Historic Preservation Commission Meeting
Video Transcript
Duration: 98 minutes
Speakers: 10
Good evening.
Welcome to the,
what's today's date? The October 8 Roswell Historical Preservation Commission.
My name is Philip Mansell, and I wanna read to you a little bit about the commission this evening. The current Roswell Historical Preservation Commission was established in 1988 with the mission to protect and preserve the historical and archaeological resources within the boundaries of the district. The commission is composed of dedicated volunteers who are appointed by the mayor and city council to carry out the design review process, and other tasks as outlined in section 13 of the
section
13 of the unified development code.
My name is Philip Mansell, and I am the historic preservation commission chair. HPC commission members are vice chair Mark DiNolo, Ron Jackson,
Rob
Zupula.
Welcome, Rob. He is a new member.
And then we have,
Judy Muir, who is the ex officio member and president of Roswell Historical Society.
Tonight, we also have with us the city of Roswell planning and zoning staff, Shay Dixon.
The process will begin with staff presenting the application. This presentation will include applicable codes and guidelines and staff recommendations based on our UDC and design guidelines as well as the secretary of interior standards for rehabilitation of historic properties and our historic district master plan.
Commission members may then ask questions to the city staff regarding the application.
Next, the applicant will present the project and commission members may ask questions and or clarification regards to the application.
Commission members may then ask questions to city staff regarding the application,
then we will take public comments, which are limited to three minutes per speaker, and
we urge you to stay on topic.
The applicant may have rebuttal to public comment if so desired. The commission will have further discussion if needed, then we will call for a motion which will require a second to that motion then a vote. Another motion may be offered. At that time, anyone aggrieved by a decision of the HPC has the right to appeal to mayor and city council.
Such an appeal must be filed with the planning and zoning director within thirty days of the decision. Thank you, and let's get started.
Alright. First on the order tonight, we have certificate of appropriateness
for HPC
20253534,
which is six one seven Atlanta Street, exterior renovation.
And we'll call staff up here to get us started with it.
Good evening, mister chairman, commissioners. I'm Shay Dixon, city of Roswell planning and zoning staff.
Today, I'm presenting staff findings and recommendations regarding 617
Atlanta Street, an after tax certificate of appropriateness for painting an unpainted historic structure.
Okay. So the applicants are
their actual plans
so sorry. The applicants repainted the front inside facade of the primary structure at 617
Atlanta Street.
Due to city action, they are requesting this after the fact certificate of appropriateness
in order to get HPC approval
for this painting.
The application was received on August 8. Past staff reviews on August 22 is now being reviewed by the board's day, October 8.
Going through the background here, here's the previous
front facade,
last year in 2024,
as well as the
oop. There you go. The previous side facade as it was unpainted.
And here it is as it is today. It's a bit of a gray paint.
This is it as it is currently existing, this is a photo from the property owner just earlier this year.
And this is the existing rear facade, which actually was already painted. And as commissioners know,
because of how state law is written out, HPC doesn't have jurisdiction over paint alterations,
only on the first application of paint. So this is currently outside of the jurisdiction of this application.
The rear facade is.
Now going on, this is going on through the history a little bit here.
This is Town Square in nineteen forties. This is the only build the only picture I could find that didn't actually yet have the building there,
but you can see the rest of the block there, which includes
the manufacturing company store,
as well as a few other shop fronts as it was in nineteen forties.
And here's the earliest picture I can currently find of 617 Atlanta Street. This is circa 1975.
When that building was operating
as Roswell City Hall. This is from Roswell Epictorial History put out by the Historical Society.
This is the building about twenty years later, circa 1994, when it was operating as the historic Roswell Visitor Center.
Now this building, as it's listed in our 2018 historic resources survey, is considered a Greek revival structure. It's a few of the, few of the features of a Greek revival building.
I'll note and I'll get into it in the next slide here, because this is a purpose built shop front, it doesn't exactly have all of
the architectural standards that you'd see in a regular Greek revival home.
But regardless, it's considered one of the only three post post civil war anter or postbellum
structures that were built in the city of Roswell, or at least the city of Roswell historic district, that are considered Greek revival structures.
One of the other ones being 1076 Canton, which we discussed a few years ago.
But here's how it here's how it compares to those architectural standards. You can see it's not a rectangle plan shape. It's not two stories in height.
It's not does not have a full height or full facade,
porch,
and it does not have double hung sash windows like most Greek revival structures do.
While it is classified as Greek revival structure in this previous survey,
all the details that would consider it as such are just on this false gable that's on the front facade of the building,
as well as just having a a brick facade rather than,
vinyl or anything else like that.
They have faux columns faux classical columns on the same gable,
emphasis on a chorus line, as well as transom and sidelights around the door all on the same,
same gable.
Now otherwise, other than just this front facade, the rest of the building much emulates
most of the brick shop fronts you'd see built within the late nineteenth to early and mid twentieth century across both the South and the entire United States. I have a few examples here. On the top right, you'll still see 617
Atlanta Street. The rest are from Milton, Florida, Bruton, Alabama, and Ashburn, Georgia. All relatively similar buildings
period.
The earliest of these
is the Fisher And Hamilton Building there in Milton. That's back in built back in the eighteen seventies.
But as we go on, we can go a little bit more into the history of this specific building. This building is considered historic according to 2003
historic resources inventory survey.
It is DS or downtown shop front zoning.
History of the property and the immediate abutting properties. The Roswell Manufacturing Company store was built immediately abutting what is now 617 Atlanta.
This structure is still existing. It's the structure that's immediately to the south of 617.
In 1911 and 1924,
the property shows up on the Sanborn Fire Insurance maps, but it actually shows up as part of the right of way for what is now Sloan Street at the time called Mill Street. That's the second image here. You can see this is from the 1924,
Sanborn Fire Insurance maps.
At the time, the structure is not existing at that location.
But as we move on in 1952,
the current existing structure is built, and it begins operations as the Bank of Roswell.
Thank you, Roswell,
Roswell having moved there from Elizabeth Way.
In 1975, the building is sold to the city of Roswell and begins service as Roswell City Hall. And it continues operating as Roswell City Hall until 1991
when city operations are moved to the new newly built at the time Roswell Municipal Complex, which is our current city hall. You can see a picture here of City Hall and municipal complex under construction.
Around that same time frame, the building begins to be used as the historic Roswell Visitor Center circa 1991.
Here we can start seeing a few HPC applications that came before the board,
regarding the property.
A signage variance was denied by HPC in 1993.
It's kind of unique because sign variances aren't reviewed by HPC anymore, and the type of signs vary sign variance was actually denied because of the, the content of the design, which is something that's considered unconstitutional nowadays.
The, in February,
HPC did approve
a new sign for the visitor center, and we couldn't find a certificate of appropriateness copy. So I can't actually tell you the exact HPC number for it, but it was approved in February.
HPC staff approved with conditions, changes to the front doors, and the removal of gazebo in 2003
through two different, administrative applications. Circa 2020, the visitor center closes in that location, and the building largely goes unoccupied. But during renovations earlier this year, PNC staff were notified that the structure is being painted,
because
of the need for HPC approval for the initial application of paint.
Code enforcement and planning and zoning staff visited the sites to notify the developers,
and the developers rather quickly worked with us to get an HPC application in so they can be before
possible.
This is one more image here, historical image, circa 1985,
06/17 operating as Roswell City Hall.
Going on, this is the site plan.
Nothing is changing to the site itself. This is just changes to the facade, to the brick facade.
The actual property goes back further and includes the parking lot behind it.
This one actually still even has the note of property of city of Roswell.
This is the paint plan. This is as it is supposed to fully appear.
Now it should be noted that this Mill Street District historic Roswell,
technically would be considered advertising and require a
permit and can't be approved as part of the HPC process. That is included as a staff recommended
condition later on to make sure that's clarified for for future reference.
This is a little bit more of the paint plan as it's fully as it's fully down out on the sides on the side facade. My apologies.
Down out on the side on the side facade. My apologies.
Now recommended conditions,
the the main thing we that staff would like to make sure
is these applicants have worked very well with the city even though they did this against HPC approval without HPC approval.
Throughout the entire process, they've been working in good faith with the city, and we'd like to be able to work with them in getting something approved for this building.
The problem is we also wanna make sure that
future
developers
do not attempt to paint a building just to get the approval and then come back for an after the pack permit
as it as their actual goal.
So the main conditions here are that the paint only remain on the building if a masonry professional contracted by the developer
concludes that the removal of the paint would noticeably harm the natural brick surface. That's one of the things we definitely would wanna protect even if the paint was coming off is to protect the actual brick surface that is underneath now.
The applicant must submit such a statement from the masonary professional to the planning and zoning director and historic district plan within six months of the approval of the application.
And if the masonry professional determines that no noticeable damage will occur,
then the paint must be removed within a year. But otherwise,
if it would cause damage, it can absolutely remain on the building. The last condition is just a reiteration of the letters painted Mill Street District and Historic Roswell would need to be a signage permit, if it were allowed under signage code and cannot come through as an HPC approval.
This same as I already mentioned, applicants have worked really much in good faith with the city after being notified of their code
violation. Staff recommended conditions, wish to ensure that the masonry of the building is protected
while allowing the applicants the possibility of retaining the now existing paint.
And recommendation avoids setting precedence that unpainted objects and structures may be painted without HPC approval.
And that's all I have. Thank you very much.
Thank you, Shay.
Can you go
forward to
the fourth or fifth slide for me?
Right there. We go back. Yeah. Okay. I was just gonna see what was written at the top of the
Thank you, Shay.
Questions for Shay?
Ron. Alright. Can you tell me this is Ron Jackson.
Can you tell me what is on the building right now? I drove by there the other day and got past it before
I looked, and I was trying to read it in the rear view mirror. And I thought not hitting another car was probably more important.
So what's on there now?
Absolutely. At Shady Dixon planning and zoning staff,
this is what's on the building. This is a picture from a little while ago, a few months ago. But, so far as I'm aware, this is fully
the full extent of what is currently on the building is this this gray and white paint. So we have painted
brick
to gray and white? Yes, sir. Now as I understand the official code of Georgia annotated,
once that occurs and it's properly approved and so forth, we lose our
jurisdiction
to have any say in it. That is correct. Any repaints of the structure after this approval
would would
be completely out of the jurisdiction of both HPC and any other reviewing committee of of the city. So if we
if this doesn't come off that building,
then we're kinda tied up.
That would be that would be in summary. Yes, sir. So that'd be a real good way for him, and you mentioned this, real good way for him or her to get their building painted.
Oops, sorry. I did it. But,
we didn't get approval, but it's on there now. So I guess it's gonna have to stay.
Now you say here that one of your recommendations is
that the paint can remain on the building if a masonry
professional
contracted by the developer. Now, what what's the definition of a masonry
professional and
who's gonna follow-up and make sure
he he or she is a professional? Are we gonna go to the
Home Depot and find some guy out in the parking lot?
Or we're gonna get a real look in the phone book and find masonry professional. Right. The, the idea the intent behind writing it in this way was to allow for a little bit of wiggle room is to who exactly would be considered an expert, but that's why it needs to come both to the planning and zoning director and myself for approval,
before it can be fully settled on.
Now who exactly would be a masonry professional by definition,
isn't specified. But if the commission wishes to include,
any amendment to that condition to make it more specific, I y'all are very, very free of your opinion. Welcome to that. So now you'll review you will review
this person,
and you'll look at their qualifications
or whatever?
As as part of the acceptance of the statement, yes, both myself and miss Jeanie Wood. Okay. Now one of the problems I've got with both of these applications, I'm very disappointed.
Not in you guys. You guys work hard.
I'm very disappointed that this that both of these are after the fact.
And that that's a good way for me to get it in. We've had people developers
in Roswell for years. And I said, well, you know, I know I'm not supposed to put a building in front of the primary structure, but I've already built the structure and it's gonna cost me a million dollars.
I mean, we had that very case
on Sloane Street.
And so we
let him do it.
So I'm concerned
that we like
my concern
on Mimosa on
Canton Street
about
demolition by neglect.
If we get a rash of all these, well, I'm not gonna take care of it. It'll fall in, then I don't have to get a permit.
I don't want us to get a rash of those things.
I know it's not your job to drive up and down the street
and look for
for outlaw
signs or outlaw paint or whatever.
But I really would like to see that the city officials in this building love to talk about process.
We follow our process. Well,
this sounds like this is a process
and it wasn't followed. And so now we got a dilemma.
Do I vote for it? Do I vote against it? Do I abstain?
Do or yours is a pretty good position.
Make them go back and straighten it out.
So I don't know what to do here.
Mark Donillo.
Just to comment. Aside from any whatever the intent may have been, I I just wanted to clarify a couple of things.
So in staff's recommendation,
you said something to the effect that
a masonry professional would look at this
and if it would not cause damage to the brick, that the paint would be removed.
Right?
Okay.
So that's assuming then that
having the the the bare brick would actually be better than having the painted brick.
Okay. So it seems like the first one of the first steps would be, is it okay to paint the brick? Right?
The other thing is when you look to the building on the right, actually this photo is a little dated because the building on the right now, the building to the south
is painted I think a similar color. It's not the green and
cream color,
historical building from
the mid eighteen hundreds. Right? And that is painted. Right? 1853, if I'm not mistaken. And that was a pre painted building, which leaves it outside HPC Jersey. Right. Right. So that I mean, that that so that is painted. So here we're trying to preserve something that was,
built in 1952,
assuming that the, you know, the the raw brick is actually,
you know, more historical or better than a historic actual historical building next to it that is painted. So, I guess my question is we're kind of going with the assumption that it would be better to remove all the paint and then I guess go back through the process and say, okay, can't we paint it? And I'm kind of putting aside the question of intent that Ron brought up, you know, which I think is a good question. So I think before we go back and say, okay, now you have to unpaint it and then we can talk about painting it again,
you know, I think we also have to ask the question, do we think this is actually more in keeping with the square,
the way it is now? So
Oh, I can I can speak to a little bit to,
part of the determination for reaching these staff recommendations
is that in the UDC design guidelines, it recommends not painting any historically unpainted brick because it
brick because it could trap in moisture and damage masonry and brick in the long term?
That being said,
I I
while our design guidelines don't go very deeply into
paint, this is fairly close to what is recommended colors for the historic district,
both in the design guidelines and in general in historic districts.
And it it was absolutely fair point to to take a look
at other structures around the area and if it would be cohesive more with paint than without. Right. So rather than concluding that you've got to take this paint off and then we could talk about putting paint back on, maybe we should, you know, look at that situation and say, okay. Is it actually better? And I pass by this every day because I live right in that area.
And just personal opinion,
the red brick looks like something built in the 1950s.
It just looks like an old bank building that was abandoned. So I think this actually probably brings it closer back into historical context.
Ron,
I've got to disagree with my colleague even though this is his his birthday.
And we're not we're not gonna sing happy birth I don't guess we are.
But, anyway, we wanna get him out of here so he can go take his daughter to dinner. But, anyway, the point is I like the brick. I like the unpainted stuff.
And
this building may very well be a precedent
to taco tsunami or whatever it is down there at the old barbecue place on Cam Street because they wanna paint it with waves and things that look like South Beach.
So this is gonna tell them tell us a lot and tell them a lot about whether they can paint it. Right now, it's brick. I just personally,
like the brick. I like it unpainted,
but that's just
personal.
Philip Mansell. Mhmm.
What are what are the penalties
for
for this situation?
For for somebody
painting without or acting without
HPC approval. So miss Jeannie might be able to answer a little bit more conclusively than I could. I I will say that if they hadn't worked with us to go through the HPC process, they would have had a code enforcement violation and had gone through the city court, but I think she might be able to speak more. That's exactly Jeannie Payton, planning and zoning director, that's exactly,
the path
is,
you know, it's a code violation and will remain a code violation.
It gets kinda put on hold until the board makes a determination.
And then whatever your determination,
they need to follow through with that action or it becomes a code violation again and that can result in a court proceeding with code enforcement.
Okay. So
if
alright, let's say that we vote to
to approve this new painting, to prove new color where everybody likes it.
Again, you know, from what Ron was saying, it sets a bad precedent.
Regardless of what our intentions and reasonings are, would there still be if we go that route, is there still, like, a penalty that that they would have to pay?
Or or our ruling would pretty much absolve them of any wrongdoing?
As long as they follow through as long as what's determined as your certificate of appropriateness,
or should you deny,
their application
to paint the building, which is already painted, they would need to rectify the situation. Gotcha. I think I just wanted to, Mr. Jackson,
I see you in one second.
I want to clarify. Mark had kind of mentioned we wanted them to unpaint it to then determine if we painted it. I don't think that's what's being presented. I think that
what Shea is trying to point out is
that the precedent of it, of a decision to leave it
painted
with the situation coming to us the way it did,
and
recognize
that once you approve painting a historic
natural
surface,
you lose control over any kind of
color. So we have examples of that on Canton Street.
And that's I think one thing that, you know, Shay just kind of hit the surface on. But I wanted to based on your comments, I wanted
see
has been determined by the state that we have no jurisdiction.
Once you say okay this paint is fine. Not that anybody's going to do it but they could go out the next day and paint it whatever color they want. So we
we want to recognize that when making a decision like this, whether it looks good, there's also that natural versus painted decision.
Yeah. So there's,
I think beyond this, we have kind of an incentive issue and a process issue, right? The incentive issue is
there's no incentive to go through the process because
there's no real penalty. You could just do it
and get away with it, whether it's good or bad.
The other is, I find it strange that a previously painted building, we have no jurisdiction over.
Shay, you said, well, this falls kind of within the the color ranges, but we have no jurisdiction over something
being historically
appropriate.
I I mean, they could paint it pink. That doesn't make any sense. It does not make sense, but that is state
regulation.
So
I guess the best way for me and it sounds like maybe somebody else can weigh in. But for me, the way I reason it out with my newer exposure to historic district proceedings and familiarization
with that state law is, you know, somebody lobbied for these regulations
at the state level and then took away the power of a city to
act on that
point of the law.
Any kind of commercial structure outside of the historic district, the city of Roswell through its design review board can regulate paint color
down to, you know,
the Pantone color
number.
Historic, we do not have it. Whether it makes sense or not, it's just the reality that we've dealt with.
Before we go too far on, mister Jackson had his hands up, and I wanna not get too far.
Yeah. My concern is
I like this recommendation
that you get a maybe find a guy, not just in the Home Depot
parking lot, but find a real professional to look at it to see if we remove it, is it gonna mess it up? Because I don't like it. I don't like it painted. I like it be brick, but that's my opinion.
I think there's some other issues besides my opinion, and one of them is this sets a heck of a precedent. You know, you you let this stuff stay,
then the next bill and they paint it and they say, oh, I'm sorry. I know I goofed.
I just read your thing. But
the
proposal you got says that a mason it can only stay there if this masonry
professional comes to planning and zoning in historic district planner
within six months
to see if it can be removed.
And I think that's a real good
suggestion.
Alright. Yes.
Robert Zappull. I have a couple of questions.
To the color paint question,
they're showing polka dots on page
26
to the paint comment. They could paint it a monotone color and they can add the polka dots.
It's in our packet. So I would think that when we approve it, are we approving it excluding the polka dots? Like, excluding the signage?
She takes some planning and zoning staff. So that is part of the that is part of the paint plan. Mhmm. And
I should say,
if it were approved as it's just currently standing
just with the gray, they would also be allowed. They would be allowed to put that there because it would be a legally conforming mural under the city code.
And since it exits HPC jurisdiction after approval, they would be allowed to do that. And if it were approved
just as the plan showed, that would also be allowed to be there.
That is definitely something you need to be looking at as part of the consideration of HPC's approval over this because this is part of the plan.
It's not currently on the structure because code enforcement and planning and zoning went out there prior to full completion. Sorry.
Prior to full completion of the project.
But that is absolutely something to take into consideration because that is part of the plan. I have two more questions regarding the paint color or the paint. On the existing front of the building, there's glass sidelights that are kinda divided up the sides.
On the photograph that you provided,
it shows that those yeah. So you can go back. So that's glass. You have another photograph that shows reflective.
Page 28 of the packet
shows the glass painted.
Is that gonna be taken off and it's gonna be go back to glass? Or is this gonna stay there like a lattice that's been painted? Sorry. Is that page 28 of the of the packet?
Can you see
this? Yes.
I don't know if I noticed that in my review. I'm trying to find it now. Don't know if you can see on the image, but the sidelights do No. Keep going.
But the sidelights
do appear to be painted in the the packet. Yeah. So they're glass here, but the photograph we have with the gentleman on the ladders and the cones Yes, sir. Shows them painted. So is that part of the approval that we're getting today? I I would say, and I think that's a good catch because I do not believe I found that in any parts of my review, that the sidelights do appear to be painted and if approved would be part of the approval.
If if HPC wants to continue with approval of this project but doesn't want to continue with the painted windows,
then, I would definitely encourage you to, include it as a condition for it. And my last question was on the same photograph I'm looking at. I don't know if you can get that one up or not.
It shows a
black box over the louver
in the pediment.
Is that a feature or
just per
what is that? That is actually a that is actually a sign frame,
much like tipsy tigers, which is next to this. Unfortunately, I have slightly more images in the agenda packet in the actual staff report than I have in here, but I believe I can turn it on the overhead here if I'm not mistaken.
Sorry for the confusion. No. You're perfectly fine.
Remember which one of these is the
overhead.
And it's a little bit difficult because this whole string of buildings
this whole string of buildings got a
had a extra note in their conditions for a previous approval, I wanna say back in 2021,
that
gave a little bit more sign permission
than is actually allowed in code and just how it lines up.
We're not entirely sure of how far the city's jurisdiction is now over whether or not we can require them to take off those signs and those sign frames.
That black box? That black box.
Because it's part of sign code.
That being said, because
that being said, because that is from an old HPC
approval that gives them permission to put those signs on, it can also be included as
a condition of approval to go back through the normal sign process. I will say I don't believe
a condition for approval can say
whether or not the sign is approved.
But if you want to lift the
the accidental condition that allowed those signs to be there, you could reinstate,
the normal sign code requirements, and they have to go back through. But only for six seventeen, not the rest of the string of the buildings.
Just so I understand,
miss Roberts Poole again.
The color photographs
prior paint
presented as before front,
Someone wrote on it before front. Does not show a sign there. You're saying that
potentially there was an approval done in the past that allowed to be assigned there, although it was never installed. Yes, sir. That's that's not associated with
the that's not associated with this application, and we hadn't been considering
it against code because of that previous approval. But it's already been approved. So we have something in writing that says a square or rectangle of that
size and location has been approved.
It's because of the complication. It's less that it's formally on paper been approved, and it's more that there has been a previous condition that allowed them to put signs on there that weren't usually allowed within the code.
So
it allowed them an extra opportunity.
Again, this is a previous approval before any,
a current staff or I believe any current HPC was here.
This is a previous approval that give them a little bit more leniency to this specific string of buildings regarding signage than,
is ordinarily allowed. Ordinarily, they would have to go through the traditional
sign application process for that the city has in place within the Unified Development
Code.
Alright. Can how about we get the applicant up and
hear what they have to say, and then we can have Shay come back up and,
answer some more procedural
questions we might have for that.
Okay. Let's call the applicant up here.
Hi. How's it going?
Good.
That's kind of our sorry. Our plan all along was to
kind of pull it all together cohesively, you know, signs, everything.
Do you own any of the other buildings,
on the strip?
Well, we own the rest of the, I guess, the the strip. You know, we're just Tipsy Tiger. Okay. Some other tenants going in there. So that was kind of the thought was we just didn't really want this to sort of stick out kind of like a sore thumb. We've had trouble leasing this property, this particular 1617.
So, you know, the plan was if we can kinda put it all together,
be more. I mean, it's not a not a pretty building.
The the old one.
I'm on the inside. I'll say that.
Anybody have some questions? Okay. Ron.
Yeah. I've got and and
one little question, and that is this it's either taco tsunami or taqueria tsunami that wants to buy or has bought
the old barbecue
place down
on Canton Street. And they want something that's really appropriate
for South Beach,
but not for here.
I'm I'm afraid this is a precedent,
particularly if it has anything other than just paint.
I kinda like the idea of it saying
historic district or Mill Street or whatever it says. Kinda like that. But on the other hand, I'm really
fond of brick
that's not painted.
So and so we've got a dilemma. You guys are
unfortunately got in the middle of it because the dilemma is ex post facto or after the fact
approval. So what do we do about that?
And
once we decide that,
what is it gonna look like when we approve it or not approve it, one way or the other? We've got to we gotta spank somebody
for
for violating our code,
or our
process or procedures.
Plus it's also gonna as I mentioned, it's gonna be a tremendous,
precedent.
I don't, you know, I don't want the taco thing down on Cam Street looks like waves instead of it. Like I say, it looks like South Beach.
And I, you know, I don't want guys to just to go wild on some of our property. We want it to look like
a mid nineteenth century, eight nineteenth century
Mill Village, which is what it was.
Judy,
thank you for being patient.
This is Judy Muir.
You just mentioned about making this block
cohesive.
However,
that
block of buildings
was built way before Canton Street
and was part of the Mill Village, and each building was built with a specific purpose.
It was the company store. It was the,
livery stable,
and there's architectural differences
in all of those buildings.
And if your thought is if it was more cohesive,
people might be drawn to it.
It turning it into a shopping center look isn't really what
the historic district is all about.
I have a very big concern
about that.
The board over the Louvre,
then, is a situation where you can see the top of the Louvre,
but if you're keeping
that gable like that,
it should be
open and
put a sign somewhere else on the side,
somewhere where it would be appropriate. If you go through historic towns,
they save all their old buildings, and they may
paint them or whatever, but they keep the architectural integrity,
and they put signs in a place where
it looks like it belongs. It's telling us what's inside the building. It will probably be changed at some point. Putting that sign there just looks very odd to me because Well, we agree with that. I will say that was we're in the process now. I mean, there'll be applications going to redo the signs. I think it
came out a little different than we thought it was.
Same with the painting you kinda mentioned. Mark mentioned that, you know, these colors don't look like they do now. We thought we'd try to go a little different, a little bold, and it just didn't really work out for us. I think as far as cohesiveness, it was, you know, this kind of looks like a 1980s bank building, and we were just trying to
sort of take that away and make it just a bit more just generalized from a commercial standpoint,
not necessarily,
you know, the plan wasn't to
mess with it, you know, from an architectural standpoint, kind of keep that integrity.
It was really just
colors just kind of make it pop and, you know,
match with what we have, you know, right there in the block.
Well, are you painting all the other buildings on that block?
They're already painted. They're already painted? Yes. Correct.
Again, each should have its own identity, its personality,
because that's what those buildings are. That's what makes a historic district. And they've got I know some of them have, you know,
minor architectural design differences within those.
I think this one just being built, you know, a hundred years later, it just you know, even though I understand what what you're saying is, you know, everything's different, you know, kind of stands out. But I think,
the thought is just to kind of treat it more as sort of one development.
But that's what I'm saying. I understand. Why would you take historic buildings that were built when the mills were being built
and turn it into
a shopping center?
Well, again, just more from a color. The plan wasn't obviously to do anything from the architectural
still know, the Greek revival, whatever it is, our plan wasn't to change that at all. So we still feel like it stands out. It's different
different sight line, different height.
You know, I think it's just from a brick color, it just just didn't seem like it really kind of flowed and kind of fit in, in our opinion.
I'll make one more comment, Mark DiNolo.
So,
my concern here and I do agree with Ron is that,
you guys kind of end up like the poster child here because because this does set precedent, right? As soon as we say, okay, this is fine,
all of a sudden we open the door to anybody painting anything brick, can they go look, they did it here.
From an architectural standpoint, and I'll defer to
a real architect here, I
this is built in the 1950s, right? So it's questionable in terms of its like historical value, true historical value. But I would believe that, okay, if it were brick, there would be other things you could do to the building, not to give you a prescription, but other things you could do to the building to probably bring it more in line with looking like a mill building, removing shutters.
I don't even know if you can take this front details down and make that more mill building
like. It would be more expensive. It might actually make it more attractive to tenants as well. But I would think you could do other things to the building architecturally
short of painting it,
to maybe make it more in character.
This is Robert Zappula. I'd like to also ask the question about the glass. Is that just an overpaint spray and they're gonna knock the glass and clean the glass? Or is it gonna be the intent that you're gonna have that opaque and you can't see in and basically see the door at the middle?
That's a good question. I think, you know, we're probably open to whatever kind of tenant shows up for that. I don't know if we're really necessarily stuck on that. I think it was just kind of part of the design. But, you know, if it if we needed to scrape the glass, we could do so.
I think from
bringing things back to how they originally were, it'd be a lot easier with the glass than than probably the brick. But, you know, again, we're we're open to that. We're open to, you know, not necessarily having sort of the dot design on the side of the building.
At this point, I mean, we've been
as open as we can with Shea and obviously wanna work with the city. You know, the Mims family owns a bunch of commercial real estate within Roswell.
You know, we're not looking to fight against it or go against the tide. I'm sorry to be a poster child for a situation like this.
Since you are the the knowledge base, on the ownership side, Shay, are you able
to help pull up
more of the presentation package we're given,
from the owner?
Sorry. I don't know if this mic oh, it was working. Shade and zoning staff. I can pull up the, the agenda packet through the overhead projector if if there's any other pages that you need to be shown. Well, I don't you probably cannot see from here.
The whoever prepared the drawings where it says the Mill Street district that we're questioning
and then the stipple of the,
polka dots. Yeah. That one. If you look down along along the Lena Street, it shows the removal of the architectural pediment and the entrance isn't exactly the same, but it does show the green tipsy tighter tiger.
There are some diamonds and things. Are you looking to also paint the facade or that's just an artist representation and we could
if we approved it, ignore all that, then we're not gonna inherit that. Correct.
So the intent though is the paint that we have, not the paint that's this color, but the gray that's on the building,
the shades of gray.
The polka dots are gonna happen?
Polka dots were going to happen as part of it. But, again, it's The wave. You know, at this point, I mean, obviously, we're we're working with
with everyone in Roswell. So, you know, if it feels like it doesn't need to happen, we can always
come over the plan. I mean, again, I don't wanna be the poster child that calls other kind of
murals and waves and things like that to happen throughout Canton Street. I think that's the other commissioner's
comments. You open the door to it and then whoever wants to walk through can walk through.
Right.
Okay.
I I'm done.
Anybody else?
Ron. I think we're ready to do something, but I do wanna say this and this probably doesn't fit in the Historic Preservation
Commission.
Malin Mims is one of the great citizens of Roswell,
and he's one of the truly great
gentlemen
of Roswell. And I know this commission wouldn't wanna do anything
that would present a problem.
We just we've got what we've gotta do,
notwithstanding
his stature in this community, but he's a great guy.
K.
Hey, Dixon. City of Roswell playing in zoning staff. I did also wanna make sure to clarify
that because of how the paint alteration regulations work within state law, within the state historical preservation law,
Regardless of if the polka dots are approved as part of this plan, even if it's approved just as standing, even if it's approved just with the gray that is currently on the building, they would have the right to add those in the future so long as they met other unaffiliated city code. So it's it's definitely something to be aware of.
Motion?
Ron.
I'm sorry.
I'll make a motion.
I can find the number. In the matter of HPC
20253534,
I move its approval
with the conditions the staff
has recommended.
Do I have a second? Mark DiNolo. I'll second that.
Order question. Yes. Am I allowed to ask or to make an amendment to his
approval or it's as he said? There was Absolutely. There was a question about the approval process. Can we as a board say that we would approve it,
contingent upon approval of the masonry expect,
expert?
Because then it alleviates the idea of, well, if you're a mason or if you're someone who actually is an engineer or someone who's a specialist,
would be able to give you a better answer of why
the paint cannot be removed without destroying the brick. Because I think that's everyone's concern.
Shay brought up that the paint traps moisture
and removing the paint can make it worse. So can we add something about it being approved by the HBC?
Yeah. I I I think that's a a good point. And I got a question to follow-up with that. Who is gonna be approving the mason
the the mason?
Because in the
in the stipulations that you've got, the developer
will pick a mason
to come out and test it. We've gotta have somebody. It's gotta be independent. Like, can we nominate somebody? Is that he okay. Oh, I'm sorry, g.
Yeah.
Yeah. Yeah. That that's what we're
searching for.
Yeah. Shady Dixon planning and zoning staff. I just would make sure that if you want to add that into the conditions or change the wording to remotion so we have the full thing in one go so we can have all the conditions together,
when we're writing out specific appropriateness if approved. Okay.
Robert Zappulla, one more quick question.
Are we going to also approve the painting and the glass as part of this? Or since that wasn't part of the,
suggested
recommendation, it's moot.
How does that work?
Planning and zoning staff. If you'd like to make sure that the paint is removed from the glass,
I would ask whoever's motioning to add that into the condition so we can also include that,
as part of the, certificate of appropriateness.
Ron, are you still gonna make the motion again and redo all that or not? Yeah. I I heard it.
I'm not sure I can repeat it.
I think we've got to we got to the question was up here.
Do we need to
vote on the mason or the so called masonry professional?
We got to we can't just let it be the guy in the Home Depot parking lot. It's gotta be somebody that somebody that knows more than I know about it
blesses this guy or gal as being,
proficient in their field. And and I did
there was a point that was made about,
did we need to
stipulate
why or in what ways
this,
blessing of the new of the removal,
how it would hurt if we leave it there? It'd cause,
whatever Shay said a while ago,
moisture in the bricks and all that kind of stuff. Do we need to go that deep? I mean, to me, number one pretty much covered it.
Robert, is there a way to specify the qualifications
of the person that would do that inspection?
Probably. But what I would
theorize or opine would be to
approve a contingent upon
a validated and approved expert who then would provide the document that says it's okay and then vote on that as part of it. Who but who's doing the validating?
They can bring whatever they want. They can bring whoever they want. And if we don't feel that it's appropriate or their professional
experience is gonna hold weight, then you would deny that. Why can't this commission,
approve it? And once Shay brings the guy back or you bring the guy back or gal back to us,
you you lay out their credentials
and what they
bring to the table, and we say,
okay or not.
I think that's what can we do that? Yeah. I mean, that that
I would so mic's working. There we go. Shay Dixon.
I I
trying to make sure I'm getting all the,
recommendation here or the condition here together.
Does it is it the board's opinion that they should come
the applicant should come back with the Masonry professional
the next HPC meeting or the next HPC meeting that they're available to come to
to
have them be looked over by the board and then come back for
and then come back later with the
approval from the masonry professional to
I I think that they just come once
and
after they submit their findings to us.
Well, we have to approve what the professional is. I mean, the professional could,
you know, we could submit the credentials of that professional to us, could do it off cycle even. We don't have to wait for the next meeting, do we? Yes. I I believe that was my confusion is whether or not HPC would like to see the credentials and approve the credentials
pardon me, prior to
the professional looking
at
the
project?
Yes.
K.
I think then the only other thing is if if someone is willing to read out out roughly what their what the
whole kit and caboodle of the
conditions being set by HPC are so we can have them all together, and then we should be able to we should be able to work on the exact wording. And if if HPC would like, I can share as I'm writing the certificate of appropriates to make sure those conditions are in line with
what y'all are all thinking,
before
the approval is formally given out, then I can also do that as well.
Can I ask Can we oh, I'm sorry, bro? Real quick. Can we approve the Mason without having a formal meeting?
Okay.
Alright.
Let's do that. Yeah.
Can I ask one more question, Robert Zappold? So
why are we not just then
tabling it until you get all that information to then decide at that point everything at once?
Alright. Shay Dixon planning and zoning staff. So there is a regulation within
state law where once a
submitted application is approved
and good to go towards HPC, there's only forty five days between when that application is deemed complete
and the approval that HPC has any control over it. Once we're past that forty five days, whatever's in the plan is automatically approved. It's unfortunately another
denied it? What's
the process that happens after that?
If if denied, then they can either later resubmit,
to HPC or they can appeal the denial to Marion City Council. Roberts Bulligan. But then there's there's paint on the building right now. Right. So it gets denied. If they don't wanna resubmit, then it stays as is?
So
if they get denied and they didn't remove it, well, they would have thirty days to appeal to city council.
Theoretically, if they are working on a resubmittal to HPC,
it also wouldn't necessarily become a code violation
just because they're still working with us to try to get HPC approval.
But if it was denied and then they didn't appeal to city council within thirty days and they didn't work with us to try to get HPC approval and they didn't remove the paint from the brick, then it would become a code enforcement situation where it would eventually go to the municipal court.
K.
Ron, do you wanna do it, or do you want me to do it? I can't remember it.
Are we doing all of number one? We're doing all of all four of them or what?
Got
it. Why do we need a number five and number six when we could say just the that the
masonry professional needs to be
approved by the chair of the HPC
and then the applicant needs to then
resubmit.
Okay.
Sounds like a very long. It's tough. She takes some planning and zoning staff. I would also add
the the six one, the glass one. You should probably add as a separate condition specifically
separate from the masonry issues,
just so we
have
it
separate.
Mark Tonolo will make a motion to approve
staff recommendations
with conditions
on item HPC twenty twenty five,
three thousand five hundred and thirty four sixteen
617
Atlanta Street,
exterior renovation
paint.
With the change that the masonry
professional be approved by the Chair of the HPC and
that the paint on the windows
be removed,
and that prior to any
change in the building
that it receive
HPC approval
in the
next,
appropriate meeting.
Do I have a second?
I'll second.
Ron Jack
Ron Jackson, I'll second.
All in favor?
Alright.
It does not pass.
Right? Because we've gotta have a majority. Right?
Why did Sorry. We had was that three yeses and one no? Or Yeah. Right. I did not vote for it. Why did why did we not have a
Yeah. We have to
You're saying that all have to I agree.
Yeah. I'm I'm stuck on So what are we doing here? If you wanna make the motion, you can do it.
Well, this is Robert Sapula speaking.
I'm stuck in my head of the possibilities
that of the doors that it opens to your point and your point,
and that the polka dots were part of this.
So I'm not really sure how I feel about it, approving it in its method and then having the chair approve the mason or the expert.
So I didn't realize at the time that I was going to
my opinion was I didn't wanna prove it. I didn't realize that it tanked the entire thing.
So
You're saying basically
You're saying basically that it it opens the door if the masonry
masonry professional says it would cause damage,
then It stays. It it opens. And anything they wanna do stays. I see. So the other alternative is that we just we just deny
and require the removal of the pain. Well, that's what I was my question before, and then we were told by staff that there's a potential that the applicant can agree to an extended period of time since this is a very unique situation, and it could be a precedent
to help work us through it because of the limits that we have in our current
ordinance,
which would then allow someone to come back to have the credentials,
do the report,
tell us that and destroy the brick. We could then make a decision based on the fact on that fact
versus us approving everything and then having someone later come back and say it's okay to remove it or not remove it in this case.
Alright. So if we don't take action on this, it's dead and they've got to reapply.
And when you say approve, you're talking about what is written here?
Yes.
Sorry.
Shade, it's in planning and zoning, staff.
Letter of the law, if it is if it is let stand that no decisions made by HPC, it's not either approved, denied, or deferred with the applicant's consent, then it is approved as submitted. So there's no the staff recommendations are not included within the So if we wanna change it tonight
with the number of people up here, we've gotta vote it down.
That way, it gives us a second bite at the apple.
Alright. Well, let's see if he will defer.
Well, I guess my only concern is that
are we gonna be forced to take the I'm sorry. This is Brad Shoemaker with Meb's Enterprise. I guess my fear is that, you know, we're just gonna be forced to take the the paint off the brick no matter what,
no matter what kind of effect it has. So I think it's just a matter of really understanding what I'm,
you know, applying for or deferring for here,
and what exactly does it cover? Am I supposed to come back with
a masonry expert,
at a at a later date? Or
Shade and planning and zoning staff. So if you agree to the deferment,
HPC will most likely give you a few directions on
extra information that they would like to know prior to the next meeting. You wouldn't be required to reapply. There's no new application fees. It's the same application.
You would just be heard at the next meeting that you can be ready to answer those same questions.
Yeah. We have meetings in November and December, whichever,
if agreed to a deferral.
I guess we would, yes. Applicant will agree to a deferral.
Do,
thank thank you for being willing to work with us on this.
Sorry
to call so much Oh, no. No. No. Emotion and confusion
and
our intent by any means.
Eeny, can we have, like, five minutes to discuss
amongst ourselves or take, like, a five minute break?
Because I
I I wanna
yeah.
Right. Yeah.
Yeah. That that's what I'm thinking. Okay. Alright. We're we're gonna we're gonna take Let me just make this comment. Mister Shoemaker, we want to
get to yes.
And I think if you give us a minute, we probably can.
Certainly.
Recess.
07:07.
Be back in your seats at 07:12.
Alright. I'm Philip Mansell, chair of the HPC, and we are back in session thirty seconds early from the five minute break.
Okay. I think we've come up with something. Do I have a motion?
Before I this is Robert Spoole. Before I make the motion for that, I ask staff in the deferral process, that's a motion for a deferral.
In requesting
the owner to accept a deferral
to provide additional documentation,
is that the motion we make is a deferral motion, not an approved, not a denied, but a deferral? Okay.
What you need to submit it?
Do you think we could have it by the next meeting?
Yeah. I would think so. I mean, we've got in house construction teams. We have access to subs who probably could find somebody, you know Quickly. Okay. Yeah. So I would think The only thing other thing to keep in mind that's probably not top of head is we have a time line twelve days prior to the meeting. You cannot receive any new information after that on that twelfth day or after.
So your timeline of thirty days shrinks.
You got eighteen days to get us information. Okay.
State exam Challenge accepted. Planning and zoning staff. We do have a December meet unlike a lot of the boards, we do have a December meeting as well. So
if you we'd also be able to make that work.
Let's go ahead and just shoot for November. I mean, I think it's everybody's
interest to probably
get to the call. So This is Robert Sapulis. I would say sixty days over the next November meeting. How do you
My recommendation for the wording would be along the lines of the next meeting
that is available for
to meet the qualifications, something along those lines. To allow it open ended for them to find what they need to do and provide it. That would be my recommendation because, otherwise, if they can't find one before the deadline for November's meeting, they still have
to we both have to hold and have them come to a November meeting just for them to get deferred to December.
Let's do it at November. I I think you guys probably wanna get this get resolution on this as quick as possible. Correct. Yep. If they don't if the Robert's full if if they don't, then they can always ask for
a a delay again. Right?
Yes. But we would have to hold a whole meeting, which is that's if that's what is the intention of HPC, that's perfectly okay. But we would have to hold the whole HPC meeting in order to have that done. To accept the the Yeah. I think we are, anyway.
Right? At the moment, there's no major application, and we've we're getting within the next day or two of the determination date. So if this is deferred to November
and we're holding it in November, it would most likely be the only case heard in November.
Okay.
This is Robert Sapula. I'd like to make a motion to defer,
case number HPC20253534617AtlantaStreet
exterior paint
to allow the owner and the applicant time to provide a
certified or licensed
mason who
can provide adequate information to satisfy the board
for regarding whether or not the paint can be removed without damaging the brick. Second.
Second.
That was Ron Jackson. All in favor?
Alright. Passes unanimously.
Brad, thank you for working with us on this. I appreciate that.
And, yeah,
just
masonry stuff.
Sounds good. Thanks, everybody. Alright. Thank you, Brad.
Okay. Next on the agenda is HPC two 0253935964
Alpharetta Street, covered and enclosed patio. I will call staff up to tell us what's going on.
Good evening. Shay Dixon, planning and zoning staff, here to present the findings and recommendations regarding
964 Alpharetta Street,
otherwise known as Cello. This is the after the fact certificate of appropriateness for the covering and closing of a patio.
K. So the applicants are requesting this after the fact certificate of appropriateness for changes made to the roof line and the semi enclosing of an outdoor dining area. Applicants have also submitted two
applicants have also submitted two administrative HPC applications not covered by this major review. These minor applications cover some additional unapproved changes to the decking as well as a newly proposed storage shed.
The application was received by HPC,
for HPC approval August
29.
Fees were received by the city September 2. Applications then considered complete. The application passed staff reviews 09/16/2025
for review by the board today, October 8.
Going to the background, these were the original
approved,
facade's elevations
for 964
Alpharetta.
This was approved in a 2024 HPC
case.
It's a little bit before my time here.
And this is the front facade as approved
in 2024 versus the submitted plans for this application, which is what the building is currently. You can mainly see the new cover over the patio area.
It's a change to the roof line as well as technically the enclosing of a space
on here a little bit. This is Cello during a site inspection in 2024.
Among the unapproved among other minor unapproved changes, you can see here how the the porch line is now an enclosed space. Is I call it semi enclosed because these glass panels are removable depending on the situation,
but it is a change both to the roof line and the enclosing of that space.
And here again is a comparison
of the approved plans in 2024
versus what was actually built as seen in that site visit earlier this year.
Here's the north side of the facade, unchanged and still in line with the previous approvals.
Now architecturally wise, there isn't a very clear
architectural style
that this building is in.
Traditionally, it was just a single story shop front without any clear architectural style.
Some of the new non historic details approved previously by HBC somewhat resemble international style,
though this isn't traditional of the building.
Going into a little bit of, how it resembles international style, it has, no decorative detailing at the doors or windows,
smooth relatively un un
pardon me.
Unornamented
wall surfaces, asymmetrical facades.
And
there's some window casements that are flushed with the outer walls, and generally the roof is flat, though there is a a sloping roof on the,
west side of the building.
I should also say that, again, that all of those details are non historic to the building. Those were previously approved in a 2024,
HPC approval. The building historically
looks like either one of these two pictures depending on which time frame you're looking at.
Pre
pre 1990, you're looking more at this concrete building
down here on the bottom left as well as post 2018, you're looking at that. And then between 1990
and 2018, you're looking at this wood sited, it's a single story shop front on the top right. These are these are both 964 Alpharetta Street.
Now historically, according to the 2003 historic resources survey, the properties that this this project is on are historic and non historic. It's actually a slight mistake I got in the staff report.
When looking at the 2003 historic surveys map, I was looking at one parcel that is actually their parking lot parcel as opposed to both their parcels, which is one is the building and one is the parking lot. The building at the time was considered historic and the parking lot was considered non historic.
I would say, however, as
as the building looked like this in 2003 with the wood siding,
staff would probably classify this building more as historic obscured rather than true historic if the historic resources survey was redone today.
So not keeping exactly what that historic and not historic classification.
Zoning, this is also d s downtown shop front.
Now this, property's history goes back to 1911 at the least.
The Sanborn Fire Insurance maps include a wood framed building on the same property that housed a blacksmith and a Wilright. A Wilright is the term at that time for a vehicle repair shop, which is kind of interesting as this same building was used for vehicle repair up through the fifties and sixties.
I got a little bit nerdy about that because this building this building was used for vehicle repair before automobiles were, or this property was used for vehicle repair before automobiles were the,
the transport of choice.
Nineteen twenty four's Sanborn fire insurance map actually includes a concrete built auto repair shop that seems to have a nearly identical footprint to the current building.
Staff couldn't confirm yay or nay if that was the same building because our previous surveys have this building built in 1938,
but it is possible that this building was actually originally built in 1924
and was just reclassified or renoted at some point in time, because there does appear to be a fairly identical building on the same footprint at in 1924.
But in 1938, we confirmingly
have the existence of the current structure on the property, and it is used at the time for auto repair.
Aerial photographs sorry. Aerial photographs suggest that the building was part of a longer line of abutting shop fronts,
circa 1952,
and continuing on to,
circa 2778
when aerial photographs suggest that the building immediately adjacent to it was demolished, once again leaving this structure as a standalone building.
Prior to 1983,
the shop front sometime prior to 1983, the shop front began use as a glasswork manufacturing
shop.
In 1983, DRB approved a new canvas canopy on two sides of the building. This is before HPC,
the current modern HPC
existed in that before this building was in the historic district.
In 1988, the building is included in an expansion of the historic district.
Assigned variance is approved by HPC in 1989.
Sometime prior to 02/2004,
the shopfront began use as a retail store called Board of Trade. Board of Trade is still a business in the historic district. It's no longer at this location.
In 02/2004, HPC staff approved the repainting of the building to a copper red as we saw on the the previous wood sighted pictures.
Circa 2,009, the shopfront began use as a retail store known as the as a classy clutter.
And then between 2018 and 2022,
both HPC as a board and HPC staff approved numerous changes to the siding, porch, windows, vents,
and other minor changes over the course of six different applications over those,
few years.
Then in 2024, HPC approved a major renovation both to the exterior of the building
and to the parking lot.
Now going into the existing side elevations is as it was built.
This is the primary entrance side.
Again, main changes is
the cover over the dining area being different as approved
as well as the dining area being semi enclosed.
This is the existing front elevation. This isn't the main entrance side of the building,
though historically it is. Historically, that far right window was actually a door.
But it currently is just the side of the building despite being the front elevation.
Existing rear elevations is also as it abuts East Alley, so this is also a side street elevation.
And this is the existing north side elevation, mainly just parking and, and support
without any extra
this is the proposed site plan. This is the site plan as it was approved in 2024
as there aren't any changes to,
the actual footprint of the building from the previous approval. It is just the changes to a few minor deck changes is going through administratively
and then the changes to enclosing of
the
dining space.
Now recommendations for approval, a few of these have already actually been met by the applicants as they've been working with us through this process.
But the the first condition is just that a satisfactory
parking plan or sorry, parking agreement,
be provided to planning and zoning for approval. This has already been done, but it was done just right after we finished submitting out the, sending out the staff reports.
The current parking that's on the property is insufficient, and their previous parking agreement was with a property that was more than 800 feet away, which wouldn't be allowable under our code as a remote parking area.
They've since done a new parking agreement that meets the code.
Second is that landscape area that landscape areas proposed and approved in the previous approval must be installed and plans to do within six months of this approval.
Third is that the approval of this application does not include the approval of the administrative h b HPC applications currently active or submitted.
And then fourth is that the streetscape fees must be paid before any administrative HPC applications are approved. These already have been paid. They were paid after the staff report went out.
For the sake of approval, we usually would still like to have all four conditions be placed upon the approval.
Nevertheless, one and four have already been met by the applicants.
Finally, for recommendations as a whole, while there are some outstanding issues, the applicants have worked in good faith with the city regarding their HPC approval after they were notified by, the
building division of a stop work notice.
And while not an ideal design for the historic district, a little bit more of a modernist design, it still constitutes an improvement when compared to the recent history of the building's appearance just as a concrete block building in the Historic District.
And that is the recommendations for
this application.
Thank you, Shay.
Ron.
This is Ron Jackson. Have we got any can you give us any detail
on the parking
that meets code?
Would you say 800 feet, 700 feet?
Do you mean the code in general or for this project in general? For this particular project. For this You said it had they had met that requirement. Where are we parking?
So there are if I'm remembering this off the top of my head, I'm not sure if it's in any documents right here. But the
the parking that's on the property is seven spaces. They need at least I wanna say it's at least 11, and they have 10 additional spaces contracted out
off of Canton Street. And I we've done the measurements. It's just barely short of 800. It needs to be less than 800 in order to be able to be contracted as part of their required parking spaces,
and I believe the number was 796.
It was just barely under, so it meets its close, but it does in fact satisfy Well, I gotta say that this it's a great restaurant. I've been there several times
and enjoy it all the rice and stuff.
It's really
good. Thank you, Ron.
Anybody else? Yes, Rob.
So, Shay, this is Robert Sapula. Shay, you're saying it's about 3,300 square feet including the existing building,
the enclosed
structure we're talking about, and then the out new outdoor
dining?
That's all the parking that's being provided, 11 spaces for all that? So they don't need to they don't need to account for the,
uncovered outdoor dining. We did have them account for the semi enclosed outdoor dining.
And for restaurants in the historic district, it only needs to be one space per 300
square feet.
Being 3,300 square feet would be 11 parking spaces.
It's there's some rounding in there for the actual number, but it ends up being 11 or 12 off the top of my head, and they have 17
counting their remote parking agreement. This is Robert Spoole again. So it's the trigger for the parking is the cover.
Well, they they need to meet those parking requirements regardless of what changes are being made in order to that's part of their business license process each year, for their renewals.
So there's there's no, like, legal nonconforming for parking agreements.
That being said,
because
we don't want to have HPCs move forward without a parking agreement in place that satisfactorily meets the code, we are we requested that they do meet it prior to,
this or their administrative applications being passed. Okay. And regarding number three, can you elaborate on what that is about? Why is that in there? It wasn't in the last one or I haven't seen that really? Yes. So
unlike the previous unlike 617 Atlanta, which only had one major application coming through,
this this application this property, I should say, has both one major and two minor applications going through. The minor applications came in at a point in time where we couldn't add it in as part of the plan review for this
major application.
But because they are under the list of things that can be done administratively through staff, we allow the applicants to apply for them as administrative applications where they'll be reviewed through the normal administrative staff review process for HPC
rather than be reviewed as part of the board.
That condition is put there because you can see in certain circumstances when there are both a major and administrative application come through, a developer argue
that well, the major was approved. That means all three were approved. So we usually like to have that condition in place when we have both a major and administrative application on the same property just to make it clear that what was reviewed for
for this meeting and for the staff reports are just the major application, and the administrative applications still have to go through the same process.
Robert Sapulle again. Are we allowed to hear what those are?
Yes. I I mentioned it on the one screen here. It is
right off top of my head here. It's one is a proposed storage shed,
and the other is
some minor changes to the decking. It's just some exterior lighting
as well as a having to move the deck a little bit to accommodate for a utility
meter, both of which were,
there's a few other small minor changes in that as well. Okay.
If if you'd like, I can also send you the full application packet for the administrative applications. HPC is very welcome to review any of those at any time. So you can always reach out for me today. Thank you for the explanation.
Hey, Shay. Philip Mansell. I've got a question,
about the parking agreement.
What happens if,
refined parking solutions and cello have a falling out and
they terminate the contract and lose those 10 spaces?
This is more out of curiosity Right. Anything. Right. Processes,
we don't have it written into code, but our traditional process for it is
if you are if the city finds that your parking agreement is insufficient, just as soon as possible, need to have a new parking agreement submitted with the city. And I think there actually is a specific deadline regarding business license renewals where you have to have your,
parking agreement in. But usually, we just have to have we usually try to have them in as soon as we realize that they're not meeting the parking agreement. Gotcha. Alright. Cool. Thanks, Shay.
Alright. Anybody else? Alright. Let's call the applicant up here.
Thank you for your patience this evening.
Welcome back.
Tom Wright Wright Mitchell arch well, Tom H. Wright architect now.
Structure on the end,
original structure we had proposed back in
proposed back in
with
a spoke roof
and operated,
stacked back, and had panels that would go in.
Canada,
we got into it
deliver it.
Owner the owners
of the restaurant
saw one in a restaurant he was
That one, I would like to have this one. I never saw it until it was installed.
Help me in front of windows,
platform, and all this.
Up is metal panels that lock to give it a
waterproof roof
back up against the building.
Over two thirds of it
bottom line is at a 42.
Two
like several of the other restaurants in the wintertime that add the plastic panels. These panels can go up to temper the space
around or in a heavy rain.
Rain. All along has been an outside
covered dining area.
Help any Yep.
Have any questions?
Okay. Do I have a motion?
I'll make the motion, Ron Jackson.
I move in the matter of
HPC
twenty twenty five,
three nine
three five.
I may I move the approval of this application with the conditions discussed
Alright. All in favor?
Passes unanimously.
Thank you, Tom, for your time. Thank you. And thank you for coming, Matt. Right?
Alright. You for coming, Matt. Right?
Alright. That moves us to
the minutes of 09/10/2025.
I've got us
a meeting adjourning at 07:14PM.
Do I have a motion for approval?
I need to abstain.
I wasn't part of that.
Yeah. Just because we won't have a quorum. I can vote on it if I wasn't there. You were here. I was in the audience. You were in the audience. Okay.
I I it
it it it makes sense that
the majority didn't vote in favor.
Even though one was abstained,
you know,
I
I I think you were right is what I'm saying. Well, we think I was Yeah. Yeah.
Motion to defer the minutes of September 10
to the next meeting. Do I have that motion?
Mark DiNolo will make a motion to defer the September 10 meeting minutes
vote or approval till the next meeting.
Do I have a second?
All in favor? Robert Sapulos second it.
Motion passes unanimously.
Although, technically, Rob was here.
Technically, I'm
chair cannot
okay. Can I make a comment? Yes. Before we get going, this has nothing to do with anything. Well, it has a lot to do.
And that is,
are we just put in your back pocket to think about. What are we gonna do about all these
after the fact approvals?
Is there some way, some process that we can
kick in? The mayor talks a lot about process.
Well, can we not have a process
so we don't get all this after the fact stuff?
New Coke.
But
I I will tell you I've had
a a couple
incidences with the city of Oakland Historical Society or Preservation Commission, and they do not mess around.
I mean,
the the vibe the fines just keep coming if if action isn't taken.
And I mean, they're huge pain, you know, huge pains about it. But
I don't know. I I we don't need to be that extreme, but it'd be nice to have some kind of happy medium where we can penalize it. I think you can see
what happens.
And it's not your job to go drive around and look for stuff.
It I don't know whose job it is, if it's anybody's, but we got to we've gotta tighten this up. Because tonight, we had a little chaos
because
we didn't know what to do with the historic
village stuff.
We've got we have got
to do that. And it has been a custom
as long as I've been on the council and maybe as long as
as,
Mayer has,
that
we kinda we're really good about giving forgiveness
instead of permission. And and there's some developers,
major developers on Grand Street that really
worked that.
I I I you guys are doing a good job of You're doing a very fine job. Getting procedures set and being transparent. I mean, that's one thing that
that we never really had was the transparency
with with everything. So And and nobody's asking I truly appreciate all the work We do appreciate it. We don't we're not asking you to go back
and look at stuff that will happen when you weren't here, but I'm just telling
you. And I think missus Mear can amen that that we've got guys that really worked us.
And they would they get us to put us in a bind of
well, what are you gonna do? You're gonna diminish my property value by a million bucks.
And we'd say, okay. Well
and it happens over and over.
Yes, ma'am. Say something that we close the meeting. This is Let me just say this one thing, and this may be out of order,
but I think there's the the trust in the city is an issue. Not in this department, but in general, in the whole city.
I think there are a lot of folks that are concerned about trust.
And we've had people say,
well, you voted for us, so trust us.
And I say trust is earned
every day.
Okay. On that note, I will close the meeting at 07:42.