Historic and Design Review Commission CTAB Meeting - March 20, 2026
Historic and Design Review Commission Compliance and Technical Advisory Board Meeting - March 20, 2026
The Compliance and Technical Advisory Board (CTAB) met on Friday, March 20, 2026, to consider four consent agenda items and four regular agenda items involving certificates of appropriateness for properties in historic districts. The board heard from applicants, staff, and one voicemail from a neighborhood representative. Key decisions included approvals with conditions on fencing and planters, denial of several replacement items for a violation case, approval of a 4-foot fence, a partial approval for window replacements, and a continuance for a siding case.
Consent Calendar
- Approval of Meeting Minutes (February 20, 2026): Motion carried with one abstention (Commissioner Speeds not present at previous meeting).
- Item 1 (1119 North Pine), Item 2 (931 Hays), Item 3 (332 Florida), Item 4 (415 Willow): Approved unanimously after no commissioner pulled any items. A voicemail from Lulu Francois, Chair of the Decanwitting Hill Historic Neighborhood Review Committee, requested that the applicant at 415 Willow be required to install historically correct one-over-one windows (not part of current application but raised as a concern). The consent agenda as approved included all four items.
Public Comments & Testimony
- No in-person public comments were made.
- A voicemail for consent item 4 (415 Willow) was played from Lulu Francois expressing concern that windows installed in 2020 did not meet historic guidelines and requesting the applicant return for review of windows.
Discussion Items
- Item 5 – 601 Burnett (Fence, Retaining Wall, Planters): Applicant Mr. Amons requested approval for a 3-foot 2-inch black rod iron front fence, a 1-foot limestone retaining wall, and limestone planters adjacent to the south and west facades. Staff recommended approval of items 1 and 2, but not item 3, citing moisture concerns. The applicant explained the planters would include drainage and foundation grading to prevent moisture. After discussion, the board approved items 1 and 2 as submitted, and approved item 3 with conditions: the planter height not to exceed the current height adjacent to the stair, and installation of weep holes and a plastic barrier to protect the skirting.
- Item 6 – 115 East Carolina Street (Violation Case – Roof, Door, Windows, Screens): Applicants Octavio and Adriana Castrita explained they had replaced their porch roof, front door, windows, and screens after a tree fell on the property, unaware of the historic district requirements. Staff recommended denial of all four items with alternative recommendations (standing seam metal roof, wood screen frames, wood windows, more appropriate door). The board accepted staff recommendations unanimously, with Commissioner Sepulveda voting nay. The applicants were instructed to work with staff on compliant replacements.
- Item 7 – 424 Burlitzon Street (Fence): Applicant Sarah Jones (online) requested a 5-foot-tall black metal fence for safety reasons, citing theft, vandalism, and a neighbor’s retaining wall that would reduce the effectiveness of a 4-foot fence. Staff recommended approval only if the fence did not exceed 4 feet. Commissioners noted that other 5-foot fences may exist in the area but were likely approved under different circumstances. The motion to accept staff recommendation passed 6-1 (Commissioner Davis nay).
- Item 8 – 2129 West Mulberry Avenue (Window Replacement): Homeowner Stella Diaz and contractor requested replacement of 10 historic wood windows with an aluminum-clad wood product (Pella Reserve). Staff recommended replacement of only three windows (20D, 20E, 25) with a full wood product, and repair of the remaining seven. The applicant argued that many windows were beyond repair and that the product was used at a nearby school. Discussion focused on the condition assessment and guidelines. The board voted unanimously to accept staff recommendation, specifying full wood replacement for the three approved windows.
- Item 9 – 1415 West Rosewood Avenue (Siding Replacement): Homeowner Erica Russell and contractor Michael Spartan requested approval to install fiber cement siding (HardiePlank) over the existing original wood siding, which is covered by vinyl. Staff recommended exposing the original siding to determine condition and repairing with in-kind wood; fiber cement was not recommended without further evidence. The applicant expressed concern about weather exposure and delays if vinyl were removed. Commissioners agreed more information was needed. The board voted unanimously to continue the case to the next meeting (April 17, 2026) and directed the applicant to work with staff in the interim to explore exploratory removal and administrative resolution.
Key Outcomes
- Consent Calendar (Items 1-4): Approved.
- Item 5 (601 Burnett): Approved with conditions – fence and retaining wall as proposed; planters approved with height cap and moisture protection measures. Motion carried unanimously.
- Item 6 (115 East Carolina): Denied as proposed; staff recommendations accepted. Motion carried 6-1.
- Item 7 (424 Burlitzon): Approved with stipulation that fence height not exceed 4 feet. Motion carried 6-1.
- Item 8 (2129 West Mulberry): Approved – three windows to be replaced with full wood product; remaining seven to be repaired with option for replacement if rot exceeds 50%. Motion carried unanimously.
- Item 9 (1415 West Rosewood): Continued to the April 17, 2026 meeting; applicant to work with staff on exploratory removal and potential administrative approval. Motion carried unanimously.
Meeting Transcript
Good morning. I'd like to call to order the Historic and Design Review Commission compliance and technical advisory board meeting for Friday, March 20th, 2026. Can I have a roll call, please? Davis. Garcia. Regard. Here. Spiller. Here. Here. Pollug. Here. Speeds. Here. Um Vasquez. Here. Zapulvada. And Davis is here. We have a quorum. Thank you. Translation Services, please. Good morning, everyone. Buenos días. Las personas que prefieren escuchar esta audiencia in Espanyol. Thank you so much. Thank you very much. The compliance and technical advisory board is an advisory board appointed by the city council. I'm Jason Vasquez, Acting Chair. Juanita Cipul Vida is the chair. It is the function of the board to advise the city manager and all relevant city departments concerning certain applications for permits for properties in historic districts and landmarks. In considering whether to recommend approval or disapproval of an application for a certificate of appropriateness, the board shall be guided by the city's unified development code and design guidelines and standards that have been adopted by City Council. An appeal of a decision by an administrative official can be filed in accordance with the city's unified development code. If anyone present wishes to speak in favor or in opposition to any item on today's agenda, please sign up on the public comment sheet. It is not necessary to sign up if you are the owner of representative for a project on the case agenda. You'll be called on as the case is called. Case representatives will be given no more than 15 minutes to present their case with an additional two minutes to respond to public comments. Speakers for or opposed to a case will be limited to two minutes each. Speakers may also sign up to yield their two minutes to another speaker who has signed up. Anyone who is yielding their time must be present at the time the speaker is called upon. Speakers will be called upon in the order in which they are signed up. Following public testimony, any commissioner may call upon any speaker to respond to further questions. Approval by the board does not take the place of any type of permit. Permits must be obtained for all work. Certificates of appropriateness for work approved by the board will be emailed to you within 10 days. No work of any type is to be started without obtaining the appropriate city permits after a certificate of appropriateness has been issued by the Office of Historic Preservations. At this time, please silence your cell phones. What is the date? It's February 20th. Can I have a motion for approval of the meeting minutes from the February 20th, 2026 meeting? So moved.
openpublica.com