Jan 21, 2021 Historic District Council

[00:00:03]

>> IN JANUARY 2021, WELCOME TO THE MEETING OF THE HISTORIC DISTRICT COUNCIL.

I WISH EVERYONE HAPPY AND HEALTHY NEW YEAR. I WELCOME THE COMMISSIONERS TO CURRENTS IN ONE PASS TO THE MEETING GOOD TO SEE YOU IN THE CHAMBERS AGAIN.

MADAM SECRETARY'S FAMILY MEMBER KOZAK. >> ROLL CALL.

>> I THINK WE HAVE A FORUM. PLEASE JOIN ME IN THE PLEDGE OF ALLEGIANCE.

>> I PLEDGE ALLEGIANCE TO THE FLAG OF THE UNITED STATES OF AMERICA AND TO THE REPUBLIC FOR WHICH IT STANDS ONE NATION UNDER GOD TO INDIVIDUAL INDIVISIBLE WITH LIBERTY AND JUSTICE FOR A

ALL. >> THE NEXT IS TO DECLARE ANY COMMUNICATIONS THAT WE MAY HAVE HAD WITH THE CITY OR APPLICANTS ON CASES THAT ARE COMING BEFORE THIS EVENING.

LET ME START. [INAUDIBLE] >> VERY BRIEF CONVERSATION WITH

HARVEY WHO IS LIKELY CONTRACTOR. >> THINK YOU. >> I HAVE ONE -- NONE.

>> I HAVE NONE BUT I HAVE TO RECUSE MYSELF ON MANY CASES TONIGHT FOR 2028-ZERO SEVEN AND

2020-56. >> I HAVE NONE. >> COMMUNICATIONS AS WE REVIEW

THE AGENDA. DO WE NEED TO SEE -- >> I WOULD MOVE TO SEAT THERESA

DUNCAN FOR 0056 AND 0057. >> OKAY. >> SECOND.

>> THANK YOU. PLEASE CALL THE ROLE.

>> THANK YOU MADAM CITY ATTORNEY. >> RIGHT HERE.

>> WOULD YOU PLEASE TELL US ABOUT BECAUSE I PARTICULARLY WHAT THEY ARE THAT IT IS GOING TO DIFFERENTIATE THEM FROM REGULATING, BUT WE HAVE TO DO IN ORDER TO SATISFY THE

REQUIREMENTS. >> I HAVE A FEW SLIDES THAT I CAN MAKE SURE I E-MAILED TO ALL OF YOU ALSO TO REMIND YOU OF THE SCREEN. I'M SURE YOU ALL KNOW THAT WE CONDUCT OUR HEARINGS IN EACH CASE AS BECAUSE I OFFICIAL HEARINGS AND THAT IS DIFFERENT THAN IF YOU ARE JUST RECOMMENDING SOMETHING AS AN ADVISORY BOARD OR IF YOU WERE PASSING A NEW LAW OR ORDINANCE, YOU ARE ACTUALLY ADJUDICATING YOUR FINDINGS OF FACT AND CONCLUSIONS OF LAW AND YOU ARE SITTING ESSENTIALLY AS JUDGES APPEAR.

WE DON'T CONDUCT OUR HEARINGS AS FORMALLY AS A COURT BUT WE DO CONDUCT THEM MORE FORMALLY THAT WE DON'T AFFORD FOR EXAMPLE WE DON'T TAKE TIME LIMITING PEOPLE'S TIME TO SPEAK OR TESTIMONY AND EVIDENCE WHICH WE DO AT OTHER HEARINGS THAT WE HAVE WITH THE CITY COMMISSION

FOR EXAMPLE FOR A PUBLIC HEARING TO ADOPT AN ORDINANCE. >> THAT'S CONNECTED BUT IT'S NOT

FINDING A SIGNAL. >> I WONDER IF I JUST PUT IT INTO THAT COMPUTER.

>> WE CAN TRY THAT. >> IF NOT, I'M JUST GOING TO GO THROUGH THEM AND SEND THEM TO

YOU. >> I CAN PULL THEM UP SO IF THEY ARE ON ZOOM.

>> WHY DON'T I JUST DO THAT, WE HAVE A BIG AGENDA TONIGHT. AND I WILL JUST SEND YOU COPIES

OF THE SLIDES IN ANYBODY ELSE'S. >> THE QUASIJUDICIAL HEARING PROCESS INVOLVES NOTICE TO OWNER AS YOU KNOW AND AFFECTED PERSONS. AFFECTED PERSONS ARE AFFECTED PERSONS IN THE CITY OR ANY RESIDENT OF THE CITY. APPLICANTS AND AFFECTED PARTIES ARE ENTITLED TO MORE THAN THE THREE MINUTES BECAUSE THEIR RIGHTS ARE UNIQUELY AFFECTED.

TWO KEY ELEMENTS TO A QUASIJUDICIAL HEARING ON THE FINDINGS OF FACT REGARDING THE

[00:05:05]

YOU DON'T HAVE TO MEET ALL NIGHT LONG, YOU CAN CONTINUE IT BUT YOU MUST BE PRESENT AS AN INDIVIDUAL MEMBER FOR ALL PARTS OF THE HEARING IF YOU ARE GOING TO VOTE.

RECORD-KEEPING IS VERY IMPORTANT. EVERYTHING THAT WE DO IN THE HEARING THE PUBLIC INPUT WE DO A VIDEO REPORT RECORDING AS YOU KNOW AN AUDIO WITH THAT.

KEEPING ALL OF THE EXHIBITS THAT WE GET HANDED OUT EVEN IF IT'S HANDED OUT AT THE MEETING AND IT'S UP TO THE RECORDING SECRETARY TO KEEP THAT AND IT HAS TO BE SHOWN TO THE HDC BEFORE YOU MAKE A DECISION. THE REVIEWING COURT IF IT'S BY THE CITY COMMISSION IS DONE BASED ON THE RECORD ON THESE HEARINGS ONLY, YOU CANNOT CREATE ADDITIONAL AFTER.

THE HDC NEEDS TO GIVE DUE CONSIDERATION TO PROFESSIONAL JUDGMENT OF YOUR PLANNING STAFF OR ANY OTHER PROFESSIONALS THAT MAY COME IN HERE LIKE ARCHITECTS AND ENGINEERS THAT PROVIDE EVIDENCE BASED ON TRAINING AND EVIDENCE. THE GUIDELINES THAT YOU ALL USE THE HISTORIC DISTRICT FOR OLD TOWN AND THE CRA, THEY ARE WEIGHED BY YOU AND USED TO UNDERSTAND QUESTIONS OF LAW AND IT IS YOUR DECISION HOW THOSE ARE INTERPRETED.

THE STANDARD OF REVIEW, MEANING IF YOUR DECISION IS REPUTE REPEALED THE STANDARD OF APPEAL IS -- AND THAT'S WHAT WE APPLY AT THE CITY COMMISSION LEVEL, THE FIRST LEVEL OF APPEAL AND WE DECIDED THREE THINGS WHETHER PROCEDURAL DUE PROCESS WAS AFFORDED TO APPLICANTS AND AFFECTED PARTIES WHAT THAT MEANS BASICALLY IS THAT THEY THE HEARING IS ACCESSIBLE TO THEM AND THEY ARE NOT CUT OFF AND WHETHER THE DECISION, THIS IS REALLY IMPORTANT, IS SUPPORTED BY SUBSTANTIAL EVIDENCE, ANY OF THESE FOR -- YOUR APPEAL MUST BE FILED WITHIN 30 DAYS OF THE HDC DECISION AND NOT THAT DEADLINE CANNOT BE EXTENDED. EVIDENCE FROM LAY RESIDENTS MUST BE FACT BASED LOVE IT AND HATED ARE NOT FACT-BASED AND DO NOT CONSTITUTE EVIDENCE AND SUBSTANTIAL EVIDENCE. CONJECTURE OR ASSUMPTIONS ARE ILL RELEVANT.

THIS PROJECT WILL LOWER PROPERTY VALUES VALUES IN THE AREA. SO FOR EXAMPLE IF YOU WANT TO FIND THAT PROPERTY VALUES WILL BE HARMED BY A PROPOSED PROJECT YOU MUST BASE YOUR CONCLUSION ON RECORD EVIDENCE RATHER THAN YOUR GOD. THE TESTIMONY FROM AN APPRAISER YOU HAVE TO ASK YOURSELF IS A TRULY SIMILAR, DOES THE RECORD REFLECT THAT OR RELYING ON YOUR KNOWLEDGE YOU NEED TO STAY OR SHOW SO THAT YOU CAN SEE THAT THE EVIDENCE SUPPORTS YOUR CONCLUSION. THE PRESENTATION OF FACTS THAT WOULD ALLOW A REASONABLE PERSON TO CONCLUDE THAT VALUES WOULD BE GO DOWN, THAT'S WHAT YOU ARE LOOKING FOR.

PROPERTY OWNERS TESTIFYING IN DETAIL ABOUT THEIR PERSONAL KNOWLEDGE OF APPRAISAL, SALES PRICES CANCELED RESULTING IN A SIMILAR DEVELOPMENT OR FROM THE PENDING APPLICATION THAT COULD BE RELEVANT TO YOUR DECISION. RELEVANT PERSONAL KNOWLEDGE MUST BE EXPLAINED BY THE PERSON TESTIFYING TO FORM THE BASIS OF YOUR MOTION OR VOTE. BIAS, ALSO VERY IMPORTANT.

BIASED IS A PREDETERMINED OPINION THAT IS NOT LIKELY SUSCEPTIBLE TO CHANGE X PARTAKE COMMUNICATIONS COULD BE A FORM OF BIAS THAT IS USED BY SOMEONE APPEALING YOUR DECISION, CLOSE FAMILY OR BUSINESS TIES THAT CAN DISQUALIFY HDC MEMBERS FROM PARTICIPATING IN A MATTER OF DUE PROCESS EVEN IF THERE IS NO STATUTORY CONFLICT OF INTEREST. AND YOU ALL KNOW WHAT THAT IS IF YOU HAVE A VOTING CONFLICT IT'S USUALLY FINANCIAL INTEREST IF YOU DON'T HAVE THAT YOU COULD HAVE THAT BIAS AND STILL ABSTAIN IN A QUASIJUDICIAL HEARING AND STILL ABSTAIN FROM VOTING.

[00:10:08]

AND SO TONIGHT, WE WILL HAVE QUASIJUDICIAL HEARINGS IN EACH OF THE CASES, FIRST CITY STAFF WILL MAKE A PRESENTATION TO INTRODUCE EVIDENCE INTO THE RECORD, THEN THE APPLICANTS AND/OR THEIR AGENTS WILL COME TO THE PODIUM AND IDENTIFY YOURSELF BY NAME AND ADDRESS.

YOU WILL ALSO BE MAKING A PRESENTATION AND INTRODUCING EVIDENCE AND TESTIMONY INTO THE RECORD. THE PARTIES, CITY AND APPLICANT CAN CALL WITNESSES, THEY CAN CROSSING CROSS-EXAMINE EACH OTHER AND WITNESSES IN THE AFFECTED PARTIES IF YOU ARE RESIDENTS OF THE CITY AND DON'T WANT TO BE LIMITED BY TIME BECAUSE YOU'RE PRESENTING EVIDENCE AND TESTIMONY, PLEASE IDENTIFY YOURSELF AS AN AFFECTED PARTY WITH NAME AND ADDRESS AND YOU'LL BE LIMITED BY TIME YOU CAN ALSO PARTICIPATE IN CROSS-EXAMINATION.

IF THERE IS AN APPEAL, THAT WOULD BE TAKEN WITH ANY OF THE DECISIONS AT THE HDC MAKES TONIGHT, THAT APPEAL MUST BE FILED FOR APPLICANTS RIGHT NOW TO THE CITY COMMISSION WITHIN CITY 30 DAYS AND FOR AFFECTED OR AGGRIEVED PARTIES MEANING YOU ARE NOT ACROSS TOWN AND JUST DON'T LIKE IT, YOU HAVE TO PROVE THAT YOU HAVE MORE INTEREST THAN JUST ANY RESIDENT IN TOWN, YOU FILE YOUR APPEAL TO THE CIRCUIT COURT. THE COMMISSION IS CONSIDERING CHANGING THAT AND HAVING EVERYBODY ALLOWED TO APPEAL THE CITY COMMISSION FIRST, BUT RIGHT NOW THEY CAN STILL APPEAL TO THE CIRCUIT BOARD. ANY QUESTIONS SOON I THINK YOU

FOR THAT COMPLETE EVIDENCE. >> ANYONE SPEAKING TO THE COUNCIL TONIGHT WILL DO SO UNDER OATH. AND SO IF YOU NEED TO BE SWORN, PLEASE STAND NOW, RAISE YOUR RIGHT HAND AND WE WILL ADMINISTER THE OATH IS TO MAKE YOU SWEAR OR AFFIRM THAT THE ORAL AND/OR WRITTEN TESTIMONY YOU ARE ABOUT TO GET WILL BE THE TRUTH, THE WHOLE TRUTH, NOTHING

BUT THE TRUTH? >> THANK YOU. NEXT ITEM IS THE APPROVAL OF

[3. APPROVAL OF MEETING MINUTES]

[4.1 HDC 2020-0046 - MARK L. + JENNIFER D. BAILEY, 809 SAN FERNANDO STREET]

>> THANK YOU. SAL, HISTORIC PRESERVATION PLANNER.

THIS IS HDC 2020-46 FOR PROPERTY LOCATED AT 809 SAN FERNANDO STREET IN OLD TOWN ZONED O T1, CURRENTLY A VACANT PARCEL. THIS IS THE AREA AND IT CONSISTS OF TWO MEDIUM PAEONIA AND ONE FULL PAEONIA. THREE, FOUR, AND SIX. THE APPLICANT IS SEEKING 2000 -- TWO-STORY RESIDENCE. ALTHOUGH THIS IS A VACANT LOTS A BRICK STRUCTURE EXISTS ON THE LOT, THE ORIGIN OR USE IS UNKNOWN AT THIS TIME THEY WERE NOT EVALUATED WHEN ARCHAEOLOGICAL RESOURCES WAS BEING CONDUCTED DUE TO BEING ON PRIVATE PROPERTY THE OWNER RECOGNIZES THE CULTURAL SIGNIFICANCE AND HAS WORKED TO BUILD AROUND THEM AND ON SITE.

THE APPLICANT RECEIVED CONCEPTUAL APPROVAL FOR THE PROJECT ON NOVEMBER 19, 2020 AND LAST MONTH OUR DECEMBER MEETING WE CONTINUED THIS TO GIVE THEM MORE TIME TO ADDRESS THE USE USE

[00:15:03]

PRESERVATION GUIDELINES AND IS RECOMMENDING 2020-46. >> THANK YOU, BOARD MEMBERS DO

YOU HAVE ANY QUESTIONS. >> I HAVE A QUESTION,. >> DO WE HAVE A SIDE-BY-SIDE OF

THE ORIGINAL GARAGE PLAN AND THE REVISIONS? >> I DON'T HAVE ONE SHEET THAT HAS THAT BUT I CAN PULL UP THE PREVIOUS ONES TO SEE THE CHANGES MADE.

>> ON THEN MY SECOND QUESTION IS, I THOUGHT I REMEMBERED FROM THIS CASE I THOUGHT WE HAD AN ELEVATION THAT SHOWED THE GARAGE IN RELATION TO THE HOUSE SO WE HAVE A STREET VIEW OF THAT, DO

WE NOT HAVE THAT? >> DO YOU THINK YOU CAN GET US THERE?

>> I'M WORKING ON IT. >> THAT IS ALL FOR ME. ANY OTHER QUESTIONS.

>> I THINK THE REPRESENTATIVE MAY BE ABLE TO ANSWER SOME OF THESE QUESTIONS THEY ARE ON THE

LINE IS THE AGENT AVAILABLE? >> YES, WE ARE HERE. >> HELLO THE BAILEY'S ARE HERE.

>> WELCOME. >> THANK YOU, HAPPY NEW YEAR FROM CORAL GABLES SOMATIC HAPPY

NEW YEAR. >> IF YOU WOULD LIKE, I CAN MAKE A FEW REMARKS AND THEN YOU CAN ASK SOME QUESTIONS WE TAKE THE COUNCIL AND STAFF FOR THEIR CONSIDERATION OF THIS APPLICATION AND CONCEPTUAL APPROVAL BACK IN NOVEMBER. SL MENTION COMBO WE TOOK GREAT EFFORT TO AVOID LOT FOR IT WAS NOT OUR ORIGINAL PLAN BUT WE DECIDED TO AVOID ANY STRUCTURES ON THAT AND KEEP THE CEDAR TREES THAT ARE THERE AND TRY TO FIND OUT MORE ABOUT THE THAT WE HAVE SEEN AND WE HAVE CITED ON THE SIDE PLANT, TRYING TO FIND OUT SOME MORE INFORMATION ABOUT THAT BASED ON THE RESULTS OF THE CONCEPTUAL REPORT APPROVAL, WE LISTENED TO THE RECOMMENDATIONS OF THE GARAGE STRUCTURE WHICH IS ON LOT THREE BLOCKS SIX AND WHILE IT IS AN ANCILLARY GARAGE BUILDING, THE ROOF STYLE MIRRORS THAT OF THE STRUCTURE OF THE MAIN HOUSE STRUCTURE ON THE SIDE PORCH GARAGE WITH THE WALL AND FLAT ROOF AND DESIGN. YOU MAY RECALL THAT WE ARE INTENDING TO PLACE SOLAR PANELS ON THAT FLAT ROOF AND WE THOSE ARE NOT TO BE SEEN FROM THE STREET, ALSO ONE OF THE OTHER SIGNIFICANT ADDITIONS TO THE GARAGE IS THAT THERE GARAGE DOOR

[00:20:02]

THAT WAS THE RECOMMENDATION THAT WAS GIVEN TO US AT THAT CONCEPTUAL THERE HAVE BEEN NO

OTHER CHANGES OTHER THAN WINDOWS THAT WE STANDARDIZE. >> THANK YOU VERY MUCH, I

APPRECIATE IT. >> SO THIS THAT YOU ARE LOOKING AT IS THE CURRENT PROPOSAL AND I CANNOT DO THEM SIDE-BY-SIDE BECAUSE OF ZOOM. BUT, I CAN BRING UP THE OTHER.

>> SO, THIS IS THE CONCEPTUAL AS IT WAS AND DO YOU HAVE ANY FURTHER QUESTIONS ON THIS.

>> NOT FOR SETH. DO WE HAVE ANYTHING? >> I HAVE ONE QUESTION THIS IS FOR THE OWNERS, I DON'T SEE WHERE IT IS NOTED ON THE DRAWING WITH THE FINISH ON THE CANTILEVER ROOF ELEMENT OVER THE GARAGES, DO WE KNOW IS THAT GOING TO BE A METAL ROOF?

OR SOMETHING ELSE? >> IT WILL BE ASPHALT SHINGLE LIKE THAT OF THE MAIN HOUSE,

THERE ARE NO METAL ROOFS. >> OKAY. >> OTHER MEMBERS OF THE PUBLIC THAT WOULD LIKE TO TALK TO THIS CASE. I SEE NO MOVEMENT, LET'S GO INTO BOARD DISCUSSION. WOULD ANYBODY LIKE TO START WITH THE DISCUSSION.

>> I RECALL THAT I THOUGHT IT WAS JIM MAY BE THAT BROUGHT UP ADDING SOME MORE VERTICALITY OR MORE ARTICULATION OF THE WALL ON THE GARAGE SO IT DID NOT APPEAR JUST AS A FLAT STRUCTURE TO MAKE

IT RELATE MORE TO THE MAIN STRUCTURE. >> I REMEMBER SEEING THAT, TOO.

I THINK THAT THE ADDITION OF THE BRACKET AND THE ROOF IS IN IMPROVEMENTS PRIOR, BUT I'M JUST NOT SURE IF THIS SINGLE-STORY STRUCTURE IS CONSISTENT WITH -- IN OLD TOWN.

AND I DON'T KNOW THAT IT DOES TO SOME EXTENTS RELATE TO A CERTAIN SECTION OF THE PRIMARY RESIDENCE BUT A VERY SMALL SECTION OF THE EVIDENCE, NOT THE PREDOMINANT ARCHITECTURE OF THE PRIMARY

RESIDENCE. >> I THINK YOU CAN WALK AROUND OLD TOWN AND FIND CASES THAT DO

IN CASES THAT DON'T. >> MR. CHAIRMAN, IT'S NOT THAT I DON'T HAVE LAPTOPS HERE SO WE CAN'T LOOK AT ALL OF THE DRAWINGS AGAIN AS WE STUDIED THEM AT HOME, BUT COULD SOMEBODY HELP ME CITE THE GARAGE, I HAVE FORGOTTEN THE STREETSCAPE HERE AND WHAT I'M GETTING AT IS, I AGREE ABOUT THE ARTICULATION, THE QUESTION IS WHO IS LOOKING AT IT?

WHERE IS THAT EXPOSURE, COULD SOMEBODY? >> AS I LOOKED AT IT LOT FOUR IS WHAT THEY ARE LEAVING OPEN BECAUSE THAT HAS THE CEDAR TREES AND THE BRICK STRUCTURE AND THE

GARAGE IMMEDIATELY TO THE NORTH OF BAD. >> IS ANYBODY GOING TO SEE THIS?

WHAT IS BEHIND THAT? >> THAT WOULD BE THE BACK OF THE PROPERTY.

THIS IS SAN FERNANDO OUT OF AMELIA AND IS THERE A STREET BEHIND THIS?

OR DOES THAT BACKUP THAT IS WHITE STREET. >> I AM REALLY TURNED AROUND.

[00:25:10]

>> NO, THAT'S NOT RIGHT. >> THERE IS NO STREET BEHIND IT. >> BEHIND THIS HOUSE IS MR. THOMPSON'S HOUSE WHICH ORIENTS TOWARDS WHAT STREET IS THAT? AND SO THIS IS THE BACK OF OUR HOUSE IS THE BACK OF HIS HOUSE, THERE IS NO DIRECT VIEW OF THE GARAGE, ACROSS THE STREET AND OFFSET IS A PROPERTY OWNED BY JULIA STARR SANFORD THAT IS ON THE CORNER, THERE IS NOT A BUILDING DIRECTLY ACROSS FROM THE GARAGE.

AND SO, SAL IF MAY BE BROUGHT AT THE AERIAL, THERE YOU GO, THAT IS EASIER TO SEE.

>> SO THE GARAGE IS ON LOT THREE. >> ONE SIDE WILL FACE THE ON TOUCH LOT AT FOUR AND ONE SIDE WILL FACE THE PROPERTY GOING UP -- STREET.

>> THE FRONT OF THE GARAGE FACES THE FRONT SUMMIT CORRECT. THE SIDE THAT WE ARE CONCERNED ABOUT -- ANY OF THE SIDES BECAUSE IT IS A FLAT BOX. AND LET ME JUST ADD, WE CONSIDERED THE POTENTIAL ADDITION OF THE PEDIMENT BUT THE REASON WHY WE CHOSE TO TRY TO MARRY THE ROOF INSTEAD IS BECAUSE IF WE ARE GOING TO POTENTIALLY ADD SOLAR WHICH IS SUSTAINABILITY IS A GOAL IN THE GRATTAN GUIDELINES, THAT PEDIMENT IS GOING TO CAST A SHADOW AND IT WOULD BLOCK ONE OF THE AREAS OF GREATEST SUN EXPOSURE BECAUSE OF THE OPEN SPACE OF THIS STREET. SO WHAT WE ARE TRYING TO DO IS CREATE A SITUATION WHERE WE CAN USE SOLAR, WE DO NOT WANT TO CUT DOWN A SINGLE TREE WE DON'T HAVE TO CUT DOWN JUST TO BUILD THIS HOUSE. AND SO, BY TRYING TO MARRY THE LOOKS AND IN THAT MANNER IT MAKES SENSE. THE OTHER THING THAT WE CONSIDERED IS WHEN YOU CONSIDER THE HISTORIC ROLE OF ANCILLARY STRUCTURES, ANCILLARY STRUCTURES TYPICALLY DID NOT HAVE MANY OF THE ARCHITECTURE FEATURES THAT THE MAIN HOUSE STOOD FOR THE SIMPLE REASON THAT HISTORICALLY THEY WERE NOT ANCILLARY STRUCTURES AND THEY WERE NOT A FOCAL POINT.

AND SO WE ARE TRYING TO MARRY THESE COMPETING CONCERNS IN A WAY THAT WOULD LOOK ATTRACTIVE FROM THE STREET AND HAVE A CARRIAGE HOUSE LOOK WITHOUT IMPEDING THE SUSTAINABILITY GOALS OF ULTIMATELY ADDING SOLAR TO THE PROPERTY AND ALLOWING MAXIMUM SUN EXPOSURE ACROSS THE

STREET AND TRYING TO MAINTAIN THE TREES AS MUCH AS POSSIBLE. >> OKAY.

>> I THINK YOU MADE MENTION OF IT, THE ENTIRE THERE IS A SECTION OF MAIN HOUSE THAT IS SURROUNDED BY A PARAPET WALL WITH THE WEST INDIES SORT OF CARIBBEAN STUCCO STYLE ROOF LINE WHICH AGAIN LOOKS AT THE DRAINS ON THAT STYLING WHICH AGAIN THAT IS ALMOST HALF THE LENGTH OF THE HOUSE, HALF THE LENGTH OF THE HOUSE. AND IT WAS NOT ARBITRARY, WE WANTED TO BRING THAT EFFECT, BRING THAT STUCCO WALL AFFECT TO THE ANCILLARY GARAGE TO THE

STRUCTURE ON PURPOSE. >> I HAVE A QUESTION FOR THE APPLICANT.

MARK, ARE YOU REFERRING I THINK I JUST FIGURED IT OUT WE DON'T HAVE A ROOF PLAN BUT IS IT THE

RIGHT SIDE? >> YES. >> SO THAT IS A PARAPET WALL

WITH A FLAT BEHIND IT. >> YES, YOU'LL NOTICE THIS THREE SCOFFER DRAINS THERE.

>> IT'S THE SAME SIZE. >> THAT'S THE SAME VIEW THAT YOU WOULD SEE AS YOU DRIVE INTO THE

GARAGE. >> OKAY FOR THE POINTS OF DISCUSSION?

>> THIS IS -- I THINK I WOULD AGREE WITH VIRTUALLY EVERYTHING THE OWNERS HAVE STATED, MY ONLY

[00:30:08]

IN OUR CASE HERE, THE ACCESSORY GARAGE IS ACTUALLY FRONTING HIS STREETS AND THEREBY GIVING IT ADDITIONAL PROMINENCE. I DO LIKE THE ADDITION OF THE EXTRA DETAILING ON THE FRONT WITH THE BRACKETS AND THE LITTLE REFORM THAT BRINGS MORE DETAILING TO IT I AM ON THE

FENCE, PART OF ME THINKS BECAUSE THAT IS FACING THE STREET. >> WELL, OUR PLAN IF I CAN, OUR PLAN IS TO LEAVE A LOT FOR BLOCK SIX MOSTLY NATURAL. THERE'S GOING TO BE NO REAL LAWN. IT'S GOING TO BE PALMETTO AND LANDSCAPING AND THERE WILL BE NATURAL AND WE DON'T INTEND TO SOLDER BRASS THAT. WE WANT TO KEEP THAT AS I MENTIONED NATURAL WITH FLORIDA PLANTINGS AND AGAIN, IT'S NOT GOING TO BE A SODDED LAWN AND SO ANY ADDITIONAL LANDSCAPING THAT WE WOULD ADD CLEARLY IT'S NOT GOING TO BE A FEATURE, IT'S NOT GOING TO BE SOMETHING THAT WE ARE HIGHLIGHTING IN ANY WAY. AND SO I THOUGHT THAT WOULD BE HELPFUL TO KNOW THAT OUR PLANS FOR LANDSCAPING ARE AGAIN FLORIDA, NATURAL GROWTH AND

NATURAL PLANTINGS. >> YES, SPEAKING OF OLD TOWN, TRADITIONALLY THOUGHT THAT THE CORNERS OF EACH BLOCK ACT RATHER AS ANCHORS AND IN THIS CASE YOU NOT DOING THAT AND YOU'RE NOT DOING IT FOR GOOD REASON AND I THINK THAT IS VALID, I THINK THAT THE RESULT IS A DEVELOPMENT WHICH IS PERHAPS NOT TYPICAL OF OLD TOWN, BUT NONETHELESS, IT DOES HAVE AN APPEAL AND IT HAS REASONS FOR BEING WHAT IT IS. AND SO, AS IN OLD TOWN RESIDENTS I HAVE NO PROBLEMS WITH THAT.

ANY FURTHER DISCUSSION OKAY, IS ANYONE PREPARED TO MAKE ADMIT A MOTION?

WE. >> IF I WOULD MAKE A MOTION I WOULD CONTINUE IT BECAUSE I THINK IT STILL NEEDS MORE DONE TO IT, BUT I DON'T THINK THAT'S THE MAJORITY OF WHAT YOU ALL THINK. THAT IS SO IF YOU ALL DISAGREE WITH THAT THEN SOMEONE SHOULD MAKE A MOTION TO APPROVE IT. I THINK THEY MADE AN EFFORT, BUT I DON'T THINK THEY REALLY TOOK INTO CONSIDERATION CAN COMPLETELY WHAT DIRECTION WE WERE TRYING TO ENCOURAGE THEM TO GO. I THINK THEY'RE CLOSE AND I THINK IT'S A GOOD LOOKING HOUSE AND THE ACCESSORY STRUCTURE COULD BE NICE IF IT JUST IF THEY MADE JUST A LITTLE BIT MORE OF A

COMMITMENT TO TRY TO TIED TO THE ARCHITECTURE OF THE MAIN HOUSE. >> THAT SOUNDS LIKE A MOTION AND

THERE. >> EXCEPT, THIS IS NOT GOING TO BE SEEN, THE GARAGE DOOR, THE EXPOSURE DOWN THE LENGTH IS TOWARDS THE LOT FOR WHICH IS FORCED AND WILL CONTINUE TO BE FORCED. SO IF I'M READING IT RIGHT, AND LIKE I SAID, WE DON'T HAVE TECHNOLOGY TO LOOK AT IT SO IF THIS THING WAS RUNNING THIS WAY I WOULD CONTINUE IT AND GET IT

FIXED. BUT IT'S NOT. >> IT FACES A PUBLIC STREET.

>> IT REALLY DOESN'T. IT RUNS IF I'M UNDERSTANDING THE GARAGE DOOR OPENS INTO --

>> THAT'S TRUE WHICH IS A STREET. >> AND IT'S A SQUARE BOX SO IT

DOESN'T ALWAYS HAVE AN ORIENTATION. >> SOMEBODY MAKE A MOTION.

>> I HAVE ONE OTHER QUESTION, DO WE DO TURN MEN WHO HAS LOT TO AMAT SIX, IS THAT VACANT OR IS

[00:35:05]

THERE SOMEBODY IN THERE FACING THE GARAGE TO THE RIGHT. >> THAT WOULD BE THE NORTH SIDE.

>> THAT IS MR. THOMPSON'S PROPERTY I BELIEVE. >> AND ACROSS THE STREET BECAUSE THIS IS A STREET WE HAVE RESIDENCES ACROSS THE STREET ALSO FACING IN.

>> I WILL MAKE A MOTION. I MOVED TO CONTINUE HDC CASE HDC 202046 UNTIL THE MARCH 2021 HDC

MEETING. >> IN ORDER TO CONTINUE TO ADDRESS OUR CONCERNS RELATED TO THE ACCESSORY STRUCTURE AND ITS CORRELATION TO THE PRIMARY RESIDENCE.

IS THERE A SECOND FOR THAT ONE? >> I WOULD SECOND. >> I WOULD LIKE TO ASK THE

APPLICANT IF HE IS PREPARED TO MAKE CHANGES? >> HOLD ON ONE SECOND.

>> JENNIFER CAN YOU HOLD YOUR THOUGHT FOR A MOMENT, WE WILL COME BACK IN A MOMENT.

>> SURE. >> ARE WE WAITING ON YOU. >> WHERE WE HAD?

>> YOU NEED TO ASK THE APPLICANT YOU WANT TO ASK THE APPLICANT IF THEY COULD BE PREPARED TO HAVE

REVISIONS MADE BY THE MARCH 2000. >> I APOLOGIZE WITH MASKS ON IT IS HARD TO TELL. SO, APPLICANTS, ARE YOU PREPARED TO MAKE CHANGES TO DESIGN AND

BRING BACK TO THE MARCH MEETING? >> I THINK WE COULD POTENTIALLY MAKE CHANGES BY THE MARCH MEETING BUT I WOULD REALLY LIKE CLARIFICATION BECAUSE THE LAST DIRECTION THAT WE HAD WAS THAT YOU NEEDED TO ENHANCE THE STRUCTURE SO THAT BETTER REFLECTED THE MAIN HOUSE.

WE HAVE TAKEN THE ROOF FROM THE MAIN HOUSE AND SO THAT WOULD IN FACT HAD A VERY CARRIAGE HOUSE TYPE OF EFFECT, THE ORIGINAL COMMENT WAS THAT PERHAPS THAT COULD BE DONE BY ADDING A PEDIMENT THAT WOULD REPLICATE THE FEATURE OF THE ENTIRE HOUSE, THE FUTURE THAT WE ARE TRYING TO DRAW ATTENTION TO. IF THEY ARE TELLING US THAT THE ONLY THING THE AMENDMENT THAT THEY WILL FIND ACCEPTABLE IS THE ADDITION OF THE PEDIMENT BECAUSE I DON'T HAVE A GOOD UNDERSTANDING OF WHAT ELSE WE COULD DO TO THIS GARAGE TO MAKE IT MIRROR THE MAIN HOUSE.

AND I MEAN THAT IN THE MOST RESPECTFUL WAY. I JUST WANT TO CLARIFICATION FROM WHAT IDEAS YOU HAVE ABOUT WHAT YOU COULD DO THAT WOULD STILL ALLOW US TO PURSUE SOLAR, WOULD STILL KEEP THE SOLAR HIDDEN FROM THE STREET BECAUSE THAT'S A PRIORITY AND ECHOES THE

MAIN HOUSE AND A MORE SIGNIFICANT WAY. >> IT CAN YOU ADD A LANDSCAPING

PLAN? >> WE ARE NOT GOING TO SIT HERE AND GIVE THEM ARCHITECTURAL.

>> I'M NOT TRYING, I JUST WANT SOME DIRECTION BECAUSE WE KINDA THOUGHT WE HONORED -- AND IF WE ARE NOT MEETING IT WE NEED TO HAVE MORE SIGNIFICANT GUIDANCE BECAUSE YOU CAN TELL US IT DOESN'T MERE THE HOUSE IT'S GOT THE SAME WINDOWS AND CORBELS IT HAS THE SAME LIGHTING, THE ONLY THING IT DOESN'T HAVE IS THE PEDIMENT SO IF YOU ARE TELLING US YOU WANT THE PEDIMENT, THEN

WE NEED TO REEVALUATE THAT. >> IN MY PERSONAL OPINION. >> IN MY PERSONAL OPINION I THINK YOU SHOULD LOOK AT WHAT THE 95% OF THE ROOF OF THE PRIMARY STRUCTURE IS DOING AND LOOK AT CHOOSING TO BE CONSISTNT WITH THAT IN THE ACCESSORY STRUCTURE.

>> CAN WE VOTE? >> THANK YOU. WE NEED TO HAVE OUR DISCUSSION ON THE MOTION THAT IS BEING PRESENTED AND SECONDED. IS THERE ANY FURTHER DISCUSSION?

[00:40:10]

[INAUDIBLE] >> MY ONLY OTHER COMMENT WOULD BE IF YOU LOOK AT THIS IN CONTEXT AND SAY WHAT WILL BE TO AFFORD LOOKING AT THIS AS A STANDALONE COMPONENT I DON'T THINK YOU WOULD APPROVE IT AS A STANDALONE COMPONENT BECAUSE IT'S NOT CONSISTENT WITH ANYTHING ELSE WE HAVE APPROVED IN OLD TOWN. AND SO, I DON'T THINK WE CAN DISCREDIT THE IMPORTANCE OF THE ACCESSORY STRUCTURE BECAUSE LEGITIMATELY THE PRIMARY

STRUCTURE IS A GOOD LOOKING HOUSE. >> WE DID SPECIFICALLY MENTION HAVING MORE ARTICULATION AND IT DOESN'T HAVE TO MIRROR THE PEDIMENT ON THE FRONT OF THE HOUSE WHICH IS THE MAIN FEATURE OF THE PEDIMENT BUT IT COULD HAVE SOME SOMETHING ON THE SIDE TO MORE BETTER MARRY THAT AND HAVE A SLIGHT PITCH TO IT. THERE IS DESIGN WAYS TO DO THAT.

I DON'T THINK THAT FLAT STRUCTURE OF THE MAIN ROOF IS PROMINENT ENOUGH TO TIE THIS IN.

>> I GO BACK TO THE OLD GUIDELINES I THINK WE ARE TRYING TO DESIGN THE BUILDING AND WHEN

WE LOOK AT THE -- THEY ARE MUCH MORE GENERAL THAN THIS. >> FOR MYSELF I FEEL LIKE IT'S ON A RAZOR THIN EDGE. I THINK AT MINIMAL ARTICULATION OF THE PARAPET, MINIMAL, JUST TO HEARKEN AND REFLECT WHAT IS GOING ON THE FRONT OF THE HOUSE FOR ME WOULD BE SUFFICIENT TO

GET MY YES VOTE. >> I FEEL LIKE BECAUSE IT'S ON AMELIA STREET, THAT IS ESSENTIALLY A SECONDARY AND IT NEEDS TO HAVE SOME ELEMENTS THAT SPEAKS TO THE ARTICULATION OF THE FRONT OF THE HOUSE TO TIE THEM TOGETHER. SOME MINIMAL ARTICULATION FOR ME

WOULD DRIVE THAT HOME. >> LET'S VOTE. >> WE HAVE A MOTION NANOSECONDS.

THE MOTION I BELIEVE IT REQUIRES SOME CLARIFICATIONS IN TERMS OF WHAT IS REQUIRED BEFORE THE

SUBSEQUENT DISCUSSION IS THERE A MOTION. >> I THINK OF WHAT PREVIOUSLY

STILL STAND. >> THE MOTION IS, TO CONTINUE TO THE MARCH MEETING.

>> PLEASE CALL THE ROLE.

>> ASKED. >> CHAIR HARRISON. >> NO.

>> SO, WE WILL SEE YOU IN MARCH, MARK AND JENNIFER. THANK YOU FOR YOUR TIME.

[4.2 HDC 2019-0039 - JOEL & JUDITH REITZER, 1132 WHITE STREET]

>> HDC CASE 2019, JOEL AND JUDITH ON WHITE STREET. >> THIS IS HDC 2019-39 FOR A PROPERTY LOCATED AT 1132 WHITE STREET. ZONED OT TO AN OLD TOWN CURRENTLY A VACANT PARCEL, THE REQUEST IS AN AMENDMENT TO MAKE CHANGES TO THE FLOOR PLAN AND ROOF. THIS IS THE PARCEL HERE ON THE PROJECT WAS ORIGINALLY HEARD AND ISSUED A COA ON DECEMBER 19 AND TO SIX-MONTH EXTENSION GRANTED ON DECEMBER 7, 2020.

THE PROPOSED AMENDMENT INCLUDES THE FOLLOWING CHANGES, AN INCREASE IN THE SQUARE FOOTAGE OF THE FOOTPRINT, CHANGES FOR THE REFORM TO ACCOMMODATE FOOTPRINT CHANGES, REMOVAL OF TOOLSHED AND THE ADDITION OF A SHED ROOF OVER THE REAR ENTRY. STAFF FINDS THAT PROPOSED AMENDMENTS TO THE PREVIOUSLY APPROVED DESIGN ARE COMPATIBLE WITH THE OLD TOWN DISTRICT IN TERMS OF MATERIAL, SCALE, ORIENTATION AND SETBACKS. NO CHANGES IN MATERIALS ARE BEING PROPOSED AT THIS TIME. THE STAFF FINDS THE REQUESTED ACTION IS CONSISTENT WITH THE LAND DEVELOPMENT CODE THE SECRETARY OF INTERIOR STANDARDS AND THE GUIDELINES AND RECOMMENDS APPROVAL OF THIS AMENDMENT TO HDC 2019-39. THANK YOU.

>> THANK YOU. BOARD MEMBERS, QUESTIONS FOR SALE?

[00:45:02]

>> I HAVE ONE IN TERMS OF THE NUMBERING OF THE STREET WE DISCUSSED WHETHER OR NOT IT SHOULD BE 1122? I SPOKE WITH THE FIRE MARSHAL WHO ASSIGNS ADDRESSES, 1122 IS ACTUALLY THIS HOME NEXT-DOOR. THE ADDRESS HAS BEEN ASSIGNED FOR THIS PARCEL THAT WE ARE SPEAKING OF AND IT IS 1126 BUT THAT ADDRESS HAS BEEN ASSIGNED AS OF TODAY, WE WILL MAKE THAT

CORRECTION. >> IS THE APPLICANT HERE. >> LET ME SEE IF THEY ARE ON THE

LINE. >> THE FLOOR IS YOURS. >> HELLO.

GOOD EVENING. THE FLOOR IS YOURS, PLEASE TELL US ABOUT YOUR APPLICATION.

WE ARE NOT HEARING ANYTHING. HE IS MUTED NOW LET'S SEE IF WE CAN GET A MINUTE IF YOU CAN HEAR

ME YOU ARE APPARENTLY MUTED. THERE WACO. >> AND WE HEAT CAN YOU HEAR ME

OKAY? >> GOOD EVENING. PLEASE TELL ME ABOUT YOUR

APPLICATION. >> IT'S GOOD TO SEE YOU ALL. AND I WANTED TO WE WERE EVALUATING THE BEDROOM SIZES GIVEN THE HOUSE PLAN THAT WE HAVE AND WHAT THIS APPLICATION DOES IS SIMPLY TO INCREASE THE BEDROOM SIZE, CREATES A LITTLE BIT DIFFERENT FLOOR PLAN AS YOU CAN SEE A MESS BEEN PROVIDED TO YOU, AND THE L SHAPE ROOF, GABLE INTERSECTS WITH THE MAIN ROOF DIRECTLY SO THAT THERE IS A VALLEY AT THE FRONT INSTEAD OF A DOUBLE SECTION ROOF RUNNING NORTH AND SOUTH. AND SO THAT WHEN IT TURNS TO THE EAST THE FLOOR PLAN CREATES THE NEED FOR HAVING ADDITIONAL ROOFS AND BELIEVES THAT THE EAST-WEST WITH THE NORTH EAST IS IMPORTANT SO WE ADDED TO THE BACK IT TO RECOVER THEN BROKEN OFF IN THE CORNER SO IT WOULD -- SO, THIS CHANGES THE ROOF ORIENTATION AT AN AWKWARD VALLEY THAT WAS IN THE PREVIOUS DOUBLE ROOFS AND IT CREATES A BETTER SITUATION FOR THE DRAINAGE OF THE WATER OFF THE ROOF.

AND AGAIN, WITH THE STRUCTURE IT WILL NOT BE PROVIDED AND ALL OF THE MATERIALS ARE THE SAME THERE IS NO CHANGE THERE. THE ORIGINAL APPLICATION HAD FENCING IN IT, THERE'S NO

FENCING IN THIS APPLICATION. SO ARE THERE ANY QUESTIONS? >> ANY QUESTIONS.

>> YES, THIS IS JIM, I'M ONLY ASKING THIS BECAUSE WE HAVE ASKED IT OF PREVIOUS APPLICANTS OF THE ARTICULATION AND I WAS JUST WONDERING HOW YOU ARE AFFIXING YOUR HARDY LATTICE AND

IS IT REALLY GOING TO READ AS AN INSET WITH SHADOW LINES IN SUCH? >> I DID PROVIDE A DETAILED PREVIOUSLY AND YOU ARE CORRECT IT WAS INSUFFICIENT IN DETAIL AND SO I DID PROVIDE A

SUPPLEMENTAL DETAIL TO SAL THIS WEEK WHICH SHE SHOULD ADD. >> IS NOT ON ELEVATION TO?

[00:50:02]

>> YES. >> AND IT'S A MISNOMER AND CARRIED OVER, IT IS JUST A HEARTY ONE BY SIX PAINTED DIFFERENTLY AND THERE BEHIND IT ALLOWS THE FASTENING OF THE

HARDY BOARD STRIPS WITH THE SPACES FACING TO THE EXTERIOR. >> SO, IN THE AREAS WHERE YOU HAVE THE ONE BY SIXES, VISTA MALL IS STEPPING BACK TO CREATE A RECESS.

>> EXACTLY. IT STEPS BACK. >> JUST ABOUT AN INCH AND A HALF. I SEE THE INCH AND A HALF ON THE DETAIL.

IT WOULD BE NICE IF IT WAS MORE THAN AN INCH AND A HALF. >> OR IF IT WAS REVERSED.

>> TO SAY THIS, WE WOULD LIKE TO RESERVE THE RIGHT TO CHANGE THE FOUNDATION IF NECESSARY TO THE WOOD FOUNDATION AND I WANT TO ASK YOU IF IT WOULD BE REQUIRED IF WE COME BACK IF WERE NOT

CHANGING THE EXTERIOR APPE APPEARANCE. >> SAL, CAN YOU?

>> FOR THE MATRIX, ALL ALTERATIONS TO A BOARD APPROVED DOA APPROVED BACK TO THE BOARD

UNLESS THE BOARD GRANTS THAT. >> THANK YOU. ANY FURTHER QUESTIONS?

>> I THINK IT WOULD PROBABLY BE A SUPERIOR LOOK IF IT WAS DONE THAT WAY.

>> IF YOU'RE GOING TO GO TO THAT EFFORT I DON'T THINK IT'S ANY MORE EFFORT TO STEP IT BACK

4 INCHES, IS ARE YOU THERE? >> I AM HERE. >> IS THAT OKAY WITH YOU IF WE ASK FOR YOU TO STEP IT BACK IT SAY FOR 6 INCHES INSTEAD OF AN INCH AND A HALF?

>> WITHOUT CONSULTING WITH THE CONTRACTOR, I DON'T WANT TO COMMIT TO THAT.

I WOULD LIKE TO POINT OUT AND I MEAN THIS WITH ALL DUE RESPECT TO ALL OF YOU, THIS IS NOT PART

OF THE APPLICATION. THIS WAS PREVIOUSLY APPROVED. >> YOU MAKE A GOOD POINT, SIR.

IS THERE ANYONE FROM THE PUBLIC WHO WOULD LIKE TO SPEAK FOR OR AGAINST THIS CASE? SEEING NONE COME I WILL CLOSE THE PUBLIC HEARING IN THE BOARD DISCUSSION.

>> JIM,. >> I DON'T HAVE ANY PROBLEMS WITH THE CHANGES THEY HAVE MADE COME I THINK IT'S A GOOD-LOOKING HOUSE AND I RECALL WHEN WE APPROVED IT WE HAD SOME CONDITION ON SCENE AND THE ELEVATION OF THE ELEVATION DETAIL BUT SHE HAS PROVIDED AND MAY BE WE COULD REQUEST IF THEY COULD FIND A LITTLE BIT MORE DEPTH OF ARTICULATION AND PASS IT WITH THAT BUT NOT CONDITIONAL UPON IT. > AND WHAT ABOUT THE CHANGE TO

THE FLOOR? >> THAT IS A HARD ONE TO CALL BECAUSE THERE'S SO MANY DIFFERENT WAYS TO DO IT, I DO THINK IT WOULD BE A SUPERIOR LOOK TO WHAT IS CURRENTLY THERE.

>> TO SEE A DIFFERENCE? I THINK YOU WOULD SEE A DIFFERENT SENATE WOULD BE A

DIFFERENCE IN A POSITIVE DIRECTION. >> IF SOMEONE PREPARED TO MAKE A

MOTION TO COVER THESE POINTS? >> I THINK I WILL MAKE A MOTION IF I THINK I GOT A CONSENSUS ON THE BOARD THAT THEY WOULD BE OKAY WITH A COMMENT REGARDING I'M NOT SURE, LET ME ASK THE BOARD, DO YOU THINK WE CAN ALLOW STAFF TO REVIEW CHANGE WITH THE ENTIRE FOUNDATION.

>> IT SEEMS LIKE THAT'S GOING PRETTY FAR. I'M NOT TRYING TO HOLD IT UP BUT THAT'S GOING PRETTY FAR. AND TO IT'S ONE THING TO ASK STAFF TO DEAL WITH AN EXTERNAL DECORATIVE ELEMENT LIKE LATTICE, IT'S ANOTHER THING TO CHANGE THE FOUNDATION.

>> I CONCUR. SO. >> IT MR. -- HOW COMMITTED ARE

YOU TO CHANGING THE FLOOR ARRANGEMENT? >> HE IS ON ME RIGHT NOW.

[00:55:03]

>> HE WAS APPROVED IN DECEMBER 19 AND WE ARE BACK IN JANUARY 21.

IT'S NOT LIKE THEY'RE STILL WORKING ON DESIGN. I GUESS I'M A LITTLE SYMPATHETIC

TO THESE CHANGES. >> ARE YOU WITH US? >> CAN YOU HEAR ME?

>> THE QUESTION I THINK IT IS THE BOARD WOULD LIKE YOU TO COMMIT TO ONE FOUNDATION OR THE

OTHER. >> IT WE WOULD LEAVE IT AS IT IS AS IT REMAINS.

>> THAT'S FINE, THANK YOU. >> IS THE MOTION POSSIBLE AT THIS POINT?

>> SUSPECTED WE HAVE A CONDITION TO LOOK AT HONESTLY I'VE JUST BEEN WORKING ON IT MYSELF AND IT'S NOT AS EASY AS PUSHING IT BACK A FEW MORE INCHES BECAUSE STRUCTURAL ISSUES.

>> AND WE APPROVED IT PREV PREVIOUSLY. >> I WOULD LIKE TO MAKE A MOTION I MOVED TO APPROVE THIS AMENDMENT TO HDC CASE 2019-39 WITHOUT CONDITIONS AND I MOVE THAT HDC MAKE THE FOLLOWING FACTS THE FINDING FACTS AND CONCLUSIONS OF LAW PART OF RECORD THAT THIS AMENDMENT TO 2019-39 AS PRESENTED IS SUBSTANTIALLY COMPLIANCE WITH THE LAND DEVELOPMENT CODE AND THE SECRETARY OF INTERIOR STANDARDS IN OLD TOWN PRESERVATION AND GUIDELINES TO WARRANT FINAL APPROVAL AT THIS TIME.

>> I SECOND. >> PLEASE CALL THE ROLE. >> MEMBER.

>> YES. >> --

>> CONGRATULATIONS. THANK YOU VERY MUCH INDEED. I WOULD LIKE AGAIN TO MAKE AN EDITORIAL COMMENT ABOUT WHAT I WOULD LIKE THIS BOARD TO DO IS TO BE ABLE TO CONSIDER FINAL PROPOSALS. I DO NOT LIKE DESIGN CHANGES PARTICULARLY SIGNIFICANT DESIGN CHANGES BEING PROPOSED ARE CONSIDERED. I DON'T KNOW WHO CAN DO ANYTHING ABOUT THAT OR WHAT CAN BE DONE BUT PLEASE DO WHAT YOU CAN. THANK YOU.

[5.1 HDC 2020-0052 - DRACE CONSTRUCTION, INC., AGENT FOR MICHAEL MOCK, 1020 WHITE STREET]

MICHAEL MOC K AT 1020 WHITE STREET. >> SAL NEEDS TO GO FIRST AND PRESENT THE CASE TO US. YOU CAN REMAIN STANDING IF THAT'S WHAT YOU WOULD LIKE.

>> THIS IS HDC 2020-52, PROPERTY LOCATED AT 1020 WHITE STREET IN OLD TOWN, IT IS CURRENTLY A VACANT PARCEL, THIS IS APPROVAL TO CONDUCT TWO-STORY STRUCTURE AND A DETACHED TWO-STORY STRUCTURE. WITH THE PROPOSED PLAN ALSO INCLUDES A 6-FOOT TALL CEDAR PRIVACY FENCE AT THE WEST SIDE ELEVATION. STAFF FINDS THAT THIS PROPOSED DESIGN IS COMPATIBLE WITH THE OLD TOWN FERNANDINA HISTORIC DISTRICT IN TERMS OF ORIENTATION AND SETBACKS AND STAFF IS RECOMMENDING DOES FIND THAT THE REQUESTED ACTION AS PRESENTED IS CONSISTENT WITH THE LAND DEVELOPMENT CODE THE SECRETARY OF DEVELOPMENT STANDARDS AND THE DEVELOPMENT GUIDELINES STAFF OR AGREEMENTS AND OF HDC 2252. QUESTIONS FOR STAFF, HEARING

NONE. >> I CANNOT REMEMBER, ARE THERE LIMITATIONS ON WINDOW

MANUFACTURERS IN OLD TOWN? >> IT IS THE SAME LIST. >> I DON'T THINK MY WINDOWS IS

ON THE LIST. >> IT IS A CASE-BY-CASE, IT IS NOT ON THE LIST.

IT IS FOR THE BOARD TO DO ON A CASE-BY-CASE BASIS. >> PLEASE, TELL US ABOUT THE

PROJECT. >> IT IS TWO-STORY HOUSE AS FAR AS THE WINDOW QUESTION, WE ARE

[01:00:06]

USE A DIFFERENT BRAND. >> WE CAN HAVE THAT IN OUR BOARD DISCUSSION.

AS FAR AS THE APPEARANCE, THE QUALITY AND STANDARDS ON THE APPROVED WINDOW.

>> THANK YOU IS THERE ANYBODY IN THE AUDIENCE WOULD LIKE TO SPEAK FOR OR AGAINST THIS CASE? SEEING NONE, CLOSE THE PUBLIC SESSION, WE MOVE INTO BOARD DISCUSSION.

>> I HAVE SEEN THE MI WINDOWS USED AND I AM NOT A BIG FAN OF THEM.

I DON'T THINK THAT THEY ARE CONSISTENT WITH OUR EXPECTATIONS FOR THE OTHER WINDOWS THAT WE APPROVED IN THE HISTORIC DISTRICT UNLESS THAT THEY CAN COME IN AND BRING US A SAMPLE OF IT THAT WOULD CONVINCE US OTHERWISE MAYBE THEY HAVE DIFFERENT LINES THAT I'M NOT AWARE OF THAT WOULD NOT BE AN UNUSUAL THING TO HAVE BUT I WOULD BE HESITANT TO APPROVE IT TONIGHT WITH THAT BE ABLE TO BE USED WE COULD APPROVE IT WITH THE CONDITION THAT THEY PICK A WINDOW THAT IS ON THEIR PREAPPROVED LIST OR THEY COME BACK AND ASKED FOR US TO

CONSIDER THE PRODUCT. >> ARE YOU LOOKING AT STAFF APPROVAL?

>> I DON'T THINK STAFF CAN APPROVE. >> IF THEY JUST PICK ONE OFF THE

LIST. >> I AGREE IT WAS IT WASN'T ON THE PREAPPROVED LIST.

>> I THINK WE'VE HAD SO MANY ISSUES OF NON- LISTED WINDOWS COMING THROUGH THAT WE DENY THAT WE HAVE GOT TO BE CONSISTENT AND IF WE WANT TO CHANGE OR ADD IT TO THE WINDOWLESS THAT'S WHAT WE NEED TO DO NOT ON A CASE-BY-CASE. LET'S HAVE A PRESENTATION AND CONCUR AND PUT THEM ON THE LIST AND THEN WE DON'T WASTE EVERYBODY'S TIME COMING THROUGH

HERE. >> OTHER THAN THAT THE ONLY OTHER COMMENT IS THAT THE AIR CONDITIONER UNIT IS SITTING RIGHT THERE EXPOSED TO NEW STREET WITHOUT BEING SHIELDED OR ANYTHING LIKE THAT IN THE ENCLOSURE, SO I THINK THAT WOULD BE SOMETHING WE WOULD NEED.

>> I DON'T THINK I THINK WE WOULD REQUIRE IT WITH AN ARCHITECTURAL ELEMENT.

>> THAT'S EASY ENOUGH. >> WHO'S THE DRAFTSMAN? I DO HAVE ONE QUESTION FOR THE APPLICANT, YOU HAVE A REALLY NICE SUNBURST EMBELLISHMENT ON THE FRONT WITH THE GABLES, WHAT IS THE MATERIAL FOR THAT AND WHAT WILL THE EXECUTION OF THAT BE?

>> THAT IS SIDING IN ITS CUT AT AN ANGLE BUT ALSO OVERLAPPED. >> THAT EMULATES A LOT OF THE

HOUSES DOWNTOWN WITH THAT DETAIL. >> IT LOOKS NICE.

MR. CHAIRMAN I WANT TO POINT OUT ONE MORE THING I QUESTION THAT CAME TO ME TODAY ABOUT THE PAEONIA AND WANTED TO PUT OUT THAT THE TEN-POINT INTERVAL IS THE MAIN ON THE SECOND FLOOR.

>> OKAY IF THERE'S A BRAND YOU CONSIST OF SAL WILL GIVE YOU A LIST.

>> THAT'S JUST A SUPPLIER THAT I HAVE USED FOR 20 PLUS YEARS AND THEY HAVE THE PRODUCT LINES.

>> THANK YOU, LET'S MOVE INTO BOARD DISCUSSION. THEY'VE ALREADY HAD SOME HERE.

>> I THINK IT'S DIFFERENT STYLISTICALLY THAN SOME OF THE OTHERS THAT WE'VE SEEN IN OLD TOWN BUT I LIKE THAT ABOUT THIS ONE, I THINK THE MASKING OF AT THE 45-DEGREE IS A LITTLE BIT UNUSUAL BUT I THINK IT FITS WITH IT BEING ON A CORNER LOT AND IT'S A LITTLE BIT FUNKY.

I AM IN FAVOR OF IT. >> TO ADDRESS THE CORNER BUT ALSO BE IN A CORNER LOT.

>> AND I THOUGHT THAT WAS A CREATIVE WAY. >> I THOUGHT WE WENT OVER THAT LAST TIME AND FOUND OUT THAT OUR INTERPRETATIONS WERE PREVIOUSLY NOT ENTIRELY ACCURATE.

[01:05:02]

>> OPPOSED COULD BE IN THE CORRIDOR. >> I WAS UP THERE I'M SORRY AND

FORGETTING THE GENTLEMAN'S NAME IS IT RELEVANT TO THIS? >> YES IT IS.

THE ENGINEER. >> ALEX AND I STOOD OUT THERE AND LOOKED AT THE APEX OF THE CORNER AND SAT BACK AND I AM NOT SURE WERE STILL INTERPRETING THIS ENTIRELY CORRECT.

>> WE ARE INTERPRETING WHAT THE LAND DEVELOPMENT CODE SAYS AT THIS TIME, WE RECOGNIZE THAT IT DOES NOT CONFORM TO THE FLORIDA DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION STANDARD AND SO WHEN THE LAND DEVELOPMENT CODE IS REWRITTEN THAT WILL BE LOOKED AT BUT FOR RIGHT NOW TO VARY FROM IT WOULD

REQUIRE A VARIANCE. >> AND THEY ARE MEETING THAT REQUIREMENT YOU DO NOT NEED A

VARIANCE FOR THIS. >> THANK YOU. >> BOARD DISCUSSION.

>> I WOULD LIKE TO JUST SAY I LIKE THE WAY IT HAS A PORCH THAT ADDRESSES THE TWO STREET FAÇADES FOR THE CORNER LINE AND SO THAT GIVES US LOADS OF ARCHITECTURAL ON THIS HOUSE AND I ALSO LIKE THE FACT THAT THE GARAGE IS PUSHED BACK FROM THE FACE OF THE HOUSE AND SO IT DOESN'T ENGAGE THE STREET, IT'S BACK FROM THE STREET. EASILY MAKING IT A SECONDARY STRUCTURE. I LIKE THOSE ELEMENTS OF THIS PROJECT.

>> LET'S TALK ABOUT THE GARAGE DOORS. BECAUSE THIS HAS COME UP A LOT.

AND I AM NOT 100% SURE THAT THE ONES DRAWN IN HERE, THAT THESE ARE A CONCEPTUAL AND I DID NOT

SEE A BACKUP OR CARRIAGE STYLE DOOR. >> IS THAT A 16 FOOTER IF WE WANT SOMETHING A LITTLE BIT FANCIER WITH THE CARRIAGE HOUSE THAT'S EASILY WITH A DIFFERENT DOOR. I REALLY DID NOT WANT TO DRAW ATTENTION TO THE DOOR.

>> WHAT IS THE MATERIAL OF THIS IS THAT A STEEL DOOR? AN INSULATED STEEL DOOR.

>> I THINK A CARRIAGE HOUSE STYLE WOULD BE MORE APPROPRIATE BUT I THINK COTS SAL HAS A

GARAGE DOOR. >> THERE ARE SEVERAL ELEMENTS TO LOOK AT THE FAN GABLE AT THE SIDE SO TO NOT DRAW ATTENTION AWAY FROM THEN THAT'S PLAIN AND SIMPLE WITHOUT BEING FLAT THAT WAS MY TAKE ON THAT. I THINK THE CARRIAGE DOOR WOULD DETRACT FROM THE APPEARANCE OF

THE REST OF THE HOUSE. >> I DID NOT BRING MY MANUAL. DID THE OLD TOWN GUIDELINES

ADDRESS GARAGE DOORS? >> THEY DO NOT. >> I DID NOT SEE ANYTHING.

>> OKAY. AND SO THE CONDITIONS THAT I WOULD RECOMMEND FOR IT WOULD BE SCREENING THE HVAC UNIT THAT'S EXPOSED TO THE STREET AND USING A WINDOW FROM THE PREAPPROVED

WINDOW LIST. IS THERE A MOTION? >> I DON'T HAVE A PROBLEM WITH

THAT. >> TO BE PUBLIC HEARING? >> I MOVED.

>> WE DID HAVE A PUBLIC HEARING. >> THANK YOU. >> I MOVED TO APPROVE THE HDC 2020-52 WITH THE FOLLOWING CONDITIONS, THAT AN APPROPRIATE ARCHITECTURAL SCREENING BE PUT AROUND THE HVAC UNIT AND ANY OTHER EXTERIOR EQUIPMENT AND THAT INSTEAD OF MI WINDOWS THE APPLICANT CHOOSES A WINDOW FROM THE APPROVED WINDOWLESS THAT CAN BE PROVIDED BY STAFF AND I MOVE THAT HDC MAKES THE FOLLOWING FINDINGS AND FACTS PART OF THE RECORD THAT HD CASE 2020-52 IS COMPLIANT WITH THE CODE THE SECRETARY OF STANDARDS ON THE DEVELOPMENT GUIDELINES TOWARD FINAL APPROVAL AT THIS TIME SUBMITTING THANK YOU SO MIKE IS THERE A SECOND?

>> THERE IS A SECONDED. ANY FURTHER DISCUSSION ON THE MOTION?

>> SECRETARY PLEASE CALL THE ROLE.

>> THANK YOU VERY MUCH INDEED. HDC CASE (202)000-5325 NORTH THIRD STREET.

[5.2 HDC 2020-0053 - TIM POYNTER, 25 N. 3RD STREET]

[01:10:15]

>> THANK YOU. THIS IS HDC 2020-53. PROPERTY LOCATED AT 25 NORTH THIRD STREET. IT IS A C3 ZONED BUSINESS IN THE CENTRAL BUSINESS DISTRICT, CURRENTLY A VACANT COMMERCIAL STRUCTURE FORMALLY THE BEAM SCHOOL OF DANCE BUILT IN 1986.

THE APPLICANT IS PROPOSING TO REHABILITATE THE EXISTING BUILDING FROM AN ADAPTIVE USED AS A BOWLING ALLEY/BAR THE SCOPE OF WORK WILL INCLUDE ALTERING AND REPLACING WINDOWS AND DOOR OPENINGS, ADDING ADDITIONAL DOOR OPENINGS AND STAIRS, START GOING THE FRONT ELEVATION AND REPLACING THE FROM PORCH RAILING IN ADDITION IN ADDITION ON THE NORTH ELEVATION WAS APPROVED AS THE STAFF LEVEL REVIEW THROUGH HDC 120. STAFF FINDS THAT THE PROPOSED DESIGNS IS COMPATIBLE WITH THE DISTRICT IN TERMS OF SCALE, PROPORTIONS, ORIENTATION AND SETBACK AND STAFF FINDS THE ACTION ASPERS IS CONSISTENT WITH THE COMPREHENSIVE PLAN THE LAND DEVELOPMENT CODE AND DID THE DOWNTOWN DISTRICT GUIDELINES AND RECOMMENDS APPROVAL OF HDC 20

2020-53 ARE THERE QUESTIONS FOR THE STAFF. >> IS -- INTERESTED IN SAYING

SOMETHING? >> IT'S TIME TO GET WINDOWS AND DOORS.

>> THE FRONT OF THE BUILDING IS POORLY DONE THIS JUST 1986. THERE'S NOTHING -- ABOUT IT AND WE WANT TO JUST GO AHEAD AND TAKE IT OFF AND ON THE WHOLE SIDE OF THE BUILDING THE BACK OF THE BUILDING AND THE OTHER SIDE THIS IS THE ONLY ONE WITH THE SHOVEL AND IT IS IN DISREPAIR WINDOWS LEAK IN THAT TYPE OF STUFF AND THIS IS WHAT WE ARE HAVING ON THE SIDE, WE COMBINED THE LOTS AND SO WE CAN ADD WINDOWS TO THE SIDE AND LET SOME LIGHT INTO THE SIDE OF THE BUILDING BECAUSE IT IS A VERY DARK BUILDING. THERE IS ONLY WINDOWS IN THE FRONT. AND IT'S A LONG BUILDING, 85 FEET LONG THIS WOULD ACCOMMODATE PEOPLE INSIDE AND ALSO OPEN IT UP INTO THE COURTYARD IT WOULD BE A SHARED

COURTYARD FEELING BETWEEN THE CAFÉ. >> HOW MANY LANES WILL YOU HAVE?

>> FOUR LANES. >> AND WILL THIS BE TENTH AND, NINE PIN?

>> TENPIN. IS THAT RELEVANT. >> WELL THERE IS A MYSTERY HERE.

THAT NINE PIN BOWLING I BELIEVE WAS OUTLAWED AROUND PROHIBITION, AMC THEN INTRODUCED TENPIN

BOWLING TO GET AROUND THAT LEGISLATION. >> TENPIN HAS BEEN AROUND FOR 120 YEARS. AND THAT IS WHAT WE ARE SHOOTING FOR.

AND, IT'S PRETTY SIMPLE AND STRAIGHTFORWARD. THERE'S ONLY 25-FOOT PART OF THE BUILDING THAT YOU COULD MESS WITH. UP TOP WHERE THEY ARE NOW THERE

ADDING THE BIG WINDOW AND PART OF THE BAR. >> THANK YOU.

ARE THERE ANY QUESTIONS FOR THE APPLICANT? IS THERE ANYONE IN THE PUBLIC THAT WOULD LIKE TO SPEAK FOR OR AGAINST THIS CASE? SEE AND NONE I CLOSE THE PUBLIC

SESSION AND WE MOVE TO THE BOARD DISCUSSION. >> I GUESS I WOULD HAVE A QUESTION THE TYPE OF WINDOWS THEY DON'T HAVE THE SAME REQUIREMENTS THAT'S A PRECEDENT.

[01:15:01]

>> I THINK IT'S NON- UNATTRACTIVE BUILDING RIGHT NOW AND I THINK THERE'S NOT A WHOLE

LOT YOU CAN MESS UP. >> WILL GOOD. >> WE CAN ONLY MAKE IT LOOK

BETTER. >> WE CAN ONLY GO UP FROM HERE. >> DID YOU SAY IT'S A LITTLE

WALL. IS THERE A MOTION. >> CAN I ASK A QUICK QUESTION? IS THERE A BALL RETURN ON THE INSIDE ARE YOU GOING TO HAVE TO DO ANYTHING STRUCTURALLY ON THE

INSIDE OF THE BUILDING STRUCTURE STRUCTURALLY? >> IT JUST SITS RIGHT ON THE

FLOOR IT SITS OFF THE FLOOR. >> AND THEN WHERE THE PINS GO, ALL OF THAT DOESN'T REQUIRE

ANY'S STRUCTURAL CHANGES. >> I DID HAVE ONE QUESTION FOR TIM, ON THE FRONT OF IT, I SEE THE PROPOSAL THAT YOU HAVE, ARE YOU TAKING OUT? [INAUDIBLE]

>> WE ARE GOING TO GO BACK WITH NICER TREES AND SHRUBBERY. >> THAT HELPS HIDE THE BUILDING

AS IT IS NOW. >> IT STAINS EVERYTHING AND. >> SO, IN HERE'S WHERE MY CONCERN IS COMING FROM, I THINK IT'S A GREAT LOOKING REHABILITATION, I THINK ABOUT THE CALLS THAT WE GET FROM RESIDENTS WHEN WE SEE CHANGES COME THROUGH AND I CAN HEAR THAT IT'S -- AND NOW WE HAVE THIS BROUGHT IN. IT HELPS THAT YOU HAVE THAT FRONT PORTICO, IT COVERS ALL OF THAT. I'M THINKING ANY KIND OF VEGETATION THAT SOFTENS THE FAÇADE OF THE BUILDING WILL GREATLY HELP WITH THE CALLS THAT

WE GET. >> WE ARE PLANNING. >> WILL BE NICE STUFF.

>> WHAT'S THE PLAN OF THE PROJECT. IT WILL BE NICE.

>> IT WILL BE NICE. WE TRY NOT TO DO BAD STUFF. >> MORRISON BELIEVES HE'S BEING

OVERWORKED. >> I WILL MAKE A MOTION. >> WHAT ARE WE ON? I MOVED TO APPROVE CASE NUMBER HDC 2020-53 WITHOUT CONDITIONS. I MOVE THAT THEY MAKE IT PART OF THE RECORD, THAT HDC CASE HDC 2020-53 IS PRESENTED IS SUBSTANTIAL AND COMPLIANT WITH THE LAND DEVELOPMENT CODE, THE SECRETARY OF INTERIOR'S DOWNTOWN HISTORIC DISTRICT AND

GUIDELINES. >> THANK YOU. IS THERE A SECOND?

>> THANK YOU. I THE MOTION IS PROPOSED AND SECONDED.

MADAM SECRETARY PLEASE CALL THE ROLE. >> IT.

>> YES. >> YES. >> THANK YOU.

[5.3 HDC 2020-0054 - ROBERT TICHY, 227 N 3RD STREET]

>> THANK YOU, GOOD LUCK. >> HDC CASE 2020-0054. ROBERTS, I HOPE I'M PRONOUNCING

IT CORRECTLY, 227 NORTH THIRD STREET. >> THANK YOU.

>> AS YOU SAY, THIS IS HDC 2020-54, PROPERTY LOCATED AT 20 TO 27 NORTH THIRD STREET, AND R2 ZONED PROPERTY, CURRENTLY A SINGLE-FAMILY RESIDENCE, CONSTRUCTED PRE-1926, THE REQUESTED ACTION IS A CERTIFICATE OF APPROVAL TO CONSTRUCT A PERGOLA AND INSTRUCT

DO AN INGROUND SPOT. HERE'S THE AREA OF THE PROPERTY. >> STAFF FINDS THAT THE SPOT PERGOLA DESIGN IS COMPATIBLE WITH THE NEIGHBORHOOD AND IS MEETING ALL THE SETBACK REQUIREMENTS. THE FULL MECHANICAL EQUIPMENT IS SCREENED FROM VIEW AND STAFF FINDS THE REQUESTED ACTION IS CONSISTENT WITH THE COMPREHENSIVE PLAN, THE LAND DEVELOPMENT CODE, THE SECRETARY OF INTERIOR STANDARDS IN THE DOWNTOWN DOWNTOWN GUIDELINES AND STAFF RECOMMENDS APPROVAL OF HDC 2020-54. THANK YOU.

>> THANK YOU, QUESTIONS FOR SAL? >> IT IS ON THE SIDE I BELIEVE. LET ME PULL UP AND ARIEL FOR

[01:20:01]

YOU. >> IT'S ON THE INSIDE OF. >> WOULD YOU APPROACH THE PODIUM

PLEASE? >> NAME AND ADDRESS FOR THE RECORD.

>> ROBERT, 227 NORTH THIRD STREET AND THE FULL EQUIPMENT WILL BE ON THE LEFT SIDE INSIDE

OF THE FENCE. >> I WILL GIVE YOU A CHANCE NOW TO INTRODUCE YOUR PROJECT,

ROBERT. >> SURE, THE PERGOLA AND THE INK GROUND SPA WITH 4 FEET, DOING ALL OF THE SETBACKS OF THE CODE AND IT WILL BE INSIDE THE FENCE AND INSIDE A PRIVACY FENCE.

THE PRIVACY FENCE WILL BE 6 FEET, 8 FEET ALL THE WAY AROUND.

>> THANK YOU ANY QUESTIONS FOR THE APPLICANTS. >> I JUST WANT TO CITE THIS PROJECT, THIS IS COMMERCIAL. HOW IS THIS WHAT IS THIS ZONED AS.

>> INDUSTRIAL. >> WHAT IS THE PROPERTY ZONED AS.

>> R2, VERY GOOD. >> I'M JUST GOING TO JUMP IN. TO THE ROAD IS SO TIGHT YOU CAN'T SEE A SINGLE SOLITARY THING THAT THEY ARE PROPOSING THEY COULD DO ANYTHING THEY WANT BACK THERE SO I THINK IT LOOKS FINE, I THINK THE SETBACKS ARE MET AND I DON'T THINK I HAVE ANY

PROBLEMS WITH IT. >> ARE THERE ANY MEMBERS OF THE PUBLIC WOULD LIKE TO SPEAK.

SCENE NINE, I WILL CLOSE THE PUBLIC SESSION. ANY BOARD DISCUSSION.

>> PRETTY STRAIGHTFORWARD. >> NONE OF IT IS VISIBLE TO THE STREET.

>> I'LL MAKE A MOTION IS THERE IS NO MORE DISCUSSION. I MOVED TO APPROVE CASE NUMBER HDC 2020-54 WITHOUT CONDITIONS. I MOVE THAT THE HDC MAKES THE FOLLOWING FINDINGS OF FACTS AND CONCLUSIONS PART OF THE RECORD. THAT HDC CASE HDC 2020-GUY FORREST PRESENTED IS COMPLIANT WITH THE LAND DEVELOPMENT COMPANY, THE SECRETARY OF THE INTERIOR STANDARDS IN THE DOWNTOWN DISTRICT DESIGN GUIDELINES TORRANCE APPROVAL AT THIS TIME.

>> THANK YOU. IS THERE A SECOND? >> I WILL SECOND.

>> THERE'S A SECOND. PERIOD MADAM SECRETARY, PLEASE CALL THE ROLE.

>> A.

>> YES. >> YES. >> YES.

>> YES. >> THANK YOU. >> THANK YOU VERY MUCH.

>> I WISH YOU FUN IN THE SUN. >> HDC CASE 2020-0055 MICHAEL STAUFFER, ARCHITECT, AGENT FOR

[5.4 HDC 2020-0055 - MICHAEL STAUFFER ARCHITECT, AGENT FOR PAMELA BROWN, 116 N 4TH STREET]

>> THIS IS HDC 2020-55116 NORTH FOURTH STREET PROPERTY IS ZONED TO R2, MEDIUM DENSITY RESIDENTIAL, THE CURRENT USES A SINGLE-FAMILY RESIDENCE BUILT IN 1866 ACCORDING TO THE SITE FILE.

THE CONTRIBUTING STRUCTURE TO THE DOWNTOWN DISTRICT. THE APPLICANT IS SEEKING A CERTIFICATE OF APPROVAL TO REPLACE THE EXISTING WATER FRONT STEPS WITH THE BRICK STEPS IN A NEW WALKWAY. THIS IS IN ARIEL OF THE PRO PROPERTY.

STAFF FINDS THAT THE PROPOSED ALTERATION IS NOT IN KEEPING WITH THE DOWNTOWN DESIGN GUIDELINES THAT STATE THAT ALL ELEMENTS OF -- INCLUDING STEPS AND RAILINGS ARE -- WITH THE BUILDING RETAINING THOSE COMPONENTS WHEN POSSIBLE. THE USE OF MATERIAL SUCH AS BRICK, CONCRETE OR WROUGHT IRON STEPS IS NOT RECOMMENDED. THE ALTERATION TO THE WOODEN PORCH STEPS IS ALSO NOT IN KEEPING WITH THE SECRETARY OF THE INTERIOR STANDARDS NUMBER TWO, THREE, FIVE, SIX, AND NINE WHICH IF STEPS ARE IN NEED OF REPAIR STAFF RECOMMENDS A REPLACEMENT IN KIND OF THE WOOD STEPS AND TO STAFF THAT THE REQUESTED ACTION IS PRESENTED IS CONSISTENT WITH THE COMPREHENSIVE PLAN LAND DEVELOPMENT CODE THE SECRETARY OF THE INTERIOR STANDARDS IN THE DOWNTOWN HISTORIC GUIDELINES AND RECOMMENDS APPROVAL WITH THE CONDITION THAT THE WOOD STEPS BE PREPARED WITH IN-KIND MATERIALS AND DESIGN.

>> WHAT WOULD WE BE APPROVING? >> WE DON'T EVEN NEED TO APPROVE ANYTHING IF THEY'RE GOING TO

REPLACE BOARD FOR BOARD WHAT IS THERE. >> THE OTHER PART OF IT IS THE

[01:25:03]

WALKWAY. >> WOULD WE BE APPROVING THAT, TOO?

>> UNDER NORMAL CIRCUMSTANCES. >> YES. THE ISSUE IS THE GUIDELINES SPECIFICALLY TALK TO MAINTAINING OF WOOD STEPS AND -- NOW, THESE STEPS ARE NOT THE 1886 WOOD

STEPS BUT THEY ARE PART OF THE ORIGINAL DESIGN. >> IF THE BRICK WALKWAY IT'S

JUST BEEN REPAIRED WOULDN'T THAT BE A STAFF APPROVAL? >> YES.

>> IF IT WAS WHAT IT WOULD BE A STAFF APPROVAL. >> SO IT'S A CHANGE OF MATERIAL.

>> CAN WE SEE A PICTURE? >> JUST MAKE THE POINT, THEY'RE JUST DOING REPAIRS THEY WOULD

NOT NEED TO SEE US. >> AND THEY COME TO US BECAUSE THEY WANT TO CHANGE IT.

>> THEY ARE JUST MAKING REPAIRS THAN SAL IS DOING HIS JOB. >> YOU COULD DENY THE CASE AND

THEY CAN MAKE THE REPAIRS AND NOT HAVE TO COME BACK. >> IT WOULD YOU LIKE TO APPROACH THE PODIUM? GIVE US YOUR NAME AND ADDRESS PLEASE.

>> GOOD EVENING. MICHAEL, 422 SOUTH SIXTH STREET. I AM AWARE OF THIS GUIDELINE BUT WHEN I LEFT MY HOUSE AND DROVE FROM DATE STREET THE OTHER DAY I PHOTOGRAPHED 20 HOUSES, ALL OF WHICH HAVE WOOD PORCHES, ALL OF WHICH HAVE BRICK OR CONCRETE STEPS, THAT WAS JUST ON SIXTH STREET. IN ADDITION THE TWO HOUSES DIRECTLY ACROSS THE STREET FROM THIS HOUSE ALSO HAVE BRICK OR CONCRETE STEPS, ALL ON A WOOD PORCH.

RECENT RENOVATIONS ONE BEHIND THE POST OFFICE THAT WAS RECENTLY RENOVATED THAT HAD RICK STEPS ON THE WOOD PORCH, IT SEEMS THAT THE CITY OF FERNANDINA BEACH IT IS CONSISTENT THAT IF THESE ARE HISTORIC IT SHOULD BE PART OF HISTORY AND IF IT'S TRADITIONAL THAT WE DO IT BUT IT SEEMS THAT THERE IS PREPONDERANCE IS OF THIS IN THE HISTORIC DISTRICT THAT HAS BRICK OR CONCRETE STEPS THAT ARE WITH WOOD PORCHES. I AM ASKING YOU TO APPROVE THIS APPLICATION GIVEN THE FACT THAT IN THIS CITY OF FERNANDINA BEACH AND THE HISTORIC DISTRICT WHEN I DID SIXTH STREET THERE ARE 65% OF THE HOUSES HAD CONCRETE OR BRICK STEPS INCLUDING SOME OF OUR PREMIER HOUSES. SO, I'M ASKING YOU TO APPROVE THIS BECAUSE IT'S CONSISTENT WITH THE FABRIC THAT WE HAVE IN THE CITY ITSELF. THINK USE MAC I GUESS WHAT I WOULD ASK YOU IS TO GIVE US A JUSTIFICATION FOR WHY YOU FEEL LIKE IT IS IMPORTANT THAT YOU

REPLACE THESE WITH BRICK INSTEAD OF WHAT IS THERE NOW. >> THIS HOUSE I DON'T KNOW HOW MANY WERE HERE IN 1997 WHEN IT WAS RENOVATED. IT WAS IN DISREPAIR, THE HOUSE WAS CONSIDERABLY RENOVATED AND THEY DID A FANTASTIC JOB. THE STEPS WERE INSTALLED IN 97 AND THE OWNERS HAVE HAD TO REPLACE THEM TWICE BECAUSE OF JUST REPAIR, WE ARE NOT ASKING TO REPLACE THE FRONT WALKWAY. WALKWAY IS SETTLING IN ALL WE ARE GOING TO DO IS LIFT THE BRICKS AT THAT PART WERE JUST GOING TO PUT THAT UP AND REDO IT BUT BECAUSE OF THE FACT THAT IT'S BEEN HAVING TO BE MAINTAINED MULTIPLE TIMES JUST BECAUSE OF THE WAY THE WATERFALLS FROM THE ROOF AND EVERYTHING ELSE. WERE ASKING SO THEY DON'T HAVE

AIRING THEM EVERY SEVEN OR EIGHT YEARS. >> IS THERE A DIVERTER OWNER FOR

THOSE. >> I DON'T KNOW THE ANSWER TO THAT.

>> YES, THERE IS. >> THAT'S PROBABLY A REASON WHY SO MANY STAIRS ARE BRICK OR

CEMENT BECAUSE OF THE SAME REASON. >> AND IF YOU LOOK, I KNOW IT'S NOT PART OF THE ARCHITECTURE OF THE HOUSE BUT THERE IS A BRICK STUCCO WALL OUT THERE.

IT'S NOT LIKE WE ARE BRINGING IN AN ELEMENT THAT IS LIKE EVERYTHING AROUND IT HAS A WOOD

PICKET FENCE AND WE HAVE BRICK STEPS, BUT. >> ANOTHER FEATURE OF THIS IS THE TREAD AT THE TOP STEP TREATED AS AN EXTENSION OF THE PORCH RATHER THAN A STEP DOWN.

WILL YOU BE DOING THE SAME THING OR WILL YOU STEP DOWN FROM THE PORCH ONTO THE FIRST TREAD?

>> WE ARE BRINGING THE TOP TREAD UP TO THE PORCH LEVEL. >> THEN YOU ARE GOING TO CREATE

MORE SPLASH BACK ONTO THE DECK. >> WE WILL GET IT OUT BEYOND THAT AND THE RAIN DIVERTER DOES DIVERTED AWAY FROM THAT A LITTLE BIT WITH THE BRICK WALL THAT IS THERE IN THE WATER STAYS IN THAT

AREA. >> ARE WE IN SETBACK? THAT IS DUE THE NEW STEPS COME

[01:30:04]

INTO THE SETBACK ARE THEY COMING INTO THE SAME FOOTPRINT? >> THERE LIKE 2 FEET.

>> DO YOU KNOW WHAT THE MATERIAL AND STEPS WERE MADE OF PRIOR TO THE 1990S? IN THE 19 '90S THEY WERE NOT THERE. I AT THAT TIME THE FRONT PORCH WAS BEING HELD UP BY A TREE. AND SO, I DON'T KNOW HISTORICALLY WHETHER THEY WERE

WOULD COME I DON'T HAVE A PHOTOGRAPH OF IT. >> ANY FURTHER QUESTIONS? ANYONE IN THE PUBLIC WHO WISHES TO SPEAK WITH THE CASE OR AGAINST IT.

>> THE NAME? >> 1627 ATLANTIC AVENUE. I HAVE TO SYMPATHIZE A LITTLE BIT, I DOUBT THAT THESE STEERS RESEMBLE THE ORIGINAL STAIRS, FIRST OF ALL YOUR WINDOW WOULD BE ALIGNING WITH THE PORCH. SO WHAT IS THERE NOW IS NOT HISTORICALLY CONSISTENCE AND I'M ABSOLUTELY POSITIVE OF THAT. BUT I WOULD ALSO CRITIQUE AND SAY IF YOU ARE GOING TO DO THAT, STEP BACK AS THE PORCH STEP DOWN AND REDUCE YOUR RISERS AND THE BRICK IS INDEPENDENT OF THE PORCH NOT PART OF THE PORCH. OTHER THAN THAT, THAT'S ALL HAVE TO SAY.

>> I THINK THEY ARE DOING THAT BECAUSE THEY HAVE THAT GATE ELEMENT AT THE TOP THAT LETS YOU GET UP TO THE TOP AND ALMOST ACTS AS A LANDING AREA AND THAT'S PROBABLY WHY IT'S DONE

THAT WAY. >> I THINK THE TRICK FOR US IS THAT THERE BEEN SO MANY REPLACEMENTS OVER THE YEARS FOR THAT VERY REASON. MINE WAS REPLACED AND I JUST POUR THE CONCRETE. BUT IF WE DO APPROVE SOMETHING LIKE THIS I THINK IT IS IMPORTANT TO HAVE THAT STEP DOWN BECAUSE OTHERWISE IT REALLY DRAWS ATTENTION THAT THESE WERE NOT EVEN CLOSE TO ORIGINAL. THEY WOULD NEVER HAVE DONE THAT THE SAME IF IT'S GOING TO BE CHANGED THEY NEED TO DO IT SENSITIVELY SO IT DOESN'T LOOK LIKE IT'S ADDED ON.

>> I FEEL LIKE SAL IS DOING EXACTLY WHAT HIS JOB IS TO DO WHICH IS TO INTERPRET THE GUIDELINES, LITERALLY AND HE IS A PURIST AS FAR AS PRESERVATION IS CONCERNED AND WE ALWAYS APPRECIATE THAT AND HE GIVES US GOOD GUIDANCE AS FAR AS THAT PERSPECTIVE ON IT BUT I ALSO THINK THAT AS TO THE APPLICANT AND WHAT JOHN SAID THIS IS A SITUATION WHERE WE ARE BEING ASKED TO LOOK AT SOMETHING WITH THE MATERIAL AND METHODS THAT WERE USED HISTORICALLY.

I THINK WE CAN DO A CERTAIN AMOUNT OF VALIDITY TO ALLOWING HOMEOWNERS TO IMPROVE THEIR PROPERTY THAT LAST AND I THINK IF THE APPLICANT IS WILLING TO CONSIDER THE SLIGHT MODIFICATION THAT JOHN MENTIONED THAT I WOULD BE IN FAVOR OF ALLOWING IT TO MOVE FORWARD.

>> IS THERE ANY FURTHER DISCUSSION? >> UNLESS THERE IS SOMETHING

THAT CAME UP WITH A PUBLIC HEARING. >> I JUST HAD SOME PHOTOGRAPHS THAT I WAS GOING TO SUBMIT INTO THE RECORD IF IT WOULD BE HELPFUL WITH THE HOUSES THAT I

SAW. >> OF WHEN IT IS LITERALLY ON A CASE-BY-CASE BASIS, WE KNOW THAT

EXISTS OUT THERE, AND WE HAVE TO EVALUATE EACH ONE INDEPENDENTLY. >> AND WITH THE APPLICANT CONSIDER A CHANGE OR DEVIATION, WHAT WE WOULD LIKE TO DO A POSSIBLE IS TO HAVE THE TWO SIDE BEEF UP AT THE PORCH LEVEL AND WERE HAPPY TO MOVE THE STEP DOWN AND JIM IS CORRECT THE REASON IS THEY HAVE DOGS AND THEY GET ON THE PORCH AND THEY OPERATE AS A LANDING AND THAT'S WISE THAT

WAY. >> IT'S A BEAUTIFUL ACTS ON THE DRAWING.

JUST TO ADD TO BENJAMIN'S POINT IN THE BOARD DISCUSSION, WE DON'T TAKE SAL'S RECOMMENDATIONS, WE HAVE TO TAKE THAT VERY SERIOUSLY AND WE SHOULD ARTICULATE OUR RATIONALE AS TO WHY WE DON'T TAKE HIS RECOMMENDATIONS IN THIS CASE AND MY ARGUMENT WOULD BE THAT THIS IS NOT ORIGINAL, WE HAVE STEPS THAT ARE ORIGINAL AND THESE ARE REPLACEMENT AND SO, WE AREN'T WALKING AWAY FOR THE SECRETARY OF INTERIOR GUIDELINES BECAUSE THIS IS NOT AN ARCHITECTURAL

[01:35:01]

>> I THINK THE OTHER THING THAT WE DIDN'T TALK ABOUT IF WE ARE CONSIDER APPROVING IT WHAT ARE THE BRICKS BEING USED. TO HAVE THEM SOMETHING ON THE HOUSE OR HAVE SOME CONTINUITY OVER YOU PROPOSING TO USE. THERE'S ONE BRICK THAT LOOKS LIKE IT'S FOR THE PIERS OF THE FOUNDATION AND ANOTHER FOR THE PATHWAY MAYBE WHICH ONE ARE YOU TRYING I ASSUME YOU'RE TRYING TO

MATCH THE FOUNDATION THE PATHWAY ALREADY HAS BRICKS. >> IT LOOKS LIKE THERE'S TWO DIFFERENT COLOR BRICKS. IT LOOKS LIKE THE PIERS ARE ONE COLOR AND THE WALKWAYS ANOTHER.

>> IF YOU SAW ON THEIR BACKYARD THAT YOU SAW THAT THEY HAD A FIREPLACE DONE AND THEY WOULD BE

DOING SOMETHING LIKE THAT. >> IS OUR MOTION HERE? THE FLOOR HAS BEEN REMARKABLY

SILENT. >> CELL. >> I CAN MAKE A MOTION, I THINK THE BOARD IS WILLING TO ACCEPT PROVIDED WE HAVE A STEP BETWEEN THE STEPS IN THE PORCH.

>> YES. >> I GUESS MAYBE MAKE THAT PART OF THE MOTION THAT THEY WILL BE

A CLOSEST MATCH AS POSSIBLE ON THE PORCH FOUNDATION. >> THAT MAKES SENSE.

>> I MOVED TO APPROVE HDC CASE NUMBER HDC 2020-55 WITH THE FOLLOWING CONDITIONS, THAT THERE BE A CLEAR STEP DOWN FROM THE PORCH TO THE BRICKS THE NEW BRICK STEPS AND THAT THE BRICKS USED ON THE NEW BRICK STEPS MATCH BRICKS THAT ALREADY HAD BEEN USED ON THE HOUSE.

AND SO I MOVE THAT HDC MAKE THE CASE MAKE THE FOLLOWING FINDINGS OF FACT AND CONCLUSIONS PART OF THE RECORD THAT HDC CASE HDC 2020-55 AS PRESENTED IS SUBSTANTIALLY COMPLIANT WITH THE LAND DEVELOPMENT COMPANY, THE SECRETARY OF INTERIOR STANDARDS AND THE DOWNTOWN DOWNTOWN

HISTORIC GUIDELINES. >> I SECOND. >> THANK YOU.

FOR PROPOSING THAT. I THINK BENJAMIN GOT IT IN FIRST.

AS THE SECOND. >> MEMBER COMPANY SAG. >> MEMBER PRESENT AS.

>> YES. >> VICE CHAIR. >> CHAIR HARRISON.

>> YES. >> IS TIME FOR ME TO STEP DOWN. >> WHAT IS THIS?

>> WITH THE NUNS. >> HDC CASE 20200057, COTNER ASSOCASSOCIATES, AGENT FOR 302 R

[Items 5.5 & 5.6]

>> IF IT'S OKAY, I WOULD LIKE TO PRESENT THIS AND THE NEXT CASE, THEY ARE RELATED ONE IS A DEMOLITION AND ONE IS A CONCEPTUAL APPROVAL FOR NEW CONSTRUCTION.

AND SO, WE WILL TALK ABOUT HDC 2020-571ST. WHICH IS A CERTIFICATE OF APPROVAL TO DEMOLISH A PRIMARY STRUCTURE ADD 201 CENTER STREET. I'M SORRY 302 CENTER STREET.

IT IS A STRUCTURE BUILT IN 1920 ACCORDING TO THE NASSAU COUNTY PROPERTY APPRAISER.

BUT I WILL GO THROUGH THE HISTORY OF THEIR PROPERTY, I BELIEVE IT'S INCORRECT, IT IS A

[01:40:02]

AGAIN, THIS IS THE CURRENT AERIAL OF THE PROPERTY. THE PROPERTY APPRAISER, DOES HAVE IT LISTED AS A 1920 STRUCTURE WHICH I DON'T BELIEVE IT'S CORRECT.

AND SO A QUICK RUNDOWN OF WHAT HAS BEEN ON THE PROPERTY, THIS IS THE 1884 SANBORN MAP, THESE ARE THE PROPERTIES HERE SHOWN AS AN IRONCLAD ALL AROUND THE BUILDING, JEWELRY AND A BARBERSHOP. THE OTHER PART OF THE BUILDING WAS A SINGLE-FAMILY ONE AND A HALF STORIES AND WHAT IS LABELED AS A SHANTY AT THE BACK OF THE PROPERTY.

THIS IS THE 1884 LITHOGRAPH OF WHAT IT LOOKED LIKE THEN, YOU CAN SEE THE STOREFRONT THAT WAS IRONCLAD, THE SINGLE-FAMILY RESIDENCE IN THE BUILDING BEHIND IT.

THIS IS A PHOTOGRAPH OF WHAT THAT LOOKED LIKE FROM CENTER STREET.

THEN IN 1891 IT IS A BARBERSHOP IN THE METAL CLAD BUILDING, THE SINGLE-FAMILY HOME IS STILL THERE IN THE BUILDING IN THE HOME IS GONE. IN 1897 STILL THE SAME, BARBERSHOP, THE SINGLE-FAMILY HOME IS LISTED AS A TAILOR SHOP. IN 1903 THE TAILOR SHOP IS STILL THERE, THE IRONCLAD BUILDING IS STILL THERE, THE BUILDING BUILT BEHIND IT WHICH SAYS SODA WATER ON ONE SIDE AND BLANKETS ON THE OTHER. IN 1909 IT'S A RESTAURANT IN THE SINGLE-FAMILY HOME, YOU WILL SEE IT HAS BEEN EXTENDED THE FRONT PORCH HAS BEEN PULLED OUT TO ADDRESS THE STREET. THE BARBERS NOW IN THE BACK AND THAT LITTLE BUILDING AND IT'S BACON ON THE OTHER HALF. AND SO WE GET TO 1926 AND THE BUILDING HAS BEEN EXPANDED BUT STILL IT'S METAL BUILDING LISTED AS A GARAGE FOR EIGHT CARS. THE ONE AND A HALF STORY HOME IS STILL NEXT DOOR TO IT LISTED AS IT'S A STORY AT THAT POINT AND THERE IS A TEN SHOT BEHIND IT.

WHEN YOU GET TO THE 1949 SANBORN MAP, THIS IS WORK OUT INTERESTING, ALL OF THE STRUCTURES ARE GONE ON THE 1949 MINUTES OF FILLING STATION ON THE CORNER.

AND SO, BAD BUILDING IS INTO ANY OF THE PREVIOUSLY EXISTING BUILDINGS BUT I BELIEVE THAT SOME WALLS OF THAT STRUCTURE MAY STILL BE IN THE REAR OF THE BUILDING WE ARE SEEING RIGHT NOW. THIS IS THE 1943 AERIAL WHICH IS KIND OF HARD TO SEE BUT THE CORNER THIS IS THE FILLING STATION THIS BUILDING HERE AND WHAT YOU'RE SEEING THAT BLACK STRIPE IS A SHADOW OF THE BUILDING NEXT DOOR. THERE'S NOTHING NEXT TO IT.

SO AGAIN, THIS IS THE NUMBER OF SURVEYS OVER THE YEARS WE HAVE GOT SOME PHOTOS FROM THE 80S ON THE MOST RECENT IN 2018 WHICH TALKS ABOUT THE HISTORY OF THE BUILDING.

IT IS A NONCONTRIBUTING STRUCTURE BUT AGAIN THE CONCERN WAS THAT HAS MANY REFORMS IN IT AND REALLY MAKING SURE WE ARE NOT LOSING ANYTHING HISTORIC WAS IMPORTANT TO ME AND I WAS SURPRISED TO SEE THAT NONE OF THIS BUILDING IS HISTORIC THE ONLY PART THAT MAY POSSIBLY EXIST IN THE BUILDING IS AFTER THE DOWNTOWN. OF SIGNIFICANCE.

AND I DON'T HAVE A SHOP HERE BUT IF YOU KNOW THE STRUCTURE ON THE THIRD STREET SIDE THERE ARE THREE FALSE WINDOWS ON THE INSIDE, IT HAS A UNIQUE ROOFLINE AND IF YOU LOOK AT IT IT LOOKS LIKE THAT IS WHERE THAT FILLING STATION WOULD HAVE BEEN SO ONE OF THE THINGS WE ARE ASKING IS IN A DEMOLITION IF THERE IS ANYTHING TO SEE THERE THAT WE PHOTOGRAPH IT BUT THERE IS NO

[01:45:03]

AS I SAID I BELIEVE PART OF THAT FILLING STATION AT LEAST ONE OF THE WALL MAY STILL EXIST IN THE SHELL OF THAT BUILDING. ALTHOUGH SOME PORTIONS MAY STILL EXIST IT DOES NOT DATE TO THE PERIOD OF SIGNIFICANCE OR RETAIN HISTORIC INTEGRITY. WHEN LOOKING AT ENDING DEMOLITION WE LOOK AT A NUMBER OF CRITERIA INCLUDING WHETHER THE STRUCTURE OR SITE WOULD MEET NATIONAL OR STATE LOCAL CRITERIA FOR DESIGNATION. IT'S CONSIDERED A NONCONTRIBUTING STRUCTURE TOWARD DISTRICT. WHETHER THIS STRUCTURE LOCALLY WHETHER THE LOSS OF THE STRUCTURE SITE WOULD DETERIORATE THE CONTINUITY OF THE DISTRICT OR SURROUNDING NEIGHBORHOOD AND STAFF FINDS THAT IT WOULD NOT AND KNOWS THAT WE ARE SEEN A CONCEPTUAL DESIGN TONIGHT FOR ITS REPLACEMENT. WHETHER THIS STRUCTURE IS NO SUCH CRAFTSMANSHIP THAT IT COULD BE REPRODUCED WITH GREAT DIFFICULTY OR GREAT EXPENSE, STAFF FINDS THAT IT'S NOT OF GREAT CRAFTSMANSHIP AND IT CAN BE REPRODUCED FAIRLY EASILY.

WHETHER THE STRUCTURE SITE IS ONE OF THE LAST REMAINING EXAMPLE OF ITS KIND OR AN EXAMPLE DISTINCTION OF ARCHITECTURE STAFF FINDS THAT IT IS NOT, WHETHER REMOVAL OF A STRUCTURE OR SITE WOULD RUIN IT WITH OPEN SPACES REMOVAL OF THE STRUCTURE WILL CREATE A HOLD BUT AS I SAID WE ARE REVIEWING CONCEPTUAL PLANS THIS EVENING. SO THAT SHOULD ALLEVIATE THAT.

WHETHER THE SITE PROBLEMS OR SITE PROMOTES THE GENERAL WELFARE OF THE CITY BY PROVIDING AN OPPORTUNITY FOR STUDY OF LOCAL HISTORY, ARCHITECTURE AND DESIGN OR BY DEVELOPING AN UNDERSTANDING THE IMPORTANCE AND VALUE OF A PARTICULAR CULTURE OR HERITAGE.

THE STAFF FINDS THAT IT WILL NOT. I THINK THAT WE CAN UNDERSTAND THE DEVELOPMENT OF THAT SITE JUST BY LOOKING AT THOSE MAPS AND PHOTOS THAT WE LOOKED AT.

WHETHER THE APPLICANT WILL BE DENIED A REASONABLE RETURN ON HIS INVESTMENT, WE DON'T HAVE EVIDENCE OF THAT. WHETHER THERE IS AN ECONOMIC HARDSHIP, WE HAVE NOT BEEN PROVIDED EVIDENCE OF THAT AND WHETHER THE COURT OF APPEALS BOARD REQUIRES DEMOLITION AND THEY HAVE NOT. AND SO WITH THAT, AS FAR AS THE DEMOLITION GOES THAT STAFF IS RECOMMENDING APPROVAL OF ACC 2020-57. AND IF IT'S OKAY WITH YOU MR. CHAIRMAN, AND I WILL MOVE ONTO THE CONCEPTUAL'S WE CAN TALK ABOUT THAT INTAKE TO

SEPARATE VOTES ON THEM. >> I WOULD LIKE TO GIVE YOU A CHANCE TO CATCH YOUR BREATH HERE AND I WOULD LIKE TO EXPRESS MY APPRECIATION FOR THE HISTORIES THAT YOU ARE PRESENTING HERE FOR THESE PROPERTIES. THAT IS EXTREMELY VALUABLE. I HOPE THAT THE MUSEUM HAS ACCESS TO THEM BECAUSE IT WOULD MAKE A GREAT ADDITION TO THEIR ARCHIVES AND THE DATE OF YOUR DRAWING IS PROBABLY THERE BUT THE FACT THAT YOU ARE PAUL CALLING IT TOGETHER WE ARE

TALKING ABOUT BOTH 3302. >> IT IS ONE PARCEL RIGHT NOW, AND YES WE FUNCTION AS WELL

BUILD ONE BUILDING IN GENERAL. IT IS BOTH OF THOSE ADDRESSES. >> THANK YOU.

SO PLEASE PROCEED WITH THE CONSTRUCTION. >> 'S MAKE THIS IS HDC 2020-56, LOCATED AT THE PARCEL OF 302 CENTER STREET. IT'S A CONCEPTUAL CERTIFICATE OF APPROVAL FOR A RESTAURANT PROPERTY AT C3 IN OUR CENTRAL BUSINESS DISTRICT AND AGAIN, WE HAVE GONE THROUGH THE HISTORY OF THE SITE. IT IS A NONCONTRIBUTING STRUCTURE THE APPLICANT IS PROPOSING TO PREPAY -- NON- ASSEMBLY THROUGH THIS WHICH WE JUST HEARD AND REPLACE IT WITH THIS NEW 6100 SQUARE-FOOT COMMERCIAL STRUCTURE.

THE PROPOSED DESIGN RESPECTS THE UNDERLYING RECORD IN THE MASS AND ARTICULATION OF THE STRUCTURE AND IT'S ALSO DESIGNED TO COMPLEMENT THE PROPORTIONATE SCALE OF A TYPICAL TWO PLOT

[01:50:04]

THE TRC COMMITTEE PRE-APPLICATION DISCUSSION WAS HELD ON JANUARY 14 AND ANOTHER TRC APPLICATION WILL BE REQUIRED WHEN THESE PLANS ARE LITTLE FURTHER ALONG.

STAFF FINDS THAT THE PROPOSED DESIGN IS COMPATIBLE WITH THE DOWNTOWN HISTORIC DISTRICT IN TERMS OF MATERIALS, SKILL, PROPORTION, REFORMS AND SETBACKS AND STAFF FINDS THE REQUESTED ACTION PRESENTED IS CONSISTENT WITH THE COMPREHENSIVE PLAN, THE LAND DEVELOPMENT CODE, THE SECRETARY OF INTERIOR STANDARDS ON THE DOWNTOWN HISTORIC GUIDELINES AND STAFF IS

RECOMMENDING CONCEPTUAL APPROVAL OF HDC 2020-56. >> THANK YOU.

QUESTIONS. >> SALE, HAVE A QUESTION ON A 2018 REPORTED, CAN YOU GO BACK

TO THE AERIAL OF THAT? >> SURE. >> IS THIS SCREEN VISIBLE TO

STREAMING? >> YES. IT IS BEING STREAMED IT TO

ZOOM'S MAKE. >> IF YOU ZOOM IN ON THAT, IT DOESN'T EVEN LOOK LIKE THE FILLING STATION, LOOKS LIKE JUST A PARKING LOT IN THAT FRONT BUILDING.

>> WHAT YEAR IS THIS? >> CAN YOU ZOOM ON THAT? >> THIS IS THE BUILDING YOU ARE SEEING, THIS IS THE STORE THAT'S OUT OF HAND NOW. THIS WIDE ROOF SECTION AND THEN

THERE'S ANOTHER ADDITION THAT HAD BEEN ADDED BACK THERE. >> I WANTED TO SECOND WHAT MIKE SAID ABOUT THESE MAPS, YOU CAN SEE THE PROGRESSION OF THE TREES AND TO WHEN THEY NOTATED IF IT WAS HEATED BY STOVES ON ELECTRIC AND IT WAS FASCINATING, IS SO GREAT TO SEE THE CHANGES.

>> SOMETIMES WE REQUIRE AN ARCHAEOLOGICAL DEMO I DON'T SEE ANY OF THAT REQUIREMENT OR NECESSITY HERE. THERE MAY BE A FEW OF THE WALLS JUDGING BY THE ROOFLINE.

THE IF THERE'S SOMETHING VISIBLE TO BE PHOTOGRAPHED THAT WOULD BE GREAT.

I DON'T THINK IT IS OF ANY CONSEQUENCE, ESPECIALLY NOT BEING FROM THE PERIOD OF SIGNIFICANCE, THAT BEING SAID, IN 1949 WE DIDN'T HAVE THE SAME STANDARD-MAKE EPA STANDARDS SET SO WE HAVE NO IDEA WHAT WE WILL FIND UNDER THE BUILDING WHEN THE BUILDING IS TORN DOWN.

IT WOULDN'T BE FRAMED STRUCTURE IF IT WAS BUILT. >> OF THE FILLING STATION.

>> ANY OTHER QUESTIONS. >> IT SOUNDED A VERY THOROUGH JOB ON THIS ONE.

WE WENT THROUGH THE BUILDING TO GO A LITTLE BIT AND THE FIRST THING WE DID WAS TALKING TO OUR CLIENT WAS GOING THROUGH THE PROCESS AND IS THAT A VIABLE REHAB, AND AFTER WALKING THROUGH A AND LOOKING AT THE NUMBERS IT WAS NOT VIABLE FOR A LOT OF DIFFERENT REASONS.

IT WAS SUCH A HODGEPODGE OF BUILDINGS THAT EVOLVED OVER THE YEARS AND ACTUALLY THE FILLING STATION IF YOU LOOK THIS WALL WAS BUILT IN THE 80S. THAT ISN'T THE ORIGINAL IT'S ABOUT 45 FEET INSIDE THE WALL IT COULD BE PART OF THAT ORIGINAL GARAGE BUT IF THERE ISN'T

[01:55:02]

JUST SO IF YOU FIND IT ALTHOUGH WE TRIED TO MAINTAIN THE RECORD ON CENTER STREET.

THERE'S DIFFERENT DEFINITIONS, SLIGHT DEFINITION OF THE FAÇADES SO IF YOU TURN THE CORNER ON THIRD AND CONTINUE THAT PATTERN DOWN THIRD STREET UNTIL YOU GET TO THE BACK OF THE BUILDING AND THEN YOU BREAK IT BACK DOWN ON 25 AGAIN. AND SO THAT IS WITH THE BIKE SHOP WHICH IS NOW A RENTAL PROPERTY NEXT TO GREEN TURTLE. AND SO IT BREAKS IT DOWN A

LITTLE BIT BRINGING IT INTO THE RESIDENTIAL SCALE,. >> I'M WORKING ON IT.

BECAUSE OF ACCESSIBILITY ISSUES, THE SECOND STORY AND THE UTILITY AND VALUE WITHIN THIS STATE

SPACE. >> ARE YOU SURE THAT IT'S NOT EXTRA SEATING UP THERE.

>> UPSTAIRS IS STRICTLY DONE MORE FOR A STATICS THAN AND TO ACCOMMODATE THE BACK OF THE HOUSE SERVICE OFFICE, STOCKROOM, THINGS LIKE THAT, BUT NOT PUBLIC ACCESS WHICH MEANS WE CAN FORGO THE ELEVATOR, WE HAVE TO GET HUNDRED 50 SEATS DOWNSTAIRS SO WE HAVE TO TAKE THOSE AND PUT THEM UP BUT IT'S IN A STATIC FUNCTION ON THE CORNER WHICH WAS IMPORTANT.

A LOT OF THIS RESTAURANT ON THE STREET SIDE IS OPEN-AIR. OR FLEXIBLE.

AND SO, THE CORNER AND I'LL SEE IF WE CAN GET SOME DRAWINGS HERE SOON, THE CORNER ELEMENT IS OPEN-AIR. AND SO IS OPEN-AIR DINING. THE BAR ON CENTER STREET CAN BE ENCLOSED OR OPEN DEPENDING ON THE SEATING AND SO WE HAVE COLLAPSIBLE WALL SYSTEM THERE, NOT GARAGE DOORS BUT COLLAPSIBLE WALLS. [INAUDIBLE] THIRD STREET WE HAVE A LITTLE PRIVATE, THERE IS YOUR MASS OF THE WHOLE BLOCK.

AND SO YOU CAN SEE A TAVERN ON THIS END AND THE 316 WHICH IS THE BEER GARDEN ABOUT TO OPEN AND THEN THAT BUILDING IS NEXT AND IT REALLY DOES HAVE WINDOWS OVER HERE, AND THIS IS THE STREET SO THE WINDOWS WILL BE RESTRICTED AND THEN IT'S WITH THE OTHER REARED BLACK MASSES OF THOSE BUILDINGS SO I THOUGHT THE CONTEXT IS BETTER THAN WHAT'S THERE NOW.

IF WE GO BACK TO THE ARCHITECTURAL AND WALK YOU THROUGH THE PLANS OF THE CHARACTER A LITTLE BIT. WILL TRY NOT TO WAVER ON IT TOO LONG.

>> ARE WE GOING MEXICAN AGAIN? >> YES, I WOULD SAY THAT IS CORRECT.

>> GOT ANY TVS? WE HAVEN'T GOTTEN INTO THAT BASED ON CENTER WE DON'T EVEN

[02:00:07]

THAT OPTION? >> HOW IT DOES ENGAGE WITH ISLAND TIME OR WHATEVER THE BUILDING TO THE LEFT OF IT, IS ADJUST TO THE LEFT THAT HAS THE WINDOWS SEVEN YOU JUST HAVE IT

UP FRONT IN THE BUILDING IS PULLED AWAY FROM IT? >> WE WILL HAVE ANOTHER WALL.

THERE WILL BE ANOTHER WALL BUILDS, A BLOCK WALL. >> HOLD ONTO THAT PHOTO, SO,

THERE WINDOWS MARKET COVERED. >> RIGHT. >> THE WINDOWS APPEAR.

>> THEY COME DOWN PRETTY LOW. >> WELL, IF YOU LOOK AT THE FRONT, THEY ARE NOT THAT LOW.

IT'S QUITE A DISTANCE WE SEE WHERE IT IS NOW, THAT'S A PRETTY GOOD DISTANCE.

>> AND THAT IS YOUR LOCI, SO YOU ARE PROBABLY COMING RIGHT BELOW THOSE WINDOWS,.

>> YES, WE WILL BE RIGHT BELOW THOSE WINDOWS. SO,.

>> THERE YOU GO. >> THAT WALL IS A LOW PORTION, IT'S ABOUT A 4-FOOT PARAPET HERE. ALL OF THESE ROOFS SLOPE TO THE SOUTH.

THERE IS AN INLET BACK THERE AND SO THIS IS THE BAR HERE. AND SO THESE WALLS CAN COLLAPSE WITH JUST A RAIL ON THIS IS THE MAIN ENTRY. THIS WRAP AROUND THE CORNER IS OPEN-AIR AND THIS IS TWO-STORY. THERE'S A CATWALK ON TOP SO YOU CAN HAVE THE FRENCH DOORS OPEN THE FESTIVAL OF LIGHTS AND THAT KIND OF THING SO IT'S A VERY OPEN AIR.

THIS IS PRIVATE DINING ROOM HERE. AND IT WILL SLIDE OPEN TO OPEN UP ON THE THIRD STREET. THIS ON THE SERVICE AREA AND BACK HERE'S THE KITCHEN.

IN THE PARAPET UP YOUR WITH THE MOVEMENT. A LITTLE BIT OF A VARIETY.

THERE IS A GOOD ROW OF PALM TREES ON THIRD STREET, WE WANT TO SUPPLEMENT SOME OF THE PLANTINGS BOTH ON CENTER AND THIRD. BUT THAT'S ABOUT 160 SEATS IN THERE AND THAT'S THE PLAN 162 IS WHAT I GOT SHOWN BUT AGAIN TRYING TO WORK WITH THE 25 MODULE WHENEVER POSSIBLE THESE ARE THE DIFFERENT ELEVATIONS AT THE TOPS IF YOU CAN GO BACK AS YOU LOOK AT THE THIRD STREET HERE, THOSE THREE WINDOWS TO THE RIGHT OF THE MAIN BLOCK THE

UPPER ONE. >> WHAT IS THE QUESTION? >> THEY ARE NOT THE SAME HEIGHT

AS THE FOUR TO THE LEFT. >> NOT THE SAME HEIGHT TO MAKE THE HEAD HEIGHT IT HAS THE Y ON

THE TOP SO IT APPEARS HIGHER. >> THESE ARE AWNINGS YOU SEE APPEAR ON THIS IS HAND-DRAWN.

AT THE END OF THE DAY THE WINDOWS WILL MATCH ON ITS PLAN TO BE STUCCO.

NOT A LOT OF -- TRYING TO KEEP IT FAIRLY CLEAN. >> THE AWNINGS ARE JUST A FABRIC AWNING. FABRIC AWNING, NO BALANCE. JUST CLEAN AND SIMPLE, OPEN FRAME HOPEFULLY AS SOLID COLORS TO MAKE TO BE OF MATERIALS LISTED?

>> YES. THIS IS JUST CONCEPT AT THIS POINT IS THE SAME TO MAKE SURE WERE HEADING IN THE SAME DIRECTION. VERY WELL.

[02:05:03]

>> WE PROVIDED THE GREASE TRAP WITH THE SPRINKLER SYSTEM YOU'LL ADD WATER TO THE BUILDING.

>> WITH FOOD AND BEVERAGES. >> WE REALLY. >> IT DIDN'T TAKE TOO LONG.

WE DID SPECIFY THE GREEN AND SO WILL WORK ON MOST OF THAT WILL BE IN THE RIGHT AWAY.

AND THAT RIGHT NOW IS IN DISREPAIR IS REALLY RAGGED. WE WILL BE FAT UP.

WITH VEGETATION AND HOPEFULLY MEET OUR GREEN REQUIREMENTS THERE'S AN AREA ON CENTER THAT HAS NOT BEEN WELL MAINTAINED. SO, I WILL BE AVAILABLE FOR QUESTIONS FROM HERE ON OUT.

>> TO BE HAVE ANY FURTHER QUESTIONS FOR JOHN? THE DEMOLITION OF THE NEW

CONSTRUCTION. IS THERE ANY TRUTH TO THAT. >> ALL OF THAT STUFF WAS DONE A LOT OF THINGS THAT THEY DID HERE WERE DONE IN THE 80S SHORTLY AFTER WE RENOVATED OUR BUILDING.

SO WHEN WERE RIGHT ON THAT IMPROVEMENTS WILL BE MUCH APPRECIATED, THERE WAS ONE THING THAT SAL DID PUT IN THE REPORT IN HIS STAFF REPORT, IT WAS CONTINGENT UPON RECEIPT OF A BUILDING PERMIT, AND I KNOW WE'VE BEEN THROUGH THIS DISCUSSION BEFORE, I WOULD ASK YOU TO CONSIDER AT LEAST UPON APPLICATION FOR A BUILDING FOR A PERMIT BECAUSE IT TAKES A WHILE AND THIS WILL TAKE SOME LOGISTICS TO GET ALL THE SLICK WORKED OUT WITH FENCING, PEDESTRIAN WALK EIGHT WAYS, ALL OF THE DIRT WORK THAT HAS TO HAPPEN, SO TO DO THAT YOU WILL

BE A BIG HELP. >> WHAT I AM HEARING IS THAT WE WILL SEE A PLAN AND HAVE APPROVED PLAN FROM THE HTC CERTIFICATES BEFORE THE DEMO PROCESS.

>> YOU WOULD HAVE THE HCC PLAN AND HAVE SUBMITTED IT WITH TECHNICAL DOCUMENTS TO THOSE.

>> AND I THINK WE JUST WANT TO MAKE SURE THAT SOMEBODY DOESN'T HAVE STICKER SHOCK AT SOME POINT AND SAYS WE DON'T WANT TO -- ON THE CORNER. LOOK I UNDERSTAND THE REQUIREMENT BUT AT LEAST HAVING IT IN THE HOPPER FOR THE BUILDING PERMIT AND IT DEFINITELY HAS BEEN VETTED WE DO THIS AS A POINT IS CONCEPT IT HASN'T BEEN VETTED YET.

>> THINK YOU. >> THANK YOU, JOHN. GOOD TO HEAR FROM YOU ARE THERE

ANY MEMBERS OF THE PUBLIC THAT WOULD LIKE TO SPEAK HERE? >> WE WILL CLOSE THE PUBLIC

HEARING AND HAVE MORE DISCUSSION. >> I HAVE A QUESTION.

I'M NOT SURE IF THIS IS FOR SALE OR JUST OUT THERE, BUT OBVIOUSLY THIS IS A VAST IMPROVEMENT OVER WHAT MEETS THIS SCALE OF THE TWO-PART BUILDING, BUT IT DOESN'T MEET THE INTENT OF THE TWO-PART BUILDING. TWO-PART BUILDING WAS TYPICALLY A RESIDENCE OVER A BUSINESS AND ARE WE LOSING SOME OF THAT TWO-PART RESIDENTIAL HISTORY FOR ANOTHER BIG RESTAURANT?

>> OF THE TWO-PART COMMERCIAL STRUCTURE REALLY IS MORE ABOUT THAT THE STOREFRONTS AND THE PROPORTIONING OF THE WINDOWS AND WHETHER THEY ARE COMMERCIAL, RESIDENTIAL OR WHATEVER.

AND I BELIEVE THAT TWO-STORY PORTION OF THE BUILDING AND THAT IS WHAT WE ARE SEEING HERE IS THAT YOU GOT THAT PROPORTION OF THE BUILD WINDOWS THAT TRADITIONALLY YOU SEE AS OFFICES OR RESIDENTIAL AND THEN YOU GOT GLAZING DOWN AT THE BOTTOM WHICH WOULD TRADITIONALLY BE A

STOREFRONT. AND SO I THINK IT MEETS. >> BASICALLY OUR PURVIEW IS THAT THE SCALE, THE MASSING, THE LOOK OF IT IN THE USES THAT FALLS ONTO SOME OTHER DEPARTMENT IF

THEY DECIDE THAT WE ARE LOSING WHATEVER. >> YES.

EIGHT SICK CATWALK UP THERE BUT COULD BE RESIDENTIAL OR COMMERCIAL, WE ARE LOOKING AT WHAT IT LOOKS LIKE FROM THE STREET IN THE PROPORTIONING, THE RHYTHM OF THE WINDOWS AND DOORS AND I THINK THIS REALLY DOES FIT IN WITH WHAT WE HAVE AN URGENT HISTORIC BUILDINGS.

>> GOOD. ANY FURTHER DISCUSSION? >> I THINK THE ONLY THING WE NEED TO CHAT ABOUT IS THE DEMOLITION, I FEEL GOOD IF WHEN WE SEE FOR FINAL REVIEW ASSUMING

[02:10:12]

OF THAT EXISTING BUILDING ONCE WE APPROVE THAT. >> SO THAT'S A TECHNICAL

QUESTION. SO DO WE CONTINUE THE DEMO? >> THE WAY TO DO IT IS TO APPROVE THE DEMO WITH COND CONDITIONS, OR APPROVE THE GRANTING OF THE DEMOLITION PERMITS CONTINGENT UPON WHATEVER CONDITION YOU WANT. THEN, THEY HAVE THIS APPROVED AND IN HAND BUT STAFF CAN SIGN OFF ON THE PERMIT FROM THE BUILDING DEPARTMENT UNTIL WHATEVER CONDITION YOU PUT ON IT. AS JOHN ASKED FOR THE SUBMISSION OF THE BUILDING PERMIT WHICH WE REQUIRE SECOND APPROVAL ANYWAY. I DON'T KNOW WHERE IN FREE BUT

IS. >> THE WAY THAT WOULD WORK THEY WOULD HAVE BOTH THE SEAL WAFER CONSTRUCTION AND DEMOLITION AND THEY WOULD PUT IT INTO THE BUILDING DEPARTMENT DEMO PERMIT OR A BUILDING PERMIT WHICH WOULD BE ABLE TO RELEASE AND THAT COULD BE HAPPEN SO WHAT DID THEY

SAY? >> I WILL PUT A QUESTION FIRST, I THINK THAT THIS COUNSEL IS WELL LABEL TO CONSIDER DESIGNS BUT YOU'RE NOW ASKING US TO GET INVOLVED IN MATTERS OF TIMING AND CONTROL OF PROCESSES AND WHILE I CERTAINLY AGREE THAT WE SHOULD NOT ALLOW A WHOLE TO EXIST, I'M WONDERING IF THERE'S BETTER PEOPLE TO ADVISE US HOW THIS MIGHT BE COORDINATED OR WHETHER WE SIMPLY MAKE A MOTION THAT WE APPROVE OR DENY EITHER OR BOTH OF THOSE BUT MAKE IT A

REQUIREMENT THAT THE CITY TAKE ACTION SUCH AS THERE IS NO HOLD. >> I THINK WHAT I AM HEARING WITH WHAT OTHER VOTER MEMBERS THINK IS I THINK THE CONDITION IS APPROPRIATE AND I DON'T THINK WE'RE GOING TO SEE A DEMO UNTIL WE HAVE AN APPROVED PLAN. I THINK THE PROCESS THAT SAL

OUTLINED WAS PROBABLY LEGITIMATE. >> SO A CONCEPTUAL APPROVAL?

>> THAT'S WHAT I WOULD APPROVE FOUR. >> I WOULD AGREE WITH THAT, I WOULD THINK WE DO A CONCEPTUAL APPROVAL PENDING APPLICATION FOR A BUILDING PERMIT.

>> AND FINALLY SHE SEE. >> IS THERE MOTION ON THERE? >> IS DOWN TO YOU THREE GUYS.

>> I WILL TAKE A STAB AT IT HELP CORRECT. I MOVED TO APPROVE HCC CASE NUMBER 202057 WITH THE FOLLOWING CONDITIONS THAT IT IS A CONCEPTUAL APPROVAL FOR DEMO CONTINGENT UPON A FINAL HCC CERTIFICATE OF APPROVAL AND SUBMISSION OF PLANS FOR THE BUILDING DEPARTMENT FOR PERMIT, DOES THAT MEAN AND I MOVE THAT THE HTC MAKE THE FOLLOWING FACTS AND CONCLUSIONS PART OF THE RECORD THAT HTC CASE 2020-57 IS PRESENTED WITH A HAPPY OR IS

NOT? >> IS SUBSTANTIALLY COMPLIANT WITH THE SEC. OF INTERIOR'S STANDARDS LAND DEVELOPMENT CODE IN THE DOWNTOWN HISTORIC DISTRICT TORRANCE APPROVAL AT

THIS TIME. >> I SECOND. DISCUSSION.

>> I WOULD LIKE TO ADD AN OBSERVATION HERE THAT THROUGHOUT WE HAVE BEEN TALKING ABOUT BOTH CASES THE DEMOLITION AND THE SUBSEQUENT -- AND NOW VOTING ON IT IS TWO SEPARATE PIECES.

IS THERE ANY WAY IN WHICH WE CAN COMBINE THIS INTO ONE PROJECT? >> IT HAS TO REMAIN TWO SEPARATE

NUMBERS. >> FOR YOUR RECORDS, BUT YOU COULD HANDLE BOTH ISSUES AND

[02:15:02]

>> I WAS THINKING MORE OPERATIONALLY THAT THE APPLICANT'S HAD TO TAKE ACTIONS BOTH ON DEMOLITION AND PERMIT FOR IT. TOGETHER.

SO IT WAS NOT ABLE TO CREATE A WHOLE. >> ANY FURTHER DISCUSSION ON THE MOTION DO WE HAVE A SECOND ONE?

WHICH IS THE CONSTRUCTION PROPOSAL THERE. >> A MOTION.

>> I MOVED TO CONCEPTUALLY APPROVE CASE NUMBER HDC 2020-56 WITHOUT CONDITIONS, I MOVE THAT HTC MAKE THE FOLLOWING FINDINGS OF FACT AND CONCLUSIONS OF LAW PART OF THE RECORD, THAT HTC CASE HDC 2020-56 AS PRESENTED IS SUBSTANTIALLY COMPLIANT WITH THE LAND DEVELOPMENT CODE, SECRETARY OF INTERIOR STANDARDS, AND THE DOWNTOWN HISTORIC DISTRICT GUIDELINES TO WARRANT CONCEPTUAL

APPROVAL AT THIS TIME. >> SECOND. >> PROPOSED, AND A SECOND.

PLEASE CALL ROLE.

>> YES. >> YES. >> YES MAKE.

>> THANK YOU. JUST ON AND OFF THE RECORD TO CONGRATULATE YOU AND YOUR FIRM ON THE AJAY LEWIS HOUSE RENOVATIONS, LEWIS, ISN'T THAT ONE OF YEARS ON GREG STREET?

>> YES. I'M DOWN THERE ALMOST EVERY DAY AND IT'S REALLY LOOKING GOOD.

>> WE HAVE A COUPLE WORKING ON THOSE HOUSES HAVE HAD SOME REAL DIFFICULT FINDINGS.

[6. STAFF CERTIFICATE OF APPROVAL]

>> OKAY. >> THE NEXT ITEM IS STAFF CERTIFICATES OF APPROVAL.

SAL. >> 'S MAKE I'M HERE TO ANSWER ANY QUESTIONS IF YOU HAVE

ANYTHING ABOUT STAFF APPROVALS? >> ANY QUESTIONS? >> BOARD BUSINESS.

[7. BOARD BUSINESS]

WE HAVE THREE APPLICANTS FOR THE VACANCY OF ALTERNATE NUMBER TWO. >> NORMALLY WE JUST PASS THESE ALONG TO THE COMMISSION TO MAKE A DECISION AND I DON'T KNOW THAT'S NECESSARILY FAIR FOR THEM. THEY DON'T, ALL I WOULD HAVE TO SAY, THANK EVERYBODY IS VERY QUALIFIED BUT THE STATEMENT I READ BY THE FIRST APPLICANT IN THE BACKGROUND WAS PHENOMENAL.

THEIR PASSION AND WHY THEY WANT TO BE A PART OF THIS THAT WAS REALLY STRIKING TO ME.

>> MR. -- IS A CLIENT OF MINE. I KNEW HIM VERY WELL. HALF OF YOUR CLIENTS OF MINE, TOO. BUT, HE'S VERY EXTREMELY TALENTED GUY AND I THINK IS VERY PASSIONATE AND HAS A TON OF EXPERIENCE, DECADES OF ARCHITECTURE AND ENGINEERING.

SO IF YOU CAN DEAL WITH SOMEBODY ELSE IN THAT FIELD ON HIS BOARD. >> MAY BE A NEED TO RETRACT MY

STATEMENT. >> ARE ANY OF THE APPLICANTS ONLINE.

>> CELL. >> ANYWAY THINK TO TAMMI'S POINT, I STILL THINK THAT MAY BE THE MOST APPROPRIATE THING FOR US TO DO IS TO REACH OUT TO THE COMMISSIONERS INDEPENDENT PLAN IF WE HAVE A RECOMMENDATION THAT WE PERSONALLY FEEL IS THE MOST VALID, THAT'S MY PERSONAL

[02:20:03]

OPINION. >> WHEN YOU LOOK AT THE BACK OF HIS BACK GROUND IS COMPLETELY CONSISTENT WITH OUR NEEDS AND HIS QUALIFICATIONS ARE ASTOUNDING AND HE LIVES ON SOUTH 12TH STREET HE'S ON A NEW BUILD ON SOUTH 12TH STREET AND HE WROTE HIS MASTERS THESIS ON

FERNANDINA BEACH. >> WHILE. >> THAT'S HUGE, THAT'S MIND

BLOWING. >> DO WE WISH TO PUT THE NAMES FORWARD WITH A PREFERRED?

>> MY SENSE IS THE COMMISSIONERS WOULD PREFER THAT WE MAKE A RECOMMENDATION, ESPECIALLY IN

THE CASE WHERE IT IS. >> OKAY, IT IS WHAT IT IS. >> GOOD QUACH.

[8.1 2021 Fernandina Beach Strategic Summary]

[8.2 Friends of Bosque Bello]

FRIENDS OF -- >> THAT IS JUST TO LET YOU KNOW THERE IS AN UPDATE IF YOU HAVE NOT BEEN TO THEIR WEBSITE THEY WANT TO START PROMOTING THEIR WEBSITE.

[9. PUBLIC COMMENT]

>> OKAY. >> PUBLIC COMMENT. >> NAME AND ADDRESS PLEASE.

>> GOOD EVENING. PAUL,. >> REALLY I'M JUST HERE TO ASK QUESTIONS AND DOING MORE OF TRYING TO FIND OUT SOMETHING. AND IT'S ALL REFERENCE TO THE MARINA. I KNOW THE MARINA PROPERTY FALLS IF I UNDERSTAND IT CORRECTLY FALLS UNDER THE HISTORIC DISTRICT, MAYBE NOT -- ITSELF PER SE BUT BRATS AND SO FORTH,

NO. >> SO THE PORTION OF THE MARINA WHO IS IN THE CRA, NONE OF IT FALLS WITHIN THE HISTORIC DISTRICT. THE CRA IS UNDER THE PURVIEW OF

THE HDC. >> SO, I GUESS MY QUESTION IS, HAS ANYBODY EVER LOOKED AT, THOUGHT OF OR ATTEMPTED TO TAKE THE PROPERTY WITH THE SHORELINE AND TO DESIGNATED OR TRY TO

DESIGNATED AS A LANDMARK OR STATE LANDMARK? >> YES.

THE ISSUES WITH THAT RATHER THAT THERE ARE NO COME ASIDE FROM ITS LOCATION THERE ARE NO SIGNIFICANT SIGNET STRUCTURES, LANDSCAPES OR MONUMENTS THAT DAY FROM THE SAME PERIOD OF SIGNIFICANCE. WE HAVE THREE BUILDINGS LEFT ON THE WATERFRONT THAT DUE DATE FROM THE WORKING WATERFRONT WHICH THOSE ARE SIGNIFICANT, BUT OTHER THAN THAT THERE IS NOT ANYTHING THERE TO DESIGNATE WHEREAS WHEN WE LOOK AT DOWNTOWN WE LOOK AT THE INDIVIDUAL BUILDING STRUCTURES, LANDSCAPES AND LOOK AT THIS SIGNIFICANCE THAT THEY PLAYED IN THE CITY AND WHAT IS STILL VISIBLE THERE AND SO, THAT IS THE ISSUE OF THAT. WE WILL EXPLORE A LITTLE MORE IF WE CAN PUSH THE BOUNDARY BUT THE PROBLEM IS YOU HAVE TO HAVE A PERCENTAGE OF CONTRIBUTING STRUCTURES TO DO SOMETHING LIKE THAT. AND IT IS SIGNIFICANT CULTURALLY

[02:25:01]

JOB AT HONORING IN THE CITY. >> I MIGHT OFFER THAT IN SUE ANNE'S BOOK, SAVING FERNANDINA, SHE DOESN'T ADDRESS THE WATERFRONT IN ANY WAY AS IN THE HISTORICAL CONTEXT.

THEY'RE NOT THINKING ABOUT IT THE WAY WE ARE THINKING ABOUT IT NOW I'M STRUGGLING TO SEE HOW THERE COULD NOT ANY SIGNIFICANCE DOWN AT THAT WATERFRONT. I DON'T WANT TO WASTE YOUR TIME TONIGHT, SO, IS THERE IT SOUNDS LIKE THERE WAS AN ATTEMPT, HE IS THEIR RECORD OF THAT.

>> EVERY TIME THERE IS A SURVEY DONE OR HISTORIC RESOURCE SURVEY, THEY LOOK TO SEE WHAT ELSE IS ADJACENT TO THE HISTORIC DISTRICT THAT WOULD QUALIFY TO BE INCLUDED IN THE NATIONAL REGISTER. WE HAVE DONE THREE OF THOSE, 1985, 1997 AT 2018 AND THOSE REPORTS ARE ALL ONLINE. THEY LOOK AT THOSE STRUCTURES BUT DID NOT REALLY DO REPORTS

FOR THEM. >> THEY ARE TAGGED ONLINE. >> JUST CONTACT ME.

>> WITH THE THREE BUILDINGS AS IT COOKS, THE WAREHOUSE, AND THE FERNANDINA, WHAT IS THE THIRD

ONE? >> I WOULD HAVE TO LOOK AT THE MAP.

>> THE OTHER REASON IS THEY WERE SO SPREAD OUT IT WASN'T LIKE IT WAS AN AREA WHERE YOU COULD JUST

DESIGNATED. >> YES, AND THE PERIOD OF SIGNIFICANCE DOWNTOWN ONLY GOES TO 27. IF THOSE BUILDINGS FALL OUTSIDE OF THAT PERIOD THEY DON'T FALL WITHIN THE PERIOD OF SIGNIFICANCE FOR DOWNTOWN, WHAT WE HAVE LOOKED AT IS THE POSSIBILITY OF EXPANDING THE PERIOD OF SIGNIFICANCE BECAUSE THERE ARE THINGS THAT HAPPEN LATER ON WITH THE SHRIMPING INDUSTRY AND IF YOU HAVE STRUCTURES LIKE THAT DOWNTOWN THAT RIGHT NOW ARE CONSISTS CONSIDERED CONTRIBUTING STRUCTURES.

>> THANK YOU. YOU RAISE AN INTERESTING POINT. >> THE THIRD WOULD BE THE WHITE

WATER STRUCTURES JUST NORTH OF THE CITY PROPERTY? >> THAT MAY BE THE GOOD SALES PROPERTY AND THE OIL WAREHOUSE TO LOOK AT THE CONFLUENCE OF LAND, AND WATER AT THIS POINT AND AT THIS POINT WE DO HAVE SOME WITH EACH OF THOSE REMAINING.

>> AND WHAT WE ARE DOING RIGHT NOW IS WE ARE LOOKING AT DIFFERENT OPTIONS.

WHILE IT MIGHT NOT BE AN OPTION TO PUT IT ON THE NATIONAL REGISTER, AND THERE MIGHT BE OTHER DESIGNATIONS THAT WE CAN SEEK FORAGE OR EVEN LOCALLY WE CAN CREATE DESIGNATIONS THAT

THE SIGNIFICANCE OF THE WATERFRONT. >> ISN'T THERE A HISTORIC

WORKING WATERFRONT DESIGNATION? >> THERE IS A WORKING WATERFRONT DESIGNATION.

NOT A HISTORIC COMPONENT TO IT. >> OKAY, IS THERE ANYTHING FURTHER THAT COMES BEFORE THE

BOARD? >> I HAD ONE THOUGHT. PAUL HAD TO WAIT ALL OF THIS TIME TO GO THROUGH THIS, AND THEN WE WENT THROUGH STAFF STUFF, SHOULD WE PUT PUBLIC COMMENT SOMEPLACE ELSE ON THE AGENDA? OR AT LEAST BEFORE STAFF REPORTS, SOMETIMES WE HAVE PRETTY HAD THE STAFF REPORTS THAT WE GO THROUGH.

I DON'T KNOW IF THAT'S A PROCEDURAL CHANGE WE HAVE TO SUBMIT.

>> WE WOULD HAVE TO SUBMITTED TO THE COMMISSION FOR A CHANGE AND I WOULD SAY WE WOULD WANT TO PUT IT BEFORE THE NEW BUSINESS ON THE OLD BUSINESS, BUT I THINK MOVING IT BEFORE BOARD BUSINESS

AND STAFF BUSINESS WOULD BE APPROPRIATE. >> I THINK THE COMMISSIONER HAD

AN IDEA FOR US. >> NO. >> SO WE CANNOT MOVE THEM TO THE

FRONT OF THE AGENDA? >> YOU COULD IF YOU WANTED TO BUT THEN THE ISSUE BECOMES, WE DON'T LIMIT, WE CAN LIMIT, WE HAVE THE RIGHT TO LIMIT TO THREE MINUTES BUT WE GENERALLY DON'T AND YOU COULD BE PUSHING OFF NEW BUSINESS FOR LONG DISCUSSIONS. OUR NEW BUSINESS PEOPLE HAVE PAID TO BE HERE. TO MAKE IT WHILE EVERYONE IS PAID TO BE HERE ONE WAY OR THE

[02:30:01]

>> THAT'S AN OPTION FOR THE BOARD BEFORE A MEETING TO REORDER A CASE OR TO REORDER THE

AGENDA. >> I JUST WANT TO COMMENT ON BOARD BUSINESS WITH THE OTHER NIGHT WE HEARD PROPOSED CHANGES TO THE APPEALS PROCESS TO THE HDC AND IT WAS GENEROUSLY PROVIDED ME WITH A COUPLE OF INSIGHTS. AND SO, THE BOARD RIGHT NOW WHERE YOUR AVERAGE PERSON CANNOT APPEAL THE DECISION OF THIS BOARD TO THE COMMISSION BUT WE COULD PROPOSE FOR THAT TO HAPPEN BUT UNDER CERTAIN RESTRICTIONS THEY BASICALLY WOULD HAVE TO BE A NEIGHBOR. IT LIMITS. I CAN'T COMPLAIN ABOUT WHAT IS HAPPENING ON WHITE SCREECHES BECAUSE I DON'T LIKE WHAT'S HAPPENING ON WHITE STREET.

I WOULD BASICALLY HAVE TO BE A NEIGHBOR ON WHITE STREAK BEFORE I COULD WEIGH IN ON THEM.

AND SECONDLY, AND TAMMI WOULD BE THE ONE WHO MAKES THE DETERMINATION AND WHAT SHE IS DOING -- AND THAT'S APPROPRIATE. WE HAVE THE PROJECT APPROVED AND THEY COULD APPEAL TO THE CITY COMMISSION THAT SEEMS APPROPRIATE. ANYTHING SALAMA STAFF TO WOULD NOT BE SUBJECT YOU WANT TO CHANGE THE COLOR OF YOUR HOUSE THEY SAY IT'S OKAY THAT'S OKAY NOBODY CAN APPEAL THAT. I JUST WANT TO PASS THAT ON. IT PASSED 322.

I THINK IT THERE WAS TO THAT. JUST PASSING OUT ON. >> I SEE IN WHAT YOU'RE SAYING

BUT I THINK THE DEFINITION OF NEIGHBOR NEEDS TO BE BROUGHT. >> YOU COULD ASK TAMMI TO

ARTICULATE THAT THE NEXT TIME SHE IS HERE. >> IF YOU MEAN ADJACENT.

>> I THINK YOU WOULD HAVE TO BE -- I THINK YOU NEED TO SEE IT, YOU COULDN'T BE COMPLAINING ABOUT WHAT'S GOING ON -- I THINK SHE'S GOING TO TAKE IT PRETTY STRICTLY.

I DON'T KNOW IF IT WILL GET USED MUCH BUT IT DOES PROVIDE THE OPPORTUNITY IT IS AN ISSUE OF

FAIRNESS FOR THE COMMISSIONERS PERSPECTIVE. >> IS PROBABLY GOING TO GET

AMENDED THAT IT GOES TO THE CIRCUIT COURT. >> YOU THINK IT'S GOING --

>> WELL, KNOWING WHO MADE THE ORIGINAL MOTION AND KNOWING WHO HAS BEEN THE ADVOCATE OF THE ORIGINAL MOTION AND THERE WAS A LITTLE PUSHBACK FROM OTHERS ON ITS FINE.

IT'S JUST A FAIRNESS THING. THAT'S ALL IT WAS. WITH WHAT WE SAY LIBERTY AND JUSTICE FOR ALL AND WE CAN SAY ONE CAN APPEAL AND ONE CAN'T. THEY BOTH COULD APPEAL BOTH GO

TO THE CIRCUIT COURT. >> I CAN REMEMBER THIS COMMISSION NEVER OVERTURNING A

DECISION OF ANOTHER BOARD. >> THE LAST TWO YEARS IT WAS TO THAT CAME TO THE CITY AND THEY BOTH HAVEN'T GOT TO DO WITH WHAT YOU DECIDE BUT PROCESSING. IT'S A MOUNTAIN OUT OF A MOLE HILL. JUST TO MAKE IT FAIRNESS BECAUSE --

>> IS THERE ANY FURTHER

* This transcript was compiled from uncorrected Closed Captioning.