 Thank you, everybody. Again, I appreciate your patience. We know that you're tiring. And we are back in a session with case number three, please. Excuse me, sir. This item is D-2017-061H. This is 205 of the Historic CD proposed to the North Historic District. This was previously continued from the February 21st hearing. There were total of 209 notices mailed, 86 notices to property owners in the subject area. 122 notices to property owners for the 200 feet and to the Tobin Hill Community Association. We received 14 responses in favor, 44 responses in opposition, and Tobin Hill Community Association is in favor. We also received a support letter from Beacon Hill Area Neighborhood Association as well as support. And the applicant, which is the Office of Historic Preservation, is here to request a continuance. Good afternoon, Madam Chair and members of the Commission and Kathy Berger-Design and the Deputy Historic Coalition Officer. I'll keep a brief comment. So we are requesting a continuance at this time. There's been an indication from the property owners into the boundaries that there is still some questions and that they'd like additional information. This is the second in three public hearings that are part of the designation process. Currently, I just wanted to remind you that one of the properties within the proposed boundaries are currently under interim protection. And any modification to the demolition would be reviewed as if they were warranted. You are asking for how long to a continuance? Continuance to the June 20th meeting to give us an opportunity to schedule a follow-up meeting with community owners and property owners. OK, thank you. I am seeing some unhappy faces. And we are going to continue with this hearing. The applicant has asked for a continuance, I think for the good reason of wanting to have more dialogue. But you are all here. You are signed up to speak. And the commission still has the option of whatever motion we want to make. We can vote for continuance today. We can vote for approval. We can vote for denial. We can have all those motions that we would send to cancel. So we are going to go ahead. You are free. You're signed up. You don't have to speak today if you don't want because there's a possibility of a continuance. But you are more than welcome to just go ahead and speak. As planned, we will hear everything you have to say. We will have questions for staff. We will treat this as a full hearing, even though the city has asked for a continuance. So first citizen, sign up, please. First one, I have this rick shell. Hi there, my name is Rick Shell. I live at 430 East Mistletoe. I am a resident homeowner. And I have to express to you guys my displeasure that you've had seven different events of the historic process. I'm a little frustrated by that. That being said, I do want to say that today you're going to hear support from longtime residents who have lived here their entire lives and have family in the neighborhood. You're going to hear support from a man who grew up and he loved it so much, he bought two more homes in the first district. He lives in Monifesta now, which is also historic. And he wants to preserve the homes here. You'll hear support from folks who own homes and are raising their families in the Patent District. You'll hear support from people in the surrounding neighborhood because they see the need for us to stand together against unchecked development. You'll hear support from the Tobin Hill Community Association, who recognizes the need to stand for the residents of our neighborhood. You'll hear support from people who were informed by OHP, came to public meetings, and decided for our neighborhood based on facts. You already received a lot of letters and supported this change that came directly from people within the district. And the question that I would post to this commission is how many of the letters of opposition were verified in the same manner that the Office of Historic Preservation verified the 51% necessary to move this process forward. It's a question that you need to ask yourselves. I can very easily go and get my friends, send in a letter that I'm opposed to something when I don't live within the district, and I may have other ideas about what's going on. One of the things that I would also like to ask is that as you hear everybody, you have to realize that we're trusting you commissioners to make the right decision for us. HDRC has already approved the merits of our historic designation unanimously. That's already happened. Okay, we are helping that you do what's right. You don't listen to the negative arguments, the misinformation that has been perpetuated around, and the false petitions that have been going around, and that you listen to the people that live in the neighborhood to move this forward, and that you approve our historic designation. Thank you. Next speaker is Nikki McDaniel. My name is Nikki McDaniel, and I would like to express my strong and enthusiastic support for the historic designation of the proposed Tobin Hill Park Historic District, important to that. My husband and I have been resident homeowners at 401 East Missile Toe Avenue within the proposed district for more than 15 years. We have talked with our neighbors and attended multiple neighborhood meetings and two historic and design review commission hearings to learn as much as we can about what historic designation means and offer our support. The proposed designation is supported by a diverse coalition of both resident homeowners and landlords who own rental properties and who have lived in those houses, as well as those who are new to the neighborhood and those whose families have been there for generations. We also have significant support for the historic district for local business homeowners who see historic districts as having special appeal and contributes to our economic vitality. A core group of supporters has led our neighborhood through an open, inclusive, and fair decision-making process. With factual information provided to everyone in both the Michigan family, as a result, we establish a practical vision that expanded our civic awareness and commitment among our neighbors. Together, we work to take responsibility for our neighborhood. This process has produced a responsible decision to seek historic designation. Already we've found that our pending historic designation has empowered us with a voice to uphold the integrity and character of our neighborhood when HDRC recently denied approval for a developer's second attempt to build a high-density multiple-family housing project on a single-family lot that was inappropriate for our part of the neighborhood. We were able to speak at the HDRC hearing and make our concerns known. Consequently, the developers gone back to the drawing board. We believe that proposed to them no more historic districts exemplifies a larger vision for our entire single-family community. Architecturally, our neighborhood is charming and diverse. A wide variety of homeless houses in the house are represented in no-two houses in a lot, but perhaps more important is the cultural diversity represented by the people who live there. They're all ages, a mix of ethnicities and races, and come from all walks of life and have a wide variety of backgrounds. One of the things that's part of our neighborhood is MS-Wide Census, which developed in the early 1900s. And we truly involve this bearer, Sam, in the neighborhood. We're excited that they're coming to historic, and thank you so much for your support. Thank you. Carmen Hernandez. And just to tell you who's next, so that way you're ready, after Carmen Hernandez will be Federica Cusner. Well, anyways, I'll look at the year if they go speak, but no, I'm not. I just wanted to tell you that I am 1,100% in 40. Federica Cusner. And then on that, we have Mark Stilman. I'm Federica Cusner. I live at 405, this is Marvellus, for the home town in Houston. And I am beginning to give an official statement of the Tougendale Community Association, but first, I'd like to thank you. First of all, historic designation has a unqualified support for the Tougendale Community Association. So, this case was approved by the U.S. DRC. It is now in the zone, not in the U.S. DRC. Third, there are always going to be people who are not informed, who think that Dallas is the capital of Texas, and you can't change that. And this is rescheduled to June. It will be the third time that the community has been asked to come out and support this. It seems to me a bit much. I'll read this as quickly as I can. I believe you've had it already in your practice. Members of our association have attended meetings of the residents of East Missile, Dallas, and Wyoming streets concerning historic designation. We can vouch that there has been real community involvement in the process. The northern part of the Tougendale neighborhood is a monocosm of a historic development in much of the city of San Antonio. It was plated when there was a rock quarry in the vicinity, and when the upper labor of Sequia was still evident enough to be used for a boundary. And by and large, the houses you see there today are the original ones, built for the workers at the quarry and the pearl brewery, as well as the manager and small businessmen of the city. It has remained residential because people want to live and raise their families on streets with that look and that feel with trees and sidewalks and the neighbors near by. It's part of the residential core of the neighborhood contributing to its historic character and enhancing the quality of all our lives. The new comprehensive plan for the city emphasizes growth of population density in areas close to downtown. That can be a good thing. It keeps the city alive, but this part of the city is already alive. Higher density must not be accomplished at the cost of the very thing that makes San Antonio unique. Its small town feel and its own but vibrant neighborhoods close into the center of the city. Our historic neighborhoods are part of the signature of our city. Historic designation will give Missaldoa a layer of protection from peaceful demolition and unwise development while allowing it to continue to live and breathe as a contributing factor to the character of this community center. I thank you for your attention. Thank you, good job. I'm just going to come. I'm just going to come. Mark Spiegelman and on the back is Cynthia Spiegelman. I'm seating my time to Ben Irving. All right, next is Cynthia Spiegelman and on the back would be Jose Trevino. Good afternoon, my name is Cynthia Spiegelman. I'm the president of the Beacon Hill Area Neighborhood Association. On behalf of the Beacon Hill Area Neighborhood Association I'm writing in support of the establishment of the designation of historic district for Tobin Hill North. Our downtown neighborhoods are experiencing unprecedented stress as we move into the future. These neighborhoods established in the early 20th century are unique and once gone they can never be replaced. San Antonio cannot be great without its great historic urban neighborhoods and that helped define who we are. There's nothing wrong with development for density but it must be compatible with its neighborhood and the only way to guarantee this kind of development is to the historic district designation. Beacon Hill was told as we face the threat of incompatible development that are only sure recourse for protection was to seek an HD designation. So we don't understand why then Tobin Hill North is under threat of continuance and possible denial especially when they've gone through the numerous public meetings, gathered the required majority of votes and their application for an HD designation has been unanimously approved by HDRC. The denial of this request will have a chilling effect on all neighborhoods seeking an historic designation. Tobin Hill North has been encouraged to seek neighborhood conservation district designation in the place of an HD designation. There's some obvious problems with this approach. The developers understandably have stated they're unwilling to wait for the year that it takes to develop NCD standards. The NCD does not necessarily protect a neighborhood from incompatible development as evidenced by the recent developments in Beacon Hill and this is not what the majority of the residents want. What is at risk is not just the preservation of historic buildings and architecture but of a community. Preserve this neighborhood and help them welcome compatible and neighborhood friendly development. Please support the establishment of their request for a historic designation for Tobin Hill North. Thank you. Thank you. Jose Trevino, Pondack will be Gloria Herrera. Trevino is not one of these people. Gloria Herrera, Pondack will be Yvonne Pizazzos. I'm Dr. Lava. I live on FILE 2 East Mistletoe with my husband Bruce Norton and I support the designation for that historic district for Tobin Hill North. I want to say that post the designation of historic also own rental for their own homes in the area and they rent out their homes but they do not live in the district. I think it's been a benefit to the neighborhood for it to be a pending historic district in October 2016, Terramarket proposed what I thought was inappropriate development at 421, 425 East Mistletoe Avenue and it was brought up at the last meeting that the majority of homes have spacious front yards and backyards and my house on East Mistletoe has quite narrow trees, pomegranate trees. My name is Yvonne Ponsack, what she said. Some people own the property and they'll live in the property but I have been terribly concerned with this property since I was born and came home from the hospital many, many years ago for that particular house. There's so many unique qualities about that house that it's impossible to tell you all. I brought two maps that I have along the way I have collected different things and I'm going to map out our area. One is from 1909, the other one is from 1912 and the reason I brought them was because in the spiritual way that's what this neighborhood is. It is a journey of the spirit for me because I feel very attached but it's also something that has to do with our history. San Antonio is unique and if you allow these things to happen people to come in, build, not dance stuff we're going to lose that uniqueness and all of that income that we supposedly were going to get is going to disappear but first of all our soul is going to die. That's part of us and so I ask you please, please consider what you were able to see in the night. It had to do with what I wanted to tell you about was that the Tocqueville was originally called a rock quarry neighborhood but the rock quarry neighborhood first appeared in the late 19th century. The legend has it that the mortar used in the Alamo Mission came from this area. Many of the city's focused limestone buildings were made from rock taken from the quarry. My family in fact was said to have donated stone of San Fernando Cathedral from there. The families that worked in the quarry settled in the area on streets such as East Missile Hill and Ewart, which used to be called East War. Many of the oldest families still have descendants living in the old rock quarry neighborhood. One of the most inner city neighborhoods, the grandchildren and great-grandchildren of the original families still live in the area. The legend of the old rock quarry and the strong culture that still bonds the families, bonds is strong to me at 30 seconds. Thank you so much. Vivian Rul, followed by... Bring him back to you. Albert Adias. I'm sorry, followed by Andrea Bernardo. Hello, I'm Vivian Rul. I am, my husband and I live at 370 Missile Tote. We bought that house three years ago, roofed in from Bernie and we love it. It's just a charming street. Every house different, mostly small, single family homes. We would really like to protect the character of that neighborhood. I didn't grow up there like he did, but I grew up in a neighborhood very much that and it feels like that. And there are people with children who are enjoying that cozy feel that a neighborhood like that has. I ask you to protect it. Thank you. Andrea Bernardo, followed by Albert Adias. Andrea, the single, three-nilized, my name is Missile Tote, this is something I see here. Into the Missile Tote Street in 1967, very happy in that neighborhood. Her grandchild and great-grandchildren were born there and she hopes that the neighborhood will stay as it is. You really appreciate that. Thank you. Thank you so much. Albert Adias, followed by Paula Starnes. Good afternoon, commissioners. My name is Albert Adias. My family moved into Tokyo in 1960, seven years old. And I lived there for a little man, probably about 40 years before I moved to Montevista, but I still own three rental properties in the proposed historic district. And I can say about the houses that they should be preserved from the favor of historical designation, but one thing people don't realize, they can drive by there to see these homes. You have to go inside to see what these houses look like. The woodwork, the pine floors, some of them oak floors, but there's also a species of pine wood called longleaf pine. That pine is hard to find. It's a shame if anybody would start destroying these beautiful homes in this neighborhood for any reason. And we're under great pressure by the previous discussion at Dignity Hill about putting the markets behind somebody's house of a conservative neighborhood, but they have to conform. And since I also lived, like I said, for about 40 years in Tobin Hill, and I lived in two of the houses in the proposed district, and I can see why these other neighbors are so passionate about giving historic because they want to preserve their homes because they live in them, they want to pass them on to children, grandchildren, and what have you, but they want to have an intact neighborhood because it's under great stress. So I hope you all vote and agree with our historic designation. Thank you. Paul Starnes, followed by Senator Levy. My name is Paul Starnes. I lived at 219 East Magnolia for 27 years, and before that I lived it on East Mistletoe and rented for seven years. So I've been part of the neighborhood for 35 years. I'm here to speak in support of historic history because we've got to maintain our neighborhoods throughout the inner city before somebody destroys them. In addition to my support, I have a letter here from another resident that I would like to read. Zoning commissioners, this is from Kathy Kitch who is president of the Dairy Marketing. He says, please know that I am in full support for the designation of Historic District for Tobin Hill Norm. I own the office building at 2520 McCullough, which houses a digital advertising agency. One of our clients, Ditten Communities, has been defining San Antonio residential community for over 70 years. I've learned a lot from him. It's simple. If you have a quality neighborhood which was thoroughly planned and constructed, the value of your property will be retained. The added bonus, Pride of Ownership, creates a safer, more stable environment. Being in historic district keeps that concept intact. Everyone that works in our building provides our clients with beautiful, well-thought-out design on a daily basis. Of course, we want that to extend beyond our working environment into our community. But then, this is from Kathy Kitch. Thank you. Sandra Levy, followed by Lynn Swanson. Well, I'm Sandra Levy and I live at 104 Ewald and that is the little one street that goes up and looks like it's dead-ended, but it's not, there's a blimp around. We just got that street paved after a five-year begging with the city. It finally happened a couple of years ago. And the houses on that street are a maximum, my name is the biggest, it's 600 square feet. I bought my house as a care-down in 2007 and the roof was like this instead of this and the foundation was completely gone. So, these are not historic houses. These are little old houses that originally were built in shotguns in 1994 for the people who were building the quarry, filling down, going to the quarry and getting stoned. My house has been added on to four times and it's 600 square feet. The historical designation is gone, it's ruined. There is no historical to hold up. My house was made as modern as possible when I redid it so that it would hold up as a form. I haven't seen anybody try to take down anything and I've seen about six houses since I moved there that have been remodeled and they look great. They look better than they did, but nobody is coming in to tear down the houses to put up a parking lot because the lots are not big enough. I am confused that I thought we were talking about rezoning to make multifamily and I don't want it to be rezoned for multifamily because there's no parking. But to make it historic is gonna give the historic societies some big problems because nobody there can afford to do what historical societies require of you when you wanna paint your house or you wanna add on or you wanna improve. You have to do what they say, not what you might want to do and I wanna fix income as most of the people in my neighborhood are and I'm old as most of them are and we don't want anybody telling us what to do with our houses. We're not gonna tear it up and try to make it into something that Montevista has or what those other fancy neighborhoods are. We're not the fancy, we're the bawdy-o, the merry-o and we need to survey that way. Thank you. Lynn Swanson followed by Daniel Trevino. Can't hear you. Hi, I'm Lynn Swanson. I'm speaking in opposition to the opposed as it mentioned as historic for this neighborhood. I'm sure many of you are very familiar with the process of this. The fall of 2016, OHP Office of Historic Preservation sent out postcards to all property owners in the proposed area and asked for a vote of either for or against for approval or against historic designation for the neighborhood. During the process, some of the properties owned by people who were known to be opposed to this designation were removed from the proposed district and the district was reduced from about 99 properties to 88 properties. Then in December, a meeting was held in which OHP announced that they had a majority of the neighborhood voting in favor of this designation and they took over jurisdiction of the neighborhood. Apparently some of the meeting questioned the majority vote at the time but the whole process went forward and historic went forward with their plan to take over the neighborhood. Since the December meeting, OHP has not publicly answered any questions about the results of the vote or reinstated a sketch that had been on their website that showed all the lots in the proposed area with the votes that they had received. Despite many questions about the website sketch and the actual votes, no information has been forthcoming. This lack of transparency and a definite silence led some in the neighborhood to try to fill the information vacuum by doing a survey of their own. Their survey indicated that a majority of the homeowners are actually now opposed to this designation. I asked the chief vote against this designation based on the fact that neighborhood support has not been demonstrated by OHP and in fact, the majority may feel very differently. Thank you very much for your time. Thank you. Next person, Daniel Trevino, followed by Cynthia Pujol. To who? David McCullough. David McCullough. Okay, next person is Cynthia Pujol, followed by David Hongola. Okay, David, you're next and you have 12 minutes. My name is David Hongola. I'm a property owner of a vision proposed district. And I first would like to make a request that the opposite house with our preservation withdraws its request for a continuous. We ask that this be decided today one way or the other. You're about to make a decision on an issue that is deeply divided in one's harmonious neighborhood. The proposed historic district is full of long-term residents whose families have shaped and created what it is today. It has undergone many transitions and for the past several years has been a hotbed of renovations for redevelopment. The majority of the properties within the proposed district have already undergone improvements, which are not in the future to be approved by the historic commission. It is these very improvements in development that have made the neighborhood we all love what it is today. It was accomplished without the interference of mandates on appearance and design by a government entity. For those who may not be aware of the background, the application for a historic was originally filed with an effort to stop the owner of the property at 425 East Mistletoe from developing their property as they desired. They had applied to become an IDZ and to put poor individual properties on each of their two blocks. A petition was circulated in the neighborhood in opposition to the rezoning, but its effectiveness remained unclear. The applicant was advised by OHP that simply submitting an application to credit start this commission, they would stop the demolition of the property until the application had run its course, which would take up to one year. The application was filed, the process started, and OHP took over during jurisdiction of what happened in the neighborhood. Unbeknownst to the applicant, the property owner had already received permission for demolition and the building was removed. This commission, later, against the recommendation of its staff, denied the application for an IDZ. There are many, many concerns with the ways and method that historic processes move forward. There has been great misinformation on all sides of the issue, and to this day, few people have a complete understanding of the impact it would have. This hearing has already been delayed twice in an effort to allow more time to present all of the options. We attempted to look at creating an NCD as a compromise of sorts to protect the look of our neighborhood. Our councilman organized a neighborhood meeting and they tend to do just that. But unfortunately, that meeting quickly spiraled out of control, and as it developed and people speaking out of turn, yelling over each other, it was infiltrated by people from outside of the neighborhood with a great and personal agenda, but something totally unrestricted. As we all know, in order for a historic application to move forward, a 50-month percent majority of the property owners in the proposed district must be in favor of the designation. The original application included 99 properties, which would have required 50 of them to go along. By converting the opposition to the IDZ and to support for a historic, the process moved ahead extremely fast. It is still unclear how the votes were counted or tabulated, but we received word that a majority was reached and the process would move forward with only 45 property owners in favor. We then learned that the map was gerrymandered. A number of people in opposition were taken out and the number of properties reduced from 99 to 88. The support for a historic was rapidly decreasing as people were changing their minds once they were informed. The staff and leadership at OHP knew at the time of the HBRC meeting that there was no longer 51% support. Rather than ask for the hearing to be delayed, they pushed it forward and the HBRC reports have secretly voted directly in the district we've created without the consent of the residents. Many of us believe that the process was conducted in the matter contrary to what is stated in the UDC, but that is something that will be sorted out by people in the know in the coming weeks and months. A number of us have been canvassing the neighborhood, speaking to our neighbors, disseminating information and gathering signatures in opposition to this historic designation. If we revert back to the original application which included 99 properties, I believe we can document that over 70% of those have not given their blessing to a historic designation. And as you can see on this map, all of the red ones are people who are opposed and have signed petitions, they have copies that are opposed to it, putting the opposition at 60.2% of the current 88 properties that are there. There's also a reference on the list that you have 12 additional properties who are gerrymandered out of it. The proposed district who are also in opposition to it. So the opposition to this is great and so ardent is this opposition, particularly on the East half of the proposed district, that the property owners there have banded together in the process of creating a new neighborhood association. That would include 66 contiguous properties in the 400 to 700 block mistletoe, including Ual Kingsport and Valentino. The bylaws have been written, the officers selected, the application is filled out and ready for submission. As it would overlap the current voluntary association, you are prepared to seek permission from the Secretary of State's office to create a mandatory association. 90% of those people in that proposed new association simply just want to be left alone and are against the historic designation. And we're going to ask at the least that this area be removed from that of the proposed historic boundaries. The close examination of the neighborhood would show homes typical to any other home you would find living in their little 410, which could be considered, while it could be considered an old neighborhood, there's really only one building that could be considered to have historically contributed to the neighborhood. Yes, there are many stories of personal family history and the families that have lived there various times during the growth and development of the city. The stories are not unique overall and shouldn't be used to dictate further growth and development. When one considers the history of the city, the prominence of the leaders and the people who develop it, what future historians will write about, I'm not aware of anyone that would be included in those annuals with you from this neighborhood. Nor am I aware of any structure in that proposed district, except for one, that bore me significance and created the neighborhood that it is today. It had been a neighborhood in district care that had been slowly revitalized mostly from west to east and only a handful of properties remain that had not been updated. The renovations that had been made had not affected the look or feel of the neighborhood. They have made it what it is. Almost 60% of the houses have replacement windows that would no longer be approved by HDRC over 30% have entry doors that would most likely not attain approval. A majority of the properties on the east end have changing fences which would not meet historic criteria would be extremely unfair to impose these new expensive standards on the few who have not made upgrades to the properties. The owner of the property of 425 East Missile Road, the catalyst for the whole process is already obtaining approval for his project from the HDRC. The construction on the property will be in the style and matter of feeding the neighborhood. This historic designation is simply not needed to retain the look and feel. There are a few other lots on the street also designated for movement. I'm sure you will hear from them that they have no intent or desire to develop in a manner on befitting to the area. All the property owners in the area whether they have lived there for generations or relative newcomers have all had equal opportunity to research with the development potentialers for the neighborhood or has been whether within the recurrent restrictions those are guidelines. The applicant who had only lived in the area for a couple of years has self-professed have fallen in love with the neighborhood as it was. It is now asking you to impose new restrictions against your neighbors who created what you loved. I ask that you do not further this rift in the neighborhood and we could allow the deep division to begin to heal. We do not want to live in such a deeply divided community and despise the derision, name-calling, labels, and political activism that surrounded this issue. If your bones for the designation are small I'll be a very vocal minority. Do not let their voices draw the quiet majority who simply want to be left alone. Please vote to deny this historic designation and send their recommendations to the city council for putting this position at this application. And once again I draw your attention to the matter of the great amount of opposition to this by far the majority of the entire proposed district. Thank you for your time. Thank you. Thank you. Sorry, I stopped doing this first round. You get the spirit, it's a game. All right, thanks. Next you have Ben Fairbent. Ben Fairbent, you have two minutes. Six minutes. My name is Ben Fairbent and I'm a big cool team and I'm from East Mongolia and I serve by the Insolium Passwords State National Program Health Center and the Association has been given today by the strategic push of the IAMS to take this as an individual today in support of the proposed change that created the Tobin-Hell North Historic District in the case of Z-2017-061. Most of the arguments, both pro and con, and there have been many of both, but I have heard in recent months concerning the proposed historic district have addressed the perceived effects of the change would have on residents of the district and or on those who would either build in the district or have other non-residential interests in the district. These are all valid and important concerns, but I would like to suggest that it is both valid and important to take a wider perspective as well. Let me explain. About 45 years ago, Ben was a new PhD experimental psychologist by training. I was teaching introductory psychology at the Mexico State University. I sought to prepare a lecture that would show students how the methods of psychological measurement might be reloged to everyday life. In order to do so, I prepared a lecture based on a book by Kevin Lynch entitled The Image of the City. And as inside, I recommend that folks strongly to all who are performing tasks such as yours as members of the Zone Commission. I faced now the task of compressing a 50-minute lecture into six minutes. Lynch and his associates in Massachusetts do the technology, do the well-established methods of experimental psychology to investigate how people, both residents and visitors, build up internal or mental images of a city. They determine the kinds of elements that city builders abstract from their cities while they're being done. They found a fairly small number of kinds of elements. These kinds of elements include edges of cities, and I believe it's said that one of those edges are diffused in May as the city peers off into the surrounding territory. Roots within the city in San Antonio has well-fined routes, especially the limited access highways and main thoroughfares such as San Pedro, Larson-Laura Street, East and West Power Street, and other. Landmarks, San Antonio is well-endowed with landmarks including the LLM, the Pahala Randall Air Force Base, the Riverwalk, the Mission, the Tower of the Americas, Market Square, the Boots, and many others. And finally, for this condensed presentation, neighborhoods such as San Antonio's downtown, King William, Aloha Heights, the Furl, Margarista, and quite a number of others. Very briefly, link these techniques such as asking residents to reveal, asking residents questions to reveal the residents' internal representation of the city. How do I get to the San Antonio, from the San Antonio Development Services Department to the Air Force? How will I know when I'm getting close? How will I know that I'm there? What will I pass on the way? Why is all of that relevant to this case? Because Lynch and his colleagues in studying three cities in detail and many others, less intensively, found that it's the number, the distinctiveness, and the richness of such elements in the images of those who know the cities that give cities their perceived character, their memorableness, and the richness of such elements in the images of those who know the cities, excuse me, their character, their memorableness, and much of their appeal. I believe that by creating the Toman Hill North Historic District, we will add to the city a memorable, distinctive neighborhood that will make San Antonio an even more attractive and interesting place to live than it is now. The city with an additional appealing and important asset. In conclusion, we do not get such chances very often. And when they go by, it may be that they will be gone forever because once too many changes have been made in a potential historic district, it will no longer be appropriate to consider it for a historical district recognition. I therefore urge you to seize this opportunity to change the city for the better, to make it a bit more memorable, interesting, and appealing, by increasing the diversity and distinctiveness of the neighborhoods and the vicinity of them. My name is Clay Nobley, and I own the property at 712 East Mistletoe Avenue. I am in complete opposition to the creation of the Historic District. Now I clarify, I am in favor of preserving any and all historical value, but I know that my street is not holding. Except for Little Alamo, a property located at 629.5 East Mistletoe. The entire push for a one-street historic district was done so in an effort to stop the owner of 425 demolishing two of the ugliest duplexes that ever built and including the property. I think it's a gross misuse of historical designation as a tool to stop re-zoning efforts. After the application had been submitted and people actually began to get the facts about what it would really mean to get a historic opposition skyrocketed. Many of the initial supporters that held briefs of 51% had signed because they were either not informed about all of the facts or had been annoyed and pressured many, many times by that. After having been informed, the opposition is now at more than 70%, and there is division in what once was a quiet, unified neighborhood. I please ask the zoning committee, you're not recommending the creation of the Mistletoe Historic District to city council. The people of this neighborhood just want to be left alone. Thank you. Cherise Bell, is she still here? Next is Marilyn Courchesse. Shadow Lee. So no Marilyn Courchesse. She had a good work. Can you state the people that are left, whether or not they specify this for us? Cherise Bell in support, Marilyn Courchesse in support. Next is Cindy Miller. Good afternoon, I'm Cindy Miller. I live in Tobin Hill. I'm here to support the historical designation, and the reason that I'm supporting the historical designation is that what we're seeing throughout our neighborhoods is kind of a mining project. Our property values are going downtown. When I bought my house, people thought I was crazy. People looked at me and said, oh my gosh, you bought the house where? And they looked like they'd throw up. And now I say, rather than people, oh my gosh, that's so cool. And so there's been a sea change in the downtown neighborhoods with the Riverwalk extension, with the Pearl District, with much of the desired ability of our downtown neighborhoods increasing. I've heard a lot of conversation about neighborhood conservation districts. I hear a lot of people say, we just want to have an NCD that has teeth. I've been in planning meetings with our city planner. I've been in our neighborhood meetings, and what I've found out is that NCD has no teeth. NCD does not protect us. Zoning and historic district is what protects the character of our neighborhoods. And without having historical designation, anyone from anywhere, and I might point out that some of the people who are speaking for us are not residents of San Antonio and are certainly not residents of our downtown neighborhoods. And I think that if you're coming from Houston or from the suburbs, you may not have a accurate picture of the character of the neighborhood. And so I think that one of the ways that we can protect our neighborhood, Tobinfield did not go as historical as an entire neighborhood, like King London and like Monte Bista. Our neighborhood is very diverse. We are home to industrial sites like Flasher. We're home to the huge Methodist hospital complex. We have such a diverse neighborhood that when you look at our NCD, I mean, at our neighborhood plans, our residential neighborhood in Tobinhill is a very narrow swath of Tobinhill. And to protect our neighborhood, it seems to me that going historical is really the only real protection that we have from urban development, which is going to be a lot line to a lot line, modernized high density. And so I hope that you will support the historical designation because I believe you'll see more of us coming forward in the future. Thank you. Okay, real ideas, followed by Lydia Kelly. Oh, I'm sorry, not Lydia Kelly, followed by Susan Furman. So the next person I have is Susan Furman, followed by Kyle Rueger. I'm sorry, I think that he just gave this time to someone who already spoke, so we need to understand all that. I was told at the beginning I have a statement from a thing. Okay, so since you already spoke, if he can either read it as a statement into the record or he can have somebody else read it, that is cited once in a lifetime. My name is Karen Carrillo, I live at 7.00 from 7.00 East. This is what I have a doing. I support the preservation of our neighborhood. I live here, actually, all my life. I've always seen my neighborhood as unique. It's quiet and calm. My family's lived in the neighborhood since the 1800s. I miss my phones, I miss the toilet, I miss my business. That time was gone, my father used to hang his hands in my room during virtually the same, while the business had evolved. The point is that he never looked into the same thing. Over the years, they've seen people agree that their phone was prepared, my father made changes and upgrades, but then two drafts were made. On May 6, 2017, a lady came to my house requesting a time application against the historic destination. She said it was to just hold off on going to the store and get everyone to enter on the channel, only through the path of the neighborhood. She said under the historic guidelines that they're conditioning it's facing the street, which we've all managed for me. It's that way it's on a corn house. That I would also be to the mercy of the people. On the historic review board, we're bringing types of cosmetic corporates with changes outside of my house, and that I might not be able to discern the items in my art, and in my law, we need to be maintained to an extra degree. She also said that in the historic guidelines that there's no work that says the wage fee. Can I tell us what we can do to this side of our homes? Alluding to the idea that we may not be able in the future of what we can and we can do inside of it. I feel like she or Conrad, have their research in front of you does have applications for wage fee and the guidelines. I feel that historic guidelines will be good for not only me, but my neighborhood as well. It's also coming in my quest to restore my house to a form of glory. Regards, Ken, period of the 7th, 2070s. This is what I'll have to do. Next is Susan Furman, filed by Kyle Bruceby. Good afternoon. I'm Susan Furman, I'm the owner of the property at 107 Ewald and also the owner of the property at 719 Missaltoe. I'm opposed to the historic preservation of this neighborhood. I feel like if you're a responsible homeowner, you take care of your property and it does not need to be made historic in order for you to preserve your home. I took the property at 107 Ewald two years ago. It looked like a dog house and right now it is one of the cutest houses in the neighborhood. I would not have been able to do that. I had permits, electrical, plumbing. I followed all the city permits and if it was made historic, I would not have been able to put shadow windows by the door and in the bathroom as code consists that you do nowadays. And I took a house, like I said, that was a dog house and made it into a beautiful small two bedroom house on a very tiny block. Thank you for your time and like I said, I oppose this historic. Thank you. Thank you. Kyle Bruceby, you're followed by Richard Horne. I'm Kyle Bruceby, I'm the owner of the property at 525 Missaltoe. I'd just like to thank you for your time today and reiterate some of the comments that I've heard. The one is, we've been told not to listen to me because I'm at this time in the community. That's talking. But what I am a part of is the silent majority of those in this office or this is for a preparation district. I do note that this is an issue that has divided the community immensely. Practically, if it could be split, as David showed you, the entire, not entirely, a large majority of the eastern portion of the proposed historic district is actually against this proposal and this level of destination. Take this out, we just don't want to be involved. Western portion of the street, if they'd like to be involved, by all means. Take this out, they're on the request. This is not an inclusive process that others may believe too. That's why the city is asked for an opportunity. It strikes me that I'm not a member of the BKHL New York Association because BKHL doesn't represent me because that's not where I live. Historic preservation is not the only way forward. We can't look at NCPs or NCPs that have to. There's something that can be read about. That's something the city would like you to discuss with me. That's why the city continues. Yeah, just basically, please resolve this today. Can I get rid of this nasty nature that I found on the street? Next, Richard Moore, followed by Michael Nicole. Richard Moore, president of the original 1979 Tobin Hill Neighborhood Association. I'm also a 50-year resident architect of Tobin Hill. I was present when the historical staff fraudulently created a Tobin Hill Historic. You ever even beat the hill coming over here trying to impress me. I feel that at this time I would recommend to this commission that you continue with the continuance because you have been shown a plan of most of the residents of Mistletoe against this historical designation. I'm an architect. I have confronted and faced the historical board. It's a very arrogant board that dictates their own personal taste as far as architects are concerned or non-architects on this commission. I strongly, strongly recommend that this thing be continued as staff has recommended because I would recommend that the city clerk send out a registered letter to every resident on Mistletoe, not East Park, not Magnolia, but residents that you are considering historical today because I don't trust the historical staff. So therefore, I think the city clerk must have a registered letter to every resident on Mistletoe to cast their vote either yes or no. I strongly recommend that this area not be designated as historical because they did take their own personal touches to your own property and it's my property and I can do what I want to with it. Thank you very much. Michael McCool, Anissa Schell. Just a reminder, we have a lot of people left to speak and we don't have time for applause. Michael McCool, Anissa Schell. It's Michael McCool. Oh, sorry, yes, that's right. Michael McCool was speaking, guessing against that column and didn't check it out. He poses, he is representing 629, each miss above the other property. Okay, thank you, we got it. All right, Anissa Schell. Followed by Judy Boat. Good afternoon, commissioners. Rick is casting out some of the many, many mailers and pieces of information that we shared with neighbors in our process for gathering signatures as well as giving information about what is your presentation looking for our neighborhood. I'm a homeowner and resident living at 430 East Mistletoe, Aberdeen. We're kind of three kids. We moved here in 2014 and we're raising our family here. We're within the boundaries of the proposed historic district. We are in support of the historic designation for Towson Memorial. The opposition is right about something. Back in September of last year, one of our properties was sold to a developer and they proposed building six single-family homes on their two lots. At that time it was presented as one lot. It was a high-density zoning. We came before you in October and opposed this project. It was a catalyst that unified our neighborhood. We had several meetings and actually, at their suggestion, we met with the city regarding the Neighborhood Conservation District as well as historic designation to find out what would be best for us so that we could protect ourselves. We voted at that meeting to file for historic designation and I filed their original application on their behalf. At that time they worked with the Office of Historic Preservation who I contacted and they guided me through the process of how to collect signatures, how to talk to people. We had several meetings where information was bashed out in both English and Spanish. They were inclusive of everyone within the district because the Office of Historic Preservation nailed the invitations. When some of the properties on Valentino expressed that they did not want to be included, we dropped them out of the district changing the boundaries because we did not want to force it upon them. We've had seven meetings about historic designation. If people still have questions and they have not attended meetings, I cannot speak for them. We have presented factual information to everyone in English and Spanish and we understand what this designation will mean for our neighborhood. We're excited to be empowered as residents to have a say in how our neighborhood continues to grow and develop. Tobin Hall North is situated perfectly to be common in historic district. We're bordered on two sides by none of this stuff. The other side by River Road into the south is the already established historic portion of Tobin Hill. There's no region we should not consider historic. Preservation is not about resisting change. It's about properly managing change. A historic designation for our neighborhood will empower the residents here to have a say in the future of Tobin Hall North. They're proud to receive the recognition of becoming historic and a gift to our community. I would like to ask those in support to please stand up. Judy Boe, followed by Jeannette Laugh. Good afternoon. I thought I was the last speaker, but it was someone signing it after me. My husband and I on the house of 510 Smithletown. I was truly surprised that there are not more people here speaking in opposition to this because I know almost 100% of the people who used to my home are in opposition. And 510 is sort of in the middle of the block, or maybe a little bit to the west. The only thing I want to say is that some of the people in favor of historic designation have come in that an NCD is weak, is only weak if you make it weak. It can be very strong and block anything you want to block if you make it that way. Some neighborhoods have made theirs weak and they have suffered for it. We don't want to make it weak if we have an NCD, but that is for discussion. What I'd like to say is that we always like to think that in America, majority rules, and we'd like to say that the vast majority of people on East Smithletown are in opposition to historic designation. And I hope you can take this into consideration when you vote and please vote today. It's been continued so many times. We've got to get this up when we go. Thank you very much. Jeanette and Lana, that's all that's on the speak. And Jeanette, that's signed in opposition. Thank you. The city is the applicant. It was, of course, your choice not to do the full presentation, asking for the continuance. I'm going to give you the rebuttal time, but just like with everybody else today, I'm holding up to a time of three minutes. Thank you. I don't really know what else there is for us to say. There was a lot of information by the speakers, both on both sides of the position. I would say there's some misinformation, but I think that that's been kind of common throughout this process, but not unique to this process in all zoning cases, as well as historic designations. Sometimes there is misinformation floating around out there that we hope that they will contact our office for clarification. For example, we're going to do units, we're not going to ask anybody to take out their window units. I will say that there's confusion about what's historic and high-stile and what is not high-stile. Monodist and King William get mentioned quite frequently. That's only two of the 27 districts that we have, and not all of the districts look like King William and Monodist. And the HDRC and OHP do not make decisions through recommendations based on personal preference. We make those recommendations as professionals trained in the field in accordance with the UTC and the adopted design guidelines. We welcome any opportunity to provide information, whether it's online or at a community meeting. And of course, I'm here if the commissioners have any other questions. Okay, thank you. We are going to start with questions. I'll start with Commissioner Diaz-Sanchez. Some questions for OHP and for staff. And I'm sorry. I know a lot of the people in the room are aware of the various processes, but I would like for it to be on record regarding the 51%, the changes of the delineation of the border, how that relates to your policy, and how, if that policy is being revisited, and with the multiple issues over the course of this year. So from the historic standpoint, and what the UTC says currently, is that the property owners are asked to let us know if they are in favor of an opposition of initiating the process for designation. Currently, the UTC requires that 51% of the properties indicate that they are in support of initiating that process. There's no current effort to change that. There has been discussion, which there usually is when we're in the middle of the designation, but there's no effort at this point to amend the UTC. So I just ask what are the benefits of zoning something historic on a property owner is one, not aware, and two, not in support? If a property owner is not aware, then there's probably either they're deceased or they are in a facility or not getting the mail. We sent out multiple notices. If you visit our website, you'll see samples of those notices that we sent out, and we send them directly to property owners. I know that sometimes things don't make it once, but we try to do multiple mailings to make sure that they do get through. And I'm sorry, what was your second question? I'm just interested if you don't reach them, what are the benefits of rezoning if the property owner has not been notified? That is not, if that is not verified. So for instance, I understand it is OHP's policy to get 51% of the majority in order to start the process, but at what point do you reevaluate that percentage? So we keep track of the percentage along the way. The UTC only requires that we reach that threshold to initiate the process. It doesn't direct us to stop in between because sometimes that figure can fluctuate because people get information and could change their position along the way. So the UTC gives us that threshold to at least begin the process and hopefully continue the conversation at these meetings or in meetings in between. The benefit to moving forward, we're talking about the designation of the historic district that impacts all of the property owners, not just them individually. And so if there are a few that are in opposition, we'd like to know what their position is, but we don't feel that that should stop the process so that that can be revealed along the way. Perhaps they're in opposition for a number of reasons and if there's any questions that we can answer for them to help them making an informed decision and that's what our role is along the way in this process. Do you currently know, we've been as a commission presented with various percentages, people standing up, I know people have left, we have been sent emails individually in groups, there have been multiple meetings, but I have to be honest, as OHP as an applicant, it has been very unclear on how that percentage has been fluctuated. It makes it very challenging to make a determination on this case whether or not there is a majority of support. So what is the percentage currently and how have you been affected that? So I don't know the exact number, I do believe it's under 40% at this time and I will also get with DSP staff to see what notices they receive. I don't know how many of the 40-something notices are actually the property owners within the boundary or if they are the adjacent property owners. But the number does fluctuate because every single day we get the information on both sides. The UTC, the fact that the percentage changes does not change the fact that it is an eligible district and that at one point we did meet the threshold to begin the process and so it can fluctuate in either direction along the way. So is your request for a continuance to have a better understanding of that percentage? Because I understand that it fluctuates but it's important to keep track of that fluctuation in order for us to make a determination. We do want a daily basis. My point is, is that the percentage along the way does not affect the process because that has already been verified. It is currently in the process. So while we're in the process it is important to acknowledge that changing percentage. Absolutely. Absolutely, but it doesn't stop us. It doesn't give us the direction to stop the work that we're doing. And so the reason for the continuance is to provide another public meeting to reach out maybe to the individual to reply in the CARS development service system, make sure that they know about the public meeting so that they can come and get their answers to their questions or to just simply let us know again how they feel. Thank you. Oh, I have questions for staff. Can you state, again, when the notices were mailed out with the initial report at the beginning, when that was issued, the number of notices that went out, opposition and support? So in the beginning, when the case was originally considered, it was originally considered on February 21st. So we typically send notices out at least 10 days prior to the date of the hearing. So our policy has always been about between 12 and 13 days. So with that original notice that went out, there were a total of 209 notices mailed. 86 notices were sent to property owners in the subject area, 122 notices to property owners within 200 feet. We received 14 responses in favor, 44 responses in opposition, and that includes the petition that we have received. And of course, we received notices from the Neighborhood Association or Children Health Community Association and Beacon Hill Area Neighborhood Association support. And it's the other commissioners to ask for more questions. I have comments, but... Okay, let's start at the end and just move down. Some of the things that were said, so I think I've already known a little bit. So things like the shadow proof windows are those not allowed in historic, right, districts here existing properties. My understanding is that they're not required to change whatever is existing, right? But if they want to make recommendations, I mean, you know, so yes, they can make changes to glass. If there's a requirement for shadow proof glass, of course, they can change that glass. There's in the guidelines, there's absolutely nothing in the adopted guidelines that say prohibited. There's nothing in the adopted guidelines that says you cannot. What is in the guidelines is this is what's recommended. This is a recommended treatment. If you would like to request something that's not recommended, you can do that in the HDRC, which we have an approval rating of 98% of all the applications that are required. That's your interpretation. And... You might as well stay up here for a while. I think, how would you say that at least after you hit 51% or more in favor? Thank you. Does that include the property owners and the effectiveness of them? That's the actual property owners within the boundaries. So, you have actually received the 21% of the property owners in favor of the process? Yes. Before we called, I don't have the date in front of me, before we called the original HDRC meeting, we verified by phone and email. 51% in support of initiating the process. Has the boundary has been changed since you started the process? Yes, the boundary has been made smaller, and I'm sorry, someone else asked me that, and I'm sorry I didn't answer that question earlier. So, the boundary was reduced, and that was in a conversation coordination with the applicant. It's not unusual for that boundary to change along the way for lots of reasons, whether it's a properties are being impacted and by other ordinances that provide protection, or if they are just not in support of being part of the district, and it's not meant to be underhanded, it's really by nature of the process which you want a higher percentage of people in support. So, producing the boundaries can achieve that. You dare to keep the same old boundary, which is still having the 21% in favor? I know, if we kept the original boundary within, although there's nothing in the UGC that says that it has to remain, you can change the boundary. It's a real quick staff, excuse me, what are the number of staff for the, if you had 209 that were sent out for the U of U? The 209 notices mailed, 86 of those were sent to property owners in the subject area, 122 notices to property owners within 200 feet. So, of those mailed out, 14 responses received in favor, 44 responses in opposition. So, do we count the 120 that are just surrounding the property area, because they're not really affected? Yes, they're included in that number because they're within 200 feet of the proposed zoning. And so, we send those to property owners within 200 feet of the subject area, as well as the subject area within the zoning. Maria Sanchez, are you ready to make a motion, or do you want to have quick comments from us? I don't know. I have several comments. It's, I have several comments. I'm deeply disappointed in the way this process has, what has happened, I mean, it's been several months. The fact that in the presentation, the applicant which is opposite to our preservation has not presented us with an update of the percentages of support to opposition. It makes it very difficult as a commission to see people stand up. Some people have to leave because they have work to go to. To not have a real, an idea of how this community feels on a consistent basis, we receive maps today that aren't dated. Again, I know people are changing their mind. The more that they know, it's just become a real challenge. Obviously, there was a process where we were examining using an NCB process. Well, we discussed today in our work session that in fact an NCB can be more restrictive in some moments. It doesn't have the front end protection that historic does. It doesn't have that immediate protection that I know a lot of people in the community want. While historic has that protection, it is monitored by a city entity. NCB has the ability for community to author their restrictions. And that's just a quick note. Again, opposite of the historic preservation has led this charge and I've just been honestly a little, not a little very disappointed with the way in which I am receiving and the commission is receiving zoning cases and a lot of the controversy that has come up around the cases has been due to lack of communication. I understand the frustration of everyone here. You don't want to see this continue. But obviously the commission is struggling with how much information has been accumulated by the applicants. I just wish there had been a lot more transparency where the boundary lines were drawn and communication. Any other comments? You don't want to make a motion just yet? All right, so again, let's try and keep comments brief but get the commissioner some help on what we're all meeting. They're done. Good, okay. All right, I'll wait. Okay, I have to agree with the commissioner the assumptions. I'm very disappointed in the presentation, lack of a work. Just what's been done on this case and even a couple of others. I am in support of, I think it's a good idea in this particular area for historic information. I feel like it would be very helpful to this street, this community. And I see the benefits of it. However, I feel like the process is not a good one. I feel like there are so many people here who are not in favor of this and this was initiated by the community. And it seems to me that the community is saying I wish that I personally did not attend the various meetings and I'm sorry that I didn't at this point. But I'm having a very hard time. I will not vote in favor of the convenience. And I am having a very hard time as much as they can favor, I am of a historic designation for this area. I feel like I cannot say the least about it. Just harden the rule. So I'll agree with my fellow commissioners on the whole process. I think there were probably some lost opportunities that got us to this point. And it is hard to assess with the information that we have. But my heart still just truly, probably breaks a little too strong. To me, I see this neighborhood as a jewel and it's, I mean, with all of its character. And I think because some of the misconceptions, I heard misconception and misinformation over and over and over again as different people came up. And I guess that's because they didn't really understand the whole picture. And so, it would just be a loss if we just left it open for developers to do whatever they want. This capability would just be, suppose I had it for me, you know, I live here, but. But that's not what's happening. But yeah, so anyway, but yeah, I'll wait for another motion to see how I go. I want to agree with commissioners last year. There seemed to be a lack of communication out there at once. And on the other hand, also, I would not be, I wouldn't believe that would be a good thing to help keep developers from just coming into the area who don't want to even like to to help preserve that, so it would be different. But at the same time, I feel that area needs to have all the information necessary to help look at the current situation. Thank you. Just a couple of comments. I'm not going to support a continuous. I'm very surprised with people that have been asked to consider a continuous today after all. All those neighbors have been here with these people and sitting there for five hours. And I'm sorry to ask for a continuous, but we didn't get your full presentation. And I wish we had that today. I don't know where this idea came from. And Cathy, you've been working your heart out the last couple of meetings for us, and I really appreciate that. I really wonder why artists are our preservation officer is not around in these really big cases. And I'm sorry, maybe she's traveling or something, but this is important stuff for the city and to always have staff be just to get them hit down by everybody at any time. I'm surprised. Obviously, like everybody else in the process has not been helpful. Aside from all that, these cases are also hard for us because it's a zoning case, but it's about historic. And we're not experts on historic zoning. Well, all we need to do is listen to what people say. I just feel uncomfortable with it. I support, and I think Ms. Gonzalez, Yvonne Gonzalez just spoke so beautifully about this neighborhood and I really think it should have the historic designation, but then again, our own code makes it dependent on the majority, and I'm also uncomfortable by the sort of rolling majority kind of thing. It was a majority, then it's not a majority. Actually, you understand what you said about, it actually makes sense to pull people out, that you are gerrymandering, and there is a reason for that. That just made sense to me. It doesn't play well with the neighbors, but I can see what you're doing with that. You guys are trying to do something that people would do support. So if y'all, you're trying to get to over 500%, then I feel like it's wrong for me to go with what seems to be the minority of people on this. So I'm not going to support a continuance, but if the commissioner suggests either support or denial of this request, I'm gonna go with her either way on that one because I am really on the tipping point on this one. I think there's a good reason for it, but then I'm hearing the opposition. So we are ready for a motion. It's a good thing I didn't join the zoning commission to be liked. This is a challenge. I've been to several community meetings, and again, Kathy is worth really hard on this. Most of all, each piece I also support. Thank you. I really cannot emphasize enough how much of the dysfunction with this case is due to communication. It's just really frustrating. At a certain point, I understand Jay mending, but then at what point do you take out other properties that aren't in support? Where does that stop? It's kind of the struggle for me because you're following a rule of thumb, but not consistently. And then not communicating to property owners when that light is shaking just great. So I understand the logic and the process in which it's actually communicating to property owners is what is problematic. I will not be making a motion for continuance. Given all of the conversations and contact, I'm gonna make a motion for a denial of zoning case Z2017061. Second. Make a motion and a second. Any last comments? Remember again that any motion needs six votes to pass. The motion is for denial. I'm excited. Commissioner Diaz-Sanchez? Yes. Commissioner Garcia? Yes. Commissioner Head? Yes. Commissioner McGee? Commissioner Phoenix? Yes. Commissioner Rosales? Yes. The motion has passed a denial. If you're spending your day with us, we're gonna take a one minute stretch break and then we have to make more cases.