►
From YouTube: Historic Preservation January 4, 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
B
Thank
you
good
afternoon,
everybody
Welcome
to
the
January
historic
preservation,
Commission
meeting
and
thank
you
for
joining
us
today.
My
name
is
Taylor
fudge:
I'm
the
chair
of
the
historic
preservation
commission,
typical
of
HP.
We
do
have
a
full
agenda
and
it's
my
goal
to
get
everybody
out
of
here
early
today.
B
As
a
reminder,
please
limit
individual
conversations
during
this
meeting.
This
will
ensure
that
commission,
members
and
applicants
can
hear
one
another.
Please
remain
quiet
until
you
are
called
upon
when
you
do
speak
at
the
podium
right
up
here
or
here,
preferably
up
here.
Please
state
your
name
and
address
for
our
records
before
the
commission
votes
on
each
item.
We
will
ask
if
any
members
of
the
public
wish
to
speak.
Speakers
will
be
given
three
minutes
to
relay
information
to
the
commission.
Members
so
be
thorough,
but
also
be
mindful
of
your
time.
B
The
agenda
and
documents
for
today's
meeting
are
located
on
the
prime
gov
website.
If
you're,
following
along
select
agenda
on
the
right
hand,
side
of
historic
preservation,
commission
meeting
to
see
the
items
being
discussed,
written
comments
receive
more
than
24
hours
before
today's
meeting
are
posted
online
and
were
shared
with
commission
commission
members.
At
this
point,
new
materials
may
not
be
shared
with
the
commission.
So
if
you
brought
new
material
with
you
that
we
have
not
seen,
please
keep
that
at
your
seat.
We
cannot
accept
and
review
that
Mark.
Can
you
please
call
roll
foreign.
C
B
You
procedures
for
today's
meeting
are
noted
in
the
agenda
for
anyone
unfamiliar
with
the
process.
Please
refer
to
that
section.
There
are
two
items
we
specifically
like
to
note
regarding
this
meeting
process
and
those
involve
certificates
of
appropriateness
and
appeals
regarding
certificates
of
appropriateness
after
an
application
has
been
approved
in
the
10-day
protest
period
has
expired,
the
HP
officer
will
mail
the
certificate
of
appropriateness
to
the
applicant
City
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.
B
Regarding
appeals
to
the
board
of
adjustment,
Board
of
adjustments,
any
person
aggrieved
by
a
decision
granting
or
denying
a
certificate
of
appropriateness,
May
appeal
to
the
Oklahoma
City
Board
of
adjustments.
All
appeals
shall
be
made
within
10
days
of
the
commission
by
sorry
10
days
of
the
commission
decision
by
filing
written
as
written
notice
of
appeal
with
the
clerk
of
the
board
of
adjustments.
B
E
You
might
have
noticed.
Desiree
has
left
us
she's
taken
a
position
with
the
state
of
Oklahoma,
we're
very
excited
for
her,
but
sad
to
see
her
go.
Mark
is
filling
in
in
her
absence
and
sitting
next
to
Mark
is
Keith
Daniels.
Who
is
her
replacement?
He
officially
starts
Friday,
but
We
snuck
him
in
to
get
a
little
preview
of
HP.
So
hopefully
we
don't
scare
him
off
today
before
he
even
officially
starts,
but
welcome
Keith
and
thank
you
Mark
for
your
help.
Perfect.
B
Thank
you.
Welcome
Keith.
Let's
see
we'll
move
on
to
item
number
three
then
accepting
of
the
minutes
oh
looks
like
we
have
commissioner
Remy,
who
is
joining
us
now.
Do
we
need
to
do
another
Quorum
call,
or
how
do
we
need
to
make
sure
that
that's
document,
okay,
yeah
Let's,
see
we
will
move
on
to
acceptance
of
the
minutes?
Have
my
fellow
Commissioners
had
a
chance
to
review
the
minutes
from
the
December
7th
meeting
and
if
so,
do
we
have
any
questions
or
perhaps
a
motion
to
accept
or
modify.
E
E
B
B
E
Actually,
for
Tim
Morton,
Trillium
Holdings
for
certificate
of
appropriateness
to
eight
request,
extension
to
hpca,
20-181,
9,
revision
of
item,
one
construct,
Edition
required
and
10
revision
of
item
three
replace
front
porch
deck
required.
So
this
is
a
case
that
was
previously
approved
by
the
commission.
They've
had
one
administrative
extension
for
six
months
and
now
they're
back
for
a
full
year
extension,
which
has
to
go
to
Commission.
The
extension
is
for
the
ca,
as
previously
approved.
E
E
What's
there
doesn't
seem
to
match
the
documentation
we
have
or
the
documentation
of
what
was
approved
previously
and
then
on
the
deck
that
has
been
installed
in
such
a
manner.
That
is
not
typical
of
a
front
porch
and
doesn't
replicate
the
porch
that
existed
previously,
and
you
do
have
comments
from
the
neighborhood
association
on
this
item.
E
B
B
So
it
looks
like
in
this
particular
case
we
do
have
a
continuance.
I'm
sorry
they've
been
recommended
approval
on
the
continuance
for
your
ca.
I,
don't
particularly
see
any
major
challenges
with
providing
the
continuance.
I
do
know
that,
from
my
own
perspective,
there
appear
to
be
some
concerns
with
the
build
out
on
the
house
that
that
are
significantly
different
from
what
was
originally
approved,
and
so
we'd
love
to
hear
your
comments
on
that
and
kind
of
what
the
prevailing
thought
was
there
and
kind
of
where,
where
the
project
is
headed.
If
that's
all
right.
I
I
We
did
a
second
revision,
which
is
the
one
that
did
get
approved
somewhere
during
that
process.
The
original
one
that
we'd
originally
submitted
was
the
one
that
ended
up
getting
built
at
that
point.
Plumbing
and
the
framing
and
everything
already
been
completed
once
it
was
kind
of
brought
to
my
attention
now
we're
you
know
at
the
point
that
obviously
the
the
buildings
erected
to
the
original,
not
the
one
that
was
approved,
so
that's
been
real.
I
Everything
else
has
been
an
easy
fix,
I
guess
the
porch
we've
already
removed
all
that
we're
starting
to
you
know,
go
back
to
their
Direction
with
it
really
everything's
kind
of
halted.
Just
because
we
would
like
to
move
forward
with
the
footprint.
That's
there
now,
obviously
just
from
a
cost
to
Anna
just
pain
in
the
butt
standpoint.
H
I
There's
already,
you
know
electrical
and
plumbing
and
everything
else,
it's
already
Incorporated
and
what's
there
if
we
were
to
remove
that
section,
we're
still
going
to
have
a
large
piece
of
concrete
there's,
there's
a
lot.
That's
going
to
go
into
trying
to
revert
it
back
to
the
approved
plan,
so
once
we
really
figure
out
what
we're
doing
with
that.
That's
when
we
really
plan
to
move
forward
and
get
it
complete.
Okay,.
B
H
E
B
I,
don't
know
if
anybody's
comfortable
granting
an
extension
right
now,
but
I
mean
it
is
a
major
major
concern
for
me
and
I
would
imagine
the
rest
of
the
commission
that
there
was
a
CA
that
was
denied
and
the
house
was
built
basically
to
those
specs.
I
I
think
it's
going
to
be
a
real
challenge.
Getting
around
that
particular
item
I'm,
very
appreciative
that
you
guys
have
addressed
the
front
porch.
B
It
sounds
like
it's
been
moved
to
the
planks
at
least
been
moved
to
run
more
appropriate
with
what
a
front
porch
should
look
like
I,
I,
think
in
looking
through
the
the
packet,
it
looks
like
there's
just
a
lot
more
documentation,
that's
going
to
be
necessary
if
we
do
decide
to
continue
versus
a
denial
or
an
approval,
but
curious.
What
other
other
comments
we
have
from
Commissioners?
What
questions
do
we
have
kind
of?
Where
do
we
need
to
take
this?
One.
J
I
Now,
with
the
extension
beyond
the
previously
approved
that
was
kind
of
our
back
and
forth,
I
mean
we
have
everything
geared
up
ready
to.
You
know,
get
everything
complete,
but
we
don't
want
to
move
forward
until
we
also
don't
want
to
have
to
go
through
the
free
demolition
of
it
to
reconstruct
it.
If
it's
a
possibility
that
we
could
leave
it
the
way
that
it
is
what.
B
I
believe
will
need
to
occur
and
again,
new
information
can
certainly
change
that
outcome
today.
I
think
we
need
to
do
a
extension
on
the
on
the
ca.
I.
Don't
think
we
have
the
documentation
to
be
able
to
come
to
any
semblance
of
an
approval
on
the
on
the
edition
of
the
house
or
the
extension
of
the
house.
What
I'm?
Looking
for
now
edition
of
the
house
take.
J
B
But
again
that's
one
man's
opinion
are
we
do
you
guys
kind
of
agree
with
that
assessment,
or
do
we?
Is
there
something
else
that
you
all
would
want
to
know
too.
D
B
D
G
J
Don't
know
that
it's
for
us
to
say
what
he
what
we
would
like
to
see
him
you
know
propose
all
over
again
I.
Don't
know
that.
That's
for
us
to
say,
I,
think
reading
into
something
that's
already
been
denied
is
pretty
clear,
but
I
personally
wouldn't
give
guidance
on
which
of
those
scenarios
you
bring
back
to
us.
D
D
K
L
D
D
I
D
For
us
to
approve
it
costly
because
I
mean
to
me
you
it's
you've
got
yourself
in
a
difficult
position,
because
where,
where
are
they,
then?
If
you
can,
if
we
would
approve
what
we
previously
did
not
approve,
then
it
would
be
a
difficult
situation
with
the
neighborhood.
Wouldn't
it
I
mean
I.
I
My
my
only
I
guess
argument
on
it
was.
You
know:
I
know
that
I
believe
based
on
the
guidelines.
We
were
allowed
to
go
up
to
750
square
feet
and
the
additional
around
200
150
200
square
feet.
If
it's
in
addition
over
that,
you
know,
is
obviously
it's
on
the
rear,
vicade,
it's
it's
right.
It's
not
visible
from
the
street.
It's
not
even
visible
from
the
side,
because
the
original
plan
had
you
know,
a
square
that
was
cut
out
of
that
one
corner
that
just
made
up
for
the
loss
of
square
footage.
I.
D
Don't
I
don't
when
people
generally
generally,
when,
when
we
have
people
working
in
the
historic
districts,
they're
so
clear
about
what
they're
getting
ready
to
do,
it
seems
like
that.
There's
some
kind
of
Disconnect
between
you
know
getting
the
approval
and
getting
the
work
done.
That
was
no
I
mean.
D
D
E
So,
first
of
all,
the
deed
has
nothing
to
do
with
this
body.
It's
between
the
owner,
the
person
who
bought
the
house
and
the
person
who
sold
the
house
and
that
would
be
enforced
between
the
two
of
them
as
a
civil
matter.
This
commission
has
no
purview
over
the
deed.
It
addresses
what
gets
applied
for
by
the
applicant,
but
the
commission
isn't
being
asked
to
consider
the
deed
restrictions.
E
I
think
that
if
you
want
to
make
the
case
for
what's
already
been
built,
this
commission
would
need
to
see
much
clearer
documentation,
comparing
kind
of
side
by
side
what
was
approved
and
what
exactly
you're,
building
all
the
materials,
all
the
dimensions,
exactly
what
it's
going
to
look
like,
so
that
they
could
assess.
E
I
So,
as
long
as,
but
with
the
extension
we
are,
we
will
be
approved
to
go
back
with
what
was
what
you
did
approve
in
the
beginning,
we're
getting
an
extension
on
that
right,
yeah
and
just
just
to
save
time.
I
mean
it
is
what
it
is.
You
know,
move
forward
with
that
and
we'd
be
within
compliance.
Yeah.
N
I
do
have
a
quick
question
for
staff,
because
I
want
to
make
absolutely
sure
I
understand
this
correctly,
but
so
there
was
an
application
I'm.
Looking
at
the
previous
actions
here
that
was
denied
and
then
they
came
back
looks
like
and
of
course
they
have
one
that
was
approved,
but
what
was
constructed
is
that
exactly
pretty
much
what
was
denied
previously
or
you
know,
did
you
construct
something
that
was,
you
know
not
really
approved
or
denied?
You
know
it.
I
E
I'll
clarify
that
first
version
was
never
actually
denied.
It
was
round
one
of
their
proposal.
They
got
a
continuance,
they
came
back
over
the
revised
proposal
and
that's
what
got
approved
so,
as
often
happens
with
projects
they
come
in
the
first
time.
We
ask
them
to
make
changes.
They
come
back
again.
The
only
thing
that's
been
officially
denied
with
this
application
was
the
demolition
that
was
proposed
by
a
previous
owner.
E
N
And
I
see
here
that
the
denied
one
was
in
2019
and
that
was
a
totally
different
application.
So
that's
maybe
what
I
was
a
little
bit
confused,
I
guess
my
thinking
on
this
one
was,
you
know,
I
think
the
continuance
or
the
extension
of
the
original
one
makes
sense,
because
no
matter
what
we
do,
you
know
I
think
it
was
approved
and
you're
still
in
the
process
of
constructing
so
I
think
that
makes
sense
as
far
as
whether
you
come
back,
you
know.
N
N
You
know,
draw
this
out
for
you,
but
I
wonder
if
it
makes
sense
to
allow
them.
You
know
have
a
continuance
if
they'd
like
to
bring
back
documentation
like
you
explain
of
what
they've
done
or
what
the
you
know
finish
plan
is.
Then
we
review
that
again
on
its
merits
and
if
it's,
if
it's
approvable,
then
you
know
great
and
if
not,
then
you
know
they
have
what
they
were
approved
for
that
they
will
just
have
to
construct.
You
know
to
that
design.
J
O
N
The
material
I
mean,
if
you,
if
you
want
to
be
hurt
next
month,
then
you'd
have
to
get
the
additional
information
basically
a
week
from
now
or
so,
and
then
you
know,
of
course,
if
we
were,
if
you
were
approved
for
the
extension,
you
could
just
keep
working
on
the
Project
based
on
the
original
approved
design.
So
I
guess
you
have
some
options.
If
you
went
that
way,.
B
J
K
E
Can
Mark
just
confirmed
that
it
was
approved
unanimously
in
Prime
gov?
It
never
showed
the
vote
on
the
screen
and
we're
supposed
to
yeah.
Okay.
N
E
N
All
right
so
I'll
make
a
motion
to
continue
hpca
200181
items.
N
K
H
E
H
B
P
Good
afternoon
Hannah
Blue
from
Lords
Studio,
220,
Northwest,
13th,
Street
Suite
One
I'm,
presenting
a
landscape
design
today
for
our
clients
and
I,
believe
that
most
of
the
items
have
been
recommended
for
approval
along
the
front
of
the
house.
The
two
items
that
I'd
like
to
touch
on
are
replacing
the
front
steps.
Number
12
and
number
13
install
sidewalk
from
the
front
of
the
steps
to
the
street,
so
hopefully
we'll
pan
over
to
this
is
the
property.
We
are
removing
a
portion
of
the
front
driveway
and
the
parking
in
front
of
the
house.
P
It
does
not
match
the
historical
character
of
the
neighborhood.
They've
got
a
large
parking,
as
you
can
see.
One
or
two
Vans
could
probably
fit
in
front
of
the
house
we're
proposing
to
remove
this
and
narrow
the
driveway
to
match
the
character
of
the
neighborhood
and
we're
also
proposing
to
remove
the
brick
retaining
wall
that
runs
parallel
to
the
street.
That's
also
not
historic
to
the
neighborhood.
There
are
several
instances
along
this
street
that
have
the
retaining
wall
seen
here
that
extend
farther
into
the
right-of-way
along
the
street.
P
So
what
we're
proposing
to
do
is
remove
the
not
historical
brick
wall
and
extend
it
towards
the
street
to
take
up
some
of
that
grade
change.
It
will
create
a
much
more
inviting
approach
from
the
street
and
from
the
driveway,
and
it
will
match
the
neighborhood
much
better.
As
you
can
see,
we've
got
concrete
and
asphalt
layers
that
are
crumbling
in
the
driveway
right
now.
P
P
K
P
Perfect,
so
the
two
points
left
in
question
were
number
12
and
13
the
concrete
sidewalk
from
the
front
door
to
the
street
and
the
rounded
concrete
steps
that
come
off
the
front
door
on
image
12
in
the
HP
application
packet,
13
and
14
illustrate
that
concrete
with
a
sand
finish.
P
It
will
just
be
Portland
gray.
What
would
be
historic
to
the
home
and
it
will
weather
over
time
to
match
more
closely
to
the
present
concrete.
B
You
know
lots
lots
of
recommended
approvals,
lots
of
recommended,
continuances,
I,
think
the
big
things
that
stand
out
to
me
obviously
you've
hit
on
some
of
those
steps.
The
sidewalk
from
the
street
to
the
house
and
I
had
a
sidewall
in
here,
but
I.
Don't
know
that
that
that
really
sticks
out
as
much
to
me
anymore,
but
in
particular,
can
you
talk
to
us
about
the
desire
reasoning
want
to
have
the
sidewalk
from
the
street
to
the
front
door.
Sure.
P
Yeah
right
now,
along
this
street,
there
are
eight
homes
that
have
Walks
from
the
front
door
to
the
street,
and
so
we
would
like
to
create
and
that's
a
diagram
on
page
18..
We've
got
them
highlighted
in
magenta
those
homes.
P
So
there
are
already
presidents
along
the
street
that
have
that
approach
from
the
street
Frontage
to
the
front
door.
So
we
really
want
to
create
something,
that's
closer
to
what
would
be
historically
accurate,
removing
that
wall
and
creating
an
entry
sequence,
that's
much
more
appropriate
to
the
front
door.
N
That
you
know,
especially
if
we're
doing
like
a
rezoning
application,
City
you're,
required
to
put
sidewalks
in
in
front
of
the
house.
I,
don't
know
the
city
is
kind
of
pushing
towards
adding
sidewalks
where
they
can
and
I
know.
I
understand
the
the
logic
in
the
in
the
staff
report
and
I
think
it
mentions
that
the
guidelines
don't
support
sidewalks,
where
there
were
none
before
I
guess
personally,
it
kind
of
makes
sense,
especially
if
the
city
added
sidewalks,
you
know.
Hopefully
maybe
you
know
in
an
Ideal
World
if
they
added
sidewalks.
Q
N
J
Tend
to
agree,
especially
with
the
elimination
of
a
lot
of
paved
parking.
I,
don't
have
you
know
much
of
a
problem
with
providing
a
little
more
access
to
the
street
and
street
parking,
and
you
know
diminishing
the
lot
coverage
is
always
a
win
with
me.
So
I
definitely
don't
have
an
issue
with
the
brick
I
feel
conflicted
about.
J
Even
the
notion
of
you
know
thinking
that
we
need
to
maintain
it
or
that
it
is
historic
or
obviously
non-historic
I,
just
don't
have
an
attachment
or
an
opinion
to
The
Brick
one
way
or
another,
so
I'm.
Definitely
a
fan
of
the
replacement
of
the
brick
with
concrete
the.
D
Guidelines
aren't
the
guidelines
are
specific
in
that,
if
you
have
proof
where
you're
saying
it
possibly
might
have
been
concrete
that
if
you
have
photographs,
then
that
might
be
allowed.
But
unless
you
have
documentation,
we've
not
let
people
change
the
steps
and
same
with
the
sidewalk
to
the
street,
but.
E
We
do
know
that
the
front
when
you're,
looking
at
the
front,
if
you're
facing
the
house
the
whole
portion
to
the
left
side,
the
kind
of
rounded
Bay
that
comes
out
and
then
the
actual
entrance
that
is
not
on
The
Sandbar
Maps
through
1955..
That
was
added
at
some
point.
We
assume
that
perhaps
at
that
same
time
they
cut
in
the
front
yard
and
added
all
of
that
Paving
and
that
they
would
have
had
to
add
the
front
steps,
because
you
now
have
enclosed
space
where
the
front
steps
would
have
been
so.
E
That
was
why
staff
recommended
a
continuance,
because
we
were
we
were.
We
were
weighing.
We
wanted
the
commission
to
weigh
retaining
a
feature
that
illustrates
the
evolution
of
the
property
over
time
versus
returning
to
something
that
might
have
been
the
historic.
D
J
D
D
No,
it's
not
knowing
is
not
the
same
as
a
photograph
or
a
drawing
or
if
they
did
our.
You
know
if
you
took
something
if
you
had,
if
you
got
permission
for
the
commission
to
maybe
remove
something
and
see.
If
something
was
there,
then
with
the
idea,
if
you
don't
find
it,
you
have
to
put
it
back.
That's
documentation,
written
documentation,
a
letter
from
a
previous
owner,
that's
documentation,
but
it's
not
documentation,
saying
that
we
know
it
was
different.
That
is
not
document.
J
N
D
What
the
guidelines
say,
I'm
just
saying
what
the
guidelines
say:
you
all
can
go
somewhere
else,
but
guidelines
say
documentation
and
historic
preservation.
We
know
that
documentation
is
a
Written,
Letter,
A
Photograph,
something
like
that.
It's
not
something
that
we
know
it
wasn't
there
before
or
we
know
something
else
was
there
before.
That
is
not
documentation.
We've.
D
N
J
N
Sometimes
we
have
to
look
beyond
the
property
a
little
bit
to
see
what
is
the
pattern
of
development
in
the
neighborhood
and
if
the
pattern
of
development,
the
neighborhood
is
that
people
do
have
a
sidewalk
going
from
the
steps
the
street,
like
you,
indicate
I,
think
there
are
eight
houses
on
that
street
Mr
chairman,
maybe
not
every
house
has
a
big
parking
parking
lot
in
the
front
yard.
You
know
I
think
to
me.
N
D
Gather
whatever
information
you
can
and
find,
it
would
be
like
saying
that
we're
working
talking
on
a
known,
historic
property
and
people
walk
in
and
go.
You
know,
there's
a
house
across
the
street
and
I
know.
George
Washington
lived
here,
but
it's
kind
of
like
that.
So
we
should
just
say:
hey
that's
kind
of
similar,
so
we'll
do
that.
That
is
not.
This
is
just
as
important.
D
Documentation
is,
is
proof-
and
you
know
the
guidelines
say
they
don't
recommend
adding
sidewalks
that
were
that
weren't
there
they
don't
recommend
taking
we've
made
other
people
do
all
sorts
of
things
based
on
that
guideline.
No,
you
can't
do
a
sidewalk
to
your.
You
know.
We've
been
doing
that
forever,
because
the
guidelines
say
that
about
the
sidewalks.
J
D
B
B
P
E
So
I
want
to
clarify
a
couple
of
things.
One
I
shared
my
screen
here.
The
portion
of
the
house
that
has
the
white
roof
is
what
was
added
on
so
historically
before
that
Edition
the
front
steps
would
have
been
inside
what
is
now.
In
addition,
what
is
now
in
closed
space
so
recreating
that
original
condition
isn't
possible
unless
we
rip
off
an
addition.
E
I
think
in
my
mind,
that's
a
more
of
a
variable
question.
The
sidewalk
I
think
it's
more
clear
that
there's
there's
not
a
sidewalk
here.
There
has
not
been
a
sidewalk.
There
are
some
properties
on
the
Block
that
have
sidewalks.
It's
not
a
uniform
feature
down
the
block,
and
that
was
staff's
concerned
with
the
sidewalk
that
they
don't
currently
have
one.
Now
it
doesn't
seem
to
be
common
on
the
Block,
although
they
do
exist
on
the
Block,
and
so
that
would
be
adding
a
feature
that
did
not
historically
exist.
B
I
guess,
for
my
own
purposes,
I'd
like
to
see
something
a
little
more
compatible
with
what's
there,
but
maybe
not
necessarily
brick
and
so
I
I,
don't
know
if
that
gets
us
to
where
we
need
to
be
on
a
motion
perspective,
but
I
guess
maybe
what
I'm
suggesting
is?
You
know
sidewalk
and
some
straight
concrete
steps,
as
opposed
to
rounded
kind
of
higher
style,
concrete
steps.
A
On
the
sidewalk,
I
think
I
think
because
you
can't
treat
the
driveway
like
a
sidewalk.
If
you
have
cars
parked
there,
how
do
you
I
mean
an
able-bodied
person
can
easily
I
guess
but
I
don't
know
I
just
I
think
the
sidewalk
to
the
door
from
the
street
is
is
important.
So
even
if
it
wasn't
historic
in
nature.
D
J
D
A
P
Okay,
yes,
yeah
well,
and
we
are
shrinking
the
driveway
entry
significantly
and
reducing
the
parking
up
front,
so
you've
got
much
more
square
footage
of
permeable
surface
and
this
would
allow
an
easier
access
from
the
street
for
parking.
That's
very
true:
I.
A
N
A
B
I
I
will
say:
Devil's
Advocate
wise.
It
does
chop
up
the
lawn
a
little
bit
compared
to
a
majority
of
the
houses
around
there.
I
think
most
of
them
don't
have
a
sidewalk
that
goes
from
the
street
to
the
the
front
door.
In
fact,
my
house
previously,
as
I,
was
thinking
about
this
in
Crown
Heights
I
mean
to
get
to
the
the
pathway
to
my
front
door.
You
had
to
walk
up
part
of
the
driveway
and
then
it
entered
onto
it.
I
recognize
that
it
isn't
excessive
bit
of
an
accessibility
thing.
N
D
D
Yeah
and
if
there
was
somebody
that
has
every
time
that
that's
come
to
the
commission,
we
have
made
exceptions
and
when
we've
done
that
most
of
the
time
we've
tried
to
recommend
things
that
can
be
removed
at
a
certain
point
in
time.
So
we
are
not
against
Ada.
If
people
come
in
and
request
that,
because
of
their
situation,
we
have
always
said
yes.
Q
So
let
me
offer
a
couple
things:
one
I'm
going
to
agree
with
commissioner
Meacham
on
this.
That
I
think
a
lot
of
times
original
gets
confused
with
historic.
The
addition
that
happened
is
part
of
History.
It
was
captured
as
part
of
the
Edition,
and
that
needs
to
be
acknowledged.
There's
some
gray
area
on
whether
or
not
you
believe
it's
contributing
or
not,
but
I
think
there
is
an
argument
to
be
made
and
should
be
respected,
that
that
is
a
piece
of
the
history
of
this
property.
So
that's
that's
one
point.
Q
The
the
sidewalk
question
I
think
is
interesting,
because
I
think
you
could
State
extenuating
circumstances
to
get
rid
of
the
parking
lot
in
the
front,
because
it
is
clearly
not
contextual,
okay.
So
so
those
are
kind
of
two
given
things
there.
The
question
becomes
okay.
When
we
remove
it,
what
is
appropriate
to
put
back
so
I'm,
not
hearing
a
case
for
an
extenuating
circumstance
to
put
a
sidewalk
to
the
street.
Q
That
would
need
to
be
made
in
my
opinion
and
then
the
second
would
be
with
lack
without
sufficient
evidence
documentation.
Q
What
is
there
I
think
you
have
to
assume
that
I'm,
referring
to
the
steps
without
sufficient
documentation,
that
that
is
a
piece
of
the
history
of
the
property,
and
so
an
extenuating
circumstance
would
need
to
be
made
to
change
the
steps,
whether
it's
a
material
or
a
shape.
Some
cases
need
to
be
made
to
change
that
from
what
is
there
currently.
A
Q
N
So,
regarding
the
sidewalk,
this
might
be
a
question
to
staff,
let's
say
so:
I
guess,
because
there
wasn't
a
sidewalk
previously
that's
kind
of
sticking
point
or
putting
a
sidewalk.
Now
it's
not
that
it's
necessarily.
N
You
know
against
the
guidelines.
It's
really
just
that
it
wasn't
there
before
and
we're
not
replacing
it
or
I
want
to
make
sure
I'm
understanding
that
correctly.
A
P
J
Okay,
well,
I
definitely
points
well
taken.
David
I
do
like
it
does.
Concern
me
a
little
to
say,
like
I've
got
a
weird
stained
glass
in
my
house
from
about
1989
and
it's
a
part
of
history,
but
it
has
nothing
to
do
with
any
historical
significance.
So
I
do
think
it's
a
little
bit
of
a
dangerous
path
to
be
like
well,
if
I
go
add
something
in
tomorrow.
It
becomes
a
part
of
history
for
this
board
to
this
commission
to
then
review
as
a
part
of
the
historical
significance
of
my
home
I.
J
Think
that's
a
little
dicey,
I
I
understand
the
concerns
on
the
sidewalk
leading
to
the
street.
More
than
the
steps
to
me,
the
steps
are
very
obviously
not
original
and
whether
they
are
historic
is
probably
a
little
bit
debatable.
So.
Q
Q
E
This
is
across
the
street,
where
the
yard
is
very
dark,
green,
that's
a
new
sidewalk
and
entry
I,
don't
know
the
date
of
that,
but
that
appears
to
have
been
added.
We've
got
one
sidewalk
leading
to
the
street.
There
kind
of
a
couple
more
as
you
go
this
way
down
the
block
to
the
West
and
then
and.
E
E
So
the
combination
of
the
lack
of
uniform,
consistent
sidewalks
to
the
street
on
the
Block
and
the
fact
that
we
didn't
have
evidence
of
there
having
been
a
sidewalk
to
the
street
here
now,
obviously
you're
right
that
could
have
been
removed
when
the
parking
lot
was
put
in
the
front
yard.
Obviously
that
has
been
heavily
altered,
but
those
two
factors
led
staff
to
recommend
continuance
on
the
sidewalk
feature.
B
P
Yes,
one
another
thing
on
the
steps
in
conjunction
with
deteriorating
and
being
replaced
in
several
pavers
is
the
first
step
that
you
land
on
is
significantly
longer
than
the
others.
So
you
don't
have
a
typical
a
gate
when
you
walk
up
the
stairs,
and
so
that
poses
some
safety
concerns.
You
can
see
here
that
very
bottom
step
is
a
gate
and
a
half
for
your
steps.
B
M
Hi
Betsy
brenstetter,
my
address
is
604
Northwest
41st,
Street
I'm,
the
neighbor
directly
to
the
east
of
this
property
I'm,
also
an
architect
and
I'm.
Also
a
past
HP
commission
member
and
have
served
on
the
neighborhood
commission
or
the
neighborhood
HP
committee
for
a
long
time
and
and
I
just
got
off
the
phone
with
the
chair
of
that
committee
before
this
meeting.
First
of
all,
we
are
very
very
impressed
with
all
of
the
detail
that
they
that
this
group
has
done
to
prepare
this
application.
M
I've
never
seen
anyone
actually
get
a
number
of
different
survey
teams
out
to
survey
property
and
being
a
long-term
neighborhood
member,
a
known
resident
of
Crown
Heights
I
have
seen
and
I've
lived
on
this
block
for
a
long
time.
I
haven't
lived
in
this
at
604,
but
I
have
lived
on
this
block
since
1993.
M
I
have
seen
changes
to
this
house
that
have
never
been
had
permission
to
have
happened
and
guessing
what
people
have
done,
including
the
last
owner
of
this
house
is
just
it's
too
hard
to
imagine.
But
this
is
a
the
driveway
is
totally
not
historic
and
that's
clear.
M
M
That
Sidewalk
has
been
there,
that's
the
old
owner
and
that's
before
they
took
all
the
trees
down
and
added
the
the
bright
green
Paving
or
the
bright
green
grass
anyway,
and
if
you
look
behind
this
house
on
40th
Street,
even
though
not
having
that
sidewalk
is
probably
the
most
common
there's,
a
pretty
good
percentage
of
houses
in
Crown
Heights
that
have
a
sidewalk
to
the
street.
M
Now
what
you
guys
want
to
do
with
that
that
brick
front
port
or
the
you
know
the
front
steps
is
totally
up
to
you,
but
these
people
have
really
bent
over
backwards
to
present
a
great
historic
solution
for
this
house
and
I,
really
appreciate
it
and
I'd
love
I
mean
we
have
had
that
house
empty
for
almost
a
year
now
waiting
for
these
people
to
be
able
to
get
to
start
their
project,
so
I
would
appreciate
it
and
the
neighborhood
would
appreciate
it
if
we
could
get
this
going
thanks.
B
That's
that's
what
we
have
a
vote
for
too
and
so
I
think
we
probably
just
need
a
motion,
whether
that's
for
or
against
either
the
concrete
walkway
and
stairwell
or
stairs
leading
up
to
the
doors
and
the
kind
of
the
remodel
of
that
as
it
is
so
I
guess,
I'd
put
it
back
to
the
Commissioners
to
see
if
we
can
get
a
motion
on
this
one
yeah.
Q
N
I'm,
sorry,
let
me
jump
over.
Do
we
want
to
separate
out
the
the
items
that
are
recommended
for
approval
and
then
the
two
items
that
are
continued,
maybe
I.
N
J
Through
is
it?
Is
it
through
11
th
of
hpca
22-00109
with
the
specific
findings
I
believe
there
was
an
agreed
upon
conditions
in
here
and
was
there
a
unique
circumstance
yet
or
were
we
going
to
add
one.
O
J
J
Sorry,
let's
start
that
over
I
would
motion
to
approve
items
six
through
ten,
with
the
specific
findings
noted
in
the
staff
report
and.
J
B
J
J
Items
6
through
10
and
14
through
19,
with
the
agreed
upon
conditions
and
specific
findings
noted
in
the
staff
report.
I
will
second
that.
J
B
E
Is
located
in
master
Park,
Ward,
6
consideration
and
possible
action
on
application
by
Corbin
Harris
Express
sunrooms
of
Oklahoma
for
Ben
Miller
for
certificate
of
appropriateness
to
one
construct
screen
sunroom
elective?
This
has
been
heard
by
the
commission
twice
previously,
they
are
out
of
continuances.
We
have
recommended
denial
at
this
point
because
the
materials
proposed
for
the
sun
room
don't
meet
the
applicable
guidelines
and
standards
for
building
materials
at
new
construction.
It's
proposed
in
an
extruded
aluminum
product.
E
We
have
not
heard
any
response
from
the
applicant
at
this
time
as
far
as
a
revision
to
the
proposal,
and
so
we
because
we're
out
of
continuous
as
we
recommended
denial.
B
B
R
So
the
we're
talking
about
materials,
the
extruded
aluminum,
if
you
look
there,
the
uprights
in
between
screens,
that
is
the
extrude
aluminum
framing,
because
this
is
an
impermeable
structure
on
the
back
of
a
house,
we
we
tend
to
not
use
wood
because
of
wood
rot
as
far
as
sustainability.
R
What
I
have
proposed
and
I
think
it
was
too
late
to
be
included
in
this
meeting-
is
to
wrap
the
the
aluminum
structure
with
a
trim
that
matches
the
existing
the
existing
materials
on
the
house.
That
way,
because
rain
is
going
to
come
in
this
green
border,
because
it's
just
screen
the
aluminum
structure,
the
structure
itself
will
not
be
damaged.
However,
the
appearance
of
it
will
match
what
is
in
the
neighborhood.
E
D
D
B
E
K
B
J
K
B
R
R
B
N
Structure
like
if
you
you
know,
built
some
house
that
was
that
a
metal
structure
and
you
you
know
clad
it
and
brick
or
whatever
so
I'm,
assuming
that
would
be
the
same
difference
Maybe
but
I
would
say:
let's
get
with
staff
because
they
know
the
guidelines
the
best
probably,
and
hopefully
they
can
lead
you
down
a
path.
That
would
be
a
quick
approval.
Sure.
J
Like
okay
I
will
motion
to
deny
item
one
of
HP
ca22-00130
with
prejudice.
B
P
B
E
This
is
an
Edgemere
Park,
where
two
consideration
of
possible
Lodge
studio
for
Zachary,
Dean
Duty,
for
certificate
of
appropriateness
to
nine
construct,
Cabana
with
fireplace
and
outdoor
kitchen
appliances,
elected
and
11
construct
garage
elective.
The
commission
saw
this
application
previously
and
approved
a
number
of
items
related
to
landscape
features.
E
Swimming
pool
in
the
backyard
continue
these
two
items
with
concerns
about
size,
height,
kind
of
bulk
Mass
lot
coverage
staff
has
recommended
approval
for
the
Cabana
item,
nine
that
height
on
that
has
been
reduced
and
stuff
out
like
that
was
consistent
with
what
the
commission
had
requested.
We
have
recommended
continuance
on
the
construction
of
the
garage.
It
remains
larger
than
the
historic
garage
and
larger
than
what
the
guidelines
support
for
construction
of
a
new
garage.
B
N
F
N
Yeah
so
as
Katie
mentioned,
we
we
we
revise
the
Cabana
to
be
shorter,
hopefully
kind
of
fit,
there's
kind
of
a
hierarchy
at
the
property.
There's
a
house
there's
a
garage
and
there's
a
cabana,
so
that's
kind
of
what
we
tried
to
accomplish
with
that
revision
and
then,
as
far
as
the
garage
size
is
concerned,
you
can
kind
of
see
this
is
actually
a
good
picture.
N
You
can
see
the
original
garage
had
kind
of
a
deep
footprint,
but
it
was
only
I
think
it
was
right
at
16
feet
wide,
which
really
is
is
too
narrow
to
get.
You
know
to
get
cars
in
and
to
get
the
doors
in
to
Modern
standards,
so
we
we
widened
it
to
allow
for
two
cars.
So
basically
that
is
the
reason
for
the
change
or
you
know
the
dimensions
of
the
garage
but
I'd
love
to
hear
you
know
any
comments
and
address
any
concerns.
N
Yeah
I
think
it
was
16
feet,
maybe
originally,
if
I,
if
I
remember
off
the
top
of
my
head,
so
it
was
just
too
narrow
to
get
either
a
double
door.
You
know
that
door
itself
is
16
feet
wide,
so
there'd
be
no
room
to
get
that
door
in,
especially
if
you
had
two
doors,
that'd
be
even
more
difficult,
so
it
was
too
narrow
to
get
you
know
two
cars
and
side
by
side.
It
kind
of
resembles
a
two-car
garage.
The
original
one
did,
but
it
wouldn't
allowed
for
that
door.
K
N
It
is
so
okay
to
give
you
some
other
background.
The
owners
are
actually
moving
out
and
they've
already
I,
think
purchased
a
new
house,
but
they
had
a
neighbor
that
was
interested
in
the
house
and
they
really
like
the
design
that
lawd
came
up
with.
So
you
know
it's
not
contingent
on
sale.
I
think
they
just
wanted
to
go
ahead
and
get
the
approval
so
that
if
they
sold
it
you
know
a
new
owner
could
potentially
build
it
out
per
these
designs,
but
yeah
so
yeah.
The
house
is
for
sale,
I
guess.
Q
N
Looking
it
up
kind
of
see
what
the
give
me
one
second
here,
I
was
gonna
see
what
the
existing
depth
was.
So
the
existing
depth
depth
was
24
8.
L
B
Q
They're
not
in
the
parking
there
I
just
think
it
needs
a
compelling,
unique
circumstances
like
we've
seen.
Is
there.
N
Would
you
be
open
to
maybe
you
haven't,
got
the
same
depth
as
the
existing
garage
was
I,
think
it
was
24
8,
so
it's
kind
of
I
think
22
and
a
half
feet
would
be.
If
you
met
the
letter
of
the
guidelines,
if
it
was
24
and
a
half
now,
it
gives
them
two
extra
feet,
but
it
matches
the
length
footprint
of
the
existing
and
you
just
add
what
is
that
like
two
feet
to
the
width
or
something
to
allow
for
the
parking
I
mean
yeah.
K
Q
And
there's
a
whole
bunch
of
we've
seen
a
bunch
of
unique
circumstances
that
allow
for
a
little
extra
I.
Think
it's
just
finding
what
you
want
that
circumstance
to
be
and
recorded.
N
E
B
G
B
N
I,
don't
know
if
it's
Unique
circumstance
or
not,
but
I
know
that
they,
you
know
they
would
like
to
have
a
bathroom
near
the
pool.
So
you'd
have
to
you,
know,
go
to
the
house
dripping
wet
and
initially
we
had
planned
a
whole
addition
that
would
accommodate
all
that
stuff
and
they
revised
that
plan
to
build
out
the
attic
so
that
they
wouldn't
have
to
take
up
as
much.
You
know
maintain
more
open
space,
but
to
accomplish
that,
you
know
that.
B
Could
this
is
a
really
really
busy
project
and
for
I
mean
just
my
own
personal
opinion,
because
it's
because
it
already
is
relatively
busy
and
a
lot
on
that
lot.
I
would
like
to
see
the
garage
be
within
the
guidelines
if,
unless
there's
something,
unfortunately,
a
bathroom
doesn't
move,
my
needle
all
that
much
on
the
unique
circumstance
side.
But
I
guess
all
that
being
said,
because
there's
so
much
on
there
I
would
like
to
see
the
garage
and
if
you
guys
are
comfortable
with
that
I
think
we
can
get
to
an
approval.
I
mean.
J
N
Yeah
I
don't
have
the
clients
here
to
give
me
a
clear
affirmative
on
that,
but
what
I
could
do
I
wonder
if
if
we
approved
it
with
that
condition
and
they
didn't
want
to
meet
the
condition,
then
I
wonder,
would
that
be?
How
would
that
work?
Well,.
J
I
think
we'd
have
to
know
where
the
where
the
footage
was
shrinking
from.
If
we
had
initially
said.
Oh,
we
would
consider
the
original
depth,
but
that
got
us
to
5
or
4.99,
but
Taylor
wants
to
get
to
450.
I
think
we'd
need
to
know
where
that
was
coming
from,
because
it
affects
the
scale
and
the
height
and
everything
so
well.
It
could
yeah.
N
E
Garages
cannot
but
we've.
The
commission
has
approved
garages
with
a
condition
that
they
be
modified
in
various
ways
with
that
submitted
to
staff
before
and
because
this
is
a
front-facing
Gable
they're
going
to
keep
the
width
as
proposed
they're
just
going
to
make
it
shorter
and
that's
going
to
shave
off
the
square
footage,
that's
something
that
that
staff
would
be
comfortable
reviewing.
E
There
was
something
else
really
important.
I
was
going
to
tell
you
guys.
E
Oh
I
was
going
to
say
yes,
thank
you
if
we
approve
it
with
that
condition,
and
then
they
don't
want
to
meet
that
condition,
we
would
bring
it
back
and
essentially
treat
it
as
a
revision.
Perfect
bring
it
back
to
the
commission.
No
that
works
for
me.
Okay,.
J
F
L
L
E
They
have
proposed
previously
to
build
a
garage.
So
it's
been
before
the
commission.
It's
been
several
years,
but
some
of
you
might
be
familiar
with
this,
this
property
and
with
this
project,
and
they
are
before
the
commission
today
asking
to
construct
a
two-story,
brick
garage
that
meets
applicable
guidelines
for
size.
E
It's
a
very
large
lot,
so
they're
within
five
percent
of
the
lot
size.
They
do
have
an
abutting
two-story
garage
that
the
proposed
garage
will
be
shorter
than
staffs
concerns
included
the
proposed
garage
material
since
the
historic
garage
was
wood,
and
this
is
a
brick
garage,
that's
more
High
style
in
character.
We
don't
often
do
this,
but
we
recommended
two
options
for
you:
an
approval
with
unique
circumstances
and
conditions
or
a
recommendation
to
continue
it
if
you
felt
that
it
needed
to
be
more
significantly
revised
from
what's
been
proposed.
S
You
set
your
name
and
address
Mark
Nunn
at
3817,
North,
McKinley,
Avenue,
awesome.
B
S
Really
I'm
really
tired,
not
having
a
garage.
You
know
you
saw
the
previous
pictures
just
over
time.
Termites
structural
damage
and
I
tried
to
save
it
and
I
couldn't
save
it
as
actually
coming
across
coming
apart
at
the
corners,
so
we
ended
up
having
tear
it
down.
S
We
went
through
this
process
before,
but
now
I'm
here
five
years
later,
so
try
and
trying
to
get
it
passed
through,
y'all,
guys
and
and
move
on
with
my
life
and
basically
for
the
time
being,
we
just
kind
of
shifted
gears
and
focused
on
landscaping
and
making.
You
know
what,
whatever
we
could
with
the
Landscaping
to
make
it
beautiful
for
the
neighborhood.
It
was
in
pretty
pretty
horrible,
safe,
but.
J
J
My
question
is
just
that
the
design
of
the
proposed
garage
seems
to
replicate
the
neighboring
home
and
garage
and
seems
to
be
in
pretty
serious
conflict
with
kind
of
the
humbleness
of
the
straight
lines
and
the
flat
facade
of
your
home,
so
I'm
just
a
little
curious
about
the
the
roof
line,
especially
feels
in
conflict
with
your
home
and
More,
in
line
with
your
neighbor's
home.
H
S
Okay,
yeah
I
know
in
the
design
I
try
to
keep
it
as
simple
as
possible.
The
the
first
design
I
had
submitted
five
years
ago
it
it
had
more
elements
that
the
the
house
has
like
the
the
little
pitch
on
the
top.
S
You
see
the
Gable
that's
facing
you
had
that
in
the
center,
but
I
just
you
know,
I
took
a
lot
of
the
design
out
of
it
and
try
to
keep
it
as
simple
as
possible
and
just
really
maintaining
stuff
like
the
the
slope
of
the
roof,
the
the
little
buttresses
that
carry
the
roofs
on
the
side.
You
know
I
keep
that
design
in
there
as
well.
K
S
Yes,
sir,
when
that
house,
when
the
other
one
came
down,
I
made
it
a
point
to
take
those
off
and
Salvage
those,
because
that
was
an
important
element.
Obviously,
that
ties
the
garage
to
my
house,
so
I
wanted
to
make
sure
that
the
structure
in
the
back
it
doesn't
compete,
but
it
also
stays
with
a
the
whole.
Looking
at
the
picture
as
a
whole,
you.
J
S
Yeah
well,
I
have
we
all
have
SUVs,
but
that's
not
the
justification.
So
currently
on
the
big
house.
They're
at
the
corner,
is
where
the
three
condensing
units
for
the
AC
are.
S
Being
able
to
pull
backwards
out
of
that
house
when
you
have
a
when
you
have
a
full
car
garage,
you're
able
to
start
turning
before
getting
to
that
corner.
When
you
have
that
post
in
the
center,
it
takes
it's
like
six
feet
more,
you
have
to
go
back
in
order
to
make
that
turn
and
a
lot
of
it
is
I,
don't
want
to
hit
an
AC
a
condensing
unit
and
making
an
ease
to
be
able
to
get
out.
S
L
J
For
the
for
the
double
door,
I'm
still
kind
of
conflicted
about
the
design,
but
so.
B
I
I
am
too
and
that's
where
I
get
as
well.
As
you
know,
the
the
new
garage
is
not
going
to
be
you're
not
going
to
replicate
it,
but
it's
supposed
to
approximate
and
I
love
the
fact
that
you
told
you
took
those
pieces
off
the
roof
line
and
you're
going
to
reincorporate
that
and
use
those
I.
Think
that's
smart
and
really,
you
know
I
think
it's
good
for,
especially
for
what
we're
trying
to
do.
B
S
I'd
like
brick,
because
it's
a
long,
lasting
material,
the
photos
I
took
of
the
houses,
I
I
they're,
not
in
this
application,
but
I
took
photos
of
all
the
houses
that
do
have
the
two-story,
the
material
resembled
or
it
matched
the
main
structure.
So
that
was
the
whole
reason
why
I
went
with
the
brake.
It's
durable.
It
matches
it
kind
of
matches
along
with.
What's
going
on
with
it.
B
That
all
makes
that
all
makes
perfect
sense,
I
think
for
me
personally,
since
we
are
going
with
something
that's
significantly
larger
since
you're,
proposing
something
that's
significantly
larger
and
and
doesn't
quite
fit
within
the
mold
of
the
guidelines.
I
I
would
like
some
concessions
to
see.
You
know
something
that
approximate
more
of
what
was
there,
which
to
me
would
mean
would,
but
that's
also
one
man's
opinion.
A
H
A
A
We
denied
it
because
there
was
proof
of
a
one
story.
Even
though
every
house
on
the
Block
was
two-story,
they
didn't
they.
Wouldn't
we
wouldn't
allow
a
two-story
garage
now
I
mean
is.
Is
it
a
unique
enough
circumstance
that,
because
the
lot's
a
little
bit
larger,
it
gets
to
be
treated
different
I?
Don't
do
I
agree
with
that
role?
No,
not
necessarily
does
the
does
this
offend
me
what's
being
proposed?
No,
but
I
mean
again
it's.
J
A
K
A
G
K
J
J
K
B
E
J
That
was
my
garage
or
an
auto
house,
or
is
that
an
accessory
structure?
Is
that
even
actually
a
garage.
A
E
Sandboard
Maps
do
sometimes
indicate
Auto,
House,
PL
it'll,
say
A
Plus,
D,
Auto,
House,
plus
dwelling.
Now
we
have
garages
that
are
historic
that
clearly
have
additional
space
in
them,
not
clear
how
they
were
really
used.
That
are
not
indicated
to
have
been
a
dwelling.
N
Guidelines
I'm
sorry
I
could
jump
in
I
was
reading
the
staff
report,
where
portions
of
the
guidelines
are
cited
regarding
the
two-story
garages.
Specifically,
it
says,
two-ster
garages
are
not
prohibited
with
a
historic
condition,
cannot
be
documented,
which
it
is
documented,
then
says.
Two-Story
garages
are
allowed
where
a
two-story
garage
was
previously
a
comma
where
a
budding
a
two-story
garage,
comma
or
on
blocks
where
two-story
garages
are
dominant
and
I
guess.
N
N
E
N
J
I
struggle
with
things
that
are
historic,
but
we're
probably
atypical
for
the
home
and
the
time
period.
I
I
understand
what
the
guidelines
say
and
I
I
know
what
direction
that
leads
me,
but
I
do
kind
of
struggle
with
that.
This
wouldn't
have
been
considered
significant
when
it
was
built
and
who
knows
what
those
circumstances
were
then,
but
it
certainly
seems
atypical
for
the
home
and
for
the
surroundings.
J
D
D
D
N
I
guess
yeah:
maybe
a
staff
can
come
in
this
just
reading
through
the
guidelines
that
are
cited
in
the
staff
report.
You
know
the
the
portion
above
the
recommended
findings,
but
just
where
it
has
the
I
don't
know
it
seems
like
it
could
be
one
of
those
conditions
which
it
would,
but
so.
E
We
we
worked
on
these
extensively
not
too
long
ago
and
I
I
think
that
the
intent
was
to
be
more
clear
about
saying
that
when
we
know
what
the
historic
garage
looked
like,
you
need
to
approximate
that
when
we
don't
know
what
it
looked
like
or
whether
it
was
two
stories,
then
you
can
have
two
stories.
If
you
meet
these
conditions,
I
mean
4.4.12
is
when
no
photographic
or
other
documentation
of
a
previous
historic
garage
is
available.
A
replacement
garage
may
be
two
stories
tall
when
blah
blah
blah
blah
blah
meets
these
conditions.
E
So
that
applies
when
we
don't
know
what
the
historic
garage
was
I
think
if
you
were
to
approve
a
two-story
garage
in
replacement
of
a
one-story
garage,
that's
been
documented.
That
was
historic.
Then
you
need
a
unique
circumstance
for
that
now.
There
is
also
a
provision
that
allows
for
a
one
and
a
half
story
garage
to
replace
a
one-story
garage.
A
S
S
S
S
From
the
the
Putnam,
no
the
one
behind
me,
no,
but
the
the
Platinum
lines
it's
like
across
the
street
yeah.
B
To
me,
approximates
is
a
very
subjective
word
again:
I
think
if
we
can
make
it
a
little
more
subtle,
not
brick
and
then
use
things
like
lot
size
and
property
size
and
all
that
to
me
that
I
think
we
can
get
unique
circumstances
there.
L
Brick
and
if
you
come
back
in
with
brick,
it
matches
the
house
this
rent.
Now
this
is
a
cosmetic
thing.
It's
not
that
if
you
have
brick
house
brick
garages
on
both
sides
and
then
this
wood
structure
to
me,
it
just
would
look
out
of
place,
but.
D
B
And
that's
kind
of
why
I
liked
the
wood
is
because
it
does
differentiate
it.
As
you
know,
you're
not
saying
this
is
the
original,
because
the
original
is
significantly
smaller.
You're
saying
this:
is
this
approximates
what
the
original
looked
like
by
utilizing
some
of
the
old
materials
utilizing
wood?
Not
having
it
be,
so
you
know
bold
as
brick
might
be
so,
but
it's.
J
Also,
just
to
kind
of
point
out
something
obvious
here:
it's
over
the
allowed
square
footage
for
a
garage,
so
I
do
kind
of
feel
that
and
I
think
that's
part
of
what's
kind
of
bugging
me
about
the
design
is
I'm
really
not
opposed
to
the
brick
and
would
probably
prefer
it,
but
you
know
we're
looking
at
570
feet,
I
think
if
we
are
jumping
away
from
approximating
towards
the
original
structure,
we
at
least
need
to
stay
kind
of
within
the.
E
So
they're
actually
within
five
percent
of
the
LIE,
which
is
the
other
it's
450
or
five
percent
of
the
lot,
and
these
are
very
large,
very
brots
over
here
it
it
may
be.
You
know
something
that
may
be
useful
for
the
commission
that
unfortunately
I
don't
have
right.
Now
is
a
more
thorough
survey
of
surrounding
garages.
Just
looking
on
Google
Earth,
there
are
some
very
large
garages,
but
there
are
also
some
pretty
small,
narrow,
one-story
garages.
N
You
know
I
think
commissioner.
Gaines
brings
up
a
great
point,
I
think
if
you
don't
want
it,
you
know.
If
you
wanted
to
kind
of
disappear
into
the
neighborhood,
I
think
I
think
having
a
brick.
Would
it
would
you
wouldn't
think
twice
about
it?
It
would
just
be
there
I
think
if
it
was
different
and
it
was
the
only
one
that
was
different,
then
you're
like
oh
well,
look
at
that.
You
know
I.
L
E
This
is
a
neighboring
garage
all
right,
so
this
this
is
the
subject
property
where
there
is
no
garage
garage
to
one
side.
One
story
hip
roof
kind
of
long,
skinny
garage,
the
one
next
to
that's
pretty
well.
Hidden
to
this
side,
we've
got
a
two-story,
more
High
style
garage
when
we
go
down
the
block
this
way,
this
is
kind
of
a
little
guy.
S
So
as
you
head
that
way,
the
houses
start
becoming
significantly
smaller,
I'm
kind
of
on
one
of
the
main
streets
of
that
addition
right
there,
which
has
that
Medium
running
through
it.
So
if
you
look
across
the
street,
you
can
start
to
see
kind
of
being
on
like
if
you're
walking
down
the
Avenue,
what
you're
going
to
kind
of
see
so.
N
There's
a
yeah
I
think
something
about
my
I
think
as
far
as
the
scale
of
the
garage
I
completely
understand
what
you're
saying
regarding
you
know.
It
looks
big
on
its
own,
but
it's
a
pretty
large
house,
you
know
if
it
were
like
a
one-story,
Bungalow
or
something
absolutely
I'd,
be
like.
Oh,
my
God,
this
garage.
You
know
it's
like
the
house,
you
know
back,
but
the
fact
that
it's
a
it's
a
pretty
large
house.
You
know
it's
a
it's
a
big
tall
house
to
me.
The
garage
still
reads
a
secondary.
N
You
know
to
the
house
in
the
context
of
this
property,
but
it's
it's
really
difficult
to
see
because
we
don't
have
like
a
site
section
that
shows
you
know.
Here's
the
house,
here's
the
garage
or
something
I
mean.
Maybe
that
would
be
something
if
you
know,
depending
on
where
we
get
to
on
this
item,
but
if
additional
information
were
required.
That
might
be
helpful
to
make
a
case
that
you
know,
although
it's
a
large
Garage
in
the
context
of
the
house,
and
then
you
know
the
neighboring
houses,
it's
still
secondary,
you
know
so.
Q
Mitchum's
made
this
comment
before,
but
it
may
not
seem
this
way,
but
we
we
want
to
approve
your
projects.
Everyone's
a
projects
I
think
this
one's
really
hard,
because
I
think
it's
pretty
definitive
that
it
does
not
meet
the
guidelines
yeah,
so
I,
think
the
question
for
the
commission
is
is
the
unique
circumstance
that
number
one
it
has
an
adjacent,
two-story
garage
and
number
two
that
the
size
of
the
lot
makes
the
massing
more
appropriate
than
a
smaller
lot.
Those
to
me
would
be
the
two
unique
circumstances
that
you
could
claim.
Q
L
I'm
of
approval,
hpca
22-178.
A
E
A
L
Thought
it
was
in
the
guidelines,
so
I
thought
that
was
perfect.
E
B
E
This
is
in
master,
Park,
Board,
6
consideration
and
possible
action
on
application
by
Corey
Bates
8
20
for
Joshua
Newberry
for
certificate
of
appropriateness
to
one
install
solar
panels
elective
these
are
proposed
on
the
detached
garage
and
on
the
primary
dwelling.
Staff
recommended
approval,
with
condition
that
may
not
be
installed
on
the
front
slope
of
the
primade
line,
because
those
would
be
fully
visible
from
the
street.
B
Hi
so
talk
to
us
about
the
solar
panels.
It
sounds
like
there's
two
that
are
in
a
place
where
they
are
generally
restricted.
Yes,
what
does
that
do
to
the
project.
T
That
to
the
project
specifically
will
drop.
The
production
of
the
system
by
38
percent
I
did
have
a
presentation
with
some
imagery
that
I
could
show
to
support
that
as
well
as
some
other
examples
of
installations
to
show
the
quality
of
the
install
that
that's
being
proposed
today,
I,
don't
know
if
that
is
available
or.
E
T
B
That
yeah
to
the
owners
of
the
house
applicants
will
they
still
do
the
project
even
without
the
front-facing
panels?.
B
A
H
T
I
one
appreciate
your
time,
your
review,
your
patience
with
me.
Continuing
to
talk
about
solar
in
HP
districts,
I
I
think
there
is
a
real
opportunity
here
to
provide
people
the
opportunity
to
put
solar
on
the
house
not
penalize
them
for
having
the
front
of
their
house
facing
south
understanding
that
the
guidelines
could
change.
T
Some
people
feel
like
they
should
change,
but
not
making
people
wait
for
that,
and
you
know
looking
at
the
systems
from
the
standpoint
of
the
quality
and
the
aesthetic
and
the
impact
on
the
historical
character
of
the
house
and
I
I've
been
up
here
before
I've
talked
to
all
of
you
before.
What
we
do
is
we
strive
to
make
these
things
look
beautiful.
We
use
silphab
black
on
black
panels,
there's
no
exposed
conduit.
T
K
N
Less
steep
slope
and
it's
kind
of
secondary
I
mean
it
doesn't
seem
like
it's
as
visually.
You
know,
as
far
as
as
far
as
solar
panels
on
the
street
facing
side
they're
pretty
minimally
visible,
I
know
that
you
know
we've
gone
around
with
this
on.
You
know
in
circles,
and
the
guidelines
are
pretty
clear.
You
know
if
it's
visible
in
any
way
on
the
on
the
south
side
of
the
facade
that
they're
not
approved.
N
You
know
my
position
on
this
is
as
a
commission,
you
know
I
feel
like
we
have
the
agency
to
interpret
the
guidelines
based
on
whatever
information
we
have.
You
know
based
on
needs
of
a
community.
Whatever
you
know,
they're
different
conditions
have
changed,
things
are
always
changing
and
we
have
to
be
somewhat
flexible,
I
believe
and
I
think
you
know,
as
a
commission,
we're
able
to
interpret
guidelines
and
make
decisions
when
maybe
the
guidelines
don't
quite
fit.
N
You
know,
what's
what's
necessary
for
a
given
time
to
me.
So
solar
panels
are
a
perfect
example
of
that,
especially
because
you're
not
actually
altering
the
building.
I
mean
it's
it's
something
that
is
applied
to
the
building.
That's
easily
easily
removable,
it
doesn't
damage
the
building
and
it
has
such
a
net
positive.
N
The
only
reason
the
only
argument
that
I
can
that
I've
heard
against
solar
panels
is
just
an
aesthetic
argument
and
from
what
I
can
generally
tell
we
don't
really
make
decisions
based
on
Aesthetics,
like
we
don't
pick
someone's
paint
color,
you
know.
If
you
want
to
paint
your
house
Pink,
you
could
paint
a
hot
pink,
so
you
know
I
kind
of
struggle
with
denying
something
that
I
feel
like
you
know.
Has
such
a
net
positive
and
the
only
detraction
that
I
can
see
is
an
aesthetic
one.
So
I
guess
that's
my
five
cents,
I.
D
I
think
that
I
just
was
I
would
say
on
the
other
side.
Is
it's
a
public
process?
If
we
want
to
change
it,
we
need
to
change
the
guidelines,
go
through
the
process
and
make
sure
that
everybody
in
each
of
the
neighborhoods
are
in
agreement.
It
might
turn
out
that
some
neighborhoods
are
have
got,
they
come
together
and
they
say
no
we're
not
going
to
do
them.
Other
neighborhoods
might
come
together
and
say:
hey
we,
you
know,
we've
gone
through
the
process.
D
People
don't
object
in
our
neighborhood,
so
I'm
not
I'm,
not
against
or
for
them.
I
am
I'm
just
for
I'm
I
feel
like
I,
represent
the
guidelines,
and
that's
the
only
reason.
If
it
is
time
I
mean
it's
obvious
that
we've
had
this
discussion
so
many
times
that
it
needs
to
get
in
the
works
to
go
through
a
process
and
look
to
see
if
people
in
the
neighborhoods
have
and
then
give
them
the
full
opportunity
to
do
that.
J
Think
that's
where
I'm
that's,
where
I
am
as
well!
It's
just
that,
while
morally
and
personally
I
would
be
a
yes
to
all
of
it.
I
do
think
like
approving
this.
While
it's
kind
of
an
active
discussion
for
change
is
just
a
little
premature.
While
it's
been
it's
on
the
table
right
now,
so
I
hesitate
to
approve
this,
not
knowing
what
that
potential
change
to
guidelines
could
look
like
or.
B
J
Reason,
but
to
be
clear,
I'm
only
saying
that,
with
regard
to
the
south
facing
facade
zero
problem
whatsoever
with.
T
The
the
homeowner
has
I,
don't
know
the
details
enough
to
speak
to
those
conversations
here,
but
I
know
that
they
have
neighbors
that
are
wanting,
so
they
they
want
to
put
solar
on
in
the
same
fashion.
Do.
F
J
K
F
K
F
F
T
Just
some
precedent
photos
that
show
what
the
install
would
actually
look
like
to
to
convey
that
level
of
quality
that
level
of
aesthetic,
because
it,
you
know,
feels
truly
like
an
aesthetic
conversation
that
you
know
as
far
as
weighing
once
you're
approve
when
to
deny.
If,
if
the
applicant
can
prove
a
level
of
quality,
that
could
be
a
reference
point
for
deciding
to
or
not
to
so
just.
Q
My
opinion
is
I,
don't
think,
for
me,
level
of
quality
is
irrelevant,
I
think
the
question
is,
and
I'm
kind
of
on
the
other
side
of
commissioner
Ryman
Phillip
is
yes,
it
technically
is
a
fix
to
the
building
and
can
be
removed,
but
the
intent
of
that
system-
it's
like
saying
a
mechanical
coil
unit
or
a
compressor-
can
be
removed
from
the
property
yeah
it
can,
but
it's
there
so
the
property
can
function
so
I
think
the
question
ends
up
becoming.
Q
L
J
E
J
Just
seems
like
such
a
long
process
and
we're
getting
more
of
them
every
month
and
I
I
am
in
agreement
to
only
approve
the
the
back
of
the
house
panels,
but
I
just
it
sounds
like
we're.
Moving
towards
everybody
wanting
to
approve
more
and
I'd
like
the
ability
to
do
it
do.
E
N
Do
we
have
maybe
I,
don't
know
a
timeline
or
some
clarity
on
what
that
process
looks.
K
N
Last
fall
at
our
Workshop
or
we
had
a
workshop
and
yeah.
We
discussed
solar
panels.
You
know
two
degrees
I
think
there
was
some
discussion
forming,
maybe
a
special
committee
to
look
at
this.
But
what
is
you.
B
A
O
A
quick
comment
as
someone
who
came
before
with
solar
panels
last
March
or
April,
and
the
frustrating
thing
as
a
resident
is
kind
of
hearing
the
same
conversation
and
then
hearing
probably
gonna
take
a
year.
You
know
if
we
start
now
and
seems
like
it's.
It's
up
to
the
commission
to
propose
changes
to
the
guidelines
so
like
I
can
go
to
the
master
Park
neighborhood
association
meeting,
which
most
people
don't
go
to
as
you
know,
and
propose
something
and
try
to
get
workshops
going.
But
it
feels
like
as
a
resident.
E
Fine
I
will
say:
staff
takes
a
lot
of
the
blame
for
the
pace
of
this,
and
that's
because
the
planning
department
is
doing
a
comprehensive
code
update
to
all
of
chapter
59.
So
that's
taken
a
lot
of
Staff
resources.
We've
also
have
have
had
kind
of
an
informal
we're
not
going
forward
with
any
other
code
changes
unless
absolutely
necessary,
but
I
know
this.
D
D
This,
because,
usually
if
we
do
a
guideline
change
for
the
for
HP,
then
we
try
to
round
up
all
of
the
other
little
issues
that
we've
had
problems
with
over
the
last
couple
of
years
garages
and
whatever
else
has
been,
you
know
a
problem,
and
so
it
takes
longer
than
I
mean
that's.
So
that
makes
the
pro
because
it
takes
so
long.
We
don't
want
to
just
do
one
item
generally.
We
want
to
do
all
of
the
items
that
have
been
problems,
and
so
then
therefore,
there's
a
bigger
study
and
going
on
to.
D
Q
I
just
say
that
I
think
that
correct
me,
if
I'm
wrong,
but
in
the
guidelines
like,
if
somebody
really
really
want
solar,
they
can
technically
put
like
a
solar
farm
in
their
backyard
and
take
up
their
backyard
space
if
it's
under
six
feet.
So
so
I
think
you.
There
are
Provisions
that
allow
you
to
get
solar.
The.
E
T
Well,
the
the
problem
becomes
where,
on
your
property,
do
you
have
the
greatest
access
to
light
to
most
efficiently
use
those
panels?
And
while
you
technically
could
put
solar
panels
in
your
backyard,
when
you
have
a
south
facing
house,
that
means
your
backyard
is
in
shade
by
the
house,
in
our
HP
districts,
there's
typically
old
growth,
large
trees
that
further
shade
anything
that's
on
the
ground
it
it
becomes.
Q
Sure,
I
I
don't
object
to
the
roof
being
the
most
efficient
way
of
doing
that.
That's
not
contestable
I
agree
with
you,
I'm
saying
there
is
a
way
within
the
guidelines
to
provide
solar.
It's
just
people
nobody's
willing
to
make
that
concession
to
make
it
happen,
but.
N
What
to
me
is
unique
about
this:
half
the
houses
you
know
streets
are
in
east
west
generally
in
Oklahoma
City,
and
what
makes
this
unique
to
me
is
that
half
the
residents-
let's
say
you-
have
a
gable
roof
per
guidelines,
could
could
have
solar
on
the
most
efficient
place
on
their
house
and
get
approved
no
problem,
the
other
half
simply
because
they're
on
the
wrong
side
of
the
street
are
prevented
from
doing
the
same
and
to
me
that's
that's
an
issue.
J
J
If
you
live
on
a
corner,
you
can't
have
a
two-story,
Edition
or
a
two-story
garage
I
mean
we
do
have
other
instances
in
which
the
location
of
your
house
determines
what
these
guidelines
allow
and
again,
that's
not
me,
I
I,
don't
know
why
we
can't
you
know
I,
don't
know
aesthetically
that
there's
a
reason
to
not
have
a
two-story
Edition
on
a
corner,
I'm
just
saying
that
location
dictates
other
things
within
the
guidelines
too.
B
K
A
J
B
Okay,
let's
see
other
business
that
was
moved.
We
are
now
on
item
number.
Eight
Communications
and
reports
looks
like
we
had
11
administrative
approvals.
Do
we
need
to
do
anything
with
those
nope
nope,
any
withdrawals,
administrative
closings,
anything
from
city
council,
Board
of
adjustments
or
the
Planning
Commission
nope.
K
B
Anything
from
the
municipal
counselor's
office,
nothing
excellent,
one,
second,
okay,
so
our
next
meeting
date
next
regular
schedule
is
scheduled
meeting
for
historic
preservation.
Commission
is
Wednesday
February
1st
2023
at
2
p.m.
At
the
municipal
building
city
council
chambers,
new
applications
for
the
February
1
meeting
will
received
January
3rd
new
information
on
projects
continued
from
today's
meeting
to
the
upcoming
meeting
must
be
submitted
to
staff
by
4
P.M
Tuesday
January
10
2023.
question.
B
E
E
Normally
we
list
those
and
I
can't
tell
you
right
now
when
it
is
because
I
don't
remember
but
I
think
it's
in
March
so
and
we'll
be
doing
commission
committee
training
coming
up
as
well
and
then
the
other
thing
I've
emailed
everyone
over
the
last
several
weeks
about
the
July
HP
meeting,
we
got
bumped
from
our
normal
2
p.m,
Wednesday
time
slot,
because
Council
has
to
meet
on
Tuesday
on
Wednesday
and
they
block
out
a
lot
of
time
for
Council
I
know
after
discussing
with
various
folks
looking
at
schedules.
E
Looking
at
other
meetings,
it
seems
the
most
viable
option
with
maintaining
Quorum
is
going
to
be
to
take
the
later
time
slot
on
Wednesday
afternoon,
so
we'll
meet
at
3
30
instead
of
2
o'clock
on
Wednesday
July
5th.
We'll
do
our
best
to
get
you
guys
out
of
here
as
quick
as
we
can
everything
on
the
consent
document,
if
you're
not
on
the
consent.
Docket
you're,
continuing
to
August
but
just
anyway
same
date,
same
location
hour
and
a
half
later.
N
Okay,
I
would
like
I'd,
have
a
quick
note:
I
inform
staff
that
I'm
resigning
at
the
end
of
this
meeting.
I
just
you
know,
started
a
business
last
year
and
it's
just
really
time
intensive
and
I
just
feel
you
know.
I
want
to
be
100
committed
and
I,
don't
want
to
feel
like
I
can't
be
100
committed,
I.
N
Experience
I'd
go
out,
public
meetings
function
before
and
it's
been
a
really
great
experience
and
all
my
fellow
Commissioners
I
think
I,
don't
know
how
many
years
I've
been
on
a
few
but
I
know.
I,
know,
I,
think
it's
just
you
and
I
who
were
there
I'd
slap
from
the
original
group,
but
anyway
I.
It's
been
a
really
great
experience
and
I
will
not
be
a
stranger.
You'll,
see
me
presenting
from
time
to
time,
I'm
sure
and
you
can
not
deny
my
projects
so
just.
N
Everything
fits
in
the
grad
line,
guidelines
yeah
no,
but
I
do
I
enjoyed
working
with
everyone
and
yeah
I'm.
Sorry
to
go,
but
I
think
it's
a
decision.
I
have
to
make
so
I.
B
You
will
be
missed
and
thank
you
for
your
service
and
thanks
for
making
this
meeting
more
efficient
for
all
of
us
and
thanks
for
everything,
you've
done
for
the
city
as
well
too,
because
this
is
important,
appreciate
it
but
appreciate
you,
okay,
any
citizens
that
wish
to
be
here.
Anybody
want
to
give
Claus
a
nope
nobody's
here.
Okay,.
A
So
that
may
slow
the
process
more,
but
I,
think
people's
time
is
valuable
and
I
don't
want
to
like
incrementally
do
one
thing
and
then
three
months
later
come
back
to
them
for
another
thing
and
or
however,
you
know
so,
I
think
it
would
be
beneficial
to
go
ahead
and
explore
some
of
these
other
things
that
keep
coming
up
too.
So.
A
N
It's
and
I
completely
understand
with
the
code
update,
that's
a
whole
mess
on
its
own
and
but
if
there's
really
just
Clarity,
it's
all
you
know
is
it
something
that
is
actively
being
worked
on
and
we
think
that
within
a
certain
timeline
we
can,
you
know,
make
a
decision
on
it
or
is
it
something
that
we're
going
to
wait
till
you
know
some
some
kind
of
you
know
it
doesn't
have
to
be
a
hard
schedule
or
something
but
there's
some
kind.
E
Update
yeah,
the
last
big
one
was
2014.
We
made
a
change
in
2019
specific
to
small
cells,
so
on
the
document
it
says
2019,
but
the
last
time
we
really
did
a
comprehensive
review
was
2014.,
and
that's
one
thing
too
that
we
had
new
guidelines
had
been
adopted
in
2012.
Then
we
did
a
pretty
good.
You
know
second
pass
in
2014.
We
don't
like
to
do
that
over
and
over
you
know
close
together,
because
then
people
are
going
well.
I
I
have
these
guidelines
I
printed
them
off.
E
A
Following
along
with
the
sign
code
update
and
how
challenging
that
has
been
to
get
approved,
I'm
a
little
hesitant
about
how
fast,
even
just
the
general
code
update
is
going
to
take
so
I
understand
like
trying
not
to
like
overwhelm
and
do
too
much
at
once.
But
I
think
these
are
things
we
need
to
do
sooner
than
later,
because
I'm,
who
knows
how
long
the
full
adoption
of
the
code
update.
D
F
E
I
will
look
at
when
our
next
Workshop
is
scheduled
and
I
will
will
make
that
kind
of
our
agenda
for
the
next
time
to
identify
areas
that
we
want
to
address
with
a
possible
update
to
the
guidelines.
I
would
say
in
the
interim
if
you
all,
when
you
have
time
when
you're
reviewing
your
packet
or
you're
talking
to
someone
about
their
house
or
anything
like
that.