Historic and Design Review Commission - Regular Meeting

Good afternoon. I'd like to call to order this historic design review commission meeting for Wednesday, September 16th, 2026. May I have a roll call, please?

Mammon.

Here.

Savino. Here. Velazquez. Galloway. Mazuka.

Here.

Guevara.

Here.

Groob. Travieso. Here. Holland. Betzer. Gibbs.

Here.

And then Commissioner Grubb. Commissioner Grubb, can we get confirmation for quorum? We have quorum, Chair.

Thank you. May I have translation services, please?

Good afternoon. Thank you.

The Historic and Design Review Commission is an advisory board appointed by the city council. I am Jay Maurice Gibbs, chairman, and the vice chair is Jeffrey Fetzer. It is the function of the commission to advise the city manager and all relevant city departments concerning all applications for permits for properties in the historic districts, for landmarks on city property in the river improvement overlay, and for demolitions. And considering whether to recommend approval or disapproval of an application for a certificate of appropriateness, the Commission shall be guided by the City's Unified Development Code and design guidelines and standards that have been adopted by City Council. An appeal of a decision by an administrative official can be filed in accordance with the City's Unified Development Code. If anyone present wishes to speak in favor or in opposition to any item on today's agenda, please sign up on the public comment sheet. It is not necessary to sign up if you are the owner of or representative for a project on the agenda. You will be called on as the case is called. Case representatives will be given no more than 15 minutes to present their case with an additional two minutes to respond to public comments. Speakers for or opposed to a case will be limited to two minutes each. Speakers may also sign up to yield their two minutes to another speaker who has signed up. Anyone who is yielding their time must be present at the time the speaker is called upon. Speakers will be called upon in the order in which they are signed up. Following public testimony, any commissioner may call upon any speaker to respond to further questions. Approval by the commission does not take the place of any type of permit. Permits must be attained for all work. Certificates of appropriateness for work approved by the commission will be emailed to you within 10 days. No work of any type is to be started without obtaining the appropriate city permits after a certificate of appropriateness has been issued by the Office of Historic Preservations. At this time, please silence your cell phones.

Thank you, Mr. Chair. We don't have any specific announcements for today, so we can take action on meeting minutes from the September 2nd hearing.

Mr. Chair, I'd like to make a motion to approve the meeting minutes from the last session, September 2nd.

I'll second. It's been moved and properly seconded. Any further discussion? May I have a roll call, please?

Mammon?

Aye.

Savino? Aye. Galloway?

Aye.

Mazzucca? Aye. Guevara?

Aye.

Group? Aye. Travieso?

Aye.

And Gibbs?

Aye.

Motion carries.

Motion carries. Thank you.

Thank you. Commissioners, if you could direct your attention to the screen to the consent agenda. We have 13 items on the consent agenda. There are comments of letters, support in your packets. So if there are any items that you'd like to pull, we can do that now. Otherwise, we can take action on the consent agenda.

Do any commissions wish to pull any items from the consent agenda?

Mr. Chair, I'd like to pull items number 11 and number 12.

11 and 12 any other items Hearing none may I have a motion for the balance of the consent agenda Mr.

Chair, I'll make a motion to accept that we accept the balance of the consent agenda items 1 through 10 and then item number 13 all with staff stipulations I

Is there a second? Second. It's been moved and properly seconded. Any further discussion? May I have a roll call, please?

Mammon?

Aye.

Savino? Aye. Galloway?

Aye.

Mazzucca?

Aye.

Guevara?

Aye.

Group? Aye. Chavieso? Aye. And Gibbs?

Aye.

Motion carries.

Motion carries. Thank you.

If you're on the consent agenda and your address is 808 North Pine, 125 West Ashby, 1115 Broadway, 1411 Alling, 509 North Olive, 105 South St. Mary's. Signage request, 607 East Nueva, 1505 East Houston, 105 South St. Mary's. The lighting request, 119 East Craig, and 10750 Pleasanton. Your case has been approved and you do not need to stay for the remainder of this hearing. If you have any questions, please contact a member of staff or your case manager. Your certificate of appropriateness or commission action letter will be prepared and emailed to you within 10 days. Commissioners, I'll pull up item number 11.

Good afternoon, commissioners. So please let me know if you'd like me to read the item into the record. The applicant is here in person.

No need to read into the record. We could bring the applicant up to the podium, please.

Sure. Jerry, if you'd like to come up to the podium, please. So please introduce yourself, and then the commissioners will ask you questions.

I'm the contractor that's trying to do this project here. Thank you. Commissioner Savino?

Yeah. Thanks for bringing this to us and sticking around today. I had some questions about the garage. And it's primarily because of the garage door. And I feel like because it's a 16 foot wide garage door.

Correct.

And we have very few, if any, in the historic district, in that particular historic district, So I was wondering, what is the driving force or priority for having that wide of a door in this particular case?

They have two cars.

Okay.

Two cars, and they need to park two cars in there.

Okay.

And the driveway is very narrow, so...

Sir, can you step closer to the mic, please?

Yes, sir. It's a 16-foot door because it's a 24-by-24 garage. The customer has two cars, and the driveway is very narrow, so there's not a whole lot of room to get.

Okay. Staff. Were you looking at any precedents or other examples of double wide garage doors in the neighborhood?

Yes, Commissioner. So no, for this one, we're not going to ask that the applicant consider widening the garage. And because of that, the 16-foot width of the garage door, it doesn't allow for the traditional two individual bays that we would normally stipulate. So that was our reason why we thought that the 16-door was appropriate for us.

Okay. What is the standard width for a garage door?

I'm not sure.

You should know that before you make it. Yeah. For an individual single garage door, standard width would be eight feet or nine feet, right?

Standard on a two-car garage is normally 16 foot.

Okay. If the math is what it is, with a 24-foot wide garage building, it's totally possible to get two eight-foot garage doors in. And so I was wondering if you would, if it worked mathematically, would you be open and amenable to doing that?

Absolutely, yes.

And primarily the reason why is from this photo that we see here, it's highly visible from the street.

Right.

If you had a garage that was rotated 90 degrees and you drove in and made that turn and it wasn't visible and you had true physical constraints, I totally understand why.

There's also a seven-foot gate that's going to close that driveway area.

Is that part of this request?

No. No, that's already there. It's been there. Okay. Yeah. There should be a picture of it. See how it's leaning this way, the gate? Mm-hmm. That gate will be closed most of the time.

Okay. Yeah, I didn't see that on the photos. I still think that it would better reflect the proportion and the scale of the doors and windows already found in the historic district because we tend to ask that Often anyway, we do not, rarely do we approve a 16-foot wide door unless the physical constraints are really, really there. And this is a case where you have a generous 24-foot wide garage building. Three feet? Oh, go ahead.

No, go ahead, please.

I was just going to say three feet, eight feet, two feet, eight feet, three feet. So would you consider that?

I would. Okay. I would consider it. I prefer not to.

Yeah.

But, you know.

Okay, thank you. That's the extent of my question right now.

You bet. Thank you. Any other questions for this applicant? Mr. Chair, I have a question. Commissioner group, go ahead.

If we can pull up slide 12 and Commissioner Savino's point, I feel like the picture might be a little misleading. No, slide 12. I guess it's the site plan. One more. Yeah, no. Okay. So I don't know. Maybe it's a different packet. One before that. Can you go one page before that? There. So it's really in the back. So I'm not sure you'll actually be able to see it visually like you have it portrayed in that picture. You might visually only see half of the garage from the street. because it's way back there.

Yes, that's a half acre.

MS. Would you agree? Sorry?

I said that's a half acre property. It's pretty big, yes.

MS. And your driveway is about 12 feet. And you're putting your picture, you're putting a 24 garage in a 12 foot driveway right now when you're doing that visual, that picture. But really, we're only going to see 12 feet of the garage.

Right. And that picture, that other slide, can you go to the other slide? Right there. So that's AI, actually. That's an AI-generated picture, as you can tell, because that's his house. So it's going to throw it in there, whatever. I just said put the garage in there, and that's what it showed me. But yeah, it's not going to be that.

How wide is the garage? How wide is the driveway?

Sorry, the driveway. The driveway's nine foot.

And the gate is seven plus the other foot that is visible in that picture?

Correct. Or is it gate? No, it's just like it shows in the picture. There's a little connection there where it connects.

Okay, I have no more questions.

Of course, that concrete is also AI.

Thank you. Any other questions for this applicant?

Well, I'd like to make a motion.

Please.

I'd like to make a motion that we accept applicant's request with stipulations one, two, three, with an added stipulation number four to utilize two single bay garage doors separated and also to provide a site plan that shows the accurate layout of the concrete and the driveway approach to the garage.

Is there a second?

I'll second.

It's been moved and properly seconded.

Let me explain this. I think even for the long run, having the two bay garage is more in keeping with the actual style of the house that's currently there. If there was a house added to a bungalow, even in the 30s or the 40s, that garage door would have been narrower. I also think that I know you're going to have to do concrete work to create an approach. Correct. Or gravel. Even for two separate doors, you're going to have to provide enough paved space for that car to approach and then align and get into the door. Whether you have one door or two doors, you need to show the driveway in your site plan. And so I'm asking for the site plan to show concrete. So we know how much concrete you're putting in.

Okay.

Not concretizing the whole backyard, you know.

Right.

So we know the extent of it. And I think that would help you figure out exactly what that trajectory and the angle for the approach to the garage is. Okay. I think it's important considering we've – Where we have long driveways in this particular historic district, the double bay door approach is in keeping with the house, and that's primarily what's important, is the house and the accessory building over the long haul, over the decades.

OK. Thank you. Second, do you have any comments for the applicant?

No, I just agree that the drawings show a wide driveway right in front of the garage. And in reality, the driveway, we don't know where the 12-foot or 9-foot ends and where the 22-foot or 24-foot starts. So that would be helpful in seeing, making a decision about the driveway.

Would you like to comment, sir? Are you good? You good? Yes. Okay. Thank you. All right. Any other comments for this applicant? Commissioner group? Mr.

Chair?

Yes, thank you. Well, I think the pictures are misleading, but I think his site plan is correct. So I am just wondering, when you have a stipulation that's saying you want a site plan that's more precise, I mean, I'm always kind of like, we have a site plan that's showing us that. I mean, how much more accurate? That's kind of what I'm saying. And I think maybe the pictures are misleading, but I think the site plan is what's leading to this decision. And I think there's enough information. I just want to make sure that we all are not asking for a lot of, you know, more architectural complicated drawings or making him do more and more just to get this garage approved. And I mean, I'll support the motion as is. But again, I just maybe feel like the pictures in the package might have been misleading, but this site plan is really what's happening.

Thank you. Sir, are you willing to be able to provide a little bit more detail in it? Yes. Okay. Thank you, sir. Appreciate it. Any other comments for this applicant? All right. May I have a roll call, please?

Mammon?

Aye.

Savino? Aye. Galloway? Aye.

Aye.

Mazuka?

Aye.

Guevara?

Aye.

Groob? Aye. Travieso? Aye. Holland?

Aye.

And Gibbs?

Aye.

Motion carries.

Motion carries. Thank you. Item number 12, please.

Item number 12, 875 East Ashby. The applicant, Greg Burkett, is here in person.

Thank you. Please step up to the podium. Introduce yourself, please.

Good afternoon. My name is Greg Burkett, Apex Sign Group, representing Area Real Estate for this application.

Thank you. Number 12. Yes. Is that the correct?

This is 875 East Ashby Place.

So we have 125 on here.

I believe Commissioner Savino pulled the wrong case.

No, sir, I did. I meant, I have 11 and 12.

I think you intended to pull case number two.

No, I did not I meant to pull case number 12 10 11 and 12 The yeah the motion for consent was cases 1 through 10 and then number 13 and

Well, Edward, go ahead.

I was going to say we can try to have the applicant for item number two come back or join virtually.

For item number 12.

Sorry. We can have 125 West Ashby try to come back virtually or in person if they're still here.

And if they're not, what would you suggest is the best way to resolve this?

I don't know, Alma, I don't know if you have a comment about that, but we could ask them to come back.

It was pretty clear she pulled number 12. What happened?

The agenda I'm looking at indicates that item number 12 is 125 West Ashby Place. So that one was pulled.

Yes.

And so if the applicant is not here, you can request a continuance to have the applicant present given whatever misunderstanding there was. But that's my understanding based on what was published.

Yeah, I think the biggest issue is the list that we have on the screen. Items 2 and 12 are flip-flopped. That's what it is. Sorry about that. Well, I guess we do have item number 12 currently in front of us. And Commissioner Savino, you did not mean to pull item number 12.

No, your address is fine. The signage is fine.

Thank you, sir.

Y'all don't need me to stand up here? We don't need you, sir. No, no. I can represent the other guy if I want.

I think we're good. Thank you.

For clarity, do y'all want to take action on this just to make sure that that's noted in the record, or are we good? We need to take action on this.

We need to take action on this.

Go ahead. So I'll go ahead and make a motion to take action on it.

So action will be the continuing for that items or we need some type of action to that defense?

I would, my main concern or the windows and I had spoken with staff about it earlier so I would like to make a motion to accept staffs to approve the project as recommended by the staff with all staff stipulation with an added stipulation that you work with the applicant on the concerns with the windows specifically in terms of yeah work with the applicant with the windows that will do it thank you Sarah second

I'm confused. Is this the item number 12 on the agenda or item number 12 on the screen?

On the agenda, 125 was Ashby Place.

It's the agenda that was published for the public.

Can we do a motion for that one? Because it was, which was approved in consent, 125 or 87?

Maybe the easiest thing to do would be to first, to clear everything up, take action on 875 East Ashby to note that that item is approved on the consent agenda with staff stipulations, and then to take action on 125 West Ashby.

Sorry to interrupt. Item number two has already been approved through consent, so we only need to take action on item number 12.

Correct. My only concern is that the address that staff called out when we listed the items on consent as being approved was read as eight 75 East Ashby or excuse me, was read as one 25 West Ashby and not eight 75 East Ashby. So that's my only concern is what vocally was said when we read out what was approved on the consent agenda. Okay.

So we need to have a motion to accept or approve item. Um,

I move to approve item number two with the address 87 East Ashby Place with all staff stipulations.

I'll second.

It's been moved and properly seconded. Assuming no discussion. May I have a roll call please?

Mammon.

Aye.

Savino. Aye. Galloway.

Aye.

Mazuka. Aye. Guevara.

Aye.

Group.

Aye.

Treviso? Aye. Holland?

Aye.

And Gibbs?

Aye.

Motion carries.

Motion carries. Thank you.

Mr. Chair, I pulled number 12 primarily because of the windows, and I think that's something that can be easily resolved with the applicant working with the staff. Therefore the applicant's presence is crucial for this kind of a motion. So is the motion still in play?

Restate the motion please.

to accept staff's recommendations for approval on this project, including all staff stipulations with the added stipulation that the applicant work with the staff regarding window types, proportions, and other standards.

Unless it's with staff stipulations, which was the understanding that the applicant had, an added stipulation does become an issue because the applicant is not here to prepare a response to that added stipulation.

Okay, so I'll make a motion to continue this case to the next available hearing.

Is there a second?

Second.

It's been moved and properly seconded and Commissioner Savino, just to be clear, the next available hearing would be the first hearing in October?

Yes.

Okay. Thank you. It's been moved and probably seconded. If there's no further discussion, may I have a roll call, please?

So I have a quick question. So we approved this one in the consent agenda. Is there something that has to be done to pull it from having already been approved?

Well, the issue is on Commission Amendment. So we approved the item... the consent agenda but the addresses were flip-flopped so therefore we took action to correct that on the as far as the consent agenda goes but on our the actual agenda that we have in front of us it's 125 West Ashby Place and that's what we're taking action on is that clear Because 675, I mean, sorry, 875 was flip-flopped on the screen as opposed to what's actually on our agenda here. Okay.

Aye.

Savino?

Aye.

Galloway?

Aye.

Mazuka?

Aye.

Guevara? Aye.

Aye.

Group?

Aye.

Travieso? Aye. Holland?

Aye.

And Gibbs?

Aye.

Motion carries.

Motion carries. Thank you. Can I have item number 14, please?

Item number 14 on the Historic and Design Review Commission agenda, case number 2026-255, 523 Adams Street. The applicant is requesting a certificate of appropriateness for approval to number one, construct a single story, 912 square foot addition with a 180 square foot covered back porch and a separate 24 square foot rear porch at the rear of the existing structure. Number two, replace existing asphalt shingle roof with a standing seam metal roof. Staff recommends approval to construct a single story, 912 square foot addition um with a 180 square foot cover back porch and 24 square foot rear porch with the following stipulations that the applicant update the proposed administration to feature traditional proportions and window configurations commonly found in the district and provide revised drawings to staff for review prior to the issuance of coa that the applicant install a standing seam metal roof that meets the standard specifications for standing seam metal roofs. C, that the applicant meet all setback standards as required by city zoning and obtain a variance from the Board of Adjustment if applicable. Number two, replace existing asphalt shingle roof with the following stipulation that the installed roof meet the standard specifications

Good afternoon, commissioners. I'm Nathan Manfred with Friendship Michigan, and I'm also here with the owner, Jeffrey. And we are here to discuss changes and modifications we made to the plans from when we were here last time for conceptual approval. So we went through and made the requested changes, things that we had actually previously discussed, modified the roof material so that we were allowed to create roofs that had a slope so we weren't presenting flat roofs anymore. We did modify the fenestration for the window that's facing the street. We are still requesting to keep the other fenestration in the closet just to have a functional closet with the shapes and forms that we had previously had in the design. We have gotten rid of the eyebrow that was also associated with the flat roof. We have included details and information about the rear deck and the type of decking it is to match the stipulations put forth by the staff. And then we've also included materials in the package for the specifications for the doors and windows, materials and dimensions, and details about how those would be put into the wall to meet the requirements for those components. And so that's basically where we are.

Thank you, sir. All right. We'll entertain questions for this advocate. We'll start with our virtual commissioners. Thank you. Are they on their present here?

Christina Chapa.

Thank you. So have a seat. Yes. Step up to the podium, please, ma'am.

Hello.

Hi, please introduce yourself.

Christine Chapa.

Thank you. Go ahead, ma'am.

Okay well thank you for allowing me to speak. I have a number of concerns with this project. So first I want to start by saying that I understand the homeowner wants to improve and expand this property and not necessarily opposed to that. My concerns are specifically about the scale and the overall impact of this particular project on the historical character of the property and the surrounding neighborhood. I do live on Adams Street just a couple of houses down. The existing house is just over 1,300 square feet, and the addition that they're proposing is 70% of the size of the house, so it's quite large, bringing the total condition space to over 2,200 square feet. My first concern is the impact that the scale has on the historic character of the house. This isn't simply a rear addition that disappears and is not visible from the front of the street. A large part of this you can see from Adams Street and it's visible from there raising. I'm also concerned about the height of the roof a little bit, the addition of a new chimney and some of the other components that are not part of the historic design for this property. So taken together, those changes alter the scale, massing and architectural presence of the house from public view. I'm also concerned about whether the original historic structure will remain visually identifiable and subordinate to the addition, or whether the project substantially changes the character and proportions of the house as viewed from the public-facing street. Aside from that, I'm also concerned about the overall development in the backyard area. There's already a large garage in the backyard, a large concrete driveway going from the street all the way to that back structure. I don't see this necessarily addressed in the scope of the work that was provided, so I'm curious if that's going to stay as is or if there are changes that are going to be part of this project related to the garage and that back space. I'd like to know what percentage of the backyard will remain green and permeable after this project is complete, which leads to my next quick concern, the drainage of stormwater. There's already...

I'm going to ask you to wrap up your comments. You had two minutes. She had no one else sign up, right? Okay. How much more do you have, ma'am?

I can get it done in 30 seconds great so drain water drainage just with the addition of the property the back porch the covered and then the second uncovered porch in addition to what's already concrete paved in the backyard how is this going to impact the drainage we already have flood issues on Wick Street which is behind this property a little bit on Adams Street near this and other surrounding streets so drainage is the top concern of mine because I do have issues with neighbors runoff flooding my area. There we go.

Thank you, ma'am. Appreciate it. We have one more? That was it. Okay. I saw two here, so we only have one.

We have one.

I'm sorry. That was on 14. I'm sorry. I did. I was on look at the wrong one. Thank you. Okay. I'll ask for questions from commissioners. I'll start with our virtual commissioners. I'll start with Commissioner Galloway. We have questions for this applicant.

No questions, Mr. Chair. Thank you.

Thank you, Commissioner Guevara. No questions right now, Mr. Chair. Thank you. Thank you, Commissioner Group.

Just to the applicant, just from the comments from the neighbor, do you have a lot coverage ratio? Do you have those percentages, including the garage and the driveway? Yes.

I'm sorry. I'm sorry, Commissioner. Continue.

I was also asking, because of the decking, the porch will be permeable?

Yes, it will be. We did meet with the King William Association the other day, and they actually asked us for the total built percentage ratio once the addition would be built, and this includes the existing garage, the porches, the front porch, everything, and we would be just under 40% of lot coverage.

Okay. Thank you. And then, yes?

Oh, I think that's it.

And then my second question is, have you considered just the part that is visible from the streets or where the closet and the bathroom is? Did you ever consider it or at some point in your plans to actually not have it visible from the street and maybe moving it that type that construction towards where the patio is? We can go back to the other slide there. Did you ever consider that in your plans are always from the beginning?

No the client really wants this rear patio. So that's something that was an important component of this project.

And then is there a way to extend further back. I'm assuming not because you have the setbacks right.

That's part of it. Correct. And then the owner would like to do some other things with the backyard in the future.

Okay. And then my third question is the windows. I know you have, you know, moved a lot of the non-conforming windows. So the closet has a total of, let me go back to the, I don't know where, there's a, yeah. So the closet has a total of three windows. And then, so there's a total of five windows on that south side that are rectangular. Am I correct?

There are two that are sash windows, and those are in the bathroom area, so those are probably the more proportionate-sized windows. And then there are three facing the south elevation in the closet, and then there are also two that face... I'm thinking here. guess technically plan west that are all the same proportion and those are in the closet and functionally we chose that size just for a couple reasons the owner wasn't interested in having a big wall of just flat siding he wanted something to break up that facade on both those faces and so that was you know one way to do that he also was interested in having some natural light come into the closet

But I'm seeing that all five of those windows are in the closet.

Correct. Yes, the two facing the rear and the three facing the side.

Thank you. Commissioner Mammon?

No questions, Chair.

Commissioner Holland? No questions. Thank you. Thank you. Commissioner Mazuka?

In regards to drainage, have you made any assessments or studies of how the water drains from the property?

I believe most of it is draining towards Wicks. It's a long lot that spans from Adams to Wicks, and Wicks has kind of the slope going down towards it. So, I mean, you know, with other site developments, landscaping and things like that, we can address things related to, you know, bioswales or, you know, French drains, things like that to address those concerns.

Okay. Thank you. I just want them to be addressed. Certainly a viable concern.

Commissioner Chaviesa.

Yes, regarding the new implementation of this project, once you complete it, what effect do you see or do the neighbors see on opposite sides? Do they have a concern that this is going to be massive or it's going to be changing the historical approach to the neighborhood?

I mean, this is the first time this has come up. We came for a conceptual review. The overall form and shape has not changed. The mass has not changed. From the conceptual review so we've addressed the staff stipulations and stipulations that were put forth at that time And I will say that the roof for the addition and all components are very subordinate to the roof of the main structure So nothing's peaking up above Nothing's higher And that was yes answer my question, but yes, okay Thank you, and I will also add that there's no intention to do anything with the existing garage structure That will remain as is

um in um in response to your your last statement um you're you're correct you're returning to us but the public you know regardless to whatever stage we're at and it has the the right um to come and speak and so she's exercising that right so of course when when they express concerns then It's key that we hear what they have to say because they live in the neighborhoods. Completely. So I just want to make sure that that part is clear.

Yeah, I'm not trying to invalidate anybody's comments here. All right, thank you. Commissioner Savino.

Yes. So Commissioner Group addressed the concern I had about the windows or wanted to get a full explanation about the windows. I'm looking at slide number 10 or page 10 in the presentation that was served to the public. Is the pop-up gable roof that we see here, is that the same one in your drawing elevation? Correct. And has it been raised or lowered?

No, we're not impacting the roof at all there.

This is existing and this is what sets the highest ridge height?

Correct.

For the building? That is correct. Okay, I just wanted to make sure. Because then in the elevations that we see here, your subsequent additions are a bit lower.

Yes. I mean, that was our goal, was to make sure everything was.

Okay. And then the third question is for staff. Whoever is, well, I guess it could be anybody. Are there any plans with the next UDC cycle that we could possibly address impervious cover in our historic districts? That's part of the reason we don't address them or have purview right now because we don't address it. And as our historic districts become, oh, I'll go into it later. Is there a question for that, Edward?

That hasn't been something that we've discussed, but the UDC amendment process begins next year.

Can we please add it to the list? Certainly. Thank you.

Thank you. All right. May I have a motion, please, so we can go into further discussion?

Mr. Chair, I'd like to make a motion to accept the project with all staff's recommendations and stipulations.

I'll second.

It's been moved and properly seconded. Commissioner Spagnuolo?

I think staff has this absolutely correct. To the windows in the closet, I think you can probably get excellent, excellent light by having one traditional shape window on one wall and another on the other. From the outside, it'll look great. From the inside, you'll get good light. Depending on your treatment, you can get nice diffused light and be able to control that light rather than in the clear stories where you really can't control it. too much and then I did want to say because our historic districts are becoming more developed this doesn't pertain just to you but overall we have a real issue and have had an issue with impervious coverage creating heat island and inadvertent drainage into neighbors yards and places where we don't want it and I feel like that's important to address with the office alright

Anything else?

Thank you. Well, for you, just stand by, sir. Commissioner Group?

I agree with Commissioner Savino's comments, and I think staff has a right on the windows as well. Thank you.

Thank you. Commissioner Galloway, comments?

No comments, Mr. Chair.

Thank you. Commissioner Guevara?

No comments, Mr. Chair. Thank you.

Thank you. Commissioner Mammon?

No comments, Chair.

Thank you. Commissioner Holland? No comments. Thank you. Thank you. Commissioner Mazuka? No comments. Commissioner Chavez?

No comments.

Thank you. May I have a roll call, please?

Mammon?

Aye.

Savino? Aye. Galloway?

Aye.

Mazuka? Aye. Guevara?

Aye.

Group? Aye. Aye. Aye. Aye. Aye. Aye.

Aye.

Aye.

Aye.

Aye. Aye.

Aye.

519 William. The applicant is requesting a certificate of appropriateness for approval to number one, construct an approximately 400 square foot addition and detached pergola structure to an existing historic cottage. Number two, modify the existing facade of the historic auditorium of the rural property. Staff recommends approval to construct approximately 400 square foot addition and attached pergola structure to an existing historic cottage with the following stipulations. That the applicant submit all material and product specifications to include windows, doors, siding, and roof to staff for review prior to the issuance of the COA. That the applicant meet all setback standards as required by city zoning and obtain a variance from the board adjustment if applicable. Staff does not recommend approval to modify the existing auditorium by removing three brick walls and Palladian windows in between the structural columns of the eastern facade and install operable overhead steel doors. Staff finds that any proposed fenestration modification should retain the Palladian arch coursework and detailing.

Good afternoon, my name is Daniel Cruz and I'm with Design Coop representing our clients who are actually here as well for 509 King William. So I want to start off by saying thank you guys for the commissioners that did join us in a DRC a few weeks ago in regards to the cottage addition. We have made some modifications to this based on that conversation. I do feel like we have in theory made it better and more appropriate for the neighborhood and the proposed addition. I'm not gonna speak too much on that one as I do feel we have, we do agree with all staff stipulations and we'll provide all data necessary for that document, I mean for the COA. I would like to discuss a little bit more about the natatorium. I have prepared a document that I will reference here throughout, just some counterpoints. So to start off with,

If you don't mind, if you can just have the elevation.

Okay, so we are proposing a heavy modification to the east elevation. One thing I do want to state is I do want to take into account actual visibility. I do think that's an important factor here. I don't want it to be represented as a primary facade. This natatorium has four sides to it and the facade that we are proposing modifications are primarily faces internal to the property. It is aligned to the internal to, it's not as meaningful to the King William streets. So when, and I bring that up because I know the historic guidelines heavily uh bring up visibility from public right away so just agenda just something to discuss and i do have photos that we can get to at the end here to just kind of show general private right away from that i actually took earlier today just to kind of showcase what we currently are experiencing another thing to know is the city has already recognized modifications to this structure in the past i have been here It was probably over two or three years ago and I did propose an alteration where we did enlarge the windows and it has been approved to remove brick. So there is evidence that we can in fact modify this structure and so we are just asking for a little bit more. And another thing to speak on is the removal or the elimination of the palladium arch that is showcased on this one facade. I do want to emphasize that, again, there are four facades to this structure. I do think it's misrepresented in the staff comments about three brick walls. Maybe it just can be read or interpreted incorrectly. However, it's just on one facade, again, primarily facing the main residence. One thing for me that I think is very important is we are trying, the homeowners want to make this an auditorium again. They want this to be an auditorium. It is an auditorium, however, for the past 50 or 50 plus years, 70 years when the conservation society did operate out of this, it was a office space. It was covered up, it was enclosed, it acted great as that. limited visibility, low light. We've actually exposed all of the original bones and the homeowner's vision here is to showcase that. And by having these large steel windows and doors that allows you to see the internal architecture Historic guidelines typically primarily focus on what's happening on the exterior, and I think that's important. Our clients have spent tons and tons of money in this project and this property in general, and I do want to make sure that that doesn't go unnoticed as their key goals here are preservation, restoration, And obviously making it comfortable for this day and age. The house was originally built in 1876. The auditorium was built in 1913. Comfort standards have changed, you know, just in how you use and operating in an auditorium in a pool structure. a lot of humidity chemical air management all that things become a factor and having operable windows that you can make this indoor outdoor space and share with the property and the neighborhoods and the community is important in my opinion if we go back to the other document i just like to show some photos of i can just go back to the beginning So these are just some photos throughout the construction. They're very brief. I didn't want to put too much, but just to show the extent, everything was removed, restored. This is the main house here. We've done a lot of work on the fence. I've been up here a few times to, you know, ask for approval on many many items here redoing roof lines fixing rot and repair all the handrails and then we have some beautiful photos of of some of the work that we've done over the years to really really make this you know what it once was and if not better and and a place for and a home for our clients and a beautiful place for the neighborhood and and the community to see and experience These are photographs of the natatorium and the state in which it was when it was purchased by our clients. And as you can see, this is actually the natatorium and what it once was for the past 50 years. We ripped it up and opened and removed all the floors, exposed all the uh beams um showed the scale of an auditorium that you know it's kind of sad to say that nobody has ever seen this or many people have not seen this other than photographs it had been covered for so long and many many people and architects and people that i've met throughout this project i've taken into the space and they've met in this space before as they were meeting with the conservation society had no idea that this was a pool and it's a shame to say or even to To me it's sad and what we're trying to do is make the space comfortable, make it what our clients want and how they're going to use it for their family, their friends and the neighborhood and showcase not just the exterior of what it is but also the interior. I think it's important and I think what we are doing, there are goals here and ideas to strip the paint off all the brick because it is a glazed brick that is underneath layers of paint that we will be dry ice blasting to restore back to the original way it was. Keep all the additional windows and doors and archways within. Expose the steel beams. As you can see here, we're maybe going to play around with that green color. We have the existing wood ceiling. We want to keep all that intact. So it's important to us to showcase what it once was and what it can be for our clients and for, like I said, the community. And here are just some photos showcasing just general visibility from the street from multiple angles, from the river. if you can't see the natatorium in there just know that it is there covered in trees again from the front of the street and the side on johnson limited visibility not saying that you can't see it from here and there but i just want to make that point and like i said in conclusion we're just requesting approval for our modification to this facade as well as the cottage thank you

all right thank you very much appreciate it does that conclude your presentation sir yes sir thank you very much um we'll go to questions now um i'll switch we're going to start with our in-person commissioner so i'll start with um commissioner savino

Thank you, Mr. Chair. Questions? So you've been approved to put the double French doors in, is that correct? So currently you have a full height doorway.

Currently have a full height doorway. I think in this file, if you go all the way down, it's the previous case from a few years ago that showcases the elevations.

Page 29. Page 29.

Correct. So those are currently windows that stop at about 30 inches above finish floor. We propose to rip them down to the finish floor, if you will. Finish floor. Okay.

So that's increasing that opening. Correct. I saw in the photo that also the fan light clear story above gets opened up also, correct?

Correct.

And then you're also asking for, in this package, skylights in the ceiling, correct?

That's correct. Okay.

In your rendering, you have one kind of configuration of skylights, and in the drawing, it's different. Which are you listing?

The rendering is probably a better representation. We had shown in our floor plan at one point larger skylights, but after looking at this, I like the idea of keeping the existing ceiling structure and appreciating it and putting smaller skylights within.

And more of them.

And more of them, correct.

Small and more of them, which is a better approach for lighting.

Correct.

Let's see. Do you have any cut sheets or product sheets on the glass doors, the large doors that you're proposing?

So I am proposing custom-made steel glass doors that we've had our fabricator make. We have some other ones that we've made. I can provide cut sheets upon request for that that our fabricator can produce.

What's the opening mechanism?

That is called out in the drawings and I can't remember the name. It starts with an R. It's a pivot door system. The float away single panel opening. So the idea here is that it's a full pivot and the elevation below shows that it kind of stops. I wanted to create an awning-like structure, kind of make the space feel a little bit bigger so they wouldn't be opening out and pivoting off that pivot point.

And then what is the fabrication or the assembly of your glass? Is it double glazed? Is it single safety glass, like quarter inch? Or what is it?

So we most likely will swap out all the glass. We've done that a lot in the neighborhood, as if we can, to either an insulated unit. As you guys are aware, the units in these single pane glass breaks easily and shatters into really dangerous pieces. So there is an approach to potentially replace that glass with safety glass or tempered. We do have to be cautious and that will get into more of the, I do like to go over the shop drawings with our fabricator, our steel fabricator as well, just to spec that out because I do want to make sure that we say that this is going to be, I don't want this to be a storefront. This is not a storefront proposed glass facade. This is going to be a thin, historically accurate, historically accurate to an extent, thinner profile steel glass enclosure.

My last question, are you amenable to adding a window on your cottage on one of the sides, one of the walls, for bedroom number two? Can you pull that up? You've got a lot of walls, but you have two wall spaces that have no windows on the outside. One more up, I believe. Number 19? Or on two?

You said which bedroom, I'm sorry?

Bedroom two.

We could add another window there, yes.

On one of the walls. You know, ideally it would be one that has high visibility, but I think you take into account your furniture and lighting.

Yeah, we're trying to maximize square footage in this space. Obviously we're not trying to make this structure really, really big, but it's something we can explore, yes. There is kind of a mechanical space behind those closets, so we aren't trying to showcase that too much.

Okay, thank you. Thank you.

Commissioner Chavez. No questions.

Thank you. Commissioner Mazuka.

No questions, but the project is really handsome. Thank you. The natatorium looks like it would be a beautiful place to swim. Thank you.

Thank you. Commissioner Galloway. Got it. No question, sir. Thank you. Commissioner group.

No questions.

Thank you. Commissioner Mammon.

No questions. Sure.

Commissioner Holland.

No questions, Mr. Chair. Thank you.

Thank you. I have a motion, please.

Okay, Mr. Chair, I'll make a motion for discussion, and I would like to motion that we accept all of staff's recommendations with stipulations.

Is there a second? I'll second. It's been moved and properly seconded. Commissioner Savino?

Yeah. To the cottage, I think you did remarkable work in remedying a lot of those issues on the cottage from what we saw earlier. And I think that it leaves intact the servants' quarters so it's legible and it remains a historic property. part of the story of the property. It doesn't clutter it. To the natatorium. The natatorium is a building for a swimming pool. What I'm concerned about with the large doors as lovely and as sexy as they are and fabulous, I really wonder if we begin to have a structure that's more like a pergola or a gazebo or a covering. It's no longer a building. When it was built to house the swimming, it was meant to be protecting you from the outside, right? For winter swimming, all seasons. But at the same time, I totally acknowledge your interest and the applicant's interest and making it updated, modern, beautiful, welcoming, and well-lit. And I think you'll get, I can't help but think you'll get a lot of mileage on putting in your skylights in key locations. I think you'll get the kind of flood of even light that makes it still an auditorium maintains its character as a very unique structure, very unique structure of the time, and especially in San Antonio. I don't know how many first decade, second decade natatoriums we have here in San Antonio. I don't think there are a lot. This might be the only one, right? So I think with careful consideration of your skylights and of those doors, the lighting and the open feel can be... really created you can create that I think it could be quite nice without you know opening everything so I just I'm making my motion based on that primarily the character of this very unique building type the only one thank you Commissioner Mizuka no further comment

Commissioner Traviesa?

No additional comments, sir.

Thank you. Commissioner Galloway? Commissioner Guevara?

Nothing right now, sir. Thank you.

Thank you. Commissioner Group?

So I have a little bit of, I don't know if I'll support the motion, but I will support, I think the applicant has done a great job really explaining the project to us today. If you can go to an I don't know, I think might be slide 14. So maybe, yeah, the pictures of the inside. So like this picture tells us a lot, right? That is, I mean, I'm just like, I'm like, wow, this place is gonna look amazing. How much of those arches above the window, like inside is preserved of the tiles?

Everything is there. It's just covered in paint.

But you are going to keep it? You're going to expose it?

Yes. The plan here is to expose all the brick, all the glazed brick. Sorry, go ahead.

No, no, no. And then maybe just to see if maybe some of my commissioners would be open to compromises. I feel like when you open the doors, you're actually giving visibility to that inside that I think is even more precious to this auditorium on the outside. So if we go back to slide where the doors are, like the open doors, would you be willing to... to say and i don't know i'm coming up with an idea and maybe something we can discuss in a drc is uh so you have like that you know side facing like where you have the original windows you're keeping all those would you then be open to saying instead of doing two garage doors you do two and then leave one of those windows open So that if we go back to that picture you see you have a window two windows and a window That's like at the end of that an auditorium like that says a lot about the history of it Is that an option and I'm throwing it out there for the commissioners to discuss today? Because I feel like at the same time, you know times have changed It's warmer outside and makes it more I mean, I think you'll also be using it and I hate to see see a place that because we're not accepting these garage doors, which are not visible from the street, it's more on the inside, but maybe, you know, minimizing that amount of impact of the history of that part of the natatorium, but again, modernizing it to where it's, you know, usable for you guys. I want to make sure that this property also moves forward and actually being used. Is that, would some of the commissioners want to be open to that idea?

Thank you.

I think if I were to open that up, I think opening up the middle one is probably the most effective for bringing in light and views and maintaining the integrity of the enclosure of the building.

It's up to the explorer. We have played with multiple iterations. Like I said, we've been working on this project for a few years now.

So let me stop you right there, because now we're in discussion. So how about, my commissioners, because I think we should be designing, and I don't think a decision should be made by the applicant representing the custody, go back to the owner. So can I do an amendment to the motion and second item? Sorry. Item number one with staff stipulation and then move item number two conceptually approved and recommended DRC.

Is there a second?

I will second. If that's a substitute motion, I'll second that. I'd be interested in a DRC. All right.

It's been moved and properly seconded. So Commissioner Grubb, go ahead, ma'am.

Yeah, so I think that I don't want a decision to be made by either the applicant representing the owner or us. I think this requires, I mean, either we do a DRC and kind of talk about it or we go aside. I think there is an opportunity to come to a compromise kind of and the applicant giving them an option to you know, maybe not go all the way and changing that whole facade. Um, and that's the reason for that emotion.

The, um, the owners are here. So, um, so did, um, commissioner group when, with that, um, change in the motion, um, and the second, so you've, um, have you pretty much laid out everything as you want to lay out there? Cause I'm going to give a second opportunity to speak. I just want to make sure you were clear. Thank you. All right. Commissioner Holland.

Sure, thank you. Yeah, I'm wondering as well that if, and I believe a DRC is the right move here. I'm hoping that there is some sort of a compromise. And I do respect my fellow commissioner's comments regarding that may be the only natatorium from that time period, the only example. And so default me wants to not touch it. And then I also want to be respectful of what time it is, what day we live in now and how do we use it. So I'd be willing to go to a DRC and look and help because ultimately we would want the structure to be utilized to highest and best use. And so I wouldn't want to completely blow it out of the water and flat out deny without at least putting eyes on it for me.

Thank you, sir. Commissioner Mammon?

No comments, Chair.

Thank you. I'll go one more round just to make sure since we're at it to the substitute motion. Commissioner Mazzucca, anything to add, sir?

No, I'll support the motion as it stands. Thank you.

Commissioner Travieso?

Just a question. Is this sanatorium visible from the street?

No, sir.

Very limited visibility. The images that I provided, which I took a few hours prior to this meeting, showcase the current stage. I'll show you here. So if you're looking here at the image, you can see the front main residence, and then there's another image I provided, a few from the street. That's me standing at the street level there, and the natatorium is beyond at the end of the property.

Okay. Thank you. I needed that clarification. Thank you, sir.

Thank you. Commissioner Guevara, final comments? No. I was asking for Commissioner Guevara. No comments, sir. Thank you. Okay.

My only, I'd like to respond to Commissioner Traviezo's question. If you're standing on the sidewalk immediately adjacent to the street for a number of yards, you can see the building. from this from Johnson Street. Yeah it is visible. No other comments.

Thank you. May I have a roll call please on the substitute motion?

Mammon?

Aye.

Savino? Aye. Galloway? Mazuka?

Aye.

Guevara?

Aye.

Grubb? Aye. Travieso? Aye.

Aye.

And Gibbs.

Aye.

Motion carries.

Motion carries. Thank you. Now we need to have a vote on the motion as amended. So have a roll call, please.

Mammon.

Aye.

Savino. Aye. Mazuka.

Aye.

Guevara.

Aye.

Group. Aye. Travieso.

Aye.

Holland.

Aye.

And Gibbs? Aye. Motion carries.

Motion carries. Thank you. Thank you, sir. Appreciate it.

Do you mind clarifying exactly what just happened?

So there was a substitute motion. So the original motion that Commissioner Sabino proposed, we were discussing that, and then so when it got to Commissioner Group, she offered a substitute motion. Basically... but adding the trying to keep some of the original characteristics and also adding the DRC for that so therefore once that happened then you know another round of going around for the commission so then we voted on the substitute motion and so commissions approved that is then we have to go back to the original motion to vote on it as amended so that's what happened there sir

Mr. Chair, can we have staff to repeat, reiterate what that full motion is?

Yes. So, Caitlin, jump in if you need to. So, as I understood it, approval of item number one with staff stipulations, and then there was discussion essentially referring item number two to a design review committee meeting. That will be scheduled for most likely next Tuesday, and depending on how fast you want to move, we could work to get you back here on October the 7th, the next hearing. Okay.

Sounds good. I look forward to the DRC. Appreciate it. Thank you very much, sir. Thank you, guys. Thank you. That was the last case on the agenda, so we are adjourned. Thank you, everyone.