►
From YouTube: 11-2-22 Landmarks Board Meeting
Description
No description was provided for this meeting.
If this is YOUR meeting, an easy way to fix this is to add a description to your video, wherever mtngs.io found it (probably YouTube).
A
B
Abby
daniels:,
so
the
landmarks
board
meeting
is
called
to
order.
welcome
to
the
november
second,
two
thousand
and
twenty-two
landmarks
board,
meeting
it's
six
o
one
pm.
um..
I
would
like
to
introduce
our
moderator
this
evening.
brenda,
written
our
before
we
begin
with
brenda,,
will
review
the
virtual
meeting
to
cor
up
first
slide,
please.
C
C
C
C
Brenda
ritenour
(she/her):
the
following
are
some
examples
of
our
rules
of
decorum
that
are
found
in
the
boulder
res
revised
code
and
other
guidelines
that
support
this
vision,,
and
these
will
be
upheld.
Tonight.
during
this
meeting.
All
remarks
and
testimony
shall
be
limited
to
matters
related
to
city
business.,.
C
C
Brenda
ritenour,
(she/her):
and
participants
may
raise
their
hand
to
speak
during
open
comment
and
public
comment.
Periods.
during
hearings.
Individuals
must
display
their
whole
name
before
being
allowed
to
speak
online..
I
am
seeing
some
folks
who
are
in
the
meeting
now
under
their
organization,
names
or
not
necessarily
their
whole,
the
name
they're
commonly
known.
as.
C
B
Abby
daniels:,
thank
you
so
much.,
so
I
want
to
acknowledge
that
we
have
full
quorum
tonight,,
including
our
ex
officio
member,
from
the
planning
board,
as
within
person
landmark
board
meetings..
The
recording
of
this
meeting
will
be
available
in
the
records
archive.
and
on
youtube
within
twenty-eight
days
of
this
meeting.
We'll
do
a
quick
roll
call
and
introductions
of
the
board
members
and
um,
our
ex
officio
member
of
the
planning
board,.
B
B
Abby
daniels:,
we
will
be
following
the
usual
format.
The
best
we
can.,
the
owners
and
applicants
have
agreed
to
use
this
format.
As
with
regular
landmarks,
board
meetings.,
you
may
only
speak
at
the
appropriate
time
during
public
participation,
or
at
the
appropriate
time.
During
the
public
hearing
request
to
speak
outside
of
those
times
will
be
denied..
The
one
hearing
we
have
tonight
is
quasi
judicial.,
so
any
person
testifying,,
including
the
applicant,
will
be
sworn
in
individual.
B
B
Abby
daniels:
that
we
came
up
with
on
our
retreat
in
july.
B
B
B
B
C
C
C
Brenda
ritenour
(she/her):,
enabling
talking
for
patrick
or
work.
you
may
need
to
do
that.,
operate.
um!.
I
will
promote
patrick
to
the
panelist..
Thank
you
and
patrick..
We
do
request
that
you
keep
your
camera
off
inconsistency
with
our
current
policies.
H
Patrick
orourke:
hi,
everybody,
it's
okay
for
me
to
start.
B
Patrick
orourke:
well,
patrick,.
Will
you
be
kind
enough
to
raise
your
hand.
it's
for
to
tell
the
board..
I
should
know
this
by
now.
I,,
patrick
o'rourke.
uh,.
I
swear
to
tell
the
truth,
thank
you,
and
you'll.
Have
three
minutes.
thank
you.,
three
things.
number
one
on
historic
boulder..
I
thought
it
would
be
a
good
idea
just
to
bring
you
guys
up
to
speed
on
what
we're
up
to,,
because
we
work
together.
H
Patrick
orourke:
closely.,
and
so
in
the
last
couple
of
months
we
did
that
meet
the
spirits
over
at
columbia,.
H
Patrick
orourke:
cemetery,,
and
we
had
four
hundred
and
seventy
five
people
join
us
that
day.,
so
it
was
a
really
fabulous
turnout..
The
weather
was
great,,
the
spirits
were
great,
and
uh,.
The
support
that
we
got
from
the
city
was
well
received,
and
uh,.
They
were
very
helpful
throughout
the
whole
process.
um!.
We
are
doing
our
home
for
the
holidays
on
saturday,
december
third,.
H
Patrick
orourke:,
it's
going
to
be
up
on
the
university
hill
area,
and
the
featured
house
will
be
scott
carpenter's
home..
So
I'm
hoping
you
guys
have
an
opportunity
to
join
us..
We
have,
I
think,
at
this
point
five
houses,
and
we're
hoping
to
get
the
sixth
house..
It's
only
gonna
be
a
one
day
event
from
ten.
In
the
morning
till
six
o'clock
at
night,.
H
Patrick
orourke:
and
then
the
final
one
is,
we
patrick
orourke:,
pushed
our
fifty
year,
gala
up
until
february
of
next
year,
and
we're
just
going
to
do
it
at
the
annual
meeting..
We
didn't
have
the
type
of.
H
H
Patrick
orourke:
regarding
historic,
folder.,
um.,
first
of
all,,
I
want
to
thank
john
decker
personally..
I
you
reached
out
to
the
of
the
day
to
work
on
the
historic
district.,
we're
looking
forward
to
it.,
I'm
traveling
for
the
next
month,
I'll
be
out
of
the
country.,
so
I'm
hoping
to
get
together
the
first
or
second
week
in
december..
Our
goal
is
to
get
this
launched
in
january
and
before
the
city
council
before
the
third
quarter,
next
year.
that
being,
said,.
The
other
item
that
came
up
at
the
historic
board
meeting.
H
H
H
Patrick
orourke:,
that
being
said,,
then
I'm,.
I'm
gonna
take
this
my
speaking
as
a
non
historic,
boulder,
member.
but
uh,
in
twenty.
Twenty-One
there
was
a
ldr
c
meeting
for
the
garbage
reception
area
garbage
containers
over
at
to
takwa.
H
H
H
Patrick
orourke:
is
a
challenge,
and
then
I
just
saw
that
I
play
pickle
all
over
there,,
and
so
I
just
saw
yesterday,,
and
this
should
be
a
concern
to
this
board-
is
that
somebody
put
up
at
the
city
level,
six
foot?.
I
know
it's
all
finishing
the
six
foot
wall.
the
solid
wall
between
the
the
the
the
playground,
and
the
tennis
courts
black
in
that
area..
So
I
don't
know
if
that
went
before
the
ldrc.,
but
it's
a
wall,
and
it's
the
first
wall.
I've
seen
that
to
talk
about.
D
Bill
jellick:,
hey,
patrick,:
this
is
bill
gelix.,
since
you
mentioned
me..
I
should
make
it
clear
that
this
color
project
that
we
got
started
was
not
done
by
me.
H
C
C
Brenda
ritenour
(she/her):
a
couple
of
hands
from
board
members.
okay,.
We
do
have
one
more
member
of
the
public
waiting.
E
Ronnie
pelusio
lmb:
yeah,,
I
guess
maybe
somebody
saw
my
hand.
um!,
so
this
is
ronnie
speaking
for
those
of
you
that
can't
see
me.,
but,
patrick
again.
Thank
you
so
much
for
attending,
and
for
all
of
your
comments
and
the
information
as
well..
I
really
appreciate
it.,
I'm
sorry
that
your
time
is
kind
of
cut
short.
E
Ronnie
pelusio
lmb:
um,.
If
there's
additional
information
that
you
feel
that
you
would
like
to
share
with
us.
um,,
please
do.,
you
can
do
that
via
email.
um.,
but
again,.
I'm
very
grateful
to
know
that
you're
here,
and
you
know,
speaking
up,.
It's
it's
very
helpful..
So
thank
you.
B
Chelsea
castellano:
yeah,
yeah,,
thanks.
yeah..
I
just
wanted
to.
respond
to
one
thing
that
patrick
said.,
thanks
for
being
here.
um,
but
um..
One
thing
he
mentioned
was
that
the
ldrc.
approved
that
garbage
corral
and
um!.
It
was
at
the
last
landmarks
board
meeting
where
the
board
actually
approved
it..
So
I
just
wanted
to
clarify
that.
D
Bill
jellick:,
I
I
to
also
want
to,
along
with
chelsea.
thank
patrick
for
weighing
in
with
information
from
historic,
boulder.,
very
important.
um!.
You
are
the
leading
edge
of.
D
Bill
jellick:
preservation
in
this
in
this
community,,
and
it's
it's
critical
that
you
get
your
words
out
there.,
and
this
is
a
perfect
form
to
to
express
what
is
happening
with
with
your
group
and
um,.
I
thanks.,
I
think,
you'll
offer
doing
it.
E
E
E
Ronnie
pelusio
lmb:
and
that's
my
memory
of
it.
um!.
I
just
wanted
to
say
that,
chelsea,.
I
think
that's
how
that
played
out
um,
and
for
anybody
listening.
um,,
I'm
pretty
confident
that
that's
what
happened
there.
um,,
if
not,,
maybe
claire,
can
jump
in
and
share
any
clarifications
on
that,.
As
I
know,.
E
B
A
D
D
Bill
jellick:,
administrative
action,,
and
it
wasn't
something
that
came
to
the
full
board
to
look
at..
I
think
I
would
like
claire
to
validate
that
for
us..
She
might
have
access
to
that
material
because
it
looks
like
this
is
building
into
something
important
enough
that
we
get
the
facts
straight
on
it.
I
B
C
Brenda
ritenour
(she/her):,
we
do
um.
there's
one
hand
up
now..
There
was
another
hand
up
earlier..
We
are
still
in
open
comment
at
the
beginning
of
the
meeting..
So
if
you
would
like
to
participate
in
open
comments,,
please
use
your
raise
hand
button
um..
At
this
moment
we
have
kathryn
bart
with
her
hand
up
so,
catherine,.
I
will
enable
your
microphone,.
C
Brenda
ritenour,
(she/her):
and
we'll
ask
you
to
swear
in,
and
then
aubrey
will
start
the
timer.
J
D
J
J
Kathryn
barth:
the
issue
of
what
happened
and
what
it
was
not
really..
I
mean
I'm
I'm
concerned
about
that.,
but
what
I
am
more
concerned
about
is
what
I
see
is
a
lack
of
of
to
talk
for
reaching
out
to
its
neighbors
and
the
community.
and.
J
J
J
J
J
J
B
Abby
daniels:
thank
you.,
katherine.
brenda,.
C
C
K
K
Lynn,
segal:,
the
windows.
lynn
segal:,
they
she's
a
historic,
preservation,
and
she's
done.
Nineteen
historic
preservations,
and
she
got
kicked
up
to
historic
to
to
the
landmarks.
board,
doesn't
make
sense
from
the
perception
of
a
stupid..
You
know
an
intelligent
person
from
the
public.,
that's
just
looking
at
the
situation.
K
K
K
K
K
K
K
K
Lynn
segal:,
I
probably
would
have
voted
to
dump
the
driveway,
because
I
don't
like
cars,
and
I
only
drive
like
every
six
months.,
but
maybe
there
are
other
reasons
that
driveway
should
have
stayed
there
for
other
people
that
enjoyed
that
garage
sale,
and
felt
that
it
had
a
historic
presence.
There,.
K
Lynn,
segal:
and
that
whole
lot
on
the
west
side
had
trees
all
over.
they're,
all
just
gone..
How
can
we
just
let
our
trees
go
like
this.
K
Lynn,
segal:
that,,
you
know
I
don't
know..
Maybe
you've
got
some
guidelines
that
make
you
get
rid
of
trees
like
that.,
but
maybe
you
need
to
change
your
guidelines..
I
don't
know
it.
just
doesn't
look
that
good
to
me
from
the
public,
and
I
ride
my
bike
constantly
all
around
mapleton
hill,
and
I
see
these
historic
places
all
the
time,.
So
I
would
like
to
see
them.
I'm
glad
about
the
color
palettes,,
because
I
don't
like
to
be
assaulted
by
bad
color.
lynn,
lynn.,
I'm
sorry,,
but
your
time
just
expired.
B
C
C
I
Clare,
brandt,,
cob:,
okay,,
clare,
brandt,,
cob:
so
october,
statistics,
blue,
as
usual,
are
the
la
c's
and
pink
and
purple
are
demolition.
Reviews.
um,,
as
you
can
tell
from
the
pie.
um.,
we
approved
more
l.
a.
cs
this
month
than
demolitions.
I
I
I
I
I
Clare,
brandt,,
cob:
um,,
the
ldrc.
and
two
were
referred
to
the
to
the
landmark
board
for
review
in
a
public
hearing,
and
one
this.
This
kind
of
mid
couple
here
was
approved
by
the
ldrc.
um.
staff,
called
up.
I
Clare,
brandt,
cob:,
so
this
is
the
year..
So
far
we
are
typically
around
three
hundred
and
fourteen
closed
reviews.
by
the
end
of
october.,
so
we're
lagging
slightly
this
year
with
two
hundred
and
eighty-four.
I
Clare,
brandt,,
cob:
um,
and
I'd
like
to
point
out
again
what
a
busy
year
has
been
for
demolition
review..
You
can
see
the
the
big
piece
of
purple.
here.
um!
we've
completed,
one
hundred
and
forty-one
demo
reviews
so
far.
This
year.
one
hundred
and
twenty-six
of
those
have
been
reviewed
by
staff,
so
um,.
I
Clare,
brandt,
cob:,
most
clare,
brandt,,
cob:,
all
of
them
post.,
one
thousand
nine
hundred
and
forty
buildings,.
I
Clare,
brandt,,
cob:
fifteen
have
been
reviewed
by
the
ldrc
or
the
landmarks
board
um,,
including
six
of
those
that
were
escalated
by
staff
for
additional
review,,
so
those
would
have
been
also
post.
One
thousand
nine
hundred
and
forty
buildings.
I
Clare,
brandt,
cob:,
and
this
is
our
graph
of
new
applications
compared
with
the
last
two
years
we've
received
and
processed
thirty-three
new
applications.
This
month,
which
is
at
this
year
october
than
we've
had
for
the
last
couple
of
years.,
yay,
um,.
I
I
Clare,
brandt,
cob:
all
right
back
to
you,
happy.
B
abby
daniels:.
Now
we
will
move
forward
to
our
one
public
hearing
this
evening.
It's
a
public
hearing
and
consideration
of
the
landmark
alteration,
certificate
application
to
restore
front
porch
and
replace
rare
addition
with
new
re
addition
at
four
hundred
and
twenty-nine
highland
avenue,,
a
contributing
property
in
the
maple,
ten
o
historic
district
pursue,
it
to
section
nine,
eleven,.
Eighteen
of
the
boulder
revised.
B
I
I
Clare
brandt,,
cob:
and
made
comments,
the
applicant
may
respond
to
anything
that
was
said..
We'll
then
ask
anyone,
everyone
to
mute,
their
computers,
and
the
board
will
deliberate.
um..
A
motion
requires
an
affirmative
vote
of
at
least
three
members
to
pass,
and
motions
will
state
findings,,
conclusions,
and
recommendation..
One
hundred.
I
Clare,
brandt,,
cob:
and
uh,.
I
wanted
to
remind
you
that
the
conditions
should
be
right
into
the
motion..
So
it's
on
the
audio
as
well
as
in
the
written
minutes,,
and
a
record
of
the
hearing
is
kept
by
staff.
I
I
Clare,
brandt,
cob:,
okay?
well,.
The
criteria
for
review
again.
are
outlined
in
the
boulder
revised
code
under
nine,,
eleven,,
eighteen,,
b
and
c
uh..
The
criteria
for
a
review
are
to
ensure
the
proposed
work,.
I
I
I
Clare,
brandt,
cob:,
it
will
just
be
extended
for
a
week,
deny
the
application,
which
would
be
subject
to
a
forty-five
day.
Period,
in
which
city
council
can
review
the
decision
and
a
denial
would
mean,.
The
applicant
could
not
submit
the
same
application
within
twelve
months.
I
I
Clare,
brandt,
cob:
the
applicant,
revised
the
design,
and
returned
to
the
lds
on
june,
twenty
ninth,
and
john
and
chelsea,
and
I
reviewed
the
design,
and
again
referred
the
application
to
landmark's
board
for
a
review
in
a
public
hearing..
We
received
a
new
design
on
september
sixth,,
which
is
where
we
are
today.
I
Okay,
clare,
brandt,,
cob:,
cool.,
clare,
brandt,,
cob:,
so
four
twenty-nine
highland
is
located
here,
mid
block
between
fourth
and
fifth
streets.
The
house
faces
south
onto
highland,
and
the
rear
of
the
house
backs
on
to
maple,
to
the
hill
alley,,
which
is
here.
I
I
Clare,
brandt,
cob:
with
you
can
probably
just
about
see
it.
A
shingle
pattern.
there
are
double
hung
one
over
one
windows,
throughout.
um,,
but
also
some
of
these
horizontal
windows,,
which
are
original
to
the
period,
and
I'll
point
them
out.
As
we
go
around.
I
I
Clare,
brandt,
cob:
and
the
pediment
also,
you
can
see
on
the
historic
picture..
There
was
a
pediment
between
the
first
and
second
columns
kind
of
up,
here,
um,
and
that
has
been
removed
at
a
certain
at
at
some
point
in
the
past.
I
Clare,
brandt,
cob:
has
been
relocated
that
this
is
an
addition
here,
and
that's
where
the
front
entry
currently
is,,
because
you
can't
access
the
front
porch
from
outside
of
the
the
house.
I
I
Clare,
brandt,
cob:.
We
think
that's
how
it's
labeled
on
the
tax,
assessor
card..
It
actually
has
some
writing
down
on
the
negative
down
here.,
so
we
we
think
that
it
actually
might
be
earlier
than
that,
and
might
be
nineteen,
twenty-nine
um..
But
since
it
was
marked
as
a
one
thousand
nine
hundred
and
thirty-nine,
to
one
thousand
nine
hundred
and
forty-four
forty-nine
photograph
on
the
card,
we're
we're
going
with
that.
With
this
one.
I
I
I
I
Clare,
brandt,
cob:
original
to
the
house..
You
can
see
it
on
the
this..
This
is
a
nine..
This
is
a
one
thousand
nine
hundred
and
twenty-nine
photograph..
This
is
from
the
tax
assessor
card
for
the
for
the
neighbor
to
the
west.,
so
this
is
just
the
edge
of
the
the
building
that
we
can
see
on
that
tax,
assessor
card.,
so
you
can
see
that
the.
I
Clare,
brandt,
cob:
horizontal
window
was
original..
It
was
probably
an
interior
staircase,.
I
I
I
I
Clare,
brandt,
cob:
as
to
whether
this
was
modified
at
that
time,,
and
if
that
upper
level
here
was
added
in
the
nineteen
seventies,
or
whether
that
was.
I
Clare,
brandt,,
cob:
a
later
edition,
clare,
brandt,
cob:,
because
we're
pretty
sure
that
this
this
portion
of
the
house
here
would
have
been
a
single
story.
I
Clare,
brandt,
cob:,
so
this,
however,.
I
I
Clare,
brandt,
cob:,
so
continuing
around
to
the
east
elevation.
um..
You
can
see
that
it's
kind
of
staggered
roof
line
here.
this
middle
gable
is
the
gable
that
includes
the
dormer
that
you
can
see
on
the
west
side
that
west
elevation
dormer.
I
I
I
I
I
E
E
E
I
Clare,
brandt,
cob:
jogging
in
here,
coming
out
again.
I
I
Clare,
brandt,
cob:,
the
uh.
as
I
said,.
The
red
lines
are
the
original
to
the
house.,
so
we've
got
the
front
porch
the
that
bow
window..
This
re
area
that
might
have
been
modified
in
the
seventies.
um..
This
dotted
line
is
the
one
thousand
nine
hundred
and
ninety-three.
I
I
Clare,
brandt,
cob:-
this
is
the
this-
is
that
stone
edition.
That's
the
one
thousand
nine
hundred
and
thirty-two
addition,
with
the
stone
foundation.
um,.
I
Clare,
brandt,
cob:,
so
the
proposal
is
to
restore
the
front
porch
to
one
thousand
nine
hundred
and
thirty-nine
photograph.
That's
that's
here.
um,.
I
I
I
Clare,
brandt,,
cob:
and
also
along.
I
Clare,
brandt,
cob:
along
this
wall,
here.,
a
continuation
of
this
from
port
will,
with
the.
I
I
Clare,
brandt,,
cob:
and
again,.
The
proposal
is
to
remove
the
front
port
roof
and
reconstruct
it
and
restore
the
um..
The
entry
steps
to
the
front
port
to
the
front
porch,,
based
on
the
one
thousand
nine
hundred
and
thirty-nine,
one
thousand
nine
hundred
and
forty-nine
tax
assessment.
I
Clare,
brandt,,
cob:,
yeah.,
tax,
assessor
photograph
and
where
we
assume
the
front
door
would
have
been.
I
Clare,
brandt,
cob:,
based
on
where
the
the
front
entry
stairs
are.
I
Clare,
brandt,
cob:,
let's
see
what
else?
oh,
and
then
in
phil,
there's
an
existing
french
door
here
on
the
porch,,
and
the
proposal
is
to
infill
that
to
to
just
fill
it
out
with
sighting
here
and
and
make
the
front
door
moved
to
this.
Location.
I
I
I
Clare,
brandt,,
cob:,
sorry.,
clare,
brandt,,
cob:,
okay,,
clare,
brandt,,
cob:,
also
the
central
chimney.
here.
The
proposal
is
to
to
reconstruct
that
that
chimney
to
match
the
existing,.
I
I
I
I
Clare,
brandt,,
cob:,
um.,
clare,
brandt,,
cob:.
The
proposal
is
to
construct
a
shared
roof
transition
that
is
nearly
four
feet
lower
than
the
historic
roof..
This
is
the
the
ridge
of
the
historic
roof,,
and
this
is
the
transition
roof.
I
Clare,
brandt,,
cob:
um!,
the
clare,
brandt,
cob:
proposal
is
to
construct
a
rear
cross,
gable,
two-story
edition,.
I
I
I
I
I
Clare,
brandt,
cob:,
so
here's
again
a
rendering
of
this.
This
elevation
from
the
corner.
I
Clare,
brandt,
cob:,
the
clare,
brandt,
cob:,
the
existing
southwest
corner
of
the
house
will
remain
generally
unchanged,
all
the
way
back.
to
the
to
the
bay
window.
here,
um,.
With
the
exception
of
this,
this
portion
of
the
house?
here,.
I
I
Clare,
brandt,
cob:,
the
dominant.
I
Clare,
brandt,,
cob:
um,
about
two
feet
below
the
historic,
rich
height,
and
the
cross
cables
are
two
foot
two
and
a
half
feet
below
the
historic,
rich
height,.
I
Clare,
brandt,,
cob:
and
three
pairs
of
double
sliding
patio
doors
proposed
at
that
level.
There's
a
balcony
on
the
second
level
above
that
shed
roof,,
but
it's
actually
insight
into
that
shed
roof
and
a
not
cantilevered.
I
I
I
Clare,
brandt,,
cob:,
um!
and
the
other
roof
slopes
mirror
the
historic
portions
of
the
house.
I
Clare,
brandt,
cob::
this
is
the
rendering
of
that
north
elevation,.
I
I
Clare,
brandt,
cob:
um!,
it's
in
set
from
the
one
thousand
nine
hundred
and
thirty-two
addition,,
which
is
this
pot,
there's
a
new
horizontal
window
here
and
and
here
um,
and
those
proportions,
those
historically,
those.
I
I
Clare,
brandt,
cob:
proposed
to
be
replaced
again..
This
is
the
historic
window
opening
in
the
dolma
um,
and
that's
proposed
for
a
french
casement
window.
I
Clare,
brandt,
cob:
proposal
is
to
remove
clare
brandt,
cob:,
the
this
clare
brandt,
cob:
addition
that
was
constructed
in
one
thousand
nine
hundred
and
ninety-three
here,,
and
and
that's
where.
I
Clare,
brandt,
cob:,
the
clare,
brandt,
cob:,
cross
cable
edition
will
set
again.
there's
a
there's.
This
shed
roof
transition..
That's
three
feet
nearly
four
feet:
lower
than
the
historic
refridge,.
I
I
I
Clare,
brandt,,
cob:,
um,,
clare,
brandt,,
cob:,
and
I
forgot
to
mention
these
two..
These
are
the
windows
in
the
one
thousand
nine
hundred
and
thirty-two
addition
that
we
believe
were
replaced
in
the
nineties.
um,
and
they
are
proposed
to
be
replaced
again.
to.
I
Clare,
brandt,,
cob:
kind
of
fit
better
with
the
proportions
of
the
windows
and
the
addition,,
but
also
to
to
to
be
functioning
windows
right
now
they
are
um!.
They
are
fixed,
fixed
windows,,.
I
Clare,
brandt,,
cob:,
um,,
clare,
brandt,,
cob:
and
the
clare
brandt,
cob:
this
wall
that
I
was
trying
to
explain.
This
currently
sticks
out
with
that
the
front
dormer,
that
you
can
sorry
not
front
dorm.
With
that
front
addition
with
the
um,,
the
gable
roof
that
you
can
see
in
the
in
the
image.
One.
I
Clare,
brandt,,
cob:,
um!,
clare,
brandt,
cob:.
This
is
the
one
thousand
nine
hundred
and
thirty-two
addition.
I
I
Clare,
brandt,
cob:
so
going
through,
or
did
anyone
have
any
questions
about
all
of
that
before??
I
move
on
to
the
analysis.
A
I
I
Clare,
brandt,,
cob:,
all
right.
clare,
brandt,,
cob:.
You
scoop
back
on
clare,
brandt,,
cob:
to
clare,
brandt,,
cob:,
it's
a
sign,
analysis.
um.,
so
the
mapleton
hill,
historic
district
design
guidelines.
we
referred
to
include
the
building
alignment.
I
Clare
brandt,
cob:
um,,
which
says
that
the
general
pattern
of
alignment
should
be
preserved.
Decks,,
solid,
fences,
or
other
additions
should
be
located
where
they
will
not
intrude
into
the
space.
open
front.
Porches
are
elements
which
are
encouraged,
if
appropriate,
to
the
style
of
the
house,,
even
if
they
encroach.
I
I
Clare,
brandt,
cob:.
I
believe
this
is
the
first
in
between
the
first
and
second
column.,
it's
kind
of
hard
to
tell
with
that
tree
in
the
way,.
So
maybe
the
um.,
the
applicant
can
confirm
that.,
and
this
is
where
the
the
original
pediment
was..
But
the
plan
is
to.
I
Clare,
brandt,
cob:,
restore
that
as
the
entry
onto
the
porch
and
then
have
the
front
entry
be
directly
in
front
of
the
porch
steps,
and
to
remove
this,
this
french
door.
that's
right:
here.
currently,
I
see.
yeah,.
I
I
I
Clare,
brandt,,
cob:,
roof
lines
interrupted
by
solar
pedal,
skylights
and
roof
de
decks.
Demand,
sensitivity,
and
designed
to
be
appropriate.
Dom
is
are
intended
to
be
elements
of
secondary
importance
to
the
main
reform..
Any
expression
of
existing
dormers
or
additions
of
new
dormers
should
preserve
this
relationship,.
I
I
Clare,
brandt,,
cob:,
clare,
brandt,,
cob:
changes
the
reform
to
a
more
horizontal
element.,
but
we
didn't
consider
this
to
be
problematic,.
As
the
visibility
is
minimal..
You
can
see
my
my
arrows
pointing
out
that
that
connect
to
part
um.
in
addition,
the
the
roof
line
of
this
connector
is.
I
I
I
Clare,
brandt,
cob:
removal
of
that
small
dormer
on
the
on
the
west
elevation,
which
the
arrow
is
pointing
to
this
little
tiny
guy
right,
here,.
I
Clare,
brandt,
cob:,
so
moving
on
to
windows.
I
Clare,
brandt,,
cob:
window
openings
themselves
should
be
carefully.
Preserved.
should
not
be
made
larger
or
smaller
to
accommodate
a
different
size.
Window.
every
effort
should
be
made
to
preserve
existing
windows
by
repair
opening
should
be
vertical.
In
proportion.,
horizontal
sliding
windows
are
generally
inappropriate.
I
I
I
Clare,
brandt,
cob:
forward
dormer
here.
um!,
so
this
is
the
the
east
elevation
uh!.
This
is
the
location
of
that
proposed
french
casement
window.
I
Clare,
brandt,
cob:,
the
clare,
brandt,,
cob:,
lower
level.
The
windows
right
here
are
not
believed
to
be
historic.
on
our
proposed
for
replacement.
I
Clare
brandt,,
cob:
uh,.
There
are
new
horizontal
windows
on
this
east
elevation.
um!.
They
generally
reflect
the
proportion
of
the
historic,
horizontal
windows.
I
I
Clare,
brandt,,
cob:
and
clare
brandt,
cob:,
the
clare
brandt,
cob:
proposed
windows
on
the
on
the
rear
addition.
I
I
Clare,
brandt,,
cob:
again.:
this
is
the
clare
brandt,
cob:,
west
elevation..
These
are
the.
This
is
the
location
for
those
french
casement
windows.
to
replace
historic
windows
in
that
forward.
Dormer.
I
I
I
I
I
Clare,
brandt,
cob::
this
is
the
rendering
of
the
rear,
is
simplified,
and
doesn't
replicate
that
doesn't
attempt
to
replicate
that
shingle
siding
in
the
in
the
in
the
gable
end.
I
I
I
I
I
Clare,
brandt,,
cob:
and
details
of
that
proposed
new
deck
could
be
reviewed
by
the
ldsc.
or
alternatively
excluded
from
this
lic
and
in
a
new
application
provided
for
the
for
rio,
deck
and
and
landscaping
um..
There
is
a
second
story:
balcony.
I
I
Clare,
brandt,
cob:,
so
in
paint
and
colors,
the
applicants
consulted
with
an
architectural
historian
on
appropriate
colors.
um..
The
body
color
that
they
proposed
was
a
a
light
blue,
which
is
not
typical
for
a
nineteenth
century
home.
but
um!.
They.
I
Clare,
brandt,
cob:
found
photographs
where
the
house
is
painted..
This
similar
color.
um!
and
the
house
was
blue
as
recently
as
two
thousand
and
seven,.
According
to
google
maps.
I
Clare
brandt,
cob:
trim
color
proposed
is
this
white
dove
and
window
sash
is
proposed
as
black
and
stuff
considered
that
using
black
for
windows,
sash
is
appropriate
and
typical
of
a
traditional.
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
Clare,
brandt,,
cob:,
however,
historic
portions
of
the
house,
are
proposed
to
be
removed
to
construct
the
new
edition.,
not
to
believe
that
the
little
tiny
trauma-
that's
that's,
hiding
here.
I
I
Clare,
brandt,
cob:,
the
general
guidelines.,
don't
conflict
with
the
mapleton
hill
guidelines
on
any
of
the
proposed,
so
staff
found
the
proposal
appropriate.
I
Clare,
brandt,
cob:
for
the
following
reasons:,
restoration
of
the
historic
location
of
the
front
door
and
the
historic
layout
of
the
front
porch
will
help
reinstate
the
historic
pattern
and
alignment
of
the
front
of
the
house
to
the
sidewalk..
There
is
photographic
evidence
to
refer
to
when
restoring
the
front
porch.
I
I
Clare,
brandt,,
cob:
uh,.
There
are
a
couple
of
items
that
we
wanted
to
flag
for
our
board
discussion
and
consideration.
exploration
of
modifying
the
proposal
to
retain
the
historic
fabric
on
the
west
elevation,,
notably
that
small
dormer,,
and
to
potentially
avoid
cutting
into
the
historic
roof
for
the
new
shed
dormer.
I
I
I
B
C
C
C
M
Andy
strom:
she's
going
to
stay
muted
because
she's
with
the
kids
at
the
moment.
B
M
Andy
strom:
I'll,
I'll
start..
This
is
andy
stroma..
I
swear
to
tell
the
truth,-
and
I
just
like
to
thank
you
all
for
letting
us
be
here.
we're
a
small
family.
been
in
boulder
for
ten
years..
We
used
to
live
up
the
canyon
and
always
love
coming
down
to
mapleton
hill
is
really
our
welcoming
to
boulder,
and
we're
just
excited
to
live
in
the
neighborhood.
um,.
We
live
on
that
front
porch
and
in
the
front
yard..
If
you
walk
around
the
neighborhood,
you
probably.
G
G
Elissa
scrafano
and
tim
sullivan:,
let's
rafano
and
tim
sullivan.,
we're
the
architects
for
emily
and
andy
strong
for
this
project,
located
at
four,,
two,,
nine
highland,
avenue.
um,.
I
want
to
thank
claire
for
an
amazing
presentation.
um!.
We
had
a
ten
page
presentation,
all
set,
and
she
covered
almost
everything,
and
andy
covered
that..
He
and
emily
used
to
live
up
in
sunshine
canyon,,
and
I
hope
you
wag
your
house
and.
G
Elissa
scrafano
and
tim
sullivan:
and
chose
to
move
down
to
mapleton
hill
to
live
in
that
community.
and
they're
committed
to
the
neighborhood,
and
also
committed
to
being
good
stewards
for
this
historic
property..
G
B
Abby
daniels:,
I
I'm
not
seeing
any
raised
hands..
So
if
you
were
are
done,,
we
will
see
if
there's
anyone
from
the
public
who
would
like
to
speak
to
this.
thank
you.
C
C
J
J
kathryn
barth:,
it's
a
it's
a
project
that
has
obviously
had
a
lot
of
care.
and
and
thought
in
it,,
and
I
have
a
couple
of
very
pretty
minor
uh,
comments.
J
Kathryn
barth:
one
is
about
the
permanent,
and
I
I
do
think
if
there's
any
possible
way
to
restore
that
pediment,.
You
have
excellent
photographic
evidence
of
it,
and
I
think
it
would.
J
J
J
Kathryn
barth:
kathryn
barth:
things
to
do
so.,
kathryn
barth:.
I
guess
that's
it.
and
I'd
like
to
just
kind
of
um,.
J
J
B
C
C
Abby
daniels:
and
I
think
we
are
safe
to
close
abbey.
okay,,
so
we'll
close
public
park.
public
comment
for
four
twenty-nine
highland
avenue..
We
do
always
offer
the
applicant
and
design
team
an
additional
three
minutes..
If
there's
anything
you
wanted
to
rebut.
That
was
said
um,,
but
I
don't
know
if
you
have
anything
additional
to
say
after
um.
kathryn
bars's,
remarks.
N
N
B
Abby
daniels:
okay,
thank
you.,
and
now
we
will
move
on
to
for
deliberation.
um!
before
we
get
started..
I
want
to
thank
you
guys,
for
the
great
renderings,,
because
they
were
very
helpful
for
me
to
see
the
house
as
clear
moved
around
it..
So
thank
you
for
that.
and
you
know,.
During
this
virtual
format,
we've
been
going
alphabetical
by
first
name
to
get
input
from
boards.,
but
any
board
members
happy
to
defer
to
to
someone
or
come.,
but
we
can
come
back
to
you.
so,
bill,.
B
Abby
daniels:
thank
you,,
bill.
chelsea,.
L
L
L
A
A
A
A
A
A
A
John
decker:
side,
entry
into
the
house.
A
A
John
decker:
john
decker:
on
the
um,
I
guess.
west
elevation.
A
A
A
A
E
E
E
E
Ronnie
pelusio
lmb:
ronnie
pelusio
lmb:,
similar
to
john..
You
know
I've
got
a
couple
of
comments
about.
E
E
E
E
E
E
Ronnie
pelusio
lmb:
this
ronnie
pelusio
lmb:
um,.
You
know
there
are
ronnie
pelusio
lmb:
a
handful
of
proposed
deviations
from
that
idea,.
E
Ronnie
pelusio
lmb:,
I
I
I
do
need
to
ask
the
applicant
a
quick
question.
E
E
E
N
Elissa
scrafano
and
tim
sullivan:
uh,
no,,
it's
not
where
the
line
is
drawn
as
existing
and
new..
That's
where
the
original
gable
extended
to,
and
that's
where
we're.
N
E
E
Ronnie
pelusio
lmb:
from
anything
that's
proposed,
is
important.
and
so
keeping
that
roof
corner
as
you're
doing
it
at
the
very
top,
you
know.,
I
do
believe,
is
consistent
with
that.,
but
that
being
said,.
You
know
similar
to
what
john
is
saying,.
I
think
we
heard
some
of
this
in
the
staff
report..
You
know
that
type
of
intrusion
of
roof.
E
Ronnie
pelusio
lmb:
on
to
the
historic
piece
of
the
building.
you
know..
I
do
believe
this
inconsistent,
and
by
I
I'm
hoping
that
there's
a
little
bit
of
the
dialogue
here,
like
I
don't
just
want
to
be
the
talking
head,,
so
I'll
share
my
thoughts,
and
I'm
hoping
that
we
can
talk
about
it
as
a
board.
E
Ronnie
pelusio,
lmb:
and
um,,
because
the
applicant
didn't
really
have
a
presentation.
I
do,
and
they've
gone
through
such
a
process..
I
would
love
for
them
to
be
able
to
respond
to
some
of
this,,
so
we
can
kind
of
understand
what
the
path
forward
might
be.
um!.
So
that
being
said,
like
that
area
that
I've
highlighted
in
red.
E
Ronnie
pelusio
lmb:
seems
to
be
problematic
in
my
mind..
I'm
just
gonna
point
out
a
couple
of
other
things,,
and
maybe
we
could
talk
about
all
of
these
together.
um,.
E
E
E
E
E
Ronnie
pelusio
lmb:,
as
we
kind
of
move,
forward,
and
and
another
part
of
this.,
not
that
I
have
a
solution
for
any
of
this
is,.
E
E
Ronnie
pelusio
lmb:
gable
and
to
be
separated.,
ronnie,
pelusio
lmb:.
You
know
they're
always
groups
together,
except
for
the
front,,
where
there's
a
single
um..
So
there's
a
little
bit
of
unusual
stuff
happening
there,,
and
then
I
would
also
say,.
I
know
why
all
this
stuff
is
happening.,
but
there's
some
real
things
happening
with
the
roof
there.
That,
I
think,
are
just
unusual.
and.
E
E
Ronnie
pelusio
lmb:,
ronnie,
pelusio
lmb:,
so.
E
Ronnie
pelusio
lmb:,
similar
to
staff..
I
I
think
that
there
is
an
opportunity
to
introduce
different
root,
forms,
and
so
the
shed
roof
form,
if
it
is
a
meaningful
way
to
make.
What
I
think
in
this
case
is
like
a
connector,,
and
you
know
the
guidelines
talk
quite
a
bit
about
this.,
it's
like..
How
do
you
connect
from
all
the
new?.
E
E
Ronnie
pelusio
lmb:
second,
ronnie
pelusio
lmb:,
you
know,,
if
you
needed
to
use
that
form
again
as
a
dorm,
or
form
on
an
addition
to
help
differentiate
you
from
old,.
You
know.
That
is
something
that
I
think
we
have
approved
and
seen
in
the
past,.
E
Ronnie
pelusio
lmb:
and
there's
certain
ways
of
doing
that.,
ronnie
pelusio
lmb:
um,.
If
you
just
go
to
the
rear
elevation.,
I
want
to
talk
about
that
for
a
quick
second,
and
then
here
from
everybody,
and
maybe
see
if
we
can
get
to
some
voting,
and
and
all
again
in
the
and
I'm.
I'm
looking
to
hear
from
the
applicants.
um,.
E
E
E
E
Ronnie
pelusio
lmb:
differentiate
the
primary
gable
from
things
that
are
subordinate.
that
behave
more
like.
E
E
Ronnie
pelusio
lmb:
um,,
you
know,
on
the
front
of
this
building,
ronnie
pelusio
lmb:,
the
major
thing,,
and
I
know
this
is
a
design
thing,.
But
the
major
thing
is
like,.
You
know,
mama,
bear,
baby
bear.,
not
that
it's
working
as
I
just
drew
it.,
but
that's
how
that
works.
Right.,
there's
a
telescope.
E
E
E
E
E
E
Ronnie
pelusio
lmb:,
which
in
the
past
they
manage
the
windows,
and
major
root
forms
with.
E
Ronnie
pelusio,
lmb:,
dormers
and
um,.
You
know
there's
quite
a
bit
of,
you
know.
plan
articulation,,
not
to
say
that
it
can't
happen.
um,.
But
you
know
that's
that's!
Having
an
unusual
root
form,
that's
connecting
it.
E
E
E
Ronnie
pelusio
lmb:,
the
back
of
house,
might
be,,
maybe
more
consistent
with
the
language
of
forms.
Elsewhere.
E
A
N
N
Elissa
scrafano
and
tim
sullivan:
photograph,
where
the
original
yeah,,
where
the
original
ridge
line
that.
N
Elissa
scrafano
and
tim
sullivan:,
the
the
line
above
the
dormer
john
decker:
ridge,
ended.,
there's
in
the
photograph..
You
see
the
tree
and
you
catch
the
ridge
through
the
tree.
N
Elissa
scrafano
and
tim
sullivan:,
it
it
doesn't.,
elissa,
scrafano
and
tim
sullivan:.
It
seems
like
that
was
an
addition
at
some
point.,
that's
kind
of
what
we
assumed.
uh:.
N
E
D
Bill
jellick:
yeah,
claire,.
Can
you
tell
me
what
the
increase
in
square
footage
is
for
uh,
this
new
addition
to
the
existing
home.
D
Bill
jellick:
so?,
maybe,
claire?.
Maybe
there
was
something
in
the
packet
that
I
didn't
see
that
I
was
looking
for.
usually,.
You
know,
there's
a
a
chart
that
shows
existing
square
footage,
new
square
footage,
et
cetera,
et
cetera.,
and
the
reason
I'm.
D
D
D
N
D
D
Bill
jellick:
to
see
if
there's
a
way
that
we
can
minimize
that
or
eliminate
it
entirely.
D
D
Bill
jellick:
to
something
old,
and
and
the
guidelines
to
try
to
steer
us
in
a
direction
where
we.
D
D
D
Bill
jellick:
inappropriate..
I
would
much
rather
see
like
on
the
original
dormer
to
the
right,
on
the
original
home
here,.
Looking
at
the
proposed
west
elevation
amassing
more
like
that.
D
D
Bill
jellick:
I
don't.
bill
jellick:.
I
I
see
if
that,
if
we
approve
this,
as
we
as
we
see
it
here,
today,.
D
D
D
D
D
Bill
jellick:
that
this
house
bill
jellick:
bill
jellick:
is
going
to
lose
some
of
its
charm.
D
D
D
Bill
jellick:
um,
bill
jellick:,
but
bill
jellick:.
It
doesn't
seem
appropriate..
I
know
staff
says
it
is,
and
maybe
everybody
else
thinks
they
are..
But
you
know
I
look
at
the
rest
of
this
property,
and
I
see
little
bay
windows..
You
know
little
codes,
small
little
dormers,
uh.
and
now,
suddenly,.
This
house
is
going
to
have
a
whole.
D
B
Abby
daniels:
uh,
thank
you,,
bill,
and
abby
daniels:,
I'm
going
to
weigh
in
before
we
start
kind
of
the
next
part
of
this
discussion,
and
there
is
a
luxury
going
last,,
because
I
think
my
colleagues
have
already
brought
up
some
things
that
that
will
guide
the
the
next
portion
of
this
discussion..
What
I
heard
from
my
colleagues
is
rawl
agreement
that
bringing
the
front
porch
back
to
um.
what
was
shown
in
that
one
thousand
nine
hundred
and
thirty-nine
photo
and
moving
the
front
door.
The
main
entrance
back
there.
we're
all
in
a
green.
B
B
B
Abby
daniels:
have
that
pediment,
and
I
think
that
ronnie
and
john
articulated
at
best.
my
concerns.,
my
hesitations,
were
with
the
intrusion
into
this
strike,
ruth
form,,
as
ronnie
so
accurately
pointed
out,
where
you're
putting
this
addition,
you're,
actually
demolishing
a
nineteen
ninety-three
addition
and
building,
I
think
a
much
better
addition
in
its
place..
You
know
you
are
putting
that.
B
Abby
daniels:
at
the
only
place,.
I
think
it
can
really
go
on
this
house,
even
to
the
point
of
of
ronnie,
your
point
where,.
If
you're
gonna
have
that
mounted
glazing
at
the
rear.
this
is,
or
on
the
house,
that
is
really
the
only
place
it
could
go..
So
I
think,
first
and
foremost..
The
conversation
is
more
about.
B
D
Bill
jellick:
yeah.
and
since
you
reference
me,,
I'm
going
to
just
jump
in
there
and
say,.
Looking
at
this
particular
perspective
with
the
proposed
south
and
the
existing
south.
um,,
you
see
a
lot
more
mass
being
added
from
the
street
view
to
this
property
than
was
here
previously,.
D
Bill
jellick:,
and
that
is
always
something
that
we
are
concerned,
with.
we're
always
concerned
with
what
you
know
can
be
visible.
and
seeing
from
the
street..
So
that
was
partly
why
I
said
what
I
said.
D
D
Bill
jellick:,
just
looking
at
that
proposed
south
front
elevation,.
You
can
see
it's
a
lot
of
busyness
going
on
behind
this
house
property,
which
you
know.
E
Ronnie
pelusio
lmb:,
abby
and
fellow
members,
is
it?.
Do
you
feel
as
though
this
is
appropriate?,
and
is
this
an
available
opportunity
to
ask
some
questions
to
the
applicant
kind
of
have
a
dialogue,.
B
Abby
daniels:,
you
know
all
the
nuances
within
this
proposal,
and
I
would
rely
on
lucas
to
interrupt
us
if
we
can't
continue
to
ask
the
applicant
specific
questions.
A
A
John
decker:
discussion.,
this
is
a
very
complex
proposal,.
A
B
D
E
E
Ronnie
pelusio
lmb:
to
hear
whether
or
not.
they
think
it's
workable,,
because
the
worst
thing
would
be
for
us
to
approve
something
with
conditions
that
make
it
just
impossible
for
them
to
deal
with,.
And
then
we
put
them
in
an
unusual
circumstance
in
which
we've
created
a
very
burdensome
condition..
E
E
Ronnie
pelusio
lmb:
not
saying
we
need
to
be
in
agreement
with
the
applicant..
There
might
be
a
conclusion
in
which
there's
a
denial.,
but
I
would
like
to
explore
all
of
that,,
because
I
know
what
it's
like
to
be
in
those
shoes,
and
you
know
you
want
to
be
able
to
have
the
talk,
and
we
have
an
opportunity
to
do
it.
now.
I
feel
like
it's
respectful..
If
lucas
thinks
it's.
O
Lucas
markley
boulder:.
I
would
think
uh,
generally
speaking,
best
to
do
the
q
a.
with
the
applicant
after
their
presentation.,
but.
O
Ronnie
pelusio
lmb:
okay,
yeah..
I
think
it
would
have
been
impossible
to
do
the
q.
a.
because
I
would
have
had
to
do
a
narration
thing..
He
wants
to
do
that
at
that
point..
So
I'm
just
gonna
jump
in
and
ask
some
questions.
um,.
I
mean
I
feel
that
you're
hearing
kind
of
the
common
voice
from
the
board.
E
E
E
Ronnie
pelusio
lmb:
that,,
you
know,,
is
very
explicitly
outlined
in
the
guidelines..
It's
not
the
only
way
to
do
it.,
but
the
two
challenges,
with
what
I
think
is
being
demonstrated
to
it
can
act.
Over.
here
is
one
that
it
overlaps,
the
historic
building
in
a
way
that
I
think
is
more
or
less
non-compliant,
and
then
to.
E
Ronnie
pelusio
lmb:,
it
kind
of
would
if
there
was
just
a
simple
severing
of
it
creative..
I
would
also
say
a
little
bit
of
an
unusual
situation
on
the
side
of
the
building,
where
it's.
butting
up
roof
forms
in
a
way
that
I
think,
is
less
sympathetic
in
nature.,
and
so
typically,
what
we
like
to
see
is
a
subordinate
form
in
between
potential,
new
proposed
form
and
historic
form.
That
really
looks
like
a
link,.
E
N
Elissa
scrafano
and
tim
sullivan:
sure..
Let
me
try
to
take
a
stab.
um!.
What's
the
reason
for
the
overlap?
is,
is.
N
N
N
Elissa
scrafano
and
tim
sullivan:
makes
that
portion
of
the
it's
really
sort
of
an
attic
somewhat
habitable
in
in
there.
um!.
So.
N
N
N
N
G
D
Elissa
scrafano
and
tim
sullivan:
yeah,
that
that's
a
twod
elevation
in
which
everything
is
sort
of
brought
to
the
same
point,
which
is
the
surface
of
the
drawing.
N
N
N
Elissa
scrafano
and
tim
sullivan:,
the
mass
of
this
proposed
rear
addition.
G
D
D
Bill
jellick:,
if
this
perspective
were
that
we're
looking
at
right,
here,
tim.
um,.
If
we
had
changed
this
to
move
it,
maybe.
D
E
E
E
E
E
Ronnie
pelusio
lmb:,
you
know,
something
in
this
zone
that
is
smaller,.
That
then
allows
for,
and
let
me
drop
smaller.
E
E
E
E
Ronnie
pelusio
lmb:
yeah,,
I
mean
the
dumbbell
version
of
this
is
a
little
more
obvious
to
me
where
you
know,
and
I'm
not
suggesting
that
you
go
into
total.
Rework
here
like
that,
would
drive
me
not
if
I
were
you.
but
like,.
If
you
find
you
know
where
you
put
dormers
in
the
roof
forms
um,
and
those
are
just.
E
E
Ronnie
pelusio
lmb:,
not
that
you
should
do
that.,
but
I
think
a
version
of
that,
could,.
You
know,
help
clean
up
some
of
these
things.
and
again.
I
really
apologize
because
I
know
that
you've
got
head
height
issues
in
there,
and
you're
trying
to
get
program
over
there
in
the
bathroom
in
the
laundry
room.
E
E
E
Ronnie
pelusio
lmb:.
I
think
you
could
debate
it,,
you
know.
um,,
but
I
feel
like
that
part
would
be
the
piece
that
I
would
say
would
be
a
condition
of
approval,,
and
maybe
we
could
talk
about
the
other,
ones,
and
other
pieces
that
I've
described.
Is
things
worth
exploring.,
but
I
I
think,
if
you,,
if
you
got
this
part
right.
E
Ronnie
pelusio
lmb:
right
in
the
sense
of
it,
being
like
more
aligned
with
what
the
regulation
calls
for.
E
Ronnie
pelusio
lmb:
um,
and
ronnie
pelusio
lmb:.
You
know
what
preservationists
ronnie
pelusio
lmb:
on
a
whole
are
aiming
to
do.
yeah,
yeah,
yeah,,
trying
to
make
sure,.
I
cover
the
basis.
um,.
I
believe
that
that
piece
of
it
could
be
approvable,
and
if
we
could
go
to
the
back
for
a
quick
second,.
This
is
a
question,
and
it's
not
a.
E
Ronnie
pelusio
lmb:
like,.
You
know
this
isn't
a
condition,
in
my
opinion.
but
um!.
You
know
the
one
and
a
half
story
thing
that
I
brought
up
earlier,
and
the
way
that
might
apply.
um,.
Let
me
see
if
I
can
make
a
straight
line:
here.
yeah,
in
the
way
that
that
might
apply
at
the
back
with.
If
you
were
to
maintain,.
E
E
Ronnie
pelusio
lmb:
ronnie,
pelusio
lmb:,
just
saying
like.
in
in
fact,.
I
think
it
might
actually
hide
the
whatever
it
is,
the
end
of
doing
with
dorm
or
a
little
bit
better,.
So
they're,
not
as.
E
E
G
G
G
G
N
E
Ronnie
pelusio
lmb:,
it's
gonna,
be
for
me
to
talk
about
the
form
thing
all
at
once.
um!,
but
I
I
also
have
similar.
they.
I
want
to
talk
about
the
caller
to
say
some
clarifying
questions
for
bill.,
but
can
you
go
to
the
east
elevation?
Quick?
um!?
I
just
want
one
more
question
here
for
the
applicant.
um,.
E
Ronnie
pelusio
lmb:,
you
know
the
same
types
of
things
apply:
um.
and
so,
you
know,
obviously,.
You
got
this
big
roof.
and,
by
the
way,
like
I
recognize
that
this
root
pitch
is
different
than
the
other
ones
is
at
least
as
drawn,,
which
is
a
little
unusual..
It
makes
me
question
whether
or
not
it
was
original,.
N
E
E
E
Ronnie
pelusio
lmb:
and
I
don't
know
how
you
do
it..
You
know
it
might
be
something
weird,,
but
it
is
the
diminutive,
and
it
looks
like
roof
and
stuff..
I
think
that
that
would
be
the
way.
and
then
again..
I
I
think
that
I
think
that
this
conversation
is
the
same
that
we
had
on
the
other
side,
and
I
don't
have
a
solution,,
you
know.,
but
I'm
just.
E
E
Ronnie
pelusio
lmb:
being
as
ronnie
pelusio
lmb:
like
ronnie
pelusio,
lmb:
specific
as
I'm
talking
about
that,
like
dormers,
are
exactly
the
size,
and
I
think
that
there's
room
to
make
deviations.
Once
you
get
past
this,
and
if
you
kind
of
commit
to
a
dominant
root
form
um,,
then
maybe
you
can
make
those
changes
more
easily,
and.
E
E
E
Ronnie
pelusio
lmb:
about
whatever
happens
in
here,
being
something
that
you
know,
follows
the
more
prescriptive
rules
of
a
connector
um.
and
then,
there
being
room
for
exploration,
a
drc.
back
of
building
to
explore
the
concepts
that
we
described,.
E
Ronnie
pelusio
lmb:,
maybe
additional
piece
to
the
ronnie
pelusio
lmb:
conditions
that
talk
about
it
in
that
way..
That's
like
the
middle
piece,
that's
the
connector
is
more
prescriptive,
and
then
the
back
of
the
building
should
follow
the
some
concept,
and
we
can
explore
that
through
erc..
If
that's
the
case
that
I
would.
D
Bill
jellick:
now,
ronnie,:
were
you
going
to
speak
to
the
window?
massing
as
well.
E
E
E
E
ronnie
pelusio
lmb:
yeah,
I
mean,
ronnie
pelusio
lmb:,
you
know,.
We
got
the
skinny
windows.
Getting
windows
are
proposed,,
I
think,
mostly,
bill..
The
thing
that
I
see
is
the
windows
that
are
occurring
in
the
upper
portion
of
the
proposal
on
the
sides
could
be
re-evaluated,
and
whether
or
not
they,
the
gables
end
up
being
exactly
as
they
are
or
are
not,
um..
It
seems
to
me,
like.
E
D
E
E
E
Bill
jellick:
and
the
reason,
yeah,
the
reason
you're
saying
that
is,
you
want
the
window
patterning
to
be
connected
to
the
actual
form,
rather
than
your.
D
E
E
Bill
jellick::
it's
really
not
a
big
deal.,
it's
about
it.
and
again,
to
offer
the
um.
the
architects
an
opportunity
to
respond
to
that
piece.
E
Ronnie
pelusio
lmb:
yeah,
and
we're
kind
of
picking
on
you
a
little
bit
there,.
I
mean,
I
know,
like
if
that
was
the
only
comment..
We
had
to
be
like
easy
greasy..
So,
but
I
do.
I'm
glad
that
bill
brought
it
up,,
because
that
would
be
something
that
clearly
would
come
up
with
drc.
and
it's
good
to
daylight.
It
right
now.,
um,,.
E
Ronnie
pelusio
lmb:
that
the
one
piece
was
more..
You
know
it's
prescriptive,
and
then
the
other
is
um,.
You
know,
explorative
and
suggestive..
E
Abby
daniels:
yeah,,
I
can
make
it
up.
I
can.
and
ronnie.
I
agree
with
the
direction
you've
led
this
conversation,
and
I
appreciate
um.
the
architect's
willingness
to
explore
this..
I
don't
know
what
john
and
chelsea
may
want
to
add
to
this
portion.
A
John
decker:
john
decker:
totally
I
I
totally
agree.
A
D
A
A
A
B
Bill
jellick:
yeah,,
I'm
raising
my
hand
because
I'm
gonna
introduce
a
a
slightly
different
vector
here
into
the
discussion.
and
and
john
jog,
my
my
brain
about
this.
w..
This
thing
has
already
been
to
the
doc
a
number
of
times,
right.
D
Bill
jellick:
and
bill
jellick:.
That's
why
I'm
kind
of
wondering.
I
mean,!
If
the
applicant
and
the
architects
are
okay
with
the
recommendations,
we're
going
to
embed
in
our
approval.,
then
I
guess
it's
okay.,
you
know..
I
guess
they're
they're,
agreeing
that
we
could
go
back
to
that.
D
D
E
L
L
L
E
E
E
D
Bill
jellick:
I'm
going
to
actually
defer
to
john.,
but
I
I
want
to
make
a-
and
I
will
comment
after
john
lays
in,
because
he's
much
more
of
the
color
expert
than
I
am,,
but
I
would
really
like
to
see,
you
know,
a
couple
of
options
presented
to
us
by
the
applicants,,
not
just
this
particular
option..
D
Bill
jellick:,
so
we
don't,
you
know,,
so
we
can
give
them
some,
you
know,
guidance
on
which
direction
we
we're
kind
of
thinking.
They
should
maybe
go
into
um,
and
also
how,.
Whatever
choices
come
out,,
we
should
get
um,,
not
a
rendering
like
this,
because,,
as
you
know,.
This
is
coming
through.
D
D
Bill
jellick:,
but
no
a
a
medium
gray,
um.
however,.
If
it
goes
up,
you
know,
on
a
full
building,,
it
might
look
like
baby
blue
eggshell
blue,,
which
is
something
we
we
generally
aren't
going
along.
With.,
so,
anyway,!
That's
what
I
wanted
to
say.
so,
john,.
If
you
would
like
to
weigh
in,
I'd
appreciate
it.
A
A
A
A
John
decker:
yes,
john
decker:
alyssa.
elissa
scrafano
and
tim
sullivan:,
so
I
just
wanted
to
state
some
research
that
we
did
about
color.
because
um,
this
is
an
edwardian
home..
I
think
that's
how
it's
classified.
it
does
the
double
colonnade
in
the
front
and
wrap
around
porch,
and
that
the
era
that.
G
G
G
A
Elissa
scrafano
and
tim
sullivan:
yeah,.
We
actually,
we
actually
consulted
a
robert
schweitzer..
I
don't
know
if
you've
ever
heard
of
him.
he's
he's,
he's
he's
he's
a
well
known.
I
I've
heard
his
name.
yeah,
yeah.,
but
yeah,
he's
not
preservation,
and
he
gave
us
a
a
few
palettes.
we'll
share
those
with
you.
A
John
decker:
contrast
and.
A
A
Abby
daniels:
well,
and
I
want
to
say
my
reaction
to
the
proposed
for
the
windows.
Sash
was
more
reaction
that
I
was
trying
to
think
of
holmes
in
mapleton
hill
that
currently
had
that
against
a
softer
palette.
um,.
But
I'd
like
to
see,,
you
guys,
how
we
could
kind
of
bring
this
to
closure
for
this
evening.
um,
ronnie,.
Was
there
something
else
you
wanted
to
speak
to.
E
F
Laura
kaplan
pb
liaison:
uh,
thank
you,
ronnie..
I
don't
think
I
have
any
insight.
you
know.
historical
preservation
is
not
my
area
of
expertise..
I
don't
see
anything
here
that
would
particularly
trigger
something
that
is
planning
boards
per
view..
So.
F
E
E
E
Bill
jellick:.
What
I
would
like
to
add
for
that,
for
that,
claire,
is
your
typing.
just
provide
alternative,
color,
combinations,
or
color
ensembles
for
review,.
E
E
E
Ronnie
pelusio
lmb:,
you
know,
with
the
design
guidelines,
say
ronnie
pelusio
lmb:
is
that
there's
something
that's
diminished
in
nature
clearly
separates
itself
from
what
is
the
historic
to
new?.
It
creates
a
clear
delineation
at
the
right
location,
like
all
of
the
stuff.
That
is,
is
like
literally
written
in
the
guidelines
to
me
that
feels
like
it
should
be
prescriptive.,
but.
A
E
E
E
E
Ronnie
pelusio
lmb:,
and
I
know
that
still
ambiguous.
but,,
like
you
know,,
I'm
not
gonna,
recite
all
the
guidelines
there
there,.
So
we
can
go.
look
at
that,
and
maybe
that
gives
us
the
opportunity
for
it
to
be
a
little
more
expansive.
for
the
design
team
to
figure
out
exactly
what
that
looks.
Like,.
E
E
E
Ronnie
pelusio,
lmb:
and
clear.,
if
you're
willing
to
go,,
I
I
don't
I,
lucas,,
I
hope
not
to
have
to
read
all
of
those.
But
I
move
that
the
landmarks
board
adopt
staff
memorandum
dated
november
second,
two
thousand
and
twenty-two
to
find
it
to
the
board
and
conditionally
approve
the
landmark
alteration
certificate
to
restore
the
front
porch
and
the
place
of
rear
addition,.
E
Ronnie
pelusio
lmb:
a
contributing
property
in
the
middleton
hill,
historic
district,,
as
shown
on
plans
dated
september
sixth,,
two
thousand
and
twenty-two.,
finding
that
the
proposal
meets
the
standards
for
issuance
of
the
landmark
alteration
certificate
in
chapter
nine,,
eleven,,
eighteen,
brc.
one,,
and
it's
generally
consistent
with
the
general
design.
guidelines,,
provided
that
the
stated
conditions
are
met.
E
Ronnie
pelusio
lmb:
this
staff
conditions
of
the
tool
that
listed
here.
E
E
Ronnie
pelusio
lmb:
the
addition
of
condition
or
approval
to
be,
and
to
d
sub
six.
E
Lucas
markley
boulder:,
and
can
you
read
those?,
ronnie,
pelusio,
lmb:
yes,,
to
modification.
to
be
is
to
include
a
connection
to
the
historic
group
form
that
we
are
building
face,
that
more
closely
complies
with
the
guidelines,
and
two
d.
Sub
six
is
to
provide
alternative
color
ensembles
for
review.
B
B
B
L
Chelsea
castellano:
it's.,
it
looked
like
there's
a
lot
of
items
on
the
list
to
be
reviewed
in
ldrc.,
and
I
was
just
wondering
if
it
would
be
possible..
I
just.
I've
seen,,
you
know..
The
thirty
minutes
goes
by
pretty
fast..
I
think
that's
what
they
have
in
the,.
L
A
L
Bill
jellick:
yeah.
and
also
also
to
be
sure,
also,,
to
be
sure,
claire,
that
you
know
one
of
the
arc.
two
architects
are
involved
in
that
review
at
least
one,,
if
not
both
of
them.
D
D
L
Chelsea
castellano:
yeah,
yeah.
sorry..
I
just
I
made
the
request
because
I
have
seen
ldrc's
where
there
wasn't
enough
time
to
complete,
and
I
would
just
hate
for
someone
who's
coming
back
for
the
the
third
time,
plus
the
landmarks
board
meeting
to
not
get
it
done
in
one,.
So
it's
just
a
request
to
give
this
project
more
time.
A.
ld.,
orc.
meeting.
E
D
D
A
A
John
decker:,
the
twenty
twenty-three
saving
places
colorado
preservation
in
conference
is
february,
eighth
to
tenth,,
two
thousand
and
twenty-three.
A
A
John
decker:,
it's
it's
both
in
person
and
for
a
tool.
A
I
Clare,
brandt,
cob:,
my
update
is
pretty
brief..
We
are
still
waiting
for
the
technology
to
be
ready
and
chambers.
Before
we
can
give
you
a
real
update
and
start
thinking
about
going
back.
A
A
E
E
Ronnie
pelusio
lmb:
um,,
you
know..
I
was
just
wondering
what
the
as
a
reminder,
update
about
marcy's
return,
the
timing
for
that..
Sorry,
I
feel
like
I
should
know
that
I
just
don't.
P
Kristofer
johnson,
cob:
yeah,
sure..
She
will
be
back
on
december
first.,
um,
and
kind
of
on
a
on
a
part
time
schedule
through
the
month
of
december.,
but
then
back
in
full
time
in
january.
F
Laura
kaplan
pb
liaison:,
the
name
of
the
landlord
marks
board,
came
up
quite
a
bit
for
a
project
that
we
were
reviewing,
and
I'm
sure
staff
will
bring
this
to
your
attention..
But
I
just
felt
that
as
your
liaison,,
I
should
let
you
know
that
happened.
um!
and
it
came
up
in
conjunction
with
the
project
that
we
were
doing.
A
concept
review
for
our
concept
plan.
Review.
F
F
Laura
kaplan
pb,
liaison:
well,,
a
hundred
and
one
units
are
proposed
of
new
housing,
and
it's
for
a
block
that
runs
from
spruce
to
pearl
and
from
folsom
to
twenty-six..
So
if
you
can
imagine
that
area
of
town
like
where
hoshi
motors
used
to
be.
F
Laura
kaplan
pb
liaison:,
where
the
old
ares
thrift
shop
used
to
be,
and
there's
a
little
parcel
on
pearl,
and
the
reason
why
it's
connected
to
landmarks
board
is
because
one
of
the
buildings
that
is
proposed
for
demolition
is
an
old
gas
station.
F
Laura
kaplan
pb
liaison:,
it's
now
it's
called
the
mecca
building..
Now
it
has,
like
a
pilates
studio
in
there.,
it
looks
like
you're
all
familiar
with
that.,
so
that
project
came
up
before
planning
board
again
for
a
concept.
Review,,
and
one
of
the
questions
was
whether
planning
board
had
strong
feelings
about
the
preservation
of
that
building.
and
um,.
I
think
the
gist
of
the
conversation
was
that's
not
our
purview..
That's
landmarks,
board,.
F
Laura
kaplan
pb
liaison:,
so
I
I
think
you
can
expect
that
they,
the
applicant
indicated
that
they
will
be
applying
for
a
demolition
permit
at
some
point.
um!.
They
they
might
change
that,,
but
that's
currently..
Their
intention
is
full
demolition,
and
then
reuse
of
some
of
the
materials
they
want
to
reuse.
Those
glue
log
beams
that
are
in
that
gas
station
and
kind
of
reference,
the
architecture.,
but
they
would
be
applying
for
a
demolition
permit,
and
that
building
is
over
fifty
years
old,,
and
I
think
marcy
has
commented
on
that
previously
from
a
staff.
F
Laura
kaplan
pb
liaison:
discussed
the
historical
aspects
of
it..
I
did
not
watch
that
city
council
meeting,,
but
my
understanding
of
the
gist
of
their
conversation
was
that
they
did
not;
that
they
viewed
the
need
for
more
affordable
housing
as
overriding
to
the
need
to
preserve
that
building,
and
you
may
be
familiar
with
that.
F
F
Laura
kaplan,
pb,
liaison:
and
christopher
was
there
as
well,.
So
I
don't
know,
christopher,.
If
you
want
to
add
anything
to
that.
Summary.
P
Kristofer
johnson,
cob:
no,,
you
captured
it.
well,,
um,
yeah,,
it's
a
um.,
the
concept,
at
least
as
proposed.
would
um,
you
know,
would
demolish
the
building?
um!.
There
were
some
architectural
references
to
um,.
You
know.
sort
of
indicate
that
that
structure
and
the
reuse
of
the
glue
and
beams
that
are
part
of
that
building.