Springfield Historic Preservation Commission - Regular Meeting

I will go through the beginning of the agenda with everybody and then among the three of you, you can elect a chair. Or you can defer that until the next meeting if you don't want to have a chair yet because it's not a full commission. There is, since David resigned, there's no acting chairperson. And this commission only has a chair. I looked through as much information as I could and there wasn't a vice chair, there wasn't a secretary to find it, it was just a chairperson. Okay, in the absence of a chair, I will call the meeting to order and we all need to stand and say the print.

nation, under God, indivisible, with liberty and justice for all.

Next on our agenda for this evening is the approval from the regular meeting minutes.

from our last meeting, which was October 28th, 2025. Hopefully everybody got the minutes.

Anybody else make a motion?

Make a motion to approve. I second.

To the neighbor, that motion passes. Do you need to do a call of eyes? You can do one. Okay, call of eyes. Okay. Cynthia Bergen? I'm sorry. Are you approving that motion? Yes. Okay. First and second. Who's our second motion?

I'm sorry. I'm sorry. Okay. So we did work in David Powell.

Yes. Mary W. Onstock. Yes. Okay.

Okay. Next on our agenda for this evening is the election of a chair. I don't know if anybody here wants to. nominate themselves, nominate somebody else, but this commission does not currently have a chair since David Allen was signed. It can also be deferred to the next meeting. I have a motion.

I have a motion we defer to the next meeting. A second.

No, you're fine. Okay. Which takes us to our agenda item 2.1. Okay, presented as a request for a certificate of appropriateness for property located at 322 North Farmer Street, the applicant is requesting approval to remove the existing clay tile roof over the front entry and construct a roof across substantially the entire front of the residence. Based on the submitted rendering, The addition would include a low-slope metal roof supported by decorative columns. Also, the provided rendering indicates the existing patio, the concrete portion at the bottom, will be redone in brick. However, I have not discussed that aspect with the applicant. That was not disclosed, but I did notice that change in the image that was provided between the existing and the proposed. The residence was constructed around 1926 and exhibits characteristics of Spanish or Mission Revival architecture, including a stucco exterior, parapeted roof form, clay barrel tile roofing, and an arched front entrance. Section A-513 of the zoning ordinance requires additions to historic buildings to be compatible with the original building in mass, materials, size, texture, scale, and overall relationship. Additions must also avoid altering or lessening the building's historic character. The application does not include the mentioned drawings, construction details, material specifications, a roof profile, or documentation showing that a full width covered porch historically existed on the home. Without this information, staff cannot fully evaluate the request against the applicable standards. There is also a possibility that the proposed porch roof would encroach into the required front and side yard setbacks. That determination cannot be made without additional survey information, however. If the commission approves the certificate of appropriateness and the roof is later determined to encroach into both setbacks, the applicant would need to obtain two variances from the Board of Zoning Appeals one for the front yard encroachment and one for the side yard encroachment a review of previous variance requests indicates that similar setback variances have been requested and approved for properties throughout the historic district though if variances are required the applicant may also ask this commission to express its support for those requests Any certificate of appropriateness issued tonight would remain subject to compliance with the zoning requirements and would not eliminate the need for BCA approval if it's determined that it is required. I'm happy to answer any questions that you might have. Otherwise, the property owner is present tonight and I believe would like to speak on her own behalf should the commission have questions.

Do you have any questions? I'd just like to hear with Wanda. Yeah.

We've actually, of course, this is what we're actually going to do.

If y'all can pass it around. Oh yeah, I like that. Is that still tan?

No, that'll be clay.

So you're going to do that instead of that? Yes. Oh, wow.

Yeah.

I like this better than the metal.

Me too.

Don't you? Yeah. Wow, Wanda, that's impressive.

Yes. It's just that we've lived on Garner Street for ten years now, and we took a house that was on its hands and knees then. and they took beautiful home and we love it but my husband is kind of cognitively declining and so that's going to make a lot better blueprint for us to live in so but robert ralston who had it it's all concrete the whole property has been concreted back through there so i can't have any kind of garden and i've got to have a front porch because we eat outside constantly

And you get the evening sun as is that porch right there.

So we're not going to have a life at all if we don't get to at least put a front porch on there. And we maintain five residences on Gardner Street alone and do a good job of it. That's beautiful.

I intend to take good care of it. How did you ever, I mean, I know they've got programs, but how did you do this so it looks... AI.

It's magic.

I mean, it is magic.

Yeah, that's beautiful. That's what we're going to do. Thank you.

Um, can I talk for a few minutes?

No, I did not see that. So we'll need a copy of that for our records. If you choose to move forward and give a certificate of appropriateness, we'll just need to reference that provided paragraph.

Yes, and so you're saying I'm still going to have to go before a whole other board, right?

Potentially. I don't know without having some survey information, but I have some information.

It doesn't look like that doesn't extend past the actual board.

Well, here's the issue. And this happens often. Concrete is allowed anywhere on a residential lot. A roof becomes attached to the primary structure, and so it becomes an extension of that. That building. And so that building, including all the roof area, needs to fit within the building setback, within the envelope. If it encroaches, there's a variance procedure.

This is 313 Walnut Street. This is an aluminum carport with aluminum posts. It sits right by Mr. Nutting's, right behind Lucy Ellis'. It's really, really close within just a few feet behind the old house. I remember now. They've set up. an aluminum carport on top of this roof, and everybody has said that's great. They probably paid 500 bucks for this. Okay, that's a 331.

The building permit would likely not have been required, and so if I don't know about a building permit, we have nothing to present to this commission.

I don't understand how that what i'm trying to do oh that i don't know i did some research on that one i drove by i don't know why a building permit wasn't full and it's also there's no way that this is 10 feet off of anybody's property lines and so all i'm asking and i've got about just a beginning like this has got a porch upstairs and a porch downstairs that is not 10 feet off of the property line this is a new house down in walnut

I'll make this comment. I mean, yeah, those may exist, but we don't have the authority to grant a variance at this board.

Right, we're just, all we're supposed to do tonight, right, is just... Say it looks good. Say it looks good and say we recommend...

certificate of appropriateness so we're not the city we're not giving you we're just saying for the historic district that's good while the historic district stamps those things and just forget my case at all just I walked up and down through there for ten years and walk those streets and God help the river and I don't understand like I said I've got piles of things that are just brand new like within the last three years And I don't understand why all those things are okay except for mine. I don't understand that.

We're not saying that yours isn't. Is that correct? That's correct. Yeah, we're not saying that yours isn't appropriate. That's what we're doing tonight is stating that that is appropriate for the historic district if it meets all the requirements of the city. Correct? Is that correct?

I just want to be treated like everybody else.

Anybody who comes in to build a new house, build an addition, do any of those things, something that gets checked in our office every single time, Marla does some of this, Coe's enforcement does some of this, Coe's administrator, we look to ensure that the building fits within the setbacks. If it does not fit in with the setbacks, A detached structure does not follow those same rules. These are all attached.

This car is attached to this house.

I will say that when I did check several, they are within the setbacks. The one you had me drive last night, I checked. That one has scaled from property view where it's about 42 feet from the right-of-way. The front setback is 30 feet. So assuming that porch isn't deeper than 12 feet, it will be within the setbacks. hurt her no other you and I him here here from rocks me one that way that group extension which is this work right I'm but they can't approve a variance.

But we're not increasing anything by a square inch. We're just using exactly what was there 100 years ago.

But that roof was not there. So that roof is an extension of the house and it encroaches in those setbacks, potentially, which is something that needs to be checked.

I think it's not our responsibility. We don't know these these rules, I think our commission, if I'm right, we're just supposed to say that looks like it fits in with the neighborhood. And in addition to that, we just only are concerned with the front of the neighborhood. You can make it pink and yellow and zebra if you want on the back. In other words, we don't have any say-so on how you do anything but the front. And also, Wanda, I think maybe Our commission, too, if it can be taken back to where it was originally, then it's acceptable. And that, I mean, technically, I don't think you would ever want to take yours back, but if you wanted to, you could. I don't know what that means. Well, that means you could take it back to what it looks like right now if you wanted to. It could be done. You're not taking down a wall or anything like that. So because of that, we would... I mean, I wouldn't have a problem, but I think it's lovely. I think we can prove it. I think they would be a benefit to our district. But that's where our responsibility stops.

That's it.

What about the aluminum parkway that's set down on the house on Walnut Street?

We're not.

If you're into aesthetics, though.

Yeah, but our stance is we're approving that picture right there, and we are. Now, David, have you...

Will you make a motion? As far as other ones, I can't speak to what we've done in the past, why it wasn't brought, why there wasn't a permit pulled. I mean, we're just volunteer board, so I can't speak to anything else that's happened in the city.

Yeah. Well, a carport potentially, if it's not attached to the structure and it's under 200 square feet, there would be no buildings required.

Yeah, because it's not attached to the building.

There's no buildings when they're required. I have nothing. My office has nothing to present to this commission.

So our responsibility tonight is just to say, take a vote on whether we approve the appropriateness of the roof on that one picture that she presented. And so I motion that we vote for that. Okay.

You would make a motion.

I make a motion. Call for the vote. to call for the vote for the approval of the Certificate of Appropriateness as evidenced by the picture that you brought tonight.

Is there a second on that?

No, second.

Okay, there's a motion and a second. Role model, do you call the roll? No. One stop.

Yes.

Birkin? Yes. Back? Yes. Passes with three.

So how can it be more that people, when they are intended to do something, Tony and I have had some long talks about this, and it's like there's no teeth in anything in the historic district, you know? How can it be to where people do go out, go for a building, before they do add something or do something, to where it is more, you know, everything is more even and beautiful?

There's some things that don't require building permits. The things that, and I'll be honest, We don't have a large staff. So things do happen without being caught, so to speak. We have regular enforcement. We have people around the city all the time. But things get built everywhere in the city that are not supposed to. To have a roof, you're supposed to have a permit. I see roofs all the time that I know before I can even send codes out, they're done with the roof. So there's nothing. This commission has told me that regarding a roof, want to be consulted. They don't want to meet for a roof.

Right. A roof is a roof. You're replacing a roof. Unless you're changing the structure of it or the, you know, the elevation of it.

But in the guidelines it says you need to put back what's there pretty much.

Yeah. And it's subjective. And you could put back if you want. If the next owner... Wanted to take it back to how it looked before you did the roof. It's doable.

Yeah.

But we approve the photo that you showed us this evening as far as what we do.

Did you talk to her? No. Somebody just needs to decide. But then ultimately, like I said on the phone, we can have someone from COATS come out and determine if a variance is going to be needed. They can look and identify where your property corners are, and they can see how much room...

If there's a sweet little lady that's to the right of us, she's over two feet into us. She would have to jack up her entire life.

It happens all over the city on these old lots where things are not built where they're supposed to be. I'm just saying I'm not bothering her. You're not necessarily bothering her by building any more than you would be building in the river. There's nothing that would bother her. that roof is still going to be there but you're telling me i can't wait till the end of october now the next the middle date for the bca is next week and then that board will meet in october because just like this board we have to notify the adjacent owners which we didn't have to do for this one of our bca approval we have to notify the adjacent property owners and we have to notify a favor it has to be advertised upon us out of a state procedure that we have to follow

Is that if you need a variance? But if it's, I mean, if it's clear with the contract.

Yeah, if she doesn't need the variance, then it'll just be a building permit.

Right.

But if the variance is required, as soon as we get the full application for the building permit, I can have them go out before vetting and at least identify where the house is in relation to your property rights. They're not going to do as good a job, I'll be honest, as a surveyor. A true survey on property is your best bet, but I also know how hard it is to get a survey done in the time that I have right now. There's not a lot of surveyors and there's a lot of surveyors.

This is ridiculous. It is ridiculous.

It is absolutely getting ridiculous.

It doesn't take any more room than a couple.

Well, but they're saying that port is not a port. Yeah. motion to adjourn thank you thank you

So now I'm going to come out and go out of it.

I mean, do you know who that is? Sorry, who? So it's you and me with Tony. I don't want to beat you. I'd like Tony.