Okay. >> There was no nobody down there, so I couldn't ask. >> You're off to a good start. always comes on in a hurry. Quiet, >> Jessica. I'm going to give everybody just a
couple more minutes before we get started so we can mute Corum. Okay, it's um we've got quorum and it is 2011. So, I'm going to go ahead and call the meeting of the January Historic and Cultural Landmarks Commission meeting to
order. Staff wants to proceed. Thank you. Welcome to the January 12th, 2026 Historic and Cultural Landmarks Commission. The Historic and Cultural Landmarks Commission requires a quorum of six members to be present and
available for voting. The following board members are present today. Chair Rick Herring, Vice Chairwoman Anna Katrina Kelly Gardner, Commissioner Kelly Drager, Commissioner Joseph Austin, Commissioner um Thomas Oliver,
Commissioner Tim Halden, and Commissioner Graham Brezendime. Staff present today are Laura Li Willlet, Mia Hoe, Anna Alvarez, Jefferson Praau, Andres Hernandez, Trey Kalls, Brandon Utterback, and myself, Laura Young.
Today's meeting agenda can be found online at www.fortex.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 that 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 7 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 procedure 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. Chair Herring, will you please call the
meeting to order? >> Yes. Thank you for those statements and the meeting is called to order. Do we have any announcements by staff? >> Um staff actually does have one that I remembered on our way up here. Um if you check into um the city council meeting
tomorrow, there is a resolution on their docket for designating the uh TXU power plant station as a highly significant endangered structure. So um that might come to you as a designation um in the next few months or so.
>> Wonderful. Thank you for that reminder. and look forward to that as it develops. Uh, commissioners, any announcements? I would just uh a by way of reminder, let everybody know or remind you that this Saturday 11:00 a.m. is the stock
show parade, Fort Worth tradition, and it's always a lot of fun. So, go and take your family and have a good time and then go on out to the stock show. Uh, that's all the announcements that I know of. So, we'll move on to the approval of the December 8th, 2025
meeting minutes. Open to a motion. >> I'll make a motion to approve the second minutes. >> All right. We have a motion by Vice Chair Kelly Gardner and a second by Commissioner Oliver. >> Chair Herring, how do you vote? >> Yay.
>> Commissioner Bzendine. >> Yay. >> Commissioner Oliver, >> yay. >> Vice Chair Kelly Gardner, >> yay. >> Commissioner Trager, >> yay. >> Commissioner Austin, >> yay. and Commissioner Holden. >> Abstain. >> Abstain. Thank you. Motion passes. I believe 6.
>> All right. We'll hear the first case, please. Right. First case is HLC-25-312 and the address location is 2025 Pearl Avenue. Um the applicant request a certificate of appropriate to demolish the detached structure of the demolition
delay designated property. Sorry. Z property of 2025 Pearl Avenue is an individually designated historic property subject to demolition delay protections. The property is located on a corner of the intersection of Pearl Avenue and Northwest 21st Street and
includes a detached accessory structure at the rear of the property. The primary residence is a Victoria vernacular house dating to circa 1904 1904 reflecting the early residential development patterns of forward. History
descriptions of the property as a reference a barn at the rear of the loft indicating that the detached accessory structure has long been part of the property and historically function as a part of the original residential complex. The expired deteration stab believe portions
of the structure could be stabilized or rehabilitated. Staff also consider secretary of the interior standards 2, five and six which emphasize retaining a proper historic character, preserving distinctive materials and repairing rather than
removing the trade features is the best option to consider. Although the barn no longer has its original windows and doors, it retains original sighting of the 304 elevations and the original form of the structure indicating that the key historic
materials and form remain and could be repaired. A condition assessment um submitted by the applicant confirms that the related state of the attached accessory structure nothing foundation settlement and termit damage. Despite these
deficiencies, staff believe the portion of the structure could be potentially stabilized or rehabilitated. On January 6, 2026, um interested parties met with the owner to discuss alternatives. S also anticipates input
from the Texas Historical Commission of the today's commission which will further inform preservation actions. Having regard to the forgoing st recommends the following motion the issuance of a COA be delayed for 180
days to a for an opportunity for the following exchange of information. First of all, the owner consider obtaining accurate estimates for rehabilitating the structure and consider working with the other neighborhood partners to find a viable
alternative to demolition or another owner. Secondly, that the documentation of the building be submitted to the planning and development department prior to the demolition of the structure. And finally, the staff report back to the HLC with an information report that
summarize the progress made in the search for alter attorney prior the expire of the delay period. And this concludes that report. >> All right, thank you for that information. Is there anyone in the chamber to speak on this case?
If there is, uh, please for >> Good afternoon. >> Good afternoon. It's good to see you all. I want to confess I did not sign a comment card. >> Okay. >> So, I love this project and this plan and carry on.
>> All right. Thank you. Um staff will note the presence of Miss Tracy, executive director of historic for Is there anyone else in the chamber to speak on this particular project?
Okay. Well, you can come forward. It's all right. We would ask you to fill out a card after you've you've completed your comments and turn it into staff, but if you'll give us your name and address for the record. >> Diana Rios, Rio S. My address is 1215
Northwest 21st Street. I'm the house that faces that. I lived there for 43 years and I've seen the barn and the decades deteriorate. When I first moved there in 1983, my neighbors had told me about the
historical significance of the barn. They told me the people that used to live there. They told me how the halls, the seuas, Mrs. Ham, who was the oldest resident
there at the time, would tell me about the barn. And the two ladies that still live there, they were the ones that were telling me about the horserawn carriages. One of the pictures you would see the attached right there. That was considered either
the carriage house or the horseless carriage house. So to me, it was historically significant, but in the years since it has come to great disrepair. Whether y'all decide to knock it down, I have no problems with
it. I would like to see a little historical marker there placed so people will know that that's part of Texas Fort Worth Tarant County history. So whether if he wants to keep it up the
present owner wants to rebuild it and make it a little barn again. I would prefer that. But I can understand it's great bad shape. It's tilting. It's just few months ago, my husband and I noticed
that someone had broken into that front window. We had to walk all the way up the street, knock on his door, and tell him, "Oh, by the way, did you know you've been broken into again?" So, my husband had to help him hold the boards in place while he screwed it in.
So whichever since I'm the house that looks at it all the time. I spoke to my next door neighbor whose main interest is the alley and he was more like well are they going to tear it down or are they going to fix it up? Y'all were going to tear it down. That way he can
move his trucks so that way it won't interfere with the construction or deconstruction. That's all I have to say. Thank you. >> Thank you Miss Rios very much for being here and for your comments. Um,
anyone else that wants to speak whether you've signed up already or not? Okay, seeing none, we'll close the public portion of the hearing and uh open for discussion, commissioners, andor a motion.
I'll just say that having a the entire property, not just the uh 1904 barn, is uh is unique in our inner city residential neighborhoods where neighborhoods have grown up around these
older um residences and their outbuildings. And we probably don't have a super abundance of these in the city, although they may exist elsewhere uh in some of the older neighborhoods. But um I'd like us to take that into
consideration as we discuss andor uh move forward. If no other discussion, then we're open for a motion. I move to uh to follow city's recommendations for a demolition delay for 180 days. >> I'll second that.
>> Okay. We have a motion by Commissioner Trager and a second by Commissioner Bryzendine. >> All right. Chair Hing, how are you both? >> Yay. >> Vice Chair Natrina Kelly. >> Yay. >> Commissioner Trager, how do you vote?
>> Commissioner Austin, how do you vote? >> Yay. Commissioner Halden, how do you vote? >> Yay. >> Commissioner Oliver, how do you vote? >> Yay. >> And Commissioner Bryson D, how you vote? Right. Commission pass. Motion passes
70. Thank you. >> Okay. Before we call the next case, just so everyone's aware of the action we've just taken, uh, we voted to uph hold the staff report so the applicant cannot demolish the structure for 180 days.
After that time, they may be able to demolish it, but many of us are hopeful that within that 180 days, basically six months, they'll find some alternatives, uh, repair or saving the structure. And as Miss Rios alluded to, it would be
nice to see this formally recognized in some way with a marker or some other uh, interpretive signage. But, um, with that being said, let's move on to the next case. Thank you. Uh the next one is a continue case
uh at CLC-25-226 at 948 Marian Avenue. So the applicant requests a COA to construct a new residence. Let's take a look of the site. So 948 Marian Avenue is the only vacant lot
located on the south side of the block between Evans Avenue and New York Avenue. So this is a site uh the building form space spacing mess and orientation for the proposed house
are generally compatible with the surroundings. Uh these are the surrounding properties. Uh these two are the uh two adjacent building of the site.
And um next one next next two photos are neighborhood buildings. These are all contributing buildings. Then we take a look the of the contextual site plan and elevation. Uh the the placement of the house
aligns with the existing pattern of the area providing a proper front setback of 26 ft, a west setback of 5'8 in and an east step back of 33 33 feet 11 in. the
proposed 10 foot nice 9 inch wide driveway overlapping with this existing two track driveway along the east boundary along with the guidelines. However, the information on the material
and paving area of the driveway is missing and should be included uh literally The proposed singlestory home use the same language as a brick house across the street at 957 Marian Avenue.
A horizontal roof line, a front gable porch with an arch entrance, a brick facade and stone essence. However, the gap porch and decorated front door
look overdressed for the block face. To be in accord with the existing style on the block, a simplified porch design at least 6 feet in depth is recommended. The proposed two finishes for the
columns may be changed to one material. The silite and the art deco mimicked pattern glass of the front door are not typical. This door can be modified to a single halflight or solid door as this
one. The main roof of the house harmonized with the neighboring buildings with its low profile simple shape. Both single and pair windows are consist with the traditional
fenestration pattern in the area. The siding window, the sliding window on the west elevation is the only one nonconforming penetration type and should be replaced
with a historically appropriate window. Additionally, the 4inch molum for pair windows indicate in the details is missing on the elevations and should be corrected to reflect this feature. Regarding the exterior material, the
proposed asphalt single roof, brick veneer wall and stone essence are commonly seen on the two blocks. Vinyl windows and fiberglass doors are acceptable as a one and a half inch
inset is provided. Having regard the following, staff recommends the following. That the request for a COA to construct a new residence at 948 Marian Avenue be approved subject to the following
conditions. One, that the front porch be at least six feet deep and be simplified to match the existing style of the block face. Two, that the front door be replaced be replaced with a single half
light door with plain glazing or a solid door. Three, that the sliding window on the west elevation be changed to a one over one window to reflect typical fenestration pattern in the area. Four,
the pave areas and compatible paving materials for the driveway and front path are be provided. Five, that all pair windows on the EV elevations be corrected to reflect a 4
inch mullion and projecting seal. Six, that any adjustment made to the drawings be submitted to the development services department prior to the issuing of the COA. This conclude the step staff
report. >> All right. Thank you very much for that report, Mia. Uh, is there anyone in the chamber to speak in regard to this case? >> Anyone? >> Uh, the owner is there, but she doesn't
want to talk. >> Okay. And that's that's fine. Uh, seeing no one to speak on this case, we'll close the public portion. And commissioners, we're open for discussion or a motion. >> Make a motion to approve with staff recommendation conditions.
>> Second. Okay, we have a motion to approve with staff conditions by Commissioner Oliver and a second by Commissioner Trager and that's on HLC-25-226. >> Okay, we have a motion and a second. Chair Herring, how do you vote?
>> Yay. >> Vice Chair Gardner, how do you vote? >> Yeah. >> Commissioner Tger, how do you vote? >> Yay. Commissioner Austin, how do you vote? Commissioner Hen, how do you vote?
>> Commissioner Oliver, how do you vote? >> Yay. >> Commission Commissioner Bryendai, how do you vote? >> Yay. >> Motion pass 70. Thank you. >> Thank you very much. And next case, please.
Thank you, commissioners. Your next case is located at 1201 Marian Avenue, HCLC-25-311. The applicant request a waiver from the Morningside Historic District design guidelines and a COA to maintain a 20 foot wide driveway at the front of the
residence in the Morningside Historic District. The request to install a new approximately 20 foot wide concrete driveway does not comply with the Morningside design guidelines or the Secretary of the Interior standards for rehabilitation. As a corner lot,
driveways should extend from the side street and the front yard should not be overtaken with paving. This ensures the original and typical lot layouts and streetscape character are retained. The applicant was denied an appeal in November by HCLC and is now asking for a
waiver from the HCLC to retain the driveway. Per the ordinance, a waiver is only granted if one, no reasonable opportunity exists to recover the cost of the work that is required by the design guidelines, and two, it is not
technically feasible to execute the work required by the guidelines. The owner provided two bids to reverse the work. Staff assessed using the lowest bid, which is approximately 6,500, that there was a reasonable opportunity for the owner to recover the cost of the work.
Given the work is on site versus an alteration to the residence itself, a reasonable opportunity exists to technically execute the work that is required by the standards and guidelines to remove the driveway. Therefore, staff recommends the following. that the request for a certificate of
appropriateness for a waiver from the Morningside historic district design guidelines and the secretary of the interior standards for the treatment of historic properties to retain work undertaken to install a 20ft driveway at the front of the residence be denied with prejudice. This concludes the staff report.
>> Thank you for that information. Um, anyone in the chamber to speak on this case? Just give us your name and address for the record, please. >> Hello, my name is Alex Havala. Uh, I'm a resident at 121 Maron Avenue. So, she
mentioned the bid. The lowest one was 6,500, but it's also another portion in that bid. It includes to put back the dirt, which is, I believe, another 2500. So, it's not 6,500 of fix the work. And
that doesn't include putting saw back because I can't just have dirt put back where the driveway was because then all that Sorry, I'm kind of sick because all of that is just going to wash out. So, you have to put grass back where the the dirt's going to be put there. There was another attachment to
that that bed on the right side. I put two attachments to that in one single PDF. It's not just one page. uh the one that has a $6,500 >> for the Salcetos concrete. They gave me two two bids. Uh one was for the actual
removal and then the other bid was for the putback of dirt. So it's two different pages. I don't know why only one page was included. >> That could have gotten missed, but you've given us the additional information. >> Yeah, it's another another 2500. >> All right.
Uh commissioners, any questions for Mr. Zavala? I don't have a specific question. More of um well I guess it somewhat as a question. Um you know as I mentioned last time that I was here at the last
meeting when you were here I wasn't here for previous meetings. One thing I just want to confirm with you >> is that when you decided to put in this driveway apron and do this work, >> you came to the city to obtain the
permit to have that apron >> put in, have your contractor put in that apron. >> Uh, so I called the permitting department to make sure I could first of all, uh, take away the city's curb and be able to put a driver approach and then be able to put the driveway in my property. and they confirmed with me,
yes, you just need to have a contractor that's licensed with the city of Fort Worth that's already registered with them, take out the permits to be able to do the work. And as far as putting a driveway on my side of the property, they didn't tell me unless you live in a historical district, you can do whatever you want passing the sidewalk all the
way to the front of your house. You don't need a permit for that. So, what I did was I found a contractor that's licensed and that's registered with the city of Fort Worth to be able to uh come to the permitting department and be able to take out permits. And that's what they did. And what happened? They
approved the permitting. The inspector went out there when they removed the curb and were making the approach and they approved the work to be done. And >> Okay. >> So, everything was approved by the city of Fort Worth. >> Yeah. So, I just want just for for the record just to confirm um because I know
how I'm going to vote um on this, but I you know, I just want to say um >> you know, it appears to me that you did do the right thing and and tried to follow all the proper steps, which not a lot of people do. >> So, I just just want to
>> All right, other questions. All right, Mr. Zalla, thank you very much. We may have some other comments as we proceed. Anyone else to speak on this case? All right. Seeing none, we'll close the
public portion and commissioners, um, we're open for discussion andor motion. >> I'd like to, uh, I know you just went back to sit down, but if you would, you and your wife wouldn't mind coming back to the podium.
Thank you for your patience as this has been a very tedious uh circumstance on on your part. Uh we appreciate as a whole the fact that you did your due diligence and you did what
you thought was the appropriate thing for this uh driveway. And let me just if you're questioning why we had you come back again is to give an opportunity for our staff because we're familiar with
their work and we know that they do respond. So we wanted to give an opportunity for everything to be balanced. Okay. Even within the unbalanced. All right. So I I specifically wanted to bring you up here. Thank you for sticking it out and
fighting for um yourselves and what you know you were told that was okay for you to do. Um that being said um my vote is that you were granted the waiver simply
because you did what you was thought was the right thing to do based on what you were told by the city of Fort Worth. So, thank you so much. >> I'm just gonna add to that. I mean, I think you could kind of tell from my previous questions. Um, I I I feel like
you did the right thing and I don't feel like that. You know, there was some miscommunication along the way. Some things didn't get handled appropriately um on the city side. um it is what it is and I don't feel like that that should be the burden of you as the resident
when you're spending a lot of money to improve um your residence um your house there in the neighborhood while it is not um doesn't flow with the guidelines from a historic standpoint um you know
we we as a city can't expect you to know more than the city staff does and you just want I will be voting to approve the waiver. >> Thank you. >> All right, commissioners. Any other
discussion, questions? If not, we'll we're open for a motion. You have the staff recommendation, but maintain a 20 foot wide driveway at the front of the residence in the Morningside Historic District. >> I'd like to second that.
>> Is that Commissioner Halden? >> Thank you. All right. We on HCLC-25-311. We have a motion to approve the waiver by Commissioner Austin with a second by Commissioner Halden. >> Thank you, Chair Herring, how do you
vote? >> Yay. >> Vice Chair Kelly Gardner, how do you vote? >> Yay. >> Commissioner Brisendine, >> yay. >> Commissioner Oliver, >> yay. >> Commissioner Trager, >> yay. >> Commissioner Austin, >> yay. >> Commissioner Holden, >> yay. >> Thank you. Motion passes 70.
>> Okay. And thank you again, uh, Mr. of all, Miss Perez for your patience as we work through this, but you'll be able to keep your driveway as is. And if you have any further questions or need communication, the staff is available to you. Thank you. All right, next case,
please. >> Yes, your next case is 1521 East Luda Street for HCLC 2539. The applicant appeals the decision of the historic preservation officer and requests a COA to construct a metalclad
carport behind the non-contributing structure where metal sighting is not allowed in the Terrell Heights Historic District. On November 5th, the development services department received a complaint regarding a metal carport which was constructed without a permit. Inspection
was performed the next day. On November 19th, the applicant submitted a certificate of appropriateness application to retain the metal carport as constructed with metal roof and metal sighting at the rear of the property. On November 21st, the historic preservation
officer denied the request for a certificate of appropriateness to retain the metal carport with metal roof and metal siding. On November 21st, the applicant appealed the decision of the historic preservation officer to deny the request
uh to retain the metal carport as constructed with metal roof and sighting at the rear of the property. And so our findings and recommendations are that the proposed request to retain the metal carport with metal roof and metal siding is inconsistent with the guidelines for materials in ter Heights.
Traditional materials used for accessory structures are typically wood, brick or stucco. The carport should use compatible materials which align with the character of traditional accessory structures in the district with roof shingles and wood or hardy sighting.
According to the owner, the structure measures approximately 25 ft by 34.5 ft and is 9 ft in height with a shed roof uh featuring a slight slope. structure is supported by six 4x4 316 in steel
columns each embedded 12 in below grade into concrete peers. The roof framing consists of 8 in 1.5 in flange 16 gauge perimeter C plland spaced at 6 ft on center which also serve as the perimeter
and one interior beam. The roof material is a 26 gauge R panel system attached using number 12 tech screws. spaced at 12 in on center. All structural connections are welded under standard 9 of the secretary of the interior standards for the treatment of historic
properties. New additions, exterior alterations, or related new construction shall not destroy historic materials that characterize the property. The new work shall be differentiated from the old and shall be compatible with the masking size, scale, and architectural features
to protect the historic integrity of the property and its environment. While the proposed carport is certainly differentiated from the existing structure, it is not considered compatible with the architectural features found on the primary structure and on accessory structures within the district. Therefore, staff recommend the
following motion. that the request for a certificate of appropriateness to retain the metal roof and metal siding on the carport which was constructed without a permit at the rear of the non-contributing structure be denied without prejudice because the request is inconsistent with the Terrell Heights Historic District guidelines and the
Secretary of the Interior standards for the treatment of historic properties and that the applicant work with staff to adjust the design to meet the guidelines and the standards. These are pictures showing the carport as built. This concludes the staff report.
>> All right. Thank you very much for that information. Is there anyone in the chamber to speak on this case? Uh if so, just come on down and give us your name and address for the record. And did you fill out one of the forms, the speaker forms? >> Yes, sir. >> Okay. Then if you'll just make sure I
guess staff may already have that, but uh welcome. And if you'd share any information with us. >> Hello. My name is Petra Hosa and this is my husband Jorge Munoz. We are the owners of this house. Um my husband built this port about four years ago. To
his knowledge, he had spoken to um one of the ladies that patrols the city patrols and he was told that as long as he built it and it was within his property, like he didn't have to ask for a permit. So he was under that
impression. Um it's been there four years and he usually he works he has projects that he works under there and so that protects his little trucks whatever he does there.
I built this carport like four years ago and then I never thought it was going to be a big problem do it do it. I saw several metal carpers around the neighbor. from me several. I took a few pictures just in case. But this that was the reason I never thought I was going
to need a a permit especially because it was going to be on the back. Uh but I got no problem to do like like what the city wants me to do. The problem I build that car for myself so I don't spend much money on it. So
basically for me to change it to be honest I would not have the money right now to do that to change it to you know the way the way they want it. So uh the reason that I would like to keep it is because I got
all my stuff underneath. I mean if I if I tear it down I probably going to have several thousands of dollars in damage because I have tools there. That's where I spend my weekends working on projects. Oh, and
I don't know. I think I think that's it. But that's that's the reason. I never thought I was going to need a permit. And also when we got the notice from from the city, uh we called the inspectors. I called the inspector right away. And then even the inspector told me, "Hey, it's not a big deal. Just go
get the permit. Go get the permit. Call for final inspection and I'll be there and spected and and ready to go." And then that's the first thing we did actually. We came here to the city try to get the permit and and everything to to get it legal and the way it should.
>> Well, thank you for those comments and I know other commissioners will have some things to say and it's certainly understandable you want to protect your tools and your projects and what you have going on back there and your vehicles as well. Um, just so
everybody's on the same page, the this commission, we're bound by the guidelines that apply to the neighborhood that you live in. So, we don't always have a lot of leeway as to what we can do or not do. Uh, but with
that having been said, um, you've spoken to some of the city people and hopefully you've spoken to staff and I think they would work with you on some alternative ideas, but that's all I have to say at this point and other commissioners may have comments.
>> Yes. Um, so are you not able to move your things out of the way while you >> Well, as you can see in the pictures, well, I like to work in projects like on I'm a journeyman electrician, so I only work there on the on the weekends and I like to work on classic trucks. So, I
have tools all over. I got my also the tools to uh land more and I have a I have a small term machine. I mean, I got tools all over the place. >> You can't move them. You're saying >> I don't have the place to to put all that stuff to be honest.
>> Not in the backyard. >> What about outside? It looks in in my opinion it looks like a simple fix. Um thank you for being willing to comply with what the staff is requesting. Um I'm sure I'm confident that you can in
order for you to avoid damaging your precious properties. I know how how you know trucks I like trucks too so I understand but I'm confident that you can move those items so that they will not get damaged. I'm also confident that
there this is this is could be an easy resolve as you work with the city to you know you know get it taken care of. It's beautiful but totally out of compliance. Only thing I would say is um because I'm
in that neighborhood as well. So uh are you aware of the neighborhood association that's over our neighborhood? If not, it they meet the second Monday of every month at the uh corner New York and Rosedale at the community center at 6. That's a good
place to get a lot of knowledge and information about the rules and regulations of our neighborhood. I just started attending those and you get more information about what's allowed and what's not allowed in our neighborhood. >> Thank you. Um I just Yeah, because it is
historical and I know it became historical after our house was built because my house is one of the few that are built from brick. I know like the historical portion of it got pushed like maybe a
few years after my house was built. >> Yeah, I know. Unfortunately, does like commit chair of Sanders don't have a whole lot of leeway on it. I I definitely understand what you're saying, but unfortunately there's not a lot of leeway that we have right now.
>> However, you did build the shed after It was designated as a historic district. Correct. >> Um I don't remember. I don't know what year it was set as historical as of like I don't have
>> built it four years ago. Right. >> Thank you. >> Miss Henosa, what year was your house built? >> 2004. >> Okay. Thank you both, Ms. Hosa and Mr. Munoz. appreciate your comments.
>> All right, commissioners. Uh, discussion motion. >> I'll make a I'll make a motion to even though I understand where she's saying, but I do make a motion to deny without prejudice. >> I second. Okay, we have a motion by
Commissioner Oliver and a second by Commissioner Trager on HCLC-25-309 to uphold the staff recommendation that the request be denied without prejudice. >> Thank you. >> Just want to make a comment real quick
now the motion's been made. Um I am going to agree with that motion. Um and just for the record, just want to be sure that it's clear that it is specifically, you know, this is what we are addressing here is
the COA and and we're looking at the Terrell Heights historic district guidelines. That's what we're bound by. And so that's why I'm going to approve it. Um, and that's what we're looking at here is strictly um as the
recommendation is made. This is specifically related to retaining the metal roof and metal siding. That's what we're voting on that of this. So, I'm going to All right. Thank you.
>> Thank you. Chair Herring, how do you vote? >> Yay. >> Vice Chair Kelly Gardner, how do you vote? >> Yay. >> Commissioner Trager, how do you vote? Commissioner Austin, how do you vote? >> Yay. >> Commissioner Ketchum, sorry, Ketchum's
not here. Um, Commissioner Rzendine, >> yay. >> Commissioner Oliver, >> Commissioner Halden, >> motion passes 70. Thank you. >> Okay. Thank you. And, um, Missos and Mr. Munoz, I know the staff will work with
you on a solution and I believe also a time frame on doing that. So, thank you for being here. >> Yes. Thank you. >> All right. Next case, please. >> Next up is HCLC-25-266
at 1909 Fifth Avenue. The applicant appeals the decision of the historic preservation officer and requests a COA to install a new style door that does not match the original at the contributing structure in the Fairmont Historic District. The door was replaced, here's the
original right here, um in September without a certificate of appropriateness. When asked if the applicant still had the door on site, it was stated that it was damaged and was thrown out. Therefore, staff could not verify whether the original door was damaged beyond repair and required replacement.
The style of the original door is unique to the residence, though Craftsman's type craftsman type, it featured a four uh it featured four lights and distinct hinges and hardware. The Fairmount standards state that if a damaged element must be replaced, the replacement should be matched in
existing in size, shape, configuration, type, operation, mountain and mullion pattern dimensions, profiles and detailing. While the proposed door in is craftsman style, it does not match the previous and the four light style and detailing like the vertical paneling and hinges.
Standards six and nine of the Secretary of the Interior standards for the treatment of historic properties also state that replacement features should match and that alterations shall not destroy historic material that characterized the property. Since there was no way to investigate the original door, staff can only determine that
original material was lost and that the replacement door is not consistent with the guidelines. Therefore, staff recommends the following. that the request for a certificate of appropriateness to retain the new six light craftsmanstyle door that does not match the original four-like door at the
contributing structure be denied without prejudice because the request is inconsistent with the Fairmont Historic District standards and guidelines and the secretary secretary of the interior standards for the treatment of historic properties. We also received uh two uh
emails from one by a neighbor and one by the Fairmont um neighborhood association um supporting staff recommendation. And this completes the staff report. >> All right. Thank you very much for that information. Is there anyone in the chamber that would like to speak on this
case? Not seeing anyone. Uh we'll close the public portion of the hearing and commissioners uh we're open for discussion and or a motion. >> Make a motion to deny. >> Second.
>> Okay. We have a motion uh to uphold the staff report and deny without prejudice by Commissioner Oliver and a second by Commissioner Bryzendine for HLC-25-266. Thank you, Chair Herring. How do you vote? >> Y. >> Thank you. Let me go back to the I was
making a motion for staff recommendation. So, let me go back and reread to make sure. What is it? >> That's clear enough. Okay. >> All right. And if I misstated that, I apologize, but we're all good. Okay. Thank you. >> Um, let's see. I believe I was uh Well,
we'll just start over. Chair Herring, how do you vote? >> Yay. >> Um, Vice Chair Kelly Gardner, how do you vote? >> Yay. >> Commissioner Trager. >> Yay. >> Commissioner Austin, >> yay. >> Commissioner Halden, >> yay. >> Commissioner Brisendine, >> yay. and Commissioner Oliver. >> Yay.
>> Thank you. Pass motion passes 70. Thank you all. >> All right. And with that, that was our last case. So, commissioners, any other comments before we adjourn? Thank you for being here today. And we are adjourned.