►
From YouTube: March 2, 2021 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
This
meeting
includes
the
remote
participation
of
members
as
authorized
under
minnesota
statute,
section
13d
.021,
due
to
the
declared
local
health
pandemic
for
the
record,
my
name
is
madeleine
sundberg
and
I
serve
as
chair
of
the
minneapolis
heritage
preservation.
Commission.
I
will
now
call
this
meeting
to
order
and
ask
the
clerk
to
call
the
role
so
may
verify
a
presence
of
a
quorum.
B
D
B
B
Our
first
order
of
business
is
to
adopt
the
agenda
for
this
meeting,
we'll
work
from
the
agendas
that
are
available
online
I'll,
go
through
the
agenda
and
sort
out
what
items
we
continue
to
a
future
meeting.
What
items
will
be
discussed
and
what
items
we
put
on
the
consent
agenda
to
be
approved,
as
recommended
by
staff
without
further
discussion.
B
B
Item
number
six
is
233
park,
avenue
ward
3
nomination
for
national
register
listing.
That
item
will
be
discussed.
So
the
proposed
agenda
is
item
4,
15,
east
franklin,
avenue
and
item
5,
9,
48,
18
avenue.
North
east
will
have
a
staff
presentation,
public
comment,
commission
discussion
and
action
and
item
233
park
avenue
will
have
staff
presentation,
commission,
discussion
and
action.
G
D
B
B
I
C
D
E
J
B
B
And
one
extension
thank
you.
The
minutes
are
approved
before
I
open
the
hearing
to
public
comments.
Let
me
summarize
the
process
for
conducting
the
public
hearing
in
this
virtual
format.
We
will
take
each
agenda
item
in
order.
First,
the
planning
staff
will
present
its
report
and
commissioners
may
ask
questions
of
the
staff
and
we'll
hear
from
the
applicant
and
commissioners
may
ask
questions
the
applicant
after
that.
I
will
open
the
public
hearing
and
we
will
invite
public
comment
first,
we'll
be
taking
speakers
in
the
order
they
pre-registered.
B
B
K
Thank
you
chair
good
afternoon
commissioners.
I'm
rob
scalecki
city
planner
in
the
historic
preservation
section
of
cped.
Today,
I'm
presenting
a
certificate
of
appropriateness,
application
for
the
installation
of
condenser
line,
set
coverings
at
all
elevations
of
the
property
located
at
15
east
franklin
avenue
in
the
washburn
fair
oaks,
historic
district,
the
subject
property
seen
here
is
a
non-contributing
resource
in
the
warehouse.
K
Sorry,
the
washburn,
fair
oaks,
historic
district.
The
building
was
completed
in
2007
as
a
mixed-use
building
with
commercial
space
on
the
first
floor
and
multiple
family
residential
located
above
the
current
hvac
system
at
the
property
is
original
to
that
2007
design
for
the
building
next
slide,
please,
the
applicant
is
proposing
to
install
polymer
synthetic
line
set
coverings
for
a
new
split
system,
hvac
system.
K
The
applicant
states
that
the
line
set
covers
are
necessary
for
this
installation
of
refrigerant
lines
to
connect
the
new
roof
system
down
to
the
individual
mechanical
closets,
which
currently
include
the
now
discontinued
sky.
Skypac
hvac
units
proposed
for
replacement,
new,
corresponding
condenser
units
would
be
proposed
for
each
unit
to
be
placed
on
the
roof.
K
The
project
has
proposed
these
alterations,
as
you
see
here
on
the
elevations
for
the
top
three
residential
stories
to
total
63
mechanical
closet,
vent
areas
on
the
property
which
will
receive
these.
The
hvac
service
from
these
proposed
line
cent
covers
the
covering
trunk
system,
includes
a
total
of
25
line
set
covering
trunks
to
extend
down
all
elevations
at
the
property.
I
will
note
that
18
of
these
will
be
on
street
facing
primary
elevations.
K
K
Regardless
of
what
changes
are
made
to
the
subject
property,
the
district's
historical
significance
will
remain
unchanged,
but
proposed
changes
may
affect
its
integrity.
The
proposed
new
synthetic
line
set
coverings
are
not
compatible
with
the
historic
character
of
the
washburn,
fair
oaks.
Historic
district.
The
overall
integrity
of
the
district
is
not
changed
by
the
the
proposed
project.
However,
the
introduction
of
a
synthetic
material
which
extends
down
all
elevations,
including
three
street
facing
elevations,
is
not
an
appropriate
material
for
a
system
for
this
type
of
system
in
this
district,
even
on
a
non-contributing
building.
K
Polymer
synthetic
extending
down
all
elevations
via
tube
coverings
is
not
a
material
that
is
compatible
for
a
major
alteration
on
a
contemporary
mixed-use,
brick
and
stucco,
building
with
metal
accents
in
the
washburn
forex
historic
district.
The
guidelines
do
not
include
this
as
an
appropriate
material
for
additions
to
buildings.
K
The
pro
the
proposed
installation
of
line
set
coverings
would
extend
from
the
roof
down
to
the
current
recessed
porches
on
all
elevations.
The
alteration
will
not
change
the
function
of
the
porches,
but
it
will
be
an
added
element.
That's
not
consistent
with
the
original
facade
and
projection
design
of
the
building.
K
With
a
new
hvac
system
deviates
from
the
original
2007
design
from
the
built
for
the
building,
the
introduction
of
multiple
polymer
synthetic
line
set
coverings
on
multiple
primary
elevations
is
an
additional
fabricated
feature,
and
while
it
is
contemporary,
it's
not
compatible
and
it
does
not
meet
standard.
9.
K
These
proposed
alternatives
could
retain
the
current
configuration
of
the
building
and
the
openings
and
would
be
appropriate
to
the
current
design
of
the
building
and
the
character
of
the
washburn
fedex
historic
district
with
that.
K
The
department
of
community
planning
and
economic
development
recommends
that
the
heritage
preservation
commission
adopt
staff
findings
for
the
application
by
ann
crisp
of
encompass
inc
for
the
property
located
at
15
east
franklin
avenue
in
the
washburn
farrell's
historic
district,
and
recommend
the
motion
to
deny
the
certificate
of
appropriateness
to
install
line
set
coverings
descending
down
all
elevations
at
the
property
located
at
15
east
franklin
avenue
in
the
washburn,
fair,
historic
district,
and
also
with
that.
I
will
be
available
for
any
comments
or
questions.
I
Thank
you.
I
was
looking
through
the
comments
that
we
received
just
this
afternoon
and
a
comment
from
eric
lammy,
I
think
was
the
name
said
something
about
our
existing
dilemma
was
caused
by
the
hpc,
not
allowing
this
when
our
building
was
constructed.
Do
you
have
any
more
information
about
that?
I
wasn't
on
the
commission
and
wasn't
in
the
twin
cities
when
this
building
was
approved,
was
there
conditions
placed
on
the
design
related
to
similar
features
or
something
related
to
the
hvac?
At
that
time,.
K
Thank
you,
crusher
howard.
That's
a
good
question
to
be
truthful.
I'm
not
exactly
sure
what
the
public
comment
is
referring
to
in
that
situation,
and
I
I'm
not
sure
what
situation
they
would
be
required
to
have
these
types
of
units.
So,
okay,.
I
E
J
J
I
have
sort
of
a
threshold
question
about
the
relevance
of
the
various
authorities
that
you
have
relied
on
in
the
program
in
the
in
the
your
report
to
the
to
a
non-conforming
resource
which
this
building,
as
I
understand
it,
is,
does
do
those
all
those
requirements
apply
in
the
same
fashion
to
that
kind
of
a
building
as
they
would
to
an
existing
building.
K
Projects
that
would
occur
on
non-contributing
buildings
that
were
built
in
the
21st
century.
So,
as
the
guidelines
are
written
for
this
district,
they
are
the
same
for
all
properties
when
taking
these
projects
into
account.
B
I
will
now
open
the
public
hearing
for
this
item
is
the
applicant
here
and
would
like
to
speak.
If
so,
if
you
could
press
star
six
on
your
phone
and
wait
to
hear
the
recorded
message
to
activate
your
microphone,
so
we
can
hear
you
and
then
state
your
name
and
address
for
the
record.
M
I
guess
the
main
purpose
behind
this
project
is
to
try
to
get
a
feasible
solution
to
fix
these
mechanical
units.
People
don't
have
heat
or
air
conditioning
depending
on
the
units
and
we're
just
trying
to
get
them
a
means
to
get
those
without
being
outrageously,
expensive
and
altering
the
facade
a
lot,
and
also
just
something
that
will
work
with
the
existing
structural
system
and
the
space
confines
of
these
hvac
closets.
M
That
do
exist,
which
had
a
particular
size
unit,
and
this
was
the
probably
the
most
cost
effective
method
of
approaching
that
we
are
open
to
different
types
of
line
set
covers.
If
that
was,
you
know,
if
that
was
the
only
sticking
point
using
a
metal
instead
of
a
synthetic
or
something
else,
I
would
have
to
defer
to
a
mechanical
in
our
office
about
the
feasibility
of
doing
the
conduit
lines,
if
that's
feasible,
with
the
with
the
spaces.
M
And
the
magic
pack
solution
is
much
more
expensive
to
try
to
alter,
remove
a
lot
of
brick
and
stucco
structurally,
it's
feasible
if
I'm
a
circle
engineer,
but
it
is
a
little
bit
more
invasive
to
the
building
and
affects
the
residents
more.
When
you
do
that,
work.
B
B
N
Great
yeah,
I
I'm
wife
osman,
I'm
on
the
board
of
directors
at
pc
flats.
My
address
is
15.
You
know:
east
franklin
apartment,
417,
minneapolis,
minnesota
55404.
Can
I
just
begin
yep?
Okay,
great
thanks.
So
yeah
I've
only
been
a
board
member
for
a
few
months,
but
I've
actually
lived
here
since
the
summer
of
2017,
which
is
just
about
six
months
before
the
hvac
troubles
began
here.
N
This
certificate
of
appropriateness
petition
is
actually
it's
over
three
years
in
the
making
in
early
january,
2018
residents
skypac
units
began
failing.
We
spent
about
half
a
year
with
both
qsc
and
steam
engineering
providing
research,
and
it
just
became
clear
that
there's
no
more
no
drop
in
replacements
on
the
market,
and
so
in
the
intervening
time
since
then,
the
board
our
property
management
company,
first
service
residential
we've,
been
working
within
compass
engineering
to
explore
and
to
vet
about
half
a
dozen
options.
N
N
Those
same
issues
also
prevent
us
from
installing
interior
chase.
In
addition,
if
we
were
to
go
with
interior
chase
for
a
rooftop
condenser
we'd
force,
we'd
have
to
force
residents
with
still
working
hvac
units
which
there
are
some
to
replace
them
at
the
same
time
and
then
in.
N
Based
on
the
governing
docks,
that
would
require
a
homeowner
vote
with
100
approval,
which
is
not
terribly
likely.
We've
explored
putting
condensers
on
each
unit's
balcony
that
results
in
slicing
off
a
non-trivial
amount
of
space
on
the
balcony,
to
the
extent
that
some
balconies
just
would
become
too
small,
even
just
like
a
table
and
chair.
Other
balconies
are
too
small
to
support
condenser
units
at
all,
so
we
would
be
forced
to
tell
some
units
like
sorry,
you
know
you
know
a
check
for
you.
N
That
option
would
also
trigger
perhaps
an
even
larger
and
more
visible
set
of
changes.
The
building
exterior
how
it
looks
from
the
streets
we've
yeah
we've
spent
two
and
a
half
years.
Looking
at
options
over
that
intervening
span
about
half
the
building's
hvac
units
have
begun
to
fail.
Two
units
now
have
no
heat.
We've
had
the
mailroom
and
underground
garbage
burglar
garage.
Excuse
me
burglarized
several
times
each
the
cvs
on
the
first
floor
concluded
twice
as
of
october.
D
N
Roof:
that's
going
to
be
about
10
to
15
grand
per
homeowner,
in
addition
to
the
hvac
costs,
which,
as
ann
said,
we're
trying
to
make
reasonable
such
that
people
don't
have
to
leave
the
building
yeah.
This
building's
in
trouble
is
hurting,
and
it's
one
of
the
anchors
of
the
franklin
that
intersection.
It
doesn't
really
affect
the
60
plus
households
that
live
here.
It
affects
the
broader
whittier
stephen
square
communities,
we're
asking
for
your
approval
of
the
exterior
chasing
so
that
we
can
move
forward
with
this.
N
So
we
can
begin
to
allocate
our
time
as
the
directors
management
to
the
roofing
questions.
The
security
questions.
It's
just
residents,
we're
asking
for
your
your
permission
for
this
appropriateness
so
that
the
members
of
the
community
broken
hvac
units
can
enjoy
a
space,
standardized,
affordable
heating
cooling
system,
and
so
that
you
know
we
can
retain
our
homes,
value
and,
in
some
cases,
our
homes.
B
I
don't
see
other
names
in
the
queue,
so
I'd
like
to
open
this
up
to
anybody
else
who
may
wish
to
speak
for
or
against
this
application.
If
you
could
press
star
six,
let
me
know
that
you
are
there.
O
Hear
me
yes
hi.
This
is
trisha
holden.
Why
is
the
vice
president
of
the
board?
I'm
the
president
of
the
federal
board
here
at
eight
street
flats,
and
I
just
in
addition
to
the
statement
from
the
board
that
why
suspend
read
for
you,
I
just
I
wanted
to
say
a
few
extra
words
just
to
fully
paint
this
picture
of
the
gravity
of
our
situation
and
the
gravity
of
your
decision
here
today.
O
So
I've
served
on
the
board
of
directors
for
nearly
my
entire
time
in
the
building,
and
we
have
been
working
on
this
problem
for
years.
We've
done
just
about
everything
in
our
power
to
find
the
most
reasonable,
affordable
solution
for
homeowners
here,
and
we've
also
done
everything
in
our
power
to
give
them
as
much
runway
as
possible
to
prepare
regularly
communicating
updates
and
anticipating
and
the
anticipated
financial
impact.
O
As
this
information
has
become
available
to
us,
I've
lived
in
this
building
for
about
four
years,
and
one
of
the
units
that
I
considered
purchasing
had
been
purchased
by
its
owner
for
an
even
hundred
thousand
dollars,
and
I
bring
this
up
because
part
of
painting
this
picture
just
I
I
want
you
to
to
fully
understand
that
the
this
hundred
thousand
dollar
purchase
price
unit
that
I
looked
at
is
comparable
nearly
identical
to
the
unit
that
I
ended
up
purchasing
and
presently,
with
my
square
footage
and
ownership
percentage.
O
I'm
looking
at
an
assessment
of
about
ten
thousand
dollars
for
an
entirely
unanticipated
emergency
roof
repair
that
the
building
had
has
known
about
since
very
late
last
year.
So
nearly
no
notice
for
this
ten
thousand
dollar
assessment,
and,
additionally,
the
solution
that
you
have
before
you
today.
O
But
the
appeal
of
of
this
particular
solution
that
you're
looking
at
is
that
it
allows
for
homeowners
to
defer
if
they
elect
to
do
so,
the
bulk
of
the
work
and
the
bulk
of
the
financial
burden,
and
so
it's
it
is
it
significantly
eases
this
incredible
burden
that
homeowners
are
facing,
and
in
this
this
picture
that
I
want
to
paint
for
you
for
some
homeowners
in
this
building.
In
the
span
of
a
few
months,
they
will
be
assessed
as
much
as
a
third
of
their
purchase
price.
O
So
obviously
you
know
these
are
big
numbers
but
of
course
they're
all
relative,
and
I
I
would
ask
that
you
consider
you
know
in
your
own
homes,
if
you
had
to
undertake
emergency
repairs
and
repairs
that
were
compulsory
and
totaling,
a
third
of
the
purchase
price
of
your
own
home,
how
much
of
a
burden
that
might
present
and
obviously
in
a
building
with
a
lower
price
point
such
as
this
folks
have,
generally
speaking
a
lower
net
worth
lower
income
higher
debt,
less
savings,
they
are
less
able
to
to
respond
to
a
burden,
this
large
proportionate
to
the
value
of
their
greatest
assets.
O
So
I'd
like
you
to
just
consider
who
we
are
and
the
demographic
of
this
building
is
almost
entirely
young.
We
are
mostly
our
mid-20s
to
late
30s
with
a
few
outliers
and
we
certainly
have
those
with
professional
corporate
jobs,
but
we
also
have
those
who
work
minimum
wage
or
slightly
above
minimum
wage
jobs.
O
O
Some
can
afford
a
blow.
That
is
this
big,
a
financial
blow.
That's
you
know
33
percent
of
the
purchase
price
of
their
home
and
for
others
this
this
burden
is
nothing
short
of
devastating
and
crippling
and
impossible
to
take
on,
and
it
will
put
them
in
a
very
precarious
position
in
precarious
times.
O
It's
these.
These
homeowners,
in
particular,
that
I
ask
you
to
think
of
today,
as
you
make
your
decision,
and
I
ask
that
you
consider
that
this
option
before
you
is
the
only
option
that
significantly
eases
the
financial
burden
on
homeowners
by
allowing
them
to
undertake
a
portion
of
the
project
at
their
election
and
as
a
reminder,
you
know
only
about
half
the
building
actually
has
this
problem
now.
O
Others
will
have
it
in
the
future,
but
for
some
folks
they
don't
presently
have
have
a
problem,
and-
and
this
is
a
very
high
cost
thing,
so
I
just
ask
that
you
consider
how
tough
of
a
situation
we
are
in
here
and
and
how
much
of
a
burden
this
will
be
for
for
some
to
bear,
and-
and
I
ask
that
you
help
us-
the
the
border
beach
street
flats
help
our
fellow
homeowners
and
our
neighbors,
and
thank
you
for
your
time
and
thoughtful
consideration.
B
B
B
Seeing
none,
I
will
close
the
public
hearing.
Commissioners,
let's
discuss.
I
know
I
am
personally
feeling
a
bit
torn
on
this
item
as
somebody
who
owned
a
condo.
B
I
understand,
but
it's
a
slightly
different
demographic
than
your
typical
homeowners,
and
that
that
I
don't
know
I
it's
certainly
beyond
our
guidelines,
but
I
empathize
with
that.
B
I
actually
looked
at
a
unit
in
this
building
back
when
I
was
looking
at
condos,
so
I'm
actually
very
familiar
with
this
building,
and
I
guess
I'll
be
curious
to
hear
what
the
other
commissioners
think,
but
I'm
wondering,
if
there's
some
sort
of
middle
ground
here,
I
realize
that
the
proposed
material
is
certainly
beyond
our
guidelines.
B
I'm
wondering
if
an
alternative
material
say
metal
painted
to
match.
B
The
flashing
was
instead
utilized
if
it
was
conditioned
that
way
if
people
would
be
more
open
to
it,
if
that
would
seem
more
compatible
with
the
guidelines,
I'm
not
visually
a
fan
of
the
kind
of
octopus
situation
that
you
get
with
these
lines,
but
I
do
think
that
I
I
understand
from
a
financial
standpoint
that
this
is
probably
the
most
cost
effective
method
of
addressing
this
issue,
and
it
is
a
non-contributing
building,
and
I
realize
that
our
guidelines
for
this
district
are
written
such
that
the
contributing
and
non-contributing
are
are
kind
of
assessed
in
a
very
similar
manner,
maybe
compared
to
some
of
our
other
districts
but
yeah.
B
I
guess
I'm
wondering
if
there's
a
middle
ground.
What
do
other
commissioners
think,
commissioner,
howard.
I
Yeah,
I'm
torn
on
this
one
as
well
so
kind
of
going
back
to
the
question
that
margot
asked
earlier
when
I,
when
I
see
that
we're
doing
a
review
on
a
non-contributing
building
a
contemporary
building
a
newer
building
in
a
district,
I
often
think
about
how
does
it
meet
the
standards
within
our
guidelines
related
to
new
construction?
Would
we
have
approved
this
design
when
the
building
was
first
built,
and
that's
why
I
asked
about
the
the
comment
that
was
in
mr
lammy's
or
lamal's
letter?
I
I
I
just
had
to
sink
a
ton
of
money
into
my
heating
system
in
november
in
my
house,
so
I
get
I
get
it
it's
it's
not
easy
to
drop
all
that
money
all
at
once
and
a
lot
of
people
don't
have
the
means
to
do
it.
I
So
I'd
be
curious.
If
there
are
other
options,
I
don't
know
if
metal
matching,
the
flashing
would
be
the
most
appropriate
or
matching
the
background
to
kind
of
make
them
disappear.
I
I
don't
know
I'd,
be
curious.
What
other
commissioners
have
to
say
and
those
of
you
who
are
in
the
construction
trades
and
the
design
trades?
Do
you
have
some
options
that
maybe
we
could
look
at.
G
Yeah,
I
would
say
that
I
don't
necessarily
take
an
issue
with
this
like
proposed
solution,
but
in
terms
of
the
material,
I
do
think
that
there
are
maybe
some
other
options
and
sort
of
having
it
match.
That
flashing
would
actually,
I
would
say,
be
my
preference
yeah.
F
I'm
just
gonna,
I'm
just
echoing
what
everybody
else
has
been
saying.
I
I
do
repair
an
alterations
on
existing
buildings
as
an
engineer
for
a
living,
and
I
I
know
the
difficulty
in
doing
it
and
the
costs
tend
to
skyrocket.
So
I
completely
understand
why
doing
a
facade
facing
condenser
pipes
is
you
know
the
route
that
the
building
is
is
trying
to
go?
I
I
wish
that
the
building
had
kind
of
explored
the
feasibility
of
running
the
lines
indoors
instead
of
on
the
facade
just
so
that
we
could
compare
costs.
F
I
would
like
to
think
going.
The
route
of
you
know.
Just
changing
what's
in
the
recessed
balcony
would
be
the
way
to
go,
but
I
I
think,
given
the
the
costs,
I
would
be.
F
You
know
open
to
running
those
lines
on
the
out
doors
with
a
different
material
and
again,
I'm
not
quite
sure
if
I
would
want
it
to
match
the
brick
and
stucco
in
the
locations
or
if
it
would
be
better
to
do
metal
and
almost
have
it
stand
out
like
the
railings
do
so
I'm
still
kind
of
smoking
through
that.
B
Thank
you,
commissioner
johnson.
I
had
also
contemplated
the
interior
running
of
lines.
I
would
imagine
that
one
of
the
big
issues
that
would
run
into
it
is
because
it's
condos
they're
individual
ownership.
B
H
I
don't
have
a
ton
of
new
stuff
to
add.
I
mean
I
think
that
it's
worth
I
so
my
general
preference
is
that
I
feel
like
these
are
ugly
and
so
so
from,
and
that
you
know
well,
that
is
kind
of
you
know
of
the
beholder.
H
Of
course
it
is,
but
that
is
actually
part
of
what
we're
looking
at
right
is
like
the
the
applicability
to
the
design
change
to
the
historic
district,
and
I
think
it's
it's
worth,
having
a
dialogue
about
how
we
treat
non-contributing
new
construction
buildings
in
historic
districts,
and
maybe
that
the
historic
district
guidelines
should
provide
for
more
flexibility
on
those
buildings.
I
think
that's
a
worthwhile
discussion.
That's
not
the
discussion
we're
having
today.
H
The
discussion
we're
having
today
is
about
this
particular
issue,
and
so,
while
I
think
they're
ugly,
I
do
think
that
it
would
be
nice
if
we
could
approve
them
simply
because
people
need
heat
and
coal
well,
not
ac.
I
live
without
ac
so,
but
I
definitely
need
heat
in
the
winter
in
minnesota.
H
So
I
am
not
convinced
that
the
that
I
wasn't
convinced,
based
on
what
we
heard
today
from
the
applicant
and
what
I
heard
from
the
hoa
homeowners,
that
this
is
the
only
solution
and
I
think
from
a
legal
standpoint
that
that
would
be
the
reason
to
approve.
It
is
because
we
felt
that
we
got
significant
evidence
that
this
is
the
only
solution
that
there's
no
other
way
that
they
can
do
it
from,
because
we
know
at
this
point
that
they
do
this.
Does
this
solution
doesn't
meet
our
guidelines
right?
H
So,
like
that's
the
first
threshold
second
threshold
is:
what
can
we?
What?
What
can
we
use
for
reasoning
to
approve
it
since
it
clearly?
I
think
a
lot
of
us
would
like
to
do
that.
Even
if
it's
not
visually
the
thing
we
would
love
to
see,
I
don't
have
anything
for
me
right
now.
That's
catching
me
to
give
me
that
reason
would
be
interested
to
see
if
any
of
my
fellow
commissioners
picked
up
on
anything
that
are
helping
given
giving
them
that
space
to
to
go
there.
H
But
that's
where
I
stand
right
now,
because
again
I
get
back
to
this
thing
that
one
of
the
biggest
things
I've
learned
being
hpc,
commissioner,
is
that
we
need
to
have
a
reason
for
for
making
these
decisions,
and
it
needs
to
be
something
we
can
be
legally
challenged
on.
So
those
are
my
thoughts.
I
would
really
be
interested
in
hearing
more
commissioner's
thoughts.
F
Hi,
I
just
wanted
to
add
that
I
you
know
I
there's
there's
four
facades
of
this
building
where
they're
putting
these
condenser
lines
on,
and
I
don't
know
how
the
other
commissioners
feel.
But
you
know
I'm,
I,
I
think
I'm
less
concerned
about
the
one
two
three,
the
the
ones
that
are
facing
the
alley
and
a
lot
more
concerned
about
the
ones
that
are
on
facing
nicolette,
franklin
and
first
avenue.
F
E
I
would
second
what
commissioner
johnson
just
said.
I
agree.
I
don't
necessarily
have
as
big
of
an
issue
with
the
ones
that
are
not
on
kind
of
the
front
facing
facades
on
those
three
streets,
but
I
agree
with
basically
what
everyone
else
has
said
in
terms
of
they're,
not
visually
appealing,
they
don't
look
nice
and
but
I
also
am
conflicted
because
I
obviously
want
people
to
have
heat.
P
Yeah,
I
also
want
to
echo
what
others
have
said.
I
I
don't
necessarily
have
a
big
issue
with
the
rear
facade
or
the
the
potential
to
do
metal
instead
of
the
the
polymer.
P
But
I
will
add
in
the
comment
that
we
got.
There
is
a
chart
of
options
provided
by
eric
lommel
that
does
kind
of
break
down
what
some
of
the
prices
and
exploration
that
the
condo
association
has
done,
and
it
does
appear
to
me
that
this
is
you
know
the
most
affordable
option.
Considering
everything
I
know,
that's,
maybe
without
our
not
what
we're
reviewing
here
and
what
the
guidelines
that
we're
given
to
do.
P
So
I
echo
commissioner
vanderek's
concerns
about
you,
know
thinking
about
what
non-contributing
buildings
and
what
guidelines
we
are
to
review
those
and
might
be
a
more
worthwhile
discussion.
But
you
know
I'm
not
necessarily
opposed
to
something
like
metal
approval
today
or
something
that
we
can
work
out.
That
might
provide
an
option
forward
for
them.
B
Q
I
yeah.
I
would
like
to
echo
that
I
would
support
using
metal
that
would
match
the
railings,
and
my
reasoning
is:
this-
is
a
a
modern
building
surrounded
by
modern
buildings
on
the
edge
of
a
historic
district.
It's
not.
I
mean
that
kind
of
impact.
I'm
not
seeing
the
big
impact
like
it's
not
next
to
historic
structures
in
near
fair
oaks
park,
and
I
guess
I
had
a
question
about
you
know.
Q
B
I
think
it
might
be
more
of
a
setting
precedent
issue
in
my
mind,
but
I
think
for
a
reason
I
know
for
a
demolition.
We
can
look
at
financial
implications,
so
I
guess
in
my
mind,
because
yeah,
I
think
that
that
chart
that
was
supplied
in
public
comment
was
really
useful
and
it
did
make
it
pretty
clear
that
this
option
that
they
are
selecting
is
the
most
economic
option.
B
That
at
least
I
know
when
you're
doing
like
code
analysis
for
architecture
that,
like
infeasibility,
can
be
based
around
financial
like
financial
infeasibility,
and
I
I
guess
I
wonder
if
that
could
be
a
logic
used
here-
that
we
feel
like
this
is
acceptable
because
of
the
other
solutions
being
financially
infeasible,
but
not
not
a
legal
expert.
There.
I
see
a
few
people
want
to
speak,
I'm
going
to
go
commissioner,
sam,
both
and
then,
if
we
can
go
to
staff
after
that.
L
Like
to
hear
andrea's
comment
before.
B
R
Thank
you
thanks.
Madam
chair,
I'm
mostly
responding
to
your
question
about
the
financial
consideration.
Yes
for
demolitions,
you
have
the
ability
to
do
that.
The
findings
do
not
allow
that
for
certificate
of
appropriatenesses
and
for
certificate
appropriateness.
Forgive
me,
and
I
would
just
really
warn
you
about
setting
a
precedent
by
considering
a
financial
reason.
For
I
mean
you
can
do
it.
You
can
do
that
and
to
answer
commission
or
statey's
question
anybody
can
challenge
it.
Anybody
in
the
public
can
challenge
it.
R
I
would
just
be
very
cautious
about
setting
a
precedent
for
considering
financial
reasons
at
this
point
in
time,
for
something
that
isn't
necessarily
allowed
in
the
ordinance
like
under
this
particular
application.
At
this
time.
Other
cities
have
it
other.
You
know
other
states
have
it,
but
the
city
of
minneapolis
doesn't.
B
B
R
Think
that's
up
to
you.
If
you
feel
that
that
is
an
acceptable
material.
I
think
you
can
make
a
finding
that
would
be
supportable
in
in
a
way
to
overturn
the
staff
recommendation.
R
B
Thank
you,
commissioner.
Sandal.
L
So
I'm
going
to
say
that
the
guidelines
are
pretty
clear
about
the
material,
but
I
think
it's
easy
for
us
to
say
you
know
this
material
is
clearly
called
out,
is
not
allowed
by
the
guidelines
and
I
think,
switching
to
a
metal
addresses
that
concern.
L
I
think
a
lot
of
the
other
concern
is
with
the
aesthetic
appearance
looking
around
in
the
neighborhood.
There
are
exposed
conduit
on
other
building
on
other
buildings,
and
but
the
the
exposed
conduit,
that's
visible
on
other
buildings
is
quite
often
for
electrical
and
it's
a
lot
smaller.
So
I
think
it's
visually
not
as
obtrusive.
L
L
That
being
said,
I
think
the
the
aesthetic
appearance,
while
it
is
somewhat
disconcerting
for
all
of
us,
is
a
little
bit
harder
to
argue
that
we
can
that
we
can
really
say,
despite
the
fact
that
this
doesn't
look
quite
the
way
we
all
wish
it
would.
I
think
it's
easier
to
say
that
we
don't
necessarily
have
concrete
rules
to
stand
on
there,
so
I'd
be
willing
to
consider
a
proposal
to
do
the
metal
change
and
to
allow
this
to
go
forward.
Based
on
that
information.
B
Michael,
oh
commissioner,
you
did
want
to
speak,
but
I
don't
want
to
speak.
I
guess
I'm
wondering
if
somebody
wants
to
make
a
motion
based
off
of
this
discussion.
J
B
Margo
is
that
you,
commissioner,
strothers?
Yes.
J
It
is
the
question
I
have
is:
would
it
make
sense
to
send
this
back
again
for
more
consideration
by
staff
with
the
applicant
to
see
if
it
could
come
back
with
a
recommendation
that
would
be
favorable?
I
mean
as
a
as
a
new
commissioner.
I
don't
have
nearly
I
know.
R
It
is
an
option
to
continue
this
item
to
anot
the
next
cycle
and
ask
the
I
think
you
can
ask
the
applicant
to
provide
additional
information
relative
to
your
questions
and
I'm
just
throwing
an
example
out
there:
alternatives
you're
looking
for
alternatives
are
there
you
know
what
are
the
other
alternatives
now
I
know
they've,
given
some
costs,
but
some
of
the
commentary
I've
heard
from
some
of
the
other
commissioners
is
they
haven't
convinced
that
there
isn't
another
terminal
to
another
alternative
cost
aside,
that's
going
to
be
able
to
work
here,
making
that
so
that
is
a
potential
option,
but
that
is
up
for
you
to
decide
and
to
to
secure
the
vote
on
to
be
able
to
do.
B
That
thank
you,
andrea.
We
have
certainly
sent
items
continued
items
before
to
ask
for
additional
information
from
applicants.
In
this
case,
I
think
we
would
be
asking
for
them
to
look
at
the
feasibility
of
using
metal
as
an
alternative
and
of
running
the
line's
interior.
Those
seems
to
be
the
two
things
that
people
are
interested
in
knowing
so
I
would
say
that
that
is
an
option
and
we
do
sometimes
continue
items
like
that.
Q
Hi,
I'd
like
to
make
an
emotion
to
approve
the
certificate
of
appropriateness
to
install
line
set
coverings,
to
send
it
down
all
of
the
elevations
of
the
property
located
at
15,
east
franklin
and
the
washburn
fair
oaks.
Historic
district.
The
material
on
the
condiments
would
be
metal
covering
instead
of
a
polymer.
R
That's
fine!
You
can
make
that
motion.
However,
you
have
to
make
a
finding
first
as
the
reason,
the
legal
finding
as
to
reason
to
overturn
the
staff
recommendation
to
deny
it.
So
what
would
be
your?
What
would
be
your
statement
as
to
the
reason
why
you
would
overturn
it
and
that
it
can
be?
You
can
pause
the
motion
at
this
moment
and
have
a
further
discussion
as
to
how
you
would
do
that.
Q
Well,
I
would
like
to
say
that
am
I
still
yeah,
I
would
like
to
say
that
I'm
not
concerned
about
precedent,
because
every
hou,
every
house,
every
building
is
its
own
situation.
Q
I
would
say
that
the
the
affordability
I'm
concerned
about
for
the
affordability
of
this
housing-
and
I
I
I'm
sorry,
but
I
think
that's
something
we
need
to
consider.
So
that's
my
that's
why
I
would
say
we
should
approve
this.
We
should
this.
This
housing
will
be
more
affordable
with
this.
This
decision-
and
this
is
a
non-conforming
building
that
is-
is
on
the
edge
of
the
district.
It's
not
even
facing
historic
structures
so
that
that's
what
I
would
say
and
happy
to
hear
more
ideas
about
reasoning.
B
Yeah
I'm
looks
like
commissioner
vandrag
wishes
to
speak.
H
Yeah,
thank
you
chair.
H
I
I
don't
know
if,
since
we
don't
have
a
second,
yet
if
we're
in
friendly
amendment
territory,
but
I
would
add
another
friendly
amendment
to
to
limit
the
new
conduit
to
non-primary
facades,
alley
valley-facing
facades
and
then
I
would
say
that
the
finding
a
fact
is
that
if
we
are
utilizing
a
material
that
is
allowable
in
the
historic
district
guidelines
that
mitigates
the
the
issue
of
not
meeting
the
guidelines
that
if
it's
in
non-primary
facades,
that
that
mitigates
the
issue
of
of
the
guidelines
and
that
finally,
like
stated
in
commissioner
stadi
mentioned,
it-
is
a
non-conforming
building
in
historic
district.
B
It
looks
like
andrea
has
a
comment
on
that
that
will
work.
Okay,
thank
you,
andrea.
Thank
you,
commissioner.
Vandarek.
I'm
pulling
up
the
floor
plans
quickly.
I
like
the
idea
of
only
limiting
it
to
the
rear
facades.
I
guess
I'm
wondering
if
that
I'm
wondering
how
that
they
would
get
to
the
how
how
it
would
be
run
to
the
front
units
if
it
didn't
go
down
the
fronts
of
the
buildings,
although
I
guess
maybe
that
is
up
to
their
their
creativity
to
figure
out.
G
Yeah
I
had
the
same
thought
as
you
trying
to
pull
up
the
floor
plan
to
figure
out.
Okay.
Is
there
a
way
to
be
able
to
service
all
of
these
units
without
having
it
on
the
front
facade,
and
I'm
I'm
not
really
seeing
it?
So
I
would.
G
Q
B
Okay,
so
the
motion
as
it
currently
stands
is
to
approve
the
application,
conditioned
that
the
covers
the
line
set
coverings
would
be
metal
and
would
be
painted
to
match
the
existing
flashing.
Does
that
sound,
correct
ian,
I
just
wanna
make
sure
we're
all
on
the
same
page.
B
Okay,
yes,
andrea.
R
I
think
that's
fine
for
your
for
your
approval
and
your
condition,
but
just
restate
the
finding
to
overturn,
and
you
have
to
kind
of
make
the
motion
to
overturn
staff
recommendation
in
favor.
You
know
this
is
your
reason
and
then
in
favor
of
this
motion
to
approve
it
with
these
conditions,
I
would
kind
of
start
start
to
finish.
So
it's
just
very
clear
for
the
record
what
what's
happening?
Okay,
I
can.
B
Do
that
so,
as
I
understand
it,
the
motion
is
to
overturn
staff
findings
because
by
switching
materials
to
metal
instead
of
the
polymer
based
material
that
was
proposed,
we
would
be
using
a
material
that
is
allowed
within
the
district,
and
I
think
a
part
of
it
is
also
that
this
is
a
non-contributing
contemporary
building
within
the
district,
and
so
this
this
material
is
definitely
allowed
on
non-contributing
contemporary
materials.
B
B
B
I
don't
see
any
further
discussion
so
with
that
with
the
clerk.
Please
call
a
roll
on
the
motion.
Bjornberg.
G
G
I
C
B
K
Again,
my
name
is
rob
skelecki,
I'm
a
city
planner
in
the
historic
preservation
section
of
cpet.
Today,
I'm
presenting
a
designation
of
the
tyler
street
northeast
john
cookhouse.
As
a
landmark,
the
property
is
located
at
948,
18th
avenue
southeast
in
2002.
K
The
minneapolis
excuse
me,
minneapolis
city
council,
member,
kevin
reich
of
ward
1
submitted
a
nomination
of
the
property
located
at
948
18th
avenue
northeast
for
consideration
as
a
local,
historic
landmark
after
completing
an
initial
review,
cbd
staff
recommended
to
the
hpc
on
april
7
2020
that
the
potential
landmark
may
exhibit
two
of
the
local
designation
criteria
found
in
section
599
of
the
heritage
preservation
ordinance.
K
The
hpc
adopted
staff
findings
in
place,
948
18th
avenue
northeast
under
interim
protection
and
called
for
a
designation
study
to
be
conducted
following
the
completion
of
the
designation
study
staff
is
now
recommending
that
that
the
tyler
street
northeast
john
cook
house
be
designated
as
a
local,
historic
landmark
next
slide.
Please.
K
K
The
property
retains
a
significant
amount
of
the
original
design
detail,
including
its
characteristic
cream,
brick
with
red
brick
accent,
its
polygonal
two-story
bay,
its
red
brick
coins,
its
massing,
hip
and
gable,
roof
shapes
and
dormer
fenestration
and
wood
detail
in
the
porsche
areas.
Next
slide,
please.
K
The
subject.
Property
is
also
representative
of
the
development
of
northeast
minneapolis
and
the
growth
of
the
city
following
the
annexation
of
land
in
northeast
minneapolis
residents
of
the
tyler
street.
Northeast
john
cookhouse,
in
the
late
19th
and
early
20th
century,
were
a
mix
of
middle
and
working
class
owners
and
tenants
whose
occupations,
workplaces
and
cultural
origins
are
greatly
characteristic
of
the
area.
K
The
designation
was
submitted
to
the
state
historic
preservation
office
for
comment
on
december
9th
2020.
In
a
letter
dated
february
1st
2021
schiphol
provided
comments
in
agreement
with
staff
recommendation
to
designate
the
tyler
street
northeast
john
cookhouse
and
concluded
that
the
property
was
a
good
candidate
for
local
designation
under
criteria.
One
and
four,
the
designation
study
was
presented
as
well
to
planning
commission
at
the
committee
of
the
whole
on
february.
K
25Th
2021,
as
detailed
in
a
memo
submitted
to
hpc
by
staff
planning
commissioners,
were
generally
supportive
of
the
property's
designation,
but
some
did
raise
comments
about
the
fact
that
the
future
land
use
is
cord
or
mix
use
and
the
future
build
form
is
transit
10
both
of
these
allowing
for
larger
buildings
of
differing
use
at
the
site.
But
the
commission
ultimately
suggested
that
the
property
was
a
good
candidate
for
designation
as
a
landmark
given
its
brick
queen
and
architecture
next
slide.
Please.
K
The
designation
of
the
property
will
help
preserve
an
important
remnant
of
northeast
minneapolis
development
in
the
late
1880s
and
communicate
the
history
and
the
corresponding
social,
cultural
and
economic
economic
growth
of
the
area.
From
that
period
into
the
20th
century,
the
designation
of
the
property
will
help
preserve
a
building
that
has
been
part
of
the
community
for
over
130
years,
the
building
has
historically
been
associated
with
transportation,
commercial
and
social
patterns
with
grew
up.
K
L
K
Thank
you,
commissioner.
Sample
staff
had
notified
the
property
ownership
following
the
nomination,
so
back
in
2020
staff
notified
them
of
the
the
hpc's
action.
The
property
ownership
and
representatives
have
not
reached
out
to
staff
staff
once
again
notified
them.
When
the
designation
staff
report
was
published
and
staff
has
not
received
any
comments
from
the
property
ownership
on
this.
D
B
B
A
Thank
you,
madam
chair
and
commissioners.
I
will
concur
with
the
staff
presentation
of
the
process,
the
formal
process
that
has
proceeded
to
to
this
point.
I
will
add
to
that
that,
in
addition
to
that
formal
process,
I
had
multiple
communications
with
neighbors
informally
and
then
some
formal
communications
that
were
sponsored
by
the
home,
neighborhood
group
and
association,
and
all
of
it
pointed
to
a
pretty
unanimous
effort
to
have
this
designation.
A
Many
different
stories
floated
through
that
were
personal
from
community
members
that
reinforced
the
technical
reasons
that
that
staff
outlined,
and
I
think
the
combination
of
how
the
subjective
importance
to
so
many
community
members
that
were
communicated
to
meme.
In
addition
to
the
technical
analysis,
I
think,
provides
the
conclusion
to
affirm
the
designation.
A
As
to
the
commissioner's
question
regarding
conversations
with
the
developer,
I
personally
have
been
in
conversations
with
them
and
they've
they've
reflected
that
they
were
fine
with
that
they
had
indicated,
maybe
some
challenge
to
to
approach
what's
next
and
to
that
end
we
have
been
talking
with
other
non-profit
developers,
most
recently
the
twin
cities,
land
trust
to
see
if
they
could
partner
with
that
particular
part
of
the
of
their
property
and
to
the
notion
that
was
brought
up
in
the
planning
commission
about
it
being
part
of
a
2040
designation
for
high
density.
A
I
would
say
the
area
is
extremely
supportive
of
that.
Already
it's
across
the
street
from
over
25
stories
of
affordable
housing
from
a
legacy
public
housing
tower
and
just
across
the
alley
the
developer
is,
will
be
building
six
stories.
Can
you
know
the
maximum
amount
allowed
for
the
central
avenue
corridor?
A
A
So
I
think
it's
one
of
these
moments
where
we
can
get
a
little
bit
of
and
and
in
terms
of
development
on
the
corridor,
but
some
remnant
of
our
past
that
people
can
enjoy,
and
so
with
that
I
would
hope
the
commission
could
support
staff
conclusions
and
affirm.
B
Applicant,
I
don't
see
any
thank
you
for
bringing
this
before
us,
so
I
will
continue
with
the
public
hearing
anyone
wishing
to
speak
for
against
this
application
again,
we'll
take
the
list
of
pre-registered
speakers
in.
D
B
And
then
open
the
floor
to
any
other
speakers
who
may
be
in
the
queue,
if
you
could,
please
provide
your
name
and
address
before
making
your
comments
and
what
I
call
your
name.
If
you
could
press
star
six
on
your
phone
and
wait
to
hear
the
pre-recorded
message
to
activate
your
microphone,
so
we
can
hear
you
the
first
name
on
the
queue
is
elizabeth.
B
C
Hi,
this
is
elizabeth
gales
from
hester
royce
and
company.
I'm
actually
here
in
case
the
commissioners
have
questions
about
an
item
in
the
discussion
part
of
the
meeting.
The
only
way
I
could
register
to
potentially
speak
was
to
choose
an
item
that
was
part
of
the
public
hearing.
I
don't
have
any
comments
on
the
designation
of
this
property.
Thank
you.
I.
B
B
Nope,
there's
no
one
else
on
the
line.
Okay.
With
that,
I
will
close
the
public
hearing.
Commissioners,
I
would
like
to
know
your
thoughts
on
this
application.
B
I
think
I
mean
I
I
think
we
all
find
buildings
like
this
may
be
a
little
endearing
or
nostalgic,
because
I
I
was
really
I
don't
know
to
me-
it's
a
cute
building
and
I
realize
it
is
in
some
rough
shape,
but
I
really
hope
that,
with
these
discussions
it
sounds
like
that
are
happening
with
other
developers
that
this
could
become
a
really
beautiful
and
and
promising
project.
But
I'm
wondering
if
anybody
has
any
specific
thoughts
on
the
application.
Commissioner,
vanderek.
H
I
agree
this
is
a
cool
looking
building.
I
hope
that
this
can
help
facilitate
redevelopment
at
the
site
and
appreciate
council,
member
and
councilman
reich
nominating
it.
So
I'm
gonna
go
ahead
and
make
a
motion
to
approve
staff
findings.
G
I
E
S
You,
our
commission,
is
required
by
federal
law
to
participate
in
the
national
register
nomination
process
by
affording
the
public
a
reasonable
opportunity
to
comment
on
these
nominations
by
preparing
a
report
as
to
whether
or
not
the
property
is
eligible
for
listing
and
then
working
through
our
mayor
to
submit
a
report
to
the
national
to
the
state
historic
preservation
office.
Regarding
your
determination,
the
ji
case
building,
which
you
see
here
before
you
consists
of
one
contributing
building
at
the
northwest
corner
of
the
intersection
of
park
and
washington
avenues.
S
The
city
of
minneapolis
identified
the
property
as
a
potential
historic
resource
back
in
2011
and
recommended
further
study
be
conducted,
and
we
were
pleased
to
receive
this
nomination
of
the
property
with
that
further
study
in
terms
of
its
integrity.
The
case
building
does
retain
integrity.
It
sustained
very
few
alterations
over
time
in
particular,
here:
you'll
notice,
its
flat
roof
and
three
story
height
remain
unchanged.
S
Next
slide,
please,
as
you
can
see
in
this
image
from
when
the
building
was
constructed,
it's
a
bit
difficult
to
see
in
this
particular
image,
but
some
of
the
key
details,
key
design
elements
are
still
very
clearly
present
and
I'll
go
back
and
forth
between
these
images.
A
bit
to
allow
you
to
see
those
you'll
note
that
low
buried
walls
of
red
brick
with
white
terracotta
capitals,
tiles
string
courses
and
dentals
continue
to
adorn
the
street
sides
of
the
building,
and
if
our
it
staff
could
go
back
to
slide
number
one.
Please.
S
S
S
The
building
was
designed
by
master
architects,
keys
and
colburn
in
the
classical
revival
style
of
architecture,
but
neither
of
those
facts
are
actually
related
to
the
property
significance.
Instead,
the
property
is
considered
locally
eligible
under
national
register
criteria,
a
and
c
in
terms
of
criteria,
a
it's
significant
for
its
role
in
commerce
and
community
planning.
I'm
sorry,
just
a
not
c.
S
Minneapolis's
place
in
this
significance
is
less
apparent,
but
still
important
for
a
half
of
a
century.
The
subject
property
served
as
the
case
company's
regional
marketing
and
distribution
headquarters
prior
to
the
construction
of
this
building,
independent
jobbers
supplied
retailers
with
case
equipment
until
case
vertically
integrated
these
operations
into
its
own
company,
in
line
with
industry
trends
at
the
turn
of
the
20th
century.
S
The
case
building's
construction
demolished,
the
notorious
courtyard
called
fish
alley
where
persistent
criminal
activity
ran
rampant
while
earlier
redevelopment
on
other
blocks.
Other
parts
of
this
block
had
weakened
the
alley's
influence.
It
really
took
the
case
project
to
eliminate
it
completely
and
for
these
reasons,
staff
is
recommending
you,
the
commission,
adopt.
B
B
I
don't
see
any
questions
and
I
realize
this
is
not
technically
a
public
hearing
item,
but
I
guess
I
guess
I
can
make
it
one
right.
I
will
open
the
public
hearing
and
see
liz.
Did
you
have
a
something
you
wanted
to
say
about
the
item?
Or
did
you
just
want
to
be
available
for.
C
C
Okay,
thank
you
yeah,
I'm
here
in
case
there
any
questions
the
owner,
who
has
owned
the
building
since
around
2000,
is
going
to
be
pursuing
historic
tax
credits
with
the
closing
of
the
old
spaghetti
factory
restaurant.
C
The
first
floor
of
the
building
is
completely
vacant
and
they
are
hoping
to
attract
a
new
commercial
tenant
into
the
space,
as
well
as
changes
that
have
been
brought
to
the
commercial
office
market
because
of
the
pandemic.
There's
going
to
be
some
modifications
that
are
occurred
to
the
interior,
the
exterior
of
the
building,
as
you
see
it
and
a
large
part
of
the
interior
will
continue
to
maintain
a
lot
of
historic
integrity.
C
So
we
hope
that
the
commission
will
vote
in
favor
of
supporting
this
nomination
and
if
you
have
any
questions
about
the
nomination,
I'd
be
happy
to
answer
any.
C
B
Well,
with
that,
I
will
close
the
public
hearing
and
start
the
commissioner
discussion.
Commissioner
sandbolt.
L
So
this
seems
like
a
slam
dunk
to
me
very
well
written
report.
L
I
was
especially
appreciative
of
a
period
of
significance,
excluding
the
1959
concrete
block
edition
that'll
give
them
some
flexibility
in
the
event
that
they
ever
need
to
get
rid
of
that
thing,
hopefully,
it'll
make
it
easier
for
for
us
to
realize
that
that
was
an
addition
beyond
the
period
of
significance.
So
with
all
that,
I'd
like
to
make
a
motion
to
approve
and
direct
staff
to
follow
through,
as
noted
in
the
agenda.
B
B
I
agree
this
is
a
well-written
report
and
it
seems,
like
I'm
happy
to
add
this
one
onto
the
national
register.
So
with
that,
I
don't
see
any
further
comments.
Would
the
clerk
please
call
the
role.
J
J
I
don't
know
if
that's
the
same
as
what
the
letter
to
you
from
ms
amy
spong
at
the
department
of
administration,
which
is
asking
for,
I
think,
to
approve
the
report
that
staff
has
provided
and
and
recommend
to
the
to
the
state.
So
that's
really.
My
only
question
is
whether
we
should
be
proving
the
nomination
or
if
we
should
rather
be
approving
the
report
and
recommending
the
approval
to
the
state.
R
I
can
I
can
speak
to
that
real
quick
unless
john
wants
to
jump
in,
but
essentially
that
that's
the
typical
language,
the
the
per
the
report
that
you
are
approving
is
the
nomination.
So
essentially
the
commission
is
approving
and
giving
their
blessing
for
the
nomination.
They
are
supporting
it
and
then
they
are
recommending
to
the
state
historic
preservation
office
to
to
take
it
forward.
So
it's
kind
of
used
interchangeably,
but
that's
generally
the
standard
language
we
we
use
for
this
in
coordination
with
the
state
historic
preservation
office.
R
B
Questions:
okay
with
that
with
the
clerk
call
the
roll
on
the
motion.
C
J
B
R
Andrea
yeah-
this
is
just
following
up
on
my
item
that
I
brought
up
in
new
business
at
the
last
meeting
in
february
about
elections
for
this
2021
year.
For
the
commission,
I
will
let
commissioner,
sam
balt
speak
to
sample,
speak
to
the
results
of
nominations
to
that,
but
I
think
at
this
point
we
can
set,
she
will
give
the
results
but
preemptively.
I
will
say
that
we
can
set
probably
an
agenda
item
for
new
business
next
week
for
elections,
since
we
have
nominations
so.
L
Yes,
I
have
received
some
nominations.
I
sent
out
an
email
and
asked
for
all
nominations
to
be
sent
by
next
week,
wednesday,
so
that
we
have
time
to
check
with
people
that
they
accept
the
nomination
and
to
get
the
ballots
set
up.
So
I
will
email
staff
once
once
wednesday
hits.
But
if
you
have
nominations,
please
send
them
my
way.
R
Forgive
me
this
is
andrea
one
more
time
as
a
note
from
staff.
I
still
I
have
noted
your
comment,
commissioner
vander
ike
about
scheduling
a
retreat.
It
is
on
my
list.
It
has
just
not
happened
yet,
but
I
will
get
to
that.
I
will
probably
send
out
another
doodle
poll
which
is
similar
to
what
I
did
for
the
last
meeting
to
gauge
availability
and
timing
for
this
particular
meeting.
We
will
notice
for
it.
R
We
will
send
out
notices
for
it
according
to
public
meeting
laws,
so
I
just
want
to
make
sure
it's
on
everybody's
schedule,
because
we
can't
hold
it
on
on
an
hpc
night.
So
thank
you
other
than
that.
No
other,
no
other
announcements
from
staff.
H
Jumping
on
that,
andrea,
quick,
when
you
do
do
that,
I
think
it
would
be
good
to
open
it
up
to
us
commissioners
of
potential
agenda
items
to
add.
I
think
I'll
have
at
least
one
I'd
like
to
talk
about
and-
and
I
would
encourage
my
fellow
commissioners
to
have
agenda
items
too.
I
know
we've
always
been
tight
on
time
in
these
things.
I
I
really
like
the
retreats.
H
I
always
think
they
add
a
lot
of
value
and
I
think
our
dialogue
is
really
interesting,
so
we
always
get
ton
of
time.
I
think
it's
worth
maybe
having
two
we've
talked
about
that
before
too,
but
kind
of
a
call
for
agenda
items
once
the
date's
locked
down,
I
think,
would
be
a
great
thing.
B
Thank
you,
commissioner.
Vanderheik.
Oh,
I
agree.
I'm
looking
forward
to
doing
the
the
retreat
and
I
think,
having
two
would
be
an
ideal
way
to
address
the
fact
that
we
always
have
more
than
we
have
time
for.
Are
there
any
other
items.
B
I
don't
see
any
so
with
that.
We
have
completed
all
items
on
the
agenda
for
this
meeting.
I
will
ask
again
if
there
are
any
other
matters
to
come
before
us,
this
meeting
there
being
no
other
businesses
meeting.
If
not
and
without
objection.
I
will
declare
this
meeting
adjourned.
The
next
regular
meeting
of
the
hpc
is
march
16
2021.