This is so good. Okay, by my reckoning, it's straight up 2 o'clock. Uh, we have quorum for the meeting to begin. So, we'll call to order the meeting of the Historic and
Cultural Landmarks Commission for April 13, 2026. and I'd ask for the statement regarding the Texas Open Meetings Act. >> Welcome to the April 13, 20126 Historic and Cultural Landmarks Commission. Our
commission requires a quorum of six members to be present and available for voting. The following commissioners are present today. Chair Rick Herring, Commissioner Kelly Trager, Commissioner Walter Peoples, Commissioner Estrris
Tucker, Commissioner Corey Malone, Commissioner Tim Halden, and Commissioner Graham Brezendine. Staff present today are Laura Lie Willlet, Anna Alvarez, Jefferson Praau, Trey Kalls, Hywan Kim, Enrique Alvarez,
Stephanie Scott Sims, Brandon Utterbach, DJ Harrell, and myself, Laura Young. Today's meeting agenda can be found online at www.fortworth.gov. Speaker registration forms must have been turned in prior to the start of the
meeting. Today's public hearing is being documented by video conference recording which will be available on the city's website. To achieve a timely and orderly meeting, the HCLC requests the following rules of procedure be respected. Each case will be called in the sequence
listed on the agenda unless otherwise directed by the chair. All ensuing dialogue shall be directed to the HCLC only. After each staff presentation, the applicant and other proponents will be given a total of seven minutes to speak.
Opposition may then speak for seven minutes. Continuation beyond the speaker's allotted time will be subject to the chairman's sole discretion and approval. All other meeting procedures will adhere to HCLC adopted rules of procedures to
the extent practicable. Following the official close of each case hearing, the HCLC will remain in open session to discuss and vote upon the item in question. During this time, no further public testimony or commentary will be allowed unless
directed by the chair. A closed executive session may be held with respect to the posted agenda items to enable the HCLC to receive advice from legal staff. For additional information on any case on today's agenda, you may contact the development services
department by calling 8173928000. Thank you for your attention. >> All right. Thank you for that information. And do we have any announcements from staff today? >> Um I did have one other announcement. I didn't get a chance to drop a photo in here, but um we did celebrate the
installation of the Chalkaw Code Talkers State Historical Marker um last week and uh that is at the Veterans Memorial Park off of Camp Buouie. If uh it was a really beautiful ceremony um lots of people came out for it. Chalkaw Nation
came and spoke. Council members, uh, if you get a chance to look at videos or if you get a chance to go and visit the marker, um, it's very bright and shiny and new. So, that's all staff has. >> All right. Thank you for that. Uh, any announcements from commissioners today.
Hearing none, uh, we'll proceed with the approval of the March 9th minutes. Uh, commissioners would entertain a motion in a second. motion. >> Second. >> All right. We have a motion to accept
the minutes by Commissioner Halden and a second by Commissioner Tucker. Tucker, excuse me. >> Chair Hering, how do you vote? >> Yay. >> Commissioner Malone, >> yay. >> Commissioner Bzendine, >> yay. >> Commissioner Holden, >> Commissioner Tucker, >> yay. >> Commissioner Peoples and Commissioner
Trager. >> Thank you. Motion passes 70. >> All right. Thank you. Well, then let's move on to the first case, please. >> Your first case, HCLC-26-094 is a text amendment to the historic preservation ordinance. The city of Fort
Worth requests a recommendation to the zoning commission to amend the zoning ordinance of the city of Fort Worth to clarify that the historic and cultural landmarks commission is the executive authority for recommending historic designations or removals thereof to the city council.
There is a copy of your ordinance um of this ordinance amendment in your packet. We did also receive um a support letter from Historic Fort Worth, Inc. for CH for this change. Um that is uh staff recommends approval of this.
>> All right. Thank you very much. Um commissioners, well, first of all, is there anyone in the audience to speak on this text amendment? All right. Seeing none, we'll close the public portion of the hearing. Uh, commissioners, any discussion or we're
open to a motion and a second. >> I move to approve the proposed text amendment. >> Second. >> And excuse me, who is that second from? Commissioner Bzendine. >> All right. We have a motion to accept the text amendment by Commissioner
Trager with a second by Commissioner Bzendine. >> Thank you. Chair Herring, how do you vote? >> Yay. Commissioner Malone, >> yay. >> Commissioner Berendine, >> yay. >> Commissioner Halden, >> Commissioner Tucker, >> yay. >> Commissioner Peoples, >> and Commissioner Trager, >> yay. Thank you so much.
>> Motion passes 70. >> All right. Thank you. Let's move on to the next case, please. Next case is sorry. Next case is a nomination case is HLC-26-081 and the applicant sorry the resolution is to adopt a
supporting the nomination of the Binyan O'Keefe storage company building to the national register of historic places. We also receive a supporting letter from historic forwork inc. And I will move forward to read the actual resolution.
Resolution 2026 2026-03 supporting the nomination of the Beyon O'N storage company building located at 200 210 East 7th Street forward Texas being added to the National Register of
Historic Places. Whereas the Bingon Oak Keefe Storage Company building is located 212 East 7th Street for Texas. Whereas the Bingon O'Keefe storage company building was constructed in 1917 as a six-story reinforced concrete and
brick warehouse designed by the prominent architectural firm Sanguinet and Stats. The building served as the headquarters of the bion of k stone excuse me of the bion of keystone
company and is clad in recre brick with restrained eclectic cast stone decorative elements. The structure retains character defining features including its original structure system, exposed concrete floors and ceilings,
historic spatial configuration and remnanced of historic painted signage. And whereas the building reflects the early 20th century commercial and industrial development of downtown forward and is representative of warehouse design and construction during
this period. The property maintains integrity of location, design, settings, materials, workmanship, filling and association sufficient to convey his historic significance. And now therefore be it resolved by the
historic and culture landmarks commission that the historical and landmark commission supports the nomination of the pinion on O'Keefe storage company building located at 200 East 7th Street forward Texas to the
National Register of Historic Places. This concludes the nomination. >> All right. Thank you very much for that. Is there anyone in the audience who would like to speak on this proposed resolution? All right, seeing none, we'll close the
public portion of the hearing and commissioners, as uh we heard additional information on this resolution in the work session and saw the some of the visuals and other information that's now being shown on the screen. Um, any
discussion or we're open to a motion and a second? >> I'll make a motion to approve HCLC 26-081. >> Second. >> We have a motion to approve the resolution by Commissioner Bryendine and
a second by Commissioner Tucker. >> Okay. Sher Harry, how do you vote? >> Yay. >> Commissioner Triger, how do you vote? >> Yay. Commissioner Peoples, how do you vote? >> Commissioner Tucker, how do you vote?
>> Yay. >> Commissioner Malone, how do you vote? >> Yay. >> Commissioner Haldin, how do you vote? >> Yay. >> And Commissioner Bryson, how do you vote? >> Yay. >> Thank you. Motion passes 70. >> All right. Thank you very much. Let's
move on to the next case, please. Thank you. Your next case is HCLC-26-075 at 1519 Circle Park. The applicant requests a recommendation to city council to add the historic and cultural landmark overlay to the building and additions located at 1519 Circle Park,
aka the North Fort Worth Baptist Church. North Fort Worth Baptist Church was founded as a small mission in 1890 and admitted into the Tarant County Baptist Association during its annual conference held in September of the following year. What started as a small group of approximately 20 worshippers grew into a
congregation of over 3,000 over the next several decades. By 1968, the North Fort Worth Baptist Church had 1,609 Sunday school students, accommodated six separate Baptist Young People's unions, and administered several other Christian programs like the Women's Missionary Union, Baptist Brotherhood, Choirs, and
Vacation Bible School. The church occupied several sites throughout the city of North Fort Worth before it purchased land at the corner of Northwest 15th Street and Circle Park Boulevard and referred to simply as Boulevard in July of 1903.
The North Fort Worth Baptist Church consists of three interconnected and sty stylistically cohesive sections. The 1927 Education Building, which occupies the northwest portion of the site, was designed by architect Charles Osborne and Crewmaster and is four
stories tall with a flat roof. In comparison with the other portions of the building, the education building reflects the classical revival style that includes the flat brick walls and a denticulated cornis classical revival. The 1941 auditorium building sits at the
northernmost corner of the site. The two-story building has modern style elements, including a brick parapit wall, and a large projecting central bay clad with cast stone, a pediment, and ornamental windows arranged between fluted pyers. This design feature appears to be a subtle reference to the
1927 classical revival sanctuary building. It replaced the 1945 Young People's Building, which sits just south of the Education and Auditorium buildings and is connected to the auditorium with a two-story hyphen. It is two stories tall and three bays wide at the primary elevation. Also in the
modern style, the building's central entrance bay is characterized by a strong vertical emphasis created by a caststone front with a stepped parapet and massing. The 1953 elementary building designed by Easterwood and Easterwood sits at the southern end of
the site and is rectangular in plan with a flat roof. It is seven bays wide by two stories tall with a recess central entrance. The congregation of the North Fort Worth Baptist Church continued to occupy the site until 1985 when they relocated to an even larger facility elsewhere in North Fort Worth. The
building sat empty for several years before being sold at a below market rate to the Premier Glacia Bautista Baptist Church, one of the largest Hispanic Baptist congregations in Texas. Staff have found as evidence that the property meets three of the eight criteria of significance for
designation. The property also retains all its original integrity and the identity for which it is significant. The staff has received um a support letter from Historic Fort Worth, Inc. Therefore, staff recommends the following motion that the HCLC recommend that city
council consider designating the structure, building, and additions only at 1519 Circle Park Boulevard as a historic and cultural landmark and that the Secretary of the Interior standards for the treatment of historic properties be used when evaluating any proposed future change to the property. This concludes the staff report.
>> All right. Thank you very much for that um extensive report. Uh is there anyone in the chamber who would like to speak on this designation request? If so, please come forward, sir, and give us your name and address for the record. Share with us anything you'd
like us to know. >> Appreciate. Thank you. Reggie Jennings here on behalf of developer commissioners. Thanks for the opportunity to speak with you all this afternoon. Won't be before you long like they say in the church house. So we have Irma Park Senior here. Um beautiful
building that we have going on. So quick overview of Oza Industries. It's a Texas-based woman uh owned firm. We have an extensive history and experience when it comes to developing affordable housing and preserving housing as well. Helped over 3,000 families across Texas,
which is part of our mission here in the DFW and Austin uh metroplex areas. utilize the housing, federal and state tax credits. And we have seven developments currently in Fort Worth. So, Emma Park, as was noted earlier, is
previously on the North Fort Worth Baptist Church. We've received a determination of eligibility um from the historic the Texas Historic Commission and we're looking to convert this into senior affordable housing. Right. So, we came back, we were here last year um
looking to have it be a family deal. talked to the to the residents of the area. They spoke up. We heard them and we're following their lead in that which is something that's very important to us when we're coming into these communities hearing what's best for them. Well, you see right here, not too far
from Ray Street is uh Sello Place. Similar uh product that we have going on at Emma Park is a former Baptist church. Just going to show you some images here of how we've maintained the integrity of that church. Right. You see in one of the uh the kitchen areas, we have some
of the stained glass there as well. And in the top right uh corner, you see that's going to be um our common area where there's many gatherings and things of that nature where we've maintained once again that stained glass. If you go and visit Cello Place, um the sanctuary area is um a place where there's plenty
of people can come hang out, have different events and things of that nature as well. And then coming soon, we have Marin Grove. Um that's over there right off of Hemp Hill and Berry Street. And then Georgian Oaks right here in downtown Fort Worth. Georgian Oaks as you all
just had heard um it's now going to be in historic registry and it's going to be a senior development 100 units. They have Maring Grove which we're almost uh finished completing uh currently right now. And that is my presentation. Open to any questions if any at all.
Thank you very much and um looking forward to seeing what all you're going to do with this historic property and u having seen what you've done with some of your other projects. Uh all very impressive and adds to the historic preservation of some of our important
buildings in Fort Worth. So thank you for that. Commissioners, other comments or questions for the applicant? Just very commendable. >> Thank you all. >> Thank you very much. Anyone else in the chamber to speak on this case?
Um, seeing none, we'll close the public portion of the hearing and commissioners are open for discussion. Motion or a second? >> Second. All right, we have a motion on the floor by Commissioner Halden and a second by
Commissioner Tucker. >> Chair hearing, how do you vote? >> Yay. >> Commissioner Malone, >> yay. >> Commissioner Bresendine, >> yay. >> Commissioner Halden, >> Commissioner Tucker, >> yay. >> Commissioner Peoples, >> yay. >> And Commissioner Trager, >> yay. Thank you. Motion passes 70.
>> Next case, please. I will try to be brief. Um, I have a summary version of the staff report if you've all had a chance to read the staff report. So, your next case is HCLC 26082 for 255 Rodeo Plaza. The applicant appeals to
the decision of the historic preservation officer and requests a certificate of appropriateness to install a projecting sign in the existing arched window instead of on the bu building facade per section 7.4.10 and section 4 uh 2.4.3S1A.
So some of the background information on March 4th 2026 the applicant applied for a certificate certificate of appropriateness for two signs a wall sign and a projecting sign. On March 13, 2026, the historic preservation officer administratively approved a wall sign
and denied the COA request for a projecting sign. On March 23rd, 2026, the applicant appealed the decision of the historic preservation officer to deny the request for a COA for the projecting sign proposed over the arched window. So the overview is the proposal
involves installing a projecting sign above the entryway directly over an arched window on a historic mission revival style building in the stockyard's historic district. The building is listed as a contributing historic resource and features significant architectural elements like
arched windows, parapits, decorative plaques. And so under the uh stockyard the stockyard's farm base code the sign allowance for this uh tenant space is 66 square feet based on frontage and the existing approval um of the sign that
was approved on the wall is about 26 um square feet. So it's actually on the left entryway there. Show you the exhibit there. That's the one that was approved administratively. Um, and
it is painted aluminum. So, the proposed projecting sign, I'll go back to the projecting sign there. Um, is measured at approximately 25 square ft. The design is also multi-layered acrylic lettering with aluminum backing. Its
proposed location is over the arched window at the entryway, which is not supported by uh several factors, several principles in the stockards forbased code. So some of those uh issues as outlined are that they this will obscure or visually interfere with a significant
architectural feature this arched window and then it appears uh partially attached to the window frame. However, with this new detail that was provided, it may not be as um attached as we thought. Uh although it still is obscuring that window and it causes
visual clutter combined with the existing wall sign uh that was placed on on the left side there. So we do believe that it'll overcrowd the entry facade. So other uh standards like the secretary of the interior standards uh standard 9,
the sign is uh is differentiated but it fails the requirement to protect historic integrity due to this location and under preservation brief 25. The new signage it should complement and not dominate the building. Uh so and we also want to avoid covering architectural
features like on this um front entrance. And so staff is recommending a denial uh without prejudice of this projecting sign over this arched window. And then we also received a letter from Historic Fort Worth, Inc. supporting staff's recommendation to deny without
prejudice. This concludes the staff report. >> All right. Thank you, Honor, for that uh staff report. Um, is there anyone in the audience who would like to speak on this case? If so, please come forward. Uh,
whoever wants to come first and give us your name and address for the record, please, sir. And any information. And remember, um, according to our rules of procedure, we have a total of seven minutes. Okay. >> For discussion. >> Gotcha. Okay. Uh, my name is Brent. I'm
with the, uh, signed contractor hired by John Ashley to do his signage. Um, Ayanna and Lauraai, it's nice to meet you guys in person. Um, so our proposal here, as you can see on the picture, uh, with the pink wording on it, that's the
frame, the support system. It's not connected to the molding or the window in any way. Um, and the color of it is painted to match the molding and the stucco on on the the archway right there.
So, um, it kind of disappears. It appears to be floating in front of the window. It's not attached to anything. It's not damaging the building in any way. And, um, the building was stuckcoed within the past two years. So, upon removal, any of the half inch penetrations could be filled and covered
up. Um, oh, it's engineered. There's there's no no threat to public safety. Um, it's engineered. It has high wind loads. Um, it's high enough to not bonk your head on. And visibility wise, if we were to put it to the left or the right or the
window of the window, whenever you walk up from that approach, you wouldn't be able to see the window behind it. But with it floating in front of the window, you get the full view of the window and the sign. So, um, if we were to put it above the
archway, it would be in that tree that you can see up there. Um, we're not touching any trees. because we don't want to damage the trees or the sign. So, that's not really an option. The left or right approach blocks the full window from that approach. So, we think
this is the best placement for the sign. And the main uh the main reason we want it a projecting blade sign is to be visible from exchange. So, that way uh passerbys can see, you know, there's an old time photo place over here. Let's go
get our picture taken. Um, >> yeah, I think that's all I got. I'll pass it on to John. Um, John's business owner. He's got the vested interest in this. >> Okay. Thank you very much. And we may have additional questions for you, but
we'll call you back. Okay, sir. Please come forward and give us your name and address for the record. >> Yes. Um, excuse me. My name is John Ashley. I own Ashley Nostalgia, which uh also owns the Jersey Lily Oldtime Photo
and Tint type parlor. Um, signage is the key to uh my business. We are an impulse item, but we support and we project Fort Worth Stockyards. That's what we're all
about. We people come in, they dress up like a cowboy, cowg girls, they have their photos done, they take them home and they post them, they put them up on their wall where they remember their experience of coming to the Fort Worth stockyards for years and years
afterwards. We are history based. I have a historian on staff when we basically are the people who we're based out of uh Midlotheian, Texas and we make all the
costumes ourselves here in Texas and we are a very big fish in a very very very small pond. We make old-time photo costumes and equipment for the oldtime photo industry, but we also operate
studios. And when I tell people all the time that we are locationbased, it's an impulse item. They have to be able to see it. Any sign that is attached to the wall, you can't see from Exchange or
from Stockyard Boulevard. So if it sticks, if it it has to have some kind of sign that actually projects out in to that area so that you know that there's something down that way. Um and it creates an interest in what's going on.
Um so we feel like the um sign itself does not in any way touch or it actually enhances the window that's there. It
makes you look up and see a beautiful window and in fact um the only person who actually came from the commission to take a look at our operation looked at what you know came with the idea that it wasn't real happy with it. I explained where it was showed her where it was and
how it was attached and how we were going to be really showing off the feature of the building. And by the end of the time she had said, "Oh yeah, that really does look good." and walked away saying, "Yep, we'll have you approved by this afternoon." And then all of a
sudden, crash, nothing. They came back and said, "No, no, we can't do that." Well, that makes just no sense. It's absolutely historically accurate. If you look down and you look at our what our historian came up with, you'll see time
and time again picture I mean uh blade signs that come out from the building in front of windows in front of architectural elements and they mark the entrance to a building. It's not you know uh it doesn't mark a a wall. It it
actually is an area where you can come in and anything else will just create confusion. We have to one side of us, we have the um John Wayne building. And if we put it over there, they'll look like they're going into the John Wayne uh museum. If we put it on the other side,
it'll look like you're going into the Texas Cowboy Hall of Fame. It just doesn't make any sense to put it anywhere else. Um, sorry. I've just This is so important that uh our signs, you know, are going to make the difference between our us
making this a go and not um the signs are signage are not intrusive in any way. They don't uh and they they make it very very plain as to where we are and what they what they are what
it is what we do. So that's what I'm trying to uh say. >> Well and very well said and and thank you for that information. Uh hold on just a second. Commissioners, any questions for the applicant at this time?
No sir, it's not lit, but we only we close at 7. So there, if you look up on the wall, you can see that there are two two lights up there, but they were there before I got there. And they do they light that that area at night because again, it's kind
of an alley and it's very dark back in there. And it is in fact putting a sign that projects out lets people know that there's something going on down there. Whereas if you if you look down there and you don't see a sign projecting, you don't know that there's
anything there. And it actually create, you know, putting a a sign that projects out would actually create a safety. It would create a feeling that there's something going on down there because there's another business that's just opened up called uh Escapeology. Yes. And uh so we're you
know it would it helps us all promote that area and keep that flowing well. Other questions commissioners. All right. Thank you uh sir and for your comments and thank you for the uh supplemental information. I think that
all the commissioners had a chance to look at it. We had enough time before the hearing started. But anyway, thank you for this very helpful. >> Well, thank you very much. I I appreciate your time and and and consideration >> and after our discussion, we could possibly have some more questions for you, but thank you very much. Anyone
else in the chamber to speak on this case? >> All right, seeing none. Oh, I'm sorry. Please come forward and just give us your name um information for the record, please.
Melissa Wade Hunter, PO Box 470243, Fort Worth, Texas. Um, I'm here representing the North Fort Worth Historical Society uh on this case. We do oppose the request. Rodeo Plaza building was built in 1921.
Oh, and by the way, our historic society has is in its 50th year this year. Um, Fort Worth Stockyards National Historic District forbased code was a hard fought battle in 2016 and 2017 lasted for a
long time. Uh, I appreciate Fort Worth citizens and staff following its guidelines to protect the district as 10 million people are projected to come through this area this year and more and I'm surely it will increase. visitors
are currently um I'm sorry the Fort Worth this Fort Worth jewel is precious. Rodeo Plaza Boulevard, John Wayne Museum is down there. People go down there and they know that there's a lot of traffic through that boulevard. Escapology as
the speaker uh previous speaker has pointed out. Also Texas Rodeo Hall of Fame also that is the corridor from the exchange down to Billy Bob's. It's a main corridor. Uh so there's a lot of
traffic. There's a lot of visibility going down that area. On your uh east side of that area is the uh coliseum. So either side of the window would not be a problem. for visibility. Staff's uh report
utilizing the formbbased code and the secretary's uh interior standards states that new sign should respect neighboring buildings, including windows, not overpower them. This request would overpower and obscure a beautiful round
arch window and create visual clutter with the already approved wall sign. So those are many those are the reasons that I request this that the uh staff's recommendation be followed along with historic Fort Worth's recommendation.
Thank you. >> Thank you very much. Um anyone else in the chamber who'd like to speak on this case? >> Yes, sir. Please come forward. And uh we're running low on our time, so uh go ahead. >> I'll make it brief. Thanks. My name is
Joshua Hiles. Uh my address is 1608 Crimson Court in Arlington, Texas. Uh I'm the historian on staff. I have a master's degree in architectural history and uh American history uh from Baylor University and material archaeology from Auburn University. Uh just wanted to speak really quickly on the historic
providence of what we're doing here. Uh it's very important to us to maintain the visible flow of this window. Uh that is actually why they've chosen to come out of the center rather than on either side because we're trying to make sure that uh pedestrians from both sides can view the window in its full uh full
glory. Uh the reason we provided you with some of those photos is these are uh instances of historic uh districts including Memphis, Miami, places where these uh types of signs were historically everywhere. They were obsequious uh throughout you know cotton
row places like that. Uh and these are signed styles that have been maintained in those historic districts and other other cities. Uh so just wanted to speak to the the integrity of that and uh that's all. Thank you. >> Thank you very much for your comments. All right. Anyone else? Last call for
any other speakers on this case. >> Seeing none, we're going to close the public portion of the case and commissioners uh open for discussion, additional questions for staff. Um, I'll just say for my myself and from my own
perspective, this is kind of a tough one because I have the utmost respect and admiration for the staff's knowledge and expertise and not only in for worse historic preservation ordinance but also the secretary of the interior standards
as well as u uh the respect I hold for Northfor Historical Society and historic forth inc. Both organizations do so much to protect historic preservation in Fort Worth. But I am struggling with this one
a little bit um because we know these types of signs, projecting signs or whatever they may be called um are historically accurate in other places. um some of the ones that I'm that are
coming to mind in the stockyards and really the only one well the uh at Finchers Western and uh what is it now? Risky Steakhouse. Anyway, those predate the historic district and the ordinances probably that guide what we're looking
at today. However, there are some examples there. So, um I'm just kind of struggling with that and that's where I am. I second that struggle. >> I have a a question for staff. So, Mule
Alley is a very similar I mean obviously the drover is at the other end of Mule Alley from Exchange, but um are there blades sign is there blade signage up and down Mule Alley or is that >> Mule Alley? Probably does have some. I think a lot of those are more like uh
canopy like they have this little projection and then they're right on top. So, but there are a few um projecting signs there, but the projecting sign standards uh would limit to how many you can have along a facade, right? It's not just how much you're
allocated based on your frontage, but also you have to be so far away from the next one. So, um it's a little different in Mu Alley. >> Okay. And then also on this uh building facade where the other businesses or museums
are located, do they have blade signage like this along that? >> No. Along this building facade, there is no other uh blade sign that I noted. So John Wayne doesn't have one. Uh those are more painted and there's probably a wall sign there. And then if you go down
further, I think I might have a photo actually the So, there's nothing there that's painted on the left. And that's the Escapeology has a wall sign. All right. And I also have a question for staff and um
did I understand correctly in work session honor that um a projecting sign as the terminology is used in the staff report would be allowed here. It's just the placement of it that is at issue. >> Correct. >> Okay.
>> We would be okay with a projecting sign for this tenant space because they're still under their uh total allowable square footage. It's just the placement over the arched window that we are not that we denied the first application. >> That's why they are appealing.
>> Can I ask a sort of follow-up question? Um, based on the the argument for visual clutter, would staff prefer one over the other rather than both if if there were a projecting sign to to not have the the
wall sign. Is that a consideration at all? >> Well, we're okay with uh the wall sign. It's all under the allowable square footage. Um, what we recommended was more of a I'm forgetting the sign type. the one that hangs the shingle. Thank
you. Uh the shingle sign. Uh but that one would be limited to 12 square feet. And so um we're we're more looking at the placement as being an issue here. >> I have a question. >> Sure. >> Gentleman says that someone was there
who told him that it looked great to them and that should be approved. Who is that person? >> So, when I did the site visit, I went out there and said that the window looks great, but I think there was a lot a lot going on. So, it was a little bit of a
confusion there. And I hoped to be able to approve it administratively, but with uh the way the standards are written after that, we got some more information to them, did the project review, and then updated them on not being able to approve that. So,
>> okay. and a follow-up qu no well not a follow-up question but to be clear I've heard it but to be clear we are okay with a projecting sign simply we don't want it over the window >> that is correct >> thank you
all right good questions good discussion uh do we have any additional questions for staff or towards south towards Exchange Avenue. Thank you. Uh how many of those windows down is that represents your storefront?
>> I think their storefront is probably from that um I can't write on this, but the second window, two windows >> between the tree and the light post, >> I believe. So, I mean, I can let the applicant clarify that, but >> Okay.
>> Uh, yeah. Well, >> fourth one down. Okay. >> Just before it turns into the gray >> right there. That's his tenant space. And if you look at the There it is right there. 44T.
So, it's very limited. It's It doesn't go all the way. >> Are there any architectural features on that side of the building that would keep you from putting the sign on either side of that window, >> such as >> Let's have the applicant come back to the microphone if if you would to
address. So, >> are there any argument architectural features that would preclude you from putting the sign on the side of the building like some of the moldings that we see in the previous picture? >> Right. So, uh placement on that bust out area. I mean, we could put a blade sign
directly above that, but as uh John mentioned, it's almost on the John Wayne Museum side of the building. So, it would cause some confusion over, you know, where his leased space is and where this business is located. Um, and
then if we were to go to the right of that pillar, there's like a 4 inch bust out going up over the archway. Um, we What's that? >> Yeah. Yeah. >> Right. The The other bus out to the
right is is not on his building. Um, but if we were to place it to the left or right of the door rather than kind of like in the center of the window area, um, we'd have to look at something for that. uh that arched
raised area. Um figure out a way to install around that because we can't have one leg on it and one leg off of it and it be structurally sound. So yeah, there's not really many great options,
right? With with every viewing angle, you see at least half the window. But if it were on either side, then it would fully block from that side. If we had it the same height or our commissioners, um, more discussion.
>> What? Actually, sorry for the applicant. If >> Come on, back up, please. Applicant. applicant. Yeah. Or applicant, I guess, or maybe answer. Um, so if this were denied, >> would you just simply find an a location
that's appropriate, not on the window, to do a blade sign? >> That's completely up to John. You want to answer that question? Um, we're just the contractors hired by him and his business. So, >> if this was denied, then I would have to
go. I mean, I have to get something that projects out. So, I would then have to go and start looking for awnings, but an awning would block it even more. I don't understand how putting a sign in front of the door of the building that I want to enter into,
it makes makes it a clutter. It's not cluttered at all. It It actually is marking where the entrance to the building is. It it I I don't I don't get it. I really don't. And if I come up with some kind of awning that goes up
over that, um, it that would block the window even more. I don't I don't know how to, you know, we feel like the sign that we're designing is away from the building so that you can see the the window. We love the window. That's the
the history of the building is part of what we do. We've created inside. We have sets. We have an old bar. We have an old Victorian parlor. We have, you know, a ranch scene. We have a 1920s scene. And people get dressed in the
outfit. I mean, we are about history. That's what we do. That's that's, you know, my whole life is built around, you know, recreating history and making people walk away with a beautiful remembrance of their time at the
stockyards. And if they can't figure out where we are, it takes away the whole the whole meaning of it. I just don't I I I seriously am just beside myself. I don't know what else we could do to make it so that as you walk down, boom, there
it is. It's real simple. It's just simple. It really is a simple sign. It's beautiful and it's to the very look of that time period and that era. Yeah, go ahead.
>> So, the straight on view, uh, if you're trying to view the window from directly across the street, uh, the width of the sign is only about 8 in. So, it really minimally covers up any view of the window. And then, as John said, I agree,
it makes more people look at the windows. I've walked up and down that street many times throughout my life and never noticed the window until we proposed to put a sign on it. So, um I think it kind of enhances the building rather than obstructing it. So,
>> okay. Thank you. Uh let's close. Any more public hearing or public comment and commissioners uh discussion amongst ourselves or a motion? >> I I guess maybe this is a discussion point um and speaks a little bit to the
difficulty um in looking at these pictures. There's already some I say this, there are already some competing signage. The fact that bull the bull fighting goes across the plaza
itself as a banner, if I'm being technical, kind of looks like a blade sign, right? It has that same sort of attention drawing feature. The proposed sign to to my mind is more
consistent with the style of the buildings accurately than the escapology flat sign. Yes, that's a flat sign, but in terms of the fonting, that's a way more modern situation. And that's not to take away
from that building's loveliness, but I I guess the the real problem I'm having is reconciling the guidelines with the intention. No, good point. And I know one thing we
always have to keep in mind is that we are looking at these cases on a case-byase basis. and uh under the guidelines and there have been instances where we've denied certain neon signs because they didn't
meet the district guidelines. There have been other cases where we have permitted them even though they were they did not meet the district guidelines for various extenduating circumstances. So, just keep in mind these are always looked at
on a case-byase basis regardless of the decision today. If I may, yes, please. When I look at when I look at the the picture on the left, there is a
building or the part of the building that we're talking about is the rounded part of the building. Correct. Yes. Rounded. >> That's where the window is. >> That's correct. >> And on either side of that Whoops. Well, it went away from me.
But on either side of that, there is a projection. The building projects on either side of that door. Is that not correct? >> Yes. A small bumpout. >> A small bumpout. Mhm. >> And so if there were a projecting sign to the right of that building or to the left to
the right of that door or to the left of that door, it would clearly indicate what was inside that door. >> I agree. >> Okay, that's the way I see it. So we're not saying you cannot that the
owner cannot have a projecting sign. We're saying not in front of the window. That's correct. >> Do the rules allow for anyone to extend the sign in this case extend the sign out past the bump out uh a certain number of feet?
>> There are requirements for protecting signs. Yes, I believeing signs six. Is that what they're asking? Yeah. >> Two feet one foot to two feet. So within that
range. I believe that theirs is showing at so they don't measure that part but if it's 60 minus so it's about 10 10 inches that it's projecting out from that wall is what they're showing
>> there's latitude for him to go out two to two feet before the sign is observed and do we know how deep those or How far out those bumpouts come? >> I don't know. >> No, not at this time, sir. I'm sorry. We're not going to have any more public comment.
>> And um and this this sign is I mean it says 50 in. That's four four feet. >> It's about >> right. According to this what we're what we have in front of us right now we would
be projecting uh 60 in so five feet but the >> the sign face itself is is still just over 4T >> it's 4 by six the actual signage part you add on the
10 in we know the width of that sidewalk I mean I've walked right there before width of that sidewalk This is >> don't know the width of the sidewalk. I mean, it looks like minimum >> six, but they have um ornamental things
out there. I think there's like a a spur out on the sidewalk. All right, commissioners. I can't make a motion. >> I move to deny without prejudice. >> I second. >> All right. We have a motion by
Commissioner Peoples to follow the staff recommendation and deny without prejudice and a second by Commissioner Halden. Um before we take the vote, I'd like a
clarification on the number of uh yay votes that would be needed to pass that motion. >> Six. Six would have to vote. >> All right. So, we have a motion and a second on the floor.
>> Chair Herring, how do you vote? >> Yay. >> Commissioner Trager, how do you vote? >> Nay. >> Commissioner Peoples, how do you vote? >> Yay. >> Commissioner Tucker, how do you vote? >> Yay.
>> Commissioner Malone, how do you vote? >> Yay. >> Commissioner Halden, how do you vote? >> Yay. Commissioner Bzendine, how do you vote? >> Yay. >> Motion 5 to one. It doesn't pass. >> Um,
>> are you I counted six to one. >> Six to one. >> Oh, sorry. Six to one. I missed that count. Did I count everyone? Everyone took a vote. Got a vote. >> The motion was to deny. >> Yes. Motion was to deny without >> It passes with six to one. Sorry. Yes.
>> All right. That is and that was a difficult case, but we're going to need to move on to the next one. Hello, commissioners. Your next case is HCLC-26-073 at 2341 North Main Street in the stockyards.
The applicant requests a certificate of appropriateness for the following work at the non-contributing structure. Install a pergola structure at the east entrance or along the front here. Waiver from sign standards 7.4.10 10 for a
projecting sign at the east/front facade to extend 9 ft above the building where a projecting sign may normally extend only 2 feet above the building and angle the sign at a 45 degree angle where normally a projecting sign is placed at
a 90° angle from the front. A waiver from sign standard 7.4.10 10 for a projecting sign at the north facade to extend approximately 3 feet above the building where a projecting sign may normally extend only 2 feet above the
building. Between the posting of the staff report and today's hearing, the applicant has requested a continuence. Therefore, staff recommends a continuence to the May 11th HCLC meeting. And I believe the applicant is
here. >> Uh, all right. Thank you for that information. Um, is there anyone here to speak on this case? Please come forward and give us your name and address for the record. >> Hello, my name is Lindseay Coleman. I
represent TOAS located in Austin, Texas. >> Okay. And you are uh requesting a continuence of the case? Yeah, we just felt like we would like to get our design better aligned with eventually approved by the commission. >> All right. Okay. Commissioners, any questions?
Thank you very much. >> Anyone else to speak on the case? Seeing none, we'll close the public portion and continue on. And we have uh requests for continuance. So, commissioners, we're open for a motion in a second.
I move to support the continuation. >> Second. >> All right. We have a motion to uh continue the case by Commissioner Trager and a second by Commissioner Prison. >> Chair hearing, how do you vote? >> Yay. >> Commissioner Malone,
>> Commissioner Bzendine, >> Commissioner Halden, >> Commissioner Tucker, >> Commissioner Peoples, >> and Commissioner Trager. >> Yay. >> Thank you. Motion passes 70. All right. Thank you. Uh, next case, please. >> Your next case is HCLC 2653
for 11:04 Stella Street. The applicant requests a certificate of appropriateness to construct a new res new residence. The proposed design of the one-story residence depicts an orientation and setback that is consistent with the predominant character of the streetscape and the existing patterns of spacing, mass, and
orientation. However, several design and plan details should be addressed in order to make the design more consistent with traditional patterns in the district, including window and porch details. Having a regard to the foregoing, staff recommends the following motion. that a window section detail be submitted to address the
required recessing of the windows that must be um that must have a projecting sill and appropriate trim. That the front window elevations reflect paired windows separated by 4 in of trim. That the hopper window on the side elevation be changed to a small one one window to
reflect a typical window style in the district and the posts on the porch be increased to at least 8 by 8 in to reflect a compatible proportion of base to post in the area and that any adjustments made to the drawings be submitted to the development services department prior to the issuance if a
certificate of appropriateness. This concludes the staff report. >> All right. Thank you for that uh report. Is there anyone in the audience to speak on this case? All right, seeing none, we'll close the public portion of the hearing and
commissioners, we're open for discussion. Motion or a second. >> Second. All right. I may have misunderstood, but this there was not a continuence requested on this case, was there? >> No, this was to approve with uh staff
recommendations. Sorry. >> Yes. So, do you want to amend your motion, M Commissioner Hall? >> Thank you. We have a second. >> Second. >> Okay. All right. We have a motion on the floor to approve with staff conditions by Commissioner Halden and a second by
Commissioner Brisendy. Um, was that Commissioner Bzendai? Okay. Chair Herring, how do you vote? >> Yay. >> Commissioner Trager, how do you vote? >> Yay. >> Commissioner Peoples, how do you vote? >> Yay. >> Commissioner Tucker, how do you vote? >> Yay.
>> Commissioner Malone, how do you vote? >> Commissioner Halden, how do you vote? >> Yay. >> Commissioner Bersendine, how do you vote? >> Yay. >> Motion passes 70. >> All right. Thank you. Uh, next case, please. Next case is HLC-25-200 1120 East Can Street and the applicant
request certificates to construct a new residence and the the proposed project is also located in Terra Heights district. Uh the proposed design for the one-story resident reflects an orientation that is consistent with the predominant character of the restrictcape including
the existing pattern spacing, massing and building orientation. However, attached garage to the main structure are not allowed in the district. Also, the partial length from porches consistent with traditional porch designs in the area which typically
include partial width purchases at the front or integrated into projecting side forms. Proposed fistration including vinyl windows is generally compatible with the traditional window patterns found in the neighborhood. However, all regular windows should maintain a 2 one
height to width ratio to avoid introducing intro in introducing multiple types of reg regular windows proportions. In terms of materials, the proposed engineer lab siding architectural roof shingles are consistent with the
neighborhood streetscape. However, the double front door needs to be simplified to a single standard door. Having regard to the forgoing staff recommend the following motion that the request for a certificate of appropriateness to consure any residence
at 1120 East Cannon Street be approved subject to the following conditions. That all windows maintain a 218 height to width ratio and be limited to two types, regular size and small size. The additional windows be installed on the
right elevation. The side siding material reflects a 6 inch reveal in the four elevations. That the double front door be simplified to a single standard door and that the garage be detached. And finally the any adjustment made to drawing be submitted
to the development services department prior the issuance of a certificate of appropri. This concludes that report. >> All right. Thank you very much for that information. Is there anyone in the chamber who would like to speak on this case? Uh, please come forward, sir, and
give us your name and address for the record. My name is Norman Patton, 413 Cedar Street, Cedar Hill, Texas. I'm representing the owner here. Um, I'm not sure I understand all of the uh staff comments.
U but I guess uh first thing I I would say is that the front door is not a double door. It's a single door with a sidelight. Um I think it's partially hidden by the column in the front which makes it look
like a a double door but it is a single door. Um, as far as the windows go, um, I mean, we're we're fine with the staff's comment on the the windows. We'll make
those, uh, however they're required to be. Um, the the garage is not attached to the house. There is a roof connection, but the the garage is a freestanding garage.
So, if that piece of roof connection needs to be removed, we're fine with doing that. U we just like to see this get approved. Uh got a a home homeowner that's trying to get in this
neighborhood for quite a while and and uh we're trying to do whatever we can do to to make that happen. So, if there's a any other questions you might have about it or or whatever, we'll be glad to address that.
>> Well, thank you for that information. And uh it seems like there just may need to be some more discussion between you all and staff to clarify some of their um some of their comments here. But one thing or a couple things I did hear you
say is that the windows were not an issue. part. The staff's comments on the windows were not an issue for you all. The um connection uh walkway or whatever it is to the garage didn't seem to be uh an issue and I understand your
explanation about the door, but that's probably just more of a technical uh issue to discuss with them. But if we're able to approve this case today, it will be that all of these staff conditions be melt uh be met with further discussion
between you and the staff. >> Be fine. >> And it sounds like you're amunable to that. >> Yes. >> Okay. All right. Thank you, commissioners. Other questions for the applicant? All right. Thank you very much. All right. Anyone else in the chamber to
speak on this case? Seeing none, we'll close the public portion of the hearing and commissioners, we're open for a motion and a second. >> Move for approval of HCLC-25-200 with conditions as indicated by staff.
>> I second. >> All right. We have a motion to accept the staff report with conditions as noted by Commissioner Tucker and a second by Commissioner Peoples. >> Okay. Chair Herring, are you vote? >> Yay.
>> Commissioner Trigger, are you vote? >> Yay. >> Commissioner Peoples, are you vote? >> Commissioner Tucker, >> yay. >> Commissioner Malone, >> yay. >> Commissioner Halden, how do you vote? >> And Commissioner Bryson, how do you
vote? >> Yay. >> Thank you. Motion passes 70. >> All right. Thank you very much. Let's move on to the next case, please. And your last case is HLC-26-065 and it's the address is 1204 East Cannon
Street and the applicant is requesting a certificate of appropriate residence in the Turtle High district as well. The proposed design of the one-story resident reflects an orientation that is consistent with the predominant character of the streetscape including the existing pattern spacing,
massing and building orientation. The proposed building segment and driveway location align with the historic structure along the block. The proposed festration including vinyl windows is generally compatible with the traditional window patterns found in the neighborhood as well with the partial length front porch which is consistent
with traditional porch designs in the area. In terms of material, the proposed engineer 6 in L siding, architectural R singles and door are consistent with the finish texture scale material historically used with the neighborhood. However, the rectangular fixed window
above the main door needs to be removed and have in regard to the forgoing start recommend the following motion. The request for a certificate of properness to constru East Canon Street be approved subject to the following conditions. that this
rectangular fixed window above the main door be removed and the end adjustment made it to the drawings be submitted to development services department for the issuance of the certificate for appropriate staff report. >> All right, thank you for that information. Anyone in the chamber to
speak on this case? If so, please come forward sir and just give us your name and address and share with share with us any comments please. Alejandro D Alejandro Duran uh 2521 McLemore Avenue, Fort Worth, Texas. I just make the
appropriate um appropriations to remove the top uh square window. >> Okay, great. And you got off easy today. Just one thing that you >> But uh I was just watching the battle of the sign. I'm like, "Oh, wow. I didn't even know this anything like this happens." And I was just glad to join
and see something like this, you know. >> But you're okay with what you've seen here in the staff report? >> Yes, definitely. >> Okay. All right. Thank you very much. Commissioners, any other questions for Mr. Duron? Thank you. All right. Uh, seeing no one else in the chamber who I think may want to speak on
this, we'll close a public portion of the hearing and commissioners open for a motion in a second. >> I move to approve uh in accordance with staff recommendations. >> I'll second. >> All right. We have a motion by
Commissioner Trager and a second by Commissioner Brisendine to accept the recommendation of staff with conditions as noted. >> Right. Comm Chair Herring, how do you vote? >> Yay. >> Commissioner Trigger, how do you vote? >> Yay. >> Commissioner Peoples, how do you vote?
>> Commissioner Tucker, >> yay. >> Commissioner Malone, Commissioner Halden, >> and Commissioner P. >> Yay. >> Right. Motion passes 70. >> All right. Thank you. Thank you very much. Uh before we adjourn, uh one final
note that we uh should have addressed in the beginning of the hearing, but we want to welcome Commissioner Walter Peoples to the commission, and we're very glad to have you, sir, and thank you for joining us and being with us. >> All right. Uh with that, we stand a
journ. Thank you, commissioners.