►
From YouTube: Heritage Preservation Board March 4, 2019
Description
Description
A
A
A
E
A
Somewhat
informally,
but
we
have
a
couple
of
basic
rules.
One
is
that
you
have
to
come
to
the
podium
and
state
your
name
and
address
when
it
comes
to
your
case
or
when
you
want
would
like
to
say
something
because
we've
got
to
report
everything
for
the
minutes,
but
we
don't
have
any
time
limits
so
unique
and
take
as
long
as
you
need
to
explain
your
application
and
I.
Usually
people
don't
get
redundant,
but
if
they
do,
then
we
like
for
people
to
take
whatever
time.
A
A
C
This
is
a
quasi-judicial
proceeding
where
the
Heritage
Preservation
Board
acts
in
a
quasi-judicial,
rather
than
a
legislative
capacity
at
a
quasi-judicial
hearing.
It
is
not
the
board's
function
to
make
law,
but
rather
to
apply
law.
That's
already
been
established
and
a
quasi
additional
hearing.
The
board
is
required
by
law
to
make
findings
of
fact,
based
upon
the
evidence
presented
at
the
hearing
and
apply
those
findings
of
fact,
a
previously
established
criteria
contained
in
the
Code
of
Ordinances
in
order
to
make
a
legal
decision
regarding
the
application
before
it.
C
The
board
may
only
consider
evidence
at
this
hearing
that
the
law
considers
competent,
substantial
and
relevant
to
the
issues
if
the
competent
substantial,
relevant
evidence
at
the
hearing
demonstrates
that
the
applicant
has
met
the
criteria
established
in
the
Code
of
Ordinances
and
the
board
is
required
by
law
to
find
in
favor
of
the
applicant.
By
the
same
token,
if
the
comet
is
substantial
and
relevant,
evidence
at
the
hearing
demonstrates
of
the
applicant
has
failed
to
meet
the
criteria
establishing
the
code
of
Orden
tsa's
and
the
board's
required
by
law
to
find
against
the
applicant
there.
C
Any
members
of
the
board
wishing
to
disclose
an
ex
parte
communication
or
conflicts
of
interests.
If
anyone
is
speaking
tonight,
they
could
please
stand
to
be
sworn
in,
even
if
you
think
you
may
speak.
If
you
raise
your
hand,
please
do
you
swear
affirm.
The
testimony
about
to
get
tonight
is
the
truth.
The
whole
truth,
nothing
about
the
truth,
so
Swan.
A
We
start
on
this
picnic.
If
you
would
indulge
me,
the
I
think
I
think
the
owner
has
shown
incorrectly
on
this
and
the
only
reason
I
know
that
is
that
a
couple
reasons:
one
I
looked
on
the
property
appraisers
website
and
then
I
dug
a
little
further
into
the
deed,
and
the
reason
I've
dug
into
it
is
I
know
that
the
property
to
the
north,
the
coca-cola
building
is
owned
by
my
son.
Is
one
partner
in
a
the
T&Y
Partners
LLC
that
you
mentioned
I
was
pretty
sure
they
had
not
purchased
all
stapled.
A
A
B
D
A
D
D
D
D
It
I
didn't
want
to
say
for
sure,
but
it
appears
to
me
that
the
applicant
is
occupying
the
southern
end
of
that
property.
That
is
designated
as
a
story,
and
it
appears
that
that
space
is
not
part
of
the
original
structure
called
and
it
is
not
does
not
seem
to
be
called
out
on
the
form
and
it
doesn't
include
any
of
the
architectural
details
also
described
on
the
form.
I
believe
it
might
be.
The
1961
edition
that's
shown
on
on
that
property.
D
It
appears
to
conform
with
the
requirements
that
the
land
development
code
and
is
consistent
with
the
Comprehensive,
Plan
and
staff
is
recommending
approval
of
this
application
to
place
a
new
sign
at
this
contributing
property.
This
application
was
properly
noticed
and
no
responses
were
received.
Are
there
any
questions.
A
A
D
I
did
notice
that
as
well.
This
sign
would
have
to
meet
the
size
requirements
for
the
historical
district,
and
so
it
would
have
to
it
would
have
to
comply
to
those
size
requirements.
I
did
not
I
I
looked
at
this
at
the
property
appraisers
site,
but
I
did
not
I
wanted
to
with
this
kind
of
stuff
with
signs
a
lot
of
times.
Looking
at
that
is
not
sufficient.
You
have
to
go
out
to
the
site
or
talk
with
the
applicant
I
didn't
have
a
chance
to
do
that.
D
A
A
D
A
A
F
F
You
just
need
anything
for
me.
I,
don't
know
exactly
what
to
say.
I
mean
I'm
gonna,
be
here
for
a
long
time,
I'm
just
trying
to
do
business
as
an
Allstate,
Insurance
Company
I
have
two
young
kids,
so
I'm,
definitely
not
going
anywhere
and
I'm.
Just
trying
to
you
know
advertise
correctly
but
stay
within
the
how
it
needs
to
be.
You
know,
so
that's
about
it.
F
A
A
F
F
D
F
D
F
F
D
A
A
Would
be
more
liberal
for
him
because,
frankly,
I
think
a
awning
sign
would
be
better
on
this
building.
There's
no
none
of
the
other
businesses.
There
have
a
and
it
packs
there.
It's
really
not
the
historic
method
of
signing
signage,
so
I
mean
if
you
did
an
awning
and
you
can
get
a
little
more
speed
on
my
fort
I
think
an
awning
would
be
better.
It
would
kind
of
announced
the
entry
a
little
better,
but
you
know
I'm
not.
A
D
D
D
G
F
H
E
A
F
Looks
way
bigger
than
what
was
on
there
I
think
I,
don't
know,
I
mean
I'm
I'm,
not
sure
I'm,
not
against
anything.
I.
Just
don't
know
you
know
on
the
fly.
I
wasn't
expecting
like
a
change
of
size,
I
guess
I
was
just
I
thought
it
be
like
a
yes
or
no,
so
I,
don't
really
know
I,
don't
know,
I
mean
I'm,
not
willing.
I
mean
I,
am
willing
to
change
or
whatever
I
don't
know.
C
A
But
normally
we
see
the
really
the
real
size
that's
going
to
be,
but
it's
that's
mean
there
was
one
solution
that
was
proposed,
always
Cornell.
That
just
did
the
letters
you're
pretty
darn
close
to
being
in
compliance,
and
then
you
can
either
reduce
the
letter
smaller
and
make
a
smaller
hands
or
just
not
do
the
hands.
You.
C
F
A
F
A
F
Wink,
probably
if
I
didn't
get
approval,
I'd
probably
try
to
go
the
awning
route.
It's
not
the
way
I'd
like
to
go,
but
if,
if
they've,
somehow
poopoo
it
and
I
have
to
go
back
through
the
whole
process,
then
I
would
submit
something
with
the
awning
and
could
just
completely
scrap
the
sign.
If
they're,
not
gonna,
I
mean
I'm
willing
to
work
with
y'all
cause.
Y'all
are
willing
to
work
with
me
and
I.
Appreciate
that
and
for
me
it's
it's
should
be
fine.
I,
don't
see
what
they
what
they
would
have
a
problem
with.
H
D
D
A
I
D
H
A
D
J
F
E
A
So
what
past
five
to
zero
was
that
the
shot
that
the
style
and
type
of
sign
are
approved,
as
you
drew
it
on,
as
your
sign
guy
drew
it
subject
to
the
maximum
size
requirements
of
the
land
development
code,
which
is
gonna,
be
smaller
than
what
you
have,
but
as
long
as
you
can
satisfy
the
staff
on
the
size
of
it,
whether
you
shrink
everything,
you
shrink
justice
on
the
hands.
How
are
you
you
know?
That's
up
to
you
and
the
sign
guy.
A
A
D
Okay,
this
is
a
replacement
of
a
metal
roof
with
a
composition,
shingle
roof
at
115,
north
Carosa
Avenue.
It's
a
Colonial,
Revival
structure,
it's
an
ER
70,
a
single-family
district
and
the
applicant
proposes
to
completely
replace
the
existing
metal
roof
with
the
shingle
roof
on
this
principal
building,
the
master
site
file
form
lists
the
roof
type
as
metal
shingles.
At
the
time
the
form
was
recorded
and
the
with
respect
to
the
review.
D
Again.
This
is
Colonial
Revival
architecture,
the
form
also
notes
corner
boards
and
rafter
tails
as
roof
ornamentation
and
the
features
will
not.
These
features
will
not
be
disturbed.
The
shape
of
the
shape
of
the
roof
will
not
change,
and
the
guidelines
do
note
that
most
architectural
styles,
including
this
one
use
shingles
into
composition,
shingles,
are
listed
as
an
acceptable
replacement
material.
It
is
noted
that
the
adjacent
residence
at
109,
North,
Grove
Street,
also
a
contributing
structure.
Also,
the
same
style
is
roofed
with
composition,
shingles.
D
Again,
the
distinctive
features
that
characterize
the
roof
will
not
be
disturbed.
The
replacement
roof
does
meet
the
historic
guidelines
and
it
is
consistent
with
the
land
development
code
and
the
Comprehensive
Plan
and
staff
is
recommending
approval
of
the
approval
of
this
application
to
replace
the
existing
metal
roof
with
the
composition,
shingle
roof
on
the
primary
contributing
structure.
This
application
was
properly
noticed
and
no
responses
were
received.
K
The
original
proposal
was
to
do
the
replacing
of
the
metal
with
shingle
and
in
the
lower
portion
of
the
front
half
of
the
house,
replacing
that
with
new
metal,
but
I
think
it
was
our
understanding
that
we
couldn't
do
a
mix
of
shingle
in
the
metal,
so
we'll
just
go
with
all
shingle.
If
that's
the
only
option
that
we
have.
A
K
J
J
A
A
K
E
A
A
D
D
D
Yeah
I
just
thought
with
with
the
approaching
springtime
and
we're
already
into
March,
we
should
perhaps
hear
something
from
the
state
in
April
or
May,
hopefully
in
April
as
to
where
they
are,
with
our
grant,
with
respect
to
the
legislative
appropriation
for
those
grants.
So
just
you
all
had
met
that.
Maybe
in
a
meeting
that
wasn't
too
heavy
of
an
agenda
that
you
might
want
to
start
thinking
about
bringing
a
list
or
discussing
different
sections
that
you
want
to
prioritize.
D
That's
one
approach
we
could
do
if
you
want
to
start
doing
that,
or
you
know
just
maybe
have
a
discussion
amongst
ourselves
as
to
what
you
would
like
to
see
us
do
again.
This
current
follows
the
state
fiscal
year.
So
once
it's
some
approved,
you
know
in
the
budget
is
passed.
We
would
imagine,
there's
some
sort
of
agreement
that
you
make
with
the
state.
D
I
mean
there
has
to
be
a
grant
agreement,
so
I'm,
assuming
that
would
have
to
be
executed
in
July
July
when
the
start
of
their
fiscal
year,
and
then
we
can
hopefully
immediately
put
out
an
RFP
we'd
like
to
have
one
lined
up
and
ready
to
go
to
get
that
started,
because
the
state
would
like
us
to
see
I'd
like
to
see
us
finish
this
within
a
year
or
fiscal
year.
If
we
can.
D
The
total
amount,
I
believe
is
one
hundred
and
eighteen
thousand
two
hundred
fifty
that
sound
right.
Eighteen
thousand
to
fifty
from
this
date
from
the
from
the
feds,
which
was
the
guaranteed
amount
and
and
we
were
going
to
get
the
hundred
thousand
from
the
state
I'll
make
sure
that's
right.
While
you
guys
talk.
A
Money
to
do
public
outreach
and
and
have
multiple
meetings
with
you
know
the
residential
owners
loners
figure
out.
What
they
saw
was
a
problem
things
that
we
saw
that
aren't
clear
enough
or
aren't
working
or
what
you
know
whatever.
There's
lots
of
updates
that
need
to
be
done.
We
don't
really
address
hurricane
shutters,
for
example,
there's
modern
things
we
haven't
addressed
in
that
design
like
guideline,
so
I
would
suggest
that
the
first
conversation
we
ought
to
have
would
be
process
wise.
A
How
does
the
staff
suggest
we
attack
it
you'd
be
able
to
ensure
that
we
have
some
good
participation
by
the
residential
owners
and
the
commercial
owner,
along
with
you
know,
along
with
the
board,
but
maybe
in
a
less
formal
setting
where
it's
not.
You
know
sitting
up
here
on
the
docks,
because
I'm
sure
everybody
out
there
that
lives
in
the
district
hasn't
has
a
problem
or
an
idea
that
they've
come
across
and
we
have
quite
a
few
because
we've
been
dealing
with
it
every
day.
A
So
I
guess
I'd
like
to
hear
personally
I'd
like
to
hear
from
the
staff
on
some
ideas,
for
that
is
that,
although
it's
important
it's
expensive,
when
you
pay
consultants
to
do
that,
so
you
know
you
have
to
be
smart
about
doing
it
to
make
sure
you
get
a
good
turnout
from
people.
But
on
the
other
hand,
you
want
to
be
sure
that
you
know
it's
cost
effective.
A
And
I
you
know
I
guess
we
could
see
how
much
interest
there
is
in
the
community
and
the
his
district.
There
might
want
to
be.
Maybe
there's
a
focus
group
of
property
owners,
commercial
owners
and
residential
owners
that
want
to
work
more
closely
with
the
consultant
and
the
board
as
we
go
through
this
I.
A
Don't
know
if
there's
that
kind
of
interest,
but
I
think
we
should
maybe
explore
it
and
see
if
there
is
I'm
not
talking
about
cast
a
thousand
so
I'm
thinking,
you
know
a
small
focus
group
of
seven
eight
and
people.
You
know
something
like
that,
but
still
small
enough
to
get
around
a
table
together
and
talk
about
it.
A
D
A
Comments
on
matter
I
want
to
follow
up
on
this
letter.
The
conversation
we
had
last
month
and
then
we
got
a
letter
from
the
city
attorney.
If
you
don't
remember
at
our
last
meeting,
we
had
a
conversation
about
the
fact
that
the
code
does
not
appear
to
allow
an
approval
to
be
appealed
so,
for
example,
and
we
keep
bringing
up
the
house
on
Bay
Street,
so
it
just
says
that
the
Heritage
Preservation
Board,
if
upon
an
appeal
of
a
Heritage,
Preservation,
Board
denial,
and
we
had
a
conversation
about
it.
We
asked
mr.
A
D
Erica
did
outline
that,
for
you
and
Patrick
can
jump
in
if
I
misspeak
on
any
of
the
of
those
requirements.
The
changes
that
she's
specifically
and
you
specifically
discussed,
are
in
the
minutes.
So
those
those
specific
changes
are
in
the
minutes.
The
question
of
where
those
go
and
how
those
are
drafted
is
really
something
as
far
as
going
forward.
That
needs
to
be
discussed
with,
obviously
with
staff
in
the
city
manager
before
it
gets
scheduled.
One
of
the
things
Erica
was
not
aware
of.
A
Think
she's
not
here
that
conversation,
but
you
know
I've,
always
been
taught
that
the
more
specific
over
rules
that
the
general
and
it's
real
specific
that
says
within
20
days
of
a
decision
to
deny
the
second
paragraph
be
talks
about
worthy
it
which
board
the
appeal
goes
to
so
I.
Don't
share
her
opinion
that
there's
any
much
ambiguity
in
there.
It's
pretty
clear
that
it
says
20
days
of
the
decision
to
deny
that
didn't,
say
well,
maybe
appeal
I'm,
happy
approved
so
I.
A
A
D
A
You
know
I
can't
make
a
motion,
but
I
or
else.
Oh,
no
one
wants
to
make
a
motion.
I'll
relinquish
the
gavel,
but
I
I
really
think
we
had
a
direct
staff
to
explain
how
important
it
is
that
this
amendment
be
made
to
allow
either
an
approval
or
denial
to
be
appealed
and
that
it
needs
to
be
done
as
quickly
as
legally
possible
because
of
the
do
processing.
C
Sure
I'm,
obviously
I'm
not
going
to
speak
for
Erica
here,
but
I
will
say
that
the
direction
to
staff
will
say
the
same,
that
they
will
be
presented
to
the
city
manager
and
obviously
this
board
can
make
recommendations
to
the
code.
That
is
the
power
of
this
board.
But
the
procedure
the
city
manager
is
going
to
follow
is
going.
A
C
A
D
Right
but
the
but,
as
you
know,
the
city
attorney
is
contracted
to
this
and
he
saw
that
that
contract
ultimately
and
so
the
Board
of
Commissioners
through
the
CM.
So
it
I
understand
what
you're
saying.
I
will
certainly
express
the
importance
of
the
amendment
of
the
amendment
that
you
wished
to
have
go
forward.
Obviously,
as
a
consensus,
I
don't
know
that
you
need
a
vote.
E
H
C
C
A
I
think
it's
a
pretty
easy
fix
and
the
first
sentence
of
the
first
paragraph
a
it's
today.
It
says
within
20
days
of
the
written
decision
of
the
Heritage
Preservation
Board,
to
deny
a
certificate
of
approval,
etc,
etc,
in
other
words,
to
approve
or
deny,
and
then
the
next.
The
line
continues
on
20
days
of
the
written
decision
of
the
Technical
Review
Committee
to
approve
or
deny
today
just
says,
deny,
because
the
Technical
Review
Committee
can't
improve
some
things
that
don't
come
to
this
board.
A
H
A
H
A
A
No
I
personally,
don't
agree
that
I
mean
why
don't
we
just
if
we
leave
it
just
general
as
to
what
the
issue
is,
the
issue
is,
you
should
be
able
to
appeal
and
approval
or
denied
either
one,
and
then
ever
in
this
section
needs
to
be
revised.
If
there's
more
than
one
section,
that's
fine,
that's
what
the
staff
and
the
attorneys
you
know
need
to
look
at
it
holistically.
You
make
sure
it
is
throughout.
So,
however,
that
how
would
they
do
that.
E
A
H
A
E
A
Okay,
a
motion
from
Miss
Milford
that
the
code
to
recommend
that
article
7
section
111
a
be
revised
because
the
code
doesn't
allow
approval
and
approval
to
be
appealed
and
we
want
to
add
the
ability
to
appeal
an
approval
and
that
amendment
should
be
done.
I,
don't
do
this
pasta
soon
as
possible?
Is
there
a
second
to
that
much.