►
From YouTube: Historic Preservation Commission - February 1, 2023
Description
No description was provided for this meeting.
If this is YOUR meeting, an easy way to fix this is to add a description to your video, wherever mtngs.io found it (probably YouTube).
A
All
right
good
afternoon,
everybody,
it
is
two
o'clock,
welcome
to
the
February
historic
preservation
commission
meeting
and
thank
you
all
for
joining
us
today.
My
name
is
Taylor
fudge
I'm
the
chair
of
this
particular
commission,
and
today
we
have
what
appears
to
be
a
relatively
light
agenda,
but
my
goal
is
to
get
everyone
out
of
here
early
as
we
are
continuing
to
battle
cold
and
get
them
as
a
reminder.
Please
limit
individual
conversations
during
this
meeting.
This
will
ensure
that
commission,
members
and
applicants
can
hear
one
another.
A
Please
remain
quiet
until
you're
called
upon
and
when
you
do
speak
at
this
Podium
up
here,
please
state
your
name
and
address
for
our
record.
Before
we
vote
on
each
item,
we
will
ask
if
any
members
of
the
public
wish
to
speak
looks
like
we've
got
several
in
attendance
today.
Speakers
are
given
three
minutes
to
relay
information
to
commission
members
to
tomorrow,
but
also,
please
be
mindful
of
your
time
as
well.
The
agenda
and
documents
for
today's
meeting
are
located
on
the
prime
gov
website.
A
If
you
are
following
Along
online
select
the
agenda
on
the
right
side
of
the
historic
preservation
commission
meeting
to
see
what
we
are
be,
what
we
are
discussing
written
comments
received
more
than
24
hours
before
today's
meeting
are
posted
online
and
were
shared
with
commission
members
and
at
this
point
no
new
materials
will
be
shared
with
the
commission.
So
if
you
brought
something
with
you
today,
please
keep
it
at
your
seat.
We
cannot
take
it
and
accept
it
up
here,
Keith
or
Mark.
Can
you
guys
please
call
roll.
D
C
A
Okay,
so
we
got
six
people
in
attendance
sounds
like
we
do
have
quorum.
It
looks
like
procedures
for
today's
meeting
are
noted
in
the
agenda
if
anyone's
unfamiliar
to
with
this
process,
I
would
refer
you
to
that
particular
section.
There
are
two
items
that
we
like
to
note
specifically
regarding
the
meeting
process.
This
involves
certificates
of
appropriateness
and
appeals,
looks
like
we
have,
commissioner
poor
joining
us
up
here.
Do
we
need
to
do
another
roll
call,
or
how
does
that
work?.
E
A
Commissioner,
poor
is
here
and
present
regarding
certificates
of
appropriateness
after
an
application
is
approved
and
the
10-day
protest
period
has
expired.
The
HP
officer
will
mail
the
ca
to
the
applicant
City
Construction
permits
cannot
be
issued
until
the
ca
is
issued.
Please
contact
HP
staff
for
final
design,
review
inspection
or
to
withdraw
items
that
will
not
be
completed.
Regarding
appeals
to
the
board
of
adjustments,
any
person
aggrieved
by
a
decision
granting
or
denying
a
CA
May
appeal
to
the
Oklahoma
City
Board
of
adjustments.
A
All
appeals
shall
be
made
within
10
days
of
the
commission
decision
by
filing
a
written
as
written
notice
of
appeal
with
a
clerk
of
the
board
of
adjustments
that
takes
us
through
our
roll
call,
our
call
to
order
process.
We
are
now
Katie.
Is
there
any
news
from
the
office
of
the
historic
preservation
officer
anything
we
need
to
move
today.
D
Nothing
well
the
only
one
thing
to
report:
I
can
do
it
here
at
this
point
on
the
agenda.
Is
that
and
you
all
should
have
gotten
an
email,
but
we
have
a
date
set
for
a
commission
committee,
training,
March
24th,
it's
a
Friday
it'll,
be
in
the
morning
like
the
previous
one
and
we
anticipate
being
at
the
convention
center
again.
D
So,
as
we've
said
before,
if
there's
particular
content,
you
all
would
like
to
see
included
in
that
training.
Please
let
us
know
and
you'll
get
more
a
more
detailed,
more
detailed
information
about
the
agendas
that
gets
closer.
We
do
have
when
we
get
to
this
point.
We
have
a
new
request
for
continuance.
So
when
we
get
to
that
place
on
the
agenda,
we'll
report
that
out
perfect.
A
A
A
G
A
That
minutes
were
passed.
You
need
him
to
sleep,
Katie,
anything
from
code
enforcement.
D
Nothing
in
particular
to
report,
as
always,
you
guys
have
the
code
enforcement
report
included
in
your
packet.
If
you
ever
have
questions
about
any
of
those
notice,
there's
a
violation
feel
free
to
reach
out
to
staff
or
to
the
city's
action
center
for
more
information,
perfect.
D
A
E
A
D
Okay,
so
she,
commissioner
Corbin
vote
D.A
on
both
the
minutes
and
the
uncontested
requests,
and
we
just
need
to
go
back
and
clean
that
up
in
the
minutes.
C
A
D
F
D
Commissioner,
Jordan's
didn't
show
that
time.
Sorry
yeah.
A
Which
is
why
but
I'm
in
support?
Okay,
what
is
the
green
slash
through
mean.
B
A
A
A
G
E
A
I,
don't
know
that
we've
ever
asked
that,
but
I
will
is
there
any
anybody
from
the
public
that
wishes
to
speak
any
of
the
items
from
the
consent?
Docket.
A
Okay,
perfect!
So
we
had
commissioner
Gaines
motion
to
approve
the
consent.
Docket.
Second,
second,
second
by
commissioner
Remy,
please
vote
in
Prime
gov.
A
Remember,
commissioner
Corbin,
would
you
like
to
vote
Yes,
yes,
yeah
I
think
we
ought
to
move
to
just
a
verbal
vote
for
each
one
of
the
items
that
we've
got
coming
forward,
because
it
seems
like
we're
having
some
some
challenges.
We
only
have
two
cases
for
individual
consideration
today
and
we
will
go
ahead
and
move
to
the
first
one
which
is
HP,
did
I
miss
something.
D
A
A
little
fast
today,
okay,
so
we
are
moving
on
to
item
number
hpca
2000,
one,
eight
one
at
104,
Northwest,
20th,
Street,.
D
This
is
in
Heritage
Hills,
East,
towards
six
consideration
of
possible
action
on
application
by
Colton,
actually
for
Tim
Morton,
Trillium
Holdings
for
a
certificate
of
appropriateness
to
nine
revise
item,
one
construct,
Edition
required
and
10
revives
item
three
replace
front
porch
deck
required.
The
commission
heard
this
previously
and
approved
an
extension
on
the
ca,
but
continued
these
two
items.
The
applicant
has
indicated
that
they
will
go
back
with
the
front
porch
matching
the
a
previous
historic
condition,
and
so
staff
has
recommended
approval
of
that.
D
H
Please
Tim
Morton
104
Northwest
20th
excellent
good
to
see
you
again
glad
to
see
the
excitement
on
everybody's
faces.
H
To
have
you
here,
okay
I,
believe
I
I
uploaded
pretty
accurate
renderings
on
what
was
proposed
and
what
we
have
now
I
know.
I
heard
before
I
came
up
here.
Y'all
said
that
you
still
don't
have
the
information
that
you
need.
So
what
information
am
I
lacking.
A
Think
we
were
looking
for
what
you
all
have
done
kind
of
to
date,
if
I
recall
correctly
and
then
talking
us
through
kind
of
the
remediation
of
the
plan
that
you
all
have
in
place.
If
I
recall
correctly,
the
what
was
built
was
not
what
was
approved,
what
was
actually
previously
denied,
correct
or
modified,
and
so
I
think
for
us,
at
least
for
me,
I
want
to
work
through
what
that
remediation
looks
like
and
where
kind
of,
where
we're
at
with
the
scope
of
the
project.
H
So,
what's
what's
there
now,
if
you
look
at
what
was
originally
denied
is
actually
it
is.
It
does
differentiate
from
what
we,
what
was
denied
originally
also
by
error
on
our
side,
but
I
think
it
errored
in
the
right
direction,
from
everything
that
I
see,
measurement
wise,
I
know
that
we're
allowed
up
to
750
square
feet,
I
think
we're
at
8
35
now,
in
addition
to
which
takes
us
about
85
square
feet
above
guidelines.
H
A
H
Aside
from
we'd
have
to
redo
the
framing
the
roof,
obviously
all
the
plumbing
everything's
in
slabs,
so
we're
busting
concrete
again
we're
relocating
all
the
plumbing
we're
doing
the
electrical.
Then
it
doesn't
fit
in
with
the
rest
of
the
floor
plan.
So
all
the
interior
framing
is
getting
redone,
it
would
be
a
very,
very
expensive
fix
sure.
Put
it
that
way.
A
A
H
I
said
it
was
a,
it
was
an
honest
mistake,
and
you
know,
with
with
me,
like
I,
have
several
superintendents
that
work
underneath
of
me
and
we
had
two
sets
of
plans.
One
of
them
got
billed
and
the
crazy
part
is
the
one
they
wasn't
supposed
to
build,
still
didn't
even
get
built
right.
So
here
we
are,
but.
B
H
And
also
you
know
kind
of
like
on
in
my
defense
of
why
it
would
be
even
more
acceptable
to
keep
what
we
have
there.
If
you
look
at
both
like
it's,
you
know
it's
that
that
one
corner,
that's
missing,
that
was
supposed
to
be
blocked
off,
so
we
at
that
point.
We
were
going
to
pour
the
same
way
and
we're
going
to
leave
that
like
as
a
porch
or
something
like
that,
instead
of
having
square
footage
on
the
house,
so
it's
not
something
that's
going
to
be.
H
You
know
Road
visible,
it's
not
really
going
to
affect
the
look
of
the
structure
yeah
that
one
corner
right
there
kind
of
where
you
see
the
electrical
panel
is
the
part
that's
supposed
to
be
shaved
out
and
missing.
A
And
I
and
I,
you
know
the
extra
85
square
feet
to
me
is
not
a
huge.
It's
not
a
deal
breaker,
but
I.
Think
where
I
keep
going
back
to
is
what
kind
of
Precedence
is
this
set
going
forward?
What
unique
circumstances
can
you
give
this
commission
to
kind
of
help
us
along
in
this?
In
this
process,
I
mean.
J
Yeah
I
mean
I
think
to
to
cut
to
it,
so
we're
we're
serving
the
city
to
make
sure
the
guidelines
are
followed.
So
when
guidelines
are
not
followed,
we
need
a
special
exception.
We
need
a
reason
or
justification,
and
so
I
think
what's
lacking
here.
Isn't
and
staff
can
correct
me
if
I'm
wrong,
it's
not
documenting
what
you're
proposing
versus
what
was
approved.
It's
give
us
the
reason
why
why?
J
H
I
really
believe
that
the
having
that
extra
section
on
there
is
going
to
give
you
a
much
more
accurate
historical
look.
I
mean
you're
not
going
to
find
a
historical
home
that
has
what
was
originally
approved.
That
has
that
large
L-shaped
cut
out,
especially
on
that
side
of
the
house,
which
I,
don't
even
think,
was
well
thought
out.
H
So
really
I
think,
even
if
even
if
I
do
come
up
with
the
funds
and
be
able
to
fix
it
and
go
back
to
what
was
originally
approved,
which
is
going
to
take
even
longer
it's
going
to
stay
in
a
dilapidated
State
longer.
Obviously,
because
then
we're
going
to
be
saving
funds
to
make
up
for
the
error,
but
I
think
what
you'll
end
up
with
in
the
end
is
going
to
look
less
historically
accurate
than
what
we
will
have
here.
H
As
long
as
it's
finished
out
to
your
standards,
especially
just
because
of
the
shape
of
it.
Now,
if
we
were
bringing
the
whole
house
back
in
and
it
was
keeping
the
same
square
shape
and
kind
of
looked
like
a
house
instead
of
something
that
somebody
just
cut
a
whole
Corner
out
of
to
try
and
save
square
footage
to
me,
guidelines
I
think
it
would
do
the
whole
neighborhood
and
the
property
itself
more
Justice.
B
Goal
of
this
commission
is
never
to
create
a
giant
Financial
hindrance
for
somebody,
but
to
kind
of
echo
what
Taylor
said
about
the
precedents
that
it
is
kind
of
a
dangerous
one
to
allow
somebody
to
do
something
and
then
ask
for
forgiveness,
and
you
know,
play
on
the
sympathies
of
me
not
wanting
to
put
you
in
a
bind
but
walk
me
through
how
it
got
this
far
down
the
road
before
somebody
was
like.
This
actually
was
like
you
know,
I
mean.
H
H
That
you
guys
have
now,
which
is
going
to
be
all
of
your
new
revisions
and
stuff
and
stuff
that
I
have
personally
went
back
through
I,
took
the
cad
file
and
everything
from
our
architect.
I
altered
all
of
them
to
match
what
we
have
whenever
this
property
was
purchased.
I
was
part
of
the
original
purchase.
Part
of
everything
dealt
with
Bill,
who
it
was
at
the
time
kind
of
hey.
This
is
what
needs
to
be
done.
I
put
the
original
packet
together,
I
was
kind
of
in
correspondence
with
Angela.
H
We,
by
the
time
that
we
hadn't
had
all
of
your
framing.
All
of
our
plumbing
slab
was
poured
by
the
time
that
I
had
ever
even
recognized
it
honestly
and
at
that
point,
I
didn't
know
that
it
was
going
to
be
that
that
much
of
an
impactful
deal
just
because
of
the
way
that
it
was
shaped.
Everything
else
now
I
do
understand
how
stringent
everything
is.
Obviously
so
you
know,
and
again
one
of
them
forgiveness,
things
yeah.
Of
course.
At
that
point,
once
we've
already
had
it
framed
had
roof
on
it
like
okay.
H
B
D
H
I
did
put
in
the
elevations.
That
is
a
proposed.
What
it
will
look
like,
if
approved
the
reason
why
you're
seeing
windows
that
aren't
in
the
current
elevations
is
because
I
did
speak
with
Angela
about
your
guidelines
like
I.
Have
that
one
main
window,
if
you
look
where
the
kitchen
is
on
that
east
side
of
the
addition,
we
are
going
to
add
another
window
to
help
complement
that
one
so
that
you
don't
have
such
a
large
section
without
a
window
in
it.
H
D
A
So
how
has
the
commission-
and
maybe
this
is
a
bad
question
in
previous
years-
dealt
with
situations
where
it
does
appear
to
be
in
an
honest
mistake
and
I
just
really
I
really
struggle
with
it.
D
I
think
that
I
mean
your
decision
has
to
be
based
upon
whether
or
not
you
think
what
is
proposed
still
meets
the
guidelines
and
meets
the
intent
of
the
guidelines
and
is
appropriate.
And
you
know
the
commission's
job
really
isn't
to
evaluate
whether
it
was
done
in
good
faith
or
bad
faith
or
whether
they're
a
nice
person
or.
F
E
J
And
I
guess
that's
what
I'm
saying
is
it's
not
this
commission's
responsibility
to
have
that
finding
it's
your
responsibility
to
make
that
case
for
that
finding,
so
we
can
steer
you
in
certain
ways
like
looking
at
what
is
the
impact
on
the
overall
context
of
the
neighborhood?
What
is
the
impact
of
the
roofline
relative
to
the
adjacent
properties?
Is
it
visible
from
the
public
right-of-way,
if
so,
from
what
Vantage
points
to
give
us
the
case
on
why
the
85
square
feet
is
appropriate
for
this
property,
so
you've
got
to
make
that
case.
I.
A
J
J
Ahead,
I
was
gonna,
say
so
so
the
things
that
Katie's
talking
about
validation
of
materiality
validating,
that
everything
I
think
I,
appreciate
your
clarification
on
adding
the
windows,
but
but
answering
staff's
questions
on
Clarity
is
the
first
piece
and
then
giving
us
the
finding
is
the
second
piece
and
I
think
those
two
things
are
what
are
kind
of
the
linchpins
for
this
case
to
get
it
approved.
B
Yes,
it's
a
complicated
problem.
I
mean
I
personally,
do
not
have
an
issue
with
the
additional
square
footage
or
the
the
current
roofline,
as
is,
but
yes,
for
you
know
just
to
make
this
on
the
up
and
up
and
make
sure
that
we're
following
the
correct
process,
I
think
we
would
have
to
get
everything
answered
and
clarified
and
have
some
reasoning
behind
it.
But
I
just
I
think
it
might
be
worth
some
guidance
from
the
commission
while
he's
here
or
since
it
is
such
a.
H
So,
as
far
as
everything
else
that
you
have
in
the
packet
is
that
as
we
move
forward,
is
that
at
least
usable,
so
at
this
point,
do
I
just
need
like
a
written
statement
explaining
all
this
that
will
help.
This
is
why
I
think
it
should
be
accepted
kind
of
that
sword
or
do
I
need
to
keep
I.
A
Think
if
they're
so
I
think
one
we
can
approve
the
floor
today,
I
think
what
it
sounds
like
is
we
needed
a
continuance
on
this
Edition
I?
Think
during
that
continuance
period,
I
think
you've
got
to
come
up
with
unique
circumstances
as
to
why
that
85
extra
square
feet
was
built.
Why
it's
necessary
to
keep
that
there
and
what
it
you
know
how
it
kind
of
fits
in
contextually
with
the
rest
of
the
neighborhood
okay.
So.
K
Almost
like
kind
of
forget
about
the
old
approved
previous
and
now
start
fresh
kind
of
with
what
you,
what
you
have
and
make
sure
it
meets
to
the
best
of
your
abilities,
the
windows
and
everything
else,
except
for
maybe
that
85
square
foot
Edition.
You
need
to
make
a
unique
circumstance,
for
that
is
what
that's,
how.
A
L
H
L
H
You
mean
you
can
even
ask
her
I
revisioned
revisions.
She
would
send
it
back,
say:
hey
you're
missing
this
she's
been
super
helpful
on
that
some
small
stuff,
like
this
window,
is
actually
bigger
than
this
window.
I'd
go
back.
Look
at
my
elevations
go
oh
yeah,
you're
right,
I'd
resize
send
back
again,
I
believe
what
you
have
now
is
to
my
understanding.
That's
is
there
anything
specific
that
you
guys
see
that
you're
saying
hey?
This
is
enough
information.
M
So
when
you
look
at
your
original
approved
packet
and
we
look
at
what
we
have
now,
there
is
a
change
in
materials.
The
first
thing
that
comes
to
mind
is
that
you've
switched
from
the
approved
cementitious,
citing
to
wood,
siding,
which.
F
H
L
According
to
staff,
you
haven't
so
I
think
my
preference
would
be
to
do
a
continuation
and
make
sure
that
if
you
come
back
to
us
wanting
us
to
make
exceptions
than
having
that
paperwork
because
I
know
sometimes
it's
hard
to
get
them
all
and
I'm,
not
normally
that
a
sticker
to
make
sure
it's
all.
If,
as
long
as
we
can
tell
what
it
is,
but
in
this
circumstance
I
would
say
yes.
B
If
we
were
to
motion
to
continue
this
to
the
April
meeting,
to
give
you
you
know
more
than
five
days
like
Angela,
do
you
feel
comfortable
that
we
could,
just
you
know,
make
sure
to
really
really
check
all
of
the
boxes
for
materials
before
that
meeting,
so
that
we
don't?
Because
I
think
you
know
if
it
were.
B
A
B
J
Okay,
I
mean
just
my
opinion,
is
I,
hear
what
Angela
is
saying
and
what
she's
saying
is
I
think
the
guides
say
that
additions
are
supposed
to
be
differentiated
for
this
specific
case.
I
personally,
don't
have
a
problem
with
that
straight
wall.
Being
on
that
side
of
the
house
opposite
the
driveway.
It's
not
probably
that
visible
from
the
street
I.
H
And
it
does
have
it,
you
know
it
does
have
about
a
two
inch
inset.
So
there
is,
you
know
a
differentiation
between
the
two
I'd.
Even
talk
to
her
about
you
know.
I
could
add
in
like
a
faux
section,
it's
a
lot
easier
for
me
to
tear
all
the
siding
off,
but
then
you're
enlarging
this
the
footprint
of
it.
You
know.
So,
even
though
it's
not
adding
square
footage
to
the
home,
it's
still
adding
square
footage
to
the
footprint
of
the
property
which
pushes
us
even
farther
into
the
red.
B
B
I
would
be
in
favor
of
approving
it
I'm
not
particularly
concerned
about
the
you
know,
a
giant
really
obvious
scenario
on
the
west
facade,
sorry
I'm,
just
looking
at
it
and
trying
to
figure
that
out
that
doesn't
concern
me
I
just
want
to
make
sure.
Procedurally,
we
are
able
to
approve
this
in
a
way
that
doesn't
set
a
really
bad
precedent
and
that
everybody
here
feels
comfortable
with.
But
if
this
were
presented
to
me
today
and
you
had
all
of
the
materials
I
would
be
inclined
to
approve
it.
H
A
A
D
D
We
have
a
lot
of
pieces
and
parts
from
different
rounds
of
review
and
to
kind
of
gather
all
of
your
materials,
your
drawings,
your
you
know
your
windows,
all
of
your
Construction
Products,
like
like
it's
a
fresh
start,
would
would
help
staff
and
would
help
the
commission
to
know
that
we've
got
what
we
actually
need,
and
yes,
this
is
actually
the
product
that
we
are
using
today
and
then,
just
on
the,
as
we
were
looking
at
the
photo
of
the
side
of
the
house,
you
can
see
a
pretty
clear
break
in
the
roof
line,
which
is
another
way
of
achieving
differentiation.
D
H
B
Include
a
summary
of
the
project
and
we'll
obviously
have
kind
of
the
history
and
previous
applications
and
stuff
but
yeah,
just
because
I
think
we
are
all.
We
were
all
feeling
a
little
unclear
about
exactly
which
phase
of
this
we
were
looking
at.
So
I
think
that
if
you
just
all
you
focused
on
was
everything
that
is,
if
you
were
able
to
finish
it
in
the
next
three
months.
B
And
they've
also
asked
for
lot
coverage
in
here,
just
while
we're
going
through
it
making
sure
you're
aware
of
all
the
things
that
need
to
be
addressed,
the
site
coverage
hasn't
been
calculated
and
presented,
and
often
square
footage
does
come
into
play
on
you
know.
B
Maybe,
if
we're
going
over
a
proposal,
maybe
it's
relevant
to
the
lot
size.
A
A
E
C
D
E
L
A
A
D
This
is
located
in
Heritage
Hills,
Ward,
6,
consideration
of
possible
action
on
application
by
Jim,
Oliver's,
classic
Contracting
for
Andrew
zillner,
for
certificate
of
appropriateness
to
one
remove
deck,
two
construct
Edition
and
three
construct
deck
staff
recommended
approval
with
just
conditions
for
this.
For
all
of
these
items,
simply
regarding
submittal
of
a
few
additional
details,
we
don't
have
a
floor
plan
with
accurate
dimensions
of
openings.
D
A
A
A
A
A
D
D
We
received
too
late
to
include
it
in
your
packet,
a
revised
master
design
statement
that
addresses
that
attempts
to
address
concerns
about
the
proposed
parking
configuration
by
removing
front
yard
parking
and
instead
installing
a
second
driveway
on
the
other
side
of
the
house.
D
The
Proposal
in
summary,
is
to
split
the
lot
so
that
the
front
house
would
be
a
separate
lot
from
the
structure
in
the
rear
and
to
convert
the
structure
in
the
rear
into
four
units.
Instead
of
two
staff
had
recommended
approval
with
some
conditions,
the
structure
is
existing.
C
I
Fallon
Magnus
733,
Northwest,
22nd
Street,
representing
the
applicant,
always
causing
trouble
me
so
just
to
address
a
couple
of
things
that
Katie
said
so
the
existing
duplex
is
two
units
and
they're
two
bedrooms,
each
and
they're
quite
large,
and
we
had
proposed
there's
currently
there's
four
parking
spaces
in
the
rear
in
the
rear
of
the
front
house
and
so
changing
it
from
two
large
two-bedroom
units
to
four
small
Studio
units.
It
doesn't
I
mean
it
technically
changes
the
density,
but
it
doesn't
change
the
number
of
bedrooms.
I
It
doesn't
change
the
number
of
bathrooms
and
that
kind
of
thing,
and
so
going
from
two
parking
spaces
per
unit
to
one
parking.
Space
per
unit
is
still
in
line
with
what
the
city
typically
likes
to
see
from.
As
far
as
Planning
Commission
goes,
we
met
with
Janice
Powers,
our
Ward
3
planning.
Commissioner.
She
walked
the
property
with
us.
I
She
was
very
happy
with
the
plans
that
we'd
shown
her
and
we
had
discussions
about
the
density
about
adding
two
units,
and
it
was
her
suggestion
for
the
parking
that,
in
order
to
appease
the
historic
preservation
commission,
but
also
neighbors
and
those
kind
of
things,
removing
the
parking
that
exists
in
the
front
and
moving
putting
a
driveway
on
the
west
side
of
the
front
house,
what
that
does
two
things:
there's
currently
a
fence.
That
is
all
the
way
at
the
front
of
that
front
house
which
I
know
it
does
not
meet
current
guidelines.
I
I
As
for
splitting
the
lot,
the
reasoning
there.
Actually,
let
me
go
back
just
a
little
just
another
reasoning
for
adding
for
making
this
four
studio
units
versus
two
large
two-bedroom
units
is
once
these
are
fully
remodeled.
I
The
price
per
square
foot
that
we
could
rent
them
at
would
be
a
lot
higher,
and
my
recommendation
to
my
client
was
given
the
neighborhood,
because
this
is
in
Paseo
it.
We
really
need
more
one
bedroom
and
Studio
units
on
the
market.
It
is
very
hard
to
find
right
now
and
the
price
per
square
foot
that
these
would
end
up
being
at
if
they
were
two
bedroom
units
would
really
price
a
lot
of
people
out
of
the
neighborhood,
and
so
that's
part
of
the
reasoning
for
it.
I
I
Our
thought
was
that
if
the
front
house
remains
a
part
of
this
parcel,
then
it
is
most
definitely
going
to
be
owned
by
someone
who
is
just
renting
out
property,
and
we
felt
like
with
the
renovations
that
we're
making
to
the
front
property
or
to
the
front
house
splitting
it
off
as
a
second
parcel,
really
opens
it
up
to
be
a
an
owner.
Occupied
property,
which
we
felt
like
was
better
for
the
neighborhood.
B
They
would
be
living
the
owner
would
be
living
in
this
space.
They.
I
Could
this
would
be
for
resale?
So
if
we
were
to
leave
leave
it
as
is
without
splitting
the
lot,
then
the
likelihood
of
someone
buying
this
property
in
total,
both
buildings
and
then
living
in
the
front
is
pretty
slim.
That's
not
real
typical,
especially
in
this
neighborhood.
So
we
felt
like
splitting
it
off
allowed
us
to
sell
it
off
individually,
it's
more
likely
to
be
owner
occupied,
it's
probably
going
to
Garner
a
lower
price
because
it
doesn't
have
a
big
yard.
It's
probably
going
to
be
a
starter
home
for
somebody
it's
in
the
long
run.
I
We
felt
better
for
the
neighborhood
as
well
as
just
insurance
purposes.
It
means,
if
you
are
in
the
front
house,
you're
completely
separated
you're,
fenced
off
you're,
not
sharing
a
driveway,
and
then
it
allows
this
to
be
its
own
freestanding
thing.
It
doesn't
physically
change
the
boundaries
of
the
existing
property
of
the
existing
buildings.
All
of
the
language
that
is
in
the
master
design
statement
for
the
Spud
is
is
really
deferential
to
Historic
preservation.
It
also
really
doesn't
allow
if
these
both
burn
down,
then
what
it
allows
really
doesn't
allow
them
to
be
built.
I
Rebuilt
outside
of
their
current
footprint,
so
we
were
really
diligent
to
make
sure
that
someone
can't
come
in
after
the
fact
bulldoze
these
or
if
they
happen
to,
if
something
happens,
to
them
that
that
what
goes
back
in
its
place
would
be
appropriate
and
and
in
kind
with
what
exists
there.
This
building
in
the
rear
is
not
historic
anyway,
but
you
know
we
still
wanted
to
make
sure
that
we
weren't
opening
up
the
property
to
eventual
Redevelopment
that
doesn't
fit
within
historic
preservation.
Guidelines.
B
B
I
B
I
B
For
me,
that's
kind
of
the
main
issue
I
have
with
it
it's
just
we
have
you
know
and
I
understand.
The
lot
split
would
make
a
little
bit
different,
but
we
have
turned
down
people
who've
wanted
two
aprons
on
one
property
and
that
feels
in
conflict
with
some
of
the
things
we
normally
really
ask
of
historic
structures
and
neighborhoods.
I
I
This
allows
us
putting
another
apron
in
to
me
is
a
better
alternative,
because
what
we're
now
proposing
is
getting
that
parking
out
from
in
front
of
the
front
of
the
property
within
the
front
setback
and
we're
pushing
the
cars
back
behind
the
setback
which
puts
them
behind
the
front
of
the
house.
So,
if
you're
driving
down
the
street
you're,
not
just
seeing
two
cars
sitting
three
feet
from
the
front
porch,
that's
that's
I
know
it's
not
ideal,
but
it's
a
better
alternative
to
than
what
is
currently
existing.
I.
A
I
tend
to
agree
with
that
I
looked
at
it
and
was
thinking
we're
going
to
put
a
driveway
in
with
the
driveway
and
the
parking
spots
in
the
front,
and
it
just
felt
like
the
whole
thing
was
going
to
be
concreted
in.
Do
we
know-
and
you
may
have
already
asked
themselves
looking
through
some
notes,
but
what
is
going
to
be
the
lot
coverage
with
the
with
all
this
new
concrete
added
and
taken
away
and
all
of
how
does
that
kind
of
calculate
and
shake
out?
A
J
D
The
this
is
our
staff
report
from
previous
reviews,
so
I
haven't
looked
to
see
if
this
has
changed
in
the
current
MDS,
but
proposed
maximum
lot
coverage
in
the
Spud
is
50
and
I.
Don't
know
if
with
everything
that's
there
now,
if
they
would
be
meeting
that,
but
the
required
lot
coverage
in
the
new
zoning
would
be
50.
Current
zoning
has
no
maximum
lot
coverage
but
requires
40
percent
common,
open
space.
I
L
So
Fallon
you
said,
Exhibit
C
is
what
shows
the
proposed
new
driveway.
D
The
the
proposed
new
driveway
is
at
your
seat:
oh
okay,
not
in
a
computer,
okay,.
F
L
F
G
J
For
sure
I
buy
the
special
circumstance.
I
do
think
it's
an
aesthetic
Improvement
that
is
necessary,
while
multiple
curb
cuts
on
what
property
is
not
common.
I
think
that
is
preferred
to
a
parking
lot
in
the
front
yard,
so
I
buy
that
I.
Think
two
things
found
that
I
would
look
at
when
you
come
back
for
the
ca,
so
this
doesn't
have
any
bearing
on
the
Spud.
J
J
So
that's
something
to
take
a
look
at
and
then
the
other
thing
I
would
recommend
looking
at,
because
we've
had
a
lot
of
cases
where
or
not
a
lot,
but
some
cases
where
a
driveway
sheds
a
disproportionate
amount
of
water
onto
an
adjacent
property
and
those
kinds
of
things
just
be
aware
of
those
issues
and
make
sure
that
we
kind
of
get
ahead
of
them
to
make
sure
the
design
is
not
creating
a
burden
on
the
adjacent
properties.
J
A
J
D
This
will
go
to
Planning
Commission
and
it
is
anticipated
to
go
February
9th.
So
if
you
all
are
comfortable
and
you're
everyone's
on
the
same
page
about
what
language
needs
to
be
revised,
you
can
recommend
approval
with
the
condition
that
those
revisions
be
made
and
list
out
those
revisions.
D
D
B
I
J
A
K
The
new
drive
that's
proposed
on
the
west
I
can't
it's
kind
of
hard
because
it
doesn't
have
an
actual
like
full
Dimension
but
I'm,
trying
to
figure
out.
If
you
stacked
two
cars.
It
still
looks
like
you
have
a
lot
of
room
yeah.
I
I
The
goal
there
was
to
keep
was
to
have
two
cars,
which
is
what
is
currently
available
in
the
front,
but
we
wanted
it
to
be
behind
the
setback,
the
property
setback.
We
don't
we
don't
want
it
to
to
be
I,
mean
people
are
going
to
park
in
their
driveway,
it's
what
they're
going
to
do,
but
as
far
as
the
official
documentation,
we
wanted
to
show
that
we
were
attempting
to
get
it
out
of
the
setback.
I.
B
To
be
concerned
with
these
is
always
the
the
chaos
that
some
of
the
density
creates
with
parking
just
because
when
yet
there
are
tons
of
multi-families
in
all
of
these
neighborhoods,
but
not
everybody
drove
two
or
three
cars,
a
piece
when
they
were
built
and
not
everybody
had
teenagers
or
whatever
so
I.
Think
that's
a
really
valid
point
to
just
maybe
not
create
an
opportunity
for
there
to
be
several
stacked
cars
and
I.
K
J
K
J
And
I
guess
my
comment
on
that
is
whether
it's
two
cars
or
three
cars
you're
going
to
have
the
density
you're
going
to
have
they're
going
to
park
on
the
street.
So
it's
it's
dry
off
parking
off
street
parking
around
street
parking
to
me.
The
question
ends
up
being.
What
kind
of
gives
me
that
gut
check
is?
What's
it
doing
to
421
the
adjacent
property
of
the
next
door,
to.
J
To
the
West,
so
so
what
is
its
impact
on
that
property
is
kind
of
that
guide
and
whether
it's
36
feet
or
18
feet?
I?
Don't
personally
really
have
a
strong
opinion.
It
would
be
looking
at
it
in
the
context
of
what
does
it
do
to
the
neighbor
and
and
trying
to
be
a
good
neighbor
on
providing
the
best
best
solution
for
the
neighborhood.
J
Well,
I'm
trying
to
get
my
head
around
all
the
cons,
the
considerations
that
need
to
be
tracked
in
addition
to
the
staff
report.
A
J
I
think
that's
fair
I
mean
okay,
I,
think
that
covers
it
because
it
says
coverage
be
revised.
So.
D
That
condition
includes
lot
size
and
setbacks
which
are
being
modified
to
allow
the
lot
split,
because
right
now
you
couldn't
split
the
lot,
because
you
wouldn't
have
the
minimum
lot
width
per
the
base
zoning.
So
if
you
wanted
to
use
that,
if
you
want
to
support
the
lot
split
and
if
you
want
to
use
that
condition,
I
think
you
would
have
to
limit
it
to
the
coverage
and
open
space
requirements
be
modified
to
be
consistent
with
the
existing
development
and
the
proposed
I
plan.
K
K
Okay,
okay
am
I
making.
What
is
it
a
recommendation
to
Planning
Commission?
Yes,
I'll
make
a
recommendation
to
Planning
Commission
for
spud01466.
K
K
F
K
K
And
the
recommendation
and
the
condition
that
the
modify
the
parking
up
front
be
modified
to
eliminate
those
parking
spaces.
G
F
L
L
G
A
D
This
is
located
in
messed
up,
Park
Ward
6
request
for
our
recommendation
to
the
board
of
adjustment
regarding
an
application
for
a
special
exception
to
allow
Home
Sharing.
You
all
do
have
a
number
of
letters
from
residents
regarding
this
proposal
and
I
believe
all
of
those
have
been
sent
to
the
applicant
as
well.
So
you've
received
those
comments.
D
The
one
thing
I
wanted
to
note,
for
the
commission
and
for
the
applicant
and
for
anyone
in
attendance
for
this
item
is
that
the
commission's
purview
is
really
the
impact
of
Home
Sharing
upon
the
historic
character,
the
historic
fabric
of
the
district,
that's
what
they
are
going
to
base
their
recommendation
upon
and,
ultimately,
the
board
of
adjustment
is
the
deciding
body
that
determines
whether
or
not
a
special
exception
for
Home
Sharing
is
appropriate
in
this
location
under
a
wide
range
of
criteria
that
they
are
charged
with
evaluating.
D
So
if
you
have
concerns
about
this
application-
and
you
want
those
to
be
heard,
I
would
encourage
you
to
attend
the
board
of
adjustment
hearing
as
well,
because
this
body
is
only
making
one
recommendation
that
will
be
forwarded
on
to
board
of
adjustment,
and
that
meeting
is
tomorrow
in
the
same
room
at
1.
30..
A
O
Good
afternoon,
commission,
ladies
and
gentlemen,
commission
my
name
is
Taylor
Volk
at
827,
Northwest
17th
Street
I
have
been
a
resident
of
Oklahoma
for
12
years.
I
joined
the
military
and
I
brought
me
here
to
Tinker.
I
went
to
the
University
of
Oklahoma
and
I've
made
Oklahoma
my
home
I've,
always
dreamed
of
owning
property
in
the
historic
districts.
Master
Park
in
Heritage
Hills
were
the
top
goal
of
mine.
O
I've
made
that
a
goal
for
a
very
long
time,
so
I
admire
the
historic
preservation
of
the
area
and
I
I
intend
to
uphold
those
the
the
historic
look
wholeheartedly.
There
are
a
number
of
concerns
from
from
Neighbors
that
was
brought
to
my
attention.
Only
a
few
days
ago,
I
have
a
couple
things
I
wanted
to
ask
the
reason.
I'm
I'm
here
well,
for
one
thing:
I
would
like
to
respectfully
request
an
extension
on
on
this.
So
I
can
address
the
concerns
with
the
neighbors.
O
That's
a
big
priority,
so
that
will
be
I
want
to
address
that
with
you.
Let
you
know
that
that
is
a
goal
that
I'm
going
to
be
going
going
forward
and
I
would
also
like
to
ask
for,
if
you
have
any
recommendations
for
the
property
or
recommendations
for
the
Home
Sharing
application
in
general,
or
any
any
insight
on
on
this,
and
what
I
can
do
going
forward
and
make
the
best
decisions
under
your
direction.
O
I
hired
a
professional
property
management
company
to
uphold
the
upkeep
and
then
maintain
the
Integrity
of
this
sort.
Preservation
she's
here
with
me
today,
Beyond
me,
and
if
you
have
any
questions
for
in
particular,
she's
also
here
to
take
any
insight.
You
may
have,
and
that's
a
goal
here.
So
if
you
could
accept
an
extension
and
I
will
be
able
to
address
any
concerns
and.
F
E
What
could
happen
is
that
this
body
wouldn't
have
a
recommendation
for
the
board
of
adjustment
to
hear
tomorrow.
So
if
this
body
continued
its
recommendation
and
the
board
of
adjustment
did
not,
then
you'd
be
in
the
position
of
this
board,
not
having
a
voice
at
that
meeting
and
must
say,
okay
and
then
it
wouldn't
be
the
voice
of
the
this
body
of
the
individual
comments.
So.
A
D
D
I
will
say
that
I
think
that
yeah
typically,
if
you
need
on
an
item
that
we
are
just
providing
a
recommendation
on
unless
there's
something
that
you're,
you
know
like
the
Spud
that
we
just
heard
that
was
before.
That
was
on
our
agenda
several
times,
and
we
continue
that
and
now
it'll
go
on
to
Planning
Commission,
but
that's
because
they
were
making
changes
to
the
sput
and
didn't
have
a
final
product
for
us
to
see.
I
think
in
this
case
the
body
that
you
really
need
a
continuance
from
is
Board
of
adjustment.
D
G
D
Someone
from
the
office
that
is
representing
the
neighborhood
is
present.
P
Good
afternoon,
Caitlin
Turner
522
call
Court
Drive
here
is
Council
to
various
Property
Owners,
some
of
which
are
here
with
us,
and
we
had
previously
requested
continuance
so
that
this
would
all
be
deferred,
as
well
as
the
board
of
adjustment.
We
didn't
hear
back
from
the
applicant.
So
that's
why
we're
here
today
and
although
we
definitely
appreciate
his
Wellness,
his
willingness
to
meet
I,
don't
see
what
can
change
permitting
wise
and
other
in
the
next
couple
weeks.
We
would
request
that
this
go
ahead
and
be
heard
today,
perfect.
D
So
in
HP
you're
it
is
required
to
be
the
the
host's
primary
residence
and
they're
required
to
be
on
site
at
the
time
of
rental.
B
Have
you
been
I'm
reading
through
these
comments
and
there
are
a
lot
of
them
and
the
one
that
is
I
mean
in
general?
I,
don't
love
a
home
share
right
there,
particularly
with
this
many
people,
but
one
thing
that
I'm
reading
over
and
over
in
here
is
statements
that
state
you
are
that
you've
been
operating
without
a
home
share.
Permit
since
at
least
October
to
me.
That's
you
know
kind
of
goes
back
to
some
of
our
earlier
concerns
that
we
just
simply
can't
allow
people
to
Skirt
the
Rules
get
turned
in.
B
B
It
just
feels
like
several
and
I
apologize
I'm,
just
there's
a
lot
to
digest
here
in
these
comments
in
this
case,
but
yeah.
It
feels
like
everything.
That's
going
on
on
the
property
feels
haphazard
and
unplanned
and
incomplete
I
mean
the
permitting
the
construction,
the
the
concerns,
the
lack
of
planning
for
this
many
people,
I
just
I'm,
failing
to
understand
how
this
is
a
good
idea.
L
Okay
and
so
the
garage
in
the
back
that
was
demolished
and
the
new
structure
that's
being
built,
was
that
just
were
you
unaware
of
the
requirements
to
get
a
city
building
permit
or
to
get
a
CA
or
a
help?
Me
explain
on
wanting
to
build
apartments
in
the
back
for
additional
living
space
for
the
rental.
O
O
B
O
A
So
the
the
struggle
that
I
have
there
are
there
appear
to
be
many
continuing
an
ongoing
challenges
with
this
particular
property
and
I.
Don't
certainly
not
speaking
for
any
of
my
fellow
Commissioners,
but
it
it
feels
inappropriate
to
exacerbate
this
problem.
Make
it
you
know,
you
know,
make
it
even
larger
and
bigger
by
allowing
a
home
sharing
application
to
go
on
in
its
current
state.
A
Now
that
doesn't
mean
that
if
all
of
these
problems
were
you
know
the
construction
and
some
of
these
other
challenges,
if
that
were
fixed
at
a
later
date,
you
know,
I
could
certainly
see
an
application
where
we
would
take
it
and
take
a
look
at
it
and
review
it,
but
with
everything
that
appears
to
with
all
of
the
challenges
that
appear
to
be
there
currently
I,
don't
know
that
I
can
recommend
that
I
could
recommend
an
approval
and
good
faith
based
off
the
concerns
from
the
neighborhood,
the
construction
challenges
and
some
of
the
other
things
that
we've
uncovered
today.
A
L
I
think
I
appreciate
you
wanting
to
come
back
and
you
made
mistakes,
didn't
get
approvals
for
those
things.
So
I
appreciate
you
wanting
to
slow
down
and
go
look
at.
How
can
you
solve
those
issues,
but
I
have
a
concern
with
you
moving
forward
with
the
approval
for
Home
Sharing
when
in
reality
you
need
to
step
back
from
the
whole
thing
and
say:
let's
take
this
in
appropriate
steps.
So
that's
my
concern
with
that.
L
Can't
really
piece
Mill
it
together
that
way.
So.
O
The
the
building
right
in
the
back,
I
I,
would
like
to
with
the
architectural
designs
and
your
recommendation.
I
would
really
like
to
add
a
garage
I
I
do
not
know
if
that
would
be
acceptable,
considering
the
size
of
the
lot.
Those
are
questions
I
had
asked
previously
and
and
I.
Don't
I,
don't
know
if
that
would
be
acceptable
or
not.
It
seemed
like
it
may
be
unlikely
due
to
the
size,
but
the
first
floor
I
would
like
to
make
is
a
garage
or
shop
or
you
know,
storage
the
second
floor.
B
B
O
My
main
goal
will
be
to
rent
the
main
structure
of
the
house,
just
one
short-term
rental,
for
the
main
structure
of
the
house.
If
I
were
to
live
in
the
back
unit,
if
I
were
to
live
in
the
back
unit,
I
would
rent
out
the
main
structure
of
the
house
right.
B
J
So
I
have
a
question
for
staff
and
I
need
to
re-familiarize
myself
with
the
regulation,
but
just
for
contacts
for
you.
J
The
home
sharing,
has
been
an
issue
for
a
lot
of
cities
and
there
was
a
lot
of
effort
taken
on
the
front
end
for
Home
Sharing,
as
it
relates
to
Historic
preservation,
districts
and
so
a
lot
of
these
conversations
and
regulations
such
as
the
requirement
to
live
on
premise
as
your
primary
residence
all
came
out
of
a
result
of
those
conversations
which
was
a
public
process,
and
so
I
would
encourage
you
to
review.
That
is.
Is
there
a
restriction
on
density
with
Home
Sharing
as
part
of
that
effort?
I'm
not
familiar.
D
So
there's
not
a
restriction
on
like
the
number
of
guests
you
can
advertise
for
on
Home
Sharing
per
se,
although
Board
of
adjustment
will
often
include
that
as
a
condition
of
their
approval
as
part
of
the
special
exception.
There's
not
a
a
cap
on
that
in
the
home,
sharing
ordinance.
What
there
is
a
cap
on
is
the
number
of
dwelling
units
you
can
have
at
a
property,
so
HP
allows
one
dwelling
unit
per
house,
so
you
would
not
be
able
to
build
a
garage
apartment
here,
because
the
house
is
already
your
primary
dwelling.
D
B
E
You
can
you
can
do
that
and
when
the
application
comes
before
the
board
of
adjustment,
those
are
questions
that
are
asked.
They
want
to
know
how
many
people
will
be
in
this
residence.
How
often
will
you
be
renting
it?
How
long
will
the
guests
be
allowed
to
stay,
and
the
earlier
question
you
had
was
about
whether
there
was
a
limit
on
the
number
that
could
be
in
a
particular
neighborhood.
E
L
D
D
Condition
of
their
approval,
often
that
that
a
host
has
to
advertise
that
they're
that
these
are
the
requirements
for
parking.
I
mean
parking
on
the
street
is
allowed
and
we
don't
have
any
control
of
that.
But
they
don't
want
people
advertising
that!
Oh,
you
can
have
a
certain
number
of
cars
that
would
become.
L
Because
I
think
the
car
is
the
size
of
a
house
for
12
people.
I
mean
cars
is
going
to
be
an
issue.
We
had
another
Home
Sharing
application
in
a
different
neighborhood
and
that's
always
my
concern,
but
in
that
instance
all
the
neighbors
wrote
to
us
saying
they
were
fine
with
it,
because
there
was
only
two
places
and
so
I
think
in
that
situation
you
have
to
look
at
what
the
impact
it's
going
to
be
on
the
neighborhood
and
I.
Think
12
is
a
lot
of
people
and.
E
That
is
a
concern.
The
board
of
adjustment
has
looked
at
the
number
of
parking
spaces
that
are
available
on
the
site
and
very
often
Property.
Owners
will
say
that
it
is
their
rule
that
you
may
only
park
on
the
street,
but
the
board
itself
Katie
is
correct.
They
have
not
said
you
may
not
park
on
the
street,
but
they
have.
They
have
encouraged
the
applicant
to
require
that
their
guests
Park
on
site.
B
L
B
Because
that's
what
all
of
these
letters
are
stating
is
that
it
appears
that
you
know
no
one
really
knows
each
other,
that's
just
people
coming
and
going
and
it
doesn't
seem
like
it's
one
family
at
a
time,
renting
the
structure
and
I'm
just
curious.
If
the
ordinance
specifically
comments
on
that
there
are
criteria.
E
D
You
happen
to
have
a
report:
I
just
have
it
pulled
up
in
here.
I
will
find
the
language
here,
but
as
far
as
I
know
that
the
ordinance
does
say
you
can
rent
a
whole
home
or
rooms
individual
rooms
within
a
home.
That's
not
the
typical
model
that
we
see
on
if
you've
ever
used,
Home
Sharing
or
you
know,
Airbnb
or
VRBO,
usually
you're
renting
an
entire
house,
but
it
does
allow
for
someone
to
rent
out,
for
instance,
one
bedroom
in
their
house
and
from
my
recollection
of
it,
there's
not
a
limit
on
that.
B
I
just
for
me,
there
are
way
too
many
issues
that
play
here
way
too
many
people
who
are
opposed
to
it
for
very
valid
reasons,
and,
ultimately,
even
if
we
were
not
having
a
concern
with
you
know,
somebody
operating
without
a
permit
or
constructing
a
building
without
a
perimeter
approval.
It
still
to
me
feels
disrespectful
to
the
neighbors
and
the
neighborhood
to
be
operating
the
way
it
is
being
operated,
12
cars
on
the
street,
lots
of
noise.
B
You
know
it
just
it
feels
really
out
of
balance
with
a
neighborhood
in
general,
not
just
this
neighborhood
with
a
neighborhood.
It.
B
A
P
Wait
and
touch
on
commissioner
Jordan
chairman
fudge's
points
that
were
made.
You
know
this
commission
protects
a
district
that
requires
Extra,
Care
and
city
council,
implements
and
encourages
that
protection
through
passing
these
ordinances,
such
as
requiring
the
approval
of
a
CA
before
demolition
before
construction,
and
also
adding
that
element
that
you
don't
see
in
any
other
district
with
a
home
sharing
application,
which
is
to
require
the
property
owner,
are
the
host
be
living
and
have
that
property
be
as
primary
residence?
P
So
none
of
that
we're
really
seeing
as
being
in
compliance
with
here
from
the
staff
report.
It
appears
that
there
is
an
illegal
demolition,
illegal
and
ongoing
construction,
which
causes
a
life
safety
issue
due
to
the
lack
of
inspection
and
by
licensed
contractors
and
City
professionals
again
also
as
well.
The
applicant
is
a
property
owner.
It
appears
he
owns
about
seven
other
rental
properties,
and
we
would
argue
that
this
is
another
rental
investment
property
that
wouldn't
be
his
primary
residence,
no
hasn't
been
living
on
site
and
it's
already
been
advertised
on
Airbnb.
P
So
for
that
reason
you
know,
and
if
it
is
another
investment
property,
that's
fine
too.
Just
not
a
short-term
rental
in
an
HP
District,
these
aren't
cosmetic
issues
again.
These
are
pretty
serious,
permitting
and
code
issues
that
have
been
violated
and
have
not
been
in
compliance
with,
and
for
this
license
to
be
granted
to
accommodate
12
people.
It's
just
such
a
hazard
with
the
conditions
that
are
on
the
property.
Now
this
is
the
first
time,
I
believe
that
a
special
exception
application
for
Home
Sharing
has
been
presented
to
you
with
a
recommendation
for
denial.
P
A
D
Mr
Volk,
if
you
want
to
sit
down
while
we
hear
from
residents
and
then
if
you
have
any
final
comments
to
make
when
that's
finished,
we'll
let
you
speak
again.
Yes,.
A
Q
Name
is
Andy
Sullivan
I
live
at
915,
Northwest,
17th
Street,
so
a
house
away
from
this
one,
my
wife
and
I
I'm,
going
to
read
this
for
briefness,
my
wife
and
I
sue
and
our
two
sons
moved
into
a
dilapidated
house
at
915,
Northwest
17th
Street
in
1976,
prior
to
a
neighborhood
association
or
HP
designation
I
was
advised
by
my
employer
when
we
moved
here
that
that
would
not
be
a
good
idea,
as
it
was
a
bad
neighborhood
and
that
our
kids
would
have
to
go
to
private
schools,
so
that
was
also
prior
to
the
1000
block
being
closed
off
to
a
cul-de-sac
to
control
traffic
going
through
our
block.
Q
If
this
is
allowed
to
go
through
you'll
be
allowing
the
utilization
of
a
home
in
a
historic
neighborhood
as
a
three-story,
multiple
occupant
hotel,
with
two
apartments
behind
it
and
no
parking
lot
or
sufficient
Street
spaces.
We've
already
experienced
that
over
the
holiday
season
there
will
be
no
control
over
who
stays
there.
It
sets
a
dangerous
precedent
allowing
anyone
else
to
do
the
same.
In
1976,
four
houses
in
our
block
were
still
multi-family,
with
as
many
as
five
living
in
one
unit,
one
was
a
boarding
house
and
the
owner
was
murdered.
Q
The
first
year
that
we
were
here.
There
were
the
last
thing.
The
house
that
in
question
I
think
was
the
last
house
in
our
neighborhood
to
be
grandfathered
in
in
World
War
II.
You
could
have
home
sharing
and
that
was
allowed
in
our
neighborhood,
but
as
those
homes
sold
off
that
passed
on,
so
we
could
end
up
with
a
neighborhood
of
small
hotels
and
so
I'm
opposed
to
this
and
hope
that
you
will
continue
your
opposition
to
it
as
well.
Thank
you
for
your
time.
Thank
you.
N
Steve
Mathis
819,
Northwest,
16th,
Street
I,
can
see
this
house
from
my
bedroom.
I
walk
past.
This
saw
whatever
it
is
every
day
with
my
dogs,
it's
not
a
garage,
it's
an
apartment,
but
my
concern
with
this
is
I
grew
up
on
a
farm
in
Arkansas
and
my
granddad
used
to
say:
if
somebody
shows
you
what
they
are
believe
it
well,
we've
got
illegal
construction.
He
tore
down
something
without
permission.
It's
got
multiple
of
the
third
floor
of
this
room.
This
hasn't
really
come
up.
I've
been
in
this
house.
N
The
third
floor
is
a
self-contained
apartment,
I
believe
unless
it's
been
changed
really
recently,
so
this,
as
Andy
said,
is
really
an
attempt
to
put
a
small
hotel
like
the
Bradford
House
up
on
Classen
in
our
neighborhood
and
I
hope
that
your
denial
to
the
board
of
adjustment
is
really
vehement,
because
this
would
be
a
case
of
a
really
slippery
slope.
N
There
are
other
big
houses
in
master
Park
and
Heritage
Hills,
and
the
pressure
for
people
to
make
money
off
these
houses
by
splitting
them
up
and
doing
this
is
immense,
because
it's
a
great
neighborhood.
Why
is
it
a
great
neighborhood,
because
we
care
about
it,
so
I
really
hope
your
denial
is
vehement
and
and
specific
as
to
why
you
think
he
should
not
be
allowed
to
open
a
hotel
in
Mr
Park.
Thank
you.
B
And
with
that
I
agree
I,
you
know,
I've
lived
in
Mesa
park
for
10
years
and
I
agree
that
the
strong
language
really
needs
to
reflect.
What
a
giant
giant
problem
this
could
be
in
a
neighborhood
that
has
10
000
square
foot
homes
and
you
know
easily
could
be
divided
up
into
30
bedrooms.
To
me
this
is
the
most
concerning
home
share
proposal
we've
seen
because
it
it
does.
We
can
make
a
lot
of
arguments
and
I
know
that
I'm
generally
the
one
to
make
them
when
it
comes
to
Home,
Sharing
and
Airbnb.
B
We
can
make
a
lot
of
arguments
about
how
it
does
negatively
impact
your
neighbors
I
love
airbnbs
in
general,
but
a
lot
of
the
proposals
we
see
I
can
easily
come
up
with
a
lot
of
reasons.
Not
to
do
it
to
me.
I
can't
come
up
with
one
reason
to
do
this,
and
this
is
the
most
you
know
impactful
and
dangerous
precedent
to
set
so
I.
Just
would
ask
also
that
we
include
some
pretty
strong
language
in
our
denial.
Does.
J
B
J
Thought
you
were
going
to
do
that
before
we
get
to
emotion.
I
want
to
just
make
a
observation
from
all
the
letters
that
I
read.
So
what
I'm
hearing
is
and
and
I
think
the
intent
is
that
there's
a
correlation
between
whether
or
not
it's
Home
Sharing
rental
ownership.
There
needs
to
be
a
correlation
of
the
use
of
the
property
with
the
base
zoning,
so
there's
a
disconnect
there.
J
That's
currently
happening
that
I
think
is
causing
a
lot
of
tension
and
concern,
but
I
do
want
to
speak
out
that
a
lot
of
the
letters
and
and
maybe
because
of
the
context
it
read
this
way,
but
there
was
a
lot
of
anti-home
sharing
across
the
board
and
I
and
I
want
to
just
make
sure
this
commission's
aware
that
yes,
in
this
particular
case,
I,
will
also
support
a
denial
for
specific
reasons
relative
to
this
property,
such
as
the
disconnection
between
use
and
intent.
J
But
I,
don't
agree
with
sort
of
some
fear-mongering
of
Home.
Sharing
will
be
the
demise
of
all
of
our
neighborhoods
and
and
I
sorry,
you
were
so
eloquent
in
how
you
said
it
and
what
you
said
was
perfect,
but
there
were
a
lot
of
letters
in
there
that
were
much
more
wide.
Sweeping
generic
against
home,
sharing
and
I
just
want
to
make
that
point
in
that
distinction
between
there
is
an
appropriate
use
and
an
inappropriate
use
of
Home
Sharing.
Q
J
B
J
And
there's
a
element
of
emotion
in
this
case
that
I
think
comes
out
in
the
letters
as
well
so
I,
but
just
from
an
objective
standpoint.
I
just
wanted
to
make
that
distinction.
I'm,
not
saying
that
this
specific
case
is
that
those
comments
are
out
of
hand.
I
just
want
to
make
that
distinction.
R
It's
not
renting
out,
for
you
know:
120
bucks,
a
night
for
10
people,
I
have
kids
at
my
house.
There's
a
lot
of
traffic
coming
and
going
from
this
house.
I
do
not
feel
comfortable
with
my
kids
playing
in
this
in
the
front
yard,
because
there's
just
so
much
going
on
and
I,
don't
know
who's
being
vetted
to
live
in
this
home.
R
If
it
is
a
home
sharing
property,
it's
so
easy
for
you
to
go
online
and
say
you
know:
I
want
to
rent
it
for
the
night
and
God
only
knows
what's
happening
over
there.
So
it's
a
very
emotional
thing
for
me
for
sure
and
I
have
had
to
look
at
this
property
and
all
of
its
different
stages
over
the
last
eight
months,
and
you
know
we
live
in
historic
preservation
for
the
preservation
of
the
neighborhood,
and
so
that's
why
this
one
is
a
concern.
R
It
is
the
volume
of
people,
it
is
the
you
know,
just
the
utter
lack
of
respect
for
the
city
and
its
ordinances.
Honestly,
once
I
saw
the
garage
raised
and
everything
I
thought,
I
never
got
a
letter
to
come
to
a
meeting.
I
never
got
any
kind
of
notifications,
so
you
know,
and
once
I
contacted
the
HP
Commission
and
I
found
out
that
you
know
there
were
no
building
permits
whatsoever.
Of
course,
I'm
the
daughter
of
a
homebuilder
and
land
developer
and
I
have
I've
gone
through
the
permit
process,
myself
and
so
I.
R
Just
the
lack
of
regard
is
very
concerning
because,
if
you
don't
even
know
that
in
modern
times
you
need
a
building,
permit
I
mean
that's
like
homeownership
101,
so
I'm
just
concerned
that
everything
else
that
goes
on
is
not
going
through
any
processes,
and
so
those
are
my
concerns.
Thank
you.
S
I'm
Andrew
Griffin
live
at
8
30
Northwest
17th
street
directly
across
the
street,
from
May
27
and
I
have
met
Mrs
Volk
here,
I've
not
met
her
son,
Taylor
I
waved
at
him
once
and
I
didn't
get
his
attention,
but
I
was
never
told
what
was
going
on
at
the
house.
I
knew
it
was
had
been
on
the
market
for
a
while.
There
have
been
some
interested
families
to
move
into
it.
We
were
excited
about
that,
but
then
it
was
radio
silence.
S
Nothing
was
being
told
to
us
about
what
was
going
across
the
street
from
us.
We
have
three
young
children.
They
they
couldn't
go
walk
down
the
sidewalk,
because
there
was
all
this
construction
debris
blocking
the
sidewalk.
There
was
something
been
spilled
in
the
gutter
it
was
concerning
to
us,
but
I
understand
you
know.
My
father
was
director
of
city
planning
for
Little
Rock
Arkansas
in
the
70s
and
80s
and
I
spent
a
lot
of
time
in
historic
districts.
S
My
wife
and
I
chose
to
live
in
one
and
there
are
certain
you
know
things
you
have
to
follow
to
live
there
and
I
I
didn't
feel
Mr
Volk
had
come
and
introduced
himself
or
told
us
what
was
going
on
and
we're
right
across
the
street.
So
I'm
glad
this
issue
is
being
brought
up
and
you
know
I
I
know
there's
been
mistakes.
S
O
Take
a
moment
to
thank
all
the
neighbors
for
giving
the
Insight
so
that
I'm
able
to
address
these
issues
head
on
and
thanks
for
having
this
meeting
today.
This
is
very
insightful.
It
sounds
like
there's
a
there's,
a
possibility
that
this
could
be
something
we
could
pursue
in
the
future.
I've
written
down
the
notes
and
I
think
that
every
single
one
of
these
issues
that
we
have
discussed
with
from
the
neighbors
I
believe
we
can.
O
We
can
come
up
with
something
that
would
be
very
easily
obtainable,
but
I
hope
that
I
can
take
the
time
with
the
neighbors
get
to
know
my
neighborhood
better
and
through
some
recommendations
that
you
had
mentioned
in
the
conversations
amongst
yourselves,
the
idea
of
having
12
people.
My
goal
was
to
host
families,
mostly
just
host
families.
That
could
you
know,
get
together
for
holidays
and
get
together
for
for
big
events
is
something
that
I
was
looking
for
at
this
particular
property.
O
I
know
that
the
idea
of
renting
out
every
single
rooms
individually
might
be
a
big
concern
if
I
were
to
go
towards
the
direction
of
Hosting
families.
Would
that
be
more
more
appropriate
versus
hotel
and
and
ideas
that
I
want
to
say?
Can
we
in
the
future
in
meetings?
Is
that
something
that,
like
rules
of
us,
you
know
establishing
this
short-term
rental
that
that
I
would
understand,
as
rules
and
and
you
know
be
able
to?
O
A
Think
my
hope
is
that
you
would
work
with
your
neighbors
and
figure
out
a
solution
that
they're
comfortable
with
and
that
you're
comfortable
with
and
that
works
works
for
everyone.
You
know,
I,
don't
know
what
what
that
looks
like
or
how
that
conversation
goes,
but
I
think
that's
a
I
personally
think.
That's
a
conversation
between
you
and
the
neighborhood
association
I.
B
Agree:
I
think
that
that
you
know
Home
Sharing
applications
that
come
before
us
that
we
don't
have
any
reason
to
deny,
because
the
HP
neighborhoods
have
worked
with
the
city
to
create
an
appropriate
compromise
and
ordinance
regarding
Home
Sharing
in
historic,
neighborhoods,
and
you
know
an
owner
occupied,
single-family
home,
that's
renting
out
and
checks
all
the
boxes
on
the
ordinances
and
doesn't
have
complaints
from
the
neighbor
and
has
proper,
permitting
I.
Think
it
would
be
hard
for
this
commission
to
you
know,
recommend
a
denial
to
board
of
adjustment.
C
O
Did
have
one
more
question?
Yes,
sir,
if
I
may
also
the
question
of
parking
I
know:
neighbors,
are
concerned
about
parking,
my
that
previous
picture,
there's
currently
one
parking
spot
in
the
back
and
my
future
goals
for
future
planning.
I
would
like
to
ask
if
I
could
extend
the
driveway,
so
I
can
allow
three
cars
in
that
drive.
O
O
A
I
think,
without
seeing
the
complete
plans
and
having
an
application
in
front
of
us,
it's
really
hard
for
us
to
make
any
sort
of
recommendation
determination
or
tell
you
yeah.
We
think
that's
a
good
thing
or
a
bad
thing.
If
you
want
to
do
it,
submit
the
application
and
then
we'll
walk
it
through
the
normal
process
that
it
typically
goes
through
understood,
yeah,.
O
K
A
Think
I
mean
certainly,
if
there's
more
parking
spaces
on
the
property.
That's
helpful,
but
I,
don't
know
that
I
mean
I.
I
can't
tell
you
what
the
configuration
would
look
like
if
you
could
see
if
it's
even
doable
but
I
think
practically
speaking.
Hypothetically,
yes,
a
driveway
with
more
parking
spaces
is,
is
better.
K
J
And
and
I'll
just
say
so:
I
live
next
door
to
Home
Sharing
and
my
neighbor
came
to
all
of
us
that
were
immediately
adjacent
to
the
property,
and
he
said:
hey
here
are
here:
are
the
rules
that
I'm
putting
in
my
advertisement?
J
How
do
you
guys
feel
about
this?
What
additional
rules
would
you
like
me
to
in
and
put
in
there?
He
followed
all
the
processes
you
got
a
CA
I
mean
he's
done
everything
on
the
up
and
up
and
there's
no
issues
and
and
and
we
feel
great
about
it
and
the
property
is
home
sharing
in
it
and
it's
it's
great.
It
doesn't
negatively
affect
the
end.
The
neighborhood
at
all.
J
What
I'm
hearing
today
and
I
hope
that
your
your
claims
are
genuine
about
wanting
to
remedy
some
of
the
missteps,
but
I
would
start
with
your
neighbors
and
what
what
is
going
to
make
them
comfortable
with
making
this
a
home
sharing
property?
If,
if
that's
your,
if
that's
your
end
goal,
you
know
it
may
be
something:
that's
a
lot
less
Revenue
than
you're
comfortable
with,
but
a
lot
of
these
questions
on
what
are
we
comfortable
with
I
mean
I?
J
B
E
G
F
D
You
make
okay,
so
we
have
yeah
in
the
staff
report.
We
have
a
recommendation
drafted
with
comments
enlisted
three
comments
related
to
this
application,
and
you
could
certainly
add
to
that.
If
you
felt
like
that
was
helpful,.
B
Okay,
so
I
would
recommend
to
the
board
of
adjustment
that
BOA,
15218
or
sorry.
D
Then
sorry,
this
is
one
seven.
Oh,
it
is
one
five
two
one,
eight
sorry.
B
About
that
one,
five,
two
one
eight
I,
would
recommend
a
denial
of
this
to
the
board
of
adjustment
on
a
request
for
a
special
exception
in
the
historic
preservation
District
regarding
Home
Sharing.
At
this
address
with
the
I
guess,
the
findings
in
is:
would
these
be
considered
findings
or
recommendations
in
the
staff
report
and
with
the
further
notation
that
the
lack
of
permitting
on
the
project
and
the
lack
of
appropriate
Cas
and
the
project
that
is
currently
underway?
B
I'd
award
this
in
a
in
this
only
amplifying
the
problems
that
have
been
noted
in
today's
commission
hearing.
A
A
C
A
There
we
go
all
right
that
recommendation
for
denial
was
passed
unanimously.
A
D
This
is
a
request
for
recommendations
of
the
board
of
adjustment
on
an
application
for
Home
Sharing.
This
is
one
that
is
located
in
an
HL
District,
which,
as
we've
discussed
before,
does
not
require
the
home
the
host
to
be
that
for
it
to
be
their
primary
residence
and
they're
not
required
to
be
on
site
staff,
recommended
approval
for
this
one.
There's
no
indication
that
the
proposed
Home
Sharing
would
be
in
conflict
with
the
historic
character
of
the
property
or
would
have
an
adverse
effect
on
the
district.
A
L
I'll
make
a
motion
approval
well
as
soon
as
I
can
find
it.
Okay
for
I'm
of
recommendation
of
approval
for
boa
15244.
B
A
Commissioner
Gordon
I
almost
called
you
Commissioner
Gordon,
but
it's
commissioner
Jordan.
Let's
all
vote,
however,
you
see
fit.
G
F
A
Okay,
let's
see
we
are
going
to
move
on
to
I,
think
communication
and
reports.
We
had
eight
items.
I'm
gonna
do
anything
with
those
Katie.
D
D
That
is
related
to
the
project
with
we
had
a
CA
and
also
an
Spud
for
this
property
that
the
SPD
that
you
heard
just
today.
There
was
discussion
the
last
time
about
whether
or
not
they
were
going
to
relocate
a
historic
window
on
the
house
and
they
withdrew
the
item
to
relocate
that
window.
So
they're
going
to
leave
that
one,
as
is
okay,.
E
A
Let's
see,
give
me
one
second,
the
next
regularly
scheduled
meeting
for
the
historic
preservation
commission
is
Wednesday
March,
1st
2
p.m.
Right
here
in
municip,
municipal
building
of
city
council
chambers,
new
applications
for
the
March
meeting
will
received
January
31st
new
information
on
projects
continued
from
today's
meeting
to
the
upcoming
meeting
must
be
submitted
to
staff
by
4
pm
Tuesday
February
7th
2023.
The
next
regularly
scheduled
workshop
for
historic
preservation.