►
From YouTube: 1-4-23 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
A
B
B
A
C
C
C
C
C
C
A
A
A
A
A
A
A
A
A
A
A
C
Brenda
ritenour
(she/her):
sometimes,.
If
you
have
a
reactions
button,,
you
might
need
to
press
that
button.
thank
you,
marcy..
I
I
lost
over
this
earlier,,
so
I
appreciate
you
sharing
it.
now..
This
shows
various
places..
You
might
find
that
raise
hand
button..
I
don't
think
I
have
anyone
on
the
phone
so..
No
one
will
need
to
press
star
9.
C
H
C
H
H
H
H
H
H
H
A
C
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
C
A
A
A
C
C
C
A
A
A
A
J
J
J
J
Marcy
gerwing,
principal
planner:,
the
landmarks
board
voted
to
schedule,
a
hearing
to
initiate
landmark,
designation
or
issue
the
demo
permit,
and
following
that
meeting
on
october
eighth,,
the
applicant
withdrew
the
demolition
application..
So
there
is
no
current
demolition
application
for
this
property.
J
J
J
J
J
J
J
J
J
J
Marcy
gerwing,
principal
planner:
in
terms
of
marcy
gerwing,,
principal
planner:,
community
and
neighborhood
support.,
there's
been
limited
community
support
for
preservation.
Since
the
demolition
application
came
in,
I
believe,
the
board
has
heard
from
2
community
members,
and
you've
received
a
recent.
J
J
J
J
Marcy
gerwing,
principal
planner:,
the
proposed
designation,
and
it's
consistency
with
the
goals
and
policies
of
the
pump
plan..
The
plan
does
not
speak
specifically
to
landmark
designation
over
and
owners
objection..
In
some
cases
it
is
appropriate,
and
is
one
of
the
things
that
makes
folders
program
strong
is
the
ability.
J
Marcy
gerwing,
principal
planner:,
very
rarely.,
marcy
gerwing,
principal
planner:,
and
that
is
also
our
finding
for
that.
The
proposed
designation,,
whether
it
would
be
generally
in
the
public
interest.
staff,
considers
that
because
the
demo
application
has
been
withdrawn,
the
initiation,
it's
not
appropriate
at
this
time,
and
would
not
be
generally
in
the
public
interest.
J
J
J
J
Marcy
gerwing,
principal
planner:
and
so
to
frame
that
discussion.
when
you
get
to
that
point,.
The
key
question
is,:
should
the
landmarks
board
initiate
landmark
resignation
over
the
owners
objection,
if
yes,
vote
to
initiate
designation,
and
the
designation
hearing
at
the
landmarks
board
would
be
held.
J
J
J
J
J
A
C
C
H
H
H
H
H
A
I
I
I
I
A
A
A
F
F
F
G
G
G
G
E
A
A
Abby
daniels:
no
longer
worthy
of
landmarking..
I
I
think,
when
I
went
to
a
site
visit
this
summer,.
The
thing
that
really
struck
me
is
how
intact
this
block
is,-
and
I
think
these
are
one
of
those
houses
that
that
tell
the
story
of
boulder's
evolution,,
that
that
we're
losing
more
rapidly
than
others.
and.
A
A
A
Abby
daniels:,
these
were
the
neighborhoods
of
the
history
of
everyday
life,,
testified,
testifying
to
our
capacity
to
endow
the
built
environment
with
grace
and
meeting.,
and
I
think
this
is
one
of
the
houses
I've
seen
in
recent
years.
That
really
does
end
out
this.
This
block,,
this
neighborhood,,
the
community,,
the
entire
city
of
boulder,
with
grace
and
meeting,,
and
I
just.
A
Abby
daniels:
that
would
change
it
so
radically.
it
could
no
longer
be
landmarked,
and
I
have
witnessed
so
many
times.
if,
if
we
do
ever
proceed
with
an
initiation
over
an
owner's
objection,,
how
many
times,,
by
the
time
this
even
reaches
city
council,,
the
owner,
has
agreed
to
land
market..
So
tonight
I
won't
be
supporting
staff's
recommendation,,
but
I
I
respect
where
they're
coming
from,
and
I
respect
everything
my
colleagues
have
have
said
about
their
thoughts
on
this
as
well.
G
G
G
G
G
G
F
F
F
G
G
J
J
K
G
G
A
A
A
L
L
L
L
L
L
D
G
G
G
G
A
L
L
L
L
L
L
L
L
L
L
L
L
L
L
L
L
L
L
L
L
L
Clare,
brandt,
cob:,
so
you
will
have
seen
in
the
memo
that
staff
doesn't
believe
the
building
retains
integrity
of
its
character.
Defining
features.
the
national
park
service
provides
standards
that
define
whether
a
building
retains
enough
integrity
to
convey
appropriate
historical
associations
or
attributes.
L
L
L
L
L
L
L
L
L
L
L
L
L
L
L
L
L
M
M
M
Stephen
sparn:,
I
was
the
young
architect,
I
I
came
to
boulder
in
69
as
an
architecture
student,,
and
I
actually
watched
this
building
be
built,,
and
then
I
did
not
know
who
the
architect
was,
or
even
who
the
contractor
was.,
but
it
in
a
way,.
It
was
a
very
interesting
building
in
my
mind.,
but
working
with
the
owners.
We.
I
put
together
the
history.
F
M
M
M
M
M
M
M
C
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
A
C
M
M
A
Abby
daniels:
and
thank
you.
abby
daniels:,
stephen.,
abby
daniels:,
and
now
we're
going
to
move
on
to
board
discussion..
I
asked
that
everyone
mute
your
computer
phone
for
the
duration
of
this
discussion
again
in
this
pilot
program.
we're
alloting,
approximately
30
min
to
have
a
board
discussion
about.
G
G
G
Ronnie
pelusio
lmb:
and
the
fact
that
there's
habitable
space,
where
there
wasn't,
and
then
the
process.
there
were
windows,
at,
or
added
in
this
dormer,
like
fashions,,
as
well
as
a
change
of
material
on
the
second
floor..
So
I
think
that
I
am
an
agreement
with
staff..
I
think
that
they
have
described
this
accurately
per.
G
G
G
F
F
F
F
A
A
Abby
daniels:
cool
building,,
as
my
colleagues
have
pointed
out,
primarily
because
of
that
stonework,,
and
I
don't
know
if
this
would
ever
fall
into
a
non
contributing
restorable
building,,
because
I
agree
that
the
roof
form
has
changed
it
so
dramatically..
I
also
see
elements
from
the
original
51
year
old
building
that
are
still
there,,
but
I
will
be
supporting
staff's
recommendation.
This
evening.
A
G
N
N
G
Ronnie
pelusio
lmb:,
you
know
that's
cool.,
so
ronnie
pelusio,
lmb:
yeah,.
I
move
at
the
landmark
board.
adopt
the
findings
of
the
staff
memorandum,
dated
january
fourth,
2,023,
and
approved
the
demolition
application
for
the
building
at
8,
25
south
broadway.
Finding
that
the
building
to
be
demolished
does
not
have
significance
of
the
criteria
set.
Forth.
A
G
Ronnie
pelusio
lmb:
certainly,
before
you
go
to
the
next
case?.
I
always
appreciate
bill's
thoughts
on
this,
and
I
know
that
he
might
be
just
trying
to
expedite
a
process.
Here.
bill,.
You
know
I
just
want
to
encourage
you
to
make
sure
that
you
get
a
voice
in
here,,
because
I
really
do
want
to
hear
what
you
have
to
say..
G
A
A
abby
daniels:,
so
this
is
a
public
hearing
and
consideration
of
an
application
to
demolish
a
house
and
garage
constructed
circuit,
1,940
at
2119,
mariposa
avenue,
anomly
and
marked
building
over
50
years
old,.
Pursuant
to
section
923
of
the
boulder
revised
code..
The
owner
is
vanessa
miles,
and
the
applicant
is
eric
barry,
with
colorado,
demolition.
J
Marcy
gerwing,
principal
planner:
yes,,
and
I
would
just
marcy
gerwing,
principal
planner:,
like
to
say
we
were
piloting
these
adjustments,
in
part,
because
our
last
meetings
went
to
one
o'clock
in
the
morning..
We
are
flying
through
the
agenda.
and
I
just
want
to
say
I.
none
of
the
adjustments
were
intended
to
cut
off
any
of
the
board's
deliberation
or.
J
J
J
J
J
J
J
J
J
J
J
J
J
J
J
J
J
Marcy
gerwing,
principal
planner:,
second,
is
it's
association
with
persons
or
events?,
cecil
cox
and
donald
mccormick
are
notable
owners
of
the
property.
cecil
clocks,
like
likely
constructed
the
house..
He
and
his
wife
mary,
are
associated
with
multiple
working
class
businesses
in
boulder..
He
had
a
coal.
J
J
J
J
J
J
J
J
J
J
J
J
J
J
J
A
A
A
O
O
O
O
O
O
O
O
O
O
O
A
A
C
P
P
Adrienne
scheffey:
20
years,
you
used
to
see
a
lot
more
of
these
stone
type
houses
in
boulder,,
especially
in
the
realm
of
essentially
nineteenth
to
ninth.
on
both
sides
of
baseline,,
and
they
were
kind
of
a
key
part
of
boulder
that
tied
it
to
chicago..
When
you
go
up
there,
you
can
see
the
stone,
structures.
and
chatauqua..
You
can
see
how
they've
preserved
those.
P
P
P
A
C
Q
Q
Q
Q
Q
Q
Q
Q
A
Q
C
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
A
A
A
Abby
daniels:
well.,
abby
daniels:,
I'm
sorry
you're
sick,
chelsea,,
but
thank
you
for
joining
us,,
despite
being
under
the
weather.,
we're
doing
great
on
time
we're
making
up
for
last
month,.
I
know
I
know,,
but
maybe
going
a
little
too
fast.,
but
we
can
discuss
that
later.
thank
you.,
chelsea.
bill.
A
A
N
N
N
N
pb
ml
robles:
oh.
pb
ml
robles:,
but
I
really
appreciate
the
hard
work
you
guys
have
to
do
when
you
encounter..
You
know
these
tough
little
projects.,
you
know,.
These
are
modest
people
trying
to
do
right
by
a
historic
building,
and
unfortunately,
it's
it's
of
the
type
that
is
gonna
have
the
kind
of
problem
she
encountered.
People
with
a
modest
house
to
begin
with.
A
F
F
A
A
F
A
O
G
G
A
J
J
J
C
C
C
C
Brenda
ritenour
(she/her):,
and
so
we
really
appreciate
that
effort,
you've
already
gone
through.
and
we
realized
that
a
next
step
after
working
with
staff,
is
really
starting
to
figure
out
how
to
support
you
all
in
carrying
forward
the
commitments
that
the
city
of
boulder
has
made
to
racial
equity..
C
C
C
C
C
C
C
C
C
C
C
C
C
C
C
E
F
F
F
John
decker:
for
something
like
that.,
john
decker:,
3
and
a
half
hours
is
kind
of
john
decker:
long,,
even
john
decker:.
If
there
was
nothing
else.,
brenda,
ritenour,
(she/her):,
and
if
we
brought
the
meet,.
If
we
brought
the
training
to
you
all
here
in
this
space,,
it
would
be
2
and
a
half
hours
here.
C
G
G
J
J
Marcy
gerwing,
principal
planner:,
but
we
could
have
a
marcy
gerwing,
principal
planner:,
special
marcy
gerwing,
principal
planner:
meeting,,
which
marcy
gerwing,
principal
planner:.
But
what
I'm
hearing
is
plug
into
the
time
commitment
you
you
all
have
already
made,
rather
than
an
additional
time
outside
of
that.
G
C
C
C
C
F
C
C
C
C
C
C
C
J
J
G
G
F
F
C
J
J
J
J
J
G
J
J
J
J
J
J
E
E
E
A
A
A
J
Marcy
gerwing,
principal
planner:,
afterwards.
abby,
daniels:,
oh,
okay,,
my
apology.
you're
right.,
I
so
so,
marcy,.
I
have
the
wrong
cheat
sheet
in
front
of
me
all
night.
I've
been
trying
to
do
it
for
my
tiny
cell
phone
that
I
can
barely
rate.
so,
marcy,.
I
do
see
that.
sorry.
okay,.
I
just
want
to
say
it's
8,.
J
J
J
J
A
A
Abby
daniels:,
so
I
think
it's
a
little
difficult
to
compare.
last
month's
meeting
to
this
one
just
based
on
the
agenda
items..
I
also
think
staff's,
presentations
and
memorandums,
really,,
but
just
some
of
the
speed
with
which
decisions
could
be
made
tonight.,
but
I
also
know
how
much
it
means
to
me
to
hear
from
my
colleagues..
There
was.