 Hey, well, welcome, everyone, to the City of Santa Rosa Cultural Heritage Board meeting, September 13th. We'll start out with a call to order and roll call. Okay. Board Member Boran. Here. Board Member Carney. Here. Board Member Fennell. Here. Board Member Klein. Here. Board Member Marslyn. Here. Vice Chair Garrett is currently absent, but we'll be here shortly. Chair Muser. Here. Let the record reflect that all Board Members are present with Vice Chair Garrett showing up linked. Thank you. Moving on to Board Business. Our statement of purpose, the principle duties of the Board include undertaking and updating historic inventories or surveys recommending designation of landmarks and preservation districts, reviewing proposed alterations to historic buildings, and promoting public awareness of preservation issues. If you are in a historic district would like more information regarding historic districts. Please see the process and review procedures for owners of historic properties. Real quickly if we can open up for public comment on that. We do not have any attendees via Zoom and nobody in person. Okay. We'll close public comment. We move to item three. What do you think about Board Member reports? Were we going to do that at all? I don't think we're doing anything except this, except the item for the special meeting. And then, and we'll. So no, no report from Ms. Murray. Either. Oh, no, I don't. I don't. I don't. Leah works. Study session. I have no reports. Okay. I do not at this meeting, but I will have a report for the next meeting. Okay. The special meetings because people aren't aware of them as much. Okay. I'm sorry. I apologize. Thanks. Just started. Okay. Moving on to item three. Scheduled items. And. This report. City of Santa Rosa. Resilient city changes. 2023. File number PRJ. 23 dash. 010 at background of city of Santa Rosa zoning code text amendment and a zoning map amendment for the resilient. City. Resilient city changes. And. Present her city planner presenter today is Christian. Thank you. It's all yours. Thank you. I'm going to share my screen really quickly. I will. I'm unfortunately hard of hearing. So. Okay. The more you could speak up the board would be appreciated. Good evening members of the board. Today I'll be discussing the resilient city combining district update. This is going to be. Talking about a few things related to resilient city that we have currently in the city. And we have certain measures for rebuilding. From disasters that were in place starting in 2018 that we're looking at changes by the end of the year. So currently we're looking at modifying our resilient city code section regarding a resilient city combining district. This currently is not within the historic combining district whatsoever because. These were adopted in response to the Tubbs nuns and glass fires. These are set to expire on December 31st 2023 unless amended by council. And these were created to address the reconstruction repair rebuilding and damaged parcels. From those disasters. This is also utilized alongside what we have is the resilient city development measures as well. So our project goals for this process and also coming here is to do permit streamlining to facilitate reconstruction. For any catastrophic events and then avoid any type of bottleneck during the permitting process. And reducing the review for any type of expedited review. So that would be reducing any level of if maybe a permit has to come to the CHP maybe it's reduced to the zoning administrator or to the staff level with the director review. So currently here has been our project timeline for the resilient city changes. We've gone through originally with city department feedback sessions in April and August. And then after that we reached out to a few developers about our design review process. And then we conducted a public survey about both of our resilient city ordinances. And then we went to the design review board for proposed changes that were pertain to design review. And then today is for cultural heritage board. Next we're bringing the entire project to planning commission for a recommendation to city council. And then we will be going to city council in November which would lead to the ordinance being adopted in December. We are currently looking at a permit streamlining for landmark alteration. This would be only be applicable to properties that are affected by any type of hazard in the city. We're currently working on that language right now for the upcoming ordinance changes. This would also help with reducing the process and time for rebuilding. Currently we have only gone through this process for hillside development and design review. So for areas that were affected by the fire they had originally they would be going to the zoning administrator or maybe even to the design review board for reviews for hillside development and design review. But our current resilient city measures reduced that to either zoning administrator level or to staff level to review these projects. This happened, that's still currently happening. That's because the ordinance is ending soon. And moving forward we're looking at making this process available for any natural disaster that happens in the city. So that's why we wanted to come to the cultural heritage where because that is a huge area of the city that could possibly be affected in the future. We're also looking at no longer tying this to a specific zone. So we're looking at no longer using the RC combining district but rather implementing it citywide so it doesn't have to go through any rezoning process with the city council. We have a few proposals to bring forward regarding resilient city landmark alteration processes. So the few of them that you can see here but I have listed four different types of projects. So separated between residential and non-residential. So we are giving you an idea about the residential project process. This would be reducing any type of rebuilding measures to just concept with a CHP and then going straight into the building permit process. Another thing would be going for residential projects going from CHP to zoning administrator. And then some findings they would need to cover would be listed under architectural compatibility so that is color, materials and pattern. Architectural features as well as district character. And then also thinking about the damage structures themselves that are considered historic. Looking at how those might be documented in any way or incorporated into the process. So that would be photo documentation in case these buildings might need to be taken down and we don't want to lose them forever so maybe we would have the property owner. Property owner have a photo documentation of whatever is left of the structure. Restoration would be maybe only a small portion of a structure is damaged. They can rebuild it or fix it or repair it and wouldn't need to go through as much measures and it would still be a part of the entire structure. Incorporation would be maybe the entire structure or majority of the structure has been damaged but there is still like a wall or a few up or any other determining factor. And then that's incorporated into a new design with the district character. And then also looking at possible historic report or historic evaluation for these projects to ensure they are still following our standards for historic preservation. Another thing to go over is that we have planned developments within the city. So these are areas within the city that kind of have their own type of zoning within the policy document. These are created to, there's a variety of reasons of why things are planned developments. They generally have their own standards because of specific reasons at the time when they were developed. A large majority of the parcels within historic districts are planned developments. So they have their own specific standards for those as well. We currently have a specific section in the RC zoning code that allows plan developments to go through different standards. But that will be being updated in the future. So to make it more clear of how these standards are going to be placed. And then lastly it's recommended by the planning and economic development department that the cultural heritage board provide comments and recommendations to staff about the proposed landmark alteration permit streamlining and the upcoming resilience city zoning code text and map amendments. My information is listed here. And please let me know if you have any questions. Thank you. Thank you. I have given this subject quite a bit of thought this last week. And trying to think about a way that the board could be the most productive and giving you information that's going to go on then to the planning commission. And I'm assuming the planning commission then will have a draft that they'll actually review. I think that might be a good idea. I think that might be a good idea. I agree. So because we don't really have kind of a draft of ideas. I drafted something up. And if everybody's okay with it, I'd like to just so that it goes on public. Maybe go ahead and read it. And I think that might add to creating some discussion of our board as to, you know, what, what things we might want to consider or think about to be forwarded to the planning commission. Do you good with that? We're trying to bring it up so we can have it on the screen while, while you're, you're going through it. And so members of the public can see it. Exactly. Okay. Yeah, it's going to be pretty hard. But if anybody's watching it on zoom and then towards the end of our discussion out, I will open this up for a public comment if there's anybody in the public. So anyway, I kind of handed this out to everybody. It's also was listed as late correspondence on an email to you that came out today. And I just titled that major disaster properties located in H combining districts. And for some of the new board members, you may already know this, but in case you don't, any area that's been designated a historic neighborhood has been identified on the zoning map and it gets a dash H after the properties on it. Miss Marie correct me if I'm wrong. And so that's what kind of makes the neighborhood identified specifically and those properties with the gas. So whatever they, their zoning was they get this addition dash H to it. So they call it acid combining district. The purpose of this document is to generate discussion around policy needs should a major disaster such as fire, earthquake or flood occur in a historic neighborhood. The disaster would involve the entire if the disaster could involve the entire district partial district or selected properties because changes to contributing structures within historic districts require either a minor or major landmark alteration permit. This document attempts to address the rebuilding needs of a historic district should it be impacted by a major disaster. So I kind of broke down some different scenarios. So the first scenario is a historic district with a major loss of structures identified as historic contributors. So should the percentage of loss contributing structures be greater than the number required to originally create the historic district, the following action shall be taken. And I'm, I think I've read somewhere I couldn't find it that when a historic district has created a survey is done and there's a count basically made of contributing structure versus non contributing structures and if there's enough contributing structures it makes it an historic neighborhood. So in this first scenario if you had a loss of so many of those contributing structures that was greater than really what was required to be. So a couple of options. First option zoning map amendment. After a survey of the affected area affected historic neighborhoods zoning map could preserve the historic district. I'll bet smaller while allowing rebuilding of loss structures under the provisions of 2028 100 that's the dash RC document that we saw the second option, removing historic district designation after a survey of the affected area, removal of historic district designation would occur if the loss of contributing structures is so significant that exceeds the number originally needed to create the historic district and geographic all location of the loss would make it impossible to adjust the zoning map for the affected historic district rebuilding would then proceed under the provisions of 2028 so those are two different things. One is we just redraw the map and actually we wouldn't be able to we would recommend to the planning commission to recommend to the city council to redraw the map or if there was so much loss like what happened in Hawaii it's really no longer a historic district it's all been lost. Two historic district with minor loss of structures deemed as historic contributors total destruction of contributing historic structure of the rebuilding of a totally destroyed structure with an historic district would be treated in the same manner as building on a vacant lot within a historic district therefore requiring major landmark alteration permit the new structure would need to comply with the identifying characteristics of the historic neighborhood and this will be an area for discussion for us is do we really need to require a major landmark alteration permit or could we do some of the things that are being suggested as far as having the zoning administrator handle the review of that or just after concept review just forward it on to building permit. B is partial destruction of contributing historic structure to repair rebuilding of a partially damaged structure within a historic district should be done in a manner to repair the structure to its original design and again if we're going to do it to a traditional design that might be something that concept review then straight on to permit process or we could stay with as it is now requiring major landmark alteration permit especially if they're going to be making changes in the process and then the third item is kind of a combination of both so you have a fire that maybe took out one of the streets or one of the area but you have pockets within the historic district but there's still enough left in the historic district for it to remain intact so you might have a rezoning map in our map rezoning the neighborhood as well as these pockets damaged or completely burnt down structures for major and minor landmark alteration permit requirements all fees associated with major and minor landmark alteration permits shall be waived losses of historic districts designated as a dash RC combining district shall receive expedited review by the CHP through the process of holding special meetings as needed and I would think that if we had a situation like this or we had a major we should be available to meet as often and as frequently as needed under a special meeting context to keep things rolling historic properties to be repaired in the same manner as they were built would be done so with a minor landmark alteration permit new structures to be built within this historic district would require a major landmark alteration permit five, removing historic designation and zoning map amendments to historic neighborhood designations a detailed survey of the historic district shall be conducted to determine the extent of damage and loss to the historic district the CHP should receive a recommendation for removing historic designation or amending the zoning map associated with the historic district CHP should provide comment to the planning commission if it is believed that historic district designation should be removed for the zoning map for the district changed and CHP special meeting shall be conducted to determine the extent of expedite review process and then finally additional considerations due to the additional complexities associated with historic districts and what makes this different than even the hillside or coffee park is that H designation because maybe the hillside was complicated because of building on a hill but the historic districts because they're collectively a historic element and so I think I feel that this new zoning language that the historic element needs its own section so anyway it is recommended the PED assign a single staff member for performing a post-incidence survey of the affected historic structures and oversee the rebuilding process so with that I'm going to jump back to staff or the other board members if they have comments or thoughts or clarification on what percentage would you say that it would have to be the buildings would be roomed or whatever to take away that designation of historic is there going to be a percentage point 25% of the buildings 50% or how many buildings were required at the time to make an historic district so I have 75% are burned it would lose its designation as an historic district I would think we would go back to the original survey that was done I don't know I don't know there was a number of percentage I don't know I know that we have we have our preservation districts we have a lot of properties outside those preservation districts that also are historic that don't have protection generation but I think I think yeah ultimately I'm sure concentration would play a role ultimately it would be the city council making that decision so whether or not it's a preservation presumably that would be on the recommendation of the city yes and that's the local designation there are other designations there's state and federal as well but if you look at the federal I read through all the federal information on the rebuilds I think this is pretty right on in terms of the federal and what our purview is I would I mean there are a couple of minor things I change in this like if you built on a vacant lot like the one on mcdonald avenue did they have to get a major landmark alteration just to build a brand new building on the lot yes yeah okay so that's one question and then I think we should clarify what the identifying characteristics of the historicity what we mean by that and what I've always assumed from our local guidelines and the federal guidelines is that you that is the pattern of the fenestration of those buildings and the pattern of the roof pitch and the materials used but that preferably the building be easily distinguished from the historic buildings so in other words like they've done in London to build a glass and steel building in an historic district is appropriate if the fenestration and the roof pitches are so large to the other buildings in that neighborhood I think that's always been an issue in Santa Rosa talking these through but I'd like to see some language like that added to this and I don't know how you I mean I think this this how do you know down on two part B if you're repairing a historic building how do you differentiate between the repair of the original building which you'd have to do my questions that's a repair in other words you're going to because your siding material has lived out its life and so you're going to replace the siding you would want we would want the siding material to match the original siding material because it's being repaired if you're doing an addition to the original structure I think that's where the Secretary of Terriers talks about differentiating something that would look blend compliment but stand out itself as this was added on there that's problematic because for instance in my house that I used to live in that siding is not made so it may have been made and is that something you want to require of and that's why I kind of feel that the processes that we see these are all discussions we would have if it were coming to the board and decisions that would be made if it was coming to the board and I know we want to expedite the process and but at the same time too if the historic district has remained intact there's also an obligation to the remaining property owners within that historic district and that's the reason why we have the major landmark alteration process and the minor landmark alteration process is to have an opportunity for us to discuss those things as well as open it up for public comment and public feedback from other neighbors and things as to how they feel about the design of that building so it's kind of on one end we want to rush it through or get it going but on the other end we also want to take into consideration that this is a historic neighborhood and possibly we still need to keep some of our processes intact I think the goal of this is to streamline process so I talked in the previous meetings about getting before the cultural heritage board through the concept design review which Chair Muser mentioned in his discussion and that's something that we can get pretty quick one of the problems where that can be problematic is with signage and the noticing process and we could really look at that and ease up the noticing so neighbors are still getting noticed but that concept design review process gets it onto an agenda with zero staff analysis it gets it on the agenda with a memo and that way the board can review the plans and make recommendations then moving into the next phase say if they were to follow all of those recommendations or get a report from a qualified professional that supports otherwise maybe something a compromise there that they could go straight to building permit for I think with the rebuild I think we went back to if it was major it went to minor and if it went from minor it went to director I think I don't know if that's how we did it at the get go for also it was delegated down to director all the way even for commercial I think it says for processes that would go to commission that would go to ZA I don't know if that was the original but those are some ideas what we did before you can see in that ordinance that was provided as an attachment to the memo is that it took things that were major projects and bumped it way down for minor projects and gave them to director level the process was intended to be very expeditious to get whether it's one person or 3,000 people that have lost their homes the goal is to get them back in the home very quickly and I completely agree that the so understand that that's when it's going to occur for somebody who has when their home has been demolished which could easily happen I mean you think about it if the fire started you know, wherever in the fountain probably burned down through the valley and through the proctor neighborhood it would take out McDonald's it would probably flip over to Cherry Street and then to Bourbon I mean if it's that big a fire it could burn a huge amount of the city because all those buildings are wood almost all of them I mean if you stuck up buildings and in that you'd have the high school which although it's not designated that's one of the most historic buildings in the city you'd have a whole lot of other major landmarks from the city so I do think it would have to be expedited because how would how do you get it done? and I think that's why there should be language that gives opportunity to undesignate a historic neighborhood and that would free up if there was so much damage if if the council was able to very quickly undesignate a historic neighborhood then you could fall back to whatever you have there without that yeah and as well as a language that would allow remapping if you had just a street or an area because like I say the reality is what makes it is the structures and if the structures are gone even if you built them back as close as you could they're still not and it shouldn't but if there is a building that is of value that's still standing that building should be treated under the historic code so for instance the McDonald mansion if that were to be a less standing that should not be raised just because the rest of the district is gone something else we do in our accessory dwelling unit ordinance we give people an option to provide design it the second unit like this when matching the siding materials color types of windows or provide a report from a qualified historian or we get up to you to figure out whose qualified to do that report but as an alternative of going for landmark alteration minor landmark alteration they provide that report and we look it over if we've got questions we know who to ask but that's an option you're going to have people in a catastrophic event with a lot of loss you're going to have people that do things that you don't want them to do but generally speaking people do the right thing and giving them really the goal here is to make it as easy as possible for them even I'm encouraging you to think outside the LNA process that that report after review if it meets certain standards and you can advise us on those standards where if they meet all those standards that they go straight to building so food for thought it seems like our discussion is kind of coming down to what do we want to do as far as the major landmark alteration permit requirement in the case of a major disaster and do we want to allow for concept review only and then you know the zoning I think it should at least go to the zoning administrator not just go direct to permit a major reduction under this circumstance or do we want to maintain the requirement of a major landmark alteration permit but maybe figure out a way to be able to fast track it a little bit more so to give some context to that when a major landmark alteration comes into the city or a minor for that matter it's not just planning staff that reviews that permit it goes through our building or engineering or water fire department everybody gets so it's not tough to expedite that and it's even tougher to expedite 100 of them let alone we've already seen 3,000 and in that case we brought on independent permitting staff and there were mistakes made standards were not followed by the homes built and in the end I think that even where those mistakes were made it was a really good thing over in Coffee Park I think Coffee Park has really turned out nicely you know for the most part but so I mean again the goal I'm assuming but I think the goal is really to make this as expeditious as possible and I don't think it would be reasonable to ask the board to be here 7 days a week yes depending on maybe the amount of destruction if it's complete destruction and the two homes next to it have all you know the other properties flanking it have also been destroyed maybe at that point it doesn't require I'm just throwing out ideas but we're looking for that kind of suggestions for you and I think can those suggestions come in after this meeting via email yeah absolutely we're happy to take any suggestions here today and then via email to Christian the only caveat we have is our timeline and we are moving quickly and that's just because both Resilience City sections expire at the end of this year and we want to make sure that these provisions are in place before the expiration so yes I think we can definitely take a look at the plans prior to the plan our deadlines are pretty soon another thought I was having to many of the waters just because that's what we like to do you know this is what we're taking forward to the Planning Commission and Council is codification of the Resilience City development measures that were developed and have been updated periodically since 2017 and so we're dealing with existing code language that we're putting into sections that make sense and modifying as needed this is creating something new that wasn't in there and it wasn't in there because the just the calamities that we have had have an impacted preservation districts right so another thought could be if this is more complex then we can do in this short period of time you know we might be able to say let the Council know that we also want to address preservation districts in this but it's more complex and we're going to come back I know that you want to move on to other things just to give it more time so we can move forward to what we have and amend that section later it's just another thought are there national guidelines like FEMA I know Mark DeBalker worked for FEMA for a while and went to disasters and made instant decisions on things would it be worth consulting with Mark to find out how how they if they had any guidelines for those decisions we have city staff that have been over helping the line fires and FEMA has a lot of there we may be able to just ask what's going on over there we might be able to get some guidance because there were a lot historic properties but you can't rebuild an historic property so it would be the ones that are left and it doesn't look like we have very many historic but the banion tree an arborist has weighed in and said that the banion tree was going to be down that came back with our building official I guess my thought is just and maybe it's totally all wrong but I just didn't want to have a situation where an RH designation combining is suddenly in a historic and it's all rules are off you know you build whatever you want and some of the neighborhoods are really challenging because some of the neighbors share a driveway with a joint garage in the back some of the neighbors have a driveway that's right along the edge of their house and then the garage is in the back these are a little narrow lots that you would never prove today that if fire was to go through there how would you rebuild those lots and how would you still allow a joint driveway but share in a historic neighborhood the answer should be yes the answer should be that's a defining characteristic of the historic neighborhood that they that's what made that all apart and those places looking the way that they look and I just think in a historic just because it is a historic district we just need to have an element you know if a disaster happens in that historic district that will kind of cover that and maybe after the fact or something might be a way to address that I don't think that this ordinance will address every situation that comes up and we all clamor on to fire there are lots of other things earthquakes can have some pretty devastating impacts as well and I think you're right I think after we see what happens there's probably going to be some urgency ordinance that comes up behind to assist and rebuild but to get us to a point where even with the smaller catastrophes you know it's one of your homes that goes down if it's an individual one single structure of fire or if it's a city block there's a gas main problem or something like that you know and I am I don't know the historic building code and we would certainly like that I don't know the official delay in on it but my recollection is that all the new structures that were legal nonconforming have been found and had to be reconstructed with current standards and we made provisions for them to still get through the process expeditiously but that's certainly something that we can look into but because I agree the other doesn't the reconstruction I don't think any of us have that and that's a problem because some of the historic district blocks are finding in West End you've heard kind of us banter so board members have I thought you were sort of gave some answers on how to handle different situations so is this a recommendation it may be a how things are handled based on circumstances generally I think we're going to probably leave it to staff as to determine what they want to move forward in their draft document but really hoping to get some feedback and again it doesn't have to happen today this is a lot to handle today you can certainly you've got to avoid the meetings even on a topic like this but I know that you can have certain you can have conversations with board members there are board members we all know they have a little bit more experience but again they can't talk to everybody and there's a reason for that education is okay education is not so there's a reason we have a 7 member board so I would encourage everybody to think about it and really look I'm happy to send out a couple ordinances like the ADU ordinance that has how we got people the state said you cannot ask for any additional entitlements meaning we can't ask for a landmark alteration in structure and preservation district if it's an ADU but we had to make some in order to avoid it you have to comply with this or do this I'm going to say a lot of times we talk about those reports and stuff but those reports are darn expensive they started about $4,000 amounts for the smallest of changes and they go up from there so somebody who's willing to do a report like that and get a certified professional writing that historic analysis that person's willing to make the investment in my opinion generally speaking there's always going to be the one ox but they're willing to make the investment to preserve the neighborhood so those are things that are food for thought for you all we're looking to you for a direction I have a question so ultimately what should we focus on in terms of coming up with a plan or a process that we can submit to the city or however it goes but do you want us to come up with a process to address these issues in historic if there's a disaster in the historic neighborhood yeah so what we're proposing in the presentation is some of the ideas that we have we would also like for you to weigh in on any kind of processing and permitting procedures you would like this is a great example of offering something to us the attachment from the chair definitely anything you can think of would definitely be very beneficial we just do have a very tight deadline so we'll be available after or via email or phone call if you have anything that comes up as well did we get a copy of your presentation it's on your agenda oh I didn't see yeah I can show you that and I think just the key to touch on the blue presentation yeah it comes up and the key to any comments from the board is really going to be looking at trying to streamline the process and make it easier for folks we all saw with the 2017 fires people just want to get back in their homes and they want to deal with going through a hillside development process or design review and to the extent that we can address the concerns of the board and what you guys look at through this process but through a streamlined way that's really kind of what we're hoping to get is there a way that the city can mitigate I don't know quite what the wording is for that but it's a 145 year old building and it burns down and you would want to build something else there that's equivalent not necessarily mimicking the historic building the codes the current codes are so different that the expenses just to bring everything to today's code is going to be extremely difficult so I don't know how you deal with that I think that's covered by homeowners insurance there's a problem because the homeowners insurance doesn't want to pay for all those upgrades people found out some hard lessons some people didn't have the clause in their homeowners insurance that would allow for code upgrades some people didn't have enough price per square foot to rebuild that I don't know I think that's more of a I don't think that's a city thing I think that would be a female thing homeowners also people need to realize they have to figure out what the rebuild is for the square footage for their own and I tell people all the time look if you were to rebuild now my house almost burned in the 2020 fire the glass fire six other homes are how we did and you just have to look what is it, is it 450 square foot is it 550 are you going to want those fancy pillars that are going to cost 40,000 a piece you've got to add all that extra but people need to be educated about being insured correctly and that was the big problem with both of those fires a lot of people were under insured so it is an issue do other cities have do you know what their codes are for the historical district has that been looked into what they're doing what I can let you know is we're one of the first cities to even have a resilient city ordinance and a couple cities that happened that were kind of may have followed ours we were kind of modeling a lot of things that are going to be happening because we were one of the few places that even had a disaster at this level so that's something to consider so if I was to just kind of condense my comments I would basically the direction that leads from me I would give would be to create a process that would expedite the rebuilding of homes by allowing the undesignation of historic districts if deemed necessary based on what was said or the remapping of a historic district or the ability to fast track our current major and minor landmark alteration processes without compromising the integrity of the historic neighborhood because we do have an obligation to those homes that remain in the historic neighborhood we don't we don't want to you know somebody survived and they got their little bungalow and now this T111 thing just got built next to it you know because it was fast track so anyway so that's that would be that might so that would be the fast track to adhere to the characteristics well yeah or allow allow staff to deem what they feel would be inappropriate I think at a minimum a review by the cultural heritage or at a concept review at a minimum and at a maximum the full scale you know because I know what you're saying with the major land we got to do the noticing we got to do it just it's gonna and with if you have quite a few numbers it could just really get rid of the major what did you say well get rid of the major landmark yeah and I guess what I'd like to keep is the what the elements of the major as far as the the it kind of protects the character defining elements of the neighborhood or it gives an opportunity at least for a review of the board but maybe get rid of the all of those other things that slow it down anyway yeah and I'm like Sam open for any process it just doesn't doesn't compromise the neighborhood the remaining neighborhood are there archives of all the historic building and we do have photo record of quite a bit of them I don't know about every single building but we do have a drive through survey that was conducted a couple years ago that have been used during all of the the binder still exists somewhere they do right by my office they're right by my house you should bring those to a meeting sometime and you have I have one okay every house in the historic district and then the that were done every yeah the contributing structures there's also a lot of photographic history the library of course the library does I I'm just going to throw out food for that again again so I know there's concern about some not that we need to discuss this day but when you're when you're putting together your recommendations I really hope that everybody takes a little bit of time to put together a recommendation and like Jessica said keep an eye on streamlining we've already seen the council waive all fees I'm just going to assume if it happens again they're going to do something along those lines but in the streamlining in terms of I mean like if the home that burnt down the home that vanished still had surviving neighbors and we saw that in a lot of neighborhoods right one random house was burnt or one random house survived there's no explanation for it but what if you know if something were there it's a I'm thinking of the Burbank Gardens district if there's single stories you may not want a double story a two-story coming into the neighborhood so think about stuff like that that could maybe keep people if they keep the same you know again roof if they keep these certain character defining elements which by the way are listed in our zoning code we codified them with the downtown station area specific plan in chapter 20 28 something and I can go ahead that's in our preservation district combining district I'll go ahead and forward that link to you too but if they were not not rebuilt like a historic building but still had those like the roof patch single story double story whatever the articulation maybe that's something that could get somebody right past right past that that landmark alteration permit and save them a ridiculous amount of money on a historic report again that's in a situation when the whole houses is gone and you I've said you can't my little thing which you can't rebuild history but that at least keeps that compatible so can we eliminate like we don't want any T11 signing but we already you know what we already and I you can propose it you guys that's I personally would be extremely supportive of that we have it in our design guidelines no T11 but then I've had people come in and say oh T11 doesn't just look like this anymore I don't even have the discussion because so few people are wanting to use that now people are going towards a hardy board but the other thing to consider too rebuild is requiring somebody to do do you mind how much you paid per shingle for your home well that's not probably an appropriate example $10 a shingle yeah so I mean it's very yeah but and there's beautiful shingles but shingles like for like you may have similar right it's kind of like wood windows you can't find wood windows unless you go to a restoration but the board has given us the ability to improve wood windows that are modern wood windows double-paying in the life all around the home that's the what we just want to do that so and again I like to say I think if your draft report if probably what I'm hearing at least at a minimum a concept review you know at least have a concept review I think the board really would like to see in concept we may not be in a position because of the emergency and everything to be in a decision making position but at least we could get feedback and then whoever the entity whether it be the zoning administrator whatever could take that feedback and go from there and in reality it's a good possibility it's going to be a higher contractor a consulting agent I mean that's what happened it may not even be your office your people that the feedback goes back to well maybe a clause that requires that individual to have a certain qualification no I think that's a good idea if it is a historic district that we try to keep it away from a group of contractors that are brought in to handle a situation like coffee park this coffee park to me isn't great so I think you can go down any street in coffee park and go under insured, over insured, under insured under insured, over insured and you can literally look at it and go okay these people did really great under insurance and these people were screwed and I think you can do that in preservation districts too you can see where there was workforce and there were the people that had more money but and just for clarification it wasn't, the contractors did the rebuild but we hired people to do the plan check and that is where that's where it's going to get approved I mean that's where the materials have called out so again I'm throwing out suggestions but I'm hoping that all of you can there be something that that's been done by a city actual employee rather than subcontract to approve within a designated district I just wanted to give some background on the data for that so we were able to pull a report for all the tubs and then fire parcels that were affected or designated RC so just for tons of nuns fire those were 2,644 parcels and from 2018 to now we've had 2,000 building permits finaled so that's quite a significant amount so I want you to think about that number when you're thinking of recommendations and the other thing to think about is yes they were contract folks that were doing a lot of these reviews but they had qualified planners in there and they were working under the direct supervision of our city staff members so they were not doing anything that wasn't in a direct line with the provisions and the direction given by city staff and I'm not aware of any city staff that have the qualifications that you're looking for I'm not aware of any city staff that have the qualifications that you're looking for I'm not qualified to write I would suggest that staff to the cultural heritage board should probably be in charge of the re-building in those historic neighborhoods No, that's a question Other comments? Patrick? I think that what Susan was talking about is someone's going to build something that is within the characters that we can in these preservation districts then they should be streamlined past any review that we have or maybe not I mean I'd like to say any review but then who's making the decision I guess is kind of what we're all a little bit hung up on but I think that's absolutely and someone wants to do a rebuild of close to what kind of what was there or something along those lines and it should absolutely just be a concept review like a repair to what was there a rebuild to what was there My understanding is that a rebuild a repair to what was there a rebuild to what was there I my read of the Secretary of State not to mimic but to remain compatible and with those those character defining elements again with the driveway depth of front yard three foot fence in the front yard those and those are all listed those were approved by the cultural heritage board we used to know it as Resolution 209 and we finally caught it and Mark Bakker was thrilled yeah I was going to say Mark is it true that some of those houses that were rebuilt my coffee park in those neighborhoods they had the plans as they were built got streamlined to be rebuilt on those previous plans they were except they had to be brought up to current standards so where we were I'm sorry yeah I can answer this was also like a previous question too about reconstructing things the way they were in historically we do have provisions for non conforming structures and uses so we did allow them to do generally the same thing as long as they're up to current building and fire code but it still allowed quite a few things to be as they were as long as they rebuilt in a certain timeline would that dictate what materials they use in the current it depends on what the building and fire requirements are but they might allow it to continue there's been some indigestion over shingle shingles and also shingle roof that's understanding forches decks vents in the home there's a lot of new fire and also interior sprinklers systems not as a big upgrade there's also a trigger for some of these things so when things were brought down to staff level review for hillside if they expanded over 10% of the original building footprint if they were doing more visual changes or environmental changes that would bring it back up to the zoning administrator level but other than that it was kept at staff level if it was generally similar to the original building I know you're under a tight time frame but just as you did a category at hillside is there possible to just throw something that category of the short neighborhood yeah we're already planning to do that I guess one of the things that when we talk about bringing something back some of these districts didn't become districts until what, 2000 yeah richwix yeah richwix so a lot of these homes started out as historic and then over the years they were you know when we talk about bringing them back you know my house is one of those awful plate houses but I had right before we went historic the owner that I bought it from put T11 up and took out all of that wonderful sign and took it all down and so in a situation like that and like the property that we had a few weeks ago that had a different sighting and then they're saying now that it's a different sighting you know we need a little bit of guidance some kind of concept review yeah repairs or if it is you know having a place all of the sighting and stuff but what was the sighting what would have been the sighting in the day I don't know that we could use a catastrophe to require people to restore I think if it was legal non-conforming they would be given the ability to go back with the legal non-conforming which is you know that whatever I'm assuming the person who owned your home and events hopefully they had building permits to do that work but it's not you need to know but yeah so if it's legal non-conforming but there's the benefit of it coming to the board on a concept review basis because restoration process if I'm going to use your house again as an example if a fire started at your neighbor's house and spread over and took out that wall it's you know you've got to reconstruct your wall the benefit you know if you're somebody who doesn't understand what the preservation district is about the benefit of coming to the board for concept is that you get that education there are a lot of people who are going to come just because it's required and say I got my plans already and this is what I'm doing exactly what was there before but there are others that will say wow that sounds like a really cool plan and it preserves the district and it makes my house work more money so anyway so that's just again I don't require anything that was legally constructed which by the way includes quite a few of those narrow driveway structures right and those are the ones I don't know that they could be reconstructed in the exact footprint I would have that we would have to defer the building you almost have to let them because there are lots that you know lot of lines and I think alone I would just have to defer to our building division on that I did not know the answer I'm trying to remember and I may be wrong but I think the cultural report does have the ability to adjust setbacks I think that's limited in historic neighborhoods so again there could be opportunity so the difference the differences setback is the zoning code district design standard whereas you've got the building code that requires certain access if it's building code the cultural heritage board might at least not that I'm aware of I don't think any board can supersede that you just have to let that process well trying to maybe think about trying to wrap this up let's kind of move towards final comments or staff I have one more question to throw in there I'm still worrying about the standalone historic buildings like the post office and there are a fairly large church of one tree but there is a large group of standalone buildings and how do we have those some designated and someone designated yeah right but I mean there are not these designated post offices designated their properties all over the city and unincorporated area a major disaster that just burned down for whatever reason just a one-off what would be the yeah I knew it wouldn't replace them but if they're damaged this I think is this ordinance intended to go for the one-off as well as the it is intended yeah so if it's designated and it has that if it's designated it has the dash H even if it's not in a district and so then if it's damaged and they want to do repairs it would need to follow the landmark alteration process so then we don't have to separate those two just everything we can to protect the cotton town sign I would also like to state we don't this doesn't have to be like perfect I would want you to know that both resiliency ordinances were updated around 12 times since 2017 so just know it will probably be changed when that happens on so when do you want us to have this ready like at our next board meeting well that's next week right we're not saying it again so we need to decide today we're just providing comments today and then if you have additional comments that you can email so you're going to take our comments today yes we're taking your comments today and if there are you know if you have additional comments that you want to email to Christian we would gladly take those just for Christian sanity if you could have that by your next meeting next week that would be lovely yeah would it be possible to see the draft prior to the planet commission meeting at this point at this point well look we can't provide it prior to the planning commission so yeah but it would be posted the week before so we always see it at that time and so the board can definitely provide comments on that that you know staff can take a look at and you know if we could get those prior to the meeting then we can take a look at it and be able to provide any response to the commission okay so this is pretty good so thank you it's just food for thought yeah and so will I heard I heard from a few but not all that there was some support for dropping down to concept in an effort to expedite concept review and then go for either director level or director level so did I excuse or even a someone that's been specially assigned that has you know those kind of qualifications to to deal with the historic structures in the historic districts something that has that high for that a number of of board members that do it there'd be some other comments final comments I don't have one more because I think that runs that on as far as if there is such a total loss that it should just it should boost the start doesn't matter entirely on that then it becomes really cool and the quicker you can make that happen and the quicker it would be people that just roll into you know you still don't think there should be like well if 25 percent is ruined they have to comply with how those buildings were it's 50 percent ruined that it's not a historic ability should there be you know still certain amounts it's gonna be so hard to tell me if it goes away entirely and the rest are mains yeah so it's gonna require a survey a legitimate survey there I hope we don't see that in our lab time other thoughts other comments I'm going to go ahead and open this up then for public comment we don't have any attendees via zoom and nobody in person I'll close the public comment period last final thoughts I'll call for adjournment then thank you all very much thank you