►
From YouTube: December 15, 2020 Heritage Preservation Commission
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).
B
B
E
D
B
B
B
B
Item
number.
Four
is
1609
university
avenue,
southeast
ward,
2
certificate
of
appropriateness?
That
item
will
be
discussed.
That
is
our
only
item
tonight.
So
again,
the
proposed
agenda
is
item
number
4,
1609
university
avenue
southeast
will
have
a
staff
presentation,
public
comment
and
commission
discussion
and
action.
B
B
C
F
B
B
Thank
you,
commissioner,
fritz
any
discussion.
B
B
C
A
C
C
B
B
The
process
is
as
follows:
we
will
take
each
of
the
agenda
items
in
order
planning
staff
will
present
its
report
and
commissioners
may
ask
questions
of
staff.
Then
we
will
hear
from
the
applicant
and
commissioners
may
ask
questions
of
the
applicant.
After
that
I
will
open
the
public
hearing
and
we
will
invite
public
comment.
B
B
F
Today,
I'm
presenting
a
certificate
of
appropriateness,
application
for
an
addition
and
rehabilitation
project
located
at
1609
university
avenue
southeast
the
phi
kappa
psi
fraternity
next
slide,
please
the
subject:
property
is
a
contributing
resource
in
the
university
of
minnesota
greek
letter,
chapter
house,
historic
district
and
off
the
buildings
in
the
district.
It
was
the
earliest
constructed
specifically
for
fraternity
or
sorority
use.
F
The
building
was
designed
by
master
architect,
william
kenyon
in
1907,
and
was
built
in
the
colonial
revival
style.
In
the
georgian
tradition,
the
building
retains
characteristic
colonial
revival,
elements
which
include
its
side,
gamble,
roof
red
brick,
cladding
pedimented
portico,
with
corinthian
columns
coins
at
all
elevation
corners
and
overall,
symmetrical
feel
the
property
retains
good
historic
integrity,
but
has
been
altered
with
some
original
elements
removed,
notably
historic
windows
and
decorative
wood
brackets
at
eaves.
F
The
applicant
is
proposing
to
rehabilitate
the
existing
historic
building
and
build
a
three-story
flat
roof
addition
at
the
rear,
which
is
the
north
or
northeast
elevation.
The
rehabilitation
will
introduce
lost
design,
detail
which
includes
brackets
and
window
profiles,
and
the
repairs
of
the
building
will
be
made,
which
consists
of
standard
masonry
and
material
repairs.
F
The
addition
portion
of
the
project
is
proposed
to
incorporate
more
housing
and
community
space
for
the
property
which
will
allow
for
additional
fraternity
members
to
reside
at
the
property
the
applicant
is
proposing
next
slide,
please
to
remove
nearly
all
of
the
rear
elevation,
historic
features
which
you
just
saw,
which
is
approximately
350
square
feet
to
construct
a
new
three-story
flat,
roof
edition
that
will
extend
approximately
38
and
a
half
feet
from
the
historic
rear
elevation.
F
The
historic
rear
includes
currently
a
one-story
front,
gambril
wing,
with
three
gabled
dormers
on
the
roof,
in
symmetry
with
those
that
exist
on
the
front
elevation
and
the
central
gable.
Dormer
includes
a
pedimented
or
sorry
prominent,
red
brick
chimney
which
will
be
removed
as
part
of
the
project.
F
F
The
applicant
is
proposing
hardy
shingle
siding
on
the
second
story,
areas
of
the
addition
of
elevations
and
has
previously
submitted
samples
for
aluminum
shingles
as
a
possible
option
as
well.
The
addition
will
include
cantilevered
bays
at
the
rear
side
of
both
side
elevations
for
the
addition
which
you
can
see
here
as
well.
F
Overall
windows
are
proposed
to
match
the
original
designs,
which
are
a
mix
of
four
light
and
mix
of
sorry,
four
light
and
six
over
one
double
hung
windows
next
slide:
please,
the
applicant
is
proposing
to
rehabilitate
the
front,
which
is
the
south
or
southwest
elevation
with
the
following
select
repair
of
the
entry
steps
and
an
addition
of
painted
metal
railings.
F
The
removal
of
existing
west
steps
to
the
main
entry
and
construction
of
new
steps
in
this
location,
repair
of
the
portico
at
the
columns
and
the
second
story,
battle,
strut
and
decking
replacement
of
all
windows
with
those
of
off-white
aluminum,
clad
wood,
sash
and
muntin
to
match
the
historic
light,
division
and
profile
and
the
re-roof
of
the
non-historic
roof,
which
will
take
place
on
the
entirety
of
the
building
as
well
brackets
and
dentals
at
the
eaves,
are
proposed
to
be
replaced
to
match
the
historic
on
the
building
as
supported
by
photo
evidence
next
slide.
Please.
F
Next
slide,
actually,
thank
you.
The
west
or
northwest
elevation
includes
red
brick
cladding
with
a
secondary
entry
windows
on
this
elevation
are
not
historic.
Six
over
one
double
hung
with
four
light:
fixed
windows,
a
large
ada
ramp,
is
proposed
to
extend
from
the
rear
of
the
new
edition
to
a
new
door
opening
on
the
historic
elevation.
The
existing
door
is
proposed
to
be
switched
with
the
adjacent
window
in
the
existing
openings
at
this
location
to
allow
for
the
accessible
entry
masonry
repair
will
also
take
place
on
the
historic
portion
of
this
elevation.
F
The
alteration
is
compatible
with
the
designation
of
the
historic
district,
including
the
period
and
criteria
of
significance,
since
the
proposed
new
addition
and
alterations
are
compatible
with
the
character
of
the
university
of
minnesota.
Greek
letter
chapter
house,
historic
district,
the
alteration
will
ensure
the
continued
integrity
of
the
historic
district,
the
overall
integrity
of
the
greek
letter
chapter
house,
historic
district,
is
not
changed
by
the
project.
F
The
addition
and
rehabilitation
will
be
compatible
with
the
character
of
the
district
and
massing
roof
shape,
fenestration
and
materials,
except
for
the
addition,
siding,
which
has
been
conditioned
and
you'll
see
that
a
bit
later,
the
addition
is
easily
identifiable
as
a
contemporary
alteration
and
does
not
attempt
to
create
a
false
sense
of
history
either
and
also
the
alteration
is
consistent
with
the
applicable
design
guidelines
adopted
by
the
commission
for
the
district
in
general.
The
project
is
consistent
with
the
university
of
minnesota
greek
letter
chapter
house
historic
district
guidelines.
F
The
new
construction
guidelines
for
this
district
are
translatable
to
a
proposed
new
addition
project.
So
for
this,
the
proposed
edition
doesn't
meet
the
guidelines
for
exterior
materials
and
staff,
as
condition
that
the
proposed
hardy
shingles
be
changed
to
a
stone,
brick
concrete
block,
stucco,
terracotta
or
wood.
F
Also,
the
new
edition
meets
the
majority
of
the
guidelines
for
new
edition,
specifically
as
it's
constructed
to
the
rear
elevation
preserves
the
form
of
the
historic
building
and
is
set
back
from
the
building
to
be
supported
and
even
retain
the
historic
coins.
The
proposed
edition
does
not
attempt
to
replicate
the
existing
building.
It
takes
design,
inspiration
and
masonry
windows
massing
elements
all
from
the
historic
building
and
it's
both
contemporary
and
compatible.
F
Please,
the
ada
ramp
is
proposed
as
a
separate
entry
to
the
side
of
the
building,
which
alters
the
current
window.
Opening
at
this
location,
the
new
entry
to
the
edition,
which
will
incorporate
the
bulk
of
the
living
units
would
not
be
fully
accessible.
F
Staff
has
conditioned
that
this
rear
entry
would
be
accessible
and
that
changes
not
be
made
to
the
existing
selected
window,
opening
on
the
side
to
switch
it
with
the
current
door.
Opening
on
this
elevation
as
the
guidelines
do
stay
wherever
possible,
88
ramps
and
entrances
should
be
placed
at
the
rear
of
the
building.
F
F
Two
all
architectural
feature
and
masonry
repairs
to
the
historic
building
shall
be
done
in
select
areas
where
evidence
shows
deterioration
and
need
for
repair.
The
full
extent
and
repair
should
be
submitted
to
staff
for
review
and
approval
for
reviewing
approval
and
should
be
in
compliance
with
the
architectural
feature
and
masonry
guidelines
outlined
in
the
district
three.
As
discussed,
the
hardy
shingle
or
metals
shingle
sightings
are
not
compatible
materials
for
the
historic
district
perth.
F
The
guidelines
stone,
brick,
rusticated,
concrete
block,
stucco,
terracotta
or
wood
shall
be
used
instead
and
samples
should
be
submitted
to
staff
for
review
and
repo
approval,
and
also
the
proposed
alteration
to
switch
the
historic
door
and
window
opening
on
the
side,
which
is
the
west
and
northwest
elevation
shall
not
be
allowed.
Openings
at
this
elevation
shall
retain
their
functionality
as
either
windows
or
doors,
and
the
accessible
entrance
shall
be
moved
to
the
rear
to
comply
with
the
university
of
minnesota
greek
letter,
chapter
house,
historic
district
guidelines,
other
than
those
specific
conditions.
F
B
H
Staff
hi
this
is
commissioner.
Sam
bolt
one
question
the
coins
on
the
corners.
It
appears
that
they're
being
retained
on
the
on
the
north,
the
back
elevation,
because
the
masonry
wall
portion
of
it
is
showing
on
first
to
be
retained,
but
the
second
floor
plan.
H
F
In
this
in
this
location
shown
currently,
yes,
they
will
be
retained.
Although
the
the
building
is
set
back
slightly,
I
should
say
the
addition
is
set
back
slightly
to
show
the
the
coins
in
this
location.
B
So
with
that,
I
will
open
the
public
hearing
for
this
item
is
the
applicant
here,
and
would
they
like
to
speak,
I
believe
so.
Sylvia
frank
appears
to
be
on
the
line.
If
you
could
press
star
six
on
your
phone,
wait
to
hear
the
recorded
message
to
activate
your
microphone
and
then
state
your
name
and
address
for
the.
C
This
record
sylvia
frank,
I'm
with
carlson
and
frank
architects
and
I'm
representing
the
fraternity.
The
fraternity
has
owned
and
occupied
this
building
for
over
a
hundred
years,
and
they
the
building,
is
in
need
of
renovation.
The
fraternity
needs
to
accommodate
more
members,
they're
proposing
for
an
additional.
F
C
I
believe
it
was
mentioned
by
one
of
the
commissioners
that
we
wouldn't
necessarily
have
to
replicate
the
pattern
pattern
of
the
buttons
on
the
windows.
So
what
you
see
on
the
image
sketches
is
one
over
one,
without
divided
lights,
on
the
edition,
but
we'd
be
preserving
the
pattern
of
the
original
historic
windows
on
the
original
fraternity
house.
C
B
C
Where
you
see
the
original
study
is
located
and
we
this
entrance
as
it
exists
now,
is
not
a
code
compliant
entrance,
there's
a
step
down
of
about
seven
entrants
inches
as
you
go
out
the
door
and
the
landing
does
not
meet
the
code
requirement
of
a
48
inch
minimum
depth
and
the
other
issue
here
is
we'd
like
to
preserve
the
historic
stair
and
the
landing
as
you
go
up
to
the
second
floor.
C
But
as
you
go
down
to
the
basement,
there's
a
headroom
problem
with
the
existing
stair
there's
only
five
feet:
10
inches
of
headroom
there.
So
if
we
revise
that
stair
into
the
basement,
so
it
takes
up
the
landing
at
that
side
doorway
we
can
create
enough
headroom
on
that
stairway,
going
down
to
the
basement.
C
It's
difficult,
I
mean
it
would
be
a
major
task
to
make
it
a
functioning
entrance,
but
what
we
would
be
willing
to
do
is
to
leave
a
door
or
the
appearance
of
a
door
that
doesn't
function
at
this
location.
C
The
the
fraternity
members
are
coming
and
going
from
class
many
many
times
a
day,
and
the
fraternity
would
like
to
renovate
they're
planning
to
renovate
the
all
the
common
areas
on
the
first
floor
and
take
that
back
to
resemble
as
closely
as
possible.
The
original
appearance
and
they'd
like
to
discourage
all
the
coming
and
going
of
the
members
into
that
front
door
and
wear
and
tear
on
those
common
areas.
C
C
So
that's
that's
our
thinking
on
the
side
entrance.
C
The
other
issue
I
wanted
to
mention
is
that,
in
talking
as
far
as
accessibility
goes
in
talking
with
karen
grid
gridley
at
the
state
who's,
the
accessibility
specialist
and
with
scott
anderson,
the
minneapolis
building
official
they're,
both
telling
me
that
the
code
requires
that
the
front
entrance
be
made
accessible
and
the
reason
for
that
is
that
we're
doing
a
major
renovation
on
the
existing
portion
of
the
house
and
that
front
entrance
is
not
code
compliant.
Now,
there's
a
step
down
of
about
seven
inches
as
you
walk
out
the
door.
C
So
we
have
to
raise
that
up,
so
we
have
a
landing
outside
the
door.
So
since
we're
altering
doing
all
that
alteration
the
code,
the
accessibility
code
requires
that
we
make
this
an
accessible
entrance
and
there.
If
it's
not
an
accessible
entrance,
the
it
would
be
required
that
the
hpc.
C
C
We
need
so
much
space
to
circle,
a
wheelchair
around
by
the
lift
and
our
porch.
Our
rear
porch,
which
we'd
like
to
maintain
would
become
smaller,
so
it
just
doesn't
work
very
well
to
put
a
lift
in
the
back
area.
B
Yes,
thank
you
for
your
comments.
I
have
a
question
looking
at
the
side
entrance
functionally,
I
understand
the
problems
with
the
existing
door
and
the
staircase
that
makes
sense
to
me.
B
I
guess
what
I'm
curious
about
is,
if
you
considered,
instead
of
opening
up
the
window
and
the
existing
study,
to
make
it
a
mud
room,
why
you
didn't
put
a
door
in
the
new
study
and
have
that
be
the
mud
room
and
have
the
studies
stay
where
it
is
just
part
of
the
concern
being
the
the
changing
of
the
existing
openings
and
wondering
if
it,
if
you'd
looked
at
using
that
study
as
the
new
study
as
the
new
mud
room
instead,
since
it's
on
the
same
side,
it
would
be
you
know
a
shorter
ramp
to
get
to
that
door.
C
I'm
not
looking
at
that
drawing
right
now,
but
is
this
the
are
you
talking
about
the
front
room?
It's
in
the.
B
Front
of
the
house:
no
it's
in
the
addition
there's
like
the
entry,
porch
the
stair
tower
and
then
a
room
labeled
study
before
you
get
to
the
bathrooms
and
like
oh
so
in
the
addition-
and
I
guess
I'm
wondering
because
it's
so
close
to
the
mud
room.
If
you'd
looked
at
using
that
instead.
C
Of
the
problem
is
the
length
of
the
ramp
that's
required.
We
need
this
entire
length
of
the
ramp,
at
least
up
to
the
door
into
the
mud
room.
What's
called
the
mud
room
in
order
to
meet
the
requirements
for
a
lamp
a
ramp
so
and
the
ramp
has
to
come
from
the
parking
area
so
because
we
need
our
accessible
parking
space
in
the
parking
lot.
C
So
we
just
don't
have
enough
length
before
you
get
to
that
room.
Okay,
provide
a
ramp.
C
One
more
thing
I
might
mention
that
was
a
condition,
and
this
is
not
related
to
the
accessibility,
but
there
is
a
wall
that
a
low
retaining
wall
that
runs
along
the
sidewalk
area
and
we'd
been
asked
to
make
any
necessary
repairs
on
that
wall.
That
wall
is
not
on
the
fraternity's
property,
so
the
fraternity
would
like
to
repair
the
wall
as
needed.
C
C
B
That
makes
sense,
that's
not
actually
a
condition
right.
It's
just
discussed
in
the
staff
report.
I'm
looking.
I
don't
think
the
condition
includes
the
retaining
wall.
C
B
I
don't
see
any
thank
you
for
your
comments
and
for
for
answering
my
question
with
that.
I
think
we
will
move
on
to
the
public
comments
since
there
don't
seem
to
be
any
questions.
B
Okay.
So
again,
anyone
wishing
to
speak
for
or
against
this
application
we're
going
to
take
the
list
of
pre-registered
speakers
in
order
and
then
open
the
floor
to
any
other
speakers
who
may
be
in
the
queue.
If
you
can
provide
your
name
and
address
before
making
your
comments,
and
when
I
call
your
name,
if
you
could
press
star
six
on
your
phone
and
wait
to
hear
the
recorded
message
to
activate
your
microphone
so
that
we
can
hear
you
the
next
person
in
the
queue
is
I
apologize.
J
Is
thomas
johnson
colin
was
unable
to
make
it
he's
our
house.
B
K
Yeah
I'm
calling
in
support
of
this
project.
I
am
a
member
of
a
an
alumni
group
that
has
been
working.
You
know
recently
on
with
silvia
and
peter
carlson
frank
on
on
this
renovation
edition
project,
but
also
have
just
been
involved
over
the
years
with
the
property,
maintenance
and
small-scale
improvement
projects
that
we've
done.
K
K
Keeping
an
eye
on
it,
we
have
a
couple
annual
meetings,
we
have
homecoming
typically,
and
you
know
we
always
always
like
to
stop
by
the
house,
and
you
know
I.
I
have
experienced
first
hand
over
the
years
that
you
know,
despite
our
our
best
efforts
to
to
do
to
do
things
in
a
very
budget
focused
way.
K
You
know,
there's
only
so
much
that
that
we
can
do
in
within
that
paradigm.
You
know
I'm
not
trying
to
discredit
anybody,
who's
done
any
work,
because
that
includes
myself,
but
it
has
been
mostly
a
band-aid
approach
for
at
least
the
last.
You
know
10-15
years
and
it
isn't.
It
is
an
older
house.
K
You
know
maybe
in
the
twilight,
but
I
think
that
this
project,
as
it's
as
it's
designed
and
as
we've
worked
through
with
with
the
hpc
and
with
the
city,
I
believe
that
this
design
and
this
project
and
this
team
that's
currently
together
working
on
this.
K
I
believe
this
is
how
this
house
gets
preserved.
I
believe
this
is
how
this
house
lasts
another
113
years.
I
feel
that
without
this
project,
as
we've,
you
know
as
we're
putting
it
together
currently
without
this
project.
I
I
don't
know
the
future
of
the
house.
It's
way
way
more
uncertain.
I
feel
if
we
don't
do
this,
and
I
feel
that
gosh
in
another,
you
know
10
15
20
years,
I
don't
know
what
our
options
would
be.
K
As
the
house
just
continues
to
age
and
show
its
age,
I
feel
that
you
know
our
our
window.
To
do
something
significant
is
is
somewhat
closing.
I
just
want
to
overall
say
that
I
support
this
project.
I
support
it
as
designed
and
believe
that
that
the
architects
have
have
put
something
together
that
has
really
really
been
mindful
of
everyone's
goals.
B
B
J
Oh
beautiful
all
right,
this
is
thomas
johnson.
I
reside
over
at
1315
fairmounts
avenue
in
the
beautiful
sleepy
city
of
st
paul
minnesota.
J
I
do
have
to
make
a
brief
disclosure
that
I
am
an
attorney,
but
I'm
not
here
in
a
representative
capacity,
just
a
personal
capacity
as
a
friend
of
good
folks
over
at
1609
university
avenue.
I
I
would
just
reiterate
some
of
the
comments
that
lance
made
and
would
specifically
request
the
relief
of
approving
this
coa,
but
without
conditions
one
through
four.
J
I
think
we've
worked
very
hard
at
providing
reasonable
alternatives
to
the
commission
and
in
particular
that
that
entrance
and
the
way
we
have
designed
kind
of
moving
just
a
couple
small
features
around,
I
think,
really
improves
the
overall
utility
of
the
project
makes
it
a
lot
more
manageable.
For
us.
J
I
think
soviet
did
a
wonderful
job
of
articulating
all
the
reasons
and
the
thoughtful
approach
we
took
to
making
that
that
ada
accessible
and
really
when
you
look
at
the
spirit
of
the
ada,
making
sure
that
that
the
entrance
that
you
know
we
intend
all
of
the
people
who
reside
at
the
property
to
use
is,
is
the
entrance
that
those
with
disabilities
would
end
up
using
as
well.
J
I
think
some
of
the
other
things
like
the
shingles,
I
think
we
found
a
reasonable,
suitable
alternative
that
also
complies
with
with
the
historic
nature
of
the
house
and
also
really
make
sure
that
it's
you
know
viable
for
a
long
period
of
time.
I'm
sure
you're,
all
well
aware
of
the
burdens
of
keeping
up
the
historic
property
are
tremendous
compared
to
the
average
new
home.
J
So
you
know
ways
that
we
can
kind
of
comply
with
the
spirit
of
the
historic
nature
of
the
property,
but
also
find
ways
to
be
cost
efficient
and
energy
efficient
are
really
important
to
us.
So
I
guess
I
would
thank
you
all
for
your
time
and
considering
this
project.
I
do
hope
that
you
vote
in
favor
of
improving
the
coa,
but
again
would
ask
for
the
recommendations
items
one
two
three
and
four
to
be
struck.
B
I
Hi
yeah,
so
this
is
martin
bovis
calling
my
address
is
222
hennison
avenue,
minneapolis,
minnesota
55401.
I
I
am
also
calling
in
favor
of
the
project,
have
been
been
involved
with
with
some
of
the
work
along
with
lance
fisher
and
thomas,
and
I
would
also
echo
some
of
the
things
that
lance
has
said
in
terms
of
the
the
condition
of
the
house
in
terms
of
where
it's
at
today
and
this
being
a
very
good
opportunity
to
to
preserve
it
for
the
next
100
years
and
then
the
other
thing
I
would
add,
is
you
know,
as
as
someone
who's
been
in
this
fraternity
and
has
remained
active
as
an
alumni.
I
I've
seen
this
fraternity
in
terms
of
membership
really
grow
over
the
last.
You
know
five
to
ten
years
to
a
point
beyond.
Where
was
that,
when
I
was
in
school
significantly,
I
would
say
40
40
50
higher
in
terms
of
membership,
which
is
great,
but
with
those
with
that
expansion,
I
think
they've
we've
heard
it,
and
I've
kind
of
seen
that
kind
of
the
capacity
in
terms
of
you
know,
being
able
to
provide
support
for
our
membership
is,
is
limited
in
our
current
space.
I
In
terms
of
you
know,
having
a
a
weekly
dinner
as
a
fraternity,
for
example,
we're
having
chapter
meetings
etc.
We
are,
I
would
say,
extremely
tight
on
space.
You
know
even
before
you
know
some
of
this
expansion,
we
were
tight
on
space.
So
that's
another
piece
of
of
information
I
just
like
to
add
in
support
of
the
project
so
that
those
are
my
comments.
B
L
L
L
As
long
as
you
know,
the
nature
preservation
of
the
historical
district
is
have
held.
One
question:
I
did
have
this
accessibility
for
ada.
L
L
B
That
is
our
list
of
pre-registered
speakers,
so
I
would
like
to
call
for,
if
there's
anyone
else
in
the
queue
who
did
not
register,
if
you
could
press
star
6
and
give
me
your
name
and
address
for
the.
B
A
I
am
also
a
proud
alumni
of
the
university
of
minnesota
and
alumni
of
the
phi
kappa
psi
fraternity
and
you
know
if
it
wasn't
obvious,
I
am
calling
in
strong
advocacy
for
the
restoration
project
as
a
you
know,
living
in
the
house
for
multiple
years
for
between
the
years
of
2012
to
2016..
A
I
would
I
would
say
that
these
restorations
are
very
much
long
overdue.
I
really
appreciate
sylvia
for
being
an
advocate
for
this,
for
this
project
and
kind
of
outlining
the
details
of
this
and
really
when
it
comes
down
to
it.
I
I
look
at
the
condition
of
the
house
when
I
was
living
there
and
and
to
only
imagine
the
the
state
that
it's
in
right
now
and
it
really
comes
down
to
the
concern
about
the
health
and
safety
of
occupants
in
its
current
state.
A
Without
this
restoration,
I
would
say
that
really
things
are
falling
apart
and
without
serious
improvements
so
that,
as
lance
mentioned,
I
I
don't
foresee
a
a
long-term
future
for
the
house,
and
you
know.
I
think
this
is
a
important
part
of
many
many
alumni
that
look
at
this
house
as
as
bringing
back
really
powerful
memories
of
their
college
experience,
and
I
see
this
as
just
a
way
to
strengthen
the
community
that
this
this
fraternity
has
to
offer
to
the
university
of
minnesota.
M
Can
you
hear
me?
Yes
hey?
This
is
charlie
kennedy.
My
address
is
four.
Eight.
Eight
five
red
oak
lane
mound
minnesota
five,
five,
three
six,
four,
much
like
quite
a
few
individuals
on
the
call
here.
I
am
also
a
alumni
of
the
fraternity
house,
but
more
than
that,
I'm
also
a
multi-generational
alumni
and
seeing
these
plans
and
what
the
architecture,
team
and
and
lance
and
tom
and
the
rest
of
the
individuals
call
have
worked
on.
M
I
have
seen
this
house
and
this
historic
preservation
be
upheld,
so
I
just
wanted
to
just
once
again
thank
the
the
teams
that
have
put
this
together
and
shared
everything
out
and
I
think,
from
a
historical
preservation
perspective
falling
in
line
with
what
regulations
have
to
be
upheld
in
today's
world,
that
this
is
the
best
solution
for
for
a
move
forward
strategy
on
a
historical
preservation
property
to
stay
for,
for
many
many
more
generations
to.
B
B
B
Our
to
our
our
remaining
person
on
the
phone,
if
you
could
just
press
star
six
and
tell
me
if
you
don't
want
to
speak,
that
would
be
really
helpful.
So
I
know
whether
or
not
I
can
move
on.
B
Okay,
I'm
gonna
assume
you're,
just
monitoring
the
meeting
and
and
not
here
to
speak.
So
with
that,
seeing
no
other
people
to
speak,
I
will
close
the
public
hearing
and
start
the
commissioner
discussion,
I'm
curious.
If
anybody
has
concerns
or
comments
on
the
proposed
application,
I'm
really
excited
to
see
this
upkeep
being
done
on
one
of
our
historic
properties.
I
think
we
all
really
enjoy
seeing
projects
that
bring
back
some
of
the
historic
character
to
our
buildings,
and
you
know
support
that
that
idea,
commissioner
statey.
E
Hi
I
had
a
quick
question
about
for
staff
about
number
four,
the
condition
number
four
do
we
know
like
from
a
standpoint
of
ada
or
accessibility.
What
the
best
solution
is
is
the
solution
that
they've
put
in
here.
E
The
the
best
for
the
actual
you
know,
users
of
the
building
is
it?
Is
it
best
to
be
in
the
rear?
That's
I
guess
my
question
has
that
kind
of
been
analyzed.
F
Thank
you,
commissioner.
We
analyzed
the
projects
based
on
the
guidelines
for
the
district.
The
guidelines
are
clear
in
this
location
that,
if
possible,
it
should
be
added
to
the
new
addition
to
the
rear
if
an
accessible
or
if
an
entry
is
being
added
as
part
of
addition.
F
F
I
should
say
we
suggested
that
they
may
want
to
go
to
commercial
plan
review
and
go
through
building
code
to
see
what
might
be
necessary
for
accessibility
for
this
property,
and
they
did
not
do
that
or
submit
any
evidence
that
would
allow
us
to
consider
that
they
did
submit
additional
evidence,
as
you
saw,
though,
and
I
do
believe
they
do
make
a
case
for
the
whole
building
as
to
as
to
why
they
believe
this
is
appropriate
here.
E
B
You
thank
you,
commissioner
stadi.
I
would
say
that
the
accessibility
is
also
my
main
concern
with
this
application.
I
understand
why,
with
the
slope
of
the
ramp,
why
they
want
to
put
it
where
they
currently
do.
I
also
think
the
caller
who
called
in
about
why
is
it
coming
from
the
back
versus
the
front
of
the
building,
had
a
good
point
and
that
it
would
be
hard
for
staff
to
make
a
finding
regarding
this
without
documentation
from
the
commercial
site
plan
review.
B
I
think
it
just.
It
puts
us
in
a
tricky
position
around
that
specific
condition,
because
we
do
want
this
to
have
appropriate
accessibility.
I'm
wondering
if
any
other
commissioners
have
thoughts.
I
guess
I
would
say.
That's
the
one
item
of
concern
to
me.
I
thought
they
did
a
good
job
addressing
our.
B
Feedback,
otherwise,
at
the
initial,
I
think
that
I'll
be
curious.
If
maybe,
commissioner
howard
has
an
opinion
on
this,
because
I
think
she
was
the
one
who
brought
it
up
at
the
first
review,
but
I
thought
that
these
windows
seemed
more
appropriately
scaled
and
that
the
more
simple
one
over
one
of
the
edition
made
a
lot
of
sense
to
me
and
it's
always
nice,
seeing
our
feedback
actually
reflected
in
design
changes.
B
D
Commissioner,
sandal
would
like
to
speak
she's
in
the
queue.
Oh.
H
Hi,
so
in
regards
to
the
accessibility
and
the
ramp,
I
I
do
understand
you
know
they're.
H
The
code
is
kind
of
set
up
in
a
way
that
prefers
that
there's
more
direct
route
from
the
accessible
parking
to
the
building,
and
so
I
think
that's
you
know,
probably
why
it's
oriented
the
way
it
is.
I
don't
know
from
a
you
know:
traffic
in
this
particular
building
standpoint.
You
know
if
there's
more
student
traffic
coming
from
the
front,
it
might
make
sense
to
flip
that
ramp
so
that
it
comes
from
the
front
up
the
side
of
the
building.
H
Personally,
I
feel
comfortable.
I
understand
this
is
a
lot
of
ramp.
It
takes
a
long
distance
and,
to
put
it
at
the
back
side
of
the
building
would
really
kind
of
impede,
basically
kind
of
how
the
site
lays
out
with
it
with
the
ramp.
At
the
side
like
this,
you
know
the
addition
can
then
be
brought
in
and
still
be
a
size
that
makes
sense
because
it
can
extend
so
far
back
into
the
into
the
lot
but
can
still
be
set
back,
which
respects
the
original
structure.
H
I
also
understand
that,
from
an
accessibility
standpoint,
there's
often
a
lot
of
pressure
to
make
the
main
entry
accessible,
which
would
be
considered
the
front
entry.
I
think,
by
putting
it
on
the
side
like
this,
instead
of
in
the
rear,
there's
a
stronger
argument
that
then
the
front
entry
wouldn't
have
to
be
made
accessible.
H
H
B
Sorry,
can
I
clarify
commissioner
sample:
are
you
suggesting
that
the
ramp
go
to
the
side
door,
but
not
connect
around
to
the
front
porch
sort
of
as
a.
H
I
believe
that
currently
there's
a
there's,
a
connection
there
from
the
top
ramp
top
of
the
ramp
around
to
the
front
porch.
That's
right,
I
would
yeah
and
that's
the
way,
I'm
reading
the
plan
and
I
believe
that
the
way
they
have
it
in
the
plans
right
now
is
the
way
that
I
would
prefer
to
see
it
actually.
Okay,.
D
Since
you
put
me
on
the
spot-
yes
sorry,
that's
all
right!
I
I
really
do
appreciate
the
architects
coming
back
with
with
the
design
revisions
that
they
have.
I
you
asked
me
specifically
about
the
windows.
I
think
the
windows
on
the
edition
are
much
more
compatible
than
they
were
in
the
the
original
design.
We
saw
it's.
My
under
edition.
That's
been
placed
on
windows
for
this
project,
around
replacement
windows
and
that
those
would
be
the
ones
on
the
historic
portion
of
the
building
that
remains
so.
D
D
I
also
agree
with
condition
2,
which
has
to
do
with
having
evidence
shown
to
the
staff.
I
think
that
makes
sense
as
for
accessibility,
I'm
always
a
proponent
of
of
universal
accessibility.
So
I'm
going
to
push
for
accessibility
wherever
we
can
make
it
work.
I'm
disappointed
that
it's
not
in
the
addition,
because
that
makes
the
most
sense
when
you're
putting
a
huge
addition
onto
a
historic
building.
It
makes
most
sense
to
put
the
the
accessibility
there.
The
reasonings
provided
might
be
sufficient
to
say
that
you
know,
we've
met
our
our
guidelines.
D
That
say
that
you,
you
know
whenever
possible.
I
I
I
think
I
agree
with
commissioner
sandbolt.
This
is
kind
of
one
of
those
compromises
that
maybe
we
we
allow,
just
because
it's
gonna
help
preserve
the
building
down
the
line
and
keep
it
usable.
B
Thank
you,
commissioner
howard,
for
letting
me
put
you
on
the
spot.
Like
that,
no
problem
yeah.
I
would
agree
that
I
would
be
okay
with
this
side
entrance
as
a
sort
of
a
meeting
things
halfway
for
accessibility.
B
If
that
condition
was
to
be
reworded,
I
think
I
would
want
them
to
continue
to
work
with
staff
on
the
final
design,
for
that,
my
concern
being
that
when
they
do
their
site
plan
review
that
there
might
be
some
required
tweaks
to
this
design
and
that
we
would
want
staff
to
review
any
of
those
to
make
sure
it
doesn't.
You
know,
deviate
substantially
from
what
we're
currently
seeing
commissioner
stati.
E
I
would
be
remiss
to
not
do
my
usual
plug
for
of
materials
that
look
historic,
but
might
necessarily
may
not
be
of
the
materials
that
are
historic.
So
I
I
for
number
three
and
four
I
I
would
be
supportive
of
striking
both
conditions,
three
and
four,
and
I
I've
liked
what
I've
heard
from
other
commissioners
about
the
accessibility
ramp.
Thank
you
for
your
thoughts
and
ideas.
B
I
guess
my
thoughts
on
the
materials
one,
although
it
wouldn't
like
greatly
concern
me
if
we
struck
that
one,
the
applicant
seems
open
to
trying
a
different
material,
and
I'm
really
intrigued
by
their
idea
that
if
the
budget
covered
it
that
they'd
try
something
like
slate
or
something,
I
think
that
would
actually
be
quite
beautiful.
B
I
realized
that
would
be
an
expensive
change
and
that
that
would
probably
be
an
easier
thing
to
do,
but
since
they
weren't
overly
concerned
with
that
one,
I
guess
I'm
not
either,
and
it
seems
like
condition.
Four
is
the
one
that
is
creating
more
of
an
issue
in
the
design.
B
Are
there
comments
from
any
other
commissioners,
or
perhaps
somebody
who
would
like
to
make
a
motion,
especially
if
that
motion
has
a
reframed
condition?
If
that's
something
they're
interested
in.
N
Hey
thank
you,
madam
chair.
I
wanted
to
just
make
a
comment.
I
in
all
honesty.
I
think
it
might
be
cleaner
if
you
are
interested
in
modifying
condition,
four
to
just
strike
it
all
together
versus
trying
to
modify
the
language
on
it.
Unless
you
have
something
very
specific
that
you
want
to
address,
to
make
sure
that
it
is
incorporated
any
design
consideration
other
than
that,
I
think
striking.
N
It
honestly
would
give
the
greatest
flexibility
to
the
applicant
at
this
point
in
time,
but
I
would
also
maybe
defer
to
staff
rob
skylucky
to
to
comment
further
on
that
if
he
has
any
other
input,
but
that
is
my
opinion.
B
Thank
you,
okay.
Thank
you,
andrea.
I
guess
my
concern
is
that
if
the
code
reviews
in
the
future
that
they
would
go
through,
require
significant
enough
changes,
does
it
come
back
to
you
and
rob
if,
if
there
are
big
changes
that
happen
from
other
city
reviews.
N
Yeah
there
it
would
come
back
to
us.
It
may
not
necessarily
come
back
to
you,
depending
on
the
scope
of
the
change,
it's
kind
of
a
a
gray
area
in
the
in
the
hpc
chapter
599
versus
the
planning
zoning
code,
where
there's
a
section
in
there
that
talks
about
substantial
change,
but
we
essentially
look
at
it
determine
whether
or
not
the
change
is
acceptable
and
meets.
N
You
know
the
initial
intent
of
the
design
and
still
meets
the
guidelines
and
so
on
and
so
forth,
and
then
we
would
make
the
decision
from
there
but
yeah.
We
would
take
a
look
at
it
if
it
if
it
did
change.
Okay,
I
think
rob
may
have
may
have
something
to
say,
but
I
know
there's
two
commissioners
wishing
to
speak
as
well.
B
Ian,
I
see
your
request
to
make
a
motion,
but
I,
if
you
don't
mind,
I'm
gonna
continue
the
conversation
and
go
to
claire.
If
that's
okay,
yes
thanks,
okay,
commissioner
vanderek.
G
Well,
I
just
wanted
to
comment
that
and
thank
you
to
chair
sunberg
for
asking
some
for
some
clarifying
items
to
andrea
the
with
regard
to
like
if
we
strike
that
and
what
happens
then
design
wise.
You
know,
I
trust
our
our
hpc
staff
to
be
able
to
monitor
design
on
that
level
and
I
think
the
importance
of
ada
accessibility,
particularly
given
the
use
of
this
particular
building,
is
super
valuable.
So
I
would
be
in
favor
of
striking
that
particular
requirement.
So
I
just
wanted
to
make
that
note.
B
Thank
you,
commissioner
vander
ike.
I
think
yeah.
I
think
that
means
that
it
seems
like
a
fair
number
of
us
are
on
board
with
the
idea
of
striking
number
four.
Then,
commissioner,
statey,
would
you
like
to
make
your
motion.
E
Yes,
I
would,
I
would
move
to
approve
the
certificate
of
appropriateness
as
written
in
our
agenda
with
the
following
conditions:
one
two,
three
five
and
six.
It
would
strike
four.
B
B
I
don't
see
any.
I
just
wanted
to
tell
the
applicant
again.
I'm
really
excited
to
see
this
project
move
forward.
I
think
this
is
great
and
it's
great
when
these
fraternity
and
sorority
buildings
are
able
to
adapt
for
the
the
changing
needs
of
their
organizations,
and
I
don't
know,
I
think,
we're
all
excited
to
see
things
like
this
happen.
G
B
D
L
B
Thank
you
that
motion
passes
the
applicant
may
speak
to
staff
about
next
steps
tomorrow.
That
concludes
our
public
hearing
items
for
tonight.
I'm
wondering
commissioners
staff.
If
there
are
any
announcements
or
additional
commission
business
to
discuss.
N
I
will
speak
first
rachel
hold
on
on
that.
Please,
if
I
think
I
know
what
it
is
but
hold
on
just
a
couple
announcements
interviews
for
new
commissioners
went
very
well.
N
N
That
is
not
final
yet,
but
provided
everything
runs
smoothly.
That
is
my
proposal,
also
an
update
on
appeals.
I
had
mentioned
at
a
previous
meeting
that
there
we
received
an
appeal
for
the
project
at
4736
dupont,
avenue
south,
which
was
heard
at
the
october
13th
hpc
meeting.
That
appeal
was
granted
by
the
business
inspections,
housing
and
zoning
committee,
so
they
will,
they
did
get
approval
to
replace
the
rest
of
the
windows
on
the
on
the
property
in
lynnhurst.
N
Also
another
update,
we
did
receive
an
appeal
for
the
demolition
of
the
first
church
of
christ,
scientist
and
that
is
anticipated
to
go
to
the
biz
committee
beginning
in
january.
So
that
is
my
announcement.
The
reason
I
have
a
question
for
rachel,
because
I
need
to
talk
to
commissioner
fritz
about
something
first
that
I
am
tardy
on,
so
I
will
sign
off.
Thank
you.
B
H
Just
wanted
to
let
you
all
know
that
we
are
planning
on
moving
forward
with
the
preservation
awards
for
this
year
and
we
will
be
looking
for
two
jurors
from
our
commission
to
serve
as
jury
for
that.
So,
if
you
are
interested
in
being
a
juror
for
the
heritage
preservation
awards,
please
let
me
know
send
me
an
email
thanks.
E
E
N
Not
at
this
time
there
is
no
formal
proposal
to
put
anything
on
an
agenda
that
topic
is
being
talked
about
with
different
city,
council
offices
and
strategies
for
what's
the
right
word,
preservation
and
recognition
in
line
with
the
community
awareness
of
it
at
this
time,
but
no,
it
is
not
on
any
officially
on
any
agenda
at
this
time.
B
I
don't
see
any
so
with
that
we've
completed
all
the
items
on
the
agenda
for
this
meeting
I'll
again
ask
members
and
staff
if
there
are
any
other
matters
to
come
before
this
meeting.