Loading...
07-11-18 SMDRB1 SOUTH MESQUITE DESIGN REVIEW BOARD 2 3 Following are the minutes of the South Mesquite Design Review Board meeting held on 4 July 11, 2018 in 2007-A at City Hall, 700 N. Main Street, Las Cruces, NM 88001. 5 6 MEMBERS PRESENT: Robert Williams 7 Ernie Campos 8 David Chavez 9 Tony Dahlin (via telephone) 10 11 MEMBERS ABSENT: Faith Hutson 12 13 STAFF PRESENT: Adam Ochoa, CLC Planner 14 Sara Gonzalez, CLC Planner 15 Larry Nichols, Community Development 16 Becky Baum, RC Creations, LLC, Recording Sec. 17 18 I. CALL TO ORDER (6:00) 19 20 Williams: We'll call the meeting to order and it's 6.00. First item on the agenda is we 21 want to approve Tony calling in on this meeting. 22 23 Chavez: So moved. 24 25 Williams: We got a motion and a second? 26 27 Campos: I second. 28 29 Williams: Okay. All those in favor? 30 31 MOTION PASSES UNANIMOUSLY. 32 33 Williams: So the motion passes. Tony you're officially okay. 34 35 Dahlin: I'm here. 36 37 II. APPROVAL OF MINUTES - June 6, 2018 38 39 Williams: So next, the first ... 40 41 Dahlin: Tony Dahlin calling. 42 43 Ochoa: Thank you Tony. 44 1 1 Williams: Thank you Tony. First item on the agenda is the approval of the minutes 2 from the June 6th meeting. Did everyone get a chance to look them over? 3 Any changes or comments? 4 5 Chavez: There was a couple of clerical, but I made my notes on something else so 6 on the average they were okay. I mean you did a great job but there was 7 a couple of misspellings and stuff but I still move that we accept it. 8 9 Williams: Okay. Do we have a second? 10 11 Campos: I'll second, yes sir. 12 13 Williams: Motion and a second, all those in favor? 14 15 MOTION PASSES UNANIMOUSLY. 16 17 Williams: Motion passes unanimously. Thanks Tony. 18 19 III. NEW BUSINESS 20 21 1. Case 71688: Request for approval of the alteration to the street facing 22 facade of the primary structure, including the replacement of windows and 23 a door, at 804 S. San Pedro Street. The subject property is zoned R-3 24 (High Density Residential District) and is located outside of the Original 25 Townsite in the South Mesquite Overlay District. Submitted by Grace F. 26 Chavez, property owner. 27 28 Williams: So first item on the agenda under new business is Case No. 71688. 29 30 Ochoa: All righty. Adam Ochoa for Community Development for the record. The 31 first and only case we have tonight is Case 71688. It is a proposed 32 remodeling if you will, a renovation of a property which includes the 33 alteration to the street facing facade of a property located at 805 South 34 San Pedro Street. The subject property is currently zoned R-3 which is 35 High -Density Residential. It is currently a multi -family structure on the 36 property. It is located in the South Mesquite Overlay, but outside of the 37 Original Townsite, just outside of it by a block or by a street really if you 38 will. The subject structure is listed as a contributing structure by the State 39 Historic Registry and was constructed circa 1920. 40 Shown here the subject property here highlighted in the light blue 41 as you can see is zoned R-3 in a sea of R-3, adjacent to R-2 to the east 42 with the cross streets of Texas Avenue, San Pedro here just to give you 43 an idea of where we're at. 44 Here is an aerial of it. If you all did a site visit as you can see that's 45 the L-shaped property that has a trampoline in the front there, just to tell 2 you where it is. Mostly single-family residential properties surrounding it and the vacant lot to the north as well. Here are some photos of the property. The top corner picture is from the front side of the building of the home with the front door and then two windows, as you can see broken light windows. Here it is right on the corner of Texas and San Pedro, showing the windows and the design of the existing structure. Picture on the top corner is taken along Texas so you can see how that area looks there and the last picture where you can see the trampoline there is taken along San Pedro showing the opposite side of that building. The proposal that the applicant is doing tonight is to do renovations to the street -facing facade of the building which includes a change to the parapet of the existing structure, the replacement of several windows and the replacement of the front door of the subject property. As I've already stated, the proposal entails a reroofing of the structure and with that reroofing the applicant was proposing to change the existing stepped parapet if you will along the front. The proposed new parapet was to be a continuous flat elevation along the entire structure which is a kind of rendition in your staff reports there showing what that is but after discussing the issue of that with the applicant about keeping the coping if you will, the steps along the front on San Pedro, the applicant is open to keeping that actually and not making it all one continuous flat area. So the back parts, those will be flat because those are just additions, that's why they got steps, so the rear and side portions will still be a flat parapet but the front will keep that front stepped coping if you will on top of the parapet and hopefully that will take care of some issues that were brought up by some people to staff with that. The proposed new parapet will be in keeping with the style of the existing structure, not only that but also surrounding structures in the area as well. Again this is just an old, what it was going to be with that front but they will be keeping the step coping on top instead for the renovation. Another thing that they're doing with this proposed renovation is replacing the existing street -facing facade windows. The existing windows are in total disrepair. The pictures I took don't really justify how bad in shape they really are unfortunately. The applicant is proposing to replace them with a more energy -efficient single -hung, broken light vinyl windows. So these new windows actually look and match the look and the style of the existing windows. New windows are actually also similar to some other structures in the surrounding area in the South Mesquite neighborhood. Showing here kind of those existing windows and again, because of the distance you can't really tell how bad those windows are. But here is the proposed, as you can see still broken light just like the existing windows, vinyl windows which is something that is allowed by the South Mesquite Design Standards. The final thing that the applicant is proposing is to replace the existing front door on the structure. The applicant has stated that that front door and staff did go and do a site visit, 0 it's extremely weathered and in dire need to be replaced. They actually have a couple pieces of wood just hammered into it to keep it together. That door has been deteriorated by direct sunlight exposure. When that sun goes up, it just hits it half the day essentially the front door. The applicant does want to replace it with a new more durable door. They originally were proposing a new decorative door with a decorative glass piece inside and the example of that is inside your staff report as well. The door will be of a wood grain detail painted mahogany to appear wooden but will be fiberglass to accomplish that durability desired by the applicant. Staff actually believes that the decorative door does not follow the South Mesquite Design Standards for doors. And with that staff did recommend to the applicant to actually change it to more of a craftsman style door to still keep that glass piece because the existing door does have a glass front door but just the style was a little too decorative for the area and more of a craftsman style was what staff was proposing and the applicant is agreeable to this as well. Here is that existing door, as you can see there are those two-by-fours holding it together. This was what was originally proposed with that decorative look with the decorative glass and this is kind of a little bit more of what they're looking at doing, more of a craftsman style, a more rustic style if you will even. Just some pictures of the surrounding area. As you can see this is catty -corner on Texas and San Pedro just to show you some of the existing structures around there to give you an idea of what's around the property. This is directly across the street on San Pedro. This is directly south of the property along San Pedro. And this is directly behind the property or west off of Texas. With that, when staff did take a look at this and staff does want to thank the applicant to working with staff to bring this a little more into compliance with what the requirements of the South Mesquite Design Standards are. When we analyze this we look at the applicable development. It has to utilize architectural styles and methods and materials that are visible, not only on the original structure but also in the surrounding area and staff does feel that the new proposal with the conditions that we will state after this will meet those requirements. Staff did receive four phone calls from surrounding property owners in support of the proposal, one in strong support, very happy to see that this deteriorated historical building is going to be brought up to par with the look and will just live longer than the way it is now. With that, staff does recommend approval for the proposal with conditions. Those conditions are: 1) that the projecting coping on top of the parapet on the front facade of the structure shall be retained; and 2) the new front door shall be of a craftsman style instead of the originally proposed decorative style. And like I stated before the applicant is more than okay with these conditions that staff has placed on it. These are the findings for approval that staff has listed in your staff report. And your options tonight gentlemen are: 1) to vote "yes" to approve the proposal with the conditions that staff has 12 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 29 30 31 32 33 34 35 36 37 38 39 40 41 42 43 44 45 46 placed on it; 2) to vote "no" and deny the proposal, just to let you know denial does require new information or findings of facts identified by yourselves; 3) to vote "yes" with any additional conditions deemed appropriate by the Board; or 4) vote to table and postpone the proposal to another date. Yes Tony. Dahlin: Mr. Chairman. Williams: Yes. Dahlin: I feel kind of strongly that they keep the, this what do you call it, the historical type sills. Williams: Yes, I think they're intending now on doing that. Delgado: Yes, actually the windows, this is Randy Delgado representing Toni Martinez, and actually the windows are going to be retrofits which are done from the inside. So the historical sill is going to be retained. Another question that I had, if you go back to some of those pictures, Mr. Ochoa mentioned that it was the wooden door got deteriorated. Okay, if you see on the door picture, you can see it has a screen door. It's actually like a screen door that's before it. So I had asked Mr. Ochoa if we're going to put this nice proposed door, if a security door or some kind of a screen door so it wouldn't get deteriorated, be allowed. Okay, around the area there are security doors. Just on the other side of 710 San Pedro, there are security doors around the area and I think that'd be great to preserve the new proposed door. Chavez: We had a case that was directly across the street from Klein Park. And instead of, I mean she wanted a security door but instead of having a wrought -iron door, she went in and got the glass door, the one that you can use a sledgehammer to. And so she had a carved, a really pretty door so it's secure. And so you can have that option too if you want to have something where you can open your door and let light in and still have your front door locked, I mean still, you're not letting in the weather ... Delgado: Yes, yes, yes. Chavez: Instead of having a wrought iron, I mean a wrought iron is, a lot of people use the wrought iron but this is another way if you're going to spend some money on a front door, a pretty front door, you want to see it. Delgado: Okay. Okay. Chavez: So I mean, just a suggestion. 5 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 29 30 31 32 33 34 35 36 37 38 39 40 41 42 43 44 45 46 Delgado: So, yes, full glass ... Williams: That ... Delgado: Yes, full glass. Chavez: Yes. You get them at Lowes. Delgado: Yes. And I know which one you're talking about. Chavez: And Dahlin: They cost $499. Delgado: There you go. Chavez: Sometimes they're on sale, you just have to go then. Delgado: Yes, that's something that the owner here was saying, that she wants some kind of door in front of the, like a screen door, but that would work, that full glass door. Chavez: Because it has a lock, that door has four locks. When you turn the lock and it locks it in the frame ... Delgado: Yes. Chavez: It's impossible to open the door ... Delgado: That's good. Chavez: For one, and then secondly, they have this thing, I've seen the video on that, on the demonstrations, they take a sledgehammer and whale on it and it doesn't do anything. Delgado: That's good. Good. Chavez: So if you got, if you're worried about some security I don't think you have to worry on that. Martinez: That'll be perfect. Chavez: I mean yes, they cost a little bit more money but if you're worried about security, you know. Martinez: That would be perfect. X0 1 2 Williams: Ernie did you have something? 3 4 Campos: No I echo David's comments. I was going to recommend they could put a 5 weather, a metal door in the front to protect the door from the elements 6 and I know we have strict compliance to the Design Standards but 1 7 wanted to present that to the applicant. 8 9 Delgado: Okay. 10 11 Campos: If they're willing to do that, I'm happy. What do you say Tony? 12 13 Dahlin: I'm thinking the metal door is a big benefit and it's $100. But the screen 14 mesh will block a lot of the sun and the UV waves. 15 16 Delgado: Okay. 17 18 Campos: Yes sir, I agree. That's all I have sir. 19 20 Ochoa: So if I may interject here, if that's another condition to allow them to do 21 that as well, to put a security door on the front, either the glass one or the 22 metal one, that's something that the Board can do as well so that is the 23 third option that you have. 24 With that though, if I may interject again we did get a letter from one 25 of our Board Members who couldn't be here, Faith Hutson unfortunately 26 but she did send a letter with a concern which I believe has already been 27 taken care of. But I still want to read this into the record just so we could 28 have this. Ms. Faith Hutson states, "Since I am unable to present at 29 tonight's meeting, I would like to have my comments read to the Board. 30 As both a member of the Overlay Board and a property owner in the South 31 Mesquite Original Townsite, I would like to state that we as a Board need 32 to be wise towards our cultural properties and balance the need to protect 33 their character within the spirit and through City planning processes. In 34 the case brought before us tonight, we have a Southwest Vernacular flat 35 roof Spanish Eclectic with projecting coping. This style was short-lived, 36 originating in the 1920s and fading by the mid-1930s, and what in my mind 37 makes it most unique is that projecting coping on top of the crenellated 38 parapet on the front facade. For staff to recommend that the parapet be 39 straightened out with the reroofing is very dismaying to me. We would 40 lose the very unique factor which sets this house apart from its neighbors. 41 Recommendations made on the basis that there is something similar to 42 the neighborhood should be reserved for new construction. Such a 43 degree of change to a contributing structure, turning it into a cookie cutter 44 adobe with no character, begins to homogenize the neighborhood and that 45 goes against our charge as stewards of our cultural properties. At the 46 second step-down of the parapet as shown in the existing elevations, if the 7 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 29 30 31 32 33 34 35 36 37 38 39 40 41 42 43 44 45 46 homeowners sought to level out the side parapets for ease of reroofing or for economy's sake, I would find that acceptable as long as the front crenellated parapets and coping are retained and restored. I respectfully ask my fellow board members to consider voting to amend staff recommendation to include a condition that retains the existing projecting coping on top of the crenellated parapet on the front facade of the contributing structure. Thank you. Sincerely, Faith Hutson." And that was directly received today by staff. But as I stated before, I believe with the conditions that takes of her concerns. Chavez: I went ahead and called the State. Yes, your property's not exactly right in, we are in the edge of the ... Delgado: Okay. Chavez: Federal, the Federal Historic District and, in the Federal there's a little bit more rules to it. But they pulled up to your house and they have a picture of it in Santa Fe. And their comment is that there are so few ... Delgado: Have that. Chavez: Of these houses with those parapets, that they're almost rare. You don't find them in Northern New Mexico, but you find them here. Delgado: Okay. Chavez: And so on my concern before I found out all of this was, "Oh my gosh, what can we do to talk you out of it?" But ... Delgado: No but we're completely in agreement that ... Chavez: But the whole thing, the way we work it is whatever's in the facade of the building, the house, needs to be as pure and historic as possible because when people drive by they're going to go, "Wow look at this. They've really restored it." So that's the importance. But I'm happy that you worked with us and I'm all ready to call for the vote. I mean thank you. Delgado: Okay. Chavez: What's your lead time? Delgado: My lead time for this, for construction, she has some medical problems going on with her mother right now so I'm going to say maybe at the most six months. Chavez: Fine, yes. E:3 1 Williams: Very good. 2 3 Delgado: So those six months, that first phase of the construction would probably be 4 the reroof, okay and then going ahead to do the parapet, restoring the 5 parapets and all that. Second phase would probably be the window 6 retrofit and the third phase of course is just completing the stucco and that 7 was my next question. What colors are ... 8 9 Williams: It's up to you. 10 11 Delgado: It's up to us. Awesome. 12 13 Chavez: It's up to you. There is no color restriction for us. Also I had another 14 question if I may. It looks like there's fencing around the property. 15 16 Delgado: That's going to be replaced. 17 18 Chavez: Are you going to, you can't put chain link. But what kind of a wall are you 19 going to put around, or something that ties in with the house-ish. 20 21 Martinez: It definitely would be something that we would tie in. At this point we 22 haven't even gotten that far. 23 24 Chavez: Okay. I'm just curious because it's, if you're going to do construction ... 25 26 Martinez: But we have ... 27 28 Chavez: Sometimes some wall cases come to us because it's right in front of the 29 house so it's ... 30 31 Martinez: Yes. 32 33 Chavez: If we can do it all at one ... 34 35 Martinez: Well it has some rock wall, about this much of it that's already there and 36 then ... 37 38 Delgado: We have a picture. 39 40 Martinez: They just extended it up. 41 42 Dahlin: Three courses. 43 44 Chavez: See here, they're cinderblock. 45 46 Delgado: Yes cinderblock. E 1 2 Chavez: The one side of the ... 3 4 Delgado: The front of the facade, if you can see right here at this front picture ... 5 6 Williams: There's some ... 7 8 Delgado: There is rock ... 9 10 Williams: Rock wall. 11 12 Chavez: Rock. 13 14 Delgado: And then on the side is cinderblock. 15 16 Chavez: So you would stucco that eventually? 17 18 Delgado: We probably would end up stuccoing that like a little garden wall maybe 19 and just maybe at least, what's the max that you guys allow? 20 21 Chavez: Four, is it four feet? 22 23 Delgado: Four feet? 24 25 Ochoa: Right. 26 27 Delgado: Four feet? 28 29 Ochoa: Four feet is the maximum allowed. 30 31 Chavez: Actually the front is four feet. For the side of the house it's higher. 32 33 Ochoa: It's eight feet. 34 35 Chavez: You can go eight feet. 36 37 Delgado: Sol ... 38 39 Chavez: So you could do a decorative whatever, create that pueblo style. I mean 40 you could do a lot but the front is four feet. The side is ... 41 42 Delgado: Okay. 43 44 Chavez: Pretty high. 45 46 Ochoa: And that would be taken care of administratively ... 10 1 2 Delgado: Yes. 3 4 Chavez: Yes. 5 6 Ochoa: As long as they follow the Design Standards. 7 8 Williams: Go ahead. 9 10 Campos: Mr. Chair. To the applicant I was going to say, do you have any questions 11 for us? 12 13 Delgado: I... 14 15 Campos: Do you, I think it's been covered, yes? 16 17 Delgado: Everything has been covered. 18 19 Campos: Okay. 20 21 Delgado: I have no questions for you guys. It's pretty straightforward. 22 23 Campos: Okay. 24 25 Delgado: You guys have any other questions for myself? 26 27 Martinez: Or suggestions. 28 29 Delgado: Suggestions? 30 31 Chavez: Are you going to put any, what kind of a decorative light are you going to 32 put in front? 33 34 Delgado: We have a light. 35 36 Chavez: It looks like there's a light, I mean this ... 37 38 Martinez: There are two lights on the side so we would do something comparable to 39 40 41 Chavez: Yes, something that ties in with the period of the style of house. 42 43 Delgado: Yes. 44 45 Chavez: Nothing very American. 46 11 1 Delgado: No, no, no, no, no, no. 2 3 Chavez: No. Thank you. 4 5 Delgado: That's what she's trying to do. She's trying to get this building (inaudible) 6 and then later on going to inside the house and renovating the inside. 7 8 Chavez: Faith Hutson is just a block away from you. 9 10 Delgado: Okay. 11 12 Chavez: And then there are some other people, Irene Oliver -Lewis, they have their 13 huge compound on Kansas. So they're all very heavy into historic 14 preservation so it wouldn't surprise me that they're one of the ones that 15 called to say, "Yes, let's do it." 16 17 Delgado: Okay. Awesome. Very good. 18 19 Williams: Right. So with that do we have a motion? 20 21 Chavez: I so move to accept the Case 71688 for 804 South San Pedro Street. 22 Move for approval. 23 24 Ochoa: With the additional condition of the ... 25 26 Chavez: With the additional conditions and suggestions. 27 28 Williams: Do we have a second? 29 30 Campos: I second. 31 32 Williams: We got a motion and a second. All those in favor? 33 34 MOTION PASSES UNANIMOUSLY. 35 36 Williams: Motion passes unanimously. 37 38 BANTER FOR A FEW MOMENTS. 39 40 IV. DISCUSSION OF OTHER ITEMS 41 42 Williams: Any other items to discuss? 43 44 Ochoa: We have no other items for discussion tonight Mr. Chairman. 45 46 Chavez: Do we have another case or anything coming up? 12 1 2 Ochoa: We do not unfortunately. So we probably will not have one in August. So 3 you will have August off it looks like so far. If anything changes I will 4 contact you. But for now and it looks like we'll have it off. 5 6 Chavez: Ok. 7 8 Ochoa: And since there's no other public here I don't think we have any other 9 public participation. 10 11 V. STAFF ANNOUNCEMENTS 12 13 VI. ADJOURNMENT (6:24) 14 15 Williams: With that, we have a motion to adjourn? 16 17 Chavez: So moved. 18 19 Campos: I'll second. 20 21 Williams: Adjourned, 7:25. 22 23 24 25 26 27 Chairperson 13