Okay, by my reckoning, it's straight up two o'clock.

Uh we have quorum for the meeting to begin.

So we'll call to order the meeting of the historic and cultural landmarks commission for April 13th, 2026.

And it asked for the statement regarding the Texas Open Meetings Act.

Welcome to the April 13th, 2026 Historic and Cultural Landmarks Commission.

Our commission requires a quorum of six members to be present and available for voting.

The following commissioners are present today.

Chair Rick Herring, Commissioner Kelly Traeger, Commissioner Walter Peoples, Commissioner Estris Tucker, Commissioner Corey Malone, Commissioner Tim Haldin, and Commissioner Graham Brasendein.

Staff present today are Laura Lie Willet, Anna Alvarez, Jefferson Prado, Trey Qualls, Hi Wan Kim, Enrique Alvarez, Stephanie Scott Sims, Brandon Utterbach, DJ Harrell, and myself, Laura Young.

Today's meeting agenda can be found online at WWW dot fortworth Texas.gov.

Speaker registration forms must have been turned in prior to the start of the meeting.

Today's public hearing is being documented by video conference recording, which will be available on the city's website.

To achieve a timely and orderly meeting, the HCLC requests the following rules of procedure be respected.

Each case will be called in the sequence listed on the agenda unless otherwise directed by the chair.

All answering dialogue shall be directed to the HCLC only.

After each staff presentation, the applicant and other proponents will be given a total of seven minutes to speak.

Opposition may then speak for seven minutes.

Continuation beyond the speaker's allotted time will be subject to the chairman's sole discretion and approval.

Following the official close of each case hearing, the HCLC will remain in open session to discuss and vote upon the item in question.

During this time, no further public testimony or commentary will be allowed unless directed by the chair.

A closed executive session may be held with respect to the posted agenda items to enable the HCLC to receive advice from legal staff.

Thank you for your attention.

And do we have any announcements from staff today?

Um I did have one other announcement.

Lots of people came out for it.

Choctaw Nation came and spoke.

Council members, uh, if you get a chance to look at videos or if you get a chance to go and visit the marker, um, it's very bright and shiny and new.

So that's all staff has.

All right, thank you for that.

Uh any announcements from commissioners today.

Hearing none, uh, we'll proceed with the approval of the March 9th minutes.

Uh Commissioners would entertain a motion in a second.

I'd like to make a motion that we approve March 9th.

Um as presented second.

All right, we have a motion to accept the minutes by Commissioner Halden and a second by Commissioner Tucker Tucker.

Excuse me.

Chair Herring, how do you vote?

Yay.

Commissioner Malone.

Yes.

Commissioner Brisendine.

Yay.

Commissioner Holden.

Commissioner Tucker.

Yay.

Commissioner Peoples.

And Commissioner Traeger.

Yay.

Thank you.

Motion passed 70.

All right, thank you.

Well, then let's move on to the first case, please.

Your first case, HCLC-26-094.

Is it a text amendment to the historic preservation ordinance?

The City of Fort Worth requests a recommendation to the zoning commission to amend the zoning ordinance of the City of Fort Worth to clarify that the Historic and Cultural Landmarks Commission is the executive authority for recommending historic designations or removals thereof to the city council.

There is a copy of your ordinance of this ordinance amendment in your packet.

We did also receive a support letter from Historic Fort Worth Inc.

for change for this change.

All right, thank you very much.

Umers, well, first of all, is there anyone in the audience to speak on this text amendment?

All right, seeing none, we'll close the public portion of the hearing.

Uh Commissioners, any discussion, or we're open to a motion and a second.

I move to approve the proposed text amendment.

Second.

And excuse me, who is that second from Commissioner Brisendine?

All right, we have a motion to accept the text amendment by Commissioner Traeger with a second by Commissioner Brisend.

Thank you.

Chair Herring, how do you vote?

Yay.

Commissioner Mullen.

Commissioner Brisendine.

Yay.

Commissioner Halden.

Commissioner Tucker.

Yay.

Commissioner Peoples.

And Commissioner Traeger.

Yay.

Thank you so much.

Motion passes 70.

All right.

Thank you.

And let's move on to the next case, please.

Next case.

Sorry.

Next case is a nomination case is HCLC Dash 26.

Dash 081.

And the applicant sorry, the resolution is still adopted.

Supporting the nomination of the Binion O'Keefe Storage Company building to the National Register of Historic Places.

We also receive a supporting letter from History For Work Inc.

And I will move forward to read the actual resolution.

Resolution 2026 2026 03.

Supporting the nomination of the Bignon O'Neill Storage Company building located at 212 210 East 7th Street Fort Worth, Texas, being added to the National Register of Historic Places, whereas the Bignon O'Keefe Storage Company building is located at 212th East 7th Street, Fort Worth, Texas, whereas the Bingo and O'Keeffe Storage Company building was constructed in 1917 as a six-story reinforced concrete and brick warehouse designed by the prominent architectural firm Sanguinet and Stats.

The building served as the headquarters of the Bion O'Keefe.

Stone.

Excuse me.

Of the beginning of Keystory Company and his clad in rec break, we restrain eclectic cast tone decorative elements.

The structure retains character defining features, including its original structure system, supposed concrete floors and ceilings, historic spatial configuration, and remnants of historic painted signage.

And whereas the building reflects the early 20th century commercial and industrial development of downtown Fort Worth.

And he's representative of warehouse design and construction during this period.

The preparatory maintains integrated location design settings, materials, workmanship, filling, and association sufficient to convey his historic significance.

And now therefore the eat resolved by the History and Cultural Landmarks Commission.

This concludes the nomination.

Thank you.

All right, thank you very much for that.

Is there anyone in the audience who would like to speak on this proposed resolution?

All right, seeing none, we'll close the public portion of the hearing.

And commissioners, as uh we heard additional information on this resolution in the work session and saw the some of the visuals and other information that's now being shown on the screen.

Um any discussion, or we're open to a motion and a second.

I'll make a motion to approve HCLC 26-081.

Second.

All right.

We have a motion to approve the resolution by Commissioner Brisend and a second by Commissioner Tucker.

Okay.

Yay.

Commissioner Trigger, how do you vote?

Yay.

Commissioner Peoples, how do you vote?

Yay.

Commissioner Tucker, how do you vote?

Yay.

Commissioner Malone, how do you vote?

Yay.

Commissioner Holden, how do you vote?

Yay.

And Commissioner Bryce and Dine, how do you vote?

Yay.

Thank you.

Motion Passive 70.

All right.

Thank you very much.

Uh let's move on to the next case, please.

Thank you.

Your next case is HCLC-26-075 at 1519 Circle Park.

The applicant requests a recommendation to City Council to add the historic and cultural landmark overlay to the building and additions located at 1519 Circle Park, aka the North Fort Worth Baptist Church.

North Fort Worth Baptist Church was founded as a small mission in 1890 and admitted into the Tarrant County Baptist Association during its annual conference held in September of the following year.

What started as a small group of approximately 20 worshippers, grew into a congregation of over 3,000 over the next several decades.

By 1968, the North Fort Worth Baptist Church had 1,609 Sunday school students, accommodated six separate Baptist young people's unions, and administered several other Christian programs like the Women's Missionary Union, Baptist Brotherhood, Choirs, and Vacation Bible School.

The church occupied several sites throughout the city of North Fort Worth before it purchased land at the corner of Northwest 15th Street and Circle Park Boulevard, then referred to simply as Boulevard in July of 1903.

The North Fort Worth Baptist Church consists of three interconnected and styling stylistically cohesive sections.

The 1927 Education Building, which occupies the northwest portion of the site, was designed by architect Charles Osborne Crewmaster and is four stories tall with a flat roof in comparison with the other portions of the building.

The education building reflects the classical revival style that includes the flat brick walls and a denticulated corners classical revival.

The 1941 auditorium building sits at the northernmost corner of the site.

The two-story building has modern style elements, including a brick parapet wall and a large projecting central bay clad with cast stone, a pediment and ornamental windows arranged between fluted pilasters.

This design feature appears to be a subtle reference to the 1927 Classical Revival Sanctuary building it replaced.

The 1945 Young People's Buildings sits just south of the education and auditorium buildings and is connected to the auditorium with a two-story hyphen.

It is two stories tall and three bays wide at the primary elevation, also in the modern style.

The building's central entrance bay is characterized by a strong vertical emphasis created by a cast stone front with a stepped parapet and massing.

The 1953 elementary building designed by Easterwood and Easterwood, sits at the southern end of the site and is rectangular in plan with a flat roof.

It is seven bays wide by two stories tall with a recessed central entrance.

The congregation of the North Fort Worth Baptist Church continued to occupy the site until 1985 when they relocated to an even larger facility elsewhere in North Fort Worth.

The building sat empty for several years before being sold at a below market rate to the Primary Iglesia Bautista Baptist Church, one of the largest Hispanic Baptist congregations in Texas.

Staff have found as evidence that the property meets three of the eight criteria of significance for designation.

The property also retains all its original integrity and the identity for which it is significant.

Therefore, staff recommends the following motion that the HCLC recommend that city council consider designating the structure building and additions only at 1519 Circle Park Boulevard as a historic and cultural landmark, and that the Secretary of the Interior standards for the treatment of historic properties be used when evaluating any proposed future change to the property.

This concludes the staff report.

All right, thank you very much for that extensive report.

Is there anyone in the chamber who would like to speak on this designation request?

If so, please come forward, sir, and give us your name and address for the record.

Share with us anything you'd like us to know.

Appreciate it.

Thank you.

Reggie Jennings here on behalf of developer commissioners.

Thanks for the opportunity to speak with you all this afternoon.

Won't be before you long, like they say in the church house.

So we have Irma Park Senior here.

Um beautiful building that we have going on.

So quick overview of OZ industries.

It's a Texas-based woman uh-owned firm.

We have an extensive history and experience when it comes to developing affordable housing and preserving housing as well.

Helped over 3,000 fans across Texas, which is part of our mission here in the DFW and Austin Metroplex areas.

Utilize the housing federal and state tax credits, and we have seven developments currently in Fort Worth.

So IMA Park, as was noted earlier, is previously on the North Fort Worth Baptist Church.

We've received a determination of eligibility from the historic historic commission, and we're looking to convert this into senior affordable housing, right?

So we came back.

We were here last year, um, looking to have it be a family deal, talk to the to the residents of the area.

They spoke up, we heard them, and we're following their lead in that, which is something that's very important to us.

We're coming into these communities, hearing what's best for them.

Well, you see right here, not too far from Ray Street is uh Cielo Place similar uh product that we have going on at Yamu Park.

It's a uh former Baptist church.

I'm just gonna show you some images here of how we've maintained the integrity of that church, right?

You see in one of the uh the kitchen areas, we have some of the stained glass there as well.

And in the top right uh corner, you see that's gonna be um our common area where there's many gatherings and things of that nature, where we've maintained once again that stained glass.

If you go and visit Cielo Place, um, the sanctuary area is um a place where there's plenty of people can come hang out, have different events and things of that nature as well.

And then coming soon, we have Marin Grove, um, that's over there right off of Hemp Hill and Barrie Street, and then Georgian Oaks right here in downtown Fort Worth, George and Oaks, as you all just had heard.

Um, it's now gonna be on historic registry, and it's gonna be a senior development 100 units.

They have Marin Grove, which we're almost uh finished completing uh currently right now.

And that is my presentation.

Open to any questions, if any at all.

Thank you very much.

And um looking forward to seeing what all you're gonna do with this historic property and um having seen what you've done with some of your other projects, uh, all very impressive and adds to the historic preservation of some of our important buildings in Fort Worth.

So thank you for that.

Commissioners, other comments or questions for the applicant.

Very commendable.

Thank you all.

Thank you very much.

Anyone else in the chamber to speak on this case?

Um see none, we'll close the public portion of the hearing and commissioners are open for discussion.

Um motion or second.

A CLC 2675.

Second.

All right, we have a motion on the floor by Commissioner Haldin and a second by Commissioner Tucker.

Chair Herring, how do you vote?

Yay.

Commissioner Malone.

Okay, Commissioner Brisendine.

Yay.

Commissioner Haldin.

Commissioner Tucker.

Yay.

Commissioner Peoples, yay, and Commissioner Traeger.

Yay.

Thank you.

Motion passes 7-0.

Next case, please.

I will try to be brief.

Um, I have a summary version of the staff report.

If you've all had a chance to read the staff report.

So your next case is HCLC 26082 for 2505 Rodeo Plaza.

The applicant appeals to the decision of the historic preservation officer and requests a certificate of appropriateness to install a projecting sign in the existing arched window instead of on the building facade per section 7.4.10 and section for uh 2.4.3 S1A.

So some of the background information on March 4th, 2026, the applicant applied for a certificate certificate of appropriateness for two signs, a wall sign and a projecting sign.

On March 13th, 2026, the historic preservation officer administratively approved a wall sign and denied the COA request for a projecting sign.

On March 23rd, 2026, the applicant appealed the decision of the historic preservation officer to deny the request for a COA for the projecting sign proposed over the arched window.

So the overview is the proposal involves installing a projecting sign above the entryway directly over an arched window on a historic mission revival style building in the stockyards historic district.

The building is listed as a contributing historic resource and features significant architectural elements like arched windows, parapets, decorative plaques.

And so under the stockyard, the stockyards farm base code, the sign allowance for this uh tenant space is 66 square feet based on frontage.

And the existing approval of the sign that was approved on the wall is about 26 um square feet.

So it's actually on the left entryway there to show you the exhibit there.

That's the one that was approved administratively.

Um and it is painted aluminum.

So the proposed projecting sign, and I'll go back to the projecting sign there.

Um is measured at approximately 25 square feet.

The design is also multi-layered acrylic lettering with aluminum backing.

Its proposed location is over the arched window at the entryway, which is not supported by uh several factors, several principles in the stockyards form based code.

So some of those uh issues as outlined are that they uh this will obscure or visually interfere with a significant architectural feature, this arched window, and then it appears uh partially attached to the window frame.

However, with this new detail that was provided, it may not be as um attached as we thought, uh, although it still is obscuring that window, and it causes visual clutter combined with the existing wall sign uh that was placed on on the left side there.

So we do believe that it'll overcrowd the entry facade.

So other uh standards like the Secretary of the Interior Standards uh standard nine.

The sign is uh is differentiated, but it fails the requirement to protect historic integrity due to this location and under preservation brief 25.

The new signage, it should complement and not dominate the building.

Uh so and we also want to avoid covering architectural features like on this um front entrance.

And so staff is recommending a denial uh without prejudice of this projecting sign over this arched window.

And then we also received a letter from Historic Fort Worth Inc.

supporting staff's recommendation to deny without prejudice.

This concludes the staff report.

All right, thank you, Anna, for that uh staff report.

Um is there anyone in the audience who would like to speak on this case?

If so, please come forward.

Uh whoever wants to come first.

And give us your name and address for the record, please, sir, and any information.

And remember, um, according to our rules of procedure, we have a total of seven minutes for discussion.

Gotcha.

Okay.

Uh my name's Brent.

I'm with the uh sign contractor hired by John Ashley to do a signage.

Um Lorelei, it's nice to meet you guys in person.

Um our proposal here, as you can see on the picture uh with the pink wording on it.

That's the frame, the support system.

It's not connected to the molding or the window in any way.

Um and the color of it is painted to match the molding and the stucco on the archway right there.

So um it kind of disappears.

It appears to be floating in front of the window, it's not attached to anything, it's not damaging the building in any way.

And um, the building was stuccoed within the past two years.

So upon removal, any of the half-inch penetrations could be filled and covered up.

Um, it's engineered.

There's there's no no threat to public safety.

Um, it's engineered as high wind loads.

Um, it's high enough to not bonk your head on, and visibility-wise, if we were to put it to the left or the right or the window of the window, whenever you walk up from that approach, you wouldn't be able to see the window behind it.

But with it floating in front of the window, you get the full view of the window and the sign.

So if we were to put it above the archway, it would be in that tree that you can see up there.

Um, we're not touching any trees.

We don't want to damage the trees or the sign.

So that's not really an option.

The left or right approach blocks the full window from that approach.

So we think this is the best placement for the sign.

And the main uh the main reason we want it, a projecting blade sign is to be visible from exchange.

So that way uh passerbys can see, you know, there's an old-time photo place over here.

Let's go get our picture taken.

Um, I think that's all I got.

I'll pass it on to John.

Um John's business owner.

He's got the vested interest in this.

Okay, thank you very much.

And we may have another additional questions for you, but we'll call you back.

Okay, sir.

Please come forward and give us your name and address for the record.

Yes, um, excuse me.

My name is John Ashley, and I own Ashley Nostalgia, which uh also owns the Jersey Lilly Old Time Photo and Tintype parlor.

Um signage is the key to uh my business.

We are an impulse item, but we support and we project Fort Worth stockyards.

That's what we're all about.

We people come in, they dress up like a cowboy, cowgirls, they have their photos done, they take them home and they post them, they put them up on their wall where they remember their experience of coming to the Fort Worth stockyards for years and years afterwards.

We are history based.

I have a historian on staff.

When we basically are the people who we're based out of uh Midlothian, Texas, and we make all the costumes ourselves here in Texas, and we are a very big fish in a very, very, very small pond.

We make old-time photo costumes and equipment for the old time photo industry, but we also operate studios.

And when I tell people all the time that we are location based, it's an impulse item.

They have to be able to see it.

Any sign that is attached to the wall, you can't see from exchange or from stockyard boulevard.

So if it sticks, if it has to have some kind of sign that actually projects out into that area so that you know that there's something down that way.

Um, and it creates an interest in what's going on.

Um so we feel like the um the sign itself does not in any way touch or it actually enhances the window that's there and makes if we look up and see a beautiful window.

And in fact, um the only person who actually came from the commission to take a look at our operation, looked at what you know, came with the idea that it wasn't real happy with it.

I explained where it was, showed her where it was and how it was attached, and how we were gonna be really showing off the feature of the building.

And by the end of the time, she had said, Oh, yeah, that really does look good, and walked away saying, Yep, we'll have you approved by this afternoon.

And then all of a sudden, crash, nothing they came back and said, no, no, we can't do that.

Well, that makes just no sense.

It's absolutely historically accurate.

If you look down and you look at our what our historian came up with, you'll see time and time again picture.

I mean uh blade signs that come out from the building in front of windows, in front of architectural uh elements, and they mark the entrance to a building.

It's not, you know, uh, it doesn't mark a wall.

It might it actually is an area where you can come in, and anything else will just create confusion.

We have to one side of us, we have the um John Wayne building, and if we put it over there, that'll look like they're going into the John Wayne uh museum.

If we put it on the other side, it'll look like you're going into the Texas Cowboy Hall of Fame.

It just doesn't make any sense to put it anywhere else.

Um sorry, I've just this is so important that uh our signs, you know, are gonna make the difference between our us actually making this a go and not.

Um the signs are signages are not intrusive in any way.

They don't uh and they uh they make it very, very plain as to where we are and what they what the uh what it is what we do.

So that's what I'm trying to uh say.

Well, and very well said, and and thank you for that information.

Uh hold on just a second.

Commissioners, any questions for the applicant at this time.

I was just curious to know if they that sign's lit.

No, sir, it's not lit, but we only we close at seven.

So there, if you look up on the wall, you can see that there are two lights up there, but they were there before I got there, and they do uh they light that that area at night because again, it's kind of an alley and it's very dark back in there, and it is in fact putting a sign that projects out lets people know that there's something going on down there.

Whereas if you if you look down there and you don't see a sign projecting, you don't know that there's anything there, and it actually create you know, putting a sign that projects out would actually create a safety, it would create a feeling that there's something going on down there.

Because there's another business that's just opened up called uh escapology, yes.

And uh, so we're you know it would it helps us all promote that area and keep that flowing well.

Other questions, commissioners.

All right, thank you, sir, and for your comments, and thank you for the uh supplemental information.

I think that all the commissioners had a chance to look at it.

We had enough time before the hearing started, but anyway, thank you for this.

Very helpful.

Well, thank you very much.

I I appreciate your time and and and consideration.

Well, after our discussion, we could possibly have some more questions for you, but thank you very much.

Anyone else in the chamber to speak on this case?

All right, seeing none.

Oh, I'm sorry, please come forward.

And just give us your name.

Um information for the record, please.

Melissa Wade Hunter P.O.

Box 470243, Fort Worth, Texas.

Um, I'm here representing the North Fort Worth Historical Society on this case.

We do oppose the request.

Rodeo Plaza building was built in 1921.

Oh, and by the way, our Historic Society has is in its 50th year this year.

Um Fort Worth Stockyards National Historic District.

Form-based code was a hard box fought and battle in 2016 and 2017, lasted for a long time.

Uh, I appreciate Fort Worth citizens and staff following its guidelines to protect the district, as 10 million people are projected to come through this area this year and more.

And I'm surely it will increase.

Visitors are currently um, I'm sorry, the Fort Worth, this Fort Worth Jewel is precious.

Rodeo Plaza Boulevard, John Wayne Museum is down there.

People go down there and they know that.

There's a lot of traffic through that boulevard, escapology, as the speaker uh previous speaker has pointed out.

Also, Texas Rodeo Hall of Fame.

Also, that is the corridor from the exchange down to Billy Bob's.

It's a main corridor.

Uh, so there's a lot of traffic, there's a lot of visibility going down that area on your uh east side of that area is the uh Coliseum.

So either side of the window would not be a problem for visibility.

Staff's uh report utilizing the form-based code and the secretary's uh interior standards states that new signs should respect neighboring buildings, including windows, not overpower them.

This request would overpower and obscure a beautiful round arch window and create visual clutter with the already approved wall sign.

So those are many are those the reasons that our request this that the uh staff's recommendation be followed along with historic Fort Worth's recommendation.

Thank you.

Thank you very much.

Um anyone else in the chamber who would like to speak on this case?

Yes, sir.

Please come forward and uh we're running low on our time, so uh go ahead and make it brief.

Thanks.

My name is Joshua Hiles.

Uh my address is 1608 Crimson Court in Arlington, Texas.

Uh, I'm the historian on staff.

I have a master's degree in architectural history and uh American history uh from Baylor University and Material Archaeology from Auburn University.

Uh just wanted to speak really quickly on the historic provenance of what we're doing here.

Uh it's very important to us to maintain the visible flow of this window.

Uh that is actually why they've chosen to come out of the center rather than on either side, because we're trying to make sure that uh pedestrians from both sides can view the window in its full uh full glory.

Uh the reason we provided you with some of those photos is these are uh instances of historic uh districts, including Memphis, Miami, places where these uh types of signs were historically everywhere.

They were obsequious uh throughout, you know, Cotton Row, places like that.

Uh and these are sign styles that have been maintained in those historic districts and other other cities.

Uh so I just wanted to speak to the integrity of that.

And uh that's all.

Thank you.

Thank you very much for your comments.

All right, anyone else last call for any other speakers on this case?

Seeing none, we're gonna close the public portion of the case and commissioners uh open for discussion, additional questions for staff.

Um I'll just say for my self and from my own perspective, this is kind of a tough one because I have the utmost respect and admiration for the staff's knowledge and expertise, and not only in Wortworth's historic preservation ordinance, but also the Secretary of the Interior Standards, as well as uh uh the respect I hold for North Fort Worth Historical Society and Historic Fort Worth in both organizations do so much to uh protect historic preservation in Fort Worth, but I am struggling with this one a little bit um because we know these types of signs, projecting signs or whatever they may be called, um are historically accurate in other places.

Um of the ones that I'm that are coming to mind in the stockyards, and really the only one well the uh at Fincher's Westernware and uh what is it now, risky stakehouse anyway, those predate the historic district and the ordinances probably that guide what we're looking at today.

However, there are some examples there, so um I'm just kind of struggling with that, and that's where I am.

I second that struggle.

Um I have a question for staff.

So Mule Alley is a very similar, I mean, obviously the drover is at the other end of Mule Alley from exchange, but um are there blades sign it?

Is there blade signage up and down alley or is that mule alley probably does have some?

I think a lot of those are more like uh canopy, like they have this little projection and then they're right on top.

So, but there are a few um projecting signs there.

But the projecting sign standards uh would limit to how many you can have along a facade, right?

It's not just how much you're allocated based on your frontage, but also you have to be so far away from the next one.

So um it's a little different in in Mule Alley.

Okay, okay, and then also on this uh building facade where the other businesses or museums are located.

Do they have blade signage like this along the no along this building facade?

There is no other uh blade sign that I noted.

So John Wayne doesn't have one.

Uh those are more painted, and there's probably a wall sign there.

And then if you go down further, I think I might have a photo actually.

The so there's nothing there that's painted on the left, and that's the escapology has a wall sign.

So thank you.

All right, and I also have a question for staff, and um did I understand correctly in work session, Anna, that um a projecting sign as the terminology is used in the staff report would be allowed here.

It's just the placement of it that is at issue.

Correct.

Okay.

We would be okay with a projecting sign for this tenant space because they're still under their uh total allowable square footage.

It's just the placement over the arched window that we are not that we denied the first application.

Okay.

That's why they are appealing.

And can I ask a sort of follow-up question um based on the the argument for visual clutter?

Would staff prefer one over the other rather than both if there were a projecting sign to not have the the wall sign?

Is that a consideration at all?

Well, we're okay with uh the wall sign it's all under the allowable square footage.

Um what we recommended was more of a I'm forgetting the sign type, but the one that hangs.

Uh the shingle, thank you.

Uh the shingle sign.

Uh, but that one would be limited to 12 square feet.

And so um we're we're more looking at the placement as being an issue here.

I have a question.

Sure.

The gentleman says that someone was there who told him that it looked great to them, and it's and that it should be approved.

Who is that person?

So when I did the site visit, I went out there and said that the window looks great, but I think there was a lot of a lot going on, so it was a little bit of a confusion there.

And I hoped to be able to approve it administratively, but with uh the way the standards are written after that, we got some more information to them, did the project review, and then updated them on not being able to approve that.

So follow-up question, no, well, not a follow-up question, but to be clear, I've heard it, but to be clear, we are okay with a projecting sign, simply we don't want it over the window.

Simply we don't want it over the window.

That is correct.

Okay, thank you.

All right, good questions, good discussion.

Uh, do we have any additional questions for staff or other designs?

Yeah, regarding the uh corner of the building that showed here on the right, you're walking uh towards south towards exchange avenue.

Thank you.

Uh, how many of those windows down is that represents your storefront?

I think their storefront is probably from that um, I can't write on this, but the second window, two windows between the tree and the light post.

I believe so.

I mean, I can let the applicant clarify that, but I'll be able to do that.

Okay.

Uh yeah, we'll down fourth one down.

Okay.

Would you like to just before just before it turns into the gray?

Yeah.

So right there.

That's his tenant space.

And if you look at the there it is right there, 44 feet.

So it's very limited.

It's it doesn't go all the way.

Are there any architectural features on that side of the building that would keep you from putting the sign on either side of that window?

Such as let's have the applicant come back to the microphone if if you would to address so are there any argumental architectural features that would preclude you from putting the sign on the side of the building, like some of the moldings that we see in the previous picture.

Right.

So uh a placement on that bust out area.

I mean, we could put a blade sign directly above that, but as uh John mentioned, it's almost on the John Wayne Museum side of the building.

So it would cause some some confusion over, you know, where his leased space is and where this business is located.

Um, and then if we were to go to the right of that pillar, there's like a four-inch bust out going up over the archway.

Um what's that?

I don't know.

Yeah, yeah.

So that's right.

The the other bus out to the right is is not on his building.

Um, but if we were to place it to the left or right of the door rather than kind of like in the center of the window area, um we'd have to look at something for that uh that arched raised area.

Um figure out a way to install around that because we can't have one leg on it and one leg off of it, and it'd be structurally sound.

So yeah, there's not really many great options.

Right, with with every viewing angle, you see at least half the window.

But if it were on either side, then it would fully block from that side if we had it the same height.

Thank you.

Yep.

All right, commissioners.

Um more discussion.

What actually sorry for the applicant?

If come on back up, please, applicant applicant, yeah.

Or applicant, I guess.

Or yeah, maybe answer two.

Um, so if this were denied, would you just simply find an a location that's appropriate, not on the window to do a blade sign?

That's completely up to John.

If you want to answer that question, um or just the contractors hired by him and his business.

So if this was denied, then I would have to go.

I mean, I have to get something that projects out.

So I would then have to go and start looking for awnings, but an awning would block it even more.

I don't understand how putting a sign in front of the door of the building that I want to enter into, it makes makes it a clutter, it's not cluttered at all.

It it actually is marking where the entrance to the building is.

It it I don't I don't get it, I really don't.

And if I come up with some kind of awning that goes up over that, um it that would block the window even more.

I don't I don't know how to, you know, we feel like the sign that we're designing is away from the building so that you can see the the window.

We love the window.

That's the whole the history of the building is part of what we do.

We've created inside we have sets, we have an old bar, we have an old Victorian parlor, we have you know a ranch scene, we have a 1920s scene, and people get dressed in the outfit.

I mean, we are about history, that's what we do.

That's that's you know, my whole life is built around you know, recreating history and making people walk away with a beautiful remembrance of their time at the stockyards, and if they can't figure out where we are, it takes away the whole the whole meaning of it.

I just don't, I I'm I seriously am just beside myself.

I don't know what else we could do to make it so that as you walk down, boom, there it is.

It's real simple, it's just simple.

It really is a simple sign, it's beautiful, and it's to the very look of that time period in that era.

Thank you.

Yeah, go ahead.

Um the straight on view.

Uh, if you're trying to view the window from directly across the street, uh the width of the sign is only about eight inches, so it really minimally covers up any view of the window, and then as John said, I agree, it makes more people look at the windows.

I've walked up and down that street many times throughout my life and never noticed the window until we proposed to put a sign on it.

So I think it kind of enhances the building rather than obstructing it.

So okay, thank you.

Uh let's close any more public hearing or public comment and commissioners uh discussion amongst ourselves or a motion.

I I guess maybe this is a discussion point, um, and speaks a little bit to the difficulty.

Um, in looking at these pictures, there's already some how do I say this?

There are already some competing signage.

The fact that both the bullfighting goes across the plaza itself as a banner, if I'm being technical, kind of looks like a blade sign, right?

It has that same sort of attention drawing feature, the proposed sign to my mind is more consistent with the style of the buildings accurately than the escapology flat sign.

Yes, that's a flat sign, but in terms of the fonting, that's a way more modern situation, and that's not to take away from that building's loveliness, but I I guess the the real problem I'm having is reconciling the guidelines with the intention.

No, good point.

And I know one thing we always have to keep in mind is that we are looking at these cases on a case-by-case basis, and uh under the guidelines, and there have been instances where we've denied certain neon signs because they didn't meet the district guidelines.

There have been other cases where we have uh permitted them, even though they were they did not meet the district guidelines for various extenuating circumstances, so just keep in mind these are always looked at on a case-by-case basis, regardless of the decision today.

If I may please when I look at when I look at the the picture on the left, there is a building or the part of the building that we're talking about is the rounded part of the building, correct?

Yes, the rounded that's where the window is.

That's correct.

That's and on either side of that.

Whoops, well, it went away from me, but on either side of that, there is a projection.

The building projects on either side of that door.

Is that not correct?

Yes, a small bump out, a small bump out.

And so if there were a projecting sign to the right of that building, or to the left, or to the right of that door, or to the left of that door, it would clearly indicate what was inside that door.

I agree.

Okay.

That's the way I see it.

And so we're not saying you cannot that the owner cannot have a projecting sign.

We're saying not in front of the window.

That's correct.

Do the rules allow for anyone to extend the sign in this case, extend the sign out past the bump out a certain number of feet.

There are requirements for projecting signs, yes.

I believe projecting signs.

Two feet.

So two feet.

One foot to two feet.

So within that range.

Right there.

So they don't measure that part, but if it's 60 minus, so it's about ten ten inches that it's projecting out from that wall.

Is what they're showing.

But there's a latitude for him to go out two to two feet before the sign is observed.

And do we know how deep those are how far out those bump outs come?

Um I don't know.

No, uh not at this time, sorry.

I'm sorry.

We're not gonna have any more public comment.

And um and this this sign is fifty inches, it's four four feet.

It's about right.

According to this, what we're what we have in front of us right now sign itself.

It would be projecting uh 60 inches, so five feet, but the sign face itself is is still just over four feet.

It's four by six the actual signage part.

You add on the ten inches, yeah.

Yeah.

I mean, do we know the width of that sidewalk?

I mean, I've walked right there before the width of that sidewalk.

This is I don't know the width of the sidewalk.

I mean, it looks like minimum I don't think that's just five or six, but they have um ornamental things out there.

I think there's like uh a spur out on the sidewalk.

Okay, thanks.

All right, commissioners.

I can't make a motion.

I move to deny without prejudice, I second all right.

We have a motion by Commissioner Peoples to follow the staff recommendation and deny without prejudice, and a second by Commissioner Halden.

Um before we take the vote, I'd like a clarification on the number of uh yay votes that would be needed to pass that motion.

Six six would have to vote.

All right, so we have a motion and a second on the floor.

Okay, Chair Herring, how do you vote?

Yay.

Commissioner Traeger, how do you vote?

Nay.

Commissioner Peoples, how do you vote?

Yay.

Commissioner Tucker, how do you vote?

Yay.

Commissioner Malone, how do you vote?

Yay.

Commissioner Haldin, how do you vote?

Yay.

Commissioner Bretzendine, how do you vote?

Yay.

Motion five to one.

It doesn't pass.

Um I count it six to one.

Six to one, sorry, six to one.

I missed that count.

Did I count everyone?

Everyone took a vote, got a vote.

The motion was to deny.

Yes.

Motion was to deny without passes with six to one.

Sorry, yes.

All right.

That is, and that was a difficult case, but we're gonna need to move on to the next one.

Hello, commissioners.

Your next case is HCLC-26-073 at 2341 North Main Street in the stockyards.

The applicant requests a certificate of appropriateness for the following work at the non-contributing structure.

Install a pergola structure at the east entrance or along the front here.

Waiver from sign standards 7.4.10 for a projecting sign at the east slash front facade to extend nine feet above the building where a projecting sign may normally extend only two feet above the building, and angle the sign at a 45 degree angle where normally a projecting sign is placed at a 90 degree angle from the front.

A waiver from sign standard 7.4.10 for a projecting sign at the north facade to extend approximately three feet above the building where projecting sign may normally extend only two feet above the building.

Between the posting of the staff report and today's hearing, the applicant has requested a continuance.

Therefore, staff recommends a continuance to the May 11th HCLC meeting.

And I believe the applicant is here.

Okay.

All right, thank you for that information.

Uh is there anyone here to speak on this case?

Please come forward and give us your name and address for the record.

Hello, my name is Lindsay Coleman.

I represent Tacovas located in Austin, Texas.

Okay, and you are uh requesting a continuance of the case.

Yeah, we just felt like we would like to get our design better aligned with the eventually approved by the commission.

All right, okay.

Commissioners, any questions?

All right, thank you very much.

Anyone else to speak on the case?

Seeing none, we'll close the public portion and continue on.

And we have uh requests for continuance, so commissioners were open for a motion and a second.

I move to support the continuation of whatever second.

All right, we have a motion to uh continue the case by Commissioner Traeger, and a second by Commissioner Brisend.

Chair Hearing, how do you vote?

Yay, Commissioner Malone, Commissioner Brisendine, Commissioner Haldin, Commissioner Tucker, yay, Commissioner Peoples, okay, and Commissioner Traeger.

Yay.

Thank you.

Motion passes seven zero.

All right, thank you.

Uh next case, please.

Your next case is HCLC 26053 for 1104 Stella Street.

The applicant requests a certificate of appropriateness to construct a new resident new residence.

The proposed design of the one-story residence depicts an orientation and setback that is consistent with the predominant character of the streetscape and the existing patterns of spacing mass and orientation.

However, several design and plan details should be addressed in order to make the design more consistent with traditional patterns in the district, including window and porch details.

Having regard to the foregoing, staff recommends the following motion that a window section detail be submitted to address the required recessing of the windows that must be that must have a projecting seal and appropriate trim.

That the front window elevations reflect paired windows separated by four inches of trim.

That the hopper window on the side elevation be changed to a small one-to-one window to reflect a typical window style in the district, and the posts on the porch be increased to at least eight by eight inches to reflect a compatible proportion of base to post in the area, and that any adjustments made to the drawings be submitted to the development services department prior to the issuance of a certificate of appropriateness.

This concludes the staff report.

All right, thank you for that uh report.

Is there anyone in the audience to speak on this case?

All right, seeing none, we'll close the public portion of the hearing and commissioners were open for discussion.

Motion or a second.

I move that we approve ACLC-46053.

Um request is uh I'm sorry, two request a continuance.

Second all right, I may have misunderstood, but this they were not a continuance requested on this case, was there?

No, this was to approve with uh staff recommendations.

Sorry.

Yes, so do you want to amend your motion, Ms.

Commissioner Holman?

Thank you.

We have a second.

Okay.

All right.

We have a motion on the floor to approve with staff conditions by Commissioner Haldin, and a second by Commissioner Brisendy.

Commissioner Brisend?

Okay.

Chair Herring, how do you vote?

Yay.

Commissioner Traeger, how do you vote?

Yay.

Commissioner Peoples, how do you vote?

Yay.

Commissioner Tucker, how do you vote?

Yay.

Commissioner Malone, how do you vote?

Commissioner Haldin, how do you vote?

Yay.

Commissioner Bretzendane, how do you vote?

Yay.

Motion passes 7-0.

All right.

Thank you.

Next case, please.

Next case is HCLC 25-200, 1120 East Cannon Street.

And the applicant request certificate of preparedness to construct a new residence.

And the proposed project is also located in Terra Heights district.

Proposed design for the one story resident reflection orientation that is consistent with the predominant character of their streetscape, including the existing pattern spacing, massing and building orientation.

However, attached garage to the main structure are not allowed in the history.

So the partial landfront project is consistent with traditional porch designs in the area, which typically includes partial width purchases at the front or integrated into projecting side forms.

However, or regular windows should maintain a two-one high-to-width ratio to avoid introducing intro introducing multiple types of regular regular windows proportions in terms of materials, the proposed engineer lab sighting and architecture roof shingles are consistent with the neighborhood streetscape.

However, the double front door needs to be simplified to a single standard door.

Having regard to the foregoing staff recommend the following motion.

Subject to the following conditions.

That all windows maintain a two-one eight height to width ratio and be limited to two types, regular size and small size.

The additional windows be installed on the right elevation.

And finally, the any adjustment made to drawings be submitted to the development services department prior to the issuance of a certificate of appropriateness.

This concludes that report.

All right.

Thank you very much for that information.

Is there anyone in the chamber who would like to speak on this case?

Please come forward, sir, and give us your name and address for the record.

My name is Norman Patton, 413 Cedar Street, Cedar Hill, Texas.

Um representing the owner here.

But I guess uh first thing I I would say is that the front door is not a double door.

That's a single door with a side light.

Um I think it's partially hidden by the column in the front, which makes it look like a double door, but it is a single door.

Um as far as the windows go, um I mean we're we're fine with uh staff's uh comment on the the windows will make those uh however they're required to be.

Um the the garage is not attached to the house.

There is a roof connection, but the the garage is a freestanding garage, so if that piece of roof connection needs to be removed, we're fine with doing that.

Um we just uh like to see this get approved.

Uh got a a home homeowner that's trying to get in this neighborhood for quite a while, and and uh we're trying to do whatever we can do to to make that happen.

So if there's uh any other questions you might have about it or or whatever, we'll be glad to address that.

Well, thank you for that information.

But one thing or a couple things I did hear you say is that the windows were not an issue.

The staff's comments on the windows were not an issue for you all.

The um connection uh walkway or whatever it is to the garage didn't seem to be uh an issue, and I understand your explanation about the door, but that's probably just more of a technical uh issue to discuss with them.

But if we're able to approve this case today, it will be that all of these staff conditions be met uh be met with further discussion between you and the staff.

Okay, that'd be fine.

And it sounds like you're amenable to that.

Yes, okay, all right, thank you.

Commissioners, other questions for the applicant?

All right, thank you very much.

All right, anyone else in the chamber to speak on this case?

See none will close the public portion of the hearing, and commissioners were open for a motion and a second.

Move for approval of HCLC-25-200 with uh conditions as indicated by staff.

I second all right.

We have a motion to accept the staff report with conditions as noted by Commissioner Tucker, and a second by Commissioner Peoples.

Okay, Chair Herring, how do you vote?

Yay.

Commissioner Trigger, how you vote?

Yay, Commissioner Peoples, how do you vote?

Commissioner Tucker.

Yay.

Commissioner Malone, yay.

Commissioner Haldin, how you vote?

And Commissioner Bryce and Dine, how do you vote?

Yay.

Thank you.

Motion passes 70.

All right, thank you very much.

Let's move on to the next case, please.

Is HCl C Dutch 26 065?

And it's the address is 1204 East Cannon Street.

And the applicant is requesting a certificate of appropriateness to construct any residence in the Terra Heidi Street as well.

And proposed design of the one story resident reflection orientation that is consistent with the predominant character of the streetscape, including the existing pattern spacing, massing and building orientation.

They proposed building segbine driveway location aligned with the historic structure along the block.

The repository, including vinyl windows, is generally compatible with the traditional window parts fund in the neighborhood, as well with the partial land from porch, which is consistent with traditional parents designs in the area.

In terms of material they proposed engineer of six inches siding, architecture singles and door are consistent with the finished texture scale material historically used with the neighborhood.

However, the rectangular fixed window above the main door needs to be removed.

And how in regards with the foregoing start recommended the following motion that the request for a certificate of appropriateness to construct any residents after 1204 East Canon Street be approved, subject to the following conditions that this rectangular fixed window above the main door be removed.

And the unit just man made it to the drawings, be submitted to development services department for other issues of the certificate of properness.

Let's conclude the staff report.

All right, thank you for that information.

Anyone in the chamber to speak on this case?

If so, please come forward, sir, and just give us your name and address and share within uh share with us any comments, please.

Alejandro do Alejandro Duran, uh 2521 Matlamore Avenue, Fort Worth, Texas.

Uh just make the appropriate uh appropriations to remove the top uh square window.

Okay, great.

And you got off easy today, just one thing that you was just watching the battle of the sign on that.

Oh wow, I didn't even know this anything like this happens, and I was just glad to join and see something like this, you know.

But you're okay with what you've seen here in the staff report.

Definitely okay.

All right, thank you very much.

Commissioners, any other questions for Mr.

Duran?

Thank you.

All right.

Uh seeing no one else in the chamber who I think may want to speak on this.

We'll close a public portion of the hearing and commissioners open for a motion and a second.

I move to approve uh in accordance with staff recommendations.

I'll second.

All right, we have a motion by Commissioner Traeger and a second by Commissioner Brisendine to accept the recommendation of staff with conditions as noted.

Right.

Come, Chair Herring, how do you vote?

Yay.

Commissioner Trigger, how do you vote?

Yay.

Commissioner Peoples, how you vote?

Commissioner Tucker.

Yay.

Commissioner Malone.

Commissioner Haldin.

And Commissioner Bryce and Right.

Motion passes on zero.

All right.

Thank you.

Thank you very much.

Uh before we adjourn, uh, one final note that we uh should have addressed in the beginning of the hearing, but we want to welcome Commissioner Walter Peoples to the Commission, and we're very glad to have you, sir.

And thank you for joining us and being with us.

Thank you.

All right.

Uh with that, we stand adjourned.

Thank you, Commissioners.