sleeper sofa okay and just one bath correct that's why for me I just would rather see just maximum of two people in the one bedrooms bedrooms okay would you split the difference and go three yeah I mean I would I would I I know we've allowed people in the sofas before so I I want to be mindful of that but I know that we're trying to kind of clamp down on on this on the applications as they come up um my only modification is going to be to modify your quiet hours um for at least 10:00 okay so um I'd like to see 10 p.m.

To 8:00 a.m okay and just every day of the week and I would also like to see on this unit um a maximum of one car okay on the one bedrooms yeah okay one vehicle you see you've been operating for a year now MH have you had any issues reports or anything like that we have not I want to ask a question before we close out on this because you're saying one vehicle however we're saying there're they can have up to three adults in it so if they're not all coming in the same vehicle would that be restriced it would it's just to not allow for on street parking oh okay that that's kind of what I was going for on this just for the neighbors but there's also so if the drive will hold two cars it it's one car per one car per unit per per unit oh okay okay thank you in the parking lot and a three-year exception yes good right ready for a motion I think motion to approve case number 15607 for the purposes that it meets the statutory requirements for the requested special exception with the following modifications maximum number of guests shall be adjusted to be three quiet hour shall be adjusted to be from 10: p.m.

To 8:00 a.m. this shall be for a term of 3 years and a maximum number of one car for the unit you got a motion in a second they're approved item number six case number 15608 is a renewal application of Randy Smith of Smith Holdings LLC to allow Home Sharing at 1138 Northwest 30 again Christy finnel um on behalf of Randy Smith and Smith holding uh 3842 Northwest 64th Street in Oklahoma City um this is one of our this one this is another one-bedroom Airbnb it's again this is in a fourplex so they're identical okay questions from the board nobody signed up to speak on this one does anybody want to address the board on this application and this one being another one bedroom m for me i' I'd like to see a maximum of three guests and then provide hours the same okay 10 P.M to 8:00 am. a maximum one vehicle and a threeyear exception perfect was that a motion no okay so that's for unit number two yes ready for one yep okay I than so motion to approve case number 15608 further purposes that it meets a statutory requirements or the requested special exceptions with the following modifications to the application uh maximum number of guest shall be three quiet hour shall be from 10: p.m.

To 8:00 a.m. maximum number of vehicles shall be one and for a term of 3 years okay motion on a second cast your votes you're approved item number seven case number 15609 a renewal application of Randy Smith of Smith Holdings LLC to allow Home Sharing 1138 Northwest 34th unit 3 um Christy finnel on behalf of Randy Smith and Smith Holdings I live at 3842 Northwest 64th in Oklahoma City uh this is one of our two bedroom units uh we have a queen bed in each of the bedrooms uh as well as a couch it is not a sleeper couch there is um in one bathroom as well in this unit okay for me a two-bedroom I'd be four four guest maximum and then change the quiet hours to 10:00 p.m.

To 8:00 a.m. and I would allow two cars two vehicles maximum on this and a threee exception okay anything else from the board and again nobody signed up to speak on this one anybody want to address the board on this application guess we're ready for a motion motion to approve case number 15609 for the purposes that it meets the statuto requirements for the requested special exceptions with the following modification to the application Qui hours shall be from 10: p.m. to 8:00 a.m. maximum number of cars shall be two and for a term of 3 years we got a motion in a second cast your votes and you're approved item number eight case number 15610 is a renewal application of Randy Smith of Smith Holdings loc to allow Home Sharing 1138 Northwest 34th unit 4 again for my last I'm with you uh Christy finnel on behalf of Randy Smith and Smith Holdings uh 3842 Northwest 64th is where I live uh this is another two-bedroom unit in our fourplex same as before uh each bedroom has a queen-sized bed uh there is a couch with no sleeper and it has a one bedroom or I'm sorry one bathroom sure same modifications on this one yeah and I don't have anybody yeah I don't have anybody signed up to speak on this one either does anybody want to address the board on this application I guess we're ready for a motion then motion to approve case number 15610 for the purposes that meet the statut or requirements for the special exception uh with the following modifications qu hours from 10 to 8 a 10: p.m.

To 8:00 a.m. maximum number of car shall be two for a term of 3 years can we get a second it has popped up okay used got it finally it said four to one okay sorry thank you thank you item number nine case number 15598 is a renewal application of Alysa Dyer on behalf of Steven Holden to allow Home Sharing at 727 Northeast Fifth Street hello my name is Alissa Dyer my address is 1316 South Youngs questions comments from the board this is a duplex right yes are both sides least no uh we my client on this one only owns one side of it so I believe there were no quiet hours listed that I saw on this okay there should be so for all of our houses we have it from 10: p.m.

To 8: a.m. it's number six and then I just want to add a number of vehicles to the application looks like the can they use the garage yeah so three cars okay what did you say that car hours were uh 10 pm. to 88 a.m. okay but it's not in the application it's just listed out in the advertisement yeah we just went through within the last like month and several things that might be so on hours that we have at seeing 10:00 p.m. until 6 o'clock a. on this case yes number six on I don't have a number six but you're okay with 10 p.m. to 800 am yeah that's what we have in all our Lis sorry for the confusion fine just want to add it to the application so it's in the I don't have anybody signed up to speak on this application so anybody want to address the board on this application I noticed you have five years that you're requesting I think on renewals we're just doing three right now so and have you had any complaints or anything like that with regards to this okay I think we're ready for a motion motion to approve case number 15598 for the purpose to that it meets the statutory requirements for the request of special exceptions with the following modifications to the application quad hour shall be added um to be from 10: p.m.

To 8 a.m. 8:00 a.m. maximum number of cars shall be three and for a term of 3 years we got a motion in a second cast your votes you're approved item number 10 case number 15599 is a renewal application of Alisa Alyssa Dyer on behalf of Adam dedr to allow Home Sharing located at 305 Northwest 25th Street and this one was also approved at um the HP commission they gave a recom a recommendation of approval any questions comments from the board this application did have a protest I think it was across the street neighbor yeah I saw that I went through and updated our check instructions and then the pre-booking message just to note that those are not okay Park in because I know we so for me I just would like to make a maximum of two cars and then just add no Street no on street parking okay because driveway can handle those easily and I would like to modify you the quiet hours to 8:00 a instead of 6:00 a okay okay anything else from the board and then a threeyear exception nobody signed up to speak on this one does anybody want to address the board okay I think we're ready for a motion motion to approve case number 15599 forther purposes that it meets the statutory requirements for the special exceptions with the following modifications to the application quiet hour shall be from 10: p.m.

To 8:00 a.m. maximum number of car shall be two no on street parking and for a term of three years okay we got a motion in a second vote you're approved item number 11 case number 15601 is a renewal application for special exception for list and dire on behalf of table Property Holdings loc to allow Home Sharing at 740 Northeast 36th Street okay anything from the board on this one um it's a one bedroom one bath and it's a duplex yeah on this one we have really can only fit one so this one and 742 are two sides of same duplex and so it's limited to one car for each guest because there's not actually room otherwise and it's on 36th Street so no parking and it didn't have quiet hours listed either so just want to add 10 p.m. to 8:00 a.m. and then a threee exception one car no on street okay nobody signed up to speak on this one do you anybody want to address the board okay I think we're ready for a motion motion to approve case number 15601 for the purposes that it meets statutory requirements for for the special exception with the following modifications quiet hour shall be from 10: p.m.

To 8:00 a.m. for 3 years maximum number of vehicles shall be one and no on street parking okay we have a motion in a second so cash BS you're approved item number 12 case number 15602 is a renewal application Melissa Dyer on behalf of Spencer and Samara Ingram to allow Home Sharing 2716 West Park Place okay any questions or comments from the board on this one does anybody want to address the board on this application I don't have anybody time to um just on this one you didn't have quiet hours listed again on the application so 10 p.m. to 88: a.m. um maximum number of vehicles two yeah I think so with that driveway M with the goal of nry parking right right and then a threee exception okay anything else think we're ready for a motion motion to approve case number 15602 for the purposes that it meets the statutory requirements for the special exceptions with the following modifications qu hour shall be from 10: p.m.

To 8:00 a.m. maximum number of vehicles shall be two no on street parking for a ter of three years all right cast your votes you're approved item number 13 case number 156 603 it's a special exception request from Melissa Dyer of table Property Holdings LLC to allow Home Sharing at the other side of the duplex of 742 Northeast 36 stream questions comments from the board on on this one Alissa um the same thing quiet hours weren't listed so so 10: p.m. to 8:00 a.m. um a maximum of one vehicle and no on street parking and I don't know how you guys feel about this but this is the other side of that duplex it is the first time it's come up but rather than have her come back in a year I I think we can give her three I'm okay with that fine these meetings are riveting and again anybody want to address the board on this one nobody signed up you should sit on this side for sure I think we're ready for a motion uh motion to approve case number 15603 for the purposes that it meets the stat statutory requirements for the special exceptions with the following modifications quiet hour shall be from 10: p.m.

To 8:00 a.m. maximum number of vehicles is one no on street parking and this shall be for term of three years Motion in a second cast your votes and you're approved item number 14 case number 15597 a renewal application of Alysa D on behalf of Julian Taylor to allow Home Sharing located at 10721 North McKinley Avenue questions comments from the board do anyone want to address the board on this application nobody signed up okay a list on this one the only modification that I would want is um a maximum of four vehicles okay you said four vehicles yep and then sorry and three a threee exception okay the goal is no street parking is probably due to yeah I think you can put four in the driveway okay okay I'll take it you said no on street parking no on street parking sure and three exception okay I think we're ready for a motion if there's nothing else motion to approve case number 15597 for the purposes that it meets the stat statutory requirements for a special exception with the following modifications uh no on street parking maximum number of vehicles shall be four for a term of 3 years right Motion in a second cast your votes and you're approved thank you guys item number 15 case number 15586 is a renewal application of Carrie Matthew to allow Home Sharing at 2336 Northwest 38 I good afternoon I'm Carrie Matthew my home address is 731 Sunny Brook Drive I'm here on behalf of wild bison homes LLC for a renewal application for a home share of 2336 Northwest 38th Street any questions comments from the board this a a two-bedroom two bath house mhm and you have a maximum of five guests that you're wanting yes that's what um was approved last year when we came in for the application and how do you accommodate the fifth one um with the couch in the living room is it a sleeper sofa or no we can adjust that if we need to I mean we have bookings for it it it's family friendly so we have a lot of families that come in with about three kidss two to three kids does anybody want to address the board on this application I don't have anybody signed up to speak okay and we would I would like to see a three-year exception on it okay since it's a renewal and I really would like to see just a maximum of four guests if you could could do that just for consistency okay okay even though we've had no complaints yeah okay all right if there's nothing else cars and and a maximum of two cars is two cars can fit in the drive okay on street parking no on street parking okay okay we have that um listed okay yeah we have that listed onir on our marketing sites on our house rules I didn't see it in the appliation so just what was that we didn't see it in the application oh okay I'm sorry no you're fine we just put it in for the record I think we're ready for a motion if there's nothing else motion to approve case number 15586 for the purposes that it meets the statutory requirements for the special exception with the following modifications uh maximum number of gas shall be four maximum number of vehicles shall be two no on street parking for a term of three years a motion on a second go ahead and cast your votes they're approved okay thank you have a good afternoon thanks you item number 16 case number 15604 is a renewal application of Bradley Davis of brash properties to allow Home Sharing 2637 West Park Place hello uh Bradley Davis my address is 2326 Southwest 122nd Street and looking for renewal on a home sharing license okay questions or comments from the board just to clarify it's a three-bedroom two bath yes and one of the similar to the last one we have a lot of uh families so we have a queen bunk bed in one room that can uh sleep for for adults actually but it's usually children and I think you're asking for a maximum of six um I think I think on my application I asked for tent but maybe I'm wrong yeah cuz it does say 10 in here it does say 10 but I think uh actually eight would probably be plenty so we have uh two King beds two queen beds and two couches three bedrooms I could get to Seven they'll have to leave a child home we try so I'd like to see a maximum of of four vehicles also on street parking driveway accommodates four quiet hours are 9 to 8 go back to the room situation you said that in two of the rooms you have a king bed sorry I have one room with I just remembered an extra bed we have a king and another room with two queens and then another room with a bunk bed with two more Queens so there's five beds that are queen or larger a total of five beds and three bedrooms correct you're saying on the one that has the two queens how big is a room to accommodate two queens big so four adults could sleep in there easily then usually the bunk bedrooms are for kids so we can comfortably sleep um 10 if you're a family I nobody nobody signed up to speak does anybody want to address the board on this anything else from the board This was um the very first time it came before the board it was approved for 10 guests I don't think I don't think so I think it was approved for eight but I want 10 I was going to say I don't recall this one at all with te yeah so if that's if 10's too much it's fine 10 is a lot for um a three bedroom home with two baths in it for me sure and what do you say your quiet hours are um they are 9 to8 okay I'm just going to modify your application just to include that okay and no complaints or problems for two years I I can get be I can get on board with the eight that you were previously approved for okay personally any other questions or comments I think we're ready for a motion motion to approve case number 15604 for the purposes that it meets the statutory requirements for the special exceptions with the following modifications uh maximum number of vehicles shall be four no on street parking maximum number of people shall be eight and quiet hours are 9:00 p.m.

to 8:00 a.m. there we go Motion in a second cast your votes you're approved thank you item item number 17 case number 15587 is an application for special exception of Lewis cabri of on behalf of Maria ortego to allow Home Sharing at 3109 North Kentucky I'm sorry 3109 South Kentucky Avenue hello everyone my name is Lis Caba uh Maria Ortega here next to me and also the property manager Libby uh today we're seeking Home Sharing license for property 3109 South Kentucky Avenue Oklahoma City 73119 any questions comments from the board this is a a two-bedroom home yes the property is two bedroom one bath and you're asking for a maximum of six um yes the bedrooms are large enough um they have Queen bids room so two queens so how do you get to six is what I'm asking I guess um so if there it's familyfriendly so if there's children involved they can you know sleep with the parents um there's also a couch in the living room so I could I could get to five maximum of five guests understood is a couch a sleeper so far or is it just a couch it's a large couch it's kind of like a L shape um so it could combinate you know to sleep on one side you said it's one uh one bathroom yes two bedroom one bathroom in the parking situation it's a shared parking that is correct there's a big driveway um it can commodate multiple Vehicles Max we're looking about three Home Sharing this is the first time this is a new application so a one-year exception yes one year is fine okay does anybody want to address the board on this one I don't have anybody signed that to speak three vehicles you say three and then I guess the number of guests yeah I mean I'm good with four or five one bedroom I maximum is five for me but I'm just trying to figure out I was do I really want to put somebody on a couch I mean I understand that um you know people come here for on on to visit or whatnot but we're running a business on I'd rather see four especially for one bathroom two four okay four people understood any other questions or comments I guess we're ready for a motion then motion to approve case number 15587 for the purposes that it meets the statutory requirements for the special exception with the following modifications maximum number of vehicles shall be three uh maximum number of people shall be four and this shall be for a term of one year all right motion and a second cast your votes you're approved thank you everyone item number 18 case number 15606 is an application for special exception of Chris Cooper on behalf of a gate Ventures Group LLC and ssg4 Properties LLC to allow Home Sharing at 28 9 Pim broke Terrace good afternoon I may not have addressed all the questions that you have in the application it was my first time to complete that application but I think we can this property is a four bed three full bath uh property it's just under 3,000 square ft with the addition that's on the back of the home does have it it's basically its own apartment it's got its own kitchen it's a living room and a bedroom so we have five beds we have a king and four queen siiz beds and requesting a total up 10 people with four cars we've got a you know a wide two-car driveway that's super deep you can almost Park three deep but we don't need more than four cars ever questions from the board i' like to make an adjustment to the quiet hours I didn't know if you said that or not I'm sorry but 9900 p.m.

To 8:00 a.m. that's fine and then how how do you get to 10 there's four bedrooms there's four bedrooms there's five beds because the add-on's basically it's an apartment it's got a living room and that's and a bedroom so it's got a a queen-sized Murphy bed plus a queensized bed in the bedroom so the add-on is not included as a bedroom I'm one bedroom of that one of the four is that one okay right the the original structure was a three bed two two bath so it's three full baths two kitchens in and how many bathrooms three full bathrooms with five beds everything is connected together they are literally like I think you saw the see the picture there um the overhead shot it they look attached from overhead it's because it was it was an originally like an apartment they are the width they're three feet apart but it's covered in between so it open one door to separate they're they are they are separate but they're attached okay well and the only reason I'm asking because of the number of guests that you're asking to accommodate so so we expect just based on our experience that 90% of the time it'll it'll be families that are just W3 so it would be a special occasion of Grandma and Grandpa traveling with and they would like to have a little extra privacy to use that second to use that second space so extra space has a queen or a king Murphy bed it's a queen Murphy bed with a queen bed in the bedroom yes okay anything else from the board nobody signed up to speak on this one do you anybody want to address the board on this application nothing else from the board I think we're ready for a motion you feel pretty good about that number would you do nine that's fine just for a future ref I mean could you share with me what your concerns would be so I would know for future we we manage quite a few properties usually number of beds two per bedroom and then uh one additional for that Murphy bed is what I'm I'm giv it for okay okay I think we're ready for a motion then motion to approve case number 15606 for the purposes that it meets the statutory requirements or special exceptions with the following modifications maximum number of gas shall be nine uh maximum number of vehicle shall be four quet hours um start at 9: and end at 800 a.m.

And for a term of one year okay cast your votes thank you for your time thank you item number 19 case number 15567 is an application for special exception of Amy L to allow Home Sharing at 7236 Skylar Lane hello my name is Amy with um I Premier holes um this is a four bedroom two and a half bath and um I have prior to this meeting had sent all the information in an email to anything from the board on this one did anyone sign up to speak on this one here I don't have anybody signed up oh she is did you yeah name and address first Cody and I live at 7242 Skylar Clan there she has her for I have the form I just thank you um I have resided at 7242 for the last two years now and I am here and protest of the application um I live on the property directly on the west side of of the property in question and um in the last two years I've only spoken with her twice and that has been in the last two months the first time after speaking first time speaking with her since the shooting occurred on January 1st was I talked to her around March 15th for the first time and I had just gotten home from taking my daughter to school and was finally able to catch her in the driveway and keep her from leaving talked to her and during that conversation it was she lied to me about who she was she said she wasn't the manager she said that she was the caretaker and she was just there fixing things and I had probably about a 20-minute conversation with her and kind of got tired of talking to her about things it was just going in a circle went home um the next time we heard from her was on April 22nd and she knocked on the door and requested to speak with me she had an envelope envelope full of information for the property management company um she uh she handed that to me and we started talking about some of the concerns next door well during that conversation it was kind of made clear to me that my concerns really weren't take being taken to heart and because she just kept repeating the same things to me over and over again about the foot traffic and all of the things that she had put in the envelope of information that she had given me um she also denied responsibility for some of the issues we'd had with some of the past tenants and the fact that we had no no one to contact I've had to contact Airbnb before because it was listed on Airbnb and they did nothing to resolve the issue um as it stands we have no faith that anything she put in that information packet she gave us is going to be followed through and implement it um honestly every all of the action she has taken or the company has taken and since the January 1 incident should have been taken long before because there has been trash floating around that yard it's been left unattended for I don't know how long and just stuff left in the front yard and then somebody's there staying again um at some point it's just gotten a bit tiring and exhausting dealing with this house next door the constant revolving door of different people that are disrespectful to the neighborhood I'm trying to raise my 5-year-old autistic daughter next door and waking up January 1st to a shooting happening next door is the last way you want to start your new year um she never gave us an formal apology like I said we didn't I didn't speak to her the first time after the shooting until almost March 15th I'm sorry I'm a little upset um it's been made very clear to us that over the last two years that we've been at the been at our address that the property management or whoever the owner was we didn't know what the situation was going on it's very clear that they had no interest in contacting the neighbors or making sure there were no issues and taking care of any issues there might be um I feel like at this point approving the application is essentially putting a price on my family's well-being and safety um I have also spoken to a number of my neighbors and I wasn't able to get a joint a letter for all of them to sign typed up before this um but I've talked to Lloyd age that lives kind of across the street from me the neighbor directly next to me the people on the other side of this address and they all have made it abundantly clear that they support our decision in this and if we oppose it they oppose it um and that's that's pretty much all I have any questions or comments so you you said that there's trash blowing around in the house leaves un right after the shooting in fact we had to deal with a few weeks of plastic blowing around the front yard from the people doing the carpet that just left trash in the front yard um before that it's been people not taking the trash out that were staying there leaving the trash cans full sitting in the driveway um trash blowing out blowing around having to pick it up out of my yard having you know seeing it blow into other neighbors yards there's been times where I've had to my myself pull the trash cans out of the street because they had gotten knocked into the street when they got emptied and there's nobody over there to do anything there's nobody that checks on that residence on a regular basis I mean honestly since the shooting happened in January 1 the most we have seen out of anybody over there has been since then the most people working on it in andout checking on it cleaning it um doing things into the yard that kind of thing the most we've seen has been since January 1st and you said that it was operating as a short-term lease property for the last two years I know for at least the last two years yes so prior to um the incident on the 1 did you report any um I had attempted to to Airbnb and I think verbo was another one that I had found listed on because I had no contact information the only information I could find was what's listed on the county assessor's website from the last Quick Claim Deed done in 2016 and then I couldn't ever find a phone number there's no nowhere that it's listed that this is managed by a property management company I couldn't find information on anything so I just had to do my best and try to deal with calling Airbnb and getting no results trying to knock on the door over there and talk to the people and ask them hey can you put your dogs inside and let you know not let them try to tear my fence down to get to my dog um things like that we've had to go over and actually talk to the people there we've had nobody to to call to talk to to try to resolve any of the situations that have arose and you said something about the foot traffic yes um like last summer it was it seemed like there was literally somebody different there every single weekend there was a different vehicle in the driveway um there was more than once it wasn't just the what happened on January 1 prior to that there had been more than one party at the residents where there were cars up and down the street blocking our driveway not being respectful of other neighbors and we had nobody to call to report it to okay so on that point right there the City of Oklahoma City has a action center okay um and that's how that's where we get our information and so I've reported the reported it to the action center and I reported it to the action center several times for not having a home sharing license it was in the permit portal that they yeah had Cod because I when I called the action center I asked and they said there was no Home Sharing license on for that for that address anything else from the board for this prot as you probably have told have seen we approved a whole bunch of renewals it sounds like those were rented out and monitored in your situation if you didn't know that it was an Airbnb just because everyone was respectful would you be in opposition of are you in Opp position of airbn being in general or just the way that this property is being managed at this point I don't want one next door to my me I don't it it causes me stress because I don't know who's next door I want to be able to know my neighbors in the two years we've I've lived at the address I have gone out of my way to get to know each one of my neighbors like each one of the six neighbors directly surrounding me because I have a daughter and we want to live in a community there's lots of other kids in the neighborhood and you know I want somebody if somebody sees something funny going on at my house to be able to come tell me hey something weird is going on well when the person next door is changing every week on who's there and you can't trust to leave your car unlocked anymore and it's not something I want next door raising a family in this situation this this isn't the right neighborhood for it and I feel like it's honestly whether it was an Airbnb or not I would be very upset at the fact that there was a shooting next door and I had nobody to call to ask what was going on except for talk to the news and talk to the police Amy are you the owner remind me are you the owner of this property I'm not an owner of the property I'm manage the property as I had uh stated in in the past so so I want in the I'm sorry in in the history so prior prior to to that um it was a long-term residence that was there and you guys have seen um that email that email she doesn't have the background of the whole history in regards to that um I did respond to the neighbor that was uh caddy Corner that um had explicitly um stated about me not addressing the issue and not being a good neighbor and things like that in regards to to to that and explain um the foot traffic it talks about all of that um who we serve we we have alluded to the fact that we have stated that it is to to allow displaced family to be there and also corporate housing that has happened and so you can see the amount of people and all that so it only happened like um half of the year in 2022 and most of that um as you guys as can see in the in the letter it shows who who we served in regards to that four of those were way over 30 days in regard to that and it was housing a family who had a fire that was there and um recovering from a ver burn victim and things like that um the rest of them have been corporate now one of the things that she's talking about in regard to the dog I I don't know all I know is that there is a um they they were corporate workers that that were there and they brought their their dog and one of the things that I will say as well too is is that um she also she eluded she has a dog and every time I walk up there it it it barks every time uh do maintenance work in regards to that so excuse me um I do have a beware of dog sign posted wait minut one at a time talk to yeah go ahead yeah I mean and so I just wanted to be able to say dogs are going to bark between between the the fence and uh there wasn't a hole or anything like that and I apologize for that I mean that's not something you know I love dogs as well too uh dogs are just going to pretty much pretty much bark in regards to that and so that that's really what I want to be able to state is in in regards to that um we do I do want to be a good neighbor um and and when it was rented out as a with Remax uh energy property they don't post a line sign that up there so um but as far as contact goes yes that's my my fault but I did do the footwork and and went back and said hey all the neighbors that's surrounding that area I dropped off physically with a letter here's our contact number so if there's anything about if you need contact our company is there we're we're operated at 247 and so if the call is there it will be there um and that that particular incident we knew the same time that she knew um shooting happens well I shouldn't say it happens I mean as you will have alluded in the past that in all the years that that you happened I mean we've never had a shooting either I mean but the thing of it is is a shooting happens because Bad characters and nuisance people come in there we can't control bad characters they were uninvited guests you can only control what you can control but at least we were able to remediate those immediately so ma'am yes ma'am thank you so Amy um you said that you are the property manager is that correct correct so did the owner tell you that they were not licensed to operate as an Airbnb when you took it on as a business for yourself um there's there's probably a miscommunication in that there was probably an assumption that was made is the miscommunication with me is that a yes or a no no no no so um you were not aware of that no okay and and also did they share with you that they had received uh notices of violation themselves no okay there was no violation they didn't share that with you no there was not a violation yeah that would share with me for the uh code violation they never shared that would if there was yeah no I we did not get anything okay yeah there were they were yes ma'am okay yes ma'am for for for Skylar is that correct yes ma'am okay yeah no we did not okay thank you so yeah um there was probably just a a disconnect there and how long have you managed the property um since the uh mid 2022 so one and one a half years pardon me one and one a half years basically sorry I I can't almost one and one a half years yes ma'am yes ma'am thank you okay your turn um with her saying that she has Managed IT for one and one one and one a half years when we moved in at the beginning of August in 20122 she was currently over there and we actually that was the first time we met her so she has been at that property for longer than that managing it um and as far as the dog situation goes I probably wouldn't be so infuriated with the dog situation except for I have beware of dog signs posted and I am very careful with my dog because he is big and he is loud and I don't want anything to happen to him um so when the neighbors that were there long term for the six months that were a displaced family moved in with two Huskies left them out in the yard 24/7 for 3 days and they started popping my fence panels off trying to get to my dog and my daughter playing in the backyard um I really could have used somebody to call I mean I understand that she has done the foot she only did the footwork on actually bringing us information to have somebody to contact after the last meeting after encouragement and suggestion from you guys there had been no attempt to contact any of us up to that point except for Jean that came to the first meeting there's not been an apology for the the instances that have happened any other questions or comments from the board I guess here's here's where I'm kind of at right now is as a board we're here to kind of be a gatekeeper to these licences to be issued to make sure that we these properties are being ran in a way that is beneficial to the communities um I'm not seeing that right now so I can't get on board because of the management side as far as whether or not we can control if an owner has a shortterm versus a long-term rental I can't control that if they can right now that the threshold is 30 days so they could every month lease these the properties out to different I I understand that um but um what I can control is the management side of things the fact that there were violations before I don't know where the owner is for this property um but I can't not get on board because I don't feel like things have been fixed um with the community I I think it's really for me in order to rebuild that trust with that Community I think it's going to require a different property manager and and so I cannot get on board for renewing I appreciate you trying um but I I would not want to wake up to a shooting and I think that I would have taken a lot more remedial steps and if I was the owner I would have been there I would have been in that neighborhood trying to figure out cuz that's my that's his property his or her property um and they're not there and they're not here to speak and and they've kind of thrown you into the fire to to speak on on their behalf so I cannot get on board with it so I if I put forth a motion it's going to be to den this renewal application um but I'm not sure or this application I just you may have to get it from somewhere else so if I may give my opinion or how my vote would turn out I would also have to deny it based on the fact that there were two code violations and for you to be the property manager and not be aware of that because the owners did not share that with you then it's not your fault but I can't justify saying yes to this application anything else from the board the the only thing that I was going to say is is that um uh coming so if if the so like you said I mean this is just for a short-term um license um aspect of it so like you said anything that's above um 30 30 days doesn't qualify within this this realm yes correct it is out of the purview of this board that's right right okay so um I can relay back to the owner that you know the short-term aspect of it has been denied um because currently we we have a corporate housing person that's in there right now that's for three months um and then we'll go month to month so it'll be as such then there's a person that's there that's signed a lease for three months right now yeah which we can't do anything about that at all right yes right so that's who that's who who's there right now so she was saying that she hadn't seen anybody there but there is somebody there oh okay and that again that's something we don't hear right at this board yeah so unfortunately we did not see the co- violation for the short-term rental aspect of things um so however um the numbers are all a listed I mean listed out to everybody so if there's anybody that they have a concern about for that then they can certainly contact us but prior to that Remax energy did not did not post anything as far as like all the rent part of it and things like that so I don't even know you know in regard to that um what their policy and process is in regard to that so so if if um if it's denied and then you could do an appeal so if in the future that they want to do this dependent on what they want to do with this property um can you reapply or how does that work six months because this is new application and and you could reply or you could even ask us to defer this if you wanted the owner to come speak on behalf of his property so if we deny it you have to file and reapply and and pay additional fee but we still can approve of what she has going on right now where there's someone who's been there for this whole period of time and they're still doing a 30 a 30-day every month renewal with you because that's we don't have any perview over that well that's what I'm saying I just need her to understand that we can't hear it if it's if you come up with the same thing yeah and so um Roberto you were Senator saying the the management aspect of it for the short term is why you can't get on board that's correct and then what aspect of that management part inside I don't feel like it's been managed in a way that um it fits that that neighborhood I I really don't I think that for me to get on board when you guys come back if I'm still on the board um not that I'm planning on resigning or anything but you know um I I I think the owner is going to have to find someone else to manage the shortterm aspect of it I really do I think that's the only way you're going to build that confidence unless um well part of that unless those relationships are mended between now and and six months when it comes back but right now um again I do feel like that Community is going to be suffering because that's that's traumatic that's traumatic to have that kind and and that's not necessarily shortterm long-term right um unfortunately there was a shooting in um one of our suburbs here recently with a suicide right we don't know where it's going to happen of course and and I think that and and I do agree with you that like that aspect of it is not necessarily your fault but I feel like the response in the management up to this point I think is within the per within your control and the owner's control so for me I I think that in order to mend that relationship with the neighbors I think it is going to be for a short-term aspect is going to be require different company yeah I mean like I said I'm I'm taking due diligence as soon as I I know something and all that and so we decided to apply for this but like I said that I would not prevue to to those code violations at all um I'm kind of new at this part of it uh as well too so um but okay I'm I'm I'm good with that I mean we can we can just say hey no shortterm less than 30 28 days or 30day stay that it'll just be a long term and we'll just accommodate the displaced family work with insurance companies and um do that and we'll just take part of that business model of short-term rental list in 30 days to be off the pl and how you operate that's going to determine you know a future success here yes I mean um so I mean it can still be listed on on Airbnb but then be able to say hey um the minimum stay is 30 days so if it shows up on there you know all that uh it because it's just a marketing platform so we would just say the minimum stay is 30 days but they can and they won be able to book anything less than that and and as a neighbor I tell this to all the neighbors and the Protestants it's it's up to you to make those calls to inform this board yes otherwise we don't know I plan on continuing to thank you very much I need some clarification on something that was just said um you said we can still list this as an Airbnb for under 28 days no she said over 30 days over 28 days over 30 30 and this is just for me only because um I thought in order for them anyone to have an Airbnb listing they have to come and get a special exception that is not true no okay and and thank you because again I said this is for me I didn't didn't know that but I didn't want to waste your time ACC according to to the ordinance anything less than 30 days is a short-term lease okay okay and thank you very much for that so the license yeah so okay I didn't want to waste your time and have you coming up here and I'm saying oh no Miss Amy okay thank you yes ma'am yes ma'am so yeah that's my understanding is uh we'll just make it a minimum minimum of 30 days that um will be there so because um insurance companies do look at that for available properties as such and that's how I get some of my leads as well too okay so that's fine all right so I'm going to put forth a motion to deny case number ask one more question is there anybody else who wants to address the board on this application okay your turn Roberto all right motion to deny case number 5567 all right thank you okay Motion in a second to deny okay did you already do all right okay item number 20 case number 15593 is a application for special exception of Tania group to allow Home Sharing at 1401 Northwest 24 Street in its units 1 through six beage one has their own item so this is unit one good afternoon my name is k and this is Miss Audrey Taza my wife we own a six unit condo on Northwest 24th and class uh and uh Douglas I think 141 Northwest 24th and uh the units are identical so three bedrooms and three bathroom in each in each unit and we're looking for we new applicants for a special exception for Home Sharing anything from the board on this did you say there were three three bed one bath no three bedrooms and three bathrooms in each unit three bathro so a total of 18 bedrooms and 18 bathrooms but we did six applications because we were advised by David to separate the applications for each unit instead of just doing it for the whole property because the units have different addresses are they all located in one structure they're in one building and in the parking situation so everybody is designated one spot no um we have a total of some have two and some have one we have a total of 12 parking but um we kept the wheelchair handicap parking separate and used 11 so assigned two parking to each unit and then one parking to H3 because we use part of H3 as our storage now so um we anticipate that it will not need as much much ping as the other ones any questions or comments from the board nobody signed up to speak on this one do anybody want to address the board on this application I don't see any application I don't see anything about quiet hour so I'm sure that you've seen all the other people go before you and 10:00 p.m.

To 8:00 a.m. it's pretty standard okay we're fine we did I'd be curious to know from Mr Noble as far as Vehicles so you have you have four of them with two car and one and two of them five five of them with two cars uh two parkings are located and then one with the one car but it's the handicap spot not the handicap spot another spot to the front of the building you don't have that on the other side of the building is one would be on the street not on the street it's a driveway there it is it's on this picture it's marked handicapped there yep yes yeah the that's the handicap spot so on this one I counted 10 spots and one handicap spot let me show you I have a picture of it I submitted it so there's a driveway on the there's a driveway on the other side side mhm so 11 you mind me showing you I trust you okay so how many how many cars can the driveway fit say that again how many cars can the driveway fit you can take one car is big enough but I say one car so on this first application it's going to be a maximum of two vehicles yes sir a maximum of six guests yes sir and a one-year exception yes sir and currently are they leased um longterm not longterm not longterm they're they're short-term leases have have you been operating this for a short-term lease for a little while yes and I don't think there were any Cod yeah there were were there oh as because it didn't have a license okay I remember that now and that made you aware to to come here right say that again the code VI violations I am myw so were the code violations in 2022 and 2023 both for Home Sharing yes the we didn't have a home sharing license and in 2022 when you receiv received that Co violation why didn't you come back or come before the board um this was the fault of the Builder he told us that uh it was already zoned for multif family and that I didn't need to worry about so when I got the second code violation and I came downtown um to find out and they said no we still had to get the Home Sharing U for that even if it's multif family have you had any complaints from the neighbors no no no complaints so which unit is it that's just going to have one vehicle H3 the middle unit one of the middle units we have two units in the middle H3 H3 so that would be 155 91 and how many people are you requesting for that one um is that the one you have three guess on also yes let me take a look at the application the the the number of guest is three maximum number of guests for that one is three yes sir okay we have no on street parking on that one also mhm nobody signed up to speak on this one do anybody want to address the board on this application anything else and your plan is to keep all six of these units short-term leased not not no long-term leases no long-term lease at the moment we're open to accepting a long-term lease but we don't have any at the moment so all so five of the six are exactly as first one here all six are identical but because of the parking situation H3 H3 had to be given one less packing but all the units are identical the same square footage and the same number of rooms and the same bathroom do we need to call each case number or is there a way to approve okay okay that was a good suggestion I'm just trying to figure out like hey can we call them all and then subject to the changes so um I don't got anything else I don't either okay I think we're ready for a motion if there are no other questions motion to approve case number 15593 for the purposes that it meets the statutory requirements for special exceptions with the following modifications quiet hour shall be from 10: p.m.

To 8:00 a.m. um there shall be a maximum number of cars allotted for this one as two no on street parking and for a term of one year we have a motion in a second so cast your vote you're approved item number 21 case number 15592 is a a special exception request of tenzan group to allow home hearing at 1401 Northwest 24th unit 2 I assume all your comments on this one would be the same as the last one say that again same same comments okay the same same adjustments to the application yes for the quiet hours right 10: p.m. to 8:00 a.m. 10: p.m. to 8:00 a.m. maximum number of vehicles being two two no on street parking for a term of one year I don't have anybody signed up to speak on this one do anybody want to address the board it six maximum on your yes yes application set six on six ready for a motion ready for a motion all right same motion motion to approve case number 15592 for the purposes that it meets the statutory requirements for special exceptions with the following modifications qu hours from 10: p.m.

To 8:00 a.m. U maximum number of vehicles shall be two no on stre parking for a term of one year okay Motion in a second so you can cast your boots okay you're approved item number 22 case number 15591 special exception request for Tan group to allow Home Sharing at 1401 Northwest 24th unit three same announcements same comments this is one this is going to be maximum one vehicle on this one correct okay anybody want to address the board on this application okay I guess we're ready for a motion motion to approve case number 15591 for the purposes that it meets the statutory requirements for special exceptions with the following modifications quiet hours from 10: p.m.

to 8:00 a.m. maximum number veh shall be one no on street parking and for a ter of one year Motion in a Seconds cast your votes okay next item number 23 case number 15590 special exception request of tan group for Home Sharing located at 1401 Northwest 24th unit 4 okay announcements six and two okay does anybody want to address us on this application okay if there's nothing else from the board I think we're ready for a motion motion to approve case number 15590 for the purposes that it meets St statutory requirements for special exceptions with the following modifications quiet hours from 10 p.m. to 8 a.m. two car maximum no on street parking for a term of one year okay motion second cast your votes and you're approved item number 24 case number 15589 requests for tanzia group for Home Sharing located at 1401 Northwest 24 Street Unit 5 same announcements again anybody want to address the board on this application okay I guess we're ready for a motion motion to approve case number 15589 for the purposes that is meets the statutory requirements for special exception with the following modifications Qui hours from 10: p.m.

To 8:00 a.m. to car maximum no on street parking for a term of one year okay we have a motion in a second cast your votes approved okay item number 25 case number 15588 is a special exception request of Tanz group to allow homes 1401 Northwest 24th unit 6 same announcements on this one I assume okay anything from the board anybody want to address the board on this application okay I guess we're ready for a motion motion to approve case number 15588 for the purposes that it meets the statutory requirements for special exceptions with the following modifications quiet hour shall be from 10: p.m. to 8:00 a.m. to car maximum no on street parking for a term of one year Motion in a second cast your votes you're approved thank you sir item number 26 case number 15596 appeal from Benjamin D Kelly from the administrative decision of the HP Commission on H hpca 23- 0117 in the HP historic preservation District located at 700 Northwest 40th Street uh Mr warhe members of the board uh my name is Benjamin Cy my wife and I and our two children own the house at 704 Northwest 40th Street um the uh house next door at 700 Northwest 40th Street is having an addition added on um and the original plans uh had a window and I guess there were pictures which we may not have access ah there we go if you'll notice the original plan had a window which was obstructed by a Chase for the most part and apparently due to reasons of which we're unaware that window is being constructed no longer no longer being or is no longer obstructed by the chase it basically overlooks our backyard um and when that was brought to the attention the city um a request for revision of the plans was submitted and approved by the historic preservation we were not notified of the request for the revision and if we had we would have we would have objected when the request for the revision was submitted um quite frankly it's not historic and it doesn't preserve our privacy um basically we think this is an invasion of our privacy we think it reduces the property value of our house next door because of that and we would prefer that that window not be there and and as I said when the request for the revision of the plans was submitted to HP we were not notified and if we had been notified ified by HP I probably would have saved myself $750 and I would have objected at that time rather than coming to you um to make this objection I I guess the other thing is and I and I said this in the document submitted it we find it somewhat problematic that HP would allow someone to basically come back and ask forgiveness for something in other words one thing was approved and they're building something else and basically they come back to HP and ask for forgiveness and so staff is here we we'll ask her to come up staff is here and we'll ask her to come up to explain their their side of the situation I'm sorry though Katie yeah Katie fle planning department I managed the historic preservation commission so this application was approved in October um we were we subsequently received a request for a revision to the ca to shift the window over the applicant explained that um there were issues with ch a chimney that they didn't accurately calculate the footprint of the chimney on the interior of the house so they couldn't build the window as it was Illustrated in the elevation drawings they submitted a documentation of what had been approved and what the proposed change was that was well within the threshold of what um staff has the authority to administratively approve as a revision so that was done as an administrative approval um the notice for that is notification that the approval has been done so notice was mailed and that's what I believe what triggered the appeal being submitted we as opposed to items that go before the full commission where applicants get a or where AB budding Property Owners get a notice of the hearing um we don't notice that way for an administrative approval we just issue a notice that things have been administratively approved and that starts the clock for a 10day appeal period and and we did appeal within that 10 days wait a minute wait make your comments on the record please go ahead that that's all I had is um what the process was but I'm happy to answer any questions you all have anything from the board anyone else no nobody signed up to speak yeah I'd like to hear from the actual home owner pardon me hi my name is Holly Hunt at 5913 Northwest 82 Circle I helped uh or I worked with the historic preservation commission to get these plans approved and the only note that I was just mentioning was the reason it didn't need to go before the commission when we shifted this window 20 Ines is because it's within the guidelines and it was completely supported by the historic preservation guidelines um and then lastly I would just admit the reason that this happened and you can see it pretty clearly in this lower photo is you see the brick chimney from the ground where I was measuring you know I'm eyeballing and I'm counting bricks I I didn't have a clear measurement until we were approved for our construction moved into construction the contractors are there they give accurate measurements of a historic chimney we must keep I mean that guidelines support keeping historic structures so that is why that the window shifted it was no other reason than that it wasn't to pee be peeking in on the neighbor so that that 20 in was only to preserve a historically relevant structure thank you so what's what's that room it's a it's a restroom it's actually a water closet for a toilet so no one's going to be standing at this window and gazing out so is and we'd be happy to do translucent glass but that's not allowed by the guidelines we have to do clear glass most certainly have blinds could you have installed a window that was had a much higher well the historic guidelines are very clear about Windows um needing to match the proportions and scale of the existing historic structure so that's what we've done in fact this is a very modest window it's only two and a half feet wide but it does match the configuration of 3 over two divided light on double pane window um therefore that's why we selected this window it's well within the guidelines that it was just really more of my mistake um not being able to get on the roof to fully measure these things that were above an existing one story jut out see the existing configuration there's a on story basically addition to the to the rear of the house that's that white siding you're seeing so we just built a very very very modest addition over the top of that but in doing so I had to contend with this chase that you're seeing that's in the siding and then in the brick the chimney those two things were a little difficult to measure and without getting on the roof and so upon discovering that hey that's actually quite a bit larger the the chimney was larger the chase was a bit smaller so that's the difference in what you're seeing here the chimney was actually deeper than what I assumed and the chase was a little bit shallower so we're talking about 20 inches of moving that and and um I mean I would say there's already windows on this facade of the house um it's it's very common in fact historic preservation likely wouldn't have approved an addition without a window on this wall but this is not a privacy issue like I said it's inside a toilet room that has a door on it this will be very no one's sitting at this window and gazing out so I appreciate your time I'm happy to answer any questions again I'll just go back to and I'm not an architect but to me I would have liked to seen a window about half that size with the sill height twice as high that way you couldn't look down into the yard and I think we actually on Planning Commission made people do that before Katie I don't I don't know if you can explain better I idea on that so yeah our guidelines talk about Windows approximating being compatible with the existing historic windows on the structure now it's common for a house to have a variety of sizes of Windows um it's common for houses to have a smaller window in a bathroom in her Hall way and if they had proposed a window different from this window I can't say that it would or would not have been approved um you know it they could have proposed something smaller and that potentially would have been supported by the commission um but this window was considered to be compatible um and to meet the guidelines um the Holly is correct that typically when we get an addition with a large expansive wall with no windows in it the commission pushes pretty hard for there to be Windows because that's part of the character of uh historic buildings is that you have a a certain window to wall space ratio um so I will say that at the meeting there was no discussion about the window placement being um a concern from anyone it w it this was approved pretty quickly um it's a pretty modest addition as far as uh what we see so is this area is this a completely new addition or were is it a remodel so the what what's green with the new um sighting on it you know the what's that called green board the sheathing is that is the new addition everything to the left of it and below it was existing and to the left is the historic house and below it is an older a much older edition and I don't recall the date that that was put on but it's just that little room on the second story that was being added are there other windows on this side facing towards the the applicants or appellants yeah there are additional windows on the second story of the original home that yes on the same side this is what was just handed were pictures that picture for the back uh we thought might be uploaded but apparently not what they um show is how much that window directly looks into our backyard and um when we bought the house there was no window there was we don't have any objection to the addition our objection is to the fact that that window is going to directly look into our backyard now one alternative would be to make it a fake window we know for a fact that there are houses within that neighborhood that look directly next to they they have an upper story with a window that directly faces the adjacent house and it's a fake window It's like got clapboard or you know some sort of material so if it's if it's purely an aesthetic issue we would have no objection to a window to a fake window and once again you know I understand that there may be administr that this was approved this is the first I'd heard that this was approved as an administrative issue and and I can understand that you know there are procedures but I think it's within our rights to object to the administrative approval and we did that within the 10 days and as I said it cost us 750 bucks to do it um I wanted to just clarify one thing and Rita can correct me if I'm wrong but the the the design of the addition including a window was approved in October and the appeal period for that expired in October so what's actually eligible to be appealed at this point is just the the shifting back and forth of the window um just to right clarify please forgive me for asking this question but just out of curiosity how many times and if you have seen people standing in that window looking at your property have you witness that yeah there's workers in there oh step so we can get it on the record please every day that's why I have the photo with the partially opened window there's workers in there yeah kitty it's still under construction well and under I just want to because I I heard the uh lady say that you know it's just a bathroom area and people wouldn't be doing that but you've actually seen people yeah but if you go to the toilet you're going to be right in front of the window but yes I've seen workers in front of the window and I will have to say there are no windows below it whatsoever and if you can see the photos which I did submit you know it's not a historic Edition below so Aro why does it have to be a historic Edition above um it you know again we would be okay with it being sheetrocked and being like a fake window like if we have to have the window I do know on that house upstairs in the guest bedroom that is a fake window our house has a fake window facing 708 yes sir give us your name and address just for the record Nikki Kart Cy 704 Northwest 40th street thank you I I figured so I've got a question if let's say and I guess read to answer this I realize that this is an appeal from the the change to the location of the window but that does does that not relate back to the original approval so what it is technically is an appeal from the administrative decision so you have 10 days to appeal that decision and you can't go back to the original one because you have that same appeal period so um the time to make any of the other suggestions about what to do with the window placement at all would have been when the commission itself voted to allow the window or the type of window or siid a window cuz the actual placement of the window was approved in the original one in October we just today we're dealing with just the location correct but to say that can we make any other adjustments there so as as I noted initially the window that was approved was for the most part obstructed by the Chase and and and that's the reason why we're appealing the the approval of the movement of the window because it's no longer obstructed at all do they have to have a variance if we make that window opaque frosted whatever they call it so that would be another um another revision to the ca um the guidelines generally don't support glass that's not clear so that's something we would have to take back to the commission um we we do have um we know that we have property owners who in various ways close off Windows from the interior because it's on the inside we don't technically review it um there can be a lot of issues with the maintenance and the condition of Windows when people do that but it's the commission doesn't approve or disallow work done to the interior of the window and obviously curtains and blinds and shutters and all that sort of thing on the interior doesn't go through any sort of review if if I may I mean another suggestion as they make a suggestion to do a faux window you could always just plant a tree to provide more privacy because com I really want this board to understand I've work with Katie on over 100 projects in this District over the last five years and I've never seen a rear addition on a house that didn't have a window on both sides this is not uncommon and so to for me for you all as a body to not support the commission who is only supporting their own guidelines and what we're experiencing here is a a group of neighbors that are just wanting to have some attention I guess I'm not sure but this is a very commonplace deal um having a reare addition that's twostory in in a in a row of two-story homes these homes are very close together privacy is an issue for everyone and everybody deals with it their own way there's other ways other than repealing um a a historic preservation commission guideline decision or commission gu decision that those people take their jobs very seriously I mean I'm in there every month and trust me if we get anything approved it's not without great research and great documentation and great thought about the design so all of these things have been considered up till now and all of the sudden we have one issue with privacy out of hundreds but I appreciate you guys name and address please yes my name is Miles Mixon I live at 500 Northwest 42nd Street I'm the contractor on this job I understand that you know these are historic neighborhoods they're very tight-knit the fabric of these neighborhoods they're you know very close quarters the only thing I'd like you guys to think about is if that's the current window where that door is right there if I shift it over 20 in that direction how much is that going to affect the field of view if I'm looking back in that direction I'm going to have the same field of view whether that window stays there or moves 20 inches and that's just like all I really have to say okay and if you look at the photos that I submitted um both via email that I just showed you there is that chimney there and and it was supposed to be 2T 10 in from that wall if you look at it you can see that the window would be have been partially obscured both by the chimney and the chase chase or chase whatever it's called and I'm not here to get attention at all I am here because it is a privacy issue we love our patio we love to sit out on our patio we love our backyard we bought the house without the window we bought the patio without without the window I don't understand I don't understand that's not what was approved that window is not what was approved period thank you okay any other questions comments from the board so one of the options as a board is that we can remand the case if we remand it it would just be asked to the administrative approval not to whether or not the wind the historic preservation could re reconsider the matter as to whether or not till out the window because I I truly believe it's it's whether the window should be there or not um I can see the I agree even in the in the original plans that were approved more than half of that window is showing and that to me is as a privacy concern so I don't whether it's a full window or partial window I think you're still having the same concern so my question would go back to if allowed to contest at the the original approval as to the window would a this different decision be made the original decision would have been made by the HP commission and so the time for that appeal and therefore any addressing by this body has long passed so the only thing that's available is an appeal of the administrative decision which is what you're reviewing today so if we remand it back to HP they just hear the location of the window from where it was uh today well that would be a little interesting because HP never saw the administrative decision that would be remanding it by this body back to staff and telling staff who made that decision look at it again well sta already saw it it's the same staff same person and so unless that Katie would it go any further so I think if this was remanded back staff would make the call at that point to go ahead and put it back on a commission agenda if that's um that that's where because clearly staff has made you know an assessment at that at the administ ative level that the revision was appropriate so if it's remanded back to us for reconsideration I I think my only option would be to put it back on HP agenda so that's the part um of course this body in order whatever it would like to order U but in terms of the matter appealed it was not a decision of the commission right so for to go to the commission it could be for input to ad administrative staff but the appeal is from an administrative decision so you'd be leaping over that and going back someplace El so if you though would we or would well HP if you if you're saying let's say that you chose to uh direct uh further review of the administrative decision and if staff did as staff is suggesting she would likely do that would be up to staff but the purview of this board and the only thing before this board is whether or not the administra decision was appropriate but I'm looking at set Part D that says that one of our options is to affirm reverse modify modify the decision or the board shall remain the case to the commission so I'm guessing that's where are you looking sub Part D okay and I approve that so I really want to look at to sure how is that not in my book thank you because right now my yeah uh for me personally the the way that I'm kind of looking at it is I don't know if different decision is going to be made but if we can get it back before the commission and let them assess and you guys can have the opportunity to interject they may make the same decision I don't know I'll be honest for me it's not whether the location I realize that I'm with you had if I've had a backyard I would not want a window um but at the same time people construct new homes two stories with Windows I I face it in my own neighborhood with two two story homes where windows can be you know that can look into our backyard um but if if we can somehow have the historic provision uh the the historic preservation commission take a look as to whether or not a different decision needs to be made then I think that is a a very good workaround but keep in mind that this appeal the language that's in this report is a an appeal from a decision of the commission itself I think what Katie has offered is a very appropriate thing to do it would allow the commission to look at it again and if that is your direction and that is what she would choose to do with her administrative decision then I think that could work out well for all parties involved so I am not a historic preservation expert me neither oh well Katie is but so that's why we have that's why we have a board committee for that so I mean that would be my preferences to reman I hate the punt but they're going to know I mean they're they've got a history and they know what guidelines they look at so I would prefer that they look at this I think it's a good idea I think it fits our jurisdiction because we can remand the case to the commission based on new evidence and I'll call this new evidence okay but this is that well but it says it says reverse or modify the decision of the historic preservation commission right or remand the case to the commission based on new evidence new evidence if it is the pleasure of this board for this matter to be reviewed by the hist preservation commission you certainly may direct that that occur there is a semicolon after commission so I feel like that or afterwards it's a whole separate option that we have um okay and that's what I'm fitting I'm calling it new evidence okay because there's got to be a solution or a method to make the and and you already said that doesn't fit the guidelines so maybe it's a variance but make that glass at our house we have one that's called frosted and you can't see in or out but it lets light in and I think that'd solve your problem so that's the other thing that you may see again and Katie can tell you more about that I don't know that frosted is allowed in that area um so if but they can make the adjustment that that they is appropriate appropriate if they choose to make one if they choose so I mean right I I would prefer to have making a a formal appro Pro deny based off of an actual uh actual full commission yes rather than an admin so I feel like I need them to tell us what they think before we can I think you could use that as additional information you could continue it for additional information from the HP commission and that is your decision today that it is continued pending additional information from the commission it could go to the commission for a recommendation to this body based on the appeal of the administrative decision made by staff okay let me so let me ask this and be mindful of the fee that the gentleman has paid and and his wife um if we remand decision is made and then there's a subsequent appeal again of that decision if is there a separate fee for that well now if you well what would be the reason that you would send it back if they told no no if we remand it and it goes before the the HP commission oh and they don't make any adjustments do they have to pay another 750 to to fill it back oh because it's all on the same yes yes it's it's continued by this body pending review by HP commission so remaining it continues it yes there's a continuance to get additional information with that let's hear from the contractor one more time my only question is I'm you know as I'm trying to you know on the interior of this remol that may not look like it from the exterior we're waiting on the matching siding to be milled so it matches the wood you know um that's siding so I'm working on getting that Tak care of but on the interior you know this thing's been fully plumbed all the tile work heated floor has been put down all the Cabinetry based on this current elevation has been ordered and provided when we you know I've probably done 40 historic preservation projects over the last 10 years I've never once had something again I understand the Privacy concern but these are tight-knit neighborhoods these every that's not the only window in that block that's going to look into whether it's the properties they back up to you know and at the end of the day I just want you know I know this is likely going back to HP this is a water closet there's a door there this you know I know the homeowner can change but right now it is a single mom with two young children no one's going to be going up there in peeking into their yard there will be a window treatment over that she's already hired a great interior designer who's already laid all that out they've already selected Fabrics you know I have the same thing I live not far away there are times I look over I'm like maybe I should shut my drapes because you know I live in a single story house where all my neighbors Windows correspond with me um but really my only concern right now is just for you know my client is just like how you know to for me to leave here and tell her hey this whole project now is now potentially I wouldn't want to say on hold but it really puts us you know I know he spent 7 $750 to be here she spent a lot more than that trying to get this project going and right now she has a zip wall up in her master bedroom you know to hide dust and all that and we're trying to get this thing wrapped up but I'm really worried that a situation like this could potentially you know add a extended time I just kind of like the the the clarity of the matter I'm assuming this will obviously work its way out but like you know I heard a few people say we could change the window or shift the window I mean if we were to shift the window right now we're talking about going in and completely gutting a third of the project we've already tiled and done to remove a wall and move things over I'm sorry that you have spent all this time and money doing this I specifically asked the person that lives there if there was going to be a window and she specifically told me no that being said you see that window right below there's no window treatment there so I it's hard for me to have faith and trust in the fact that there'll be no window treatment up there and even though there's only a single female with her children right now I don't know who's going to live there next year five years from now 10 years from now thank you would it solve your problem if the glass was frosted yes 100% yes it would okay and that's a problem because we can't do that so um I mean it's not a variance to have frosted glass the guidelines say glass should be clear the commission has the ability and I think you all acting as the Commission in hearing this appeal also have the ability to for instance say we're going to uphold the revision with the condition that the glass G be frosted um that could be something that we ask of the commission or and Rita correct me if I'm wrong that could be something that that this body attaches to the revision if someone came to me with a brand new application and they had frosted glass I would say you know staff's not going to recommend approval of the frosted glass that'll have to be heard by the commission you'll have to have some sort of special justification this addition is it's hard to tell from a straight on photo but if you look at the site plan the addition is about half the width of the house and it's all the way over to the um east side and we're looking at the West Side North southeast west is hard um um so that addition and that window is something that's not going to be visible from the street which is often an opportunity for us to have a little more flexibility with design um that's something that I think would be discussed by the commission if we were talking about an alternative window type or treatment of some sort um so I don't know if that answered any questions but just I think my only request is I I'm still in favor of remending it to the commission is just to put it on the on the next agenda to be mindful of the the homeowner and whether or not to provide some finality basically to that so that's that's going to be so because it didn't come from the commission the remand would be where it came from which would be the administrative decision of Staff who has expressed that she plans to share it with the commission for a recommendation okay so typically when we remand though it's typically that's not a recommendation typically when something gets remanded back to the commission that's the last stop and they make a decision yeah um not remanded to the commission because it didn't come from the commission yeah but staff has the authority to forward any items on to the commission that they don't think qualify for administrative approval and at that time the commission approves or denies right and that that is appropriate but as far as this body goes where they send it on remand has to be where it came from and it came from you so so would the recommendation go back to me I guess I'm trying to understand why it would come back here come back where it came from and then you would decide what to do with it so if your decision was you know this is bigger it needs to go back to the commission then you would send it to the commission for a recommendation which you would then bring back here and you would say to this body that sent this to you and asked you to look at this again what the commission said and what your decision was and whether or not administratively you have a different view now because you have gotten input from the commission as you suggested typically if we have something that we think can't be administratively approved and we take it to the commission it doesn't come back to us to staff okay it's just approved and typically if something's remanded whether it's remanded to staff or to the commission at that point it's either approved or dened it doesn't come back to this body so I'm just trying to save people time and meetings and you know if we're going to remand back to HP the commission's going to hear it again they're going to hear concerns about the window and privacy that they didn't hear the first time um it's but they're going to make their own decision correct they're going to make a decision it's more efficient for them to be the final stop and to either approve or deny the revision I would prefer that a board that has that exper expertise yes would make that decision and not us yeah and they don't have to appeal again let's say the commission says oh that's horrible we don't we want to keep it exactly the way staff did it because this board sent it it's supposed to come back so nobody's got to pay an additional fee the matters continued until the commission has a decision as directed by this body if that's what they decide and then it comes back here so if the decision of the commission as related by you is we recommend Frost at windows and the appealing party is happy with the appealing the frosta windows then the Matter's done but if the commission says no no no we must always have clear windows then that also comes back to this body and then this body has a decision to make about what happens next but the commission's role is to act as the uh Authority on the historic placement of this window and the kind of glass and all of that so it's asking for a professional opinion about the historic window rather than a decision on whether or not the appeal of that decision should be granted it's purely technical purely expert advice to this body okay I can't make a motion hypothetically if somebody made a motion to remand this to the HP staff for consideration of this administrative decision you're going to look at it again question I before we even go any further you're a staff member correct yes how many other people are working with you on this so we have two other staff that are pretty much fulltime time HP and then half of another person oh okay and and my question is because I've been listening to this debate back and forth if we were to say based upon what you recommended and you said we can approve that possibly frosted glass at this point could we do that now and you can get that approved without it going back and forth again so all do I mean can they cuz the glass is not put in the window yet right yeah I I have some sympathy for the for the plight of the homeowner and the and the construction crew I mean I understand that they would like to complete this project and I appreciate Mr vor's suggestion regarding the Frosted windows in fact they wouldn't even have to replace the window we have what I'm hear we have frosted windows at my workplace and they're not installed frosting they're installed clear and they had frosting so they wouldn't even they wouldn't even have to replace the window so I I thank Mr Vorhees for his suggestion and we would not object to that and if the home owner and the construction crew would like to proceed you know under those circumstances we would have no objection so could that happen so I'm going to look to on that one on the extent to which cuz what I'm says we canif yeah you can modify um and the I guess it would be it's a condition that the homeowner has to agree to you can't condition it if they haven't consented to that the modification has to be related to and let me look at this the thing that was appealed from was the administrative approval by by Administration and so if Administration said this is you must do it this way and this board is saying we don't agree with what the administrative person said we think it should be that way then that also is an appropriate decision of this board but that's what they choose but I thought what I heard them say was they wanted to send it back to you because you were expert in this area and that you want it then to send it to the commission everybody else is saying time is kind of of the essence if this body decided that based on the information presented so far that they wanted to direct you to issue a CA with a frosted window then that would be pleasure of this body if that's what they chose to do because it's an appeal from your decision that the window was appropriate the way that it is so it's it's up to this body to decide what they want to do but do we have authority and jurisdiction to order frosted clients to order frosting um I was afraid the answer was no the answer is this is an from an administrative decision the administrator said clear glass M um it was appealed because GL in this location clear glass in this location so it was appealed and the appeal was that's not appropriate it's not appropriate not because of historic purpose but because it interferes with their quiet and of their backyard and if that is the case and if this body agrees that they have a right to a certain level of quiet enjoyment of their backyard that this interferes with and if the placement of the window in the manner that they would like is something that this body deems appropriate then this body could say you know you're right this is the kind of window that you want we will we will grant your appeal and your appeal is from the administrative approval and since it would be from the administrative approval it would be to say you don't agree that the administrative approval was appropriate and so what is appropriate staff has said and it has been mention frosted glass if you decided that that was the thing you wanted to do today because this is an appeal you have wide latitude and you could do what you chose to do so long as so long as it was something that was within your room uh the window is within your room you could now talk about front door but the window is in your room so um the person appealing says I don't want this clear glass looking over my backyard do you agree or not agree that it is an appropriate change to make from what the administrative approval dictated my concern with remanding with a corrective action to change the window to to be frosted is that going forward other people may see that and says well if you've got a problem with a clear glass just appeal it to the board of adjustment they'll make the change and I don't feel like I'm in a position right now to make that sort type of decision because I don't know historically what guidelines they use as to which kind of Windows to use so I'm still in favor in remanding this and getting in front of the historic Commission because they've got that expertise to make those kind of decisions and and and I respect that opinion what I what I would say is that um once again I have sympathy for the fact that the owner would like to complete this project the construction people would like to complete this project so time is valuable to them and everybody else if they would agree to frost the glass we would withdraw our objection so can Katie come back up and and um tell us whether or not that's feasible if uh frosted glass can be approved so frosted glass would have to go back to the commission the quickest I could do that would be June 3D that's their next meeting um because staff doesn't have the ability to administratively approve frosted glass I think if we feel like there's a workaround where this body can say do frosted glass um you know that's one thing but staff can't administratively approve a revision from the applicant to switch from clear glass to frosted glass so at this point even if we say yes we're going to do frosted glass it's still going to be June 3D before it's heard before the commission correct yeah if it goes back to the commission that's when they would hear it okay so that's what we're looking at does this body have the ability to approve that though paron does this body have the ability to not to approve the the the glass if uh the home owner agrees this body it has to go back to the we have some authority to modify I mean the only reason why I asked that question is it would relieve the homeowner of the need to go back to HP I mean we'll be happy to go back to HP but you know once again we're willing to concede that the home owner wants to this project and so I guess what I would ask is does this body have the ability to approve frosted glass and if the home is willing to do that we're done yeah I'm struggling with the limits on our jurisdiction because it's an like I say yeah that's what I'm looking at too looking June okay if we're if we're looking at the appeal itself and it's the location then I feel I just don't believe that we're saying well I don't think we can consider the type of window let's see what the actual application says it's administrative approval of hbca three so four do we have Sarah in our packets a copy of the no we don't a copy of the matter appealed from do you have a copy of the application itself yeah it is revised the previously approved application to item one construct Edition to relocate Windows okay and that's what was that's what was administratively yes that's what's that's what the appeal was for okay and so the thing that you administratively appealed was the new placement of the window so board member you are correct that if you said the thing that you want to change is the placement of the window that would be something you could do um you did previously say you wanted advice from the expert AG P Commissioners um whichever decision make I think is going to be appropriate because you have full authority to do that um m is mentioning a date sometime from now and meanwhile the window is where the window is and if the window is an issue the window remains an issue until such time as it can be altered if that is what you decide to do so just to um there have been questions about what's allowed what's not allowed guidelines for materials Building Materials in new construction additions to historic buildings um clear glass must be used in all windows reflective tinted patterned or sand blasted Glass in windows is generally not appropriate patterned leaded or colored glass can be used in transoms and sidelights when established by the architectural style of the building or support by historic documentation for a specific property or structure so that's what the commission would reference in determining whether some sort of treatment to the glass was appropriate so is tinted glass colored glass um tinted glass yeah it would be glass that has a green tint or a brown tint or something like that where it's not just fully clear and transparent so can you see all the way through tinted Glass Tinted glass you can see all the way way through typically um but it would be like if I'm holding up a white piece of paper it looks green or it looks blue or it looks Brown through the glass even though it's white as opposed to clear glass where it looks you know the same color through the glass I'm still in favor of just remaining can't control future owner I I don't feel like I'm an expert to demand any sort of frosted glass and the HP commission may say you know what that clear glass is just fine as is in its current location I'd rather have them make that decision since they look at this more often than we do um another thing that you could consider um the person that's doing the work did talk about window treatments that were planned for the window if that's plan you could consider allowing that to go in and then meanwhile um if the commission reviewed it again if the HP commission looked at this again and decided that frostic glass was appropriate after all despite uh what the guidelines say about it it would not stop what's moving forward at this moment but the window treatment would allow ow the Privacy that the appealing parties desire so one thing would continue and the other thing would cease to be a barrier because there would be something in that window that would block The View that uh is desired by the appealing parties if HP commission said oh no there's no way we would recommend frosted glass then you still have the window treatment and maybe there's more information about the window treatments that might be helpful um going forward any other person who bought that house could change those windows could uh somebody get hit a baseball in it break it there there goes the the frosting but the decision is whether or not the relief Mr Dr Callie seeks is something that you have available to give is the relief going to be provided by a contractor who is going to install the window treatment is it going to be by the HP commission who's going to or not going to recommend frosted glass what how can you give this applicant the relief s is there relief you choose to give and those are things for you to to consider um maybe maybe there's more to hear from the contractor about when that happens with the window treatments what kind of window treatments what they do what they block what they don't block I believe it was brought up earlier though that window treatments are not in the windows on the first floor so we can't guarantee that not say that it's not going to be followed through but what are the window treatments also of the I mean you can open window window shades or whatever window blinds and leave them open so I don't I don't feel like the window treatments themselves are going to necessarily provide permanent relief I still think I still think it needs to be remanded personally so was that date in June though so you have all of this time prior to the meeting that the window is is the window is one month it's a month before anything can be done to the window which you know that's a concern of both parties right so you have and we don't know what the outcome is going to be no once our decision is given so again I just need to know what alternatives may be um offered to to bring some type of compromise where we can get you what you need today and to get them where they need to be to continue their work is there anything that we can compromise with today they could put a tarp over the window that's that that's between the neighbors I think today my feeling is we remand this back to HP let let the experts re negotiate this case I want to thank the board for taking the time I mean I know this is we probably consumed at least half an hour of your time and I apologize for that but I I I I thank you for uh seriously considering our our appeal PA I think you wanted to say one more thing no you got to come up to the front sorry I actually decided against it I'm I'm for going back to the commission because I know we can get it approved again because we are that much inside the guidelines and we can't make exceptions to these types of rules for just every so often somebody's like o I don't want you looking at me well there are thousands of people in this neighborhoods that have the exact same condition so I believe the commission will side with us again thank you that's kind of where I'm at I mean we may remain it and if they hear it they may approve it as is right that's why I don't feel like I'm an expert to to to make any sort of like recommendation as to what should and should not happen because again because if if we if we re if we remand with the corrective action being frosted Windows anytime someone gets in that situation we're going to start sealing these seeing these appeals and then they're going to site this decision as you guys have set the president that you you can recommend that so um I'm can I make a motion wait till Rita says you can I think they can I was just looking at the application again to see what it was to be sure that the action that you take is consistent with the request and it says we object to new placement of window overlooking backyard and then there are detailed descriptions um but if if that is that's all that it says we object to new placement of window overlooking backyard then so let me ask a real quick question before we vote and please forgive me they're objecting to the placement of the window when we first began this discussion was there a period where you can appeal any decisions that were made pertaining to the placement of the window that's what they're appealing that's what they're appealing has that time exhausted was there a period of time that you had to work with in 10 days they were timely okay and and I just want to make sure you know we got everything covered ourselves the appeal was from the administrative decision made by okay okay okay Roberto I think you're on oh wait a minute sorry Sarah Welch planning department I think both HP and board of adjustment staff need just a little bit clarification of the next steps based on the motion so if you so if you're about to make a motion to remand the item remand the item which would go back to the historic preservation officer who then is most likely to send it to the commission um to review the revision and the HP commission makes a decision um is that the final decision or are you saying that the um that the applicant has is preserving the right to come back to the board to continue the appeal of that decision my I'm just trying to go through even legally I mean if it gets remanded back to the district court The District Court makes a decision there has to be a subsequent appeal well um the appeal right now is about the placement of the window so unless something that HP does changes that you know if if HB says well okay we agree with you the window shouldn't be here should be over over there but then that's also not appropriate then this body would still have jurisdiction and be able to review it because it's placement of the window if HP says well we think frosted glass would be appropriate and that is what is recommended frosted glass of that window and that is what gets approved and that is satisfactory for appeal purposes of the appealing parties and it comes back here frosted glass okay everybody's satisfied because it is the windows uh view onto the backyard that caused the problem so if it's no longer causing a problem with the frosting and that's what the commission reviewed then that is perfectly fine but if the if the appealing party decides no I don't want frosted glass I just want this window moved all together I don't even want a window there period Well I I I do think the young lady does bring up an interesting question if this is remanded to HP and I guess it would get remanded to the administrative staff technically I suppose they could approve it again and then we'd be right back here again but even if it goes to the HP board and they approve it would we have the ability to appeal that I mean I neither we nor the owners want to keep going back and forth and back and forth and back and forth I I have to admit I don't want to spend another or another 750 bucks but would we have the ability to peel if HP approves the repositioning your your appeal would still be open because it had to do with placement of the window right and so until that is satisfied that appeal still stands and this body hasn't closed it because they sent it for further review to HP commission HP commission brings that information back here if this board is satisfied with what HP commission brings but you are not then you have an ability to appeal it further to district report but this body would see it again because they sent it away for further review I I have enjoyed beating all of you but I I I I hope that we don't have to consume more of your time so my final thing is because the window has already been approved itself but we're discussing the placement of the window that's what he has on his fill I know but we're going to remand it back to it but there's still going to be a window there regardless at some point maybe they're going to bring the case back up okay that's why I'm I'm getting so confused because the window has already been approved and that's what he's saying he doesn't that and so when it goes back to either administrative review and administrative has indicated it would go to full permission for consideration would be the placement of the window which is the item appealed from and now because of the discussion today whether or not some alternate treatment of the window would be appro so that would be included with it placement and treatment included okay it would not be an additional fee it would be no no no I wasn't talking about that I was just uh saying that not only we just asking for a review of it plus an addition of the um material of the window right the the glass GL the glass the glass or not the problem was brought to you how do we resolve this issue and so the answer to how do we resolve that issue is going back to the commission to the staff that originally approved placement of the window uh the placement had to do with uh whether or not you there was a view from the window so I understand all of them but again my thing is are we going to ask them for some type of different glass just the placement of the window I think we're going to still be where we are we're going to remand it and basically they will take it into consideration it will be both of those things would would placement of the window be appropriate or leaving it where it is and doing frosting be appropriate or whatever other things Katie comes up with to present to them as an option for here yes so I think the the item that would be on the agenda for HP would be the relocation of the window plain and simple but as part of their discussion and their consideration would be are there conditions that we want to attach to the approval of this revision that yes you can move the window over but only if you do XYZ to satisfy concerns of neighbors concerns of the commission you know issues with compatibility Etc so they're not going to have an agenda item that says Frost the glass on the windows but what I would anticipate is as part of that discussion on this is why we have concerns being expressed about the location of the window what are the other solutions that could we could come up with to mitigate that thank you Katie because that's what I was asking will there be other Provisions that will be discuss when they're talking about this when it goes back to Once once it goes back to them just like any other item on the on their agenda um you know they may review someone's fence and say yes you can have a fence there but it should really only be this tall not that tall you know it's kind of a negotiation in one of the meetings so I don't know how it goes and apparently my two colleagues down there know but for me I didn't so thank you would would we be notified since we were not notified at the administrative I might come knock on your door and notify you in this case but yes you will absolutely be notified you would be in within the mailing area anyway but I will make sure that you know um I mean barring some sort of catastrophe if it gets remanded back it will be on our June 3r agenda so thank you okay Roberto so moved can I do that yeah what did you so move all of that um motion to remand case number 155 96 back to the administrative staff is that appropriate yes that's where it came from okay motion got a second on remand cast your votes you're remanded thank you again for your consideration and I appreciate Mr vor's suggestion sir sir uh do those go in the oh I do I think they need to go in the record do you have extra copy okay she say she EMA well we have some of them but not all of them okay okay item number 27 has been deferred till May 16th and item number 28 has been deferred till May 16th okay I don't have any additional items we don't have any board committees does anybody want to say something read nope is that enough citizens to be heard no other business I think we're adjourned thank you Lord Jesus

As found on YouTube

Contact Us