►
From YouTube: H-Board Hearing 1/10/23
Description
No description was provided for this meeting.
If this is YOUR meeting, an easy way to fix this is to add a description to your video, wherever mtngs.io found it (probably YouTube).
A
B
A
D
A
A
B
Member
Berkeley,
yes,
member
Guida,
yes,
the
motion
has
been
approved.
A
A
F
You,
madam
chair,
on
page
four
paragraph:
five:
if
you
can
change
it
to,
she
thought
the
six
foot
setback
was
insufficient
and
then
on
page
12,
paragraph
six,
if
you
can
change
it
to
read
member
Aguilar
Medrano
said
she
had
concerns
about
the
steel
Arbor,
which
is
visible
from
the
street.
This
is
getting
into
the
details,
but
I
wanted
to
provide
you
with
some
constructive
comments
to
consider
incorporating
in
case
the
board,
decides
to
see
this
project
again.
A
Berkeley
motion
to
approve
is
just
amended.
A
Been
approved,
we
have
under
findings
of
fact
and
conclusions
of
law.
We
have
eight.
Are
there
any
changes
to
any
of
these
either
staff
or
board?
It
appears
not.
Is
there
a
motion
to
approve.
G
Excuse
me,
sorry,
I,
don't
know
how
to
I
raised
my
hand
on
the
museum.
I
have
a
change.
Yes,
please
it's
for
number
for
number,
eight
case,
20226066
hdrb
on
page
four,
the
second
line,
it's
just
a
typo.
They
left
out
the
word
board.
So
it
should
say
the
board
finds.
A
A
H
We
have
two
minutes
two
minutes:
okay,
I'll
speak
very
quickly.
My
name
is
Steven
Fox
I'm,
founder
of
a
new
millennium
Fine
Art
I've,
been
in
business
and
Santa
Fe
for
42
years,
I've
been
involved
with
the
United
Nations,
since
I
was
about
four
years
old.
Five
years
old
and
I've
started
a
branch
of
the
United
Nations
in
Santa
Fe
New
Mexico.
The
details
are
complicated.
H
If
you
could
write
a
letter
to
this
USA
Secretary
of
State,
Anthony,
blinken,
2201,
C
Street,
and
ask
him
to
come
visit
Santa
Fe
and
see
why
it
should
be
a
branch
of
a
branch
of
the
United
Nations
should
be
here
in
Kenya.
There
are.
Would
you
want
me
to
stop
talking
just
go.
H
So
that's
better,
better
amplification.
So
in
Kenya,
there's
the
United
Nations
environment
program
that
was
started
by
a
person
named
Maurice
strong
and
his
wife
Hannah
strong.
They
they
all
live
in
Southern
Colorado
near
the
crestone
crystal
in
Colorado,
and
there
are
other
branches
of
it.
Aeronautics
is
in
Montreal.
H
Of
course,
the
Palace
of
the
Nations
is
in
Geneva
Switzerland,
and
we
need
one
here,
because
the
one
in
New
York
is
not
addressing
problems
of
stopping
child
trafficking,
not
addressing
problems
of
nutrition,
consumer
protection
and
and
longevity,
and
a
couple
of
other
major
concerns.
I've
discussed
them
with
the
former
ambassador
to
the
United
Nations
William
Blaine
Richardson
III
his
office
is
216
North
Washington
and
we're
making
some
tremendous
progress.
H
I've
been
able
to
stop
the
provisor
from
deploying
one
billion
of
their
so-called
vaccines
in
the
30
poorest,
Nation
45,
poorest
nations
of
the
world,
and
an
extra
35
I
wrote
to
all
the
U.N
ambassadors.
See
this
the
chairman
of
advisor,
wanted
to
give
you
know
this
Greek
bearing
gifts.
Do
you
remember
ever
read
Homer.
You
know
the
the
Greeks.
Beware:
Greeks
bearing
gifts;
okay,
so
to
make
a
long
story
short
I
was
successful
in
preventing
this
derailing
his
plan
and
saved
a
billion
people
right
here
in
Santa
Fe
from
correspondence
in
Santa
Fe.
H
J
H
Accomplishment
in
this
last
year
was
getting
the
human
rights
commissioner
Dr
Michelle
bachelet
to
go
to
xinjiang.
You
know
it's
a
complicated
thing:
it
involved
a
translation
into
Arabic
that
I
sent
to
all
the
UN
ambassadors
from
from
Mauritania
to
Indonesia
and
it
worked,
and
so
she
decided
that
she
had
to
go.
There
issued
a
scathing
report.
The
Chinese
didn't
like
it
at
all:
added
131,
page
objection
to
it
and
now
we're
waiting
for
some
other
things
to
happen
and
to
conclude
before
you
leave
all
of
you
before
you
leave
the
building.
H
H
We
need
a
better
facility,
I've
been
operating
out
of
a
business
on
121,
West,
San
Francisco
and
a
drunk
from
either
evangelos
or
Matador,
or
desert
dogs
drove
up
on
the
curb
about
two
weeks
ago
and
smashed
into
the
facade
and,
and
it
would
be
helpful
if
the
city
you
a
decorum
of
you,
would
would
reaffirm
that
the
the
the
the
facade
should
be
restored
to
what
it
was
historically
that
building's
been
there
since
1854
1864,
or
something
like
that
and
I.
If
you
have
any
questions.
H
K
You
very
much
mine
is
very
local,
as
opposed
to
Global
and
I
wanted
to
just
give
you
a
little
update
on
the
Lucchesi
case.
From
my
point
of
view,
and
also
to
ask
you
for
a
status
review
at
203,
East,
Santa,
Fe,
Avenue,
so
Casey,
the
sign
from
57
Old,
Santa,
Fe
Trail
was
removed
from
the
board.
You
were
supposed
to
have
a
recommendation,
however.
According
to
what
I
thought
I
heard,
Miss
flamboy
say
was
that
that
could
actually
recommend
height
exceptions
but
design
exceptions.
K
I
mean
you
could
approve
height,
exceptions
recommended
design
exceptions,
but
they,
but
they
took
it
away
anyway,
and
it
went
to
the
board
of
adjustment
and
there
and
and
Mr
member
bien
venue
and
myself
brought
up
non-conformity
of
the
sign
at
the
meeting
and
only
two
out
of
four
members
voted
for
it.
So
again
didn't
have
a
quorum,
so
the
appeal
was
withdrawn.
K
It
was
sent
to
board
of
adjustment,
and
then
there
all
they
talked
about
was
that
it
was
a
last
non-conforming
sign
then
either
of
the
two
previous
strong
conforming
signs
and
nobody
wanted
to
read
for
1452
A6
third
sentence.
Only
the
third
sentence
in
which
actually
said
structures
other
than
buildings,
including
signs
that
don't
need
architectural
standards
or
sign
standards,
are
considered
non-conforming
and
a
non-conforming
signs
not
cannot
be
altered
or
renewed.
They
can
only
be
removed.
K
I,
don't
know
why
your
staff
did
not
actually
bring
that
to
your
attention
or
bring
that
to
the
board
of
adjustments
attention
and
when
the
board
of
adjustment
heard
it,
they
were
told
they
were
only.
There
was
really
only
a
height
exception,
which
the
boa
should
grant
that
didn't
really
have
anything
to
do
with
design.
Even
though
letter
sizing
and
Ma
you
know,
square
footage
of
the
sign
was
higher.
This
case
has
been
a
travesty
as
far
as
I
can
tell
in
the
total
waste
of
time,
because
again,
that
ordinance
is
very
clear.
K
It's
on
point,
and
it
should
have
been
your
attention
should
have
brought
to
it,
been
brought
to
it,
as
should
have
been
the
boa,
and
that
is
still
as
far
as
I
understand
under
discussion,
because
we
actually
had
a
City
attorney
say
that
that
section
had
nothing
to
do
with
signs
now
in
terms
of
203
East,
Santa,
Fe
Avenue,
it's
one
of
those
ones
where
you
know,
maybe
you
should
really
I,
don't
know,
feel
badly
about
it.
K
You
agreed
that
on
this,
a
significant
building
that
they
could
make
a
second
edition
onto
a
primary
facade,
the
same
primary
facade
that
had
been
added
on
to
by
the
oil
and
gas
lobbyists
when
they
had
it-
and
this
was
done
because
maybe
in
the
future,
they
might
need
a
bathroom
for
somebody,
who's,
disabled
and
again
I.
Don't
think
future
hardship
is
part
of
the
ordinance
and
again
Aging
in
place.
Everybody
is
Aging
in
place.
K
A
Thank
you
Stephanie
anything
under
stealth,
Communications,
Heather,.
D
Hr
Rios,
we
are
still
working
on
the
proposed
editions
and
amendments
to
the
code
regarding
exceptions,
and
so
we
will
be
getting
that
to
you
next
time.
I
had
promised
it
this
time
so
which
is
over
some
additional
refinements
that
and
discussion
that
we
had
regarding
just
the
mechanics
of
doing
so
and
then
the
criteria,
because
the
criteria
are
important
to
consider
as
this
you
know
an
exception
is-
is
something
that
is
unique
and
demands
thoughtful.
D
Consideration
like
the
board
has
been
doing,
but
we
want
to
make
sure
the
code
reflects
that
as
well,
and
so
that
will
be
next
time
and
and
like
Stephanie
Minato
mentions
that
lucasi
sign
did
go
to
the
board
of
adjustments
this
past
week
and
the
applicant
may
have
confused
things
a
little
bit
because
the
sign
is
within
code.
The
only
thing
that
the
proposed
sign,
the
only
anything
that
is
not
within
code,
is
the
height,
so
the
sign
of
size
will
actually
be
reducing.
D
A
We
will
move
on
to
Old
business
and
our
old
business.
We
have
one
case,
and
that
is
Heather's
case
and
I
will
ask
speakers
to
limit
your
comments
to
two
minutes
and
who's
going
to
help
me
on
this
on
the
two-minute
limit,
Melissa
Heather
Melissa.
Thank
you.
If
you'll
just
raise
your
hand
when
it's
the
two
minutes,
thank
you.
Heather.
You
have
the
floor.
D
Thank
you
it
if
we
can
get
the
PowerPoint.
Oh,
please.
D
J
D
D
The
site
is
located
just
to
the
east
of
Delgado
Street
on
Canyon
Road
on
the
north
side
of
Canyon
Road,
and
it
currently
has
a
gallery
and
some
other
businesses
in
there
all
related
to
to
the
Morning
Star
gallery
and
the
applicant
is
requesting
an
addition
at
North
West
corner
of
the
property,
as
you
can
see
here,
the
the
square
there
where
there's
a
tree
and
then
also
an
addition
of
portal,
so
with
reference
to
What,
was
seen
previously.
D
The
board
went
over
the
the
drawings
and
the
concerns
were
with
the
portal
being
too
similar
to
the
historic
portal.
So
this
is
a
design
that
was
brought
to
to
you
previously
and
it
illustrates
sort
of
the
the
slope
the
decorative
feature
there
at
the
base
of
the
portal,
and
so
the
board
suggested
a
reduction
in
the
amassing
of
the
portal
and
the
scale
to
maintain
the
prominence
of
the
historic
portal.
Let
it
stand
out
there
that
first
picture
was
that
historic
portal
and
then
an
adjustment
of
massing,
both
in
plan
and
style.
D
So
the
applicant
made
an
amendment
or
adjustments.
So
this
is
what
it
looks
like
today.
These
are
the
drawings
that
show
the
existing
conditions
and
you
can
see
over
there
on
the
right
hand,
side
of
the
drawing
the
historic
portal
which
primarily
faces
to
the
interior
of
the
site.
But
then,
of
course,
it
has
a
prominent
view
from
513
East
Alameda.
So
this
is
a
request
for
an
expansion
of
a
kitchen,
a
bathroom
Edition
on
the
south
elevation,
the
ports
Hall
on
the
south
elevation
as
well,
which
that
might
be
incorrect.
D
So
my
apologies
I'll
show
I'll
go
over
the
Sly
got
mixed
up.
I'm
sorry,
so
you
can
see
on
the
floor
plans
the
existing
and
the
proposed,
so
the
existing
has
several
different
rooms
which
will
be
expanded.
D
So
this
is
a
yard
wall
here
that
exists
on
the
site,
expand
into
this
area
as
well,
so
and
that
right
now,
there's
no
portal
in
that
South
South
elevation,
but
there
will
be-
and
this
is
the
product
of
the
discussion
that
you
all
had
last
time,
and
so
the
portal
is
smaller
in
scale.
D
The
windows,
the
large
windows
that
exist
today
will
be
reduced
in
size
and
there
will
be
French
door
placed
underneath
the
Porton
and
the
windows
that
are
proposed
are
similar
in
scale
to
the
existing
building
as
it
is,
and
these
are
the
renderings
illustrating
the
existing
condition
as
well
as
so
from
the
north,
as
well
as
view
to
Northeast,
as
well
as
with
the
change
of
the
portal.
So
you
can
see
on
the
bad
bottom
series
of
drawings.
D
That
portal
there
that's
being
proposed,
so
staff
finds
all
criteria,
have
been
met
and
recommends
approval,
but
there
is
a
condition
of
approval,
and
that
is
the
board
of
adjustment
needs
to
review.
The
West
Edition
for
a
variance
for
setback
requirement.
This
is
sort
of
the
odd
thing
that
happens
in
historic
districts.
Is
you
know,
zoning
is
not
one
size
fits
all
and
in
the
RCA
Zone
District,
that
requires
a
pie,
foot
setback,
so
the
applicant
is
understands.
D
C
C
B
L
320
Aztec
Street
good
evening
Heather
has
done
such
a
lovely
job
of
presenting
my
case.
I'm,
not
really
sure
I
have
anything
to
add
other
than
I
did
bring
some
books
with
examples
of
carvings
that
I'm
hoping
that
we'll
do
on
the
on
the
beams
and
the
the
corbels
in
the
in
perhaps
The
Columns,
and
so
that's.
My
only
addition
really
is
that
we
would
would
like
to
do.
Sort
of
traditional
carvings
on
the
wood
are.
A
L
C
M
M
L
It's
very
traditional
carving,
that's
done
mostly
by
John
got
memes
is
interpretation
or
synthesis.
Synthesis
of
Spanish
Colonial
would
work
in
Spanish,
Colonial
churches.
It's
where
I'm
headed
with
this.
Thank
you.
C
Madam
chair
a
question
for
the
applicant:
yes,
so
Gala
the
the
port,
the
new
portal,
the
corners
are
wood
posts.
Yes,.
L
Wood
post
I
am
hoping
to
do
a
river
rock
Foundation,
much
like
the
river
rock
walls
that
we
already
have
on
site.
L
D
L
A
foil
to
the
where
we
find
nature
of
them
of
the
original
portal.
C
L
L
L
A
A
A
C
B
A
B
L
A
You
all
we
will
move
on
to
new
business
and
we
have
five
cases
under
new
business
and
the
first
one
is
located
at
805.
Apalaki
Hill
is
the
applicant
here.
The
applicant
is
here-
and
this
is
Angela's
case.
Angela
present
your
case.
Please.
Q
M
O
O
Get
there
is
the
the
appearance
of
the
house,
as
you
drive
up
from
Apodaca
Hill,
see
at
the
top
of
the
hill
to
the
left.
So
that's
a
two-story
non-converting
structure
was
built
sometime
in
the
1960s,
there's,
not
a
historic
survey
for
this
address,
but
it
has
been
identified
in
in
previous
files
as
as
non-contributing
and
reiterated
in
a
2015
board
case,
there
were
alterations
proposed
before
to
bring
the
windows
into
compliance
with
the
three
feet
to
the
corner
rule
as
well
as
divided
lights.
O
Network
had
been
done
this
new
case.
Well
it
also
in
that
case,
second
floor
windows
were
moved
and
an
East
Elevation
rear
stained
glass
window
was
removed
and
then
filled
with
a
stucco
wall.
O
This
is
the
so
that's
the
front
of
the
house.
The
approach
from
Abu
Dhaka
Hill,
set
off
from
the
from
the
street
towards
the
east.
This
to
the
top
right
is
the
rear
and
then,
in
the
middle
on
your
left
is
the
South
Side
Southwest
side
of
the
structure
where
an
addition
is
proposed-
and
this
is
a
nice
schematic
showing
those
angles
to
to
the
to
those
facades
and
elevations.
O
It's
got
a
lot
of
facades
so
for
a
site
plan
like
I
said
you
approach,
abadaka,
Hill
and
the
the
house
is
approached
this
way
and
that's
the
front
and
where,
where
you
see
red,
are
proposed
editions
a
small
portal
new
portal
there
on
the
northwest,
Corner
a
rear
portal
on
the
East,
also
in
in
red
and
then
in
addition
to
the
Southwest
elevation
in
the
large
red
box.
O
So
you
have
the
west
elevation
here
and
the
proposed
west
elevation
the
the
addition.
This
is
the
addition
of
the
guest
house
and
it
calls
for
an
additional
680
square
foot,
one
story,
guest
house
and
it's
it
will
be
split
level
as
the
site
climbs
from
west
to
east.
The
tallest
proposed
height
is
13
feet,
4
inches
at
its
north
east
corner,
and
the
heights
of
the
remaining
Corners
vary
between
eight
feet:
four
inches
at
the
southwest
corner
to
11
feet
at
the
northwest
corner
southwest
corner
earlier.
O
Pardon
me,
northwest
corner
is
11
feet.
The
proposed
Heights
comply
with
the
tight
standards
as
they
are
under
the
existing
Second
Story
height
existing
second
story
story,
height
at
19,
feet,
8
inches,
the
proposed
Edition
features,
multiple
stop
stepped
masses
and
staff
worked
with
the
applicant
to
soften
the
corners
to
more
closely
comply
with
the
downtown
and
East
Side
District
standards.
Recent
Santa
for
recent
Santa
Fe
style,
the
applicant-
proposes
black
divided
light.
Aluminum,
clad
doors
and
windows.
Stucco
proposed
is
suede,
the
existing
house,
stucco
colors
desert
rose
and
they
are
close
in
color.
O
Moving
to
the
North
elevation
on
the
main
house,
the
addition
The
Proposal
is
to
add
418
square
feet
of
a
portal
to
the
rear
elevation,
and
this
proposed
portal
will
be
constructed
with
black
steel
columns
and
rafters
with
a
rusted
patina
and
the
roof
will
be
two-thirds,
enclosed
and
a
third
will
be
semi-enclosed
with
latia
members
on
the
moving
around
the
I'm
going
to
stay
right
here
on
the
North
elevation,
because
it
shows
the
additional
portal
at
the
entry.
O
O
The
Proposal
calls
for
replacing
windows
on
the
Second
Story.
The
new
windows
will
be
flagstone
and
color
to
match
existing
and
the
applicant
proposes
to
add
a
stucco
wall
to
screen
the
existing
roof.
O
Mount
roof
mounted
it's
right
there,
the
mini
splits
that
are
on
top
that
were
built
without
they
were
added
without
a
permit
and
they
are
coming
back
to
add
a
buffering
short
wall
for
that
that'll
be
lower
than
the
existing
parapet
height
and
the
proposal
calls
for
a
six
foot
interior
yard
wall
with
wood
gate
on
the
west
elevation,
and
these
are
the
proposed
colors
and
finishes.
O
Staff
was
at
this,
we
were
at
the
site
today,
as
you
observed,
and
staff
recommends
approval
of
the
project
with
the
conditions
that
the
additions
Corners
be
softened
further
to
comply
with
the
downtown
and
East
Side
design
standards,
and
that
the
additions
proposed
into
yard
wall
at
the
South
End
of
the
west
elevation
be
shortened
to
resemble
a
yard
wall.
O
With
these
conditions,
staff
finds
that
the
application
complies
with
14-5.2
d,
the
general
design
standards
for
all
the
historic
districts
and
section
14-5.2
e,
the
downtown
and
East
Side
District
standards,
and
with
that
I
stand
for
questions,
and
the
applicant
is
here
as
well
to
flesh
out
his
proposal
further
and
to
answer
questions
about
his
project.
A
A
Can
you
give
us
a
little
bit
of
history
on
that
porch?
If
you
know
it.
O
The
the
existing
thank
you
for
the
chair,
thank
you
for
the
question.
Cheerios.
Are
you
referring
to
the
existing
portal
on
the
front
of
the
house?
Yes
or
the
actually
I'm,
not
quite
clear,
there's,
there's
one
on
the
rear.
Let
me
get
back
to
the
pictures
here.
A
O
Down
below
here
it
looks
like
it's
a
stone
column,
but
it's
actually
been
it's
a
stucco
column.
C
C
E
M
O
C
The
and
there's
no
for
yard
wall,
the
allowable
it
would
meet
the.
M
O
T
G
O
Thank
you,
member
Berkeley,
for
your
question.
I've
got
slide
the
north
elevation
slides
existing
and
proposed
up,
and
it
shows
the
proposed
simplified
steel
portal
in
question,
and
it
is
one
of
the
considerations
is
that
it
is
not
publicly
visible.
First
of
all,
it's
a
non-contributing
house,
but
that
it's
in
the
rear-
and
it
is
not
visible.
It
is
not
characteristic
of
old
or
recent
Santa
Fe
style.
O
A
Anything
further
member
Berkeley,
I.
A
You
any
other
questions
for
Angela
members.
If
not,
the
applicant
should
come
forward
and
cancel
it
in.
B
U
U
As
Angela
mentioned,
this
project
has
been
modified
few
times
as
a
non-contributing
building
and
David
rash
on
her
on
the
last
Edition
mentioned
that
in
the
report,
what
we
trying
to
do
on
the
main
house
is
basically
to
match
all
the
windows
together.
Right
now
we
have
mismatched
windows.
So
when
they
came
last
time
which
David
rash
presented
that
project
was
some
of
the
windows
were
changed.
Some
not
so
this
proposal
we're
trying
to
unify
the
building
added
more
comprehensive
kind
of
look
to
it,
so
everything's
matching
together.
U
The
addition
is
that
it's
going
to
be
a
small,
it's
an
attached,
guest
house
or
for
the
client
as
an
elderly,
a
mother-
that's
using
the
space
I'd
like
to
address
the
the
entry,
the
the
exemptions
that
this
staff
is
asking
us
to
do
for
the
project,
because
I
think
the
drawings,
it's
a
really
multifaceted,
multi-facile
project.
So
looking
at
that,
maybe
a
little
bit
confusing.
But
it's
not
a
freestanding
wall.
U
There
is
a
portal
behind
it
that
attaches
that
wall
into
the
house,
so
there's
no
freestanding
element
in
there
and
the
reason
we
created
that
wall
is
it's
to
create
another
Courtyard,
another
step
entry
into
the
project.
It's
going
to
be
beyond
that.
Well,
it's
just
going
to
be
landscaped
a
little
bit
differently
and
we're
also
providing
a
bench
for
people.
U
You
know
to
basically
get
rid
of
their
shoes
and
they
can
either
bring
it
in
or
out,
but
it
creates
a
little
bit
a
little
intimate
space
beyond
the
wall
and
Beyond
the
Wall
life
in
Santa.
Fe
is
very
popular.
It's
just
like
we,
we
all
kind
of
like
have
these
privacy
walls
in
the
downtown
area,
and
we
have
our
Oasis
and
you
know
a
little
bit
of
a
privacy
in
those
area.
U
Another
point
that
I'd
like
to
present
is
the
structure
itself,
sits
85
feet
away
from
Apodaca.
So
when
you
are
visiting
the
site,
you
are
in
the
private
driver,
you're
going
close
to
it
as
a
public
view.
You
are
always
about
85
or
more
away
from
the
project.
So
you
don't.
You
know
you
don't
perceive
it
as
you
driving
into
the
private
driver
and
looking
at
the
project,
the
I
don't
know.
U
If
the
board
is
consider
concerned
about
the
steel
column,
but
in
the
historic
district
we
have
done
steel
columning
before
your
most
recent
project,
right
on
East
Alameda
right
across
the
park.
I
have
a
picture
of
them,
they
have
all
steel
columns
and
they
are
in
the
downtown
east
side,
historic
district.
So
and
but
there's
you
can
see
it
from
the
streets
from
the
park
from
the
from
the
park
you
can
or
from
the
East
Alameda.
U
Thank
you
for
attaching
meat
here
but
yeah.
This
is
that
wall.
That
is
the
corner.
That
shows
there's
a
roof
structure
that
goes
and
connects
back
to
the
house
and
the
other
side
of
it.
We
have
a
raised
planter
because
the
house
really
sits
on
the
slope.
As
Angela
mentioned,
one
corner
of
the
house
is
only
eight
feet:
high
we're
really
pushing
the
Finish
roll
everything
down
and
and
that
corner.
U
So
I
would
ask
the
board
to
reevaluate
that
exemptions
that
the
city
staff
is
asking
for
this
project.
As
far
as
the
corner
goes,
the
corners
are
as
soft
as
possible.
We
have
detail
of
all
the
corners
we
have.
You
know
two
inch
insulation
on
the
corner.
We
cutting
the
corner.
There
are
detail
on
the
corners,
really
everything
is
as
smooth
and
soft
as
is
possible.
This
is
again
not
our
first
project
in
the
historic
districts.
We
are
familiar
with
their
desire
of
having
a
soft
appearance,
and
this
structure
conforms.
A
C
You,
madam
chair
Mr,
moseraba
I,
really
appreciate
the
drawing
package
you
submitted,
as
well
as
the
work
that
you
did
with
with
staff
on
the
back
and
forth
on
design.
I
know,
there's
a
perhaps
a
multi-year
project
I
found
the
renderings
in
particular
extremely
convincing.
Not
only
are
they
kind
of
beautifully
executed,
but
they
really
do
show
the
elements
that
you're
proposing
quite
well
oftentimes.
When
we
look
at
you
know
just
2D
drawings,
it's
difficult
to
kind
of
fully
understand
the
massing
that's
being
proposed.
C
In
my
view,
the
the
guest
house
dramatically
improves
the
property.
So
this
is
not
a
question
of
you
know
is
something
compatible.
Only
this
to
me,
you
know,
is
it's
really
good
design?
This
is
something
that
adds
something
to
the
property.
C
C
I,
like
the
tension
between
the
kind
of
heavy
front
of
the
house
and
the
kind
of
lighter
rear
or
tall
I,
think
that
you
know
you're
tying
to
an
existing
structure.
I
I,
it's
not
publicly
visible.
We've
seen
steel
structures
like
this
before
in
the
historic
districts
I'm
I'm
in
favor
of
the
rear
portal,
the
the
guest
house
itself,
the
massing
of
it,
reminds
me
a
little
bit
of
Irvin
Gill
in
Southern
California.
C
His
work,
which
kind
of
traded
very
heavily
in
mass
and
and
often
had
these
types
of
Entry
features
a
thick
wall
that
you
passed
through.
I
think
that
the
entry
experience
for
the
guest
house
will
be
exceptionally
nice.
I
agree
with
you
that
you
know
this
is
not
a
freestanding
yard
wall.
This
is
part
of
the
architecture
it
is.
It
is
backed
up
by
the
roof
that
covers
the
entry.
We
see
that
very
clearly
in
the
in
the
in
the.
R
C
The
renderings
and
I
think
it's
really
really
artfully
done
so
I
think
overall,
I'm
I'm,
quite
in
favor
of
everything,
that's
being
proposed.
It's
really
well
presented.
We
even
have
construction
details
here.
C
The
only
questions
I
have
for
you
are
one.
What
is
the?
What
do
we
understand
the
roofing
material
to
be
the?
Is
it
standing
seam
metal
on
the
two
entry
porches.
U
Adam
chair
member
of
the
board.
Thank
you
thanks
for
your
word.
First
I
really
appreciate
it.
The
roof
would
be
a
corrugated
metal,
rusted,
corrugated,
metal.
C
So
we'll
see
a
dark
brown
dark,
dark
brown.
C
Steel
look,
and
that
is
the
same
as
what's
being
proposed
for
the
steel
throughout
Madame.
U
Chair
member
of
the
board,
we
work
with
the
staff
at
the
we're
doing
actually
black
patina
on
those,
not
paint
but
the
patina.
So
there
will
be
variation
in
the
finishes,
but
it
would.
It
would
not
be
a
paint,
so
it
would
be
more
rustic.
Looking
more
weathered,
looking
black,
not
similar
to
the
right
iron,
but
a
little
bit
more
variation
in
the
colors
and
the
texture.
C
Understood
and
then
my
last
question
is
the
what's:
the
existing
house
color
is
shown
as
this
desert
rose.
The
proposed
Edition
is
not
exactly
the
same
color.
It's
this
suede
color.
C
There's
no
proposal
to
to
re-stucco
the
main
house
right.
We're
talking
about
these
are
close
enough
and
the
two
masses
will
have
just
a
slightly
different
shade
of
Stucco
on
them.
The
proposal
Madam.
U
Chair
member
of
the
board,
you're
correct:
they
were
not
going
to
restackle
the
house
but
accept
areas
which
we
have
to
modify
the
windows.
M
A
Would
you
let
us
know
again
what
the
difference
is
in
the
existing
stucco
and
the
new
stucco,
because
I
was
under
the
impression
that
the
ordinance
indicates
that
all
buildings
have
to
be
of
one
color
am
I
correct
or
not
Angela
or
Heather,
except
under
Portales.
They
can
have
a
different
color.
O
Thank
you
chair.
The
board
speaks
to
Earth
Tones
and
compatible
and
that
they
should
be
the
same.
Additions
should
match
existing
in
the
code.
It
says
that
the
downtown
east
side,
historic
standards,
design
standards.
Thank
you
and.
D
C
D
U
So
we
we
came
across
this
bridge
on
your
previous
project
in
lapadaka,
which
we
proposed
a
two-star
two
color.
So
when
we
applied
for
this
application,
we
actually
asked
for
exemption
in
our
letter.
So
it
we
ask
for
the
exemption
for
two
colors
in
our
proposed
letter.
A
But
they
are
quite
very,
very
similar.
U
Income,
similar,
yes
correct,
but
they're,
not
matching
in
the
sense
of
100
matching
but
they're
similar.
But
since
we
on
our
previous
Apodaca
project,
we
came
across
the
two
color
was
not
palable.
We
had
like
accented
little
different
color
for
our
base,
a
little
bit
of
darker,
and
at
that
time
we
didn't
ask
for
exemption
and
the
board
decided
not
to
give
us
those
color
variation.
So
in
this,
when
we
applied
for
this,
we
actually
asked
for
the
exemption.
A
O
Members
of
the
board,
the
I
worked
with
the
applicant
on
bringing
those
colors
closer
together.
They
were
in
contrast
and
so
I'm
I
made
the
call
that
it
did
not
require
an
exception
to
be
two
different
colors
because
they
were
so
close
and
that's
what
he's
referring
to,
because
we
worked
on
this
back
and
forth
extensively
with
to
get
it
here
tonight.
So
it's
why
it's
not
in
your.
It
wasn't
advertised
as
an
exception.
O
F
O
So
that
those
photographs
are
in
the
in
your
packet,
in
the
previous
case
that
I
referred
to
earlier,
there
are
so
the
2015
case
that
brought
the
house
up
into
compliance
with
three
feet
to
the
corners,
as
well
as
the
divided
lights.
There
are
existing
photographs
that
show
the
house
in
a
different
differently
from
what
it
looks
like
today:
okay,
that
are
not
described
in
that
case,
okay,
either
from
that
photo
photographic
evidence.
F
It's
on
to
the
comments
my
comments
tonight,
I
just
want
to
point
out.
F
It
is
on
the
new
edition,
the
existing
houses,
the
Spanish
Bible,
Revival
style
and
I.
Don't
think
that's
something
we
typically
come
across.
I
also
had
not
caught
that
there
was
a
portal
on
the
other
side
of
that
wall,
which
I
do
think.
You
know,
I,
think
that
helps
cite
it
to
the
to
the
building
a
little
bit
better.
I
still
have
some
concerns
about
that
element.
F
Also,
some
concerns
about
the
steel
portals
just
given
that
it's
on
the
historic
east
side
and
that
it
also
has
the
corrugated
metal
on
top
same
concerns
about
the
different
colors
of
Stucco.
Mostly,
my
concern
is
that
that's
it's
you
know
it's
not
going
to
look
intentional
I
feel
like
it's
going
to
look
like
the
existing
building
that
it
was
tried
to
match
and
it
wasn't,
and
then
this
isn't
something
that
we've
talked
about
this
evening
yet,
but
the
windows
on
the
new
proposal
are
also
a
different
color
than
the
existing
structure.
F
The
proposed
windows
are
black.
Existing
structure
is
a
flagstone
kind
of
beige
color
and
then,
ideally,
if
possible,
you
know
we'd
always
love
to
see
true
divided
light
Windows.
If
that's
something
that'd
be
possible
and
I
know,
you'd
mentioned
that
one
of
the
goals
was
to
make
all
the
windows
on
the
existing
house
and
the
addition.
Cohesive
I
did
notice
that
the
existing
windows
that
you
were
matching
only
have
mountains
on
the
interior.
The
packet
did
say
that
the
new
windows
would
have
muntins
on
both
the
interior
and
exterior.
F
A
Applicant,
do
you
have
any
comments
in
reference
to
member
Aguilar
matrana's
comments?
Please.
U
I'm
chair
a
member
of
the
board,
the
two
colored,
the
differentiation
between
the
color,
was
done
intentionally
to
break
the
mass
down.
We
have
a
separate
entry
for
the
guest
house.
We
have
a
separate
entry
for
the
main
house.
We
wanted
to
appear
almost
like
almost
like
a
two
structure
that
they're
very
similar,
but
they
are
separated
so
instead
of
creating
a
huge
mass
of
the
building
with
this
Edition
I
think
the
colors
differentiation
and
the
entrance
help
to
break
down
the
mass
of
the
building
of
this
one-story
building
versus
the
two-story
building.
U
U
What
we
are
proposing
for
the
new
windows
or
the
structure
which
we
have
the
it
has
a
mountain
for
the
outside
and
inside.
There
is
really
no
true
divided
light
these
days,
a
manufacturer,
they
don't
build
true,
divided
light
through
divided
light
means
that
every
pane
of
the
glass
is
separate
from
the
other
piece,
and
you
cannot.
You
have
the
best
be
custom
made
no
window
manufacturer
make
those
because
they're
very
energy,
inefficient
or
the
occupant
and
for
the
for
the
building.
U
So
these
are
insulated,
but
they
appear
to
be
as
as
divided
light
on
the
inside
and
outside
the
new
ones
that
we
are
adding
to
the
house
would
conform.
We
are
not
proposing
of
changing
anything
on
the
inside
on
the
existing
one,
as
it
was
approved
in
2015,
through
the
H
board
and
again
for
the
wall.
It's
a
part.
U
It's
it's
just
a
vocabulary
as
I
understand
the
H
board
can
look
at
it,
objects
subjectively
and
say
I,
don't
like
it,
which
I
guess
it's
your
provocative,
but
it's
not
it's
something
very
unfamiliar
on
the
east
side.
A
F
You,
madam
chair,
one
other
question:
I
forgot
when
we
were
on
our
site
visit
today.
We
noticed
that
there
weren't
any
hype
poles,
which
is
my
understanding
that
those
are
required
prior
to
this
hearing
tonight.
So
maybe
staff
can
speak
to
what
are
the
next
steps
in
that
unless
none
of
us
saw
unless
we
missed
them,
I'm,
not
sure
if
the
applicant
also
wants
to
speak
to
that
sure.
U
Madam
chair
member
of
the
board
we
got
it
was
a
really
short
time
for
us
to
get
the
surveyors
on
the
site
and
we
got
them
on
the
site,
but
the
Monday
was
a
miscommunication
that
you
know
they
didn't
put
the
story
poll.
The
story
Pearl
went
up
this
afternoon
and
we
sent
all
the
pictures
to
Angela.
U
O
I,
looked
at
one
of
the
stakes
out
there
today
and
it
said
14
but
I
want
to
respond
to
this
dialogue.
Is
that
the
the
the
this
is
part
of
all
applications?
O
Is
it
construction
with
new
heights
requires
story
polls,
it's
been
standard
practice
and
when
we
were
out
there
today,
his
contractor
had
put
up
site
Stakes,
but
not
hype,
poles
and
so
I
communicated
with
the
applicant
today
and
he
he
they
had
been
put
up
incorrectly,
and
so
then,
this
afternoon
they
went
and
put
up
the
the
polls
that
showed
the
massing
and
he
I
requested.
He
bring
slides
of
that.
He
sent
them
to
me
late
this
afternoon.
So
as
staff
you
can
review
the
project
as
you've
seen
it.
O
You
did
not
see
the
simulated
massing
as
you
is
part
of
cases.
So
it's
up
to
you.
If
you
feel
you
need
to
see
those
the
applicant
can
provide
those
you
know,
I
guess
it
could
be
postponed
for
the
next
meeting
so
that
you
all
go
to
the
site
and
see
it
but
I'm.
That's
where
that
set.
O
A
I
don't
know
for
me,
the
applicant
is
adding
really
basically
a
small
addition
and
not
very
tall
and
I
think
we
should
proceed
with
the
application.
C
I'm
sure
yes,
but
some
additional
comments,
I
I
I,
think
you
know
where
I
was
going
with.
The
stucco
was
a
kind
of
similar
concern
to
member
Aguila
Medrano
in
the
course
of
the
questions
of
the
applicant.
I
did
notice
too
that
the
the
windows,
the
new
windows
will
not
match
the
existing
windows
and
I.
You
know
buildings
evolve
over
time.
You
know
I
understand
that
it
would
be
ex.
C
You
know
it
could
potentially
be
quite
costly
to
do
all
of
the
windows
at
once
and
that's
not
what's
being
proposed,
but
I
am
in
favor
of
a
design
solution
that
somehow
brings
some
coherence
to
the
whole,
as
is
suggested
by
these
renderings
right,
the
the
renderings
suggests
to
kind
of
same
stucco
color,
if
not
window
color.
It
also
suggests
that
some
new
elements
are
on
the
old
house
as
well
as
the
new
house,
and
so
we.
P
C
Have
that
coherence
being
established
I,
you
know
I
would
strongly
favor
and
and
perhaps
recommend
as
a
condition
of
approval,
that
the
stucco
color
be
consistent,
whether
that
means
matching
the
existing
houses.
Stucco
color,
which
I'm
not
a
fan
of
or
restocking
the
main
house
to
match
the
addition
or
or
to
an
approved,
pre-approved
color.
C
The
reason,
the
reason
being
is
you
know
that
desert
rose
with
white
Windows
versus
sand
or
suede
with
with
black
windows
I'm
concerned
that
the
combination
of
the
two
elements
on
each
structure
will
further
differentiate
them,
and
so
you
know
to
me,
you
know
old
and
new
or
kind
of
clearly
established
by
some
of
the
massing
and
certainly
the
windows
and
detailing,
but
I
think
I
think
it's
got
to
be
something
Stronger
to
kind
of
pull
together
all
of
the
masses
and
so
I
would
really
recommend
a
consistent,
approved,
stucco,
color
I.
C
Think
as
to
the
the
question
that
you
know,
I
I
certainly
understand
member
aglo
martana's
point
about
the
the
East
Side
historic
district.
Being
more
restrictive,
I'm
just
I'm
always
frustrated
as
the
designer
that
the
that
the
district
standards,
because
they
are
more
prescriptive,
preclude
any
design.
C
We
often
get
design
results
that
are,
you
know,
letter
of
the
law
and
and
are
the
kind
of
most
basic
responses,
and
it's
staffs
obligation
to
to
counsel
applicants
to
to
explain
what
the
district
standards
say,
but
I
think
it's
exciting
when
something
like
this
comes
before
us
I
think
I
think
it.
It
shows
Evolution
over
time,
which
is
one
of
the
objectives
of
of
our
ordinance.
I
I
think
that
a
heterogeneity
of
districts
I
think
that
buildings
being
of
their
place
in
time.
C
O
You
I
believe
I
believe
he
did
and
I
when
we
were
there.
Today,
it's
visible
from
the
you
can
see
the
whole
house
and
the
addition
from
public
way.
U
Madam
chair
member
of
the
board.
Again,
as
we
mentioned,
the
Apodaca,
which
is
a
dead
end
Street
would
you
know
be
about
our
Edition?
Is
about
85
feet
away?
You
almost
no
way
of
seeing
the
back
side
of
it
from
the
public
view.
The
entries
are
visible
from
the
Apodaca.
You
have.
The
notion
of
the
building.
I
I
also
agree
with
the
board,
with
the
condition
that
addition
or
the
to
be
one
color
consistent.
A
G
A
B
K
Stephanie
manonato
PO,
Box,
1601,
Santa,
Fe,
New
Mexico
I,
understand
that
this
is
a
non-contributing
building.
That's
85
feet
back
from
the
street.
However,
it
is
visible.
My
concern
is
not
so
much
with
the
little
walls
in
sort
of
mud,
room
kind
of
idea
going
on
there,
but
with
the
back
Port
tall,
it
is
very
tall.
It
is
as
tall
as
the
existing
building
and
it
seems
really
disproportionate,
besides
which,
of
course,
it's
metal.
I
totally
disagree
with
member
Guida.
K
It
is
the
actual
law
law
that
you
are
to
be
enforcing
or
applying
not
the
spirit
of
the
law
and
not
some
design.
You
know
mid
20th
century
whatever
you
might
want
to
call
it
to
this
district
and
again,
I
think
that's
something
that
if
you
want
you
need
to
advocate
for
that
at
the
council
level,
but
not
sit
here
and
subjectively
use
standards
that
are
not
in
the
law.
K
So
again,
if
this
building,
even
though
no
one
contributing
needs
to
be
a
new
Santa,
Fe
style,
then
I
ask
that
that
be
done
and
there
can
be
very
creative
elements
within
windows
and
doors
and
portals,
etc,
etc.
So
to
say
somehow
that
your
stifled
or
the
implication
that
your
stifles,
because
you
can't
do
this
really
modernistic
design
in.
P
K
Quistoric
Zone
I,
I
I,
don't
find
convincing
and
again
it's
not
in
the
law
and
really
this
this
sort
of
subjective
I
like
this.
So
let's
do
it
anyway,
is
what
gets
all
these
all
the
city
boards
in
trouble
and
I'd
have
to
say
too.
If
Miss,
if
Heather
there
Muslim
boys
said
that
there
was
was
no
design
elements
that
the
sign
was
really
going
to
be
20,
inches
high
and
20
square
feet.
That
is
the
location
sign.
Why
did
she
sit
there
silently
for
about
30
minutes?
Well,.
A
C
C
2022-006106
hdrb,
805,
Apodaca,
Hill
I,
moved
at
the
board
approved
the
project
as
submitted
with
the
following
recommendation
that
the
condition
that
the
applicant
propose
to
have
the
stucco
color
of
the
Edition
match
the
stucco
color
of
the
house,
either
by
color
matching
the
existing
stucco
or
re-stuccoing.
The
existing
house
with
a
pre-approved
color
for
the
district.
F
Thank
you,
madam
chair
in
case
number,
two
zero.
Two,
two:
zero
zero
six
one
zero
six
hdrb
I
would
move
to
postpone
the
case
to
a
future
date
to
be
determined
and
I
will
list
the
following
as
possible
recommendations
that
the
client
could
consider
for
resubmittal,
as
member
Guida
pointed
out
that
the
stucco
of
the
existing
structure
and
the
proposed
structure
match
whether
that
be
the
existing
color
or
the
new
color
of
suede,
that
the
client
reconsider
the
materials
of
the
portals
to
change
them
from
steel
to
possibly
wood
and
I'm.
F
F
C
A
Thank
you.
That
means
that,
sir,
that
your
case
is
postponed
until
do
we
have
to
a
date
certain,
or
do
you
just
want
to
work
with
the
applicant
for
a
particular
day.
D
Sure
Rios
one
question
for
the
applicant,
which
should
be
ready
by
January
24th,
with
some
drawings
prepared,
probably
January
the
week
before
Wednesday
whatever
that
might
be.
Yes,
okay,
so
January
24th
and
will.
A
You
accept
that,
yes,.
A
And
the
roll
call
vote
was
taken,
so
we
will
see
you
again
on
January
the
24th.
Thank
you,
sir
next
case
is
located
at
239
Johnson,
and
this
is
for
a
status
review
and
primary
facade,
designation.
O
Your
chair,
members
of
the
board,
this
case
is
before
you,
it
is,
has
a
design
it's
designated
contributing
and,
as
stated,
it
is
for
a
status
review
here
tonight
with
the
designation
of
primary
facade
multiple
as
applicable.
O
O
It's
quite
an
interesting
read
in
its
story.
It
tells
the
earlier
it
basically
started
in
the
vernacular
Manner
and
it
evolved
as
it
appears
today,
as
mostly
Pueblo
Spanish
Revival
style.
The
early
front
portions
are
brick
which
matches
the
other
territorial
brick
structures
on
Johnson,
Street
and
the
historic
rear
editions
are
constructed
of
adobe.
It
features
a
flat
roof,
a
metal-lined
cannolis
and
a
mix
of
two
over
two
double
hung:
wood
windows
and
with
bullnose
lentil
detail
and
four
feet
by
three
feet.
O
Metal
casement
windows
with
a
fixed
Center
pane
in
recent
years,
metal
bars
have
were
have
been
added
to
all
the
windows.
Let's
see,
let
me
give
you
the
floor
plan.
This
is
the
facade
diagram
and
it
shows
the
evolution
of
the
footprint
you
can
see
how
it
all
came
together
and
and
grew
together.
It
currently
offices
houses
at
one
time
it
was
a
nursing
home
and
a
restaurant
and
a
bookstore.
O
It
has
the
head
in
parking
at
the
South
End
of
the
West
facade
and
a
bookstore
inhabits
the
South,
the
south
portion
in
a
1996
board
case,
the
the
Georgia
O'keeffe
Museum
had
proposed
to
demolish
the
building
for
parking
for
its
Museum,
but
the
case
was
later
withdrawn.
They
found
other
arrangements
as
we
know,
so.
O
The
applicant
requests
review
of
the
historic
status
and
designation
of
its
primary
facade
staff
agrees
that
the
historic
status
should
be
maintained,
contributing
per
14-5.2
C,
the
designation
of
significant
and
contributing
structures,
and
that
the
West
number
one
time
the
facade
diagram
up
here
this
this
is
this
whole.
The
side
here
is
number
one
be
designated.
M
O
The
South
elevations
facades,
two
three
and
four
also
be
designated
as
primary
facades,
and
that's
these
this
west
facing
excuse
me
south
facing
these
one,
two
and
three
facades,
because
that's
also
it's
it's
greater
than
four
feet,
so
it
counts
as
its
own
facade
and
with
that
I,
the
reasoning
being
that
they
convey
the
original
historic
story,
it's
integrity
and
it's
unified
from
its
vernacular
roots
to
its
Pueblo,
Spanish,
Revival
Styles,
and
it's
retained
it's
its
original
windows
and
other
historic
materials.
O
O
O
I
believe
the
South
Point
has
had
a
brick
exterior
first
and
you're
familiar
with
it.
A
Have
to
swear
you
in
Chris
and
Angela.
Second
question
for
me:
is
okay
from
1880s
and
what
is
the
most
recent
year
of
any
kind
of
remodel
or.
O
The
middle
portion,
that's
the
pink,
you
see
the
pink,
let's
see,
that's
either
the
original
or
the
it's.
The
center
part
that's
Adobe.
In
the
middle
there.
O
A
B
A
Thank
you
Chris.
Do
you
agree
or
disagree
with
staff's
recommendations.
P
P
I'm
only
in
in
the
type
that
Angela's
trying
to
dig
through
it
is
that
there's
there's
like
many
portions
of
this
building,
starting
in
the
1880s.
There
is
brick
on
the
inside.
We
found
some
brick
in
some
place
besides,
there's
brick
with
Adobe
right
next
to
him,
so
I
think
that
there's
probably
been
added
on
to
many
times
and
it
even
overhangs.
It's
it's
locked
on
the
east
side
a
little
bit,
but
somebody
just
kind
of
Built
Well.
P
A
And
there's
a
lot
of
brick
buildings
to
the
right
of
that
building.
Matter
of
fact,
the
one
brick
building
right
next
to
it
I
believe
that's
significant
and
that's
totally
brick
and
I
believe
they
share
a
brick
wall.
Correct.
E
P
M
P
It's
and
that
brick
building
I've
worked
on
the
o'piece,
the
one
next
to
the
O'keefe
building
one's
the
restaurant.
Now
it
feels
the
same
inside,
but
it's
been
all
converting.
P
A
So
Angela,
if
you
don't
find
that
exact
date,
I
think
Chris
made
the
point
that
all
portions
of
the
building
are
historic.
A
Thank
you.
Any
questions
for
Mr
Purvis,
no
questions.
Anyone
from
the
audience
wishing
to
comment
from
for
on
this
project.
Anyone
on
Zoom.
K
Thank
you,
Stephanie
benonato
I'm
in
favor
of
the
and
the
status
is
contributing
and
I
agree
with
staff
and
the
applicants
approve.
You
know:
approval
of
it
of
the
to
the
South
and
West
facadas
being.
M
K
It's
a
very
interesting
building
and
I
hope
that
whatever
changes
occur,
that
even
those
parts
that
are
not
considered
primary
facades
will
the
history
of
them
will
be
retained.
Thank
you.
F
A
T
A
You
Mr
purpose.
Thank
you.
Thank
you.
Angela
next
case
is
located
at
793.
Camino
Del
poniente
is
that
applicant
here.
A
I
Okay,
Madam
chair
members
of
the
board.
This
is
793
community.
I
In
the
history
downtown
East
Side
District,
the
background
is
kind
of
complicated.
The
original
construction
began
in
1938
and
has
gone
through
many
Integrations.
Since
then,
the
applicant
proposes
to
remove
an
existing
storage,
shed,
that's
non-historic,
add
488
square
feet
of
bathroom
and
closet
and
storage
area
to
the
north
side
and
a.
M
I
I
I
I
This
primary
facade
diagram
shows
Assad's
one
and
two
are
considered
the
primary
elevations
at
the
greatest
image
proposed
existing
and
proposed
South
elevation.
The
garage
is
kind
of
is
outlined
in
a
red
rectangle
on
the
left
on
the
lower
diagram.
I
And
this
is
the
west
elevation
and
again
you
can
see
the
garage
outlined
in
red
existing
an
proposed.
I
And
the
north
elevation
again
with
the
proposed
elevation
changes
outlined
in
red.
I
So
do
we
have
our
applicant
on
yes.
I
Staff
recommends
approval
of
the
post
project
and
finds
that
the
application
complies
with
Section
1452d,
General
design,
standards
for
all
historic
districts
in
the
downtown
and
East
Side
design
standards
in
your
packets.
You
will
see
responses
to
the
exception
from
the
applicant
staff
agrees
with
items.
One
and
two,
however,
does
not
find
that
all
the
exception
criteria
have
been
met
for
item
three
of
the
proposed
project
and
with
that
I
will
take
any
questions.
Even
here.
F
Thank
you,
madam
chair
I'm.
Thank
you
Ramon.
Can
you
walk
us
through
or
someone
at
City
staff
the
exception
that
the
applicant
is
seeking,
so
it's
50
of
the
existing
primary
facade,
so
that
is
different
than
the
square
footage
on
site.
It
was
mentioned
that
that's
a
linear
foot
calculation
am
I.
So
it's
the
linear
feet,
foot
of
a
primary
facade.
I
F
C
You,
madam
chair,
and
thank
you
Ramon,
so
I
understand
the
50
feet
or
sorry
the
the
50
exceeding
the
50
of
a
primary
episode,
but
the
garage
is
not
proposed
to
talk
to
tie
into
and
a
primary
facade
the
the
facade,
that's
immediately
adjacent
to
the
garage
door.
Opening
is
not
primary.
Is
that
correct,
correct.
I
So
we
kind
of
looked
at
it
like
if
you
were
looking
at
that
South
elevation.
You
would
consider
new
addition
as
a
portion
of
the
primary
facade.
A
Thank
You
Blue
Moon,
let's
swear
in
will
McDonald's.
D
A
G
You
I
had
a
question
just
to
further
clarification,
please
from
Ramon
about
why
you
don't
agree
with
the
Third.
I
Exception
that
exception
regards
hardship
or
undue
burden
on
part
of
the
applicant,
and
it
doesn't
in
staff's
opinion
it
not
having
a
garage
isn't
not
an
undo
large
ship.
M
N
N
N
Well,
it
is
you
know
it's
a
it's
a
lovely
Hill
house
here
in
a
you
know
in
this
key
area,
where
you
drive
all
around
it
on
the
sekia
Madre
and
abatea
Street
and
poniente
anytime
you're
in
that
neighborhood,
so
I
think
it's
an
important
house
I
and
it's
been
added
on
to
in
various
ways
over
time,
but
I
think
the
the
entry
Courtyard
and
those
primary
facades
are
well
are
well
preserved
and
that
the
house
on
a
large
slot
there's
still
that
it
a
lot
of
the
fine
qualities
that
this
house
remain
and
and
the
owners
want
to
preserve
those
qualities
so
that
you
know
I
feel
like
the
the
additions
are
reasonable
without
damaging
the
contributing
part
of
the
house.
N
I
think
when
Ramon
was
talking
about
the
exception
criteria,
he
said
three
when
I
think
he
it's
question
two
that
refers
to
hardship
that
that
the
exception
will
be
is
required
to
prevent
a
hardship
to
the
applicant
or
injury
to
the
public
welfare.
N
And
while
we
talk
about
these
as
findings
of
fact,
there's
a
lot
of
opinion
here.
For
someone
with
a
large
house
not
to
have
a
garage.
N
N
M
N
Open
to
to
discussion
and
I'm
glad
to
answer
any
questions.
A
Will
can
you
tell
us
the
height
of
the
garage
and
the
proposed
room,
as
in
relation
to
the
house,
to
the
existing
house.
N
Well,
it
you
can
see
in
the
in
the
west
elevation
that
the
that
the
the
garage
is
proposed
to
have
11
foot
five
height
on
on
the
back
side
that
there's
a
gradual
slope
on
the
property
north
to
south
to
North,
as
it
moves
toward
the
asakia
naturally,
and
that
garage
is
pretty
much
the
same
height
as
the
the
main
part
of
the
house.
N
Yeah
the
floor
level
is
a
little
lower,
so
the
parapet
is,
you
know,
maybe
four
inches
higher
than
the
the
middle
part
of
the
west
elevation,
which
is,
it
has,
is
short
at
ten
foot
two
and
the
the
addition
at
the
back
on
the
North.
Its
high
point
is.
N
Read
my
scale
here:
yeah
10
foot.
N
10
foot
11
nuggets.
Excuse
me
12,
foot
11.
is
the
height
of
the
at
the
North
side
and
again
that's
the
lowest
part
of
the
property.
So
the
floor
is
bad.
Floors
go
up
and
down
inside
the
house,
but
at
least
in
the
in
the
bedroom.
The
existing
finish
floor
is
about
two
feet
above
the
grade
where
the
outside
of
that
wall
would
be.
But
the
answer
is
12
foot
11
there.
C
Thank
you,
madam
chair
will
and
I
see
that
a
new
gate
is
not
required.
This
this
garage
would
be
accessed
not
from
Pointe
Street
but
from
Aveda.
Is
that
correct?
That's.
C
N
Editions
the
bedroom,
bathroom
Edition
and
the
garage
Edition.
So
if
you
look
at
the
floor
plan,
it
is
two
thank
you,
you're
not
the
same.
C
One
thing
I'm
concerned
about
is
that
we
get
a
long
expanse
of
blank
facade
on
the
rear
of
the
garage,
the
north
elevation
of
the
garage.
You
know,
I
see
you
know
where
we
have
a
lot
of
visibility
on
a
beta
Street.
You
give
us
the
rotated
volume.
We
see
the
garage
door,
we
see
the
windows,
so
there's
there's
some
architectural
interest
there,
but
on
the
rear
of
the
house
or
what
really
does
face
Seiko
Madre.
We
have
a
it's
foreshortened
in
the
elevations,
but
you
know
if
we
understand
it
from
the
plan.
C
It's
a
pretty
long.
Blank
facade
and
I'm
I'm
wondering
if
there
is
an
opportunity
to
create
some
manner
of
architectural
interest.
You
know
I
know,
there's
screening
there
I
know,
there's
a
fence.
I
know
there's
trees,
but
you
know
those
may
not
be
there
one
day
is
there
anything
we
could
do
on
that.
North
facade.
C
That
could
be
one
thing
that.
N
You
know
that
we
did
add
that
window
on
the
west
and
and
I
agree
that
when
you
look
at
that,
you
know
particularly
that
you
have
just
that
one
window
in
the
that
Closet
Storage
Edition,
but
but
then
there's
just
a
long
blank
there.
So
we
couldn't,
you
know,
there's
there's
not
a
lot
of
space
to
create
any
different
levels
in
the
facade
of
the
garage,
so
really
I
think
it
is
a
matter
of
creating
an
opening
there.
N
That
could
be
a
window
opening
that
would
that
would
give
it
a
little
more
character
and
I
I
believe
we
would
be
I
believe
the
owners
would
be
amenable
to
that.
I.
C
Think
it
would
help
you
know,
I
think
you
know
the
possibility
and
there
may
be
a
buttress
detail
that
you
could.
You
could
borrow
from
elsewhere
in
the
house
and
I
wouldn't
want
it
to
be
contrived.
C
A
Anybody
else,
member
Berkeley,
could
you
not
anywhere
from
the
public?
Yes
Heather,
just.
D
Just
one
comment
for
the
applicant
with
reference
to
the
exception:
that's
being
requested,
the
hdrb
is
a
recommending
body,
not
an
approving
body,
and
so
this
this
case
will
have
to
go
to
the
city
council
for
approval,
review
and
approval,
and
so
that
involves
one
additional
Hearing.
In
addition
to
this,
one.
A
Occur
right,
anyone
from
the
public
wishing
to
comment
on
this
particular
project,
no.
K
Thank
you,
Stephanie
benonato
I
feel
that
the
facade
that
has.
P
K
Don't
think
garages
are
exactly
historic
and
I
do
agree
too,
that
on
the
other
side,
the
north
side,
that
it's
a
long
blank
facade
and
that
it
definitely
changes
the
character
of
that
side
of
the
building
and
also
at
least
at
a
minimum.
If.
K
Allow
this
kind
of
Edition
that
there
needs
to
be
some
architectural
relief.
I.
Think
the
applicant's
argument
that
somehow,
if
you
have
a
large
enough
house
or
enough
money
to
buy
enough
Goods
that
somehow
it's
a
hardship
than
not
to
have
adequate
storage
and
again.
K
It
seems
to
me
that
you
could
find
enough
space
in
your
house
to
have
storage,
and
if
we
look
at
this
kind
of
subjective
classist,
you
know
socially
relative
Justice
or
standards
depending
on
how
much
money,
because
it
could
be
a
hardship
that
your
dog
doesn't
have
a
bed
in
the
bedroom
and
you
gotta
add
on
or
you
need
a
walk-in
closet
or
who
knows?
What?
But
again
you
need
to
have
the
standards
that
are
the
same.
Whether
you
have
a
big
house
or
a
little
house
and.
K
A
A
C
I
recommend
that
the
board
recommend
approval
of
the
project,
finding
that
the
exception
criteria
have
been
met
and
put
the
following
conditions
on
on
approval
that
the
applicant
revise
the
north
elevation
of
the
garage
to
include
elements
of
architectural
interest,
either
buttress
or
window
or
some
other
relief.
That
is
in
keeping
with
historic
districts,
stand
with
the
esa
District
standards
and
submit
them
to
staff
for
approval.
F
A
G
G
Motion
I'm
just
wondering
if
we
ought
to
have
it,
come
back
on
another
time
with
some
new
designs
all
together.
A
Was
that
emotion
or
I
don't
know?
What's.
G
G
A
Thank
you
is
there
a
second
to
this
motion.
C
Chair
just
a
point
of
discussion,
I
think
In
fairness
to
the
applicant
The
Board
needs
to
provide,
along
with
this
motion,
some
additional
direction
for
the
design
that
they
would
like
to
see.
A
G
No
I'm,
sorry
I,
really
don't
have
specific
suggestions
or
recommendations
other
than
that.
The
garage
well
I
believe
that
if
they
can
find
a
way
to
fit
a
garage
in
there,
that
fits
this
or
design
standards
and
is
not
so
obtrusive
I
think
that
that
might
be
something
for
them
to.
That
would
be
something
to
consider.
D
If
I
might
offer
a
suggestion,
one
of
the
things
a
couple
things
to
think
about
is
there
something
that
can
go
by
way
of
not
having
an
exception
and
is
there
something
that
you
know?
There's
the
redesign
as
as
board
member
Berkeley
pointed
out
to
make
it
not
as
obtrusive.
But
if
the
garage
were
detached
from
the
building,
then
the
exception
would
go
away
because
there
would
be
a
simple
one-story
addition
on
the
North
facade
that
could
meet
the
criteria
and
the
garage
would
then
be
considered
in
of
its
own.
A
separate
building.
A
Well,
that
certainly
is
an
option
that
the
that
the
applicant
has
do.
You
have
comments
in
reference
to
that
member
Berkeley.
G
Yeah
I
might
suggest
that
they
try
to
go
that
route
as
just
a
separate
building
as
an
addition,
and
not
not
attached
to
the
building.
A
I
A
remnant
of
the
historical
low
wall,
but
the
coyote
France,
runs
along
the
north
side,
all
along
the
asakia.
A
So,
as
member
Guida
pointed
out
to
try
to
give
the
applicant
a
little
bit
of
direction
and
member
Berkeley
thought
that
not
attaching
the
garage
to
the
house
would
do
that
and
still
have
a
postponement
in
this
case
to
redesign
and
so
I'm
going
to
call
for
a
roll
call,
vote
could
could
I
speak.
N
N
So
that's
problematic,
I
know
that
it
makes
the
exception
requests
go
away
and
what
we
would,
if
it's
going
to
be
postponed,
is
it
possible
to
to
get
at
least
a
vote
on
the
bathroom
closet,
Edition
separate,
and
we
could
come
back
and
and
look
at
the
garage
again,
but
it
would
serve
us
if
we
could
get
a
portion
of
this
approved
tonight.
N
If
that
would
be
amenable
to
the
board.
I'm.
A
Gonna
have
to
ask
the
maker
of
the
motion.
It
was
member
Berkeley
if,
if
she
wants
to
have
the
the
room,
excluding
the
garage
to
go
forward
on
this
I,
don't
know
what
other
members
of
the
of
the
board
how
they
feel
about
this
or
come
back
with
a
new
design
for
everything.
May
I
hear
your
opinions.
A
F
Chair,
if
staff
doesn't
have
an
issue
with
that
process,
I
would
be
fine,
approving
the
bathroom,
slash,
closet,
Edition
and
approving
the
demolition
of
the
shed
a
question
or
I.
Guess
a
clarification
also
would
be
during
our
site
visits.
F
C
A
Of
the
motion,
Berkeley,
yes,
are
you
in
favor
of
of
approving
the
bathroom
that
that
yes,
a
portion
of
it,
the
proposed
Edition,
excluding
the
garage?
Yes,
okay,
why
don't
you
restate
your
motion?
Please
Madam.
B
Chair
may
I
suggest
that
she
withdraw
the
previous
motion
and
receive
yes.
A
Would
you
withdraw
your
motion
previously
stated
and
state
a
new
motion?
Yes,.
G
2022-006213-Hdrv
to
approve
the
bathroom
Edition
and
the
demolition
of
the
shed,
and
to
request
that
the
applicant
return
with
a
new
design
for
a
detached
garage.
Whether
it's
one
car
or
two
cars,
is
but
that
it's
detached
and
less
obtrusive
than
the
current
design.
D
Just
one
clarification
chair
Rios
so
since
this
came
in
as
one
application
package,
the
hdrb,
if
it's
the
pleasure
of
the
board,
will
be
approving
a
portion
of
that
package
to
come
back
with
the
garage
will
have
to
be
a
new
and
separate
application.
So
there's
no
time
constraint
so
tonight
what's
being
approved.
If
that's
the
pleasure
of
the
board
is
the
demolition
of
the
storage
building
and
the
addition
off
of
the
bedroom
and
then
the
applicant
can
come
back
soon
if
they
wish.
What
the
revised
design
for
the
garage.
A
D
B
N
Next
and
I
appreciate
I
appreciate
the
the
board
working
with
me
on
this,
and
so
that
we
can
at
least
move
forward
forward
with
part
of
this.
It
really
helps
us.
Thank
you.
Okay,.
A
We'll
we'll
see
you
next
time,
thank
you,
Roman,
we'll
move
on
to
the
next
case,
which
is
located
at
608
and
a
half
coming
to
De
la
Luz.
This
is
also
your
case
drama.
M
I
P
I
I
I
I
This
is
the
existing
South
elevation.
This
is
the
location
that
is
going
to
be
the
rebuilt
portal
on
the
second
floor
and
new
site
walls.
This
original
building.
This
is
the
original
Casita
that
was
probably
done,
I'm
guessing
in
30s
and
then
two-story
a
little
Revival
Edition
was
done
sometime
in
the
70s
or
80s.
I
So
South
elevation
is
the
most
visible.
It's
the
other
east
north
and
west
are
not
really
prominent
on
the
streetscape.
So
on
the
left
is
the
East
Elevation.
The
right
is
the
north
elevation
that
patio
up
there
is
going
to
get
rebuilt.
I
Here's
the
site
plan-
and
these
are
mislabeled
the
one
on
the
right
is
the
proposed.
The
one
on
the
left
is
the
existing.
I
This
is
the
East
Elevation,
showing
the
new
windows
and
a
new
portal
on
the
Casita,
and
this
is
the
north
elevation
showing
that
patio
area
a
second
deck
that
will
be
redone.
A
Any
questions
for
Ramon
board
members,
foreign.
F
Thank
you,
madam
chair.
Thank
you,
Ramon
I'm,
not
sure
if
this
is
something
you
can
speak
to
quite
yet,
but
if
this
case
let's
say
were
to
come
back
for
a
status
review,
would
your
recommendation
be
that
the
front
facade
of
the
original
Casita
be
primary
and
contributing
because
there's
no
status
on
it
currently?
Is
that
correct?
That's.
I
C
A
D
The
pleasure
of
the
board
is
that
a
status
review
occur
first,
then,
then,
you
would
not
be
able
to
move
forward
if
you
decide
not
to
do
a
status
review
and
then
you
can
move
forward.
F
Madam
chair,
thank
you.
The
reason
I
asked
was
from
our
site
visit
today.
It
appeared
that
the
door,
the
screen
and
the
windows
on
that
original
Casita
were
also
original
to
the
1930s-ish.
So
on
because
of
that
portion
alone,
I
would
be
in
favor
of
a
status
review,
although
I
hate
to
delay
an
applicant's
project,
but
for
this
Casita
I
would
like
to
see
one.
C
C
I
believe
we
have
an
obligation
to
move
cases
through
to
do
so
and
apply
the
the
code.
I
I
I
this
is
not
a
to
me.
This
is
not
an
important
enough
building
to
warrant
that
extra
effort
which
may
or
may
not
prove
to
be
that
this
is
a
contributing
building
at
all.
A
So
that'd
be
the
I,
don't
know
I
kind
of
tend
to
agree
with
member
I
don't
vote
except
in
case
of
a
tie
end.
We
have
three
peoples
the
same
thing
constituting
a
forum's,
a
quorum,
so
I
wouldn't
be
voting,
but
in
looking
at
this
portion
of
the
building,
I
do
believe
that
it
would
Merit
a
status
review
and
unfortunately
it
was
not.
We
didn't
go
down
that
path.
A
That
path
should
have
been
taken
first
and
then
gone
forward,
but
it
appears
that
two
members
of
the
board
want
to
go
forward
on
this.
So
we
will
hear
from
the
applicant
if
you'll
get
sworn
in.
Please.
B
A
Yes,
sir
good
evening,
what
do
you
have
to
tell
us
about
this
project.
R
R
We
did
this
site
visit
with
Ramon.
We
discovered
that
these
windows
and
the
existing
door
to
the
Casita
do
have
some
values
to
them
and
the
idea
was
brought
up.
That
indicates
that
the
board
would
like
to
see
them
maintained
if
that's
a
possibility
and
I
approached
the
owners
and
they're
willing
to
maintain
these
windows
and
this
door
as
well.
R
So
we're
open
to
the
rest
of
the
house.
The
main
house,
you
know,
has
a
very,
not
divided
light
windows
and
like
a
very
thin
aluminum
windows,
so
we'd
like
to
replace
the
rest
of
the
house
with
the
the
two
divided
light
clad
and
we
are
open
to
maintaining
the
South
elevation
Windows
of
the
Casita
and
restoring
them.
R
A
You
for
that
any
questions
for
the
applicant
or
comments.
A
E
C
Point
or
a
discussion
earlier
this
evening
was
do
with
the
application
of
the
district
standards
and
new
work
being
in
conformance
with
him.
Is
there
an
allowance
for
an
unsupported
or
cantilevered
portal?
That's.
I
I
M
R
C
Okay
got
it
and
your
proposal
beyond
the
on
the
original
Casita,
the
older
Casita,
your
proposal
you're,
allowing
for
the
possibility
of
if
the
board
suggests
it
maintaining
the
windows
in
the
door,
but
but
the
the
portal
would
be
replaced.
Yeah.
R
M
R
Like
literally
with
four
by
four
post
and
two
by
four
and
it's
sinking
in
One
Direction,
so
we'll
be
replacing
it
with
a
similar
portal
that
we're
proposing
for
the
main
house.
Okay,.
C
C
C
Makes
sense,
design,
wise
and
so
I'm
I'm
appreciative
that,
notably
the
raising
of
the
parapet
in
the
rear
and
and
capping
it
with
a
railing
is
the
railing
that
we
see
above
the
parapet,
going
to
be
the
same
as
the
railing
for
the
Second
Story
portal.
In
the
front,
all.
R
A
Any
other
questions
or
comments,
member
Berkeley
do
you
have
anything
to
say
in
reference
to
this
particular
case,
not
this
time.
A
K
Thank
you,
I
I
I,
like
the
design
and
where
it's
going
I
think
it's
more
harmonious
with
the
older
parts
of
the
house.
However,
I
am
concerned
that
you're
not
going
to
do
a
status
review,
because
just
seeing
that
you're
going
to
preserve
something
further
on,
you
know
in
the
future
somebody
can
come
back
and
go,
but
it's
a
non-contributing
house
and
I
believe
that
you
were
told
I
can't
remember
if
it
was
the.
K
M
M
E
K
Three
out
of
four
to
vote
for
something
and
if
you're,
allowing
two
to
vote,
I
believe
that
there
was
a
case
that
the
former
member
Katz
said.
The
chair
can
vote
to
also
create
a
tie,
not
just
break
a
tie,
or
you
don't
have
a
successful
motion.
If
you
only
have
two
people
voting
for
it
so
again,
I
would
urge
you
to
think
about
a
status
review
in
order
to
preserve
that
particular
facade.
A
Stephanie.
Thank
you.
Your
two
minutes
are
up
appreciate
your
comments
and
I.
Think
that
attorney
rubelid
has,
in
the
past,
indicated
something
different
than
what
you're
stating.
M
Q
Thank
you,
chair
Rios,
for
the
opportunity
to
respond
to
this
I
know
this
is
an
issue.
That's
come
up
a
couple
of
times
and
I
want
the
board
to
know
that
we've,
you
know,
I've
done
research
on
this
matter,
I
I'm,
going
to
read
just
a
little
bit
from
Robert's
Rules
of
Order
to
understand
what
the
basic
principle
is.
This
is
section
44
Cohen
one
basic
requirement
for
approval
of
an
action
or
Choice
by
a
deliberative
assembly,
except
where
a
rule
provides.
Otherwise
is
a
majority
vote.
Q
The
majority
means
more
than
half
when
the
term
majority
vote
is
used
without
qualification
is
in
the
case
of
Base
requirement,
it
means
more
than
half
of
the
votes
cast
by
persons
entitled
to
vote,
excluding
blanks
or
abstentions,
and
a
regularly
or
properly
called
meeting,
and
there's
more
analysis
that
voting
requirements
based
on
the
number
of
members
present.
A
majority
of
those
present
two-thirds
while
possible,
are
generally
undesirable,
since
an
abstention
in
such
cases
has
the
same
effect
as
a
negative
vote.
Q
M
Q
Adopted
in
2009,
the
chair
of
this
board
cannot
vote
except
to
break
a
tie.
That
is,
the
chair
of
this
board
cannot
vote
to
create
a
time
which
is
a
departure
from
Robert's
Rules
of
Order,
but
there
is
a
principle
of
statutory
construction
that
also
applies
to
city
ordinances
and
the
Santa
Fe
city
code.
Q
This
is
a
matter
that
I've
discussed
with
other
attorneys,
the
city
attorney's
office,
as
well
as
my
supervisor,
and
they
are
in
agreement
with
me
so
I
believe
in
a
situation
like
this,
where
there
are
three
voting
members
and
the
chair
is
abstaining,
a
vote
of
two
is
a
majority
which
requires
passage
of
the
project.
A
C
Sure
I'll
make
a
motion.
Yes,
sir,
so
case:
2022,
zero,
zero,
six,
two
one:
four
hdrb
608
and
a
half
Camino
De,
La
Luz.
Remember
the
board
approve
the
project
as
submitted
with
following
conditions
that
the
on
the
South
facade
of
the
Casita
that
the
existing
windows
and
or
be
retained
as
part
of
the
design
and
the
board
notes
that
those
historic
elements
have
some
importance.
B
D
D
My
name
is
Heather
lamboy
presenting
346
Hillside
downtown,
which
is
located
in
the
downtown
east
side.
Historic
district.
The
request
before
you
this
evening
is
for
an
addition
or
two
editions
actually
one
to
the
freestanding
studio
and
one
to
the
main
residence
on
this
property.
You
can
see
this
residence
is
sort
of
unique
and
represents
a
unique
history
of
Santa
Fe.
In
terms
of
this
neighborhood,
it
was
more
anglo-american
related
and
the
architecture
was
different
from
what
you
find
in
the
historic
East
Side.
D
The
board
did
review
this
case
for
status
on
December,
13th
and
designated
this
as
contributing
the
primary
facades
would
be-
and
you
can't
see
from
this
picture
very
well-
would
be
this
South
elevation.
The
portion
of
the
East
Elevation
with
the
fireplace
and
the
west
elevation,
which
is
confined
to
the
historic
home
I,
can
further
clarify
that
with
some
graphics
and
if
you
wish,
so
the
site
is
located
to
the
east
of
a
salary
Peralta,
the
intersection
with
Hillside
and
to
the
east
of
the
park
it's
outlined
in
white
here.
D
This
refers
to
the
primary
facades
that
I
was
just
describing
and
so
those
elevations.
So
there's
number
numbers
one:
two
and
three:
those
were
designated
by
the
board
as
as
primary
back
in
December
on
on
December
13th.
The
addition
that
the
applicant
is
proposing
is
not
to
a
primary
facade.
It's
to
the
South
elevation
of
the
property.
D
You
can
see
here
a
picture
of
this,
the
South
elevation-
and
this
is
the
right
expansion
of
the
kitchen
I'm.
D
Sorry
I
messed
up
that
other
case,
but
this
is
an
expansion
in
the
kitchen
by
182
square
feet,
a
bathroom
addition
on
that
South
elevation
and
494
square
foot
portal
on
the
south
of
elevation,
as
well
as
a
deck
so
the
before
and
after
floor
plans
are
Illustrated
for
you
here
and
with
the
deck
there
on
the
South
Side
in
sort
of
grayed
out
as
well
as
an
illustration
of
the
expansion
of
the
the
studio,
you
will
note
that
the
studio
will
become
attached
right
now.
D
This
is
a
picture
of
the
South
elevation.
The
sense
this
picture
the
deck
has
been
removed.
I
was
the
old
historic
deck,
while
not
historic,
but
it
was
a
deck
that
was
on
the
property.
It's
not
there
currently
and
East
elevation
of
the
studio.
You
can
see
that
the
portal
there
is
somewhat
detached,
it's
just
barely
detached,
so
that'll
be
removed.
The
studio
will
have
an
addition
to
the
south
of
that
on
that
South
elevation
and
an
upper
tall
added
as
well
the
elevations.
D
This
is
an
illustration
of
the
South
elevation
the
before
and
the
after,
and,
as
you
can
note,
the
there
will
be
the
construction
of
an
additional
fireplace.
The
window
pattern
is
not
similar
to
the
pattern
that
exists
on
the
house,
though
these
windows
do
meet
the
downtown
east
side,
historic
district
standards.
D
They
are
not
of
a
comparable
material
or
to
the
historic
residents.
Certainly
the
historic
District's
ordinance
does
speak
to
unique
features
and
also
it
speaks
to
compatibility
with
primary
residences,
the
historic
residents.
D
This
is
a
picture
of
the
or
I'm
sorry.
These
are
the
elevations
of
the
east
side.
So
you
can
see
the
addition
to
the
kitchen,
which
is
for
that
boxy
components
there
on
the
rear
of
the
house.
That
is
an
addition
already
and
then
the
deck
is
Illustrated,
as
well
as
beyond
the
changes
to
the
studio.
D
This
is
a
rendering
of
the
property,
and
you
can
see
that
the
applicant
is
creating
enclosed
porch.
With
the
portal
Additionally,
you
can
see
that
there's
a
cantilever
not
exactly
cantilevered
but
sort
of
a
more
modern
interpretation
of
the
studio
apartments
with
the
portal
not
being
similar
to
what
you
would
find
in
the
downtown
and
east
side,
or
not
even
similar
to
the
front
porch
with
the
the
classical
columns
and
the
like.
It
is
distinct
and
once
again,
a
rendering
of
that
East
Elevation.
D
The
street
elevation
will
not
have
as
much
of
an
impact
because
it
is
sort
of
all
tucked
behind
that
primary
facade
at
the
rear
of
the
property.
So
the
visibility
is,
is
not
is
minimal
in
terms
of
the
street.
So,
with
reference
to
the
staff
recommendation,
staff
finds
that
section
14-5.2
d2a
has
not
been
met
in
a
similar
materials,
architectural
treatments
and
styles.
Of
addition
to
the
historic
restaurants,
it's
not
concludes
my
presentation.
D
So,
but
with
reference
to
it
being
related
to
the
the
house,
it
is
staff's
opinion
that
it
does
not
relate
to
the
house,
but
the
board
might
find
difference
in
this
particular
case.
D
Cheerios
board
member
Guida.
We
do
have
that
provision,
as
that
is
correct.
P
B
V
Martinez
P.O
box,
925
Santa
Fe
New
Mexico
Heather.
Would
you
mind
I'd
like
to
give
you
some
things
that
you
can
pull
up.
V
M
D
N
K
R
D
What
you
can
do
is
just
I
will
put
this.
M
V
I'm
sorry
I
wanted
to
show
a
photograph.
As
you
recall,
we
had
a
status
review
meeting
on
this
on
this
project
and
it
was
determined
that
the
front
facade
and
the
two
facades
were
primary
facades,
and
so
you
know
so
we
didn't
test
that.
Thank
you
very
much.
That's
great!
V
The
our
proposal
is
not
to
this
to
this
facade,
which
is
really
beautiful
and
part
of,
and
a
beautiful
part
of
the
of
the
streetscape
as
well,
and
we
had
the
his
history
report.
Historic
report
done
the
Higby
report,
which
shows
the
that
there
was
a
quite
a
bit
of
History
on
this
beautiful
house,
and
so
our
addition
is
not
to
the
front
of
the
house
but
to
the
to
the
rear
of
the
house.
V
It's
not
it's
not
minimally
visible
from
the
street.
It's
invisible
from
the
street,
it's
not
publicly
visible
at
all,
and
so
we
intend
to
make
sure
that
the
existing
A
View
From
the
street
is
unchanged
and
I
tried
to
show
that
in
my
in
my
also
in
my.
V
You
know
what
Heather
I'm
sorry
I
I
wanted
to
show.
This
show
this
elevation,
it's
a
it's
a
towards.
V
D
V
Oh
I'm,
sorry
there.
V
Make
it
smaller
yeah
but
smaller,
so
so
it's
and
this
this
facade
is
unchanged.
This
is
what
we
propose.
V
Is
that
not
only
is
the
house
itself
unchanged,
but
the
walls
which
enclosed
the
the
Casita
and
the
wall
which
encloses
the
kitchen
Edition,
would
be
unchanged
and
would
remain
all
of
our
all
of
our
changes
to
the
house
or
all
of
our
additions
to
the
house
are
behind
those
walls
and
not
visible
at
all
from
the
street.
V
Our
addition
is
to
take
the
elements
of
the
house
that
exist,
the
stone
walls,
the
stone
bases,
the
the
same
stucco
color,
the
same
white
trim
and
use
those
in
ways
that
are
compatible
and
I
believe
recent
Santa
Fe
style
so
that
they
do
take
into
account
the
existing
elements
of
the
house,
but
that
they
are
again
completely
un
unpublicly,
visible.
Sorry,
not
publicly
visible.
V
The
recent
Santa
Fe
style
sections.
There
is
nothing
in
the
section
that
precludes
what
we're
what
we're
trying
to
do.
Most
of
it.
Recent
Santa
Fe
style
talks
about
publicly
visible
facades,
most
of
it
almost
almost
two-thirds
of
it.
Talk
about
that,
and
otherwise
it
says
about
not
being
more
than
two
stories,
not
being
a
cantilevered
not
being
not
being
like
a
80
or
not
having
the
windows
or
flat
rooms
shall
not
flat.
V
V
We
proposed
this
Edition
to
make
the
house
come
down
to
the
existing
ground,
a
very
very
nicely
in
the
back
of
the
house.
That
is
where,
right
now
there
is
a
huge
drop
off
from
the
house,
and
so
even
from
the
kitchen.
If
you
walked
around
the
house,
you
saw
that
there's
a
big
stairway
in
the
kitchen
Edition
down
to
down
to
the
ground.
V
It
will
be
broken
up
with
decks
and
so
that
so
that
we
more
gently
come
down
to
the
house.
The
Casita
cannot
be
a
a
freestanding
structure
because
structures
have
to
have
10
feet
between
them
or
have
to
have
no
space
between
them.
They
cannot.
You
know
the
addition
can
be.
The
addition
of
the
Casita
can
be
attached
to
the
house,
but
it
cannot
be
made
less
than
10
feet
from
the
house.
That's
just
fire
regulations.
V
Any
structure
has
to
be
10
feet
and
and
10
feet
away
and
the
existing
you
can
see
that
does
not
meet
those
standards,
and
so
that's
why
we
have
it
touching
the
house,
so
I
sent
for
any
questions.
V
I
would
I
would
recent
Santa
Fe
style
is
how
I
would
characterize
it.
I
I
would
have
the
same
question
about
how
we
would
characterize
the
existing
house,
the
style
of
the
existing
house.
You
know
it's,
it
again
was
like
a
sort
of
an
amalgam
of
a
bungalow
style
and
Santa
Fe
style,
house
and
I.
V
Think
it's
very
beautiful
and,
and
one
of
the
things
that
the
hippie
report
I
mentions,
is
that
the
addition
of
the
get
of
the
kitchen
shows
the
sort
of
the
additions
over
time
and
that's
part
of
what
we're.
What
we're
trying
to
do
is
is
we're
not
trying
to
make
our
addition
in
the
back
seem
like
it
is
a
a
replication
of
the
existing
house,
but
it's
done
over
time.
I
would
say
recent
recent
Santa,
Fe
Style.
F
V
F
V
Oh
okay,
you
mean
okay,
so
there's
a
hip
roof
on
the
existing
house
and
a
flat
roof
on
the
existing
Casita.
And
so
the
white
is
just
indicating
the
the
additions
and
the
re-roofing
of
the
existing.
Because
part
of
that
a
white
is
the
is
the
existing
kitchen.
So
it
doesn't
mean
that
it
would
be
a
white
roof.
It's
just
indicating
that
it's
a
roof
and
I
wasn't
showing
the
materials
of
the
roof,
because
it's
not
visible.
F
So
on
to
Commons
I
think
we're.
You
know
we
discussed
last
time
what
a
special
property
this
is
and
and
when
we
were
designating
the
primary
facades
and
so
I
was
surprised
and
a
little
disappointed,
I
think
to
see
the
proposed
changes
to
the
back.
I.
Think
Heather
summarized
the
issues
very
well
and
I'm
in
agreement
with
all
of
them.
I,
don't
think
I
could
say
them
differently
than
you
already
did
so
I'll
just
say
that
I
agree
with
issues
you
had
I
think
from
the
larger
moves
of
the
per
tall.
F
You
know
even
to
the
smaller
portions
like
the
window
patterning,
you
know,
even
the
rail
is
the
railing
is
more
contemporary.
You
know
we're
all
in
agreement
that
it
doesn't
have
to
mimic
the
original
house.
But
to
me
this
looks
like
a
completely
different
house.
If
I'm,
if
I'm,
just
looking
at
this
back
perspective,
it
feels
like
a
completely
different
house
to
me
than
the
front
does
and
I
think
the
per
tall
in
the
addition
is
really
pushing
the
limits
on
the
you
know:
exception
criteria,
it's
not
technically
cantilevered,
but
I.
F
Think
it's
meant
to
give
that
impression.
So
yeah
Heather
I
think
you
summarized
the
issues
very
well.
Thank
you
for
that
and
and
I'm
in
agreement
with
what
you
stated.
That's
all
Madam
chair.
Thank
you.
Thank.
A
C
Thank
you,
madam
chair
I'm,
I,
politely,
disagree.
I,
I,
think
that
what's
presented
here
is
an
exemplary
Edition
and
remodel
to
a
house
that
was
noted
as
contributing
and
and
and
and
facades
designated.
The
board
made
very
clear,
its
intent
to
preserve
the
character
of
that
original
on
glow
style,
house
or
craftsman,
Santa
Fe
style
house.
C
It's
really
not
a
style
that
we
see
too
often
in
town
here
and
and
the
applicant
has
has
done
that
they
have
retained
the
entire
presence
of
the
house
and
all
of
the
features
that
we
deemed
necessary
to
keep
I
think
that
the
proposed
Edition
is
subordinate
to
that
house
and
I
think
the
style
of
the
the
Edition
Beyond
being
allowed
by
the
code
and
I
appreciate
the
applicants
reading
of
the
code
and
reminding
the
board
and
the
public
of
what
it
says
doesn't
attempt
to
mimic,
and
it
also
doesn't
attempt
to
cover
up
that
existing
structure
that
we
said
was
so
important.
C
Recent
Santa,
Fe
style
is
allowed
in
this
District
I.
Don't
think
it
should
be
excused
only
because
it's
not
visible
publicly
visible.
This
is
a
to
me.
This
is
a
a
great
example
of
how
to
do
a
an
addition,
that's
of
its
time
and
place
and
meets
the
needs
of
of
a
contemporary
owner
and
also
integrate
not
only
with
the
existing
structure,
but
keep
it
clear.
C
C
C
I
I
shudder
to
think
what
we
would
have
in
the
districts
if,
if
all
design
decisions
were
made
by
attorneys
or
by
the
code,
this
shows
an
application
of
the
code,
but
is
done
so
in
a
subjective
way,
one
that
incorporates
good
professional
design
sense
and
an
understanding
of
what
we're
attempting
to
do
in
the
historic
district.
A
Mr
Martinez,
this
elevation
that
we
are
seeing
here,
I've
seen
a
wall
that
has
one
window
that
appears
to
be
rather
dominant
to
the
elevation
of
the
house.
Can
you
tell
us
the
proportion
of
the
height
of
that
wall
to
the
to
the
height
of
the
home?
Yes,.
M
V
The
the
north
side
of
that
wall,
half
of
that
wall
with
the
window,
is
the
actual
wall
of
the
kitchen
and
we're
just
extending
that
wall.
V
V
Already
half
of
it
is
already
existing
okay
and
we're
proposing
that
we
make
the
wall
only
as
tall
as
the
existing
wall
That's
the
kitchen
wall,
so
it's
much
lower
than
the
the
hip
roof
that
it
is
of
the
main
house.
V
So
in
this
perspective,
because
you're
right
next
to
that
wall,
it
looks
like
it's
taller,
but
it's
much
shorter
than
the
than
the
house
I.
Can.
Let
me
just
we'll
just
do
this.
V
Okay,
see
see
the
wall
on
the
right,
on
the
left
hand,
side
which
has
the
window.
Yes,
it's
it's
the
it's
the
side
of
that
wall,
so
it
that
wall
is
like
you,
you
can
see
in.
This
is
much
shorter
than
the
than
the
hip
of
the
of
the
house
and
I'm
just
extending
that
wall
at
its
parent
height,
no
higher.
A
V
A
Thank
you
thank.
F
You,
madam
chair
I,
just
wanted
to
add
that
I
take
no
issue
with
the
citing
or
the
proposed
massing
of
either
of
the
editions.
I
think
those
are
in
proportion
to
the
existing
house
and
are
done
nicely,
so
my
issues
are
really
pertain
mostly
to
you
know
the
architectural
treatments
and
the
style,
and
then
Heather
I
had
a
question
for
you.
D
Chariots
commissioner
Aguilar
Medrano
board
member
Aguilar
Medrano
the
the
interpretation
of
what
is
recent
Santa
Fe
style
is
what's
at
task
here,
so
you're
correct
in
pointing
out
that
the
administration
is
not
like
the
administration
of
the
historic
building
and,
and
so
while
so
it
determined
the
Board
needs
to
determine
whether,
if
it's
dissimilar
enough
that
it
doesn't
meet
that
one
Criterion
that
we
keep
referencing
or
you
know,
are
there
suggestions
as
to
some
of
the
components
of
the
historic
house
that
can
be
picked
up,
but
not
be
exactly
the
same.
D
F
D
D
That
I
think
that
would
be
a
great
idea,
but
this
particular
house,
the
that
is
a
more
modern
design
and
picking
up
some
elements
from
the
historic
Bungalow
style
building
like
with
what
you
would
have
with
sleeping
porches
and
and
the
like,
that
you
typically
find
but
sort
of
a
modern
interpretation
would
be
something
if
I
were
an
applicant,
that
I
would
do
and
what
I
would
look
for
as
staff.
A
Member
Berkeley,
do
you
have
anything
to
say
in
reference
to
this
project.
G
Yeah
I
guess
the
comment
that
I
would
make
is
that
I
actually
agree
with
both
sides.
On
the
one
hand,
a
hundred
percent
appreciate
all
of
the
work
that
the
architect
did
in
completely
complying
with
all
the
style
regulations
that
you
cannot
see
a
thing
from
the
street
Etc
and
really
met
the
needs
of
the
owner
in
terms
of
expanding
some
space.
At
the
same
time,
it
is
striking
really
striking
how
different
it
looks.
G
It's
like
remember,
Aguilar
Medrano
commented
it's
like
two
different
houses,
so
I'm
really
kind
of
torn
between
the
two
I
think
it's
a
hard
call
I.
Think
for
me.
The
thing
that
really
struck
me
was
actually
the
windows,
probably
most
of
all,
are
so
different
from
the
the
rest
of
the
style
of
the
house
and
I'm
not
really
sure
what
the
thinking
was
there
aside
from
it,
not
replicating
what
the
existing
Windows
look
like.
G
What
what
the
kind
of
the
and
maybe
the
architect
can
speak
to
this,
what
the
impetus
was
for
creating
this
style
of
window,
in
particular
in
the
back.
V
Yes,
the
you
know
what
we,
what
we
did
was
we
took
off
of
the
the
narrow
windows
on
either
side
of
the
front
facade.
You
can
see
those
in
our
in
my
illustration,
and
so
we
were
doing
a
sort
of
a
a
variation
of
those
of
those
kind
of
narrow
windows
and
using
them
in
a
way
to
to
emphasize
the
the
new
fireplace
the
new
stone,
Cloud
fireplace
in
the
back
and
and
things
like
that.
V
So
we
were
that's
that's
where
that,
where
that
design
came
from
the
the
recent
Santa
Fe
style
does
require
that
they
have
a
30
degree.
I
mean
a
30
inch
maximum
for
the
pieces
of
glass,
and
so
we
were
very
conscious
to
make
sure
that
we
divided
those
in
a
way
that
maintained
that.
V
That
is
at
the
end
of
the
bathroom,
the
inside
bathroom
and
then
that
that
sort
of
pattern
is
replicated
on
the
on
the
doors
under
the
portals
that
come
out
of
the
kitchen
and
the
guest
house.
The.
T
B
T
Curious
members
of
the
board,
I'm
speaking
in
in
support
of
this
project,
I
agree
very
much
with
what
member
Guida
said.
I
think
you
know
this.
This
is
really
one
of
the
most
exemplary
cases
that
I've
seen
in
historic
districts
where
we
have
a
house
that
really
doesn't
comply
with.
T
You
know
the
original
historic
house,
which
we've
all
said
is
so
beautiful,
is
not
of
Santa
Fe
style,
and
this
is
one
of
the
inter
the
odd
things
about
design
in
this
town
and
so
I
I
think
it's
rather
peculiar
that
we
would
then
require,
in
addition
to
be
done
in
a
Santa,
Fe
style,
or
something
that
the
house
does
not
purport
to
have
I'm
particularly
concerned
about
over
regulating
private
backyards
that
are
visible
to
the
public
and
I.
Think.
M
T
Given
these
two
things,
I
think
that
would
that
would
certainly
sway
me
to
suggest
that
this
this
is
a
very
reasonable
approach
and
one's
it's
quite
attractive,
good
job,
Richard.
B
J
Am
yes,
yes,
just
want
to
thank
everyone
for
their
time
and
efforts
very
much
appreciated,
and
all
the
feedback
and
I
am
very
much
supportive
of
making
sure
that
the
architecture
and
the
character
of
Santa
Fe
remain.
Is
wonderful
and
spectacular
and
unique
as.
R
J
It's
a
marvelous
house,
with
a
fantastic
character
and
I,
worked
with
Richard
very
hard
to
make
sure
that
we
maintain
materials
and
treatments
with
evolving
the
house
and
and
very
much
keeping
it
behind
the
back
so
that
it's
not
visible
and
I
just
wanted
to
make
one
specific
comment
about
the
windows
and
that
we
did
pick
up
the
narrow
elements
in
the
front
and
the
south
facing
is
the
only
only
facing
that
really
gets
light.
J
A
A
D
V
Existing
square
footage
of
the
home
is
12
1285
square
feet
and
the
Casita
is
230
square
feet
with
portals
of
70
40
about
208
square
feet
and
the
additions
that
we're
proposing
are
the
auditions.
V
D
Chair
I
am
going
to
unmute,
Sybil
Mueller,
you
may
speak
and
I'll
meet
yourself
mistake
and
please
set
your
name
and
address
for
the
record.
B
S
Thank
you
good
evening,
members
of
the
board
Madam
chair.
Thank
you
for
giving
me
two
minutes.
I
am
in
favor
of
the
applicant's
Edition
and
I
find
that
the
character
I'm
I,
really
like
that
the
character
of
the
contributing
facades
remain
unchanged
and
that
the
addition
is
distinguishly
different
from
from
what
existing
facade
is.
I,
find
it
very
beautiful
that
he
is
taking
the
material
and
juxtapose
it
to
a
to
a
nice
solution
that
is
contemporary
and,
at
the
same
time,
also
matches
and
and
and
ads
to
that,
the
existing
house.
K
Thank
you
I'm
in
agreement
with
member
Aguilar,
Medrano
I.
Don't
think,
and
also
excuse
me,
your
first
things
are
coming
to
me,
the
other
member
with
the
last
name:
I'm,
sorry,
that
oh
Berkeley,
that
there
are
elements
in
the
Edition
that
are
not
harmonious
that
are
very
contemporary
and
people
have
said
that
contemporary
does
not
need
modern,
Santa,
Fe
style
and
I
would
point
out
certain
things
like.
First
of
all,
we
don't
even
really
know
what
the
roof's
going
to
be
made
out
of
that
was
never
answered.
K
Not
Square
kind
of
thing
that
is
very
contemporary
I
mean
the
design
is
very
nice
I'm,
not
saying,
as
as
was
said
if
it
was
someplace
else,
it
would
be
great,
but
it
happens
to
be
here
and
I
do
think
that
it's
a
little
able
to
contemporary,
just
because
you
have
the
same
color
or
the
same
this
or
the
same.
That
doesn't
mean
that
it
actually
is
harmonious.
K
It
just
means
that
you're
imitating
certain
small
design
elements
without
actually
making
it
harmonious
and
I
also
want
to
address
a
group
of
Mr
Ruba
weeds
of
2009
20
resolution
that
only
spoke
to
the
chair
not
voting
to
create
a
tie.
It
doesn't
go
to
NC
Roberts
Rules
of
Order,
so
voting
majority,
which
requires
a
majority
of
the
members
present.
Not
the
voting
members
present.
The
members
presence
means
that
three
out
of
four
have
to
vote.
In
order
for
the
vote
to
actually
be
valid,
we
don't
have
the
chair
of
staining
all
the
time.
K
A
C
A
Berkeley
is
going
to
Second
it
Berkeley
seconded
broke
off
vote.
Please.
A
We
have
finished
with
the
cases
for
this
evening.
We
will
go
on
to
discussion
items.
Anything
under
discussion.
A
Q
I
just
wanted
to
bring
to
the
board's
attention
that
the
appeal
with
respect
to
the
project
at
3
30
Don,
Cabrero
Place.
This
was
a
denial
of
the
Reconstruction
of
a
latia
Topper
on
a
stucco
yard
wall.
Oh.
A
Q
The
Don
Gaspar
area,
historic
district
that
is
set
for
an
appeal
hearing
before
the
governing
body
tomorrow
night
that
appeal
was
brought
by
the
homeowners
Who
challenged
the
decision
of
the
board
not
to
permit
them
to
reconstruct
the.
Q
Coyote
latia
extension
to
the
stucco
yard
wall.
My
boss
does
tell
me,
though,
that,
because
of
the
length
of
tomorrow
night's
agenda
before
the
governing
body
that
we
may
not
get.
M
To
it
that
they.
Q
Actually
get
to
that
appeal
tomorrow
night,
we're
not
sure
that's
going
to
happen.
Thank
you.
Q
And
I
have
one
other
matter
to
bring
to
the
board,
and
that
is
that,
with
respect
to
the
approval
in
2021
of
the
cell
tower
at
St
John's
College,
which.
E
Q
E
Q
De
Cruz
Blanca
the
neighborhood
and
Mr
Stephen
durkovich,
who
was
a
an
attorney
as
well
as
an
agreed
neighbor
in
in
that
area.
The
upper
Camino
De.
Q
Appeal
which
was
granted
by
the
district
court
judge
Francis,
Matthew
and
I,
was
the
attorneys
at
the
city
attorney's
office
agreed
to
seek
a
reconsideration
of
the
ruling
on
that
appeal.
We
did
submit
a
motion
to
reconsider,
but
the
motion
to
reconsider
was
denied
and.
Q
Or
not,
we
should
appeal
the
judge's
ruling
to
the
court
of
appeals
and
were
in.
R
Q
That
but
our
belief
is
that
the
board
properly
applied
the.
F
Q
That
matter
and
that
we
need
to
pursue.
R
Q
With
by
applicants.