►
From YouTube: HPC 6-14-22 Full
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
Call
to
order
the
meeting
of
the
historic
preservation
commission
of
june
14
2022..
A
May
we
please
I'd
like
to
welcome
you
all
to
this
meeting
and
introduce
the
members
of
the
commission
beginning
on
my
right.
A
A
C
A
We
would
now
have
moved
to
announcements
dennis
fernandez,
our
administrator,
but
I
would
like
to
also
recognize
that
our
staff
here
today
is
elaine
lund.
I'm
into
owen
and
our
legal
counsel
miss
pettis
max.
E
This
morning's
hearing,
I
just
wanted
to
first
of
all
request
that,
if
we're
kind
of
at
the
peak
of
of
holiday
season,
so
if
you
know
of
a
holiday
that
you're
going
to
be
away
for,
if
you
would
let
us
know
in
advance
of
the
hearing,
I
know
our
our
calendar
got
a
little
bit
shifted
with
some
of
the
special
call
public
hearings
and
we're
sort
of
meeting
on
an
alternative
date
cycle
right
now.
E
I'm
I'm
anticipating
us
not
having
to
meet
in
july,
but
we'll
we'll
see
when
we
get
a
little
bit
closer
to
that.
But
if
you
do
know
of
a
holiday
that's
coming
up,
we
would
appreciate
the
communication
with
that.
We
do
have
a
couple
items
on
the
agenda
today.
So
we'll
we'll
begin.
The
process
wanted
to
ask
our
legal
counsel,
miss
pettis
mackel,
to
discuss
the
potential
conflicts
of
inter
interest
in
ex
part
day,
communication.
F
Thank
you
good
morning,
kamaria
pettis
macro
from
the
city
attorney's
office.
Will
the
commissioners
please
state
whether
or
not
they've
had
any
ex
parte
communications
regarding
any
of
the
items
that
are
on
the
agenda?
No,
no!
No,
additionally,
will
the
commissioners
please
state
whether
or
not
they
have
any
conflicts
of
interest
regarding
the
items
that
are
on
the
agenda.
No,
no.
Thank
you.
E
With
that
we'll
administer
the
swearing
anyone
in
the
public
who's
going
to
be
presenting
or
giving
testimony
or
public
comment
this
morning.
If
you
could
please
stand
and
raise
your
right
hand.
E
This
morning's
first
case
item
number
seven
hpc
2022-02
for
the
property
located
at
134,
1314,
south
desoto
avenue.
E
The
order
of
this
presentation
is
is
going
to
be
that
the
the
agent
property
owner
come
forward
and
present
his
information
then
followed
by
the
staff
report
and
then
going
through
the
normal
sequence
of
events
through
the
public
hearing
process.
So
with
that
I'll
ask
mr
blackwood
to
come
up
and
begin
his
presentation.
Thank
you.
G
Good
morning,
members,
jim
blackwood,
I'm
the
property
owner
of
1314
south
desoto,
the
subject
of
this
hearing.
Can
we
have
the
powerpoint
come
up?
Please
great.
G
As
I
said,
I'm
jim
blackwood
I've
been
a
a
neighbor
here
in
hyde
park
for
25
years
now
I
love
this
area.
It's
my
home.
I
love
the
historic
preservation
element
of
the
home.
I've
done
it
myself.
I
love
doing
this
work.
G
The
pictures
here
on
the
the
slide
here
show
the
before
and
after
of
my
house
and
the
before
and
afters
of
the
carriage
house,
which
was
at
the
time,
a
non-contributing
property,
and
then
I
built
a
brand
new
structure
that
blends
in
perfectly
as
if
it
were
contributing,
that's
the
kind
of
person
I
do
kind
of
person.
I
am,
and
these
are
the
things
that
I
do.
G
I
love
the
preservation
component.
I
love
the
codes,
I
love
the
history
and
the
traditions
and
I
do
deep
research
in
both
to
make
sure
I
get
it
right.
So
I've
got
a
very
brief
presentation
here.
I'm
allowed
about
30
minutes
or
so,
but
I
cut
it
down
to
kind
of
focus
in
on
the
most
relevant
points
here
and
the
points
of
proof
that
I'll
bring
up.
G
So
the
bullets
are
very
simple
here:
some
overhead
images,
some
administration
just
to
gain
perspective,
of
what
we're
talking
about
then
summarize,
very
briefly,
the
application
that
I
submitted
to
you
that
you
have,
and
hopefully
you've
had
at
least
a
chance
to
take
a
look
at
that
and
then
I'll
summarize,
the
proofs
that
support
my
position,
that
this
is
in
fact
a
non-contributing
property
overview
image
here
on
the
top
here
marked
by
the
red
indicator,
is
the
property
you
can
see
the
it's
on
a
corner
street
the
trees
obscure
it
a
little
bit,
but
desoto
avenue
runs
toward
the
northwest
and
then
toward
the
southeastest
hills
across
the
street
to
your
left
as
you're
looking
at
that
is
burns
park
and
that
borders
howard
avenue.
G
So
that
gives
you
a
general
perspective
to
the
north
is
an
historic
apartment.
Building
that
was
built
in
1926
and
to
the
right
as
you're.
Looking
at
that
structure
marked
with
the
red
is
also
a
historic
property
built
originally,
as
a
single
family
house
being
currently
used
as
a
duplex
down
on
the
bottom,
the
photo's
a
little
bit
small
to
compress
the
file
here
a
little
bit
to
send,
but
you
can
see
through
even
the
undertype
there.
G
The
historic
property
maintains
pretty
much
the
same
footprint
that
we've
got
right
now,
but
what
is
quite
prominent
there
and
the
prominent
feature
is
that
porch
that
faces
the
southeast.
It's
a
completely
open
porch.
It
was
never
filled
in
and
it
was
not
used
as
a
sleeping
porch.
According
to
any
of
the
evidence
that
I
have-
and
it
was
clearly
built
at
that
time
with
a
clear
view
of
tampa
bay
from
a
second
story
that
was
unobstructed.
G
G
G
It
is
underlined,
as
I
said,
indicate
below
or
as
established
by
the
nomination
package,
which
is
right
here
and
what
you
see
before
you
as
contributing
altered,
but
contributing
and
non-contributing
definitions
as
they
exist
in
the
code.
That
is
part
of
the
municipal
ordinance.
I
also
highlighted
the
the
key
phrase
in
there
that
says:
criteria
to
qualify,
so
anything
that
is
qualified
has
to
do
so.
According
to
this
code-
and
this
is
the
key
word-
the
first
word
criteria
that
we
will
keep
in
mind
as
we
go
forward
boiling.
G
G
G
Here's
a
summary
of
the
of
the
photos
that
you
have
also
in
your
package
here,
I'm
not
going
to
go
red
arrow
by
red
arrow.
G
Everything
from
damage,
destruction
to
fenestration,
inappropriate
materials
such
as
asbestos
and
aluminum
and,
of
course,
the
most
prominent
feature
that
is
visible
on
both
the
front
as
well
as
the
longest
street
side
is
the
filled
in
porch
and,
of
course,
down
here
at
the
bottom.
We've
got
the
stairs
that
lead
to
that
filled
in
porch,
which
was
a
separate
apartment
that
was
created.
Those
stairs,
in
fact
I'll
bring
it
up
now
are
not
built
to
code.
They
are
currently
illegal.
G
Okay,
these
next
angles
also
show
violations
you
can
see
in
your
upper
left.
There
is
even
a
window
that
was
filled
in
with
concrete
to
facilitate
the
apartment
quarters
that
are
behind
there,
as
well
as
to
provide
room
for
all
the
external
plumbing
and
wiring
you
see
on
there
above.
That
is
another
window
that
was
original,
that
is
filled
in
with
an
inappropriate
material,
aluminum
same
on
the
other
sides,
etc
in
the
center,
and
the
bottom
is
the
rear
of
the
structure
facing
the
northwest.
G
That
has
a
lean
to
like
structure.
I'm
told
in
the
staff
report
that
the
arc
somehow
approved
that
I
don't
know
how
that
came
about.
We
don't
have
the
record
for
that,
but
that's
clearly
not
contributing
to
just
a
casual
observation
to
the
far
right
is
the
door
that
leads
to
a
rear
apartment
that
was
cut
out
in
roughly
1953.
G
What
we
have
on
page
47,
however,
though,
is
a
paragraph
that
was
omitted
out
of
the
staff
report
and
that
omission
of
that
paragraph
is
significant,
and
I
can
read
it
for
you.
If
the
historic
exterior
building
material
is
covered
by
non-historic
material
such
as
modern
siding,
the
property
can
still
be
eligible.
If-
and
I
emphasized-
if-
because
it's
italicized
in
that
paper,
if
the
significant
form
features
and
detailing
are
not
obscured,
mine
are
obscured
if
a
property's
exterior
is
covered
by
a
non-historic,
false
front
or
curtain
wall,
probably
a
porch-like
enclosure
as
well.
G
G
G
That
is
not
so
because,
on
page
45,
under
the
elements
of
integrity,
materials
quote
a
property
whose
historic
features
and
materials
have
been
lost
and
then
reconstructed
is
usually
not
eligible.
That
was
a
paragraph
that
was
also
omitted.
I
have
two
other
omissions
that
I'm
not
going
to
discuss
I'll
save
those
for
for
the
question
and
answer
session.
G
Okay,
this
pattern
of
omissions
is
not
inconsistent
with
the
history
of
this
structure.
Down
below
here
is
a
preservationist
report.
There
was
a
formal
report
that
the
hhpna
of
which
I
am
a
member
paying
member
of
provided
a
sworn
testimony
in
a
hearing
before
the
arc
in
june
of
2018.,
you
can
match
blue
text
with
blue
text.
The
text
of
this
report
was
lifted
from
an
internet
source
without
citation.
G
The
citation
should
have
said
that
this
was
a
wikipedia
source
on
contributing
and
non-contributing
properties.
You
will
notice
that
there
is
a
sentence
missing
in
the
preservationist
report.
The
sentence
missing
is
highlighted
there
and
you
can
read
it
for
yourself.
It
says
sometimes
something
as
simple
as
reciting
a
I'm
I'm
not
reading
this
verbatim.
I
don't
have
my
glasses
on.
I
can't
read
through
the
red,
but
something
as
simple
as
residing
a
building
could
potentially
render
a
building
non-contributing.
G
It
not
only
provides
that
sentence
that
was
omitted
in
the
preservationist
report,
which
shouldn't
have
been
omitted,
but
it
exonerates
the
building
then,
and
it
exonerates
the
building
now,
because
there's
a
photo
also.
That
shows
exactly
what
they're
talking
about
there
with
the
second
floor
covered
in
asbestos,
siding
with
window
air
conditioners
on
the
side.
So
when
we
superimpose
my
building
on
that
and
look
at
that,
my
book,
my
building,
is
the
textbook
example
of
a
non-contributing
structure
that
could
also
be
replaced
on
that
official
wikipedia
page
on
contributing
and
non-contributing.
G
The
the
beginning
here
cites
the
functions
here.
I
want
to
draw
your
attention
to
what
is
highlighted:
single-family
residence,
it's
not
a
single-family
residence
that
is
not
the
current
function.
It's
not
the
current
function
through
history,
either.
In
fact,
we
can
even
debate
the
historic
function
as
being
correct.
G
It
was
originally
built,
yes,
as
a
single
family
residence,
but
the
historical
use
of
the
structure,
as
documented
through
history,
is
that
for
70
years
of
the
100
years
of
history,
it
has
been
used
as
a
multi-family
residence.
It
has
only
been
used
as
a
single
family
residence
for
30
years
also,
notably-
and
this
is
the
most
important
part-
that
the
property
is
zoned
and
used
as
multi-family
and
was
zoned
and
used
as
multi-family
for
30
years
before
it
was
designated
altered,
but
contributing
as
a
single
family
home.
G
I
don't
know
what
the
legal
implications
necessarily
are
right
now,
but
it
appears
that
that
is
an
implied
down.
Zoning
of
the
property
and
its
use-
and
I
don't
know
if
that's
either
proper,
but
at
a
minimum.
Those
facts
were
aware
of
the
people
who
designated
this
30-plus
years
ago
and
that
right
there
should
have
been
a
disqualifier
because
it
should
not
and
cannot
be
legally
restored
to
a
single
family
home
and
then
decrement
the
private
property
owners
rights.
At
the
same
time,.
G
Next
slide,
the
staff
report
here
seems
to
affirm
that
the
property
is
not
contributing
itself
and
do
so
three
times
in
their
own
text.
They
highlight
a
text
under
historic
districts.
If
a
property
has
quote
been
substantially
altered
since
the
period
of
signific
district's
period
of
significance,
it
doesn't
contribute
mine's
been
substantially
altered
on
two
visible
sides.
G
The
second
quote
to
the
right
there,
the
initial
designation
of
contributing
altered
was
based
on
alterations
that
were
deemed
to
be
inconsistent
with
the
structures
original
character,
but
reversible.
So
here
we've
got
the
concession
that
the
alterations
were
inconsistent
with
the
structure's
original
character,
that's
good,
but
it
uses
the
key
word
reversible.
It
says
that
that
is
the
operative
term
by
which
that
designation
was
levied.
Reversible
is
not
in
the
code.
Let
me
remind
everybody
that
is
not
in
the
code.
G
G
The
alterations
are
not
based
on
reversibility,
but
they
are
based
on
whether
they
are
remedial
or
not,
and
I
have
a
precedent
to
demonstrate
exactly
that
point
coming
up
and
the
staff
report
and
the
last
bullet
down
you
know:
that's
highlighted.
The
staff
report
itself
affirms
that
that
very
quote
that
I
highlighted
so
I
didn't
even
have
to
provide
that.
It
does
note
in
that
there's
a
minor
typo
in
there.
They
say
it's
the
definition
of
non-contributing,
but
it's
actually
the
definition
of
altered
but
contributing
okay.
G
Here's
the
precedent
that
I
alluded
to
in
the
history
of
these
kind
of
proceedings,
they're
quite
unusual,
but
there's
one
that
mirrors
my
case
almost
identically,
and
it
does
so
on.
Two
major
points
number
one:
the
type
of
changes
that
were
made,
the
alterations
you
can
read
them
in
bold.
It
regarded
the
enclosure
of
a
carport
check,
the
alterations
to
the
front,
porch
check,
windows
and
siding,
check
and
check.
So
we're
four
for
four
on
this
case
that
occurred
in
1997..
G
This
particular
property
here
is
the
1801
bayshore
property.
This
is,
as
the
map
shows
designated
altered,
but
contributing
it
went
before
the
arc
in
may
of
1997
at
a
highly
contentious
hearing
that
didn't
conclude
until
about
1,
30
or
2
in
the
next
morning,
but
the
arc
board
member
is
quote,
and
this
is
from
the
tampa
tribune
article.
G
I
do
not
have
the
archive
record
of
the
arc
hearing,
but
liz
albert
said
she
voted
to
allow
demolition
to
proceed
because
quote
legally
there's
no
other
way
I
could
vote
the
enclosure
of
a
carport
is
alterations
of
the
front
porch
and
siding
the
standards
for
historic
structures
in
hyde
park.
Allow
for
remedial
there's
that
change
again,
because
that's
in
the
code,
the
remedial
changes
necessary
touch-ups,
but
not
those
that
change
the
character
of
the
building.
G
The
character
of
my
building
was
fundamentally
altered,
as
my
package
says,
from
a
single
family
house
to
a
multi-unit
apartment.
Building
that
character
is
fundamentally
altered,
so
she
said
we
couldn't
fit
it
into
the
category
of
historically
contributing
because
there
were
too
many
alterations
just
as
the
code
criteria
mandates.
G
Okay,
the
staff
report
alleges
that
this
property
can
be
rehabilitated
with
rehabilitated,
in
accordance
with
the
secretary
of
interior
standards
for
rehabilitation
using
physical
and
photographic
evidence
to
support
its
assertion.
That
assertion
is
not
correct.
G
The
secretary
of
interior
standards
for
rehabilitation
concludes
with
a
pair
starts
with
a
paragraph
and
concludes
with
a
sentence
before
it
goes
through.
The
10
10
points
of
u.s
code,
saying
the
following:
standards
are
to
be
applied
to
specific
rehabilitation
projects
in
a
reasonable
manner,
taking
into
account
economic
and
technical
feasibility.
G
I
have
enclosed
here
an
inspection
report
here
and
that's
part
of
this
package
that
I'm
going
to
submit
as
part
of
the
record
here,
that
the
walls
and
ceilings
and
floors
are
constructed
by
lath
and
plaster
wall,
so
that
no
cavity
space
was
left
for
mechanical
plumbing
and
electrical
systems
and
components
to
be
installed
and
brought
up
to
code.
Unquote,
that's
why
you
see
all
that
plumbing
and
conduit
on
the
outside
and
the
insides
of
the
buildings.
There
is
no
room
to
run
any
of
this.
G
G
So
here
we're
going
to
summarize
the
proof
here.
The
evidence
clearly
shows
that
my
property
does
not
meet
the
code
criteria
for
a
contributing
designation.
Nor
does
it
meet
the
criteria
for
the
nrb15
that
the
staff
report
cited.
This
is
what
the
staff
report
cited
nrb15
and
they
did
so
because
of
the
code
section
27-261,
subsection
261.
G
Unlike
this,
though,
that
spells
out
what
contributing
and
non-contributing
are
clearly,
the
hrb
does
not
do
so
in
60
pages
of
text,
and
I
have
the
the
pdf
on
on
file.
I
could
submit
as
evidence
as
well
if
we
do
a
simple
keyword,
search
for
the
word
contributing
being
the
operative
term,
because
that's
what
we're
deciding
here
today,
whether
the
property
is
contributing
or
whether
it
is
non-contributing
the
word
contributing,
comes
up
in
that
60-page
document.
Only
three
times
two
of
those
are
extraneous
hits.
G
Fourth,
the
staff
reports
and
states
that
the
additional
initial
designation
was
based
on
a
function
of
reversibility.
Once
again,
that's
the
wrong
legal
standard
that
was
applied.
Third
major
bullet
bayshore,
1801,
bayshore
property
mirrors.
My
case
and
four
specific
examples
and
the
arc's
legal
routing
ruling
per
the
code
centered
on
the
remedial
natures
of
those
changes.
G
Lastly,
the
secretary
of
interior
standards
for
rehabilitation
as
sound
as
they
are
cannot
be
applied
here
because
of
the
technical
and
economic
phys
feasibilities,
the
economic
being
subordinate
to
the
technical
feasibility.
In
this
case,
the
property
cannot
be
rehabilitated,
as
the
staff
report
asserts.
G
G
So
they're
still
bound
hpc
we're
all
still
bound
by
this
code,
so
section
two
subsection
261
does
not
replace,
supersede
or
obviate
this
code
at
all
either.
So,
even
though,
under
the
code
provisions
is
going
to
consider
the
nrb
here,
number
15,
that
doesn't
mean
that
this
has
been
obviated.
G
G
As
I
said
before,
the
word
contributing
the
operative
phrase
and
the
term
that
we're
going
to
be
using
in
this
discussion
and
decision
is
only
mentioned
three
times
and
the
one
time
that
it's
mentioned
in
context.
It
supports
a
non-contributing
position,
but
moreover,
one
is
left
to
ask
the
question:
are
there
two
two
competing
criterias
by
which
we
judge
contributing
and
non-contributing
properties?
G
G
H
H
H
H
The
aerial
map,
at
the
top
of
your
screen,
shows
where
the
property
is
located
at
the
north
northwest
corner
of
desoto
avenue
and
hills
avenue
and
at
the
bottom
of
the
screen
you
can
see
the
view
primarily
looking
at
hills
avenue
here.
That's
the
the
shorter
side
of
the
property
and
desoto
avenue
is
the
longer
side
of
the
property.
H
It
shows
it
as
a
primarily
a
one-story
tile
clay
tile
building
with
a
second
story,
sort
of
pop-up
made
out
of
wood
at
the
center
of
the
building,
and
it
also
shows
the
front
porch
on
the
the
south
and
southwest
corner
of
the
house
shown
in
a
wood
construction
as
well.
H
You
can
see
that
the
dashed
lines
sort
of
indicate
where
there
are
openings,
so
you
can
see
that
the
the
porch
shown
in
yellow
on
the
first
story
at
this.
The
bottom
corner
is
open
on
two
sides
and
then
the
second
story
would
frame
structure
appears
to
have
some
openings
in
it
as
well,
indicating
that
it
may
have
been
partially
opened
to
the
elements
which
was
commonly
seen
when,
as
part
of
a
structure
was
used
as
a
sleeping,
porch
or
sleeping
room
toward
the
back
of
the
structure.
There's
an
indication
that
there's
auto
storage.
H
H
You
can
make
out
the
the
openings
where
the
front
porch
is
on
the
southwest
corner
of
the
building
and
clearly
see
that
there's
no
second
story
directly
above
the
porch
at
that
time
or
along
the
front
of
the
building.
At
that
time,.
H
H
There's
now
an
addition,
a
wood
frame
addition
on
the
rear
of
the
building
there's
another
building
on
the
property,
a
one-story
garage
located
to
the
northwest
of
the
house
and
the
second
story
structure
appears
to
have
expanded
toward
the
toward
the
front.
So
it
looks
like
that
second
story:
wood
frame
section
has
been
brought
forward
toward
hills,
avenue.
H
H
H
These
are
the
present
day
photos.
The
property
appears
to
be
on
the
desoto
elevation,
not
substantially
different
from
how
it
appeared
in
the
1984
photo,
except
that
the
garage
for
the
auto
storage
toward
the
rear
of
the
property
has
been
enclosed,
and
you
can
see
a
couple
of
paired
windows
there
where
the
garage
door
opening
was
previously.
H
Moving
around
to
the
east
elevation
of
the
building,
again
the
the
front
of
the
building
here
or
the
hills
avenue
sides
to
your
left,
and
you
can
see
the
second
story
edition
over
the
original
first
story
and
the
this
stair
addition
on
that
side
and
then
the
bottom
right
picture
shows
the
north
elevation
or
the
rear
of
the
property
or
the
other
rear
of
the
property.
H
H
H
But
reversible
the
nomination
report
for
the
national
register
listed
hyde
park,
historic
district
provided
the
following
definition
of
the
of
a
of
altered,
but
contributing
structures.
It
was
one
in
which
the
structure
has
undergone
alterations,
inconsistent
with
its
original
character
or
one
in
which
appropriate,
inappropriate
materials
have
been
used,
but
which
retains
most
of
its
original
visual
character
and
can
be
returned
with
reasonable
effort
and
costs
to
approximately
its
historic
form
altered,
but
contributing
covers
a
lot
of
territory,
but
some
guidelines
are
fairly
evident.
H
The
removal
or
covering
of
original
exterior
siding,
is
considered
a
serious
alteration.
This
is
true
even
when
the
new
material,
aluminum
vinyl
visually
approximates
the
original
material
weatherboard.
This
alteration,
in
particular
concerns
itself
with
short-term
benefits,
to
the
detriment
of
the
original
fabric
of
the
building
enclosing
porches.
The
removal
of
decorative
architectural
features
features
wholesale
replacement
of
windows.
The
construction
of
non-conforming
additions
all
generally
cause
a
building
to
be
later
be
labeled
as
altered.
H
It
has
to
be
evident,
however,
that
these
changes
are
remedial
in
order
to
gain
the
designation
altered,
but
contributing
rather
than
non-contributing
altered,
but
contributing
buildings
are
considered
certifiable
as
contributing
to
the
district
under
the
tax
program,
and
I
believe
that
refers
to
the
the
federal
tax
credit
program
in
1988
the
city
of
tampa
designated
hyde
park
as
a
local,
historic
district.
H
H
H
This
is
a
the
full
map
from
the
ordinance
88-199
from
june
of
1988,
I
believe
and
again
showing
just
that
portion
where
the
building
is
at
hills
avenue
in
south
desoto
avenue.
H
H
H
H
Built
circa
1920
to
1314
south
desoto
avenue
was
built
during
the
hyde
park,
historic
district's
period
of
significance,
which
is
about
19,
sorry
to
1886-1930.
H
It
was
identified
in
the
initial
1985
doc
nomination
for
the
national
register,
listed
hyde
park,
historic
district,
and
it
was
called
out
then,
as
a
contributing
to
altered
structure
on
the
local
designation,
adopting
ordinance
map.
It
was
shown
as
a
contributing
structure
for
the
local
historic
district.
H
There
have
been
alterations
to
the
two
prima
primary
elevations
since
1985,
when
it
was
initially
evaluated
for
the
national
register
historic
district,
except
for
the
enclosure
of
the
garage,
the
all
the
major
alterations
were
in
place
along
the
l,
sorry
along
the
desoto
avenue
elevation
and
the
hills
avenue
elevation.
Those
alterations
were
in
place
at
the
time
the
structure
was
originally
determined
to
be
contributing,
so
its
integrity
has
been
maintained.
At
the
same
level,
the
staff
recommends
as
no
alterations.
H
H
Your
action
today,
as
is
to
move,
to
approve
or
deny
the
request
to
change
the
status
of
1314
south
desoto
avenue
from
contributing
to
non-contributing
the.
H
To
review
the
the
provided
evidence
and
to
use
national
register
bulletin
15
to
determine
the
whether
the
building
should
be
changed
in
its
from
its
current
status,
so
staff
has
provided
some
information
from
national
register
bulletin
15
and
your
staff
report.
The
applicant
provided
additional
information
from
national
register
bulletin
15.
H
A
I
Okay
hi,
my
name
is
patrick
cimino.
I
live
at
604
south
oregon
avenue.
I
am
speaking
on
three
wearing
three
hats
today,
as
I
speak,
I'm
the
vice
president
of
historic
hyde
park,
neighborhood
association,
I'm
also
presenting
a
letter
from
the
spanish
town,
creek
neighborhood
association,
and
I
will
speak
very
briefly
as
a
homeowner.
I
Basically,
the
the
hyde
park,
neighborhood
association
at
spanish
town
creek
support,
maintaining
the
contributing
nature
of
the
structure.
Hhpna's
board
voted
for
this,
because
the
weight
of
the
expert
and
substantial
evidence
has
weighed
in
on
this
over
decades.
As
it's
already
been
outlined,
it
came
through
with
the
initial
survey.
I
I
There
is
a
lot
of
modifications
that
have
happened
in
these
houses
over
the
years
and
if
that
criteria
was
absolute,
which
I
I
know
it
takes
a
lot
of
interpretation
and
it
does
take
experts
to
look
at.
We
would
not
have
very
many
contributing
structures
remaining,
so
we
do
have
to
look
beyond
a
lot
of
that
and
I
have
spent
way
more
money
on
my
house
is
renovating
them
than
I
bought
them
for
even
at.
D
I
F
Kamaria
pettis
mackel
from
the
city
attorney's
office.
I
apologize.
There
is
additional
information
from
the
property
owner.
If
you
could
just
have
a
motion
for
that
as
well
to
receive
and
file
his
information.
A
J
J
J
J
I
agree
with
the
gentleman
that
spoke
a
while
ago.
A
lot
of
renovations
have
to
be
made,
but
that
is
not
a
renovation
situation.
That
is
an
absolute
deterioration
project.
That
project
is
never
ever
going
to
be
any
better.
Unless
someone
comes
in
and
is
willing
to
put
the
time
and
the
money
into
it,
I'd
like
to
elaborate
on
all
the
ways
that
your
approval
of
this
plan
would
enhance
and
improve
our
neighborhood
my
little
corner
of
hyde
park,
but
I
won't
take
up
your
time.
J
J
F
F
F
Subsection
c
actually
subsection.
I
criteria
for
review
of
application.
The
criteria
to
be
applied
by
the
hpc
in
approving
or
not
approving,
an
application
filed
here
under
shall
be
the
criteria
set
forth
in
the
national
register,
bulletin
number
15
or
any
amendment
or
replacement
thereof.
A
F
A
A
B
This
is
for
miss
lund.
Can
you
show
the
two
pictures
again
the
original
and
the
current.
A
B
B
H
Elaine,
london,
star
preservation,
staff:
this
is
a
slide
showing
the
historic
aerial
photograph
of
the
house
and
the
present
day
all
right
construction.
H
Sorry,
we
have
the
photo
from
1984.
Is
that
what
you
would
like
to
see.
D
D
H
A
G
The
the
evidence
that
I
provided
in
my
original
application
disputes
that
present
use,
though
there's
two
ads
from
the
tampa
tribune,
one
from
1953
and
another
one
from
1959
advertising
apartments,
rental
units
for
rent.
A
C
C
As
far
as
I
understand
it,
also,
for
example,
the
interior
of
the
property
only
matters
if
you're
going
after
secretary
of
the
interior
tax
credits,
so
the
local
designation,
all
we
look
at
is
the
exterior
of
the
structure
and
not
the
inside
of
the
structure.
So
that's
a
comment
in
a
question
and
then
I'm
going
to
follow
up
with
another
one
from
mr
blackwood.
G
Well,
it
provided
the
the
statement
from
the
inspector
there.
That
said,
there
was
insufficient
room
or
no
room
for
plumbing
electrical,
mechanical
and
components
in
the
walls,
floors
or
ceilings
and.
G
Was
built
out
of
concrete
covered
with
stucco
and
yes,
terra
cotta
block
is
interior.
It's
not
visible,
but
yes,
built
slab
on
grade
and
fairly
ironic.
The
the
pierce
family
that
built
it
had
a
role
in
the
turn
of
the
century.
Electrifying
parts
of
tampa
and
didn't
leave
sufficient
room
for
their
own
future
equipment
in
the
house.
G
That's
true-
and
I
I
looked
at
that-
and
I
considered
that,
because
my
original
intent
in
buying
this
through
you
know
whether
it's
informal
witness
or
formal
contractor
witness,
was
to
restore
it
to
bring
it
up,
etc.
But
it
was
only
appear
after
a
period
of
literally
years
of
kind
of
piecing
things
together
doing
a
formal
inspection
report
that
I
saw
that
it
was
not
only
impossible
and
unfeasible,
but
then
I
looked
further
into
its
actual
designation
and
status,
and
I
presented
the
evidence
that
I
did
but
to
your
point
about
firing
things
out.
G
There's
electrical
conduit
on
the
outside
of
the
building
on
the
inside
of
the
building
and
on
the
particular
the
most
restorable
components
might
be
the
front
of
the
house
that
electrical
conduit
is
all
running
on
the
outside
of
the
original
drywall
that
would
all
have
to
come
off.
We
would
have
to
pull
all
of
that
out.
That
would
bury
the
casings
of
all
of
those
windows.
G
F
Kamaria
pettis
mackel
from
the
city,
attorney's
office,
canvas
lund
answer.
The
questions
asked
by
the
board
regarding
what
is
considered
during
the
designation
process
is
regarding
to
the
the
use
of
the
property
in
whether
or
not
for
the
local
landmark
or
local
historic
district.
If
is
there
any
consideration
of
the
interior
versus
exterior
components
of
the
residents.
H
Yes,
elaine
lund.
The
commissioner
was
right
on
both
points.
We
do
not
consider
use
when
determining
whether
or
not
a
building
physically
retains
its
architectural
integrity,
and
we
do
not
look
at
the
interior
of
the
structure.
We
only
consider
the
exteriors
unless
it
is
an
application
for
locally
for
an
ad
valorem
tax
credit.
D
Yes,
dominique
cobb,
I
have
a
question
in
regards
to
the
alteration
of
the
siding
and
the
inclusion
and
closure
of
the
carport
from
this
question
is
for
staff.
Is
there
any
type
of
permitting
that
can
be
found
for
that
change,
because
maybe
that
can
answer
when
it
was
changed
over
to
multi-family,
because
it
looks
as
though
that
those
sightings
were
changed
to
cover
the
second
structure,
the
addition
to
the
second
structure?
So
maybe,
if
do
you
have
any
of
those
permitting.
H
Elaine
lund,
during
the
research
that
I
did
for
the
permitted
activities
on
the
site,
the
only
permit
that
I
believe
that
I
found
was
for
the
exterior
stairwell
and
if
there
was
anything
else
I
would
have
had
included
that
in
the
staff
report.
So
just
let
me
check
that
real
quick
did
not
find
any
permit
records
on
the
enclosure
of
the
garage
or
anything
referencing
the
sighting.
G
And
in
reply
to
the
commissioner's
question,
the
the
card
carport
or
that
garage
fill
in
simply
expanded
the
existing
apartment,
rental
space
that
that
space
existed
in
the
rear
bedroom
since
at
least
1953
and
the
enclosure
just
expanded.
That
further.
B
Yes,
miss
miss
lund.
Can
you
review
the
period
of
significance
again
and
and
show
us
the
the
photo
that
or
photos
that
comport
to
that.
H
Yes,
the
the
period
of
significance
for
the
hyde
park.
Historic
district
is
1886
to
1933.,
so
anything
built
from
1886
to
1933
is
potentially
a
contributing
structure
in
the
district
and
then
I'm
sorry.
You
wanted
to
see
the
yeah.
H
B
H
H
B
H
We
had
just
the
aerial
photograph
yeah.
B
B
B
I
I
guess
maybe
they
in
the
whole
district,
they
didn't,
they
didn't
identify
how
each
structure
contributed.
Did
they.
C
When,
when
the
period
of
significance
is
established,
we
know
that,
for
example,
in
this
case,
that
the
original
structure,
as
shown
in
the
photograph
in
1923,
had
a
second
story
unit,
but
it
certainly
appears
that
the
second
story,
what
we
are
calling
the
front
porch
the
faces
hills
was
was
not
there.
Is
that
correct.
G
C
H
The
alteration
the
major
alteration
to
this
building
since
its
initial
construction
being
the
expansion
of
the
second
story
across
the
hills,
avenue
elevation.
We
do
not
know
exactly
when
that
was
completed.
It
may
have
been
after
the
period
of
significance,
but
it
was
definitely
after
the
building
was
initially
found
to
be
contributing.
C
All
part
of
the
original
report
that
was
done
at
the
time,
and
so
the
building
in
its
entirety
was
considered
to
be
historically
significant,
meaning
because
that
porch
was
put
on
after
the
period
of
significance.
We
think
we
don't
know,
but
at
the
time
of
designation
in
the
1980s,
the
whole
thing,
including
that
front
second
story.
Porch
was
in
fact
part
of
the
designation,
correct.
C
H
It
is
part
of
the
the
entire
contributing
structure
so.
C
G
Okay,
thank
you,
but
we
do
here
to
question
their
commissioner.
What
we
do
know
is
that
the
porch
was
completed
in
some
manner
to
facilitate
rent
to
a
tenant,
at
least
as
far
back
as
1959.
C
Yes,
and-
and
that
was
very
much
so
a
part
of
the
history
of
hyde
park-
there
was
that
era
after
world
war
ii,
where
so
many
of
the
houses,
as
you
know,
were
subdivided
into
apartments
and
then
come
the
1970s
80s.
They
started
to
return
back
to
single
family
use.
It
doesn't
appear
that
that
happened
to
this
one,
but
certainly
that
was
part.
The
historic
pattern
of
use
was
that
definitely
correlates.
G
Is
our
m24?
Currently
it
was
a
historically
zoned
r3a
starting
in
1956.,
so
it's
a
multi-family
use
multi-zoning,
as
is
it
roughly
70
years
old.
C
G
I've
done
the
math
on
that.
It's
not
my
intent
to
to
do
anything
at
this
point.
I'm
taking
one
step
at
a
time,
but
the
the
math
of
the
size
of
the
lot
allows
a.
I
don't.
What's
the
word
right,
volume
or
density,
or
something
like
that,
it's
either
four
or
five
units.
D
G
G
I
understand
that,
but
I've
looked
at
where
the
church
is
and
where
the
apartment
is,
and
there
is
a
necessity
for
some
type
of
massing
and
intimacy
of
some
measure
that
mirrors
those
angled
setbacks
that
could
blend
in
perfectly
with
either
an
addition
or
a
separate
structure
or
some
some
combination
thereof,
but
that's
very
hard
to
articulate
and
sell
or
or
to
explain
to
somebody
because
they
only
know
and
see
what
is
done
and
the
mechanics
of
getting
there
and
explaining
are
either
promising
or
much
more
problematic.
As
you
well
know,
as
a
contractor.
B
I
I'm
going
back
to
picking
up
on
your
point
and-
and
I
agree
with
commissioners
who
craft
back
on
the
zoning
issue
it
this
the
fact
that
it's
multi-family
versus
single
family,
and
in
this
case
and
with
the
the
guidelines
in
bulletin
15,
it
we're
really
looking
at
the
exterior,
not
the
use,
so
that
that
point
that
it
was
single
family
and
now
multifamily
or
vice
versa.
B
That's
really
irrelevant
to
this
particular
case,
because
we're
really
talking
about
the
exterior
and
and
when
I
look
back
at
some
of
the
things
mentioned
in
bulletin
15
and
I
think
ms
cobb
said.
B
B
From
bulletin
15,
although
there
have
been
a
lot
of
changes
to
this
building
over
time,
it
does,
it
says,
define
the
essential
physical
features
that
you
know
represents
its
significance
and
those
physical
features
that
are
visible
and
that
whether
or
not
the
property
retains
the
identity.
So,
although
there
have
been
many
alterations
over
time-
and
you
know
it
also
speaks
to
workmanship-
well,
the
the
recent
workmanship
is
also
immaterial
to.
This
is
like
that's,
why
we
restore
and
rehabilitate
properties.
B
So
I
think
there
are.
You
know
there
are
a
lot
of
things
in
here
that
in
bulletin
15
that
speak
to,
although
there's
a
lot
of
work
that
needs
to
be
done
on
this
building
and
a
lot
of
work,
not
so
great,
maybe
has
been
done
and
understanding
why
you
said
you
bought
it
in
the
first
place,.
B
So
so
I
so
my
I
guess
my
my
question
is
back
to
staff.
Is,
I
think
you?
I
think
you
noted
that
we
don't
know
what.
B
B
H
Was
said
to
be
contributing,
yes,
that
is
correct:
there's
not
the
florida
master
site
file,
form
for
the
building
and
the
designation
report
or
the
nomination
report
for
the
national
register
district.
Neither
of
them
expand
on
the
individual
buildings.
To
that
point,.
B
G
We
can
reasonably
say
is
the
homeowner
looking
at
the
tile
work,
both
upstairs
apartment
as
well
as
downstairs.
It's
got
that
characteristic
1950s.
I
call
it
bomb
bunker
tile,
so
it's
that
really
thick
stuff
that
probably
looks
at
somewhere
in
the
50s.
They
renovated
and
then
listed
it
for
rent,
as
evidenced
by
the
tampa
tribune,
article.
H
Elaine
lund,
historic
preservation
staff
by
1931
on
the
sanborn
company
map.
It
appears
that
that
central
second
story
was
beginning
to
be
brought
forward
toward
the
front
of
the
house.
H
G
A
commission
on
your
point
about
significance,
as
it's
described
in
the
historic
register
bulletin,
that
the
significance
is
they
kind
of
in
a
cumbersome
way
describe.
It
is
essentially
a
function
of
integrity
and
then
there
are
these
seven
elements
of
integrity
that
were
included
in
the
staff
sheet,
but
they
weren't
described
as
the
nrb
describes
them.
That
part
was
removed,
but
in
my
analysis
of
those
seven
elements
of
integrity
that
underpin
the
significance,
only
one
of
them
applied
out
of
the
seven
and
that
was
location
by
being
physically
located
within
the
historic
district.
F
A
C
So
integrity
is,
as
was
noted,
as
basically,
there
are
seven
different
items,
location,
design,
setting
material
workmanship,
feeling
and
association,
and
these
are,
as
we
all
know,
has
some
measure
of
interpretation
over
time.
Even
the
bulletins
get
interpreted
in
different
ways.
C
However,
it's
my
opinion
that
as
a
historic
preservationist
that
many
of
these
still
apply
to
this
particular
structure,
but,
more
importantly,
this
structure
has
not
been
substantially
altered
since
the
period
of
the
district's
significance,
except
for
really
the
two
top
portions
of
the.
What
we're
going
to
call
the
the
second
story
and
it
does
share
the
historic
association
of
the
district.
This
was
a
district
that
was
the
integrity
of
the
district
and
and
certainly
the
the
value
of
this
historic
district
was.
C
It
was
primarily
a
single-family
residential
district
that
had
structures
that
were
built
between
1886
and
the
early
1930s,
and
this
clearly
clearly
lands
right
in
the
middle
of
that
it's
it's.
The
design
certainly
follows
the
tenets
of
what
would
have
been
designed
at
that
time.
C
This
was
sort
of
a
modest
two-story
structure
materials
used
at
that
time.
The
block
were
certainly
part
of
the
the
materials
used
for
structures
in
this
historic
district
and
as
somebody
who
has
worked
in
these
kind
of
buildings,
I
can
certainly
sympathize
they're,
not
easy.
The
frame
ones
are
so
so
much
easier
to
work
in,
but
yes,
they
can
be
remediated
over
time.
C
So,
in
my
opinion,
the
essential
physical
features
are
still
there
and
the
the
aspects
of
the
integrity
that
are
vital
to
this
property
being
nominated
are
still
present.
So
I
will
be
voting
to
keep.
The
designation
is
contributing.
A
In
that
case,
I
would
like
to
draw
attention
to
a
sentence
in
in
the
national
register
bulletin
15
on
our
report.
Page
3.
A
Ultimately-
and
I
quote
ultimately,
the
question
of
integrity
is
answered
by
whether
or
not
the
property
retains
the
identity
for
which
it
was.
It
is
significant
and
I
think,
as
we
listen
to
ms
shoecraft's
comments
regarding
the
seven
aspects
of
the
integrity,
that
surely
answers
a
question
with
respect
to
this
particular
facility.
A
A
And-
and
I
think
we
need
to
focus
our
attentions
on
those.
A
F
A
A
A
Then
we
need
another
motion.
Please.
F
A
D
F
B
B
I
was
gonna
I
was
gonna
make
an.
I
don't
want
to
make
this
motion,
that's
why
I
think
we're
all
we're
all
feeling
the
same
thing,
but
if.
A
F
D
All
right,
thank
you.
This
question
is
for
miss
miss
lund.
Can
you
give
a
definition
on
reversibility
really
quick
just
so
I
can
for
my
memory
and
also
for
the
commissioners
kind
of
get
an
understanding
of
what
reversibility
is.
As
a
regards
to
this
structure,.
D
And
I
believe,
mr
the
site
owner
went
over
it
a
bit,
but
I
would
like
it
from
staff
so
that
so
that
we
can
know
where
the
staff
stands
on.
Understanding.
D
While
staff
is
searching,
the
reason
why
I
asked
for
reversibility,
because
I
know
that
even
though
the
sightings
were
done
after
or
it
hasn't
been
established
after
the
contributing
time
of
1933,
I
noticed
that
the
sightings
had
severe
alteration.
So
if
I
can
just
have
a
point
of
clarity
on
what
the
standards
are
from.
A
D
B
Yeah,
I
thought
there
was
information
provided
by
mr,
mr
black
wood.
Sorry,
I
almost
said
blackburn
blackwood
that
there
was
asbestos
or
something
yes.
C
I
don't
see
it,
but
maybe
there's
a
better
photograph.
G
The
whole
porch
would
be
removed.
The.
C
F
Hold
up
camaria,
pettis
snaggle
from
the
city
attorney's
office.
I
just
want
to
make
sure
we
have
a
point
of
order.
Miss
covet
asks
a
question
of
staff
about
the
definition
of
reversibility.
D
H
H
Elaine
lund,
historic
preservation,
staff,
the
city
of
tampa
code
of
ordinances,
does
not
provide
us
with
the
definition
for
reversible.
So
if
we
look
to
the
merriam-webster
dictionary,
they
do
have
a
definition
for
reversible,
I'm
sorry
not
for
reversibility,
but
the
definition
for
reversible,
capable
of
being
reversed
or
reversing
such
as
a
capable
of
going
through
a
series
of
actions
such
as
changes,
either
backward
or
forward
b,
having
two
finished
usable
sides
or
c
wearable
with
either
side
out
and
then
the
second
definition
of
reversible
provided
is
a
reversible
cloth
or
article
of
clothing.
H
D
H
D
A
I'm,
mr
blackwood,
would
you
like
to
comment.
G
Just
on
the
the
front
porch
there
too,
I
mean
I
if
I
heard
the
commissioner
on
yen's
comment
that
that
has
now
has
now
been
deemed
historic
by
some
measure
with
the
asbestos
siding.
I
guess
the
asbestos
siding
is
historic.
Now
too,.
F
A
E
I
would
like
to
sort
of
refocus
the
discussion.
This
is
not
a
debate
back
and
forth
between
the
applicant
and
the
board.
This
is
consideration
of
the
application
before
you
and
the
eligibility
criteria
to
move
it
forward
either
for
approval
or
denial.
So
I
would
encourage
you
if
you
have
questions
during
this
period,
to
go
ahead
and
ask
those
questions
so
that
you
can
move
the
process
forward,
but
I
don't
want
to
open
up
a
environment
of
debate
during
this
hearing
at
this
point.
It's
beyond
that
point.
It's
your
consideration
of
the
application
before
you.
D
I
have
a
question
for
staff
elaine,
the
so
when
the
because
I
just
want
to
clarify
for
myself,
I
guess
when
the
building
was
incorporated
into
the
district,
it
was
with
all
the
changes,
except
for
the
back
stairwell.
H
The
from
the
from
the
photograph
taken
during
the
survey
it
is
in
1984.
It
appeared
that
the
garage
had
not
yet
been
enclosed
and
was
still
functional
as
a
garage
and
the
other
so
that
occurred
sometime.
D
And
I
have
another
question:
do
you
have
because
of
the
the
district?
The
buildings
were
not
individually
looked
at,
so
we're
not
talking
about
like
individual
designation
but
designation
as
a
whole
group.
D
H
H
G
Could
I
pull
up
the
slides
please
online.
I've
got
a
backup
slide
on
that.
G
The
permit
was
not
followed
and
that's
why
you've
got
this
bump
and
two
bumps
in
this
with
the
stairs
having
been
built
and
then
approved
later
after
they
were
built
by
the
arc
and
they
were
approved
later
or
excuse
me
in
november
1994
they
had
to
reorient
and
were
told
to
reorient
the
stor
the
stairs
to
comply
with
the
zoning
requirement,
I.e
the
zoning
code
because
they
point
to
the
street
instead
of
pointing
to
the
rear,
but
the
permit
that
was
approved.
G
If
you
see
that,
if
you
can
go
through
that
diagram,
the
permit
that
was
approved
had
the
stairs
going
to
the
rear.
So
somewhere
in
the
construction,
they
decided
to
change
it
and
point
them
toward
the
street.
So
that's
an
illegal
staircase.
There
number
two,
it's
also
in
violation
of
the
hyde
park
standards,
as
I
brought
up
in
my
presentation
because
it's
built
on
the
street
side.
So
it's
both
illegal
as
well
as
inappropriate.
I
don't
know
how
the
arc
approved
that
being
in
violation,
clear
violation
of
the
hyde
park,
standards.
C
The
period
of
significance
was
1886
to
1933.
The
local
historic
district
was
done
in
the
1980s.
At
that
time.
Many
many
of
the
structures
in
the
hyde
park
historic
district
were
altered,
some
well
and
some
not
so
well,
but
at
the
time
of
designation.
I
just
need
to
understand
this
at
the
time
of
designation
in
1985,
once
the
structure
was
designated,
the
entire
building
was
designated,
including
the
alterations.
C
Is
that
correct
meaning
there
wasn't?
You
didn't,
have
a
building
that
was
designated
except
for
this
component,
meaning
the
whole
structure,
the
property
itself,
the
exterior
was
designated
low
at
the
local
level
and
then
the
design
guidelines
are
what
guided
the
any
of
the
alterations.
Am
I
correct
in
that
understanding.
H
Yes,
commissioner,
you
are
correct
there.
There
is
no
case
that
I'm
aware
of
and
which
part
of
a
building
was
called
out,
as
contributing
in
part
was
not.
C
And
do
you
know
of
any
historic
districts
across
the
country
locally
designated
that
essentially,
after
the
they
were
designated
and
and
the
period
of
significance
is
the
only
thing
that
was
there
meaning
in
this
case
there
had
been
no
changes
since
1933
and
1985.
Do
you
know
of
any
historic
district
in
the
country
that
meets
that
criteria.
D
At
this
time,
if
no
other
commissioners
have
any
more
dialogue,
I
would
like
to
make
a
motion.
F
G
Yeah,
I
would
to
the
commissioner's
statement
there.
I
would
just
like
to
bring
it
back
to
what
staff
report
already
noted
in
the
staff
summary
that
the
initial
designation
of
contributing
altered.
So
we
had
remember,
we
had
three
criter
three
designation
options
contributing
altered,
so
they
understood
the
alterations
and
then
they
also
further
stated
was
based
on
alterations
that
were
deemed
inconsistent
with
the
structure's
original
character.
So
I'll
just
leave
it
at
that.
A
D
I've
seen
that
the
the
residence
has
been
significantly
altered.
Also,
there
has
been
a
legal
counter
illegal
structure,
so
I
make
the
motion
to
approve
the
change
of
degradation.
D
B
A
That
there
is
a
motion
and
a
second
all,
those
in
favor
of
the
motion.
Please
show
signify
my
eye
and
show
a
sign.
I
all
those.
A
A
A
C
I
would
do
I
have
to
repeat
verbatim
or
if
you,
if
you
I.
C
A
E
Good
morning,
commissioners,
dennis
fernandez,
architects
review
historic
preservation
manager
here
to
update
you
on
item
number.
Eight.
If
you
recall
back
in
april
it
was
april
the
13th
we
had
a
meeting
to
initiate
consideration
of
the
expansion
of
the
hyde
park,
a
local
historic
district
to
include
the
area
north
of
the
current
boundary
line.
Do
we
have
a
map
that
we
can
show
might
help
our
discussion.
E
You
can
get
the
map
there.
I
think
it'll,
give
you
a
visual.
I
think
most
of
you
are
well
apprised
of
this,
though
the
application
was
brought
to
the
commission
by
the
two
neighborhood
associations
that
essentially
composed
the
area
that
would
be
the
historic
hyde
park,
neighborhood
association
and
the
hyde
park,
spanish
town
creek,
civic
association,
at
that
hearing
staff
did
notice
in
accordance
with
the
code
section
27149.
E
However,
there
was
a
procedural
error
with
a
notice
and,
as
a
result,
a
notice
was
determined
to
be
flawed
and
unable
to
proceed
through
the
process
for
consideration
at
council
in
its
current
form.
So
we
are
have
been
speaking
to
the
applicants.
I
believe
one
of
the
representatives
is
is
here
today
about
a
path
moving
forward
which
would
be
to
have
to
re-notice
the
hearing
and
bring
it
back
to
the
commission
for
consideration.
Once
again,
I
know
that's
quite
a
undertaking.
We
apologize
for
that
defect.
E
However,
I
think
airing
on
the
side
of
caution.
It
does
give
us
the
ability
to
perhaps
address
some
of
the
feedback
that
we
heard
at
the
first
hearing
and
we
in
talking
with
the
applicant
the
applicants
and
they
have
retained
legal
counsel
as
well.
Since
we
last
met
we're
looking
at
possible
dates
in
august
and
september
to
notice
to
bring
back
the
hearing
now
when
we,
when
we
met
in
april,
we
we
did
have
a
special
time.
We
met
at
5
30
p.m,
instead
of
meeting
at
the
normal
9
a.m.
E
E
So
I
wanted
to
give,
I
know
mr
cimino's
here
he
may
have
something
to
add,
but
I
wanted
to
give
that
update
to
you
and
just
let
you
know
that
we
we
have
some
additional
steps
before
we're
able
to
move
that
forward
to
city
council's
consideration.
I
Thank
you
all
the
only
thing
I'll
add
on
patch
could.
I
I'm
patrick
cimino,
I'm
vice
president
of
historic
high
park,
neighborhood
association
and
I
live
at
604
south
oregon
avenue.
I
We
really
appreciate
the
efforts
that
have
gone
into
this
at
both
the
level
of
the
arc
and
the
historic
preservation
commission.
We
understand
that
this
is
primarily
a
procedural
issue
and
we're
comfortable
with
moving
ahead
as
expeditiously
as
we
can
to
proceed
as
planned.
So
we
and
again
I
I
I
know,
there's
a
lot
of
rules
and
stuff
and
we
want
to
follow
them
like
everybody
else,
so
we're
proceeding
and
I
don't
unless
you
all
have
questions.
That's
all.
I
wanted
to
say.
E
All
right,
so
one
of
my
recommendations
to
the
neighborhood
association,
because
they
are
the
applicant
and
have
been
conducting
most
of
the
public
outreach,
was
to
conduct
an
additional
public
meeting
within
with
the
property
owners
of
the
neighborhood
prior
to
the
actual
notice
public
hearing
before
the
hpc
occurring.
I
think
that
that
will
go
a
long
way
in
the
outreach
of
some
of
those
property
owners
who
felt
that
they
weren't
part
of
the
early
discussions
or
part
of
the
discussions
at
all,
and
so
that's
been
staff's
recommendation
to
the
applicants.
A
Okay
and
that
now
does
that
conclude
the
comments
for.
E
A
E
As
I
said,
we'll
be
back
in
touch
with
you
about
scheduling,
but
that's
where
we
are
as
of
today.
A
E
In
accordance
with
your
rules
of
procedure
each
may
it
is
an
agenda
item
for
the
election
of
officers.
The
officers,
of
course,
are
the
chairperson
and
vice
chairperson.
They
serve
in
that
capacity
for
a
year.
E
I
normally
begin
the
consideration
of
this
item
with
the
chairperson.
Currently
mr
lagas
serves
as
your
chairperson
during
the
nomination
process,
I'll
ask
for
nominations
and
if
an
individual
is
nominated
I'll,
just
ask
if
they're
willing
to
perform
the
duties
of
that
position
for
the
next
year
and
there
can
be
multiple
nominations.
If
you
choose
but
I'll
open
the
floor
for
nominations
for
the
chairperson.
E
A
E
Thank
you.
Congratulations!
We'll
open
up
the
floor
for
nominations
for
vice
chair.
Currently,
commissioner
cobb
serves
in
that
capacity.
Are
there
any
nominations
for
the
vice
chairperson
position.
E
And
are
you
willing
to
serve
the
capacity
we
have
a
nomination
for
commissioner
cobb
or
they're
in
the
other
nominations,
seeing
none
if
I
could
just
have
a
show
of
hands
for
if
affirming
the
nomination.
Thank.
E
Moving
on,
as
I
said,
we
do
have
a
july
hearing
scheduled
on
the
calendar.
I
will
get
back
to
you
on
on
the
need
for
that.
As
of
right
now
we
have
no
applications
pending,
which
is
probably
welcome
on
on
your
end.
This
has
been
a
busy
year
so
far
and
moving
to
item
11.
I
have
no
new
business
for
you
this
morning,
either.
A
Then
I
would
oh
I'm
sorry.
B
I
have
a
question:
what's
on
the
application
that
we
had
last
month,
what's
the
schedule
for
that.
D
F
E
We'll
certainly
inform
you
when
there's
activity
on
that
that
needs
your
attention.
B
F
Well,
I
believe
you
wanted
a
workshop.
There
was
discussion
of
a
workshop
with
staff
to
explain
the
different
concepts
that
are
in
chapter
27,
relevant
to
the
hyde
park
district.
I
mean
not
the
historic
district
I
apologize,
so
we
could
certainly
you
know,
work
together
to
to
get
that
organized
to
have
a
workshop,
giving
some
clarification
on
some
terms
or
designation.
C
Yes,
I'm
sorry,
I
made
that
suggestion,
because
I
personally
would
find
it
very
very
helpful,
because
there
are
a
lot
of
different
terms
and
especially
when
we're
talking
about
local
versus
national
register,
and
you
know
what
the
implications
of
those
are
and
I
would
go
beyond
hyde
park.
I
mean
we
represent.
E
On
that
sure
I'll
be
happy
to
arrange
that
we'll
we'll
try
to
identify
some
dates
that
work
for
everybody:
okay,.
A
A
E
A
Are
there
any
other
comments
of
new
business
that
anyone
would
like
to
bring
up?
Yes,
mr
yeah.
B
I
forgot
this.
I
I'm
not
sure
if
I
sent
forward
this
in
an
email
and
to
whom,
but
I
received
a
an
invitation
to
to
do
like
a
some
kind
of
group
yeah
with
the
commission
and
it
that
seemed
like
not
a
good
idea.
C
G
B
E
From
mrs
giusack
to
miss
owen,
there
was
a
need
to
create
another
group
email
so
that
we
could
email
all
the
information
to
you
as
a
group
and
not
necessarily
putting
everybody's
individual
emails
in
there,
and
the
result
was
that
message
that
we
were
unaware
was
going
to
be
generated.
So
what
we
did
was
essentially
we
deleted
the
group,
so
there's
not
a
necessity
for
you
all
to
feel
like
you
have
to.
You
know
caution
yourselves
if
you
respond,
so
I
I
thank
you.
Price
should
have
called
you
back
with
that,
but.