►
From YouTube: HPC 7/11/23
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
A
A
A
A
B
B
B
B
B
B
B
H
Good
morning,
Commissioners
Dennis,
Fernandez
architecture,
review
and
historic
preservation
manager,
welcome
to
this
morning's
historic
preservation.
Commission
hearing
and
welcome
to
our
applicants
and
the
public
as
well,
who
are
joining
us
I,
did
want
to
begin
by
letting
you
know
about
a
couple.
H
Events
that
are
going
on
for
archives,
Awareness,
Week
archives
awareness
week
is
taking
place
this
week,
mainly
hosted
by
our
archives
and
Records
staff
that
they
did
a
great
job
celebrating
campus
136th
birthday
from
1887
until
this
year
and
as
part
of
the
celebration
there's
a
number
of
opportunities
for
the
public
to
engage
in
some
interesting
conversations
about
the
history
of
the
city.
There's
some
opportunities
in
here
for
public
presentations
and
there's
even
an
opportunity
in
here
to
kind
of
record
and
document.
H
H
So
those
are
both
in
close
proximity
to
the
Robert
Saunders
Library,
where
the
event
will
be
held
for
kind
of,
like
obvious
reasons,
with
the
weather,
it's
a
little
challenging
out
there
to
do
something
Outdoors
right
now,
so
the
event's
going
to
be
held
at
the
the
library
and
there'll
be
a
a
lot
of
City
officials
and
Community
leaders
in
attendance.
We
have
to
see
you
there
for
that
as
well.
It's
at
11,
A.M.
I
H
I
H
B
J
Thank
you
good
morning,
Commissioners
Elaine,
Lund
historic
preservation
staff.
This
morning
we
have
a
presentation
for
you
for
the
mar
Marjorie
Park
Marina
Gatehouse
at
115,
Columbia
Drive,
that's
HPC,
2023-02,
it's
being
presented
to
you
this
morning
for
consideration
for
recommendation
to
city
council
for
local
Historic,
Landmark,
designation.
J
This
is
the
present
day
aerial
map
showing
you
the
location
of
the
Marjorie
Park
Marina
gate
house
on
Davis
Islands.
It's
located
as
I
said
on
Columbia
Drive,
and
it
is
just
at
the
Western
Edge
of
the
Marjorie
Park
Marina.
It's
currently
owned
by
the
city
of
Tampa
and
is
in
use
by
the
Tampa
Police
Department.
J
This
is
the
1931
Sanborn
map,
showing
you
the
location
of
the
the
gate
house.
You
can
see
there.
It
is
just
adjacent
to
the
yacht,
Basin
off
Columbia
Drive.
It's
shown
in
yellow
indicating
that
it
is
a
wood
frame
structure
and
you
can
see
where
the
I
believe
that
says
wooden
deck
was
then
leading
out
into
the
water.
J
In
the
1920s
Davis
Islands
was
a
little
more
than
two
mud
flats,
big
and
little
grassy
Islands
DP
Davis
was
a
developer,
who
had
seen
a
some
successful
real
estate
development
in
Miami,
but
made
his
way
to
Tampa
because
of
the
a
very
competitive
market
in
the
Miami
area.
J
D.P
Davis
teamed
up
with
Burke's
Hammer
a
local
developer
and
bought
the
underwater
Islands
from
the
city
of
Tampa.
As
part
of
the
purchase
agreement,
Davis
promised
to
stay
700
feet
off
of
the
Bayshore
Boulevard
financed
the
construction
of
the
bridge
connecting
to
Davis
Islands
and
deed
55
Acres
as
Marjorie
Park
to
the
city
of
Tampa.
J
Today,
the
Tampa's
Municipal
hospital
and
the
Davis
Islands
tennis
clubs
are
part
of
Marjorie
Park,
the
yacht
Basin
and
its
slips
were
originally
built
to
accommodate
about
30
vessels
and
they
opened
for
the
public
in
1927..
J
The
construction
of
Davis
Islands
itself
began
in
1924
as
the
Circa
1926
after
the
the
building.
The
excuse
me
after
the
land
had
been
dredged
from
the
the
bay
and
built
up
and
the
roads
have
been
constructed
throughout
the
islands.
You
can
see
some
of
the
initial
buildings
that
were
constructed
in
1925
and
1926
here.
J
J
Davis
referred
to
his
style
of
choice
for
the
island
as
Venetian,
and
you
can
see
with
the
way
it
was
constructed.
The
several
canals
that
were
formed
within
the
island
to
give
plenty
of
properties
of
Waterfront
access.
J
J
Franklin
o
Adams
was
Martin's
Hampton's
representative,
who
oversaw
the
construction
of
several
of
the
local
projects
on
in
the
area
and
on
Davis
Islands
Hampton
was
well
versed
in
the
Mediterranean
Revival
stylings.
He
served
on
the
beach
park
development
Architectural,
Review
Board,
which
was
another
Mediterranean
Revival
theme
subdivision
in
Tampa,
and
he
personally
designed
29
of
the
more
than
100
buildings
constructed
on
Davis
Islands
between
1925
and
1935..
J
J
The
Gatehouse
is
a
one-story
frame.
Structure
was
built
on
a
concrete
slab
foundation
and
the
exterior,
while
it
is
wood
frame,
is
clad
and
textured
stucco.
It's
a
three
Bay
rectangular
building
symmetrically
masked,
and
it
has
a
central
pedimented,
Pavilion
and
arts
passes
way,
flanked
by
the
flat
roof.
Wings
clayboral,
trial,
clay,
Barrel
tiles
cover
the
pediment
parapet,
the
building
features
case
net
windows
with
wrought
iron
access,
and
those
include
the
wrought
iron
grills
that
cover
the
six
light
windows
on
the
East
facade.
J
The
Marjorie
Park
Marina
Gatehouse
is
significant
for
its
association
with
Davis
Islands,
a
product
of
the
Florida
lamboob
in
the
mid-1920s
and
significant
for
its
association
with
architect,
Franklin
o
Adams.
It
also
reflects
the
completeness
of
D.P
Davis's
plan,
which
included
every
facility
for
Resort
living
on
Davis
Islands
from
yacht
Basin
to
golf
course
all
in
the
Mediterranean
Revival
Style.
J
The
facility
was
constructed
as
constructed
as
part
of
Marjorie
Park,
the
55
acre
recreational
area
on
the
northeast
side
of
the
island,
the
building
and
its
Mediterranean
Revival
style
was
recently
rehabilitated
and
it
maintains
its
historic
integrity
and
therefore,
this
historic
resource
is
significant
under
National
register.
Criterion
a
in
the
area
of
architecture.
J
That's
also
the
relates
to
the
portion
of
the
Tampa
city
code
under
Section,
27,
257
a21
and
under
a22,
and
the
sorry
in
the
areas
of
recreation
and
Community
planning
and
the
areas
of
recreation
and
the
area
of
architecture
which
is
a22
there.
We
are
the
city
of
Tampa,
as
I
stated
owns
this
structure
and
the
application
was
submitted
by
the
Tampa
Police
Department
and
authorized
by
the
mayor
of
the
city
of
Tampa,
and
the
public
notice
was
complete.
J
K
Good
morning
my
name
is
Jay
Reese
I'm,
equivalent
City
Tampa
Police
Department's
Marine
unit.
We
just
recently
got
the
building
signed
over
to
us
as
from
Parks
and
Rec,
so
we
now
occupy
the
entire
building.
It
serves
as
our
main
office
for
patrols
throughout
the
city
of
Tampa.
I
came
to
the
Marine
unit
in
2021.
Our
building
was
in
pretty
rough
shape.
We
did
a
rehabilitation
project,
we
put
it
back
to
its
original
design.
At
some
point,
the
doors
have
been
moved
to
the
Waterside.
K
We
put
it
back
to
the
original
construction,
where
the
entry
doors
are
now
in
the
interior,
Breezeway
and
we'd
like
to
continue
with
making
it
more
like
what
it
originally
was.
We
recently
secured
funding
to
added
dock
where
the
original
dock
came
out
from
underneath
the
archway,
but
I
think
this
building
is
a
great
piece
of
history
for
Tampa.
K
B
H
E
I
guess
I
could
add
to
that.
I
think
that
it's
that
it's
interesting
and
appropriate
that
this
building
be
used
by
the
Tampa
Police
Department.
This
land
was
donated
to
the
city.
You
know
as
part
of
a
condition
of
of
zoning
approval,
I
guess,
which
is
interesting
and
I,
think
it's
appropriate
that
it
be
used
for
civic
purposes,
so
I'm
ready
to
make
a
motion.
E
All
right,
just
for
the
record,
my
name
is
Patricia
Ortiz
and
I'd
like
to
make
a
motion
to
recommend
Tampa
City
Council
approve
this
request
to
designate
the
Marjorie
Park
Marina
Gate
House,
located
on
115
Columbia
Drive
for
a
local
Historic.
Landmark
designation,
I'd
like
to
go
on
further
to
say
that
this
designation
is
supported
by
the
criteria.
E
Okay,
part,
a
a
part
one,
the
building
or
site,
was
constructed
or
achieved
its
significance,
During
the
period
of
historic
significance
as
delineated
in
the
National
register
of
historic
places,
and
it
has
a
quality
of
significance
in
our
local
history,
our
local
history
architecture
and
culture,
which
is
present
on
Davis
Island.
E
I
would
go
on
to
say
that
this
structure
is
associated
with
events
that
have
made
a
significant
contribution
to
the
broad
patterns
of
our
history,
that
it
is
associated
with
the
lives
of
persons
significant
and
our
past,
and
that
it
embodies
the
distinctive
characteristics
of
a
type
period
and
a
method
of
construction.
Furthermore,
it
is
consistent
with
criteria
c.
G
E
Yes,
in
addition,
the
the
owner,
the
city
of
Tampa,
supports
this
designation,
and
that
concludes
my
motion.
Thank
you,
commissioner,
and.
B
Opposed
saying
nine,
we
move
forward
with
the
motion
to
approve
the
majority
Park
Gatehouse
for
115
Columbia
Drive.
Thank
you
next
on
the
agenda
Elaine.
Thank
you.
J
J
There
we
go
this
property
now
located
at
1807.
North
Morgan
Street
is
in
front
of
you
today
under
consideration
as
item
number
HPC
2023-05
as
the
for
its
redesignation
of
a
relocated
contributing
structure
in
a
local
historic
district.
J
Originally
located
at
1808
North
Morgan
Street,
the
structure
was
moved
from
the
site
shown
here
in
green
to
the
site
shown
in
red.
This
is
the
most
recent
aerial
map
that
we
have
for
the
site
and
you
can
see
the
building
at
its
former
location
at
1808
North
Morgan
Street
before
it
was
moved
across
the
street.
J
This
is
the
1928
Sanborn
map
sheet
number
57f,
showing
again
the
sending
and
receiving
locations
for
the
structure.
You
can
see
the
actual
footprint
of
the
building
there
and
the
parcel
shown
in
green.
It's
a
wood
frame
structure
with
a
wrap
around
porch
and
indicated
indeed
for
dwelling
at
that
time,
and
it's
now
in
use
as
a
the
home
of
a
law
firm
office
again
showing
the
original
and
current
locations
in
green
and
red.
This
is
our
Tampa
Heights
Historic
District
map.
J
Say
two-story
building
with
distinctive
Craftsman
Bungalow
characteristics.
J
J
And
then
in
2023
the
building
was
is
shown
on
its
current
site
at
1807
North,
Morgan
Street.
J
And
which
was
approved
by
the
Architectural
Review
commission,
as
was
the
relocation
we
find
that
the
building
meets
the
criteria
for
redesignation
as
a
relocated
structure.
That's
in
section
27,
261
B.
At
the
city's
code
of
ordinances,
we
have
an
owner-initiated
application
for
a
relocated
building
within
a
historic
district.
The
application
was
complete.
The
criteria
in
this
section
of
the
code
refers
us
to
National
register
bulletin
15
to
determine
whether
it
continues
to
contribute
to
the
Integrity
of
the
Tampa
Heights
historic
district.
J
J
M
My
name
is
Harvey
schoenbrun
and
I
owned
the
building
owned
it
for
many
many
years
and
when
I
sold
the
property.
There
was
my
law
office,
which
was
my
pediatrician
Dr
Phillip
Adler's
office
that
has
now
been
demolished,
but
the
city
said
that
I
could
not
demolish
this
structure,
even
though
it
was
very
old
and
in
poor
shape,
and
so
I
decided
I
wanted
to
stay
in
the
neighborhood.
Since
I
was
born
on
the
corner
at
the
old
St
Joseph's
hospital
and
had
been
in
this
neighborhood
for
35
years.
M
D
M
Mean
it's
taken
a
lot
because
it
it
had
a
lot
of
termites
had
a
lot
of
rot
in
putting
a
building,
that's
three
and
a
half
feet
above
the
ground
on
a
basement
that
I
had
constructed
because
there
wasn't
room
on
the
property.
For
me
to
put
my
closed
files,
so
we
decided
to
use
a
basement,
but
it
was
placed
on
top
of
the
basement
with
a
lot
of
structural
work
being
done
and
now
is
undergoing
a
complete
renovation
in
new
roof.
M
New
electrical
new
Plumbing
new
siding,
total
renovation
of
the
interior,
which
we
discovered
the
subfloor
was
all
rotted
had
to
pull
that
out.
We
keep
discovering
things
as
we
go
along,
but
it
should
be
completed,
Jo
de
Lotto,
the
contractor,
which
is
a
big
company.
Usually
they
don't
do
little
projects
like
this,
but
they
thought
it
was
interesting,
said
that
by
October
30th,
we'll
have
a
certificate
of
occupancy,
so
we'll
see,
but
I
think
it's
going
to
be
an
absolutely
beautiful
building
and
a
credit
to
the
neighborhood.
M
M
We
have
15
spaces
that
they
have
a
total
of
four
guest
spaces
for
their
15
town
homes,
so
I
think
I'll
probably
be
seeing
them
in
my
parking
lot,
but
we're
very
excited
about
it,
because
when
I
retire
from
the
practice
of
law,
my
daughter
will
continue
to
practice
law
there
and
hopefully
someday.
Maybe
her
son
will
also
do
it.
We're
really
committed
to
the
neighborhood
and
that's
it.
B
E
I
have
a
question
sure:
what
is
the
impetus
for
moving
the
house
I'm.
M
Had
to
be
moved,
they
said
it
could
not
be
demolished.
It
wasn't
part
of
the
seven
story,
321
unit
project,
with
a
540
car
parking
garage
and
this
so
this
building
was
on
the
corner
and
it's
my
understanding
that,
where
the
building
was
will
become
a
park.
C
M
E
J
I
B
L
I'll
take
a
stab
at
this
one.
Thank
you.
I
moved
to
redesignate
the
property
located
at
1807,
North
Morgan
Street
as
a
contributing
structure
and
amend
the
Tampa
Heights
district
building,
inventory
and
map,
because
the
application
does
meet
the
criteria
established
in
the
National
register.
Bulletin
number
15
for
the
following
reasons.
L
L
C
I
G
H
Commissioners
just
want
to
take
an
opportunity
just
to
pause
for
a
moment
and
kind
of
consider
the
two
cases
that
you
just
reviewed,
one
being
a
public
building
and
and
the
other
private
building,
but
both
kind
of
showing
the
relationship
between
the
historic
preservation,
commission
and
the
architecture
review
commissions.
The
first
you
making
a
recommendation
for
landmarking
which,
pending
City
council's
approval,
that
would
then
go
under
the
jurisdiction
or
the
architecture
review
commission
to
monitor
any
changes
in
the
future.
That
may
happen.
H
We
fortunately
have
a
very
considerate
and
sensitive
occupant
currently,
and
you
know
down
the
road
15
or
20
years
as
that
building
continues
its
presence.
We
want
to
make
sure
that
those
improvements
that
were
made
are
maintained
and
and
continue
to
reflect,
the
character
of
that
building
and
Davis
Islands
and
then
the
second
case,
where
you
had
a
building,
that's
located
in
a
local,
historic
district.
The
architect
review
commission
considered
that
request
to
relocate
the
structure,
and
you
know
in
in
my
experience.
H
You
know
that
was
the
best
decision
for
the
structure,
because
it
maintains
its
relationship
to
the
residential
component
of
the
district,
as
sort
of
the
edge
of
the
district
has
become
more
intensified
in
development
and-
and
so
you
know
once
again
that
comes
back
to
the
historic
preservation
commission
to
ensure
that
the
protective
measures
are
then
reapplied
to
the
building
upon
the
relocation
and
then
subsequent
to
that
any
changes
would
go
back
to
the
architecture
review
commission.
So
you
know
this
is
a
very
intertwined
program.
H
It
can't
happen,
though,
without
these
owners
and
and
agents
and
applicants,
you
know
it's,
it's
definitely
a
relationship
that
we
try
to
build
with
Property
Owners
to
promote
preservation,
but
they
they
do
the
heavy
love.
So
we
were
very
appreciative
and
it
allows
us
to
kind
of
sit
here
and
reflect
maybe
more
independently
application
to
application
on
their
challenges
and
the
successes
that
we
can
realize
together.
B
We
have
a
comment
from
staff:
if
are
we
open
for
Commissioners
to
speak?
Oh.
G
Yes,
okay,
I
would
just
say
to
your
point:
Mr,
Fernandez
and
Mr
chamber
on
that.
This
is
one
of
those
challenging
things
where
I,
usually
moving
buildings.
Settings
aren't
are
sometimes
frowned
upon,
but
I
do
think,
seeing
it
and
on
the
new
site,
really
enhances
the
your
building
and
I
know.
It
was
a
great
effort
and
I
think
everyone
made
good
interpretations
on
this
one,
including
the
owner,
so
I
I
think
those
are
things
that
it's
not
always
a
straight
line
and
a
black
and
white
issue.
F
F
It's
really
like
simple
and
elegant
and
I
and
I
really
appreciate
the
work
that
the
police
department
put
into
it,
and
it's
interesting
the
history
about
you
know
the
developer
of
like
disappearing,
but
I
think
that's
a
great
example
of
how
the
city
is
like
really
values
the
property
that
they
have
their
work
in
you
know,
so
it
benefits
the
neighborhood
as
a
whole
and
then
with
the
law.
Practice
I
think
it's
awesome
because
it's
it's
within
the
district,
the
national
and
the
local.
F
So
it's
still
within
the
criteria
and
it's
a
beautiful
house
and
then
also
I
think
when
you
talked
about
the
owner
talked
about
his
daughter
and
maybe
his
grandchildren,
it's
a
legacy.
You
know
so
it's
like
it
ties
in
the
the
neighbor,
the
house
to
the
neighborhood,
but
also
the
people
to
the
house,
to
the
neighborhood,
so
I
think
they're,
both
beautiful
structures
and
I'm
really
like
encouraged
to
see
the
owners
really
take
part
in
it.
I
think
it
makes
it
a
lot
easier
to
make
a
decision
for
it.
So
thank
you.
E
And
just
one
comment
from
from
myself
in
regard
to
1807
Morgan,
Street
I
think
this
is
a
really
great
project
and
I
can
tell
that
it
took
a
lot
of
effort
with
staff
and
the
construction
company
and
the
property
owner.
But
what's
really
interesting
to
me
here
is
that
it
contributes
to
like
the
dynamic
nature
of
the
Tampa
Heights
district,
because
we
have
new
construction.
That's
coming
in.
That
is
aligning
itself
with
the
design
standards
as
best
as
possible,
but
then
we
we're
keeping
these
older
structures.
E
J
J
J
For
this
presentation
the
applicant
is
here
and
I
will
begin
with
a
photo
essay,
and
then
we
will
have
the
applicant
come
forward
to
make
the
request
and
then
I
will
continue
with
the
the
staff
report.
Following
his
presentation.
J
So
the
request
here
is
for
a
change
in
status,
from
contributing
to
non-contributing
for
an
accessory
structure.
So
what
we're
looking
at
today
is
just
the
it's
a
residential
Garage
in
the
Hyde
Park
historic
district
is
not
the
primary
structure,
not
the
main
house.
That's
under
consideration,
just
the
just
the
garage.
J
This
is
the
location
of
the
property
at
1802,
West,
ChatOn
Avenue,
and
this
is
the
2022
aerial
map
showing
where
it
is.
You
see
that
it's
in
the
Hyde
Park
area,
Jatan
Avenue,
is
just
to
the
North
and
the
it's
at
the
corner
at
Fremont
Avenue,
which
is
the
street
along
the
east
side
of
the
property.
J
This
is
the
Hyde
Park
Historic
District
map,
showing
you
the
location
of
the
subject
site
within
the
district.
Again,
the
the
red
line
shows
the
outline
of
the
local
historic
district
and
the
blue
lines
showing
you
where
the
national
registered
District
boundary
is.
So
you
can
see
it's
in
both
both
the
national
and
the
local
historic
districts.
J
The
main
structure
on
the
product
property,
the
the
residents
I
just
wanted
to
show
you
the
the
main
house,
so
you
can
see
the
characteristics,
the
architectural
characteristics
of
the
primary
structure.
J
It
does
have
crosswind
Bungalow
features.
It
has
the
the
sort
of
the
airplane
pop-up
second
floor,
which
was
originally
an
open,
sleeping,
porch
or
ventilated,
sleeping
porch.
This
is
the
North
and
the
East
Elevation
on
the
photo
of
the
left,
so
you're,
looking
at
it
from
the
corner
of
Jatan
and
Fremont,
and
then
we're
looking
at
the
rear
of
the
structure
on
the
in
the
right
photograph
and
that's
actually
an
addition
to
the
house
that
was
constructed
around
1990.
J
This
is
the
the
subject
building
today
that
we're
looking
at
is
the
the
garage,
the
accessory
structure
on
the
property.
So
the
request
is
for
for
this
particular
structure
here
we're
looking
at
it
on
the
left.
The
East
Elevation
is
the
view
from
Fremont
Avenue
and
then
the
west
elevation
is
interior
to
the
property.
So
we're
looking
at
that
from
the
backyard.
J
This
is
the
north
elevation
on
the
left,
so
that
view
is
also
from
the
backyard
area.
Noticeable
in
this
picture
are
the
different
types
of
siding
that
are
on
the
structure.
There
is
a
what
is
called
a
double
OG
siding
on
the
west
elevation
and
on
the
North
elevation,
just
a
clapboard
siding,
horizontal,
regular,
horizontal
siding
on
the
south
elevation
of
the
building,
which
you
can
see
from
the
alley.
J
There's
a
drop,
siding
or
a
dolly
Garden
siding
shown,
so
the
building
actually
has
three
different
types
of
siding
on
it:
Additionally
the
the
person
door
that
you
see
there
that's
on
the
the
rear
and
the
garage
door,
of
course,
are
not
original
to
the
structure.
Those
are
more
recent
recent
additions
to
the
building.
J
Some
of
the
details
of
the
structure
here
on
that
east
side
of
the
building,
you
can
see
the
exposed,
soffit
and
then
there's
a
a
railing
along
just
above
the
garage
door
which
appears
to
that
it
may
have
been
for
sliding
doors.
At
some
point,
you
can
see
in
the
top
right
structure
that
opens
off
it
again
with
the
exposed,
rafter
tails
and
then
on
the
bottom
picture,
just
a
bit
of
the
condition
of
the
building.
J
We
have
some
photos
of
the
interior
of
the
building,
so
you
can
see
the
contrast
between
some
of
the
the
new
framing
around
the
the
door
that
was
added
on
the
the
back
wall
and
the
original
framing
of
the
structure.
J
N
Commissioners
Jim
Lloyd,
with
Lloyd
Craftsman,
representing
the
homeowners,
the
wagamens
at
1802,
West
Jatan
Avenue,
just
want
to
start
with
a
little
background
on
myself
I'm
a
smaller
Builder
I,
typically
only
take
on
two
or
three
projects.
At
a
time
been
in
the
business
about
almost
30
years,
I've
currently
worked
on
28
Hyde,
Park
historic
homes
going
back
to
2011.,
15
of
which
have
included
accessory
buildings
I'm
very
vested
in
the
neighborhood.
N
There's
going
to
be
discussion
about
the
property
contributing
to
the
historic
District
in
a
period
of
significance,
essentially,
which
is
up
through
1933
1866
1886
to
1933.
So
there's
a
couple
of
discrepancies
with
this
particular
building,
mostly
determined
by
the
site
plan
and
then
the
type
of
materials
that
we've
got
that
were
being
used
out
there.
So
this
is
the
current
site
plan
showing
the
location
of
the
garage
on
the
lot
and
the
size
of
the
garage.
So
the
current
garage-
that's,
there
is
19
by
20
foot
3
and
it's
located
on
the
Southeast.
N
N
This
is
the
1951
Sanborn
map
showing
that
building
in
the
same
location,
which
is
after
the
period
of
significance
in
1933,
you'll
notice,
the
size
and
compared
to
this
is
actually
the
lot
just
to
the
West.
This
building
is
still
existing,
you'll
notice,
the
size
there,
and
also
on
the
1929
map
same
situation,
see
how
the
building
is
narrower
front
to
back
or
side
to
side
than
it
is
front
to
back,
whereas
that's
more
of
a
square
building.
N
This
is
a
I
had
my
drafts
person
put
the
Sanborn
map
into
Cad
and
we
took
some
Dimensions
so
you'll
see
that
these
are
pretty
similar.
I
mean
obviously
you're
trying
to
take
something
from
a
long
time
ago
and
try
to
scale
it
out.
But
when
you
have
the
actual
size
of
the
lot,
then
you
know
what
the
size
is
on
the
survey.
N
It's
pretty
easy
to
come
up
with
some
of
these
Dimensions
that
are
on
there.
So
this
is
actually
within
CAD,
it's
a
scaled
drawing
so
the
19.
This
is
1929
over
here.
So
this
building
scales
out
to
10
foot
by
20
foot
and
the
proof
you
can
kind
of
see.
So
this
is
12
feet
to
the
porch
and
then
a
55
foot
overall
length
of
the
building
is
67
feet
and
it
shows
the
building
itself
at
26
feet
wide.
N
So
if
you
go
back
to
the
original
survey
or
the
current
survey,
you've
got
a
42.5
foot
building
and
then
23
foot
six,
which
is
to
the
actual
building
itself,
not
including
the
porch.
You
add
those
two
Dimensions
together,
you
get
66
1
compared
to
67,
which
is
pretty
close.
N
N
The
building
is
currently
20
feet
deep
and
19
feet
wide,
so
it's
much
wider
than
what
it's
shown
on
the
original
Sanborn
Maps
and
if
you
look
at
the
the
building
next
to
it,
on
the
on
the
property
adjacent
again,
it's
showing
much
wider
and
I
went
out
and
measured
this
building.
This
building
actually
is
20
feet
wide
front
to
back.
So
it's
not
like
they
went
out,
and
you
know
the
scale
was
off
or
something
like
that.
I
mean
when
they
were
measuring
these.
N
They
were
trying
to
make
the
attempt
to
show
that
they
were
the
the
right
size.
That's
not
like
they're,
just
saying,
oh
well,
there's
a
building
there
I'll
just
sketch
it
out,
so
that
kind
of
summarizes
the
size
of
the
building
here
versus
what
the
current
building
is.
N
N
N
These
are
the
three
different
sightings
that
are
currently
on
the
property.
That's
the
East
Elevation!
That's
a
Dolly
Varden
siding!
It's
a
six
inch
siding!
That's
got
double
Laps
on
it.
This
is
the
north
elevation
that
has
just
a
plane,
lap,
siding.
N
That's
the
South
elevation,
which
has
a
novelty
siding
so
there's
three
different
types
of
siding
that
are
on
the
property
I
apologize
for
having
to
use
my
phone
I
was
having
a
little
printer
issue,
so
they
went
by
and
took
a
look
today,
and
this
will
show
you
what's
on
the
original
House,
so
the
original
house
at
a
was
lap
siding,
which
is
typically
what
you'd
see
I
mean
normally
again,
with
my
experience
with
these
properties.
If
you're
looking
at
a
contributing
accessory
structure,
it
typically
will
have
the
same
characteristics
as
the
main
house.
N
N
Obviously
they
took
whatever
siding
was
laying
around
and
used
that
to
construct
this
new
bit
the
new
building.
You
can
see
the
scale
of
the
trim
again.
Typically,
you
know
you're
looking
at
that's
a
four
and
a
half
inch
wide.
N
N
A
lot
of
the
trim,
that's
on
the
accessory
structure.
Actually,
all
the
trim,
that's
on
the
accessory
structure,
is
three
quarters
of
an
inch
thick.
So
it's
it's
a
newer
material
that
they've
used
for
the
I
got
one
here,
yeah
that
one
so
this
is
this
is
one
of
the
corner
boards.
That's
on
there
I'm!
Sorry,
that's
the
other!
That's
the
other!
This
is
the
corner
board.
That's
on
there,
so
you
can
see
that
that's
three
quarters
of
an
inch
thick.
N
Essentially,
so
it's
not
it's
not
the
same
materials
that
we're
on
potentially
on
this
original
building
and
it
doesn't
match
what
the
main
structure
of
the
house
is.
There's
going
to
be
some
discussion
about
the.
N
The
existence
of
barn
doors,
let
me
see
that
where
that
photo
is.
N
So
this
is
the
this:
is
the
rail
that's
currently
over
the
the
garage
door
that
you
know
denotes
the
fact
that
they
were
potentially
sliding
barn
doors
that
was
on
the
building?
But
again
this
door
is
16
feet
wide,
so
I'm
not
quite
sure
unless
it
was
like
a
side,
entry
garage
I'm,
not
sure
how
this
would
have
fit
on
the
building.
That
was
there
in
addition
to
that,
the
again
piece
of
trim
that
is
behind
it.
N
N
Let's
see
what
other
photos
I
have
interior
some
of
the
some
of
the
studs
are
narrower,
studs,
so
they're.
Basically,
the
studs
are
inch
and
a
half
by
three
and
a
half
which
is
a
new
material
Dimension,
not
an
old
material,
Dimension
typically
they'd
be
you
know
at
least
inch
and
three
quarter
by
more
than
three
and
a
half
inches,
because
it's
a
it's
a
piece
of
wood.
That's
not
been
milled
down
to
like
what
they
normally
would
do.
Today,.
N
This
is
another
project
that
I'm
working
on
as
well.
That's
got
so
that's
another
piece
of
trim.
Also
original
trim
on
that
house.
That's
showing
it's
one
inch
thick.
N
Here's
a
column,
that's
on
the
house,
that's
showing
the
material
being
again.
One
inch
thick
so
I
think
there's
some
significant
discrepancies
in
terms
of
the
determining
determination
of
this
particular
building
being
the
original
accessory
structure.
That
was
on
the
lot
prior
to
1933
and
it
was
even
showing
in
the
same
location
in
1951.
So
this
building
was
constructed
in
this
location.
Sometime
after
1951
there
was
in
the
presentation,
Elaine
I'll
show
you
that
the
garage
wasn't
shown
on
the
1976
Sanborn
map.
N
The
accessory
structure
was
not
mentioned
on
the
83
to
85
hard
Park
surveys.
It
wasn't
marked
as
an
existing
and
contributing
structure
until
1992.,
so
I,
don't
in
in
with
with
what
I'm
showing
you
here
I,
don't
believe
that
this
particular
building
was
the
original
building
to
the
site.
It's
got
some
materials,
you
know
that
were
used
back
then
you
know.
Even
the
the
soffit
itself
is
a
is
a
just
a
one
by
six
soffit
screw
that
over.
N
N
N
N
J
J
Okay,
I'm
just
going
to
run
through
these
photos
again
for
you
just
to
refresh
your
memories
from
moments
ago.
Again,
this
is
the
East
elevation
of
the
the
structure
in
question
and
the
west
elevation,
looking
at
it
from
the
street,
from
Fremont
Avenue
and
also
from
the
backyard
and
then
again
just
the
North
and
the
South
elevations,
looking
at
it
from
the
that
side
in
the
backyard
and
then
from
the
alley
as
well.
J
These
are
the
photos
that
I
showed
you
or
some
of
the
details.
The
applicant
did
go
over
some
of
the
detailing
with
you
again
and
discussed
the
the
soffit
details
and
the
trim
Dimensions,
as
well
as
the
different
types
of
siding
on
the
house.
I'm.
Sorry
on
the
garage,
the
interior
photographs,
that
I
showed
you
showing
the
framing
and
the
structure
of
the
garage.
J
J
I'm
going
to
go
through
the
Sanborn
maps.
For
you
again,
this
is
the
1920s
Sanborn
map
showing
the
location
of
the
structure
and
the
location
of
the
primary
structure
was,
has
not
changed
and
then
the
location
of
a
garage
that
was
shown
on
the
site.
You
can
see
that
the
garage
was
shown,
it's
indicated
by
the
word
Auto
there.
So
you
know
this
was
a
garage
or
an
auto
house
as
a
one-story
wood
frame
structure
that
was
interior
to
the
lot
on
the
west
side
and
that
same
structure
appears
on
the
1951
Sanborn
map.
J
I
hope
on
your
screens.
You
can
see
this
portion
of
the
the
structure,
this
portion
of
the
site,
this
one's
particularly
fuzzy,
but
you
can
sort
of
make
out
what
appears
to
be
a
structure
located
along
the
the
South
boundary
near
the
near
the
south
east
corner
of
the
lot,
and
this
1965
photos
a
little
clearer.
J
J
J
You
can
see
the
shade
difference
on
the
along
the
roof
line.
There.
J
So
in
1983
in
1984,
this
is
when
the
Hyde
Park
historic
district
was
inventoried
for
its
listing
in
the
National
register
of
historic
places.
At
that
time,
only
the
primary
structures,
only
the
houses
were
documented
and
recorded,
and
that's
all
that
are
included
in
the
National
register
of
historic
places,
listing.
J
In
1989,
an
inventory
was
done
of
all
of
the
accessory
structures
in
the
district,
and
those
were
then
at
that
point
in
the
local
historic
district.
Excuse
me,
the
the
district
was
adopted
as
a
local,
historic
district
in
1988
and
in
1989.
The
survey
for
the
accessory
structures
was
done
and
at
that
time
the
accessory
structures
were
added
to
the
local
Hyde
Park
historic
district,
so
some
are
shown
as
contributing
structures
on
the
the
maps.
From
this
point
forward.
J
This
is
a
1989
application,
for
the
the
site
plan
is
from
the
1989
application
for
the
addition
to
the
main
structure
to
the
house,
and
at
this
time
you
can
see
that
there
was
a
accessory
structure
shown
on
the
site
plan
at
the
the
current
accessory
structures,
location.
J
Going
through
the
maps
for
the
historic
districts
this
one
first
one
is
from
the
1985
survey
of
the
historic
district
showing
the
the
primary
house
on
the
site
and
yellow
there.
J
It
was
considered
to
be
contributing
and
his
alterations
were
noted.
It
had
been
covered
in
vinyl,
siding,
I,
believe
and
the
front
porch
had
been
screened
in
the
contributing,
but
altered
structures
were
shown.
J
As
altered
structures
to
point
out
that
they
would
be
eligible
for
the
for
programs,
such
as
the
local
ad
valorem
tax
exemption
program,
to
encourage
such
Rehabilitation
of
the
structures,
this
is
the
1988
map
of
the
local
historic
district.
J
All
the
contributing
and
contributing
altered
structures
are
shown
as
contributing
on
the
1988
map.
This
is
the
map
that
was
used
during
the
adoption
of
the
local
historic
district,
and
this
is
the
1992
update
to
the
local
Historic
District
map.
You
can
see
we
did
our
in
our
files.
J
We
have
no
maps
that
are
available
prior
to
1992.,
unfortunately,
but
we
do
have
this
one
from
from
that
year,
showing
the
accessory
structures
on
the
site,
and
you
can
see
some
are
shown
in
heavy
black
line
or
as
contributing
structures
such
as
the
one
here
at
1802,
Jatan.
J
So
our
findings
generally
to
summarize
them,
are
that
both
the
house
and
the
accessory
structure
appear
to
have
been
constructed
during
the
the
historic
districts
period
of
significance
from
1886
to
1933..
J
The
garage
has
characteristics
of
structures
built
during
the
district's
period
of
significance,
and
while
the
house
was
identified
in
the
initial
85
nomination
for
the
national
register
listing,
the
garage
was
identified
in
the
1989
local
survey
of
contributing
accessory
structures
and
the
garage
has
been
shown
as
contributing
on
all
of
the
maps
for
the
historic
district
since
that
time.
So
its
classification
has
been
consistent
throughout
its
documentation.
J
The
evidence
that
we
have
is
that
the
characteristics
of
the
building
are
consistent
with
the
construction
methods
and
the
design
elements
present
in
similar
buildings
constructed
within
the
Hyde
Park
historic
district,
and
while
the
garage
may
not
be
original
to
the
site
and
does
not
appear
to
be
the
same,
one
that
was
previously
located
on
this
site,
it
may
have
been
relocated
from
another
place
within
the
historic
district
from
a
nearby
location
or
it
may
have
been
constructed.
J
So
the
staff
recommendation
will
be
that
the
accessory
structure
should
retain
its
status
as
contributing
to
the
Hyde
Park
historic
district.
The
owner
did
submit
the
application
for
the
building
within
a
historic
district,
to
change
its
status
from
contributing
to
non-contributing
that
application
was
complete
in
accordance
with
criteria.
J
It
embodies
distinctive
characteristics
of
the
type
of
architecture
represented
through
Hyde
Park,
and
it's
consistent
with
the
his
the
built
into
architectural
characteristics
of
the
primary
structure
on
site,
and
it
maintains
historic
relationships
to
site
and
setting
as
it
has
since
its
evaluation
in
1989..
H
Good
morning,
once
again,
Commissioners
Dennis
Fernandez
Architects
review
in
historic
presidential
manager,
I
wanted
to
just
provide
a
little
context.
It's
a
very
thorough
presentation
but
I
think
both
the
applicant
and
the
staff.
Your
your
role
this
morning
in
applying
National
register
bulletin
number
15
to
determine
the
contributing
status
or
the
ability
to
change
status
as
a
significant
one,
because
the
staff
does
rely
on
the
existing
building
inventory
very
heavily
in
making
his
decisions
as
to
where
other
structures
are
protected
or
not
protected
under
the
historic
preservation
ordinances.
H
A
couple
things
that
I
just
kind
of
want
to
share
as
kind
of
being
in
this
role
for
quite
a
long
time
and
seeing
a
lot
of
different
scenarios
with
structures
and
throughout
the
city
is
that
there
are
situations
throughout
Hyde,
Park
and
through
all
the
historic
districts
where
accessory
structures
were
built
either
before
or
even
at
you
know,
after
or
before
a
principal
structure
was
constructed.
We
have
examples
where
the
accessory
structure
was
constructed
and
a
principal
structure
was
never
constructed.
H
Last.
If
you
recall
last
time
we
met
in
May,
you
looked
at
a
redesignation
of
a
relocated
structure
in
Hyde
Park,
where
there
was
an
existing
contributing
accessory
structure.
But
then
the
principal
structure
had
been
built
in
the
1950s
and
was
non-contributing
and
then
that
acted
as
the
receiving
site
for
contributing
structure.
So
at
the
end,
those
two
structures,
although
both
contributing
were,
were
not
necessarily
original
to
the
site.
H
So
we
we
did
look
heavily
at
the
construction
methods
and
although
there
are
some
replacement
materials
which
we
see
pretty
much
throughout
the
district,
I
mean
once
we
get
into
the
60s,
we
start
seeing
the
the
you
know
the
change
to
nominal
Dimensions
that
you
know
that
doesn't
necessarily
negate
the
fact
that
a
large
part
of
the
structure
is
dimensional
Lumber
and
built
in
the
same
techniques
that
we
see
within
structures
that
are
built
in
the
1920s
and
within
the
period
of
significance
for
Hyde
Park.
H
H
Is
they
wouldn't
have
used
Dolly
Varden,
siding
they
wouldn't
have
used
most
likely
that
architectural
style
so
there's
a
lot
of
you
know
sleuth
work
that
you
have
to
kind
of
consider
in
in
sort
of
picking
this
apart,
but
at
the
end
of
the
day,
going
back
to
National
register
bulletin
number
15,
the
the
portion
dealing
with
when
a
structure
was
constructed
is
only
part
of
the
consideration
of
which
structures
actually
contribute
to
the
historic
fabric
of
a
neighborhood.
So
it's
not
an
easy
task.
H
We
try
not
to
bring
you
know
we
try
to
bring
you
as
much
information
and
not
you
know,
introduce
conjecture,
but
it
is
something
that
we
think
we've
provided
you
all
the
information
that
we
can
as
a
staff
and
I
think
the
applicant.
You
know
in
good
faith,
has
tried
to
act
in
his
clients
behalf
to
provide
you.
The
information
that
they
have
there
is
I
want
to
just
remind
the
commission
of
its
of
its
role
that
this
is
a
determination
of
of
essentially
eligibility
for
contributing
status.
H
It's
not
a
structural
evaluation.
It's
not
a
you
know.
A
an
architectural
Rehabilitation
exercise
that
that
jurisdiction
is
for
the
architecture
review.
Commission,
you
know
if
there
was
going
to
be
changes
to
the
structure
subsequent
to
modify
it
or
bring
it
back
more
towards
a
unified,
historic,
architectural
type
that
happens
at
the
architecture
review
commission
if
the
applicant
wanted
to
make
a
request
for
demolition
based
on
the
fact
that
their
structural
defects
or
an
economic
hardship
that
would
be
done
at
the
architecture
view.
H
Commission,
Your
Role
is
strictly
to
determine
if
it
qualifies
as
a
contributing
structure,
adding
to
the
context
of
the
historic
district
as
it
did
originally,
when
the
inventory
was
conducted.
B
O
J
Correct
and
we
have
permits
going
back
through
the
1980s,
but
nothing
prior
to
that,
so
we
do
not
have
anything
before
1989
permit
wise.
That
would
show
anything
regarding
this
particular
structure.
O
I
have
a
follow-up
question:
the
way
the
property,
the
main
structure
is
located
on
the
property.
It
would
indicate
to
me
that
they
probably
originally
had
been
a
driveway
that
came
off
Jatan
on
the
western
side
of
the
property,
so
not
on
the
corner
side,
the
interior
portion
of
the
lot.
That
makes
sense
to
me
when
I
look
at
the
Sanborn
map
and
the
shape
of
the
original
building.
Let's
call
it
that
the
auto
storage,
the
garage
is
there
any
indication
now
that
there
was
a
driveway
or
a
curb
cut.
J
Yeah
not
from
the
the
Dutton
Avenue
side.
Now
that.
O
Yes,
it
could
come
in
from
the
alley,
but
that's
not
the
typical
pattern
of
driveways
in
the
Hyde
Park
historic
district,
particularly
on
this
side
of.
D
O
Most
of
them,
as
you
know,
come
off
the
main
street,
which
is
why
the
reason
why
I'm
bringing
that
up
is
because
the
location
of
the
present
structure
seems
odd
to
me,
I'm,
not
saying
that
it
isn't
historic,
I'm,
just
saying
it
just
doesn't
conform
to
the
typical
patterns
of
accessory
structures
in
the
historic
district
in
this
particular
part,
I
would
have
expected
to
see
a
driveway
cut
I
and
that
that's
it
for
me.
For
now,
thanks.
C
J
L
Family
showed
this
garage
showing
up
from
our
notes.
It
appears
that
in
1989
it
would
have
been
the
first
time
that
this
this
structure
showed
up
on
anybody's
map
anywhere,
regardless
of
how
it
was
constructed
and
it
by
definition,
historic
structures
are
50
years
old
or
older,
and
that
mathematically
doesn't
jive
in
my
mind
that
once
this
structure
finally
did
show
up
somewhere
and
it's
clear
from
the
evidence
that,
prior
to
that
1989
date,
the
accessory
structure
was
never
noted
or
designated
on
a
map
or
even
commented
that
it
was
there.
L
So
if
that's
the
case,
then
it
wouldn't
qualify
by
that
one
definition
alone,
regardless
of
materials
and
construction,
and
so
on
so,
and
it
may
be
that
it
is
an
error
on
the
part
of
the
folks
who
did
these
surveys
and
did
the
maps.
But
all
we
have
to
go
by
is
what
is
shown
on
the
evidence
presented
and
not
what
we
think
might
have
been
there
or
could
have
been
there.
O
Perspective
are
generally
very
accurate,
they're
very
carefully
drawn
Maps.
So
to
me
that
just
raises
a
huge
red
flag
as
to
whether
or
not
it's
just
something
that
we
rely
on
as
preservation
is.
Everybody
looks
at
the
Sanborns
we
go
through
histories,
the
layers.
You
can
see
the
changes
in
the
property
and
I'm
not
saying
that
this
couldn't
be
an
error.
You
know
it's
possible,
but
in
my
my
view,
highly
unlikely.
The.
C
E
F
Oh
yeah
I
think
I'm
similar
with
me
too,
because
the
structure
was
originally
closer
to
the
house
on
the
other
side
and
then
it
was
moved
lower
and
it's
not
the
same
scale
as
the
other
one
as
the
original
one.
So
then
it's
like
when
was
it
added
and
what
is
the
significance
of
Hyde
Park
again
the
period
of
significance?
Again,
it's.
F
So
then
that
was
done.
It
was
moved
after
1933.,
and
so
that's
that's
that's
concerning
and
then
the
fact
that
the
when
the
original
Maps
were
drawn
or
when
the
district
was
drawn
up
in
1985.,
the
accessory
structures
were
not
included,
but
then
it
was
included
in
1992,
but
it.
But
from
the
comment
that
was
said
earlier,
that
the
individual
accessories
were
not
like
examined,
it
was
just
like
included,
so
we
don't
know
what
the
condition
of
the
buildings
were.
F
B
It's
for
my
clarification
for
me
with
contributing
structures
when
how
many
of
those
attachments
are
contributing
now
in
Hyde,
Park
I
know
for
this
property
seems
to
be
around
1992
is
when
it
was
showing
up,
but
as
far
as
Hyde
Park,
okay,
let
me
rephrase
that
how
many
contributing
accessory
dwellings
are
in
High
Park.
J
Yeah
I
would
say
the
majority
of
the
accessory
structures
that
are
shown
on
the
maps.
More
than
50
percent
of
them
are
contributing
yeah
700.
I
Since
there
are
several
questions,
sorry,
since
there
were
several
questions
of
Staff
I'd,
ask
that
you
have
the
applicant
see
if
he
has
any
follow-up
conclusions
or
remarks
based
on
the
questions
on
the
Commissioners
had
of
staff.
N
I
mean
I
think
the
one
thing
that
kind
of
struck
me
with
the
conversations
that
have
been
going
on
you
know
is
that
the
I'm
just
I'm,
trying
to
find
the
exact
wording.
N
Just
because
it
was
in
that
section
15
there
that
it
that's
what
it
highlighted
it
before.
No.
N
I'm,
sorry,
it's
under
Criterion,
C,
historic,
the
second,
the
the
last
sentence
in
that
the
property
page
three.
This
is
on
the
report.
N
And
then,
actually
in
the
in
the
paragraph
prior
to
that
defining
the
essential
physical
features,
property
must
retain
the
essential
features
that
enable
it
to
convey
its
historic
identity
and
that
it's,
you
know
the
comment.
My
comment
will
be
that
it's
been
substantially
altered
since
the
period
of
the
district's
significance,
so
just
showing
that
you
know
the
man
door's
been
replaced,
the
garage
door
has
been
replaced,
the
roof's
been
replaced,
the
the
corner
boards
have
been
replaced,
the
siding
I
mean
it's
hard
for
me,
I
mean
I.
N
N
So
if
we're
going
to
rebuild
a
building
like
this,
we're
going
to
try
to
salvage
it,
maybe
they
didn't
care
as
much
back
in
the
70s
or
60s
whenever
this
got
done,
so
they
just
again
I
feel,
like
somebody
just
kind
of
threw
whatever
was
laying
around
and
put
that
up
on
the
building
and
said:
hey,
it's
historic.
So
that's
kind
of
my
contention
is
that
I,
don't
I,
don't
think
there's
enough
here.
That
proves
that
this
is
still
a
contributing
structure
to
the
historic
district
in
the
period
of
significance
from
the
1886
to
1933.
D
N
B
And
just
keep
in
mind
Commissioners
we're
not
here
for
the
Integrity
of
the
building.
This
is
just
here
for
the
in
contributing
and
non-contributing
I
know
it
may
answer
a
question,
but
it's
not
worth
it.
M
E
C
D
H
I
mean
once
again,
Dennis
Fernandez,
with
the
staff
we've
seen
both
there's
all
different
types
of
options
that
we
see,
but
we
we
do
see
different
operational
functions
for
some
of
these
sliding
doors,
I
mean
I.
Think
the
fact
that
it
has
the
railing
indicates
that.
C
H
You
know
that
probably
had
we
could
have
had
a
a
secondary
door
somewhere
or
a
fixed
or
a
little
hard
to
determine
the
the
the
photo
that
we
have
of
it
before
it
was
modified,
appears
to
show
that
there
was
some
type
of
door
in
place,
but
a
little
difficult
to
to
see
with
the
pixelation.
I
At
this
time,
excuse
me
from
the
legal
department
I
do
as
I
previously
provided
the
commissioner's
sample
motions.
I
I
do
want
to
direct
your
attention
to
whether
or
not
the
Commissioners
decide
to
approve
the
request
or
deny
the
request
that
your
request,
your
approval
or
denial,
should
be
specifically
to
the
accessory
structure
and
not
to
the
property
as
a
whole,
but
specifically
to
the
accessory
structure,
because
that's
what
this
application
is
regarding
at
the
top
you'll
see
that
it
says
property.
But
please
Focus
your
motion
on
the
accessory
structure.
G
G
It
is
unclear
whether
the
period
of
significance
of
the
structure
or
whether
the
construction
of
the
structure
was
within
the
period
of
significance.
The
building
no
longer
has
Integrity
to
its
original
materials.
It
has
three
different
types
of
sightings
on
three
sides:
the
door
overhead
door
is
new.
It
appears
that
there
was
once
barn
door
or
a
sliding
door
and
there
there's
a
new
roof.
G
There
are
several
materials
and
construction
types
that
are
different
and
therefore
the
Integrity
is
not
the
same
as
it
was
historically
and
I
believe
that
is
sufficient
unless
I'm
told
otherwise.
G
B
H
For
our
final
item
on
the
agenda
this
morning,
I
do
have
an
update
of
some
of
the
activities
going
on
with
the
East
Tampa
Memorial
Park
Cemetery
resources
that
we've
been
discussing.
The
last
three
meetings
had
just
a
few
slides
to
kind
of
help
us
along
that
overview.
H
Just
as
a
reminder,
and
for
those
that
may
have
not
been
participating
in
in
our
hearings
in
the
past,
these
Tampa
neighborhood
is
a
very
large
neighborhood
and
the
eastern
part
of
our
city.
Essentially,
this
map
shows
the
boundaries
of
the
community
redevelopment
area
in
blue,
and
that
area
is
composed
of
different
neighborhoods
from
the
East
Tampa
area,
situated
to
the
east
of
I-275
and
the
north
of
I-4
generally.
H
So
last
we
met
I
Was
preparing
to
attend
a
meeting
with
East
Tampa
Community
advisory
committee,
which
did
occur.
I
did
attend
that
meeting
in
June
and
on
June
6
and
presented
a
pretty
thorough,
PowerPoint
overview
of
our
program
and
some
of
the
opportunities
similar
to
what
I
presented
to
the
Commission
in
the
past,
mainly
focusing
in
on
the
designation
and
recognition
of
historic
resources
in
the
East
Tampa
area.
H
It
was
well
attended.
I
think
there
was
probably
about
50
individuals
that
were
there,
and
there
was
some
discussion
from
the
committee
that
followed
those
particular
interest
in
Memorial
Park
Cemetery.
Obviously,
that
had
just
recently
transferred
ownership
to
the
city.
So
there
was
a
lot
of
discussion
about
what
was
planned
for
the
cemetery
and
we've
been
coordinating
both
with
the
public,
some
of
which
were
in
attendance
at
this
meeting
and
and
others
that
have
kind
of
formed
groups
that
are
promoting
the
preservation
of
the
cemetery.
H
In
you
know,
gathering
information
and
and
hopefully
kind
of
leveraging
our
our
effort
to
bring
some
protection
and
improvements
to
to
the
cemetery
itself.
H
At
that
meeting,
I
did
obviously
pass
out
a
lot
of
business
cards
and
provide
our
general
contact
information.
There
was
a
discussion
sort
of
after
the
fact
from
some
individuals
that
had
interest
with
buildings
that
they
were
familiar
with
and
we're
going
to
kind
of
get
back
with
me.
I
haven't
actually
had
that
contact
as
of
yet
but
I
expect
that
it's
going
to
be
forthcoming,
the
more
that
we
we
continue
to
to
interact
with
the
community.
There.
H
I
had
mentioned
at
the
beginning
of
the
meeting
and
I
know
that
this
was
a
central
discussion,
Point
for
the
recognition
of
East
Tampa
and
some
of
the
other
African-American
resources
that
that
are
either
designated
or
undesignated
is
to
bring
recognition
and
kind
of
celebrate
the
heritage
of
of
those,
as
we
do
with
our
other
historic
resources,
and
so
the
the
most
current
ones
that
we're
dealing
with
for
the
historic
marker
markers
are
the
scrub
in
the
Jackson
house
markers
which
are
being
dedicated.
H
This
week,
as
I
mentioned,
there
have
been
some
other
ones
that
have
been
recently
installed
and
there's
another
number
of
additional
ones
that
are
sort
of
being
considered
but
haven't
been
approved.
Yet
so
The
College
Hill
Cemetery
marker
was
installed
in
2022.
That
is
just
on
the
east
side
of
the
Italian
Club
Cemetery,
as
exists
today
and
the
markers
president.
If
anyone
attended
that
that
dedication
I'm
not
sure,
but
it's
present,
if
you
wanted
to
go
see
that
today,
the
Zion
Cemetery
marker
was
approved
by
the
Hillsborough
County
advisory
committee
as
well.
H
I
sit
on
that
committee,
so
I
am
kind
of
participating
in
these
discussions.
On
a
you
know,
on
a
basis
of
the
applications
are
presented
to
us
by
their
staff.
The
marker
has
not
been
approved
by
the
Zion
Cemetery
preservation
and
maintenance.
Society
they've
been
working
on
some
of
the
text
of
how
they
want
the
the
marker
to
read.
H
So
the
the
the
financing
has
been
approved
and
we're
still
pending
the
text
and
the
location
that
they'd
like
that
installed
and
then
other
markers
that
have
been
recently
approved
and
still
are
sort
of
in
the
development
stage
of
either
text
or
fabrication
or
the
Memorial
Park
Cemetery
marker
one
for
Blake
high
school
and
then
another
for
Rogers
Park,
Golf
Course.
H
So
those
those
are
sort
of
the
the
current
inventory
of
markers
and
then,
as
I
said,
there's
additional
ones
that
are
that
are
coming
down
the
pipe.
L
Dennis
may
I
ask
a
question:
please
are
the
the
historic
markers
the
locations
of
those
are
those
included
on
the
website
for
the
Department
for
your
division?
We.
H
Have
a
link
to
to
those
on
our
on
our
website.
There's
an
entire
inventory
for
the
state
where
you
can
go
by
county
and
deter.
You
know,
see
what
has
been
installed
and
where
they're
located.
So
they
we
kind
of
are
staff,
particularly
our
archives
and
record
stats,
really
diligent
about
kind
of
keeping
those
up,
because
sometimes
they
get
hit
by
cars
and
sometimes
they
need
repairs,
and
so
sometimes
they're.
You
know
offline
for
a
little
bit,
but
there's
funding
for
repairs
and
maintenance
that
are
part
of
the
program
as
well.
H
As
you
recall,
the
Johnson
Brothers
houses,
which
were
recommended
for
local
designation
by
this
committee
at
our
last
hearing,
we
are
scheduled
to
bring
those
to
City
Council
on
August
24th,
for
their
considerations
or
in
the
process
of
preparing
to
notice
for
those
hearings
and,
and
so
actually,
the
scrub
marker
that
I
just
discussed
is
going
to
be
or
actually
is
installed
in
front
of
these
two
structures.
H
So
it
gives
you
sort
of
a
real
world
experience
of
of
the
housing
type
that
were
in
the
scrub
and
then
the
Memorial
Park
Cemetery
we've
been
working
on
progressing
with
the
local
Landmark
designation
of
this.
As
you
know,
it
was
acquired
by
the
city.
It's
been
going
through
a
number
of
efforts
internally
with
the
city
to
try
to
really
determine
the
records.
H
The
record
record
keeping
was
very
poor
on
the
cemetery,
so
there's
a
lot
of
work
going
into
determining
where
their,
where
there
are
burials
and
what
areas
May
and
not
have
burials,
there's
also
individuals
in
the
public
who
own
plots
and
but
yet
the
record
keeping
doesn't
really.
You
know
determine
that
so
the
city's
working
very
diligently
on
that
and
coordinating
with
outside
experts
to
try
to
get
some
sort
of
control
on
that
from
the
role
that
we're
taking
creating
the
path
to
local
designation.
H
H
We
had
to,
of
course,
wait
till
all
the
documents
and
closing
for
that
to
occur
now
we're
conducting
the
staff
research
that
goes
into
all
of
the
designations
and
creating
the
the
legal
description
coordinating
with
outside
agencies
to
determine
the
extent
of
the
boundaries
that
we
establish
and
then
also
coordinating
with
the
public,
to
try
to
gather
information
that
they
may
have
to
add
to
the
the
composition
of
the
designation
report.
H
Once
we
have
that
complete,
there's
going
to
be
another
hearing,
as
there
was
today
for
a
recommendation
by
the
HPC
we'll
notice
for
that.
Currently,
our
or
our
plan
is
to
bring
that
at
your
next
meeting
on
September
19th,
so
we'll
be
noticing
in
August
for
that
and
then
contingent
on
your
recommendation.
H
So
we
feel
that
we're
making
good
progress,
kind
of
checking
off
the
the
more
code
required
aspects
of
the
process,
but
also
engaging
the
public
and
trying
to
gather
information,
and
you
know,
expand
sort
of
the
context
of
what
the
designation
means
for
the
community.
B
You,
yes
thank
you.
Dennis
for
the
update,
I
actually
do
have
a
question
in
regards
to
the
Jackson
house
and
also
the
city
of
Tampa
I.
Guess
they
go
together,
City
of
Tampa.
The
pamphlet
that
you
gave
out
earlier
I
do
want
to
encourage
people
that,
when
you
stop
by
this
week
to
check
out
the
soul,
walk
on
Thursday
I
know
it
may
not
be
held
at
the
Jackson
house,
but
stop
by
the
Jackson
house,
because
it
prompts
my
next
question.
B
B
H
I,
don't
currently
have
an
update
other
than
what
Mr
drum
go.
You
know
provided
last
time,
I
think
that
you
know
the
the
negotiations
with
the
adjacent
property
owner
crucial
as
he
had
mentioned,
and
those
are
still
ongoing.
So
I
don't
want
to
add
any
conjecture
to
the
discussion,
but
I
think
the
situation
everybody
understands
is
you
know
very
important
and,
and
but
we
have
to
you
know
secure
that
component.
H
So
I
can
certainly
check
with
him
and
provide
an
update
for
you
at
the
next
hearing,
but
I
don't
have
anything
other
than
the
information
I
gave
you
today.
F
B
B
Oh
yes,
can
we
take
a
vote
for
those
approval
of
the
motion?
Hi
those
opposed
seeing
none.
We
will
recommend
the
approval.
Also.
We
want
to
take
in
consideration
the
next
meeting
date,
which
is
September
19
2023.