Link

Social

Embed

Download

Download
Download Transcript

[Item 1]

[00:00:04]

>> CHAIRMAN: I WILL CALL TO THIS ORDER THE DECEMBER 19, 2019, MEETING OF THIS HISTORIC DISTRICT COUNCIL. IF YOU WOULD PLEASE CALL THE ROLL.

WITH MR. MORRISON. >> BOARD MEMBER: I'M GOING TO RECUSE MYSELF FROM ACCK2019-41

BECAUSE I'M THE AGENT FOR THE OWNER. >> BOARD MEMBER: I HAVE NONE

>> BOARD MEMBER: I HAVE NONE. >> BOARD MEMBER: I DID RECEIVE A PHONE CALL FROM MR. REITZER THE DAY AFTER LAST MONTH'S MEETING. HE CALLED TO THANK THE BOARD FOR THEIR COMMENTS AND LET ME KNOW HE WAS GOING BE ADJUSTING HIS DRAWINGS TO ACCOMMODATE THOSE COMMENTS. I RECOMMENDED HE

CONTACT SAL TO MAKE SURE HE COMPLETED HIS DRAWING SET. >> BOARD MEMBER: I HAVE NOD HAVE

HAD NONE. >> CHAIRMAN: CITY ATTORNEY WOULD YOU PRESENT THE QUASI JUDICIAL

PROCEDURES. >> SURE. WE HAVE SIX CASES ON THE AGENDA. FOUR UNDER OLD AND TWO UNDER NEW BUSINESS. THEY WILL BE CONDUCTED AS QUASI JUDICIAL HEARINGS IN ACCORDANCE WITH FLORIDA STATUTES AND THE CITY COMMISSION ADOPTED PROCEDURES. WHAT THAT MEANS IS CITY STAFF WILL MAKE A PRESENTATION AND INTRODUCE EVIDENCE INTO THE RECORD. HE MAY CALL WITNESSES. THEN THE AGENT AND OR THEIR APPLICANT IN THE CASE WILL COME TO THE PODIUM.

PLEASE STATE YOUR NAME AND ADDRESS AND YOU ARE TESTIFYING AND INTRODUCING EVIDENCE INTO THE RECORD. DOCUMENTS, PHOTOGRAPHS, OR WITNESS TESTIMONY. AND BOTH THE CITY AND THE PARTY OR APPLICANT MAY CROSS-EXAMINATION EACH OTHER AND EACH OTHER'S WITNESSES. IF THERE ARE ANY AFFECTED PARTIES HERE, YOU ARE TREATED THE SAME WAY AS THE CITY AND THE APPLICANT. IF YOU ARE HERE TO TESTIFY, PLEASE MAKE SURE YOU TAKE THE OATH IN A FEW MINUTES AND YOU WILL NOT BE LIMITED BY THE AMOUNT OF TIME THAT YOU GET TO SPEAK. IF YOU ARE GOING TO APPEAL ANY OF THE DECISIONS MADE BY THE HISTORIC DISTRICT COUNCIL TONIGHT YOU WOULD NEED TO FILE THAT APPEAL WITHIN 30 DAYS. APPLICANTS CAN APPEAL THE HDC'S DECISION AT THIS TIME AND THAT APPEAL IS FILED WITHIN 30 DAYS TO THE CITY COMMISSION. ARE THERE ANY QUESTIONS?

>> CHAIRMAN: ANYONE WISHING TO TESTIFY THIS EVENING I WOULD ASK NOW TO STAND AND SWEAR TO TELL

THE TRUTH. >> RAISE YOUR RIGHT HAND. DO YOU SWEAR OR AFFIRM THE ORAL AND WRITTEN TESTIMONY WILL BE THE TRUTH, THE WHOLE TRUTH AND NOTHING BUT THE TRUTH?

>> I DO. >> CHAIRMAN: THANK YOU. BOARD MEMBERS, MR. COMELLA, WERE THERE

[Item 2]

CHANGES TO THE MINUTES? YOU AND I HAD A CONVERSATION EARLIER TODAY ABOUT THE REITZER ITEM.

>> I'VE NOT HAD A CHANCE TO CHECK ON THAT. >> CHAIRMAN:

>> BOARD MEMBER: MINUTES HAVE YOU HAD AN OPPORTUNITY TO LOOK AT THE MINUTES AND WERE THERE ANY CHANGES. I RECALLED THAT WE CONTINUED IT BECAUSE WE NEEDED CHANGES. THE MINUTES SAY WE PROVIDED A CERTIFICATE OF APPROVAL CONDITIONAL UPON MOVING THE DOOR IN THE UTILITY ROOM TO THE BACK OF THE UTILITY ROOM. I KNOW WE HAD THAT DISCUSSION BUT DID WE APPROVE IT THAT WAY?

>> BOARD MEMBER: THE WAY I REMEMBER IT IS THAT WE GAVE IT A CONCEPTUAL APPROVAL WITH THE

CONDITION THAT THEY WERE GOING TO COME BACK, I THOUGHT >> WE CAN DOUBLE CHECK. IT

DOESN'T AFFECT TONIGHT'S -- >> CHAIRMAN: WE'RE NOT GOING TO APPROVE THE MINUTES BECAUSE WE

THINK THEY NEED ADJUSTMENT. IS THAT FAIR? >> I JUST CAUGHT THAT TODAY. I WAS THINKING TO MYSELF, IF WE APPROVED IT WHY ARE THEY COMING BACK.

>> THAT'S WHAT IT EH SAYS IN THE MINUTES. IT WARRANTED CONCEPTUAL APPROVAL.

>> CHAIRMAN: I MUST HAVE MISREAD THAT. SO, PERHAPS THEY ARE CORRECT.

>> IT DOES. I HAVE HOME HERE. >> CHAIRMAN: THANK YOU. CAB WE GET OUR MOTION AND SECOND ON

MINUTES? >> BOARD MEMBER: I'LL MAKE A MOTION TO APPROVE THE MINUTES.

>> BOARD MEMBER: I'LL SECOND. >> CHAIRMAN: ANY DISCUSSION? HEARING NONE, ALL THOSE IN FAVOR OF THE MINUTES PLEASE SIGNIFY WITH AYE. I STAND CORRECTED AND I APPRECIATE THAT.

>> BOARD MEMBER: MR. CHAIRMAN, AT THIS JUNCTURE I WOULD LIKE TO PROPOSE THE FACTS TO THE MINUTES. THEY ARE CONCISE, ACCURATE AND TIMELY. REAL GOOD JOB. THANK YOU.

[00:05:04]

>> THANK YOU VERY MUCH. >> CHAIRMAN: OKAY. BOARD MEMBERS, WITH YOUR APPROVAL, AND

[Item 5.1]

BY VOICE VOTE, I WOULD LIKE TO BRING MR. BECKMAN, THE NEW BUILDING OFFICIAL, FORWARD AT THIS TIME RATHER THAN HAVE HIM SIT THROUGH OUR SIX CASES TONIGHT. BECAUSE WE'RE SO FORTUNATE TO HAVE STEPHEN BECKMAN AS OUR NEW BUILDING OFFICIAL. THANK YOU VERY MUCH

FOR COMING FORWARD. SAY WHATEVER YOU WOULD LIKE TO SAY. >> THANK YOU FOR INVITING ME.

STEPHEN BECKMAN BUILDING OFFICIAL CITY OF FERNANDINA BEACH. I WOULD JUST LIKE TO SAY VERY BRIEFLY THAT THERE IS MANY MINUTES I'M SURE PEOPLE FIND AMELIA ISLAND AND FERNANDINA BEACH AS A PLACE THEY WANT TO LIVE. AND ONE OF WHICH IS THE BEAUTIFUL DOWNTOWN HISTORIC DISTRICT THAT WE HAVE HERE. IT IS A GEM. AND I'D LIKE TO SAY THAT I AM HONORED TO BE PART OF THE PROCESS IN MAINTAINING AND HOLDING THE STANDARDS FOR THIS AREA THAT EVERYONE REALLY DESIRES TO HAVE IN THIS COMMUNITY. AND I'M HAPPY TO HELP WHATEVER YOU -- HOWEVER I

CAN. I LOOK FORWARD TO WORKING WITH YOU ALL. >> CHAIRMAN: THANK YOU. ANY QUESTIONS OR COMMENTS FOR HIM? IF NOT, I MIGHT JUST ADD, WE UNDERSTAND UNDER FLORIDA LAW YOU HAVE BROAD DISCRETION. WE RESPECT THAT. WE JUST ASK THAT IF THERE'S SOMETHING COMING DOWN THE PIPE THAT'S GOING TO AFFECT SOMETHING IN THE HISTORIC DISTRICT, OLD TOWN OR THE CRA, WE SURE WOULD APPRECIATE BEING KEPT IN THE LOOP. ANYTHING WE CAN DO TO HELP MAKE YOUR JOB BETTER. THANK YOU VERY MUCH. WE'LL GET OUGHT THE RECENTLY RELEASED SAVING FERNANDINA BEACH 72-78 WHICH IS MY NEW BIBLE RIGHT NOW. I RECOMMEND ANYONE INTERESTED TO GET A COPY OF THIS AND READ IT. IT IS INSIGHTFUL AS TO HOW WE GOT TO WHERE WE ARE TODAY.

>> WHERE CAN YOU FIND THAT? >> CHAIRMAN: BOOK LOFT. GO SEE THAT NICE LADY OVER THERE INDULGENCE, BOARD MEMBERS. ON TO OLD BUSINESS. 3.1 HDC2017-03. THIS IS ARTISAN 126

[Item 3.1]

SOUTH SECOND, 1345 SOUTH THIRD, 132 SOUTH SECOND AND 147 SOUTH THIRD. DO YOU WANT TO CONSIDER

THESE SEPARATELY OR TOGETHER? >> SO THERE'S TWO SEPARATE AMENDMENTS TONIGHT. WE'LL HANDLE THEM SEPARATELY. GOOD EVENING. SAL COMELLA. THE CITY'S HISTORIC DISTRICT PLANNING. THIS IS HDC2017-03. AMENDMENT TO ALTER WINDOW PLACEMENT AT PROPERTIES LOCATED AT 132, 145. THE PROPERTY IS ZONED MU-1 MIXED USE. IT'S THESE THREE SUBJECT PROPERTIES.

IT'S MY UNDERSTANDING THERE'S BEEN A CHANGE TO THE FLOOR PLAN OF THE INTERIOR OF THE PROPERTIES TO ACCOMMODATE ELEVATORS. SO, THAT'S WHAT NECESSITIED THE NEED TO MOVE SOME OF THE WINDOWS ON THE SIDES OF THE STRUCTURE AND ON THE REAR OF THE STRUCTURE. I HAVE THEM IN THE WRONG ORDER. SORRY. SO, 2017-03, THE FIRST AMENDMENT ON PROPERTY AT 126 SOMATISTS SECOND AND 135 SOUTH THIRD STREET IS AN AMENDMENT TO ALTER THE BRICK DETAILING. THIS WAS AN AMENDMENT WE HEARD COME THROUGH LAST MONTH AT THE MEETING AND THE BOARD CONTINUED THE CASE TO ASK FOR MORE DETAIL AS TO THAT BRICK DETAILING THAT'S GOING TO CHANGE. IF YOU GUYS REMEMBER, THE BOARD HAS APPROVED IT FOR ONE OF THE STRUCTURES. THIS IS TO ALLOW THAT DETAIL TO CHANGE ON THE OTHER TWO STRUCTURES WHICH SHARE THAT SIMILAR DETAIL. SO THAT ALL THREE WILL MATCH.

STAFF HAS ANALYZED IT AND FINDS THE REQUESTED ACTION AS PRESENTED IS CONSISTENT WITH THE LAND DEVELOPMENT CODE. THE SECRETARY OF THE INTERIOR STANDARDS AND THE COMMUNITY REDEVELOPMENT AREA GUIDELINES AND IS RECOMMENDING APPROVAL OF THIS AMENDMENT TO HDC2017-03.

THANK YOU. >> CHAIRMAN: QUESTIONS FOR STAFF?

>> BOARD MEMBER: I HAVE A QUESTION. I DON'T SEE ANYTHING DIFFERENT THAT WAS PRESENTED THE

LAST TIME THAT WE CONTINUED IT. AM I MISSING SOMETHING? >> THEY'VE NOTATED THE DRAWINGS.

[00:10:01]

>> BOARD MEMBER: WHERE IT SAYS PROPOSED FACADE? LIKE ON THE VERY LEFT-HAND SIDE WHERE IT

SAYS 8 INCH STEP, 4 INCH STEP, THAT WASN'T THERE BEFORE. >> CORRECT.

>> BOARD MEMBER: IS THAT SUFFICIENT? >> BOARD MEMBER: MY RECOLLECTION OF THE LAST MEETING WAS ASKING FOR AN ACTUAL DETAIL THAT WOULD SHOW HOW THIS THING IS PUT TOGETHER. I MEAN, I CAN UNDERSTAND HOW CALLING OUT THE STUCCO BANDS IS AN IMPROVEMENT OVER PREVIOUS SUBMITTAL BUT, FOR EXAMPLE, IT SAYS FOUR INCH BRICK BAND, THAT DOESN'T TELL ME ANYTHING ABOUT THE BRICK. WHAT KIND OF BRICK IS IT SET AT. FROM THE DRAWING IT LOOKS LIKE BRICKS SET AT A 45 DEGREE SAW TOOTH ANGLE. IS THAT WHAT WE'RE GOING TO GET? THAT IS WHAT I WAS HOPING WE'D BE SHOWN TODAY WAS A LITTLE MORE DETAIL SO WE ACTUALLY KNEW WHAT WE WERE GOING TO GET. THIS IS STILL A LITTLE VAGUE AND KIND OF GOING DOWN THE ROAD WE WENT PREVIOUSLY.

>> MY UNDERSTANDING IS THAT'S WHAT THE PHOTO THEY'VE PROVIDED IS THEY WANT TO MATCH THAT EXACTLY. THAT DETAILING THAT WAS ALOUD FOR THE CHANGE. BUT I DO UNDERSTAND WE DON'T HAVE A

DRAWING ILLUSTRATING THAT. >> BOARD MEMBER: COULD WE GET MR. RICH UP HERE FOR THAT? BOARD

MEMBERS, IS THAT OKAY? IS MR. RICH HERE? >> COME ON UP. NAME, ADDRESS,

WHO YOU ARE AND LET US ASK YOU SOME QUESTIONS. >> SURE. ROBERT SWANBECK. YOU WANT HOME ADDRESS? BUSINESS ADDRESS. OUR MODEL IS LOCATED AT 123 SOUTH THIRD STREET OVER

HERE IN FERNANDINA BEACH. >> BOARD MEMBER: SO I GUESS MY QUESTION IS IS THE INTENT TO

MATCH THAT EXISTING PHOTOGRAPH ON THE NEW BUILDINGS. >> YES. THE BRICK BAND ON THE

SECOND LEVEL. RIGHT THERE IS THE INTENT. >> BOARD MEMBER: OKAY.

>> CHAIRMAN: QUESTIONS FOR MR. SWANBECK? >> BOARD MEMBER: DO YOU HAVE ANY ADDITIONAL COMMENTS THAT YOU MAY HAVE PICKED UP FROM ANYONE THAT YOU WANTED TO DELIVER AT THIS

TIME? >> SPEAKER: NO. >> CHAIRMAN: OKAY. THANK YOU VERY MUCH. DO YOU WANT TO GO TO THE PUBLIC MEETING? ANYONE FROM THE PUBLIC WISHING TO TESTIFY ON CASE 2017-03 THIS WOULD BE THE TIME. HEARING NO ONE, MR. SWANBECK YOU CAN SIT.

HEARING NONE, WE'LL CLOSE THE PUBLIC HEARING. BOARD, IS THIS SUFFICIENT FOR WHAT WE WERE

LOOKING FOR? >> BOARD MEMBER: I THINK THE INTENT IS TO MATCH THE EXISTING PHOTO I'M OKAY WITH THE AMOUNT OF DETAILING THERE. IT'S A LITTLE SHY OF THE DRAWING

ITS ITSELF, >> CHAIRMAN: OTHER COMMENTS? I HAVE TO KEEP REMINDING MYSELF THIS IS A CRA IT IS NOT THE HDC. SO, IT IS A DIFFERENT SET OF DESIGN STANDARDS. WE'LL PROBABLY NOT BE AS ENTHUSIASTIC IF IT WAS AN HDC BUILDING.

OKAY. DID YOU WANT US TO TAKE THESE UP ONE AT A TIME >> SPEAKER: YES

>> BOARD MEMBER: I MOVE TO APPROVE AMENDMENT HDC2017-03 WITHOUT CONDITIONS. I MOVE THAT HDC MAKE THE FOLLOWING FINDINGS OF FACT AND CONCLUSION OF LAW PART OF THE RECOMMEND. THIS 2017-03 AS PRESENTED IS SUBSTANTIAL I COMPLIANT WITH THE LAND DEVELOPMENT CODE. THE COMMUNITY REDEVELOPMENT AREA GUIDELINE AND THE SECRETARY OF THE INTERIOR STANDARDS TO

WARRANT APPROVAL AT THIS TIME. >> BOARD MEMBER: I WILL SECOND THAT. BUT I THINK IT SHOULD BE

AMENDMENT 2. >> BOARD MEMBER: YES. IS THAT CORRECT? IT'S THE SECOND

AMENDMENT? IS THERE A TYPO THERE? >> BOARD MEMBER: IN THE AGENDA I

THINK IT'S AMENDMENT 2. >> BOARD MEMBER: ARE WE GOOD WITH THAT CHANGE? I THINK

[00:15:35]

THERE'S SOME CONFUSION. >> YES. >> CHAIRMAN: LET'S GET THIS

SORTED OUT. >> SO THERE'S A MOTION TO APPROVE FROM MR. MORRISON.

>> CHAIRMAN: AND THERE'S A SECOND FROM MR. HARRISON BUT THERE'S A QUESTION OVER WHAT EXACT AMENDMENT ARE WE APPROVING. CAN WE BRING UP ON THE SCREEN PERHAPS THE ACTION THAT WE'RE TAKING SO THAT EVERYBODY CAN SEE IT INCLUDING THE PUBLIC..

>> MR. MORRISON DID YOU STATE CASE 2017-03. >> SPEAKER: WE'RE NOT

DIFFERENTIATING BETWEEN THEM. >> BOARD MEMBER: CAN YOU GO TO THE DETAILED AGENDA. MAYBE IF YOU REFERENCE THIS IS REGARDING THE BRICK AND 3.1. AS OPPOSED TO 3.2 ON THE AGENDA. LET'S GET IT RIGHT. THE HYPERLINK IN BLUE THERE UNDER 3.1 SAYS AGENDA PACKET AMENDMENT 2 WHICH

DISTINGUISHES IT FROM THE OTHER CASE. I SUPPORT -- >> BOARD MEMBER: I MOVE TO APPROVE AMENDMENT AGENDA ITEM 3.1HDC CASE NUMBER 2017-03 WITHOUT CONDITIONS. HOW ABOUT

THAT? BECAUSE AMENDMENT TWO ISN'T TIED TO IT. >> BOARD MEMBER: I SECOND THAT.

>> CHAIRMAN: ANY DISCUSSION? HEARING NONE, PLEASE CALL THE ROLL.

>> MEMBER CON WAY? >> YES. >> MEMBER HARRISON?

>> YES. >> MEMBER POZZETTA. >> YES.

>> CHAIR SPINO? >> YES. >> CHAIRMAN: MOVING ON TO

[Item 3.2]

2017-03 FOR 132 SOUTH SECOND STREET. THIS IS THE ALTER WINDOW PLACEMENT.

>> SPEAKER: TO APPROVE COA TO AT ERR WINDOW PLACEMENT AT THE SIDE AND REAR ELEVATIONS. THIS IS HDC 017-03. WHICH IS A MIXED USE MU1 PROPERTY. THESE ARE THE THREE SUBJECT PROPERTIES. THE CHANGE OCCURS AT THE SIDE AND REAR OF THOSE THREE UNITS TO ACCOMMODATE FOR AN ELEVATOR SHAFT WHICH WILL BE PROVIDED IN WITHIN THE FLOOR PLAN WHICH REQUIRED SOME MOVING OF THE PLACEMENT OF THOSE WINDOWS. STAFF FINDS THAT THAT CHANGE WHICH DOES OCCUR AT THE SIDES AND REAR WILL HAVE VERY LITTLE VISUAL IMPACT ON THE PROJECTS AND RECOMMENDS AND FINDS THAT THE REQUESTED ACTION AS PRESENTED IS CONSISTENT WITH THE LAND DEVELOPMENT CODE, THE SECRETARY OF THE INTERIOR STANDARDS AND THE COMMUNITY REDEVELOPMENT AREA GUIDELINES

AND RECOMMENDS APPROVAL OF HDC 2017-03. >> BOARD MEMBER: IS THIS FOR THE

FACT APPLICATION. >> YES. THESE BUILDINGS HAVEN'T BEEN CONSTRUCTED YET.

>> CHAIRMAN: NO OTHER QUESTIONS FOR MR. COMELLA? MR. SWANBECK, ANYTHING TO ADD THAT WE SHOULD

KNOW? >> SPEAKER: I DON'T THINK SO. YOU KNOW, WE ORIGINALLY DIDN'T DESIGN THESE PLANS WITH ELEVATORS AND WE RAN INTO A LOT OF PUSHBACK FROM PERSPECTIVE BUYERS. SO THAT'S THE INTENT BEHIND THE CHANGE. AND SHOULDN'T BE ABLE TO SEE IT

REALLY FROM THE STREETS. >> CHAIRMAN: OTHER QUESTIONS FOR MR. SWANBECK? THANK YOU SIR.

WE'LL OPEN THE PUBLIC HEARING. ANYBODY WISHING TO TESTIFY ON 2017-03 ON 132 SOUTH SECOND

[00:20:02]

STREET PLEASE COME FORWARD NOW. SEEING NO ONE, I'LL CLOSE THE PUBLIC HEARING. BOARD

DISCUSSION? BOARD MEMBERS? >> BOARD MEMBER: I DON'T FEEL LIKE THERE'S AN ADVERSE EFFECT WITH THIS CHANGE. SO, I DON'T SEE IT AS BEING SOMETHING WE SHOULD HAVE HEARTBURN OVER.

OTHER THAN THE FACT THAT EVERY MONTH WE SEEM TO HAVE ANOTHER CHANGE FOR THIS PROJECT WHICH IS

FRUSTRATING. >> CHAIRMAN: BUT THERE'S 22 UNITS. IF YOU THOUGHT ABOUT 22

SEPARATE BUILDING PROJECTS. >> BOARD MEMBER: I DON'T SEE AN ISSUE.

>> CHAIRMAN: WOULD SOMEONE LIKE TO MAKE A MOTION? AND BE CLEAR AS TO THE ADDRESSES HERE SO IT'S

GOOD FOR THE RECORD, PLEASE. >> BOARD MEMBER: I WILL MAKE SUCH A MOTION.

>> CHAIRMAN: THANK YOU MR. HARRISON. >> BOARD MEMBER: I NEED THE FORM OF WORDS. I MOVE TO APPROVE AMENDMENT TO HDC CASE NUMBER 2 2017-03 IN RELATION TO PROPERTY TO BE CONSTRUCTED AT 132 SOUTH SECOND STREET, 147TH SOUTH THIRD STREET, AND 135 SOUTH THIRD STREET WITHOUT CONDITION. AND I MOVE THE HDC MADE THE FOLLOWING FINDINGS OF FACT AND CON LUCIEN OF LAW FOR THE RECORD. THAT THIS AMENDMENT TO HDC CASE 2017-03 AS PRESENTED IS SUBSTANTIALLY COMPLIANT WITH THE LAND DEVELOPMENT CODE, THE COMMUNITY REDEVELOPMENT AREA GUIDELINES, AND THE SECRETARY OF THE INTERIOR'S STANDARDS TO

WARRANT APPROVAL AT THIS TIME. >> BOARD MEMBER: SECOND. >> CHAIRMAN: MOTION HARRISON.

SECOND MORSE ISSON. ANY DISCUSSION? HEARING NONE, MS. SAMANTHA PLEASE CALL ROLL

[Item 3.3]

2019-20. 22 SOUTH EIGHTH STREET. SOON BE TO A MICRO-BREWERY.

>> THIS AN AMENDMENT TO HDC2019-20. FOR A PROPERTY LOCATED AT 22 SOUTH 8TH STREET.

THE AMENDMENT TO THE PREVIOUSLY APPROVED COA TO ADD MECHANICAL SCREENING AT THE NORTH AND EAST ELEVATIONS TO THIS PROPERTY. THIS WAS CONTINUED FROM THE NOVEMBER MEETING. SINCE THEN, WE'VE HAD DISCUSSIONS WITH THE APPLICANT. THEY'VE PROVIDED US BETTER LOCATIONING OF THE MECHANICAL AND I BELIEVE TONIGHT THEY'RE GOING TO PRESENT TO YOU SOME ALTERNATE PLANS THEY HAD TAKING INTO CONSIDERATION THE BOARD'S FEEDBACK FROM LAST MONTH FOR THAT SCREENING DESIGN. AND WITH, THAT THAT, AS WE TALKED ABOUT LAST NIGHT, WE'VE DISCUSSED SCREENING A LOT AND PUT THROUGH CHANGES TO THE LANGUAGE FOR OUR SCREENING AND WHAT WE'RE LOOKING FORWARD WHICH REALLY IS JUST SAYING THAT IT'S GOING BE APPROPRIATE FOR THE BUILDING. THERE'S NO ONE-SIZE-FITS-ALL SOLUTION. AS WE CAN SEE IN THIS CASE. EVERY BUILDING IS VERY DIFFERENT. BUT THAT HASN'T BEEN PASSED THROUGH THE CITY COMMISSION YET. SO WE ARE ENCOURAGING PEOPLE TO COME UP WITH SCREENING THAT DOES FIT THE BUILDING AND THAT WAS THE NOTE I HAD ABOUT IT LAST TIME WAS THAT IT COULD BETTER FIT THE PROJECT. AS I SAID, THE APPLICANT WILL BE PRESENTING SOMETHING TONIGHT WHICH SHOWS US SOME CHANGES TO THAT. SO, STAFF DOES FIND THE REQUESTED ACTION AS PRESENTED IS CONSISTENT WITH THE LAND DEVELOPMENT CODE, SECRETARY OF THE INTERIOR STANDARDS AND THE DOWNTOWN HISTORIC DISTRICT GUIDELINES IS RECOMMENDING APPROVAL OF THIS

AMENDMENT TO HDC 2019-20. >> CHAIRMAN: QUESTIONS? IF NOT, WE'LL ASK MR. SASSER TO COME UP.

MR. SASSER? >> SPEAKER: MR. SASSER IS GOING THROW HIS VOICE TO MS. PRINCE.

TERESA PRINCE WITH THOMAS, HETY AND PRINCE AND I REPRESENT THE APPLICANT CMR AND TWO OTHER AGENTS ARE HERE, MR. RICHARD AND CHIP SASSER. I DO HAVE ITEMS IF I MAY APPROACH. THANK YOU.

>> CHAIRMAN: JUST STRUCK BY HOW WE CAN LITERALLY SEE THE SCREENING ELEMENT ACROSS THE

[00:25:04]

STREET AS WE SIT HERE DOING OUR WORK. THANK YOU. WHEN WILL THE BEER BE READY?

>> SPEAKER: AND WE DO HAVE A POWER POINT PRESENTATION TO SHOW SOME VARIOUS VIEWS OF THE BUILDING. AND I DON'T KNOW DO I GIVE THAT TO YOU OR PLUG IT IN HERE? WE CAN DISCUSS THIS FIRST.

YOU SKIPPED THE PICTURE START BY STATING THAT THIS WAS A MISTAKE. AND IF I HAD A HAT I WOULD HAVE IT IN MY HAND.

COMING TO YOU WITH HAT IN HAND AND SAYING THAT WE ARE GOING TO MAKE THIS LOOK DIFFERENTLY. IT WAS NOT -- THIS IS NOT WHAT WE'RE DISCUSSING TONIGHT. BUT WE WANTED TO MAKE YOU AWARE THIS

IS ON THE WESTERN SIDE OF THE BUILDING OVER THE MEXICAN -- >> I WANT TO DISCUSS IT IF I

MAY. >> SPEAKER: CHIP SASSER 2011 SUNRISE DRIVE. I WANT TO APOLOGIZE FOR THAT HIDEOUS STRUCTURE. IT'S GOT TO BE THE WORST THING THAT I'VE EVER SEEN OUR COMPANY PRODUCE. AND IT WAS JUST A MISTAKE. IT WAS NOT BUILT TO THE DRAWINGS. AND WHATEVER YOU ALL APPROVE FOR US TO DO ON THE REST OF THE BUILDING WE'RE GOING GO BACK AND

FIX THAT. THAT'S ALL. >> CHAIRMAN: OKAY. >> SPEAKER: WHEN THEY ASKED ME TO REPRESE LOOKED AT THAT AND SAID OH MY IT WAS A CATALYST FOR US TO BE ABLE TO ADDRESS IT THROUGHOUT THE HISTORIC DISTRICT FROM THIS

POINT FORWARD >> SPEAKER: AND I THINK -- SAL, I DON'T KNOW HOW TO OPERATE

THIS. >> I CAN PUT IT UP HERE. THAT'S EASIER.

>> SPEAKER: OKAY. . >> HE'S GOING TO HAVE TO CHANGE THE SLIDES FOR YOU

>> SPEAKER: OKAY THE FIRST FEW SLIDES ARE JUST TO ALLOW YOU THE SEE THE BUILDING. REALLY WHAT WE'RE HERE FOR TONIGHT AS YOU KNOW IS WE'RE LOOKING AT THE BREW PUB SIDE OF THE BUILDING AND TALKING ABOUT THE SCREENING THAT WE WILL BE DOING. YOU KNOW, WE'LL NOT BE IMPLEMENTING WHAT IS ON THE BUILDING NOW. AND RICHARD IS HERE AND CAN DOC ABOUT IT IN MORE DETAIL. THERE IS A PARAPET ON THE BUILDING ALREADY. SO, THIS IS THE FRONT VIEW AND THE SIDE OF THE BROW PUB THAT IS BEING -- BREW PUB THAT IS BEING DEVELOPED NOW. THE OTHER SIDE. THEN THE NEXT SLIDE, SAL, IS THE VIEW FROM THE CHURCH. WE'RE ON EIGHTH STREET NOW LOOKING AT THE SIDE THAT USED TO BE FRED'S. AND THE NEXT SLIDE IS THE BACK OF THE BUILDING. AND WE ARE DISCUSSING THE SIDE OF THE BUILDING TONIGHT AND WHERE THE ADDITIONAL SCREENING WILL GO. AND THE NEXT SLIDE SHOWS YOU THE VIEW FROM 8TH AGAIN LOOKING AT THE BACK OF THE BUILDING ON THE SIDE THAT IS CURRENTLY THE MEXICAN RESTAURANT. AND THE NEXT SLIDE. THAT'S IT. WE JUST STARTED -- WHAT MR. SASSER, WHAT MASSEURS SASSER DID TODAY WAS WALK AROUND AND THESE SLIDES WERE SHOWING VARIOUS AREAS WHERE THINGS WEREN'T SCREENED. AND WE WERE TRYING TO FIND EVIDENCE OF WHAT TO DO. IF YOU JUST KEEP GOING, SOME OF THESE WERE ONES THAT ARE CURRENTLY NOT SCREENED. AND THEN WHEN YOU GET TOWARDS THE END, THERE'S SOME SCREENING OPTIONS. THEN THE NEXT ONE AND THE NEXT AND, OF COURSE, THAT'S CITY HALL. THAT IS THE COURTHOUSE WITHOUT SCREENING.

HERE IS THE PATIO PLACE WHICH KIND OF LOOKS LIKE THEY TRIED TO IMPLEMENT THE CONCEPT OF WHAT'S ON THE FRED'S BUILDING NOW WHERE THEY PUT A FENCE-LIKE STRUCTURE ON TOP OF THE BUILDING AND PAINTED IT THE SAME COLOR. THEN THE NEXT SLIDE SHOWED ANOTHER TYPE OF SCREENING. WHAT WE'RE PROPOSING IS TO DO THE VERTICAL SLATS. PUT SOME SPACING BETWEEN THEM AS YOU SEE WITH THE DETAIL.

[00:30:04]

IF YOU DON'T MIND GOING BACK TO THE BEGINNING WHERE YOU CAN SEE OUR BUILDING. WE HAVE THE PARAPET THAT RUNS ALONG THE THREE SIDES OF THE BUILDING. SO, WE'RE PROPOSING TO PUT THIS ON THE ASH STREET SIDE OF THE BUILDING BACK TOWARDS 9TH STREET WHERE YOU SEE THE ELECTRICAL

DETAIL. WHERE ALL THE ELECTRICAL IS GOING TO BE. >> BOARD MEMBER: THE WALL BEHIND

YOU, WITH THE LADDER LEANING AGAINST IT? >> SPEAKER: NO IT'S GOING TO BE

HERE. >> CHAIRMAN: THAT'S THE ASH STREET SIDE.

>> SPEAKER: YEAH. SO THE ELECTRICAL DETAIL THAT'S IN YOUR PACKET SHOWS WHERE THE ELECTRICAL IS GOING TO BE. THEY DID POSITION THIS TOWARDS THE REAR OF THE BUILDING. THE ELECTRICAL AS MUCH AS POSSIBLE. AND THAT WAS NOT IN YOUR LAST PACKET. SO THEY HAVE PROVIDED THE DETAIL OF WHERE THE ELECTRICAL WILL BE ON THE ROOF. AND THEN PROPOSING TO DO A SCREENING. RICHARD HAS INDICATED HE CAN EITHER STAIN IT OR PAINT IT. I BELIEVE CHIP AND I WERE DISCUSSING -- AND WHATEVER THE BOARD'S PLEASURE IS -- PAINTING IT WOULD PROBABLY

MAKE IT LESS OBVIOUS. PAINTING IT THE COLOR OF THE BUILDING. >> BOARD MEMBER: PAINT TO MATCH.

>> SPEAKER: ABSOLUTELY. SO, THERE IS NOT MUCH TO TALK ABOUT HERE. WE'RE JUST SHOWING YOU THE DETAIL. WHATEVER YOU APPROVE TONIGHT, IF IT IS YOUR PLEASURE TO APPROVE SOMETHING, WE WILL IMPLEMENT IT OVER THE MEXICAN RESTAURANT AS WELL TO MAKE IT CONSISTENT. AND WHEN YOU WALK -- ONE OF THE REASONS CHIP TOOK SOME OF THESE PICTURES IS EVEN -- IF YOU GO TO THE NEXT SLIDE, SAL. OKAY. STOP THERE. YOU KNOW, THE PICTURE WE SHOWED YOU IS HIGHLY EVIDENT OF THAT PIECE OF FENCE. BUT YOU CAN SEE FROM THE STREET, IF WE DO SOMETHING WITH A LITTLE MORE -- THIS IS THE PIECE THAT'S THERE ON TOP OF THE MEXICAN RESTAURANT NOW. SEE IT'S TUCKED IN HERE.

SO, FROM THE STREET, IF WE MODIFY THAT, PUT THE VERTICAL SLATS WITH SOME SPACING AND GET IT PAINTED TO MATCH THE BUILDING, THAT'S WHAT WE'RE PROPOSING TO DO TO, YOU KNOW, SCREEN THE MACHINERY THAT'S THERE NOW AND, OBVIOUSLY, IT DOES SCREEN THE MACHINERY THERE NOW AND THEN SCREEN ON THE OTHER SIDE. I WILL CERTAINLY ANSWER ANY QUESTIONS. THERE IS A MORE DETAILED INSERT THAT I HANDED OUT TO SHOW YOU WHAT WE INTEND TO DO.

>> BOARD MEMBER: CAN YOU ASK YOU TWO QUESTIONS. THE FIRST ONE IS, WHAT IS THE MATERIAL OF THE VERTICAL PLATE THAT IS BOLTED TO THE EXISTING SCREEN ON TO WHICH THE NEW SUPPORTS WILL BE.

>> SPEAKER: I BELIEVE IT'S WOOD. BUT I'LL LET RICHARD ANSWER IT. >> SPEAKER: WHERE ARE WE NOW?

>> SPEAKER: HE WANTS TO KNOW WHAT IS THIS CONSTRUCTED OF? >> SPEAKER: IT WOULD BE OF WOOD.

ONE BY FOUR WOODEN SLATS VERTICALLY. >> BOARD MEMBER: BUT THE PLATE

OR THE SUPPORT THAT ATTACHES IT TO THE WALL. THIS HERE. >> SPEAKER: THERE'S A 2 BY 6 VERTICAL LAG BOLTED INTO THE PARAPET WALL. AT THIS END OF THE BUILDING I DON'T HAVE THAT PARAPET WALL. I'VE COME TO COME UP WITH A BOOT MOUNT, IF YOU WILL, AND FLASH IT TO PROPERLY

MOUNT IT. >> CHAIRMAN: ON THE 9TH STREET SIDE.

>> SPEAKER: YES, SIR. >> BOARD MEMBER: OKAY. >> SPEAKER: THAT'S THE GUTTER.

WHICH I DID HAVE A PARAPET WALL TO BOLT TO. ALL THE WATER GOES TO THAT GUTTER.

>> BOARD MEMBER: THANK YOU. THE OTHER THING IS WHY IS IT SO HIGH? IT APPEARS TO BE HIGHER

THAN IS NEEDED TO -- >> SPEAKER: FOR THE UNIT TO BE SCREENED IN YOUR LITTLE DRAWING, THAT'S THE ACTUAL UPPER STRUCTURE, IF YOU WILL, THE EXHAUST STICKING UP THERE.

>> BOARD MEMBER: SO YOU'RE MAKING IT LEVEL WITH THE HIGHEST ITEM IN THERE.

>> SPEAKER: YES. AND WE DID DISCUSS, IF I MAY, THE LATER PICTURES SHOW WHERE THEY DID A LOWER SCREEN AND THE SILVER IS STILL KIND OF PEEKING UP ABOVE IT. SO IT JUST DEPENNEDS UPON YOUR PLEASURE. DO YOU WANT A LOWER SCREEN SO IT DOESN'T LOOK AS MUCH LIKE THE PATIO PLACE ONE THAT LOOKS LIKE YOU'VE DROPPED A FENCE ON TOP OF THE BUILDING OR WOULD YOU LIKE A LOWER SCREEN

THAT YOU WILL SEE PARTS OF THE SILVER PEEKING OUT? >> BOARD MEMBER: I HAVE A COUPLE OF QUESTIONS. SO, JUST TO BE CLEAR, WHAT WE'RE SAYING IS THAT YOU ARE GOING TO PUT

[00:35:06]

SCREENING -- PUT THE SCREENING ON THE EAST SIDE AND THE NORTH SIDE OF THE BUILDING? IS THAT

CORRECT? >> >> SPEAKER: YES, SIR. THE NORTH

INSTALLATION WILL BE RETROACTIVE. >> CHAIRMAN: SO THE DETAIL THAT MS. PRINCE BROUGHT TO US TODAY IS REFLECTIVE OF THE DETAIL ON THE NORTH SIDE.

>> SPEAKER: WHAT WILL HAPPEN ON THE NORTH SIDE. WHATEVER YOU APPROVE TONIGHT.

>> BOARD MEMBER: WHERE IT'S MOUNTING ON THE BACK SIDE OF THE PARAPET. SO, IN THAT SITUATION, IT'S, LIKE, I DON'T KNOW, ALMOST -- IT'S A LITTLE OVER SIX FEET TALL FROM THE ROOF DECK OR WHATEVER. WHAT ABOUT ON THE EAST SIDE WHERE IT'S MOUNTED DIRECTLY TO THE ROOF DECK?

BECAUSE THERE'S NOT A PARAPET. HOW HIGH IS IT THERE? >> SPEAKER: IT'S GOING HAVE TO

BE AT LEAST SIX FEET TALL. >> BOARD MEMBER: IS IT GOING TO MATCH THE SAME HEIGHT AS WHAT

YOU ARE DOING ON THE OTHER SIDE? >> SPEAKER: THAT'S WHAT WE WERE PROPOSING. NOW IF YOU WANT IT TO BE THE HEIGHT THAT COMPLETELY HIDES EVERYTHING THEY MIGHT HAVE TO BE DIFFERENT HEIGHTS. BUT WE WERE PROPOSING TO KEEP IT AT THE SAME HEIGHT ALONG THE BUILDING WHEN WE DISCUSSED THINGS BECAUSE WE THOUGHT IT WOULD LOOK MORE UNIFORM. BUT IT MAY MEAN THAT SOMETHING POKES UP ABOVE IT.

>> BOARD MEMBER: SO THE NEXT QUESTION IS THAT ON THE DRAWINGS YOU BROUGHT IN TONIGHT WHERE IT SHOWS THE EAST SIDE ELEVATION, THE FENCE, I GUESS I SHOULD SAY SCREEN, EXTENDS -- I DON'T KNOW HOW FAR THAT IS. SAY 20 FEET OR SOMETHING LIKE THAT. IS WHERE IT SHOWN THE ONLY PLACE YOU ARE PROPOSING IT GOES. OR IT GOES ALONG THE EAST SIDE AND YOU ARE NOT GRAPHICALLY SHOWING IT THAT

WAY? >> SPEAKER: ONLY WHERE IT'S SHOWN GRAPHICALLY BECAUSE THAT IS WHERE THE EQUIPMENT IS THAT'S GOING TO SHOW TO THE STREET. ON THE LEFT SIDE OF THE LARGE DRAWING YOU HAVE CALLING IT A CEILING PLAN. IT'S KIND OF A I DO AGRAM AND YOU SEE SKETCHED IN BLUE THE ROOFTOP EQUIPMENT UP THERE AND YOU WILL SEE THAT MOST OF IT IS FAR ENOUGH IN TO WHERE IT'S NOT GOING TO SHOW. SO, I DIDN'T FIND IT NECESSARY TO SCREEN THE ENTIRE DISTANCE OF

THE EAST WALL. >> BOARD MEMBER: SO LIKE WHERE THE PLAN THAT YOU ARE SHOWING AND WHERE IT SHOWS THE TOP AIR CONDITIONING UNIT THAT IS ALMOST FOUR FEET TALL, YOU ARE NOT GOING TO SCREEN THAT?

>> SPEAKER: I DON'T PLAN TOO. IF IT TURNS OUT I'M WRONG AND THEY'RE TALLER THEN I'LL HAVE TO SCREEN THOSE AS WELL. IF IT SHOWS TO DRIVING DOWN THE ROAD OR WALKING DOWN THE SIDEWALK.

SPECIFIC WE HAVE A PARAPET THERE ALREADY THAT IS 32.5 INCHES TALL. SO IT'S GOING TO

SCREEN -- NOT THE NINTH STREET. >> BOARD MEMBER: ON THE SOUTH SIDE?

>> SPEAKER: RIGHT. >> BOARD MEMBER: THEN ON THE NORTH SIDE WHERE YOU GUYS ARE SAYING THAT YOU ARE GOING TO RETROACTIVELY FIX, YOU KNOW, THE DETAIL THAT'S THERE NOW OR WHATEVER, THERE'S NOT AN ELEVATION OF THAT OR WHATEVER. IS IT SAFE TO ASSUME YOU ARE BASICALLY PLANNING ON PUTTING THE SAME FOOTPRINT OF IT THERE? YOU ARE JUST GOING TO CHANGE THE

DETAIL. ? >> SPEAKER: THAT'S CORRECT. THAT WAS OUR INTENT. THIS WAS MY DETAIL. THAT'S WHAT WAS SUPPOSED TO GET INSTALLED. AND MY OWN PEOPLE DIDN'T INSTALL WHAT I DIRECTED THEM TO DO. AND I AM SORRY. I AM A LITTLE OVERWHELMED THIS YEAR. IT CAN

CONCERNLY BE CORRECTED. >> BOARD MEMBER: IF YOU ARE DONE I HAVE A COUPLE OF QUESTIONS.

FIRST A COMMENT. AND I THINK YOUR PRESENTATION DOES A REALLY GOOD JOB OF SHOWING EVERYONE WHY WE HAVE STARTED FOCUSING IN ON THESE REQUIREMENTS. BECAUSE SOME OF THEM ARE PRETTY EGREGIOUS. SO, I HOPE SAL RECORDS THAT AND KEEPS THAT FOR NEXT TIME SOMEONE COMES IN WITH NO SCREENING HE CAN JUST SHOW THAT. ONE THING, IF WE CAN LOOK AT THE PHOTO OF THE EXISTING SCREEN CONDITION. YOU WILL SEE HOW YOU HAVE LIKE A DIAGONAL WOOD BRACE PIECE. YOU CAN'T SEE IT FROM THAT. GO TO THE CLOSE-UP ONE. MY FEAR IS WITH THE DETAILED WAY YOU HAVE IT CURRENTLY WE'RE GOING TO STILL HAVE THAT LITTLE DIAGONAL BRACE PIECE THERE. IT MIGHT GIVE A FAR BETTER LOOK IF THAT SCREENING WERE TO WRAP SOME DEGREE AROUND. IT WOULD HELP

STABILIZE IT AND VISUALLY GIVE IT MORE -- >> SPEAKER: ON THE LEFT SIDE IT SURE WOULD. INTO THE PARAPET WALL BRACE AND THEN ON THE RIGHT SIDE A RETURN TWO OR THREE FEET.

[00:40:02]

>> BOARD MEMBER: YEAH WOULD GIVE IT MORE STABILITY AND WE WOULDN'T JUST HAVE THAT DIAGONAL TWO BY FOUR. THE SAME ON THE NINTH STREET SIDE THAT YOU ARE PROPOSING. IF YOU HAD A RETURN LEG, IT WOULD GIVE THE STRUCTURE SOME STABILITY AND VISUALLY A LITTLE MORE PROMINENCE OR

OBSCURE MORE OF THE EQUIPMENT UP THERE. DOES THAT WORK FOR YOU? >> SPEAKER: EVEN ON THE NORTH

STREET SIDE ON THIS SIDE. YEAH. >> BOARD MEMBER: ON THE OPEN END THERE. A LITTLE RETURN ON THAT

WOULD BE APPROPRIATE. >> CHAIRMAN: ANY OTHER COMMENT OR QUESTIONS FROM THE BOARD? WE DO APPRECIATE YOUR EXTRA EFFORT AND YOUR HELPING US TURN A PROBLEM INTO A SOLUTION. FOR

THAT WE VERY MUCH APPRECIATE IT. COME ON UP. >> SPEAKER: I DIDN'T GO AROUND THIS MORNING WITH THE INTENT OF BLIND SIDING THE OTHER PROPERTY OWNERS. I RODE AROUND FOR INSPIRATION OF WHAT TO DO. BECAUSE THIS IS PUTTING LIPSTICK ON A PIG NO MATTER HOW YOU LOOK AT IT. IT IS A CHALLENGE. AND I FEEL FOUR GUYS TRYING TO COME UP WITH STANDARDS. BECAUSE I JUST DON'T THINK, YOU KNOW, ONE SIZE IS GOING TO FIT ALL BY ANY STRETCH OF THE IMAGINATION.

IT'S ALMOST CASE BY CASE. THE TYPE OF THE BUILDING. AND WHERE YOU ARE STANDING. AM I ON 9TH STREET, THE SIDEWALK NEXT TO THE BUILDING, OVER BY THE CHURCH. WHAT'S MY VIEWPOINT TO SEE THIS.

THEN IS THE SCREENING ITSELF BRINGING MORE ATTENTION TO THE ROOFTOP THAN JUST THE MECHANICALS. I DON'T KNOW. Y'ALL ARE GOING TO HAVE A BIG CHALLENGE.

>> BOARD MEMBER: I THINK PAINTING IT IS GOING TO HELP REDUCE THE VISUAL IMPACT OF THE

SCREENING. >> SPEAKER: I'M SURE YOU WILL PUT IT NO WHATEVER MOTION BUT IS IT YOUR PLEASURE IT BE TALL ENOUGH TO COMPLETELY SCREEN. WOULD YOU LIKE THE HEIGHT MORE THAN HAVING SOMETHING COME OUT? I THINK WE'RE PROPOSING SIX FEET, RIGHT? 36 INCHES. SO, I MEAN, CERTAINLY THAT'S THE WAY WE'RE PROPOSING IT. AND IT'S GOING TO LOOK SIMILAR TO THAT EXCEPT THE SLATS WILL BE RUNNING THE OTHER DIRECTION. SO, WHATEVER THE PLEASURE OF THE BOARD IS ON THAT. WE'RE PROPOSING THAT IT BE TALL ENOUGH TO SCREEN IT COMPLETELY.

>> CHAIRMAN: THANK YOU VERY MUCH. WE'LL OPEN THE PUBLIC MEETING. IS THERE ANYONE WHO WISHES TO SPEAK ON HDC-2019-20. THIS WOULD BE THE TIME. OKAY. WE'LL CLOSE THE PUBLIC MEETING.

MOVE INTO BOARD DISCUSSION. WHAT'S YOUR PLEASURE? >> BOARD MEMBER: I GUESS AS A BOARD WE JUST HAVE TO DECIDE WHETHER OR NOT WE'RE GOING START HOLDING PEOPLE ACCOUNTABLE TO WHAT IS GOING TO BE THE FUTURE CHANGES TO THE LAND DEVELOPMENT CODE OR NOT. I MEAN, YOU KNOW, WHEN WE WERE WORKING ON THE LANGUAGE FOR THE MODIFICATIONS, YOU KNOW, I THINK THAT WHEN I WAS WRITING IT, MY INTENT WAS, AND I THINK IT SAYS THIS, THAT THE SCREENING NEEDS TO BE CONSISTENT AND INTEGRATED WITH THE ARCHITECTURE OF THE BUILDING ITSELF. THIS IS A MID-CENTURY MASONRY STRUCTURE. YOU KNOW, IS THIS SCREENING DETAIL CONSISTENT WITH MID-CENTURY DESIGN? IS IT CONSISTENT WITH THE MATERIALS OF THE BUILDING? I THINK THE ANSWER TO BOTH THOSE THINGS IS NO. I THINK IT IS AN IMPROVEMENT OVER WHAT THEY HAVE NOW, YOU KNOW. BUT IS THIS A PRECEDENT FOR WHAT WE EXPECT TO SEE THE SOLUTION MOVING FORWARD AS FAR AS WHAT THE INTENT IS OF THE LAND DEVELOPMENT CODE? I WOULD HOPE THAT IT'S NOT. IT CERTAINLY WOULDN'T BE THE INTENT THAT I

HAD WHEN I WAS PROPOSING THE CHANGE YOU KNOW. >> BOARD MEMBER: I THINK FROM MY MIND THE KEY TO GET IT TO RELATE MORE TO THE BUILDING IS PAINTING THE COLOR OF IT. THAT'S REALLY

GOING TO GO A LONG WAY. I SEE WHAT YOU ARE SAYING. >> CHAIRMAN: OTHER COMMENTARY?

>> BOARD MEMBER: DID THEY HAVE GREEN WHEN IT WAS A ONE DIXIE. PROBABLY NOT. SO IT'S HARD TO

MAKE THAT COMPARISON. >> BOARD MEMBER: WELL A TRUE MID-CENTURY WOULDN'T HAVE ANY SCREENING AT ALL. YOU JUST STUCK THEM ON THE ROOF AND LET THE SMOKE FLOW WHERE YOU WANT.

>> BOARD MEMBER: WINN-DIXIE, THAT GOES BACK A COUPLE OF WEEKS.

>> BOARD MEMBER: APPARENTLY IT WAS A WINN-DIXIE FOR A LONG TIME.

>> SPEAKER: YES. >> CHAIRMAN: OTHER COMMENTS? BENJAMIN, I THINK THE COMMENTS ARE SOLID AND SOUND. HAVING SAID THAT, I THINK THEY'VE WORKED WITH US AND TRIED TO COME

[00:45:06]

UP WITH A REASONABLE SOLUTION SHY OF BUILDING A VERY TALL CONCRETE BLOCK AND STUCCO WALL WHICH -- WELL, IT WOULD BE A LOT TO ASK I THINK TO COVER THESE MECHANICALS. SO, I THINK THEY'VE COME UP WITH A FAIRLY REASONABLE SOLUTION. WOULD ANYBODY LIKE TO MAKE A MOTION?

>> BOARD MEMBER: I STILL HAVE A QUESTION. IS IT PROPOSED ON THIS HERE THAT THE FENCE LET ME

CALL IT IS ESSENTIALLY A SHADOW BOX STRUCTURE? >> SPEAKER: I THINK THAT'S THE

DETAILS. STAGGERED SHADOW BOX. >> BOARD MEMBER: IT SAYS TWO ROWS STAGGERED.

>> SPEAKER: I HAVE TO HAVE GAPS BETWEEN MY PLANKS TO DEAL WITH WIND LOADS EASIER.

>> BOARD MEMBER: RIGHT. BUT WHERE YOU'VE GOT THE GAP IN THE FRONT THERE WILL BE A

>> BOARD MEMBER: I'LL MAKE A MOTION TO APPROVE. >> BOARD MEMBER: CAN I MAKE A COMMENT? I THINK THAT MY RECOMMENDATION WOULD BE THAT IN KEEPING WITH WHAT MEMBER POZZETTA SAID IS THAT IF WE'RE GOING TO APPROVE IT THAT WE SHOULD APPROVE IT WITH THE CONDITION THAT THERE BE A RETURN ON THE ENDS OF THE FENCE SECTION SO THAT, YOU KNOW, FOR AESTHETIC. WE CAN'T DO IT FOR STRUCTURAL REASONS BECAUSE THAT'S NOT REALLY OUR PURVIEW.

BUT TO SAY, YOU KNOW, MAYBE IF WE SAID A MINIMUM OF THREE FEET RETURN. DOES THAT SOUND

REASONABLE? >> BOARD MEMBER: I WITHDRAW MY MOTION AND ASK MR. MORRISON TO

MAKE ONE. >> BOARD MEMBER: I MIGHT COMMENT ON THAT, BENJAMIN. THREE FEET.

WE WANT MORE THAN THAT RIGHT? I DON'T KNOW. IS THREE FEET A REASONABLE NUMBER? GOOD ENOUGH.

I'VE GOT TWO ARCHITECTS I'LL TAKE THAT. I AGREE, THE RETURN AND WAS THERE ANYTHING ELSE.

>> BOARD MEMBER: ARE YOU GUYS OKAY WITH THAT? >> SPEAKER: YES, SIR.

>> BOARD MEMBER: PAINT COLOR MATCHED AND HEIGHT NOT TO EXCEED -- SAL, DO WE WANT HEIGHT NOT TO EXCEED OR JUST LEE IT OPEN-ENDED BASED ON THEM TRYING TO GET THE MECHANICALS COVERED?

>> THAT'S UP TO THE BOARD. >> BOARD MEMBER: I THINK THE HEIGHT SHOULD BE APPROPRIATE TO

SCREEN THE MECHANICALS. >> BOARD MEMBER: I LIKE THAT. >> BOARD MEMBER: I DON'T THINK WE NEED TO SPECIFY. IF YOU USE THAT CONDITION I THINK YOU COVERED IT. THANK YOU. I MOVE TO APPROVE HDC 2019-20 WITH THE FOLLOWING CONDITIONS. THAT THE HEIGHT OF THE SCREENING BE APPROPRIATE TO SCREEN THE MECHANICAL EQUIPMENT BEING INSTALLED; THAT THE ALL EXPOSED WOOD MATERIAL BE PAINTED TO MATCH THE EXISTING COLOR OF THE REST OF THE STRUCTURE; AND THAT THE SCREEN DETAIL RETURNS BACK TOWARDS THE CENTER OF THE ROOF A MINIMUM OF THREE FEET ON EACH END. AND I MOVE THAT THE HDC MAKE THE FOLLOWING FINDINGS OF FACTS AND CONCLUSIONS OF LAW PART OF THE RECORD THAT HDC2019-20 AS PRESENTED IS CON PLIANT WITH THE LAND DEVELOPMENT CODE AND THE SECRETARY OF NOIFR'S STANDARDS TO WARRANT APPROVAL AT THIS TIME.

>> BOARD MEMBER: SECOND. >> CHAIRMAN: ANY DISCUSSION? HEARING NONE, PLEASE CALL THE

ROLL. >> MEMBER POZZETTA? >> YES.

>> MEMBER CONWAY? >> YES. >> MEMBER HARRISON?

>> YES. >> MEMBER MORRISON? >> YES.

>> CHAIR SPINO? >> YES. >> SPEAKER: THANKS GUYS.

>> CHAIRMAN: I THINK IT'S GOING GET INTERESTED ONCE THE CHANGES GET APPROVED. ALL RIGHT.

MOVING ON TO OLD BUSINESS 3.4. HDC 2019-39 REITZER. >> SPEAKER: 2019-39. PROPERTY

[Item 3.4]

LOCATED AT 1132 WHITE STREET. ZONED OT-2. HIGH DENSITY RESIDENTIAL IN OLD TOWN. THIS IS A CERTIFICATE OF APPROVAL TO CONSTRUCT A ONE STORY SINGLE FAMILY RESIDENCE AND ACCESSORY

[00:50:05]

STRUCTURE. THIS CASE WAS GRANTED CONCEPTUAL APPROVAL LAST MONTH. SOME OF THE NOTES WE HAD AT THAT POINT WERE ENCROACHMENT INTO THE SIDE YARD VISIBILITY CORRIDOR WITH SOME STEPS. I BELIEVE THERE WAS SOME DISCUSSION ABOUT THE FOUNDATION. THE APPLICANT HAS SUBMITTED REVISED DRAWINGS AND ADDRESSED ALL THOSE CONCERNS. AND WITH THAT STAFF FINDS THAT THE REQUESTED ACTION AS PRESENTED IS CONSISTENT WITH THE LAND DEVELOPMENT CODE, THE SECRETARY OF THE INTERIOR STANDARDS AND THE OLD TOWN PRESERVATION AND DEVELOPMENT GUIDELINES AND

RECOMMENDS APPROVAL OF HDC-2019-39. THANK YOU. >> CHAIRMAN: THE QUESTIONS THAT CAME UP LAST MONTH REGARDING SOME ARTICULATION ON THE POINTS? AND, OF COURSE, THE EGRESS INTO THE SIDE YARD. WHAT ALSO WAS THERE?

>> THOSE WERE THE TWO. >> CHAIRMAN: OKAY. SO, WE'RE THERE? QUESTIONS FOR MORE

COMELLA. >> SPEAKER: THEY'VE RELOCATED THE DOOR AND THE STEPS TO COME

OFF THE REAR OF THE HOUSE RATHER THAN OUT THE SIDE. >> CHAIRMAN: IS THE NEW

CONSTRUCTION GOING TO BE ADJACENT? 2019-42? >> BOARD MEMBER: NO.

>> CHAIRMAN: THANK YOU. OKAY. QUESTIONS FOR MR. CAMELLO? ALL RIGHT. LOOKS LIKE WE'RE GETTING THERE. WE'LL ASK MR. REITZER TO COME UP AT THIS TIME AND SEE IF YOU HAVE ANY QUESTIONS FOR HIM.

PLEASE IDENTIFY YOURSELF FOR THE RECORD. >> SPEAKER: GOOD EVENING. JOEL REITZER, ARCHITECT AND OWNER OF THE PROPERTY. AND MY ADDRESS 1365MENUNCI ROAD, FERNANDINA.

>> CHAIRMAN: QUESTIONS FOR MR. REITZER? BENJAMIN? >> THE ONLY COMMENT I WOULD MAKE IS WITH THE FOUNDATION THING, YOU KNOW, THE SORT OF SIMULATED PIERS YOU SAID ACCENT LATTICE.

IT'S REALLY ONE BY SIX KIND OF SLOTS. >> SPEAKER: CORRECT. IT IS A BOARD SO THAT WE'RE NOT GOING TO HAVE ROTTING WOOD COME IN CONTACT WITH THE GROUND IN THE

FUTURE. >> BOARD MEMBER: BUT YOU DID A GOOD JOB OF ADDRESSING THE

CONCERNS THAT WE HAD LAST TIME. >> CHAIRMAN: OTHER QUESTIONS. >> SPEAKER: I DO HAVE A HANDOUT

IF YOU WANT TO SEE A BETTER VIEW -- >> BOARD MEMBER: YOU MADE IT, WE'LL LOOK AT IT. CAIRNS.

SO THE FOUNDATION WILL HAVE RECESSES IN BETWEEN THE CLIFFS OR THE APPEARANCE. SO, THERE'S AN INCH-AND-A-HALF REVEAL SO THERE WILL BE THREE QUARTER INCH BOARD AND STILL A THREE QUARTER

INCH REVEAL. >> BOARD MEMBER: THERE WERE BASICALLY FOUR ISSUES I THINK FROM THE LAST MEETING. THE SIDE PORCH AND STEPS, THE SIDE ROOF OVERHANG, THE SIDE PANELS AND THE FENCING. WE'VE MOVED THE FENCING AND ADDRESSED THE OTHER THREE.

>> CHAIRMAN: THANK YOU. OTHER QUESTIONS? >> BOARD MEMBER: IS THERE ANY

GAP IN THE ONE BY SIX BOARD? >> SPEAKER: THERE WILL BE A GAP. THOSE BOARDS ARE SQUARE BOARDS AND WE WANT TO TRY TO GIVE A GAP APPEARANCE TO IT. IN THE DETAIL WE DON'T SHOW EXACTLY HOW WE'RE GOING DO IT WHETHER WE'RE GOING TO GAP WIT A GAPPING TOOL OR WHETHER WE'RE GOING TO DO A TONGUE AND GROOVE LOOK OR WHETHER IT IS GOING TO BE A LAP AND GAP LOOK. BUT WE DO BELIEVE THAT AND AGREE WITH YOU THIS SHOULD BE A GAPPING APPEARANCE THERE. SO IT APPEARS AS THOUGH IT'S AN AIR FLOW. THEN PAINT THE BACK SIDE OF IT DARK SO THAT YOU ARE NOT GOING TO SEE THE SAME COLOR ON THE FRONT FACE AS YOU SEE BEHIND THROUGH THE GAP WHICH IS THE CASE WITH SOME OF THE OTHER HOUSES IN THE AREA. WANT TO TRY TO AVOID THAT TO GIVE IT A MORE AUTHENTIC

[00:55:01]

APPEARANCE. >> BOARD MEMBER: OKAY. BUT THE DETAIL SHOWS THEM BUTTING UP

HARD TO EACH OTHER. >> SPEAKER: I'M SORRY IT DOESN'T APPEAR VERY WELL. IF WE BLEW THAT UP A BIT, IT WOULD BE ABLE TO SHOW THAT. BUT THAT'S OUR INTENT.

>> BOARD MEMBER: OKAY. BUT I'D BE HAPPY WITH A THREE QUARTER INCH GAP BETWEEN THEM.

>> CHAIRMAN: OKAY. OTHER QUESTIONS? >> SPEAKER: I WOULD PREFER A SMALLER GAP THAN THAT SO AS TO NOT CATCH DIRT AND LENT AND THE LIKE. PERHAPS MAYBE A ANGULAR CUT ON TWO ADJACENT BOARDS THEN A GAP. SO, YOU HAVE A WIDER APPEARANCE ALMOST LIKE A TONGUE

AND GROOVE IF YOU WILL. >> BOARD MEMBER: THE IMPORTANT THING IS YOU ARE ADDRESSING THE

RECOMMENDATION FOR A SIMULATED PIER. I THINK THAT IT'S GOOD. >> CHAIRMAN: THANK YOU SIR. WE

WON'T MAKE YOU WORK ANY HARDER THAN THAT. >> SPEAKER: WE'RE TRYING FOR THE SAME OBJECTIVE. THE LATTICE WHERE IT CAME FROM. THE OTHER OWNER OF THE PROPERTY, I HAD OTHER DETAILS THAT SHOWED LATTICE AND SHE DIDN'T LIKE THAT APPEARANCE.

>> BOARD MEMBER: BEEN THERE. DONE THAT. >> CHAIRMAN: WE'LL OPEN THE PUBLIC HEARING ON HDC2019-39. IS THERE ANYBODY WHO WISHES TO SPEAK TO THIS ISSUE? IF NOT

WE'LL CLOSE THE PUBLIC HEARING. BOARD MEMBERS? >> BOARD MEMBER: I LIKE THAT HE PROVIDED US WITH ENOUGH DETAIL AND DRAWINGS AND ANSWERED THE QUESTIONS THAT WE HAD FROM LAST

MEETING. SO THAT WORKED PERFECT FOR ME. >> BOARD MEMBER: AND RESOLVED THE SIDE YARD ISSUE PERFECTLY. I'LL MAKE A MOTION. I MOVE TO APPROVE HDC CASE NUMBER 2019-39 WITHOUT CONDITIONS. AND I MOVE THAT HDC MAKE THE FOLLOWING FINDINGS OF FACT AND CONCLUSIONS OF LAW PART OF THE RECORD. THAT HDC CASE 2019-39 AS PRESENTED IS SUBSTANTIALLY COMPLIANT WITH THE LAND DEVELOPMENT CODE, THE SECRETARY OF THE INTERIOR STANDARDS AND THE OLD TOWN PRESERVATION AND DEVELOPMENT GUIDELINES TO WARRANT APPROVAL AT THIS TIME.

>> BOARD MEMBER: I'LL SECOND. >> CHAIRMAN: ANY DISCUSSIONS? HEARING NONE, MS. ROCHE PLEASE

CALL ROLL >> CHAIRMAN: MOVING ON. 2019-41. COTNER. BENJAMIN IS

[Item 4.1]

GOING TO LEAVE US. MR. CAMELLO. >> SPEAKER: THANK YOU. THIS IS HDC 2019-41. FOR A PROPERTY LOCATED AT 303 CALHOUN STREET. IT IS AN R2 ZONED PROPERTY. MEDIUM DENSITY RESIDENTIAL. AND THIS IS A CERTIFICATE OF APPROVAL TO CONSTRUCT TWO ACCESSORY STRUCTURES. SOME OF YOU HAVE THE BEEN ON THE BOARD MIGHT REMEMBER WE'VE SEEN A SIMILAR PROJECT FOR THIS HOUSE COME THROUGH, I BELIEVE IT WAS LAST YEAR. ACTUALLY THE YEAR BEFORE THAT. TO DESIGN A GARAGE TO MATCH THIS PROPERTY WHICH IS A UNIQUE PROPERTY. WHICH STARTED LIFE AS ST. PETER CATHOLIC CHURCH AND IS NOW A SINGLE-FAMILY HOME. IT WAS BUILT AROUND 1925. AS I SAID, I'VE BEEN ADAPTED FOR RESIDENTIAL USE NOW. BACK IN 2018, THE BOARD DID APPROVE CONSTRUCTION OF TWO ACCESSORY STRUCTURES. ONE BEING 625 SQUARE FEET AND ONE BEING 375 SQUARE FEET. SINCE THEN THE APPLICANT HAS FOUND A SECOND FOUNDATION WHICH EXISTS ON THE PROPERTY WHICH IS ACTUALLY APPEARS TO BE MADE OF THE SAME MATERIAL AND THE SAME FOOTPRINT AS THE CHURCH ITSELF SITTING NEXT TO THE CHURCH. IN LIGHT OF THAT WE'VE ALTERED THEIR DESIGN FOR THE TWO GARAGES. THEY WOULD LIKE TO KEEP THE SECOND FOUNDATION AS A HISTORICAL ARTIFACT AND BUILD WITHIN THAT FOOTPRINT. WHEREAS THE PREVIOUS DESIGN WOULD HAVE BEEN OVER THAT FOOTPRINT'S FOUNDATION. WITH THAT, STAFF FINDS THAT THE DESIGN OF THE ACCESSORY STRUCTURE IS COME PATSIBLE WITH THE HISTORIC PRIMARY STRUCTURE AND THE SURROUNDING NEIGHBORHOOD. WE HAVEN'T FOUND INFORMATION YET RELATING TO WHAT THIS SITE FEATURE ACTUALLY IS.

THIS PROPERTY DOESN'T APPEAR ON THE HISTORIC MAPS SO WE'RE NOT SURE WHAT THE INTENTION WAS. WE DON'T THINK IT WAS EVER ACTUALLY USED. BUT SECRETARY OF THE INTERIOR STANDARD NUMBER 8 SAYS SIGNIFICANT ARCHAEOLOGICAL RESOURCES AFFECTED BY THE PROJECT SHOULD BE PROTECTED AND PRESERVED. IF SUCH RESOURCES WILL BE DISTURBED MITIGATION HAS TO BE TAKEN. THE PROPERTY OWNERS

[01:00:07]

DO WANT TO HONOR THIS FOUNDATION. WITH THAT STAFF FINDS THE REQUESTED ACTION AS PRESENTED IS CONSISTENT WITH THE LAND DEVELOPMENT CODE, THE SECRETARY OF THE INTERIOR STANDARDS AND THE DOWNTOWN HISTORIC DISTRICT GUIDELINES AND IS RECOMMENDING APPROVAL OF HDC

2019-41. THANK YOU. >> CHAIRMAN: QUESTIONS FOR SAL? WERE YOU ON THE BOARD AT THE

TIME WE DID THIS CASE? >> YES. THE SECOND VERSION. THE ORIGINAL I THINK WAS 2016.

HERE ARE SOME PHOTOS OF THE FOUNDATION THEY FOUND. I'VE DONE A SITE VISIT. AND IT DOES APPEAR THAT THIS IS THE SAME FOOTPRINT AND WE'RE NOT SURE WHAT IT WAS INTENDED TO BE USED FOR. BUT IT IS AN IMPORTANT AQ LOGICAL FEATURE ON THE SITE THAT THE HOMEOWNER DOES WANT TO

RETAIN. >> BOARD MEMBER: WHAT MATERIAL IS THE FOUNDATION?

>> A CONCRETE. IT LOOKS LIKE IT MATCHES THE FOUNDATION OF THE CHURCH BUILDING.

>> CHAIRMAN: CHALLENGING SITE. ANY OTHER QUESTIONS? IF NOT, THIS ONE IS ON YOU BENJAMIN?

>> YES. >> CHAIRMAN: COMMENTS? >> BENJAMIN MORRISSON 2107 CHITFIELD DRIVE. FERNANDINA BEACH. THE OWNERS HAD A COA FOR A SIMILAR DESIGN BEFORE AND THE DIDN'T GET AROUND TO COMPLETING THE PROJECT AND TIME-LAPSED AND THE COA LAPSED AND IT SORT OF GAVE THEM AN OPPORTUNITY TO EVALUATE. THEY FOUND THIS EXISTING FOUNDATION THEN, YOU KNOW, I THINK APPROPRIATELY THE DECISION WAS MADE OUT OF AN OVERABUNDANCE OF PRECAUTION TO WORK AROUND THE EXISTING FOUNDATION. EVEN THOUGH NOBODY KNOWS HOW TIS HISTORIC IT IS.

IT REPRESENTS TRYING TO BE AS SENSITIVE AS POSSIBLE TO THE POSSIBILITY OF IT BEING

CONTEXTUAL. ANYBODY HAVE ANY QUESTIONS? >> BOARD MEMBER: HOW LONG HAS IT

BEEN USED, THE MAIN HOUSE, HAS A HOME? >> SPEAKER: I DON'T KNOW. I

THINK PROBABLY FOR DECADES. >> BOARD MEMBER: THAT'S MY RECOLLECTION. A GOOD 20 YEARS.

>> CHAIRMAN: THANK YOU. GO AHEAD AND OPEN THE PUBLIC HEARING. IS ANYBODY WISHING TO SPEAK TO HDC CASE 2019-41. THIS WOULD BE THE TIME. SEEING NO ONE WE'LL CLOSE THE PUBLIC

MEETING. BOARD MEMBERS? >> BOARD MEMBER: I THINK WE SHOULD APPROVE IT.

>> BOARD MEMBER: I LIKE THE -- YOU KNOW TYPICALLY WE ASK TO NOT COPY A HISTORIC BUILDING. BUT I THINK WHAT WE'RE SEEING AS THE NEW FORM IN THE BACK IS MORE OF A CALL OUT TO IT. IT IS A DIFFERENT MATERIAL. IT IS A SLIGHTLY DIFFERENT DESIGN. BUT IT STILL EVOKES THE CHARACTER OF THE ORIGINAL HOUSE BUILDING WITHOUT BEING COMPLETE COPY SO IT'S OBVIOUS TO FUTURE PEOPLE

THE DIFFERENT ELEMENTS. >> BOARD MEMBER: I AGREE. >> CHAIRMAN: OTHER COMMENTS?

OKAY. >> BOARD MEMBER: MR. POZZETTA SPOKE VERY ELOQUENTLY THERE. I WOULD LIKE TO MAKE A MOTION. I MOVE TO APPROVE HDC CASE NUMBER 2019-41 WITHOUT CONDITIONS. AND I MOVE THAT HDC MAKE THE FOLLOWING FINDINGS OF FACT AND CONCLUSIONS OF LAW PART OF THE RECORD. THAT HDC CASE 2019-41 AS PRESENTED IS SUBSTANTIALLY COMPLIANT WITH THE LAND DEVELOPMENT CODE, THE SECRETARY OF INTERIOR STANDARDS AND THE DOWNTOWN HISTORIC DISTRICT

GUIDELINES TO WARRANT APPROVAL AT THIS TIME. >> BOARD MEMBER: I SECOND.

>> CHAIRMAN: ANY DISCUSSION? HEARING NONE, MS. ROCHE, PLEASE CALL ROLL.

>> YES. >> YES >> YES

>> YES. >> YES. >> CHAIRMAN: MOVING ON.

[01:05:03]

BENJAMIN, COME ON UP. CASE 2019-42. THIS IS THE STOKES PROJECT. I'M SORRY THE CAIRNS

[Item 4.2]

PROJECT. STOKES IS THE AGENT. SAL? >> SO THIS IS HDC2019-42. TWO MEDIUM LOTS 1 AND 2 ON BLOK 16. IT IS ZONED OT2 WHICH IS OLD TOWN. IT IS A CERTIFICATE OF APPROVAL TO CONSTRUCT A SINGLE FAMILY RESIDENCE. THIS PROPERTY IS UNIQUE. IT DOES -- IT IS THE VACATED PORTION OF TOWN GATE WHICH WE'VE SEEN BEFORE IN THE THREE OTHER LOTS THAT HAVE THE SAME SITUATION WHERE THEY OWN THAT PORTION OF THE VACATED RIGHT-OF-WAY OF TOWN GATE. BUT NONE OF THE CONSTRUCTION WILL OCCUR WITHIN THAT VACATED PORTION. BETH HAS ANALYZED THE NEW CONSTRUCTION AND FOUND THAT IT IS COMPATIBLE WITH THE ENVIRONMENT OF OLD TOWN IN KEEPING WITH THE GUIDELINES SAT OUT TO MAINTAIN THE ORIGINAL GRID. THE ONLY NOTE THAT I DID HAVE WAS ABOUT THE DORMER ON THE ROOF WHICH DOESN'T HAVE A WINDOW AND IT'S ONLY ON ONE SIDE OF THE PROPERTY. SO IT DOESN'T APPEAR TO HAVE A FUNCTIONAL OR AESTHETIC PURPOSE. THE APPLICANT HAS -- I ASKED THE APPLICANT AND THE APPLICANT HAS TOLD ME THAT IT HOUSES I BELIEVE SOME OF THE HVAC EQUIPMENT SO IT DOES ACTUALLY HAVE A FUNCTIONAL PURPOSE. HE CAN TALK MORE TO THAT. WE THAT, STAFF DOES FIND THAT THE REQUESTED ACTION AS PRESENTED IS CONSISTENT WITH THE LAND DEVELOPMENT CODE, THE SECRETARY OF INTERIOR STANDARDS AND THE OLD TOWN PRESERVATION AND DEVELOPMENT GUIDELINES AND RECOMMENDS APPROVAL OF HDC 2019-42. THANK YOU.

>> CHAIRMAN: QUESTIONS FOR SAL? >> BOARD MEMBER: SAL, DO WE HAVE ANY REQUIREMENTS WHERE THE HOUSE STEPS OVER THE TWO CONJOINED LOTS? IS THAT SOMETHING WE ARE CONSIDERING, IN THIS CASE, OR IS THAT ONLY WHEN IT'S ON LIKE A CORNER SITUATION OR AN OUTSIDE -- FACING THE STREET?

>> ARE YOU ASKING ABOUT THE VISIBILITY TRIANGLE? I BELIEVE THE DORMER IS SERVING AS THE MID-LOCK CORRIDOR. EVEN THOUGH TOWN GATE IS VACATED IT IS STILL TOO MEDIA PANELS CROSSING THAT

LINE. >> BOARD MEMBER: THAT'S WHAT I PICKED UP ON. THE DORMER.

>> YEAH. >> BOARD MEMBER: WHAT'S THE SCALE?

>> I'M SORRY? >> BOARD MEMBER: WHAT IS THE SIZE OF THAT DORMER

>> THE DORMER IS -- >> BOARD MEMBER: I DON'T THINK THE DORMER LINES UP WITH IT.

>> IT'S ABOUT 8 FEET IT LOOKS LIKE. SEVEN AND CHANGE. >> BOARD MEMBER: WE'LL TALK TO

THE APPLICANT ABOUT THAT. >> CHAIRMAN: VERY GOOD. OKAY. IS THERE SOMEONE HERE? COME ON

UP. IDENTIFY YOURSELF FOR THE RECORD. >> SPEAKER: JOHN STOKES 96096

VICTORIA'S PLACE. >> CHAIRMAN: QUESTIONS FOR MR. STOKES?

>> BOARD MEMBER: SO WAS THE INTENT OF THE DORMER FOR FUNCTIONAL REASONS OR TO ADDRESS

THE MID-LOT CORRIDOR REQUIREMENT. >> SPEAKER: THE CONDITION OF THE HOUSE IS 720 SQUARE FEET SO WE'RE LIMITED ON WHAT WE CAN DO. WE'RE USING ONE OF THE BEDROOMS TO HAVE A STACKABLE PURPOSE WAS TO PUT THE AIR R - HANDLER AND THE WATER HEATER IN

THAT SPACE. >> BOARD MEMBER: BUT YOU UNDERSTAND TO HAVE A DEMARCATION

OF THE MID-LOT CORRIDOR? >> SPEAKER: I'M SORRY? >> BOARD MEMBER: DO YOU UNDERSTAND THE REQUIREMENT TO HAVE A DEMARCATION OR SOME INDICATION ON THE HOUSE OF WHERE

THE MID-LOT RUNS? >> SPEAKER: I DON'T UNDERSTAND. I'M SORRY.

>> BOARD MEMBER: I THINK THE ANSWER IS NO THEN. THERE IS A REQUIREMENT FOR INTERIOR LOT TIS

LIKE THIS-- >> THERE'S NO EXCEPTION FOR IT. IT SAYS IF YOU CROSS THAT MID-LOT LINE ON THE TWO MEDIAS THAT YOU WILL HAVE IT. THE GUIDELINES -- IT WAS VACATED AFTER THE GUIDELINES WERE WRITTEN SO THERE WAS NO CONSIDERATION FOR THE TOWN GATE

LOTS BEING DIFFERENT >> BOARD MEMBER: IN THE OLD TOWN DESIGN GUIDELINES WHERE YOU HAVE, YOU KNOW, YOUR PROPERTY HAS AN INVISIBLE LINE DOWN THE MIDDLE OF IT THAT REPRESENTS A

[01:10:04]

HISTORICAL DEMARCATION OF THE PROPERTY. AND THE GUIDELINES HAVE LANGUAGE IN THEM THAT REQUIRES THERE TO BE A -- WHAT'S THE WORD I WANT TO USE? AN ARCHITECTURAL DEMARCATION INTEGRATED INTO THE DESIGN OF THE STRUCTURE THAT HONORS THAT TRADITIONAL OR HISTORIC CORRIDOR THAT WAS THERE. WHICH THERE ISN'T ANYTHING RIGHT NOW THAT'S DOING THAT.

>> BOARD MEMBER: IT IS A DIVISION BETWEEN LOT 1 AND LOT 2.

>> SPEAKER: OKAY. I KNEW WE WERE NOT ABLE TO BUILD ON THE TOWN GATE SECTION OF THE CLOSED RIGHT-OF-WAY. I KNOW I HAD -- WHEN I MET WITH THE BOARD PRIOR, LAST YEAR, ON 804 WHITE STREET WE DID A SHED DORMER ON THE SECOND FLOOR. OF COURSE, IT WAS THAT EH REAR OF THE HOUSE. THAT WAS FOR THE SECOND FLOOR BATHROOM. SO WE ARE TRYING TO MIMIC THAT SAME CONCEPT OF A

SHED DORMER. >> BOARD MEMBER: THE ISSUE IS THAT THE DORMER DOESN'T MATCH

WHERE THE FEATURE IS SUPPOSED TO BE. >> BOARD MEMBER: WELL THAT AND THE DORMER FACES THE WEST SIDE AND THE ACTUAL AREA THAT PROBABLY WOULD NEED TO INDICATE THAT WOULD BE ON THE EAST SIDE OF THE HOUSE. SO IT'S NOT EVEN ON THE RIGHT SIDE OF THE HOUSE.

>> SPEAKER: SO IS THE FIX TO REVERSE THE FLOOR PLAN? >> BOARD MEMBER: NOT NECESSARILY. IF YOU IMAGINE THE LINE THAT RUNS BETWEEN LOT 1 AND 2, THE INTENT OF THE CODE IS THAT THE ARCHITECTURE OF THE HOUSE PROVIDES SOME KIND OF INDICATION THAT THERE IS A TRANSITION THAT OCCURS THERE. THIS LOT LINE AND ALL THE LOT LINES THAT KIND OF SHOW US WHERE THE ORIGINAL KIND OF SPANISH LOTS ARE LAID OUT ARE REALLY THE ONLY HISTORIC THING WE STILL HAVE LEFT OF THE ORIGINAL SPANISH SETTLEMENT THERE. SO THE INTENT WAS -- THE GUIDELINES IS TO HAVE THE ARCHITECTURE SPEAK TO THAT GRID. SO, IF YOU LOOK AT YOUR SITE PLAN WHERE THE HOUSE STRADDLES THAT LINE, THERE SHOULD BE SOME KIND OF ARCHITECTURAL FEATURE GOING ON AT THAT CROSSOVER. THERE HAVE BEEN A LOT OF DIFFERENT SOLUTIONS TO THAT THAT PEOPLE HAVE PRESENTED AND WE'VE REVIEWED. ONE OF THE THINGS WE'VE TRIED TO BE CONSISTENT ABOUT IS THAT THAT -- ADDRESSING THAT LINE OCCURS AT THE LINE. SO THAT WOULD BE SOMETHING IMPORTANT TO KIND OF LOOK AT AND VISIT WITH THE DESIGN. OTHER THAN THAT FEATURE, I DON'T SEE ANYTHING OBJECTIONABLE ABOUT IT. BUT THAT'S ONE THING JUST TO MAINTAIN CONSISTENCY ABOUT SOMETHING THAT WE HAVE TALKED ABOUT AND REQUIRED FROM OTHERS, THAT'S SOMETHING THAT WOULD NEED

TO GET ADDRESSED. >> BOARD MEMBER: AND I THINK SAL CAN HELP YOU BY SHOWING YOU SOME EXAMPLES MAYBE OF THE WAY THAT OTHER PEOPLE -- OF OTHER PROJECTS THAT WE'VE APPROVED AND

HOW THOSE APPLICANTS ADDRESSED IT. >> SPEAKER: OKAY.

>> BOARD MEMBER: I THINK -- WELL, I THINK WE SHOULD CONTINUE -- WELL DO WE WANT TO

CONTINUE IT? >> BOARD MEMBER: YEAH. I MEAN, I THINK --

>> BOARD MEMBER: IS THIS FOR A FINAL? >> CHAIRMAN: THANK YOU MR. STOKES. BEFORE YOU GET INTO YOUR DISCUSSION, MR. MORRISON PERHAPS WE COULD OPEN THE PUBLIC HEARING AND SEE IF ANYBODY HAS ANYTHING TO ADD. AND THEN WE CAN DISCUSS BOARD ACTION. WE'LL OPEN THE PUBLIC HEARING ON 2019-42 WHITE STREET. SEEING NO ONE, WE'LL CLOSE THE PUBLIC HEARING. IS THAT A RECORD? MR. MORRISON, JUST TO PICK UP ON YOUR POINT, I THINK -- WHEN I FIRST SAW THIS PROJECT I DIDN'T REALIZE WE WERE TALKING ABOUT CONCERN THAT NEEDS TO BE ADDRESSED. AND MY SUGGESTION MIGHT BE WE CONTINUE IT AND ASK IF MR. CAMELLO CAN PROVIDE TECHNICAL ASSISTANCE TO THE ARCHITECT ON GETTING IT RESOLVED. BECAUSE OTHER THAN THAT I THINK THAT I DON'T THINK YOU WILL HAVE ANY OTHER ISSUES

WITH THIS. >> CHAIRMAN: IT IS A GREAT LITTLE HOUSE. BUT GOT DO SOMETHING FOR THE MEDIA. I HAD FORGOTTEN -- IS IT IN THE -- HOW BIG DOES IT -- IT NEEDS TO BE

[01:15:03]

TEN FEET. >> FIVE FEET ON ONE SIDE. ONE POSSIBLE SOLUTION MIGHT BE PULLING THE HOUSE FURTHER TO THE STREET AND MAKING WHERE THE PORCH IS SOMETHING THAT

REPRESENTS THE TEN FEET. >> CHAIRMAN: LET'S BACK UP. MY SUGGESTION THEN. SO, WE'RE AT 12 FEET OFF THE RIGHT-OF-WAY RIGHT NOW. CORRECT? IT WOULD BE POSSIBLE TO ADJUST -- WE GENERALLY RECOMMEND FIVE. AND THE REASON THAT -- I WAS NOT MEANING TO BRING THIS SITUATION UP IS BECAUSE IT'S SUCH A SMALL FOOTPRINT HOUSE. ONLY 715 CARE FEET. IF THEY CHOSE TO BE 12 INSTEAD OF 5 IT DIDN'T SEEM LIKE A BIG IMPOSITION ON THE NEIGHBORHOOD. SO, IF YOU WERE TO ADDRESS WHERE THE HOUSE IS RELATIVE TO THE RIGHT-OF-WAY, COULD YOU GET THAT DORMER TO

DEFINE THE LINE? >> OR THE PORCH ROOF. IF YOU LOOK AT WHERE THE MEDIA LINE

IS -- >> CHAIRMAN: WHICH PORCH? >> THE REAR. IT'S NOT FAR FROM THE REAR PORCH. MOVING IT FORWARD WOULD PULL THE BUILDING -- I'M NOT SURE HOW

MANY FEET THAT IS. >> CHAIRMAN: I'M SURE HE IS TALKING TO HIS CLIENTS.

>> BOARD MEMBER: I THINK THAT WOULD BE A GREAT SOLUTION. MY COMMENT WOULD BE IF THE PORCH BECOMES THE KIND OF IDENTIFYING FEATURE BY SLIDING IT UP IT WOULD BE ENHANCED IF THE ROOF ELEMENT AT THE PORCH HAD A NICE CLEAN BREAK THAT WOULD MAKE IT VISUALLY EVEN MORE DEFINITIVE.

THAT HEY SOMETHING JUST HAPPENED HERE AT THIS LINE. I THINK THAT WOULD BE A GREAT SOLUTION IF YOU

COULD MAKE IT WORK. >> CHAIRMAN: I'M GOING TO GO ON A LIMB AND SUGGEST WE'RE PROBABLY GOING TO CONTINUE THIS AND ASK YOU CONSULT WITH SAL ON MEETING THIS DEMARCATION. I THINK WITHIN THE EXISTING PLANS WITH MINOR MODIFICATIONS YOU ARE GOING TO GET THERE.

>> SPEAKER: VERY GOOD. THANK YOU. >> BOARD MEMBER: WHEN YOU HAVE A TRUE PURE FOUNDATION IS THERE A REQUIREMENT THAT THERE BE LATTICE OR ANYTHING.

>> IT IS RECOMMENDED IN THE GUIDELINES THERE BE SOME KIND OF INFILL WHETHER IT BE LATTICE OR

BOARD. >> BOARD MEMBER: THAT WOULD BE ANOTHER RECOMMENDATION. MAYBE PUT SOME SORT OF LATTICE IN BETWEEN THE PIERS. THAT'S WHAT WE'VE REQUESTED FROM OTHER

APPLICANTS IN THE PAST. >> CHAIRMAN: THANK YOU. >> SPEAKER: THANK YOU.

>> CHAIRMAN: BOARD MEMBERS, WOULD SOMEONE LIKE TO MAKE A MOTION.

>> BOARD MEMBER: WE SHOULD ASK WHEN HE THINKS HE CAN COME BACK IF WE'RE GOING TO CONTINUE IT.

WE CAN GET OUT THE FEBRUARY MEETING. >> BOARD MEMBER: I HATE TO HOLD

HIS PROJECT UP. >> SPEAKER: I CAN MEET TOMORROW. >> ARE YOUR CLIENTS EAGER TO

MOVE FORWARD? >> SPEAKER: THEY ARE. BUT, OBVIOUSLY, WE WANT, YOU KNOW, TO

BE A GOOD NEIGHBOR TO THE COMMUNITY. >> BOARD MEMBER: I MEAN, WITH

THE HOLIDAYS -- >> I SUPPOSE YOU WANT CHRISTMAS OFF?

MONDAY. BUT I THINK TO GET DRAWINGS BACK -- >> CHAIRMAN: I THINK YOU ARE

GOING TO GET PUSHED OUT TO FEBRUARY. >> SPEAKER: VERY GOOD. THANK

YOU. >> CHAIRMAN: IT WILL PROBABLY MAKE EVERYBODY HAPPIER IN THE

END. CAN WE GET A MOTION? >> BOARD MEMBER: I'LL MOVE TO CONTINUE HDC CASE 2019-42 UNTIL THE FEBRUARY MEETING OF THE HISTORIC DISTRICT COUNCIL. WHICH WILL BE THE THIRD THURSDAY

OF FEBRUARY. >> AND TO BE CLEAR, 2020. >> BOARD MEMBER: IN 2020.

THAT'S RIGHT. WE ARE PAST 2019. >> BOARD MEMBER: I'LL SECOND THAT.

>> CHAIRMAN: DISCUSSION? HEARING NONE, COMMISSIONER COULD YOU HANG FOR ONE MINUTE? THANKS.

MS. SAMANTHA PLEASE CALL ROLL. >> YES >> YES

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

>> CHAIRMAN: MOVING ON. WE ALREADY TALKED TO -- RANDOM BOARD BUSINESS. MR. BECKMAN,

[Items 6 & 8 ]

STAFF REPORT? >> I DON'T HAVE ANYTHING BUT TO WISH EVERYBODY HAPPY HOLIDAY AND

A HAPPY NEW YEAR AND STAY SAFE. >> CHAIRMAN: I SUPPOSE YOU WANT CHRISTMAS DAY OFF?

[01:20:10]

MEMBERS, JUST TO BRING TO YOUR ATTENTION A COUPLE THINGS ON MY PLATE. FIRST IS THE WATERFRONT DESIGNS ARE GOING FORWARD AND IT'S MY UNDERSTANDING FROM MANAGER MARTIN THAT THEY -- THE NEXT ITERATION WILL BE PRESENTED TO THE CITY COMMISSIONERS AT THEIR ENVISIONING WORKSHOP IN LATE JANUARY. SO, HOPEFULLY EVERYBODY WILL HAVE AN OPPORTUNITY TO SEE WHAT'S GOING ON THEN AND HAVE SOME INPUT. ACROSS MY PLATE TODAY THAT THE AIRBNB VROV BILL IS BACK UP IN THE FLORIDA LEGISLATURE. IT HAS COMPANION BILLS, HOUSE AND SENATE. THE AIRBNB BILLS ARE BACK UP IN THE LEGISLATURE. COMPANION BILLS, COMMISSIONER ROSS. THE AIRBNB VRO BILLS WOULD ASSUME LOCAL AUTHORITY ON REGULATING AIRBNB AND GIVE IT TO THE GENERAL ASSEMBLY. THE STATE OF FLORIDA THEY HAVE CAMPAIGN ONBILLS. I HAVE CONTACTED SENATOR BEAN AND REPRESENTEDIVE BYRD PERSONALLY BUT I WANTED TO PUT THIS ON YOUR RADAR. THIS COULD HAVE A DIRECT AND NEGATIVE IMPACT ON THE HISTORIC DISTRICT WHERE YOUR GUEST COTTAGE WHICH ARE CURRENTLY ONLY RENTED AS PART OF A HOMESTEAD PROPERTY COULD BE RENTED OUT ON A NIGHTLY BASIS. I WOULD THINK THIS WOULD BE VERY NEGATIVE FOR OUR COMMUNITY. ESPECIALLY IN OLD TOWN AND IN DOWNTOWN WHERE HOMES ARE RIGHT ON TOP OF ONE ANOTHER. I DON'T WANT IT. IT IMPACTS THE WHOLE CITY, ESPECIALLY THE

HISTORIC DISTRICT WHERE WE'RE RIGHT ON TOP OF EACH OTHER. >> IT AFFECTS THE BEACH TOO. IN

A DIFFERENT WAY. >> CHAIRMAN: MY PURVIEW, IT DOES NOT INCLUDE THE BEACH. BUT YES.

SO, I WILL AT SOME POINT MAY BE ASKING THE HBC TO MAKE RECOMMENDATIONS THE COMMISSION TO WEIGH IN ON THIS ISSUE AND ASK THE CITY COMMISSION TO WEIGH IN ON THIS ISSUE AND BRING

WHATEVER FORCE YOU CAN TO BEAR. >> I THINK WHAT WORKS EVEN BETTER IS YOU NEED TO

INDIVIDUALLY CALL THEM. >> CHAIRMAN: OKAY. BY THE WAY THE COMPANION BILL AS SPONSORED IS BROUGHT BY A JACKSONVILLE REPRESENTATIVE. ANY OTHER BUSINESS TO BE BROUGHT BEFORE

THIS BOARD? >> BOARD MEMBER: I HAVE ONE COMMENT FOR SAL THAT I HAVE REACHED OUT TO SOME OF THE WINDOW MANUFACTURERS AND ASKED THEM TO GET IN TOUCH ABOUT SETTING UP A TIME TO COME PRESENT SO THAT WE CAN EVALUATE AND APPROVE WINDOW MAKES AND

MODELS FOR USE IN THE HISTORIC DISTRICT. . >> I HAVEN'T HEARD FROM ANYBODY

YET BUT LOOKING FORWARD TO IT. >> CHAIRMAN: THANK YOU ALL. 6 6:25. AND ALL UNANIMOUS. I MISSED THE STOKES THING.

* This transcript was compiled from uncorrected Closed Captioning.