[00:00:01]
[Landmark Commission Meeting on February 5, 2024.]
EVERYBODY.UH, WELCOME TO THE, UH, MEETING OF THE DALLAS LANDMARK COMMISSION.
IT IS FEBRUARY 5TH, IT'S 1 0 1, AND WE'RE CALLING THIS MEETING TO ORDER.
I, UM, I'M THE CHAIR, EVELYN MONTGOMERY.
OUR VICE CHAIR IS COURTNEY SP, AND WE HAVE A GENEROUS QUORUM OF COMMISSIONERS PRESENT WITH US TODAY IN PERSON AND ONLINE.
SO WE WILL BEGIN BY HAVING ELAINE, UH, DO A ROLL CALL OF ALL COMMISSIONERS.
DISTRICT ONE, COMMISSIONER SHERMAN, PRESENT, DISTRICT TWO.
COMMISSIONER MONTGOMERY PRESENT, DISTRICT THREE.
PRESENT? DISTRICT 11 KI COMMISSIONER GIBSON.
COMMISSIONER ANDERSON PRESENT.
AND COMMISSIONER CUMMINGS PRESENT.
UM, FIRST OFF, DO WE HAVE ANY PUBLIC SPEAKERS HERE ON SOMETHING OTHER THAN ONE OF THE CASES THAT WE'RE HEARING? JUST WANTED TO TALK TO US.
UM, WE'LL HOLD OFF ON OUR APPROVAL OF MINUTES.
DOES THE VICE CHAIR HAVE ANY MOTIONS? I HAVE THE FOLLOWING INDIVIDUALS, UH, SIGNED UP TO SPEAK TODAY.
QUA CUMMINGS, KEVIN BUSH, AND NATASHA BUSH.
IF YOU'RE HERE AND WOULD LIKE TO SPEAK AND YOUR NAME WASN'T CALLED, YOU'LL NEED TO GET WITH, UM, ELAINE AND FILL OUT A FORM SO THAT WE CAN GET YOU ONTO THE LIST.
SO WITH THAT SAID, UH, FIRST ORDER OF BUSINESS IN REGARDS TO THE CONSENT AGENDA, UH, MOVE TO APPROVE CONSENT ITEMS ONE THROUGH THREE.
SO OUR MOTION IS TO, TO FOLLOW STAFF RECOMMENDATIONS ON APPRO THOSE FIRST THREE, UH, CONSENT ITEMS. AND WE HAVE A SECOND.
AND ANYBODY HAVE ANY COMMENT? SEEING NONE.
THOSE THREE ARE DONE AND OVER WITH.
I MOVE THAT WE ADOPT THE FOLLOWING AGENDA.
WE'LL START WITH DISCUSSION ITEM ONE, FOLLOWED BY DISCUSSION ITEM TWO.
THANK YOU, COMMISSIONER, GUEST FOR YOUR SECOND.
AND NO OPPOSED THEN WE ARE GOOD TO GO.
UM, COULD WE JUST GET, UH, COMMISSIONER, UM, THE SECOND FOR THE FIRST MOTION, ROBIN THE RECORD? WE NEED TO HEAR IT ON THE RECORD.
I DO WANNA GET HIS NAME RIGHT.
WHAT? I MEAN, I DID SAY A SECOND.
YEAH, BUT COMMISSIONER YOUR NAME.
SO THAT'LL BE COMMISSIONER ROTHENBERGER.
I'LL HAVE TO HAVE THAT ON THE RECORD.
LET US, UH, NOW TURN TO ADDRESSING OUR DISCUSSION ITEMS OF TWO OF WHICH ARE THE HAPPIEST THING WE EVER DO HERE.
TALKING ABOUT MAKING NEW LANDMARKS AND PEOPLE WHO STEPPED FORWARD TO PRESERVE IMPORTANT PLACES.
RDA DUNN PRESENTING ON BEHALF OF CITY STAFF.
THE SUBJECT PROPERTY IS LOCATED AT 5,700 CELESTIAL ROAD.
IT'S KNOWN AS THE WHITE R CEMETERY GARDEN OF MEMORIES.
THE REQUEST IS FOR A LANDMARK COMMISSION AUTHORIZED HEARING TO CONSIDER A HISTORIC OVERLAY FOR THE WHITE ROCK CEMETERY GARDEN OF MEMORIES ON THE NORTH SIDE OF CELESTIAL ROAD AND BOARDED BY CEDAR CANYON ROAD ON THE NORTHEAST AND WEST STAFF.
RECOMMENDATION IS APPROVED SUBJECT TO PRESERVATION CRITERIA.
UH, WE DO HAVE SOME SPEAKERS HERE ON THIS.
OH, READING DESIGNATION COMMITTEE.
OH, DO I READ IT? APPARENTLY, YES.
WE DIDN'T ASSIGN ANYBODY TASK FORCE.
WE'LL LET COMMISSIONER POSI READ.
DESIGNATION COMMITTEE RECOMMENDATION, APPROVE SUBJECT TO PRESERVATION CRITERIA.
[00:05:03]
OKAY.NOW CAN WE HEAR FROM THE SPEAKERS? EXCELLENT.
THE FIRST ONE ON OUR LIST IS IKA CUMMINGS.
AND I MENTIONED THIS EARLIER IN OUR BRIEFING, AND I'M SURE MANY PEOPLE CONTRIBUTED TO GETTING THIS LANDMARK TO US, BUT I MUST SAY THE HEAVY LOAD OF RESEARCH AND WRITING, AS FAR AS WE KNOW, IT WAS QUA CUMMINGS.
THE DESIGNATION COMMITTEE DIDN'T HAVE TO DO ANYTHING THIS TIME.
USUALLY WE HAVE TO RESEARCH AND WRITE, BUT SHE DID IT.
BUT JUST TO STATE YOUR NAME AND ADDRESS FOR THE LEGAL
MY NAME IS SHANIQUA CUMMINGS AND MY ADDRESS IS 1806 MCNEELY STREET.
CAN YOU HEAR ME OKAY? IT'S 1806 MCNEELY STREET IN LANCASTER, TEXAS.
UM, FIRST OFF, I WANNA SAY THANK YOU TO THE LANDMARK COMMISSION AND THE DESIGNATION COM, UH, COMMITTEE FOR YOUR, UM, CONSIDERATION OF THIS DESIGNATION AND FOR YOUR HARD WORK.
AND HARD WORK IS AN UNDERSTATEMENT.
UM, WHEN IT COMES TO DESCRIBING, YOU KNOW, THE EFFORT THAT TOOK PLACE TO BRING THIS NOMINATION TO THIS POINT, UM, THE WHITE ROCK CEMETERY GARDEN MEMORIES IS IMPORTANT TO ME BECAUSE NOT ONLY AM I AN ADVOCATE OF PRESERVATION, UM, OF AFRICAN AMERICAN HISTORY AND CULTURE, BUT I AM A DESCENDANT OF PIONEERS WHO WERE BURIED THERE AND WHO LIVED IN WHAT WAS ONCE, UH, FRIEDMAN'S TOWN CALLED UPPER WHITE ROCK.
UM, WHERE THE CEMETERY NOW LIES, UM, WITH OTHER NOTABLE AND INTERNS LIKE, UH, HENRY KELLER, WHO, UH, IS THE NAMESAKE OF KELLER SPRINGS ROAD AND GEORGE COT OF THE COT FAMILY FOR WHICH, UH, COT ROAD IS NAMED.
UM, THE TURNERS, THE TAR POLICE AND ANDERSON BONNER, UM, UH, WHO WAS A PROLIFIC LANDOWNER IN THE AREA AT THE TIME.
UM, AND HE'S ALSO ENTERED THE CEMETERY, UH, MANY OF WHOM WERE, ARE BORN INTO ENSLAVEMENT.
UM, THE CEMETERY IS IMPORTANT AND IT IS AN HISTORICAL ASSET NOT ONLY TO THE AFRICAN AMERICAN COMMUNITY OF DALLAS, BUT TO DALLAS HISTORY AS A WHOLE.
UM, AND THIS IS WHY WE'RE SEEKING LANDMARK DESIGNATION TO PRESERVE THE LEGACY AND THE HISTORY OF THESE FAMILIES IN THE CEMETERY.
AND OUR NEXT SPEAKER IS KEVIN BUSH.
SORRY YOU'RE NOT FOR THIS ONE,
SO THERE ARE NO OTHER SPEAKERS FOR D ONE? NO, THAT IS, IT WAS, WAS THE COUNCIL MEMBER HERE.
DID THE COUNCIL MEMBER FOR THIS DISTRICT WISH TO SPEAK ON THE WONDERFUL NEWS OF THIS? YOU STILL HAVE TO STATE YOUR NAME AND ADDRESS.
MICHAEL'S DRIVE, DALLAS, TEXAS.
I JUST WANTED TO SAY THANK YOU ALL FOR YOUR HARD WORK ON THIS.
UM, AND I REALLY WANNA, I KNOW THOUGH THAT, UH, MY COMMISSIONER WILL BE SHARING ALL THE THANKS THAT WE CRAFTED TOGETHER.
UM, BUT I PARTICULARLY WANTED TO CALL OUT THE, THE MEMBERS OF THE COMMISSION WHO WORKED SO HARD TO MAKE THIS HAPPEN.
AND I ALSO WANNA THANK, UM, LOUIS OCON WHO JUST WALKED IN BECAUSE HE VERY GRACIOUSLY HELPED CREATE THE ARCH, UH, THAT, THAT, UM, THAT STANDS OVER THE CEMETERY.
UH, THIS IS A MOMENT IN DALLAS HISTORY.
IT'S AN UNKNOWN PART OF DALLAS HISTORY, AND I HOPE THAT ALL OF YOU WILL ALSO BE JOINING US ON FEBRUARY 18TH, WHERE WE'LL BE CELEBRATING ALL OF THE AFRICAN AMERICAN HISTORY OF NORTH DALLAS.
SO IF YOU WANT MORE INFORMATION ABOUT THAT, IT'S STARTING TO GO OUT AND WE'LL SHARE THAT WITH ALL OF YOU.
SO AGAIN, THANK YOU AND I, I LOOK FORWARD TO A, A POSITIVE VOTE.
AND WE DID DISCUSS IN OUR BRIEFING, WE WERE WONDERING WHETHER MORE WOULD BE COMING FORTH FROM YOUR DISTRICT FOR INITIATION AND DESIGNATION.
WE'RE IN THE WORKS WITH DR. DUNN ON THESE.
UH, NOW COMMISSIONERS, ANY DISCUSSION? YES.
AND I WANTED TO AGAIN, THANK MS. CUMMINGS FOR THE INCREDIBLE WORK AND HARD LONG HOURS THAT SHE PUTS INTO NOT ONLY THIS PARTICULAR LANDMARK, BUT ONGOING LANDMARK SINCE HOPEFULLY SOON TO BE OTHER LANDMARKS, UM, THROUGHOUT DALLAS AND, AND PARTICULARLY AROUND OUR AMERICAN COMMUNITY.
UM, SO THANK YOU MS. CUMMINGS, BECAUSE YOU, YOU, WITHOUT YOU, MANY OF US WOULD BE, UM, IN COMPLETELY IGNORANT ABOUT SO MANY IMPORTANT HISTORICAL THINGS.
UM, AND IF THERE'S NO MORE DISCUSSION, I'D LIKE TO MAKE A MOTION.
[00:10:01]
DISCUSSION? AHA.YOU KNOW WHAT? COMMISSIONER TA LOT OF TIMES FOR A NEW DESIGNATION, WE DO LIKE TO LET THE COMMISSIONER REPRESENTING THAT DISTRICT MAKE THE MOTION.
SO THAT WOULD BE COMMISSIONER GIBSON, IS IT? HE'S LOOKING AT YOU.
TER DO I HAVE A SECOND? SECOND, SECOND.
COMMISSIONER ROTHENBERGER WAS FASTER THAN COMMISSIONER RENE
WHO, WHO, WHO IS KIND OF NEAR THERE? MM-HMM.
IS THERE ANY FURTHER DISCUSSION? ARE WE READY TO VOTE? ALL THOSE IN FAVOR OF THIS MOTION, PLEASE SAY AYE.
WE ARE PLEASED TO WELCOME A NEW LANDMARK TO OUR ROSTER.
I DIDN'T SAY THE WHOLE TOWN IS WELCOMING IT.
OKAY, NEXT UP WE HAVE ANOTHER ONE.
WHAT USED TO BE KNOWN AS RED BRYANTS STAFF.
RHONDA DUNN PRESENTING DISCUSSION ITEM D TWO.
THE SUBJECT PROPERTY IS CITED AT SIX 10 WEST JEFFERSON BOULEVARD.
THE, UH, NAME OF THE PROPERTY, THE COMMON NAME IS L CHETO RESTAURANT.
AND THE CURRENT NAME, THE REQUEST IS FOR A LANDMARK COMMISSION AUTHORIZED HEARING TO CONSIDER A HISTORIC OVERLAY BY THE EL RANCHITO RESTAURANT ON THE SOUTH SIDE OF WEST OF WEST JEFFERSON BOULEVARD AND WEST OF SOUTH BLUE ALLEN AVENUE.
AT THE INTERSECTION, STAFF RECOMMENDATION IS APPROVED SUBJECT TO PRESERVATION CRITERIA, DESIGNATION COMMITTEE RECOMMENDATION APPROVED SUBJECT TO PRESERVATION CRITERIA.
ALRIGHT, NOW WE'RE READY FOR THE SPEAKERS ON THIS ONE.
KEVIN
WHAT? THEY'RE THE SPEAKERS ON C FOUR.
I DON'T THINK WE HAVE SPEAKERS EVEN THOUGH THEY WERE, IT SAYS C TWO.
I DON'T KNOW HOW THAT COULD HAVE HAPPENED, BUT, UM, THOSE TWO SPEAKERS WERE SIGNED UP FOR C FOUR, WHICH WE MOVED OVER HERE, BUT THEY ARE DOWN HERE AS BEING FOR D TWO, WHICH IS THE ONE WE'RE DOING RIGHT NOW.
SO YOU HAVE TO WAIT ANOTHER FEW MINUTES.
BUT THESE ARE SHORT USUALLY AND, AND ALL POSITIVE AND FRIENDLY, SO THAT'S GOOD.
ALRIGHT, WE DO HAVE SPEAKERS, MITCH, THEY'RE HERE FOR ELTO.
WELL, WILL THE SPEAKERS FOR EL RANCHITO PLEASE COME UP TO THE MIC? I AM NOT PREPARED TO SPEAK, BUT, UM, I JUST WANNA GIVE
UH, MY NAME IS LAURA SANCHEZ AND I LIVE IN ON 15 14 0 HILL AVENUE AND IN OAK CLIFF IN KEER PARK.
UM, I JUST WANNA GIVE THANKS TO THE COMMISSION HERE FOR ALLOWING MY BEAUTIFUL RESTAURANT TO BE A LANDMARK HISTORIC LANDMARK IN, IN THE CITY OF DALLAS.
WE'RE SO PROUD THAT MR. BECK DESIGNED THAT BEAUTIFUL RE UH, RESTAURANT FOR SO BRYANT AND AFTER 40 YEARS WE'RE STILL THERE AND WE PLAN TO HAVE IT FOR ANOTHER 40 YEARS, HOPEFULLY.
WELL, WE ARE VERY GRATEFUL FOR YOU FOR WANTING TO DO THIS, AND IT WAS AN HONOR FOR ALL OF US THAT THANK YOU.
WE'LL BE ABLE TO MOVE IT FORWARD.
I, I, IT IT'S AN HONOR TO BE, NOT TO BECOME A LANDMARK.
I REALIZE THERE ARE REASONS PEOPLE MIGHT NOT.
WE DID A FEW YEARS AGO HAVE ANOTHER RESTAURANT IN OAK CLIFF THAT WISHED TO SELL TO A DEVELOPER AND THEIR ORIGINAL BUILDING TAKEN DOWN AND WE WERE NOT ABLE TO CONVINCE THEM TO DO OTHERWISE.
BUT, UM, IT IS FABULOUS THAT YOU HAVE, HAVE SEEN THE IMPORTANCE OF MAINTAINING THE HISTORY OF, OF THAT BUILDING AND WHAT YOU ACCOMPLISHED THERE IN ALL THE YEARS THAT YOU'VE BEEN.
MS. CHAIRMAN HAS DONE A WONDERFUL JOB EXPLAINING EVERYTHING TO ME AND IN, IN HER VISITS TO ME, AND, AND EXPLAINING WHAT, WHAT WE CAN ACCOMPLISH AND WE CAN GET FROM BEING A LANDMARK.
AND SO I REALLY THANK HER FOR HER HARD WORK AND, UH, IT'S BEEN QUITE A LONG, LONG WORK
WE ALL KNOW THAT COMMISSIONER SHERMAN IS VERY PERSUASIVE AND KNOWS A LOT AND SHE DOES HER JOB VERY WELL.
DID WE HAVE ANOTHER SPEAKER THAT
[00:15:01]
WAS SITTING WITH YOU OR SHE REFUSES? SHE REFUSES.ANYBODY HAVE ANY OTHER COMMENTS? COMMISSIONER PREZI, WHO DID A LOT OF WORK ON THE RESEARCHING THE HISTORY OF THIS? WELL, FIRST OFF, I WANTED TO, UH, THANK LAURA SANCHEZ FOR HER WONDERFUL, UH, STEWARDSHIP OF THE BUILDING FOR THE PAST 40 YEARS AND REALLY WORKING TO MAINTAIN AND KEEP THE BUILDING UP.
IT'S SUCH A, A TREMENDOUS, UH, LANDMARK FOR OAK CLIFF.
I LIVE IN OAK CLIFF AS WELL, AND IT'S JUST, UH, IT, IT'S SO WONDERFUL THAT, THAT YOU'RE WILLING TO MAKE, UH, THIS GIFT REALLY TO THE CITY AND TO PROTECT THE BUILDING AND PERPETUITY SO THAT WE KNOW THAT THE BUILDING WILL BE THERE FOR FUTURE GENERATIONS TO COME TO, TO ADMIRE AND TO ENJOY, UM, AND HAVE A MARGARITA
AND AGAIN, ALSO THANK YOU TO COMMISSIONER SHERMAN FOR ALL THE WORK SHE DID ON, UH, UH, GETTING THIS, UH, UH, NOMINATION TO THIS STAGE AND, AND WORKING WITH, UH, LAURA AND PUTTING IT ALL TOGETHER.
THANK YOU FOR, FOR TAKING THIS ON.
AND, AND ALSO AS A MEMBER OF THE DESIGNATION COMMITTEE, THERE WERE MANY PEOPLE THAT WORKED ON THIS DESIGNATION REPORT AND THE DIFFERENT PIECES THAT WENT INTO IT.
I KNOW I DID THE RED BRIAN PIECE OF, OF THE HISTORY, BUT THERE WAS LOTS OF OTHERS THAT, THAT PUT IT TOGETHER.
SO THIS WAS REALLY A TEAM EFFORT AND A REALLY, A WONDERFUL EFFORT AT THAT.
NOT SEEING ANYBODY LOOKING TO HAVE SOMETHING TO SAY, IT IS TIME FOR US TO VOTE.
ALL THOSE IN FAVOR? WAIT A SECOND.
WE DIDN'T MAKE THE MOTION, KAT BE IN FAVOR OF A MOTION THAT HAS NOT BEEN MADE.
COMMISSIONER SHERMAN, WHY DON'T YOU MAKE THIS MOTION? THANK YOU.
UM, IT'S HONESTLY WITH GREAT DELIGHT AND, UM, TREMENDOUS GRATITUDE TO A LOT OF PEOPLE, NOT ONLY LAURA FOR BEING WILLING TO SEE THIS BUILDING DESIGNATED, BUT UM, ALSO TO, UH, COMMISSIONER HINOJOSA FOR HER EARLY, UH, ENCOURAGEMENT OF THIS PROCESS, UM, AS WELL AS COMMISSIONER CUMMINGS AND, UM, OF COURSE COMMISSIONER OSI, WHO AT THE TIME WE KICKED THIS BOULDER OFF THE HILL WAS, UH, EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR OF PRESERVATION DALLAS.
WE ALSO HAVE THE SUPPORT OF THE BECK ARCHITECTURE CONSERVANCY, UM, WHO LENT ENERGY TO THE REPORT AS WELL AS ADVOCACY FROM THE BEGINNING.
UM, AND, UM, WE, UH, WE'RE VERY EXCITED ABOUT THIS, UH, FOR OAK CLIFF FOR DISTRICT ONE, BUT ALSO FOR, UM, THE FACT THAT THERE ARE MANY BECK PRODUCTS THAT ARE NOT SAVED, UM, AND FOR PERPETUITY.
AND THIS IS THE FIRST COMMERCIAL BECK TO BE RECOGNIZED IN THIS WAY.
SO, UH, WITH THAT, I, UM, IN THE MATTER OF DISCUSSION ITEM 2 6 10 WEST JEFFERSON BOULEVARD YTO RESTAURANT, I MOVE THAT WE APPROVE, UM, LANDMARK DESIGNATION OF THIS PROPERTY SUBJECT TO THE PRESERVATION CRITERIA.
SO BEAUTIFULLY WRITTEN BY THE DESIGNATION COMMITTEE AND I'LL, UH, SECOND THE MOTION.
THE MOTION IS SECONDED BY COMMISSIONER HINOJOSA WHO WINS THE SPEED GAME AGAIN.
ALRIGHT, ALL THOSE IN FAVOR, PLEASE SAY AYE.
WASN'T THAT FUN? WE HAVE UNANIMOUSLY APPROVED THE DESIGNATION OF THIS PROPERTY AND WE ARE ALL VERY HAPPY.
ALRIGHT, NOW
YOUR SIGN OKAY? YES, YOUR SIGN.
SO THIS WAS CONSENT ITEM FOUR.
RHONDA DUNN PRESENTING CONSENT ITEM FOUR ON BEHALF OF CITY STAFF.
THE SUBJECT PROPERTY IS CITED AT 1511 MAIN STREET.
IT'S KNOWN AS THE BUSH KIRBY BUILDING.
THE REQUEST IS FOR A CERTIFICATE OF APPROPRIATENESS TO INSTALL AN INTERNALLY ILLUMINATED CLOUD SIGN ON STOREFRONT OF BUILDING ANNEX STAFF.
RECOMMENDATION IS AS FOLLOWS, THAT THE REQUEST FOR A CERTIFICATE OF APPROPRIATENESS TO INSTALL AN INTERNALLY ILLUMINATED CLOUD SIGN ON STOREFRONT OF BUILDING ANNEX BE APPROVED IN ACCORDANCE WITH DRAWINGS AND SPECIFICATIONS DATED 1 4 20 24.
THE PROPOSED WORK IS CONSISTENT WITH PRESERVATION CRITERION SECTION EIGHT UNDER SIGNS THE STANDARDS AND CITY CODE SECTION 51 A DASH 4.501 SUBDIVISION, G SIX C ROMAN ONE FOR CONTRIBUTING STRUCTURES THE SECRETARY OF THE INTERIOR STANDARDS AND HAS BEEN REVIEWED AND APPROVED BY SPECIAL DIVISION SIGNED DISTRICTS FOR AESTHETICS AND APPROPRIATENESS TO THE DISTRICT TASK FORCE RECOMMENDATION THAT THE REQUEST FOR THE CERTIFICATE APPROPRIATENESS TO INSTALL
[00:20:01]
AN INTERNALLY INTERNALLY ILLUMINATED CLOUD SIGN ON STOREFRONT OF BUILDING ANNEX BE APPROVED WITH THE CONDITION AND UNDERSTANDING THAT THE SIGN WILL BE ATTACHED TO THE EXISTING NON HISTORIC INCOMPATIBLE STOREFRONT FACADE AND WOULD OTHERWISE BE INAPPROPRIATE IF PLACED ON A PORTION OF THE HISTORIC FACADE.AND NOW WE GET TO HEAR FROM KEVIN BUSH.
OH, YOU'RE GONNA LET HER GO FIRST AND SHE IS NATASHA, AND YOU STILL HAVE TO STATE YOUR NAME AND YOUR ADDRESS.
I'M THE OWNER OF THE PERFECT PLACE LOCATED AT 1511 MAIN STREET.
UM, AS A FIRST GENERATION ENTREPRENEURIAL WIFE AND MOTHER, I AM HONORED FOR THE OPPORTUNITY TO BE A BLESSING TO MY FAMILY AND COUNTLESS OTHER FAMILIES THROUGH MY SMALL BUSINESS IN THE GREAT CITY OF DALLAS.
I THINK THE SIGN IS BEAUTIFUL BECAUSE IT COMPLIMENTS THE HISTORICAL ARCHITECTURAL DESIGN OF THE BUILDING WHILE ENHANCING MY SPACE AND BLENDING WELL WITH OTHER BUSINESSES NEARBY.
MY INTENT IS TO RESPECT AND MAINTAIN THE BEAUTY OF THE HISTORICAL DISTRICT BY MATCHING, BY MATCHING OR EXCEEDING THE SIGNAGE OF PAST TENANTS.
I ASK THAT YOU APPROVE THE PROPOSED SIGN FOR THE PERFECT PLACE AS THIS BUSINESS REPRESENTS GENERATIONAL WEALTH FOR MY CHILDREN.
AND IT'S EVIDENT THAT A WIFE CAN BE EQUALLY AS SUCCESSFUL AS HER HUSBAND.
UH, THANK YOU FOR YOUR TIME AND CONSIDERATION.
AND YES, SHE CAN TELL MY HUSBAND THAT
AND NOW WE WILL OPEN IT UP FOR, UM, QUESTIONS FROM THE COMMISSIONERS OF EITHER CITY STAFF OR OUR SPEAKERS.
EVEN THE ONE THAT DIDN'T SPEAK.
THEY CAN ASK HIM QUESTIONS TOO.
I THINK COMMISSIONERS COMMISSIONER ANDERSON, UH, DO I DO HAVE A QUESTION? UM, SO THIS IS PART OF THE KIRBY DESIGNATION AND THIS, THIS BUILDING IS PART OF THE KIRBY BUILDING DESIGNATION? YES.
SO IF YOU GO TO THE NOMINATION FORM FOR THE KIRBY BUSH BUILDING, THIS IS CONSIDERED THE ANNEX.
SO KIRBY IS 1509, THIS IS 1511.
SO THIS IS WHERE THE DEPARTMENT STORE USED TO BE.
SO THERE'S TWO BUILDINGS, THE KIRBY BUILDING PROPER AND THEN THE ANNEX.
WELL, MY CONCERN INITIALLY WAS THAT THIS PLASTIC BACKLIT SIGN IS NOT SOMETHING YOU'D HAVE SEEN IN OLD DOWNTOWN DALLAS.
IT'S MORE LIKELY TO BE SOMETHING YOU'D SEE IN A CONTEMPORARY SHOPPING CENTER OR WHATEVER.
AND I JUST WANTED LIKE TO HAVE A LITTLE MORE DISCUSSION ON WHETHER OR NOT THIS IS APPROPRIATE.
IT APPEARS THAT THIS IS ON AN HISTORIC BUILDING, BUT A NON-CONTRIBUTING ENTRANCE TO THAT BUILDING.
AND I GUESS THAT'S WHERE THE TASK FORCE FELT THAT THEY WOULD MAKE A COMPROMISE OR A CONSIDERATION TO PUT IT THERE.
UM, I JUST WOULD LIKE TO BE SURE THE COMMISSION REALIZES THIS IS SOMETHING UNUSUAL AND TYPICALLY YOU WOULD NOT HAVE A PLASTIC BACKLIT SIGN ON AN HISTORIC BUILDING.
IT SEEMS LIKE WE MIGHT WANT TO CONSULT OUR CITY ATTORNEY WHO WILL GO TO A MICROPHONE, UM, AND OUR STAFF ABOUT WHAT IT ACTUALLY SAYS ABOUT THE STANDARDS FOR A SIGN ON THIS PARTICULAR PART OF THE, THE KIRBY LANDMARK.
UM, SO I WILL READ YOU DIRECTLY FROM THE DESIGN STANDARDS FOR THE KIRBY BUILDING, UM, ORDINANCE 1 9 6 9 7 PAST 9 28, 8, UH, 1987.
IT SAYS, SIGNED ALL NEW SIGNS SHALL BE, UH, DESIGNED TO BE COMPATIBLE WITH THE ARCHITECTURAL QUALITIES OF THE ORIGINAL RESOURCE STRUCTURE AND SHALL BE APPROVED BY THE LANDMARK COMMISSION PRIOR TO ISSUANCE OF A SIGN PERMIT.
SO IT REALLY SPEAKS TO THE, TO THE KIRBY BUILDING IN AND OF ITSELF.
OH, WE THAT WE DON'T GET ADEQUATE GUIDANCE FROM THAT ON NO.
WHAT WE DO IN THIS CASE, OF COURSE NOT.
THEY'RE JUST LEAVING IT UP TO US.
I STILL WOULD LIKE TO KNOW IF THE ATTORNEY WOULD LIKE WHERE TO GO.
DO YOU, WHAT DO YOU THINK THEY, IF ANY INTERPRETATION THAT YOU CAN PULL OUT OF THIS AS A TRAINED ATTORNEY WOULD BE BETTER THAN WHAT WE AS HISTORIANS AND ARCHITECTS AND SUCH WILL FIGURE OUT? IT'S JUST WHAT THE ORDINANCE SAYS THAT ALL NEW SHINES UP SHALL BE DESIGNED TO BE COMPATIBLE WITH THE ARCHITECTURAL QUALITIES.
AND THAT'S UP TO THIS COMMISSION TO DETERMINE WHETHER OR NOT, UM, FINE
WELL, AND AGAIN, IT SAYS TO THE ORIGINAL RESOURCE STRUCTURE, WHICH
[00:25:01]
IS THE KIRBY BU BUILDING, NOT NECESSARILY THE ANNEX.AND REMEMBER THAT THE SIGN, IF YOU LOOK AT THE, UH, THE PICTURES PROVIDED IN YOUR PACKET, IT IS ON THE PART OF THE BUILDING THAT, UH, I WOULD, I THINK WE WOULD ALL BE CONCERNED IF IT WAS BEING PUT ON THE ACTUAL ORIGINAL FACADE, BUT THERE'S ALREADY A, A, UH, SURROUND OF THE ENTRANCE THAT IS NOT ORIGINAL TO THE BUILDING, IS NOT COMPATIBLE AND THE SIGNS BEING PLACED THERE.
SO THERE WILL BE NO DAMAGE OR ISSUE WITH HOW THE UH, SIGN IS PLACED ON THERE.
AND AGAIN, THAT'S AN INCOMPATIBLE CHANGE TO THE BUILDING IN THE FIRST PLACE.
I HAVE A QUESTION, MATT, ON THE ANNEX BUILDING, UM, WHAT IS THE HISTORY TO THE ANNEX BUILDING THEN? WHAT'S, WHAT'S THE DATE ON THAT ANNEX BUILDING? IT'S, IT'S NON CONTRIBUTING.
I UNDERSTAND THAT, BUT ALSO I'D LIKE TO KNOW ABOUT IT.
IT SAYS OLD AS THE BUILDING FROM MY UNDERSTANDING, OR ALMOST AS OLD.
IT WAS BUILT AS A DEPARTMENT STORE, A SEPARATE DEPARTMENT STORE FROM THE KIRBY BUILDING.
SO THE KIRBY BUILDING WAS SUPPOSED TO BE A COMPLIMENT TO THE ADO OFFICE HOTEL WITH THE RETAIL SPACE ON THE FIRST FLOOR AND OFFICE SPACE.
AND THEN THIS WAS ACTUALLY THE, UM, WHAT'S THE NAME? I'M TRYING TO THINK OF THE NAME OF THE DEPARTMENT STORE.
DOES ANYBODY REMEMBER? I THINK IT WAS SANGER HARRIS.
A HARRIS A HARRIS WAS THE NAME OF THE DEPARTMENT STORE.
DO WE HAVE A YEAR ON THE BUILT ON WHEN THE ANNEX WAS BUILT AND WHAT, WHAT WAS MAKING THIS NON-CONTRIBUTING WHEN THIS WAS, WHEN THIS FIRST WAS LOOKED AT? DOES DO WE KNOW THAT AS WELL? I THINK THEY SEE THE ENTRANCE IS NON-CONTRIBUTING? I THINK THEY'RE JUST SAYING THAT STOREFRONT, THAT ROUGH CONCRETE WHERE THE SIGNS HANGING JUST STORE FRONT.
AND THE STOREFRONT UNDERNEATH.
JUST THE FIRST LEVEL STOREFRONT STORE, BECAUSE THOSE WERE ALTERED I THINK IN THE 1970S AND THE ALTERATION WAS INAPPROPRIATE.
UM, HANG ON A SECOND, MR. ANDERSON.
WE WANT TO LET COMMISSIONER OFFICE TALK BECAUSE HE HASN'T GOTTEN TO THANK YOU.
UM, I'M GONNA BE SUPPORTING BOTH THE STAFF AND TEST FOR THE TASK FORCE RECOMMENDATION TO ALLOW THE SIGN FOR THE VERY REASONS IT STATED.
UM, THAT, THAT IT MEETS THE CRITERIA.
AND I THINK IT'S A MISTAKE FOR US TO PUT ADDITIONAL BURDENS ON APPLICANTS BY, IN MY OPINION, BLINDSIDING THEM WITH SOMETHING LIKE THIS THAT SAY, OH, WELL IT'S NEXT DOOR TO THIS, OR IT TOUCHES THAT.
WELL, THAT'S NOT WHAT OUR GUIDELINES SAY.
AND THEY HAVE MET THOSE GUIDELINES.
THANK, THANK YOU COMMISSIONER OFFIT.
AND, UM, YES, I'M SURE IT IS PAINFUL FOR APPLICANTS WHEN THEIR CASE COMES BEFORE US AND WE COME UP WITH A NEW QUESTIONS TO ASK AND CONCERNS TO HAVE.
HOWEVER, THAT'S PART OF WHY WE HAVE STAFF TASK FORCES AND THE LANDMARK COMMISSION SO THAT THERE'S A LOT OF VOICES ABLE TO CONSIDER.
SO WE DON'T LET SOMETHING SLIP THROUGH THAT WE WILL REGRET LATER, WHICH IS, YOU KNOW, HARD AS THIS IS, IT'S BETTER THAN DOING IT WRONG THE FIRST TIME.
COMMISSIONER SHERMAN, I REMAIN A LITTLE BIT CONFUSED AND I'M SORRY, BUT, SO THIS ANNEX IS PART OF THE KIRBY COMPLEX BASICALLY.
SO IT IS PROTECTED, BUT IT'S DEEMED CONTRIBUTING OR NON-CONTRIBUTING WITH THE EXCEPTION OF THE STOREFRONT.
IT'S DEEMED CONTRIBUTING WITH THE EXCEPTION OF THE FIRST FLOOR GROUND LEVEL STOREFRONTS.
SO WE'RE BEING ASKED IF, UM, AN ALTERATION TO A NON-CONTRIBUTING SECTION IS APPROPRIATE TO THE NON-CONTRIBUTING, I MEAN TO THE, UM, INCOMPATIBLE CHANGE THAT WAS MADE WHEN THE STOREFRONT WAS MODIFIED.
IS THAT CORRECT? I DON'T KNOW IF I'D SAY IT THAT WAY.
WELL, I MEAN, IT SEEMS, MY, MY CONCERN IS THAT ARE WE BEING ASKED TO ENDORSE PERHAPS SOMETHING THAT MIGHT AMOUNT TO TWO WRONGS MAKING A RIGHT, WHICH WE'RE TYPICALLY CAREFUL NOT TO DO.
BECAUSE WHEN YOU HAVE SOMETHING THAT'S NON-CONTRIBUTING, WHEN YOU MAKE IT, WHEN YOU AUTHORIZE A CHANGE TO IT, IT'S NOT SUPPOSED TO CONTINUE TO GO THE WRONG WAY.
IT'S SUPPOSED TO GO IN A DESIRED, OKAY.
SO THAT, I MEAN, WE'VE VOTED MANY, MANY TIMES OVER THE PAST TO CONSIDER WHETHER IT'S AN ALTERATION TO A INCOMPATIBLE AREA,
[00:30:01]
A FURTHER ALTERATION IS APPROPRIATE OR NOT.AND JUST BECAUSE IT WAS INAPPROPRIATE TO START WITH DOESN'T SEEM AS THOUGH ADDING INAPPROPRIATENESS MAKES IT MORE APPROPRIATE.
IT'S JUST, I DIDN'T CONSIDER IT SINCE IT'S A SIGN AND IT'S BASICALLY TEMPORARY BECAUSE I LIVED DOWNTOWN AND SIGNS KIND OF COME AND GO.
I WASN'T REALLY THINKING OF IT, THINKING OF IT AS AN ALTERATION.
'CAUSE YES, I WOULD DEFINITELY AGREE.
IF IT'S INAPPROPRIATE, WE NEED TO START ROLLING IT BACK AND MOVING TOWARD APPROPRIATE.
BUT LIKE I SAID, I WAS LOOKING AT IT IN TERMS OF THE GENERAL SIGNAGE DOWNTOWN, IT IS COMPATIBLE WITH THE SIGNAGE IN THAT AREA.
UH, A SIGN IS TEMPORARY, YOU KNOW? YEAH.
I MEAN IT'S LIKE, SO ONE MIGHT ARGUE THAT A SIGN IS TEMPORARY, JUST LIKE ONE MIGHT ARGUE THAT COLOR IS TEMPORARY EVEN THOUGH SOMETHING MIGHT STAY IN PLACE FOR DECADES.
SEE, TO ME, THAT'S NOT TEMPORARY IN NATURE.
BUT THAT'S, THAT'S WHERE I CAN SEE THAT, YES, MAYBE IT'S VAGUE, THERESA, WHAT THE ORDINANCE SAYS, BUT FOR US TO BE, FOR IT TO BE SUGGESTED TO US THAT WE DON'T HAVE PURVIEW HERE WHEN WE REALLY DO HAVE PURVIEW HERE.
OTHERWISE IT WOULDN'T BE COMING IN FRONT OF US ANYWAY.
I MEAN, IT'S COMING BEFORE US FOR REASONS.
I THINK WE, WE DO HAVE PURVIEW.
IT'S JUST THAT, UM, THE GUIDANCE AND OUR USUAL PRACTICES ARE TO HOLD NON-CONTRIBUTING THINGS TO A LOWER STANDARD THAN WE DO CONTRIBUTING THINGS.
AND OF COURSE, I YOU'RE RIGHT, TWO, TWO WRONGS JUST MAKE A DOUBLE WRONG INSTEAD OF A BETTER, BUT AT A IMPORTANT POINT THAT DR. DUNN MADE WAS THAT THIS IS A SIGN, SO IT'S EASILY REPLACEABLE, IT'S TEMPORARY, YOU CAN GET IT OFF IN THE MEANTIME, IT WILL BE THERE.
UM, I, I UNDERSTAND THE APPLICANTS HAVE ALREADY HAD THE SIGN MADE, SO I SERIOUSLY DOUBT I CAN TALK YOU INTO CHANGING THE SIGN.
I DIDN'T THINK THAT SUCCEEDED THAT ONE.
OKAY, GO AHEAD COMMISSIONER ANDERSON.
AND THEN I THINK WE NEED TO SEE IF NO ONE ELSE HAS A COMMENT, IF SOMEONE WANTS TO MAKE A MOTION, THIS IS A CONFUSING ONE.
COULD I SEE? OR COULD WE ALL SEE THE, THE WHOLE FACADE, THE KIRBY AND THE ANNEX SO WE GET A FEELING FOR WHAT THIS REALLY LOOKS LIKE.
WHAT I HAVE IN MY REPORT, I THINK I HAVE THE ANNEX, BUT NOT OKAY.
BUT I HAVE IN MY REPORT THAT'S THE ANNEX AND TO THE LEFT IS THE KIRBY.
THIS IS A CLOSEUP ON THAT PARTICULAR SECTION WHERE THE SIGN WILL BE PLACED.
AND I THINK I'D HAVE TO GO TO THE, UH, GOOGLE MAPS IN ORDER TO SHOW THE ACTUAL I I THINK THAT'S ADEQUATE IF YOU JUST COULD TAKE IT UP.
SO COULD YOU READ AGAIN, UH, PLEASE.
THE CRITERIA I WE'RE SUPPOSED TO DETERMINE WHETHER THE SIGN IS COMPATIBLE WITH THE BUILDING, IS THAT CORRECT? ALL NEW SIGNS SHALL BE DESIGNED TO BE COMPATIBLE WITH THE ARCHITECTURAL QUALITIES OF THE ORIGINAL RESOURCE STRUCTURE AND SHALL BE APPROVED BY THE LANDMARK COMMISSION PRIOR TO ISSUANCE OF A SIGN PERMIT.
SO OUR CHARGE TO DETERMINE WHAT TYPE OF SINUS COMPATIBLE WITH THIS BUILDING.
ANYONE ELSE WITH A COMMENT? I REMAIN CONFUSED ABOUT ONE.
FOR THOSE OF YOU THAT KNOW MUCH MORE THAN I ABOUT SOMETHING THAT IS UNLIKELY, BUT GO AHEAD.
UM, WHAT WOULD ORIGINAL RESOURCE STRUCTURE MEAN IN THIS CASE? I THINK THAT'S PART OF THE, THE KEY HERE, UM, IS THE ORIGINAL RESOURCE STRUCTURE, THE KIRBY, WHICH WOULD BE HOLDING THIS LITTLE SIDE BUILDING THAT LOOKS DIFFERENT FROM THE KIRBY TO A DIFFERENT STANDARD ANYWAY.
IS IT THAT BUILDING OR, AND I'D SAY THAT IF THEY MOVED THE SIGN FOUR FEET UP AND IT WAS IN THE HISTORIC FABRIC, EVERYBODY WOULD SAY, NO, YOU CAN'T PUT A SIGN UP THERE BECAUSE YOU'VE ATTACHED IT TO A HISTORIC FABRIC.
I DON'T KNOW WHAT WE SAY, WHETHER IT'S, WHETHER THIS CHUNK OF THE BUILDING, BECAUSE IT IS ALL WRONG FOR THE BUILDING, JUST DOESN'T COUNT FOR US OR NOT, BUT DO WE HAVE, HAVE OPTIONS SO HARD BECAUSE THEY ALREADY HAVE THE SIGN? I HAVE TO ADMIT, THIS IS NOT THE SIGN I WOULD'VE CHOSEN.
PERHAPS A BIT MORE HISTORIC SCRIPT MIGHT HAVE WORKED BETTER, BUT I DON'T, I'M NOT SURE THAT IT WOULD BE WHAT APPROPRIATE ONE WAY OR THE OTHER TO SAY THIS SIGN CANNOT BE THERE OR SAY, THIS SIGN IS FINE.
I HATE TO DO WE HAVE AN OBLIGATION IN TERMS OF BASIC PRESERVATION PRINCIPLES, PERHAPS TO, TO FACTOR IN WHETHER OR NOT IN OUR OPINION, THIS SIGN, THIS PARTICULAR SIGN HAS AN ADVERSE EFFECT ON THE KIRBY AS A WHOLE.
WE DO HAVE THAT RESPONSIBILITY, BUT WE ALSO HAVE TO REMEMBER THE OTHER HISTORIC PRESERVATION PRINCIPLES.
SOMETHING THAT'S EASILY REVERSIBLE IS NOT SO BAD.
[00:35:01]
IT DURING THE TIME THAT IT'S UP, IT, IT, IT'S STILL OKAY.AND I BELIEVE THAT OUR APPLICANT WOULD LIKE TO RESPOND TO SOME OF THIS.
SO PLEASE, WHAT IS IT YOU WOULD LIKE TO SAY? MS. BAR?
SO I JUST WANNA APOLOGIZE TO EVERYONE.
I HAD NO IDEA GOING THROUGH THIS WHOLE PROCESS OF SIGNING THE LEASE, TALKING WITH THE OWNERS, NOBODY EVER MENTIONED THAT IT WAS A HISTORIC BUILDING BECAUSE HAD I KNOWN, I WOULD'VE REACHED OUT TO SOMEBODY AND SAY, HEY, WHAT IS THE CRITERIA? WHAT ARE YOU LOOKING FOR? WHAT DO I NEED TO DO? VERSUS GOING OUT AND GETTING ASSIGNED AND GOING TO THE PERMIT, LIKE, AND THEN FIND OUT, HEY, AFTER MY SIGN IS DONE, OH, YOU HAVE TO GO IN FRONT OF THE LANDMARK COMMITTEE.
LIKE, SO I JUST WANNA APOLOGIZE TO YOU GUYS BECAUSE I HAD NO IDEA AND NOBODY TOLD ME THROUGH THE WHOLE PROCESS.
SO THAT'S JUST, WE HEAR THAT A LOT AND IT CAUSES A LOT OF UNNECESSARY STRESS AND PROBLEMS FOR PEOPLE AND WE TRY TO UNDERSTAND THAT.
IS OUR CITY ATTORNEY WISHING TO MAKE A COMMENT OR ARE YOU JUST SITTING OVER THERE? I GUESS SHE HAS NOTHING TO SAY.
OH, SO THE BUILDING, UH, THE DESIGNATION REPORTS THAT THE BUILDING IS IN THREE PARTS, A FIVE STORY BLOCK ORIGINALLY LEASED TO THE A HARRIS DEPARTMENT STORE, A PROJECTING U-SHAPED BODY, A SMALL ONE STORY TOWER POSITIONED OVER THE SOUTHWEST CORNER OF THE BUILDING AT MAIN AND AAKER.
SO THAT GIVES YOU, SO THEY WERE ALWAYS DIFFERENT.
THEY WERE ALWAYS DIFFERENT BUILDINGS SEEN.
SO THE QUESTION FOR THE APPLICANT, UM, I KNOW THIS IS GOING TO BE ILLUMINATED AND THERE'S A, A MOCKUP OF IT AT NIGHT.
WILL IT BE ILLUMINATED ALL NIGHT OR JUST TILL A CERTAIN HOUR AND THEN GO OFF? IS IT ON A TIMER OR WHAT, WHAT, HOW DOES IT, SO THERE WILL BE A TIMER.
UM, IT WILL END AT 10 O'CLOCK.
SO REALLY IT'S FIVE HOURS YOU'RE THINKING IF WHEN IT'S DARK OUT.
BUT, UM, I GUESS THEN THE OTHER QUESTION IS, OR I GUESS FOR FELLOW COMMISSIONERS, IS IT REALLY, IS IT THE ILLUMINATED PART OF THE SIGN THAT'S A PROBLEM? OR IS IT THE SCRIPT? I MEAN, THE SCRIPT REALLY IS KIND OF AN ART NOVO THOUGHT TO IT.
SO IT'S SORT OF IS A LITTLE HISTORIC LOOKING, BUT THE WHAT
UM, I KNOW WE'VE LOOKED AT SIGNS BEFORE AND IF THIS IS A LOGO, THEN MAYBE THEIR LETTERHEAD, EVEN THOUGH IT'S NOT NECESSARILY WHAT I WOULD'VE CHOSE, IF IT'S THEIR LETTERHEAD, I DON'T HAVE A PROBLEM WITH THE ACTUAL SIGN.
BUT THE BACK LIT, THE GLOWING PLASTIC LOOK IS WHAT IS GONNA AFFECT THE BUILDING.
UNLESS MADAM CHAIR, COMMISSIONER OFFIT, I'M READY TO MAKE A MOTION.
I MOVE THAT WE, UH, APPROVE AS RECOMMENDED BY STAFF IN THE TASK FORCE FOR CASE NUMBER CA 2 3 4 DASH 46 RD 1511 MAIN STREET FOR THE SIGN.
I THINK COMMISSIONER PEL WAS THE FIRST TO SECOND THAT.
IS THERE ANY FURTHER DISCUSSION BEFORE WE TAKE A VOTE ON THIS? YES.
UM, WHEN I'M READING, WHEN I'M READING THE ORIGINAL DESIGNATION REPORT FOR THE LANDMARK COMMISSION, I'M SEEING A LEGAL DESCRIPTION OF A HUNDRED BY A HUNDRED FEET AT THAT CORNER.
UM, YOU KNOW, FROM MY MEASUREMENTS, THERE'S NO WAY THAT COULD INCLUDE THIS PIECE OF PROPERTY.
I THINK THE COMMISSION IS TRYING TO MAKE THIS HISTORIC BY ASSOCIATION.
SO I'M GONNA STATE THAT FOR THE RECORD.
YOU COULD HAVE SAID THAT BEFORE THOUGH.
THAT WOULD'VE BEEN THAT'S FINE.
I, ANY OTHER COMMENTS PEOPLE WISH TO MAKE BEFORE WE VOTE ON THIS MOTION? COMMISSIONER SHERMAN, I GUESS MY QUESTION FOR COMMISSIONER ROTHENBERGER IS IF IT'S NOT PART OF THE COMPLEX, THEN IT SHOULDN'T HAVE COME BEFORE US IN THE FIRST PLACE.
BUT THE LEGAL DESCRIPTION FROM THE DESIGNATION REPORTS IS A HUNDRED BY A HUNDRED FEET IN THE KIRBY BUILDING.
WHEN I'M MEASURING ON GIS, THIS PORTION OF THE BUILDING'S, WELL OUTSIDE OF A HUNDRED BY FEET.
SO THERESA, DO YOU AGREE WITH THAT? I WOULD HAVE TO DEFER TO STAFF.
THEY'RE THE ONE THAT ACCEPTED THE APPLICATION.
THEY DEEMED THAT THIS IS PART OF THIS CON THAT THIS WAS PART OF THE HISTORIC DISTRICT.
SO I WOULD DEFER TO STAFF ON THAT.
AND SO DR. DUNN HELP US UNDERSTAND, OH, IN THE NOMINATION IT'S BOTH 1509 AND 1511, AND THIS IS 1511.
[00:40:03]
AND ALSO IN OUR DATABASE, WHEN YOU ENTER THE ADDRESS, IT ALSO COMES UP AS THE KIRBY BUSH BUILDING, WHICH IS A PART OF THIS DESIGNATED AREA.IT DOES SHOW ON THE, UM, WHAT WOULD'VE BEEN THE CASE REPORT.
IT, IT SHOWS THE THREE LOTS IN A ROW THAT FACE ONTO COMMERCE.
SO I'M ASSUMING THAT THAT'S, THAT WOULD BE THE LITTLE, THAT WOULD INCLUDE THE SMALLER BUILDING.
SO WE MAY HAVE A WONKY LEGAL DESCRIPTION FROM 1987, THE HUNDRED, WHAT DOESN'T NECESSARILY NEGATE IT FROM RIGHT.
THIS, SO AS SOMEONE WHO WORKS IN THIS FIELD, IF THE LEGAL DESCRIPTION IS WRONG AND WELL, WHATEVER THE ORDINANCE STATES THAT LEGAL DESCRIPTION CONTROLS AND SO THAT'S WHAT MATTERS.
BUT IS THE VISUAL DRAWING I WAS JUST LOOKING AT ON KATE'S VERSION OF THE ORDINANCE, PART OF THE IT'S WRITTEN TOO? NO, I, I DON'T SEE IT.
I MEAN, I SEE A, I SEE A BOX SHOWING THE ROUGH LOCATION, BUT THAT'S AN EXHIBIT AND IT'S ALSO VERY CONCEPTUAL.
WE CAN MAKE ANYTHING TAKE FOREVER.
DID WE NOT WARN YOU ABOUT THAT?
WHAT'S CONFUSING THIS AS WELL IS SOME, SOME OF THE NATIONAL REGISTER INFORMATION SHOWS BOTH BUILDINGS.
SO I THINK THAT'S WHERE SOME OF THIS COMES FROM.
BUT FROM OUR LANDMARK DESIGNATION, I DON'T, I DON'T SEE HOW IT COULD INCLUDE THIS BUILDING.
WELL, SINCE IT HAS BEEN BROUGHT TO US, WE HAVE TO HEAR IT AND WE HAVE TO MAKE A JUDGMENT.
AND I DON'T KNOW WHY, HOW IT CAME TO US, WHETHER THE ORIGINAL SIGN PEOPLE TOLD THEM YOU HAVE TO GO GET CA IS THAT WHO IT, THE, THE CITY SIGN WAS? SO IF THERE WAS A MISTAKE MADE, IT WAS COMPLETELY OUTSIDE OUR STAFF.
IT WAS SOMEONE ELSE AIRING ON THE SIDE OF CAUTION, WHICH WE APPLAUD IN OTHER STAFF MEMBERS TO, TO CONSIDER HISTORIC PRESERVATION.
OKAY, I'M READY TO CALL FOR VOTE ON THIS.
ALL THOSE IN FAVOR OF THIS MOTION, PLEASE SAY AYE.
ALL THOSE OPPOSED TO THIS MOTION? AYE.
MEAN NAY
WE SHOULD DO THE ROLL CALL VOTE.
JUST TO MAKE THIS TAKE LONGER.
DISTRICT ONE COMMISSIONER SHERMAN NAY.
DISTRICT TWO COMMISSIONER MONTGOMERY? YES.
I, I'M SORRY I DIDN'T HEAR YOU.
DISTRICT EIGHT COMMISSIONER ACY.
COMMISSIONER ROTHENBERGER AYE.
DISTRICT 13 COMMISSIONER ZIEL.
DISTRICT 14 COMMISSIONER GUEST.
GOOD LUCK WITH YOUR BUSINESS, YOUR FAMILY, YOUR SIGN,
IT'S HARD TO BE A BUSINESS OWNER OR MARRIED TO ONE.
IT'S TIME TO VOTE ON THE MINUTES.
IT'S A SPA, RIGHT? THAT'S WHY IT'S PERFECT.
ONE OF THE COMMISSIONERS WANTED TO KNOW WHAT WAS SO PERFECT, BUT NOW WE KNOW
DID ANYBODY HAVE ANY, UM, CHANGES THEY THOUGHT WE NEEDED TO MAKE TO THE MINUTES AS SENT OUT BY ELAINE? UH, SEEING NONE.
COMMISSIONER ROTHENBERG IS SECONDED.
ALL IS IN FAVOR OF APPROVING THE MINUTES.
THAT COMPLETES ALL OUR WORK FOR TODAY IN THE ABSOLUTE SHORTEST LANDMARK MEETING EVER IN ALL OF HISTORY.
SO ANYBODY WATCHING AND THINKING THIS IS NORMAL
[00:45:01]
IT IS 1 45 AND THIS MEETING OF THE LANDMARK COMMISSION IS ADJOURNED.