►
From YouTube: H-Board Meeting 7/26/22
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
Good
evening,
everyone
I
am
calling
this
meeting
to
order.
We
are
the
historic
districts
review
board
today
is
july,
26
2022.
melissa.
May
we
have
a
roll
call.
Please.
B
C
C
Under
new
business
number,
three
strike
the
name:
carly
piccarello
and
heather
lamboy.
C
F
A
We
have
minutes
of
july
12
2022
any
changes
board
members
divorced
death.
I
have
a
couple
and
I'll
go
through
them
very
quickly,
they're,
both
on
page
eight
melissa,
paragraph
six
line
two.
Instead
of
miss
lucero's,
husband,
fred,
it
should
read
mr
valdez,
the
contractor
indicated
they
had
been
before
the
board
many
times
period.
Cheerios
stated
that
not
regarding
these
particular
revisions
and
then
on
that
same
page,
paragraph
eleven,
I'm
sorry,
the
first
one
was
paragraph
six.
I
hope
I
said
that
second
sentence
should
read.
A
B
F
We
have
a
slight
change
to
one
of
them.
It's
the
alameda
one
and
do
you
have
where
it
goes
carly?
I
I
don't
have
it
in
front
of
me.
D
We
have
the
the
question.
Sorry,
the
question
is
in
regards
to
the
two
walls
correct.
F
Yeah,
I
think
it
is
in
the
conclusions
that
the
northern
section
of
the
east
wall,
that
is
historic,
is
included
as
contributing.
H
Okay,
did
you
get
an
amendment
that
shows
that
the
south
wall
was
designated.
F
Yes,
that
was
added.
I
had
said
that
the
walls
needed
to
be
included,
and
only
the
south
wall
was
not
the
north
portion
of
the
east
wall,
which
was
part
of
the
motion.
A
A
B
A
C
This
is
number
case
number
2022-005633.
D
C
This
is
a
case
in
regards
to
the
banners,
and
this
is
for
the
hometown,
heroes
and
tonight
staff
request
a
review
of
the
proposed
banners,
the
design
and
the
recommendation
to
the
governing
body
for
the
forthcoming
resolution.
That
would
allow
for
these
banners
in
this
city
right
away.
Okay,
so
what
I
have
up
on
the
screen
is
a
map
of
the
locations
for
the
decorative
light
poles
in
the
downtown
area,
and
these
minus
a
few
locations.
C
C
A
call
was
placed
to
see
how
many
banners
would
fit
on
each
poll
and
pnm
looked
into
the
rating
and
saw
that
they
would
not
support
one
banner.
So
all
of
the
banners
had
already
been
purchased
printed
ready
to
go
so
these
groups,
the
american
legion
group
and
a
few
other
community
groups
we're
left
with
looking
at.
Where
can
we
put
these
banners
so
having
gone
forward
in
good
faith?
C
They
needed
a
new
location
and
the
city
worked
to
find
locations
in
and
outside
of
the
historic
district.
So
part
of
these
are
in
the
rail
yard.
Part
of
these
are
on
guadalupe
street
and
they
span
a
few
different
districts,
as
we
can
see
here,
historic
transition
district.
C
Part
of
the
choice
of
location
for
these
is
that
they
are
in
close
proximity
to
the
veterans,
memorial
cemetery
and
then
what
we
also
did
in
the
process
of
ground
truth
and
some
of
these
light
poles
was
editing
out
a
few
locations
so
that
each
each
banner
would
be
given
a
more
equal
weight
so
that
no
one's
sitting
at
a
back-up
house,
location
or
a
telephone
pole
or
a
pole
that
is
tangled
up
in
the
tree,
because
every
banner
has
a
veteran
portrayed
on
it
in
color
and
here's
the
hardware
sitting.
C
C
So
the
idea
was
that
approximately
two
per
block
would
allow
for
some
alternation
of
these
banners
and
allow
for
mitigate
some
of
the
vision,
visual
impact
for
how
they
sit
in
the
historic
district
by
having
just
two
per
block
creates
a
bit
of
a
rhythm.
It
allows
them
not
to
maybe
be
stood
up
one
next
to
the
other,
and
but
because
this
is
something
that
we
would
normally
work
to
work
on.
The
design
to
have
it
a
little
bit
smaller
in
scale
the
location
was
one
thing
that
we
could
help
craft.
C
So
that
said,
staff
didn't
feel
that
we
could
administratively
approve
this.
But
so
we
brought
it
to
the
board
for
a
recommendation
to
the
governing
body
and,
let's
see,
make
sure
I'm
just
not
missing
anything.
The
numbers,
the
locations
and
the
sizes
are
all
in
the
packet
here.
So
we
have
35
that
are
in
the
downtown
east
side,
seven
located
in
the
historic
transition
district
and
five
that
are
in
the
west
side,
guadalupe
the
rest
of
them
are
on
the
outside
of
the
historic
districts,
and
with
that
I
will
stand
for
questions.
A
C
That
correct
yes,
madam
chair,
excuse
me
for
leaving
that
out
so
the
typically
these
would
have
gone
from
memorial
day
to
veterans
day.
So
we
are
looking
at
trying
to
get
them
up
relatively
soon
and
then
coming
down
just
after
just
around
thanksgiving
is
about
two
weeks
after
veterans
day
to
allow
that
to
happen.
A
Then
they
come
down
and
then
at
the
beginning
of
memorial
day
or
prior
to
memorial
day,
other
banners
will
be
put
up.
Is
that
correct.
C
So
so
we
are
at
the
point
where
we
missed
the
window
to
get
them
up
by
memorial
day,
so
we've
kind
of
cut
into
that
time,
because
we,
I
think,
the
finding
out
the
information
that
they
could
not
go
on.
Surya's
was
a
bit
late,
and
so
we
are
now
past
memorial
day
and
looking
at
getting
them
up
as
soon
as
possible
and
then
going
into
november.
C
The
long-term
project
is
finding
the
permanent
home,
I
think,
and
that
would
also
be
that
would
also
determine
the
size
and
the
color
and
all
that
if
it's
downtown
or
excuse
me
if
it's
in
the
historic
districts.
So
this
is
more.
C
This
is
an
application
for
this
year
and
this
time
frame
that's
listed
in
the
packet
only
and
then
in
the
in
the
next
year.
If
we
find
that
they're
in
the
size
and
color
that's
in
harmony
with
the
districts,
then
we
can
administrative
approve.
But
if
not
then
they're
coming
back
to
the
board.
D
C
Our
recommendation,
the
way
it's
is
stated,
is
that
we
are
recommending
for
approval
for.
E
C
That's
that's
pretty
on
the
nose,
because
it's
a
recommendation,
it's
not
approval
or
denial
like
that,
would
we
would
typically
trigger
an
exception
now
laying
out
look.
I
looked
at
all
of
our
exception
criteria
and
I've
kind
of
built
that
argument
into
the
staff
report,
because,
essentially,
you
know
they've
gone
through
the
process
correctly
and
been
afforded
a
difficulty,
a
hardship,
we've
looked
at
different
design
options.
C
We've
looked
at
just
this
harm
the
district,
and
so
while
we
don't
have
a
formal
exception
because
of
the
way
the
code
works.
Yes,
you're,
looking
at
today
giving
a
formal
recommendation
of
for
recommendation
or
not.
I
C
So
that
so
most
of
guadalupe
is
outside
of
that
just
outside
the
district,
and
so
that
is
something
that
still
has
to
be
crafted.
A
I
C
No
so
right
now,
we've
also
got
banners
up
in
the
fonda,
and
so
we've
skipped
those
as
locations
too,
but
those
are
roughly
around
18
inches
and
so
we're
looking
at
two
feet
wide,
so
we're
only
adding
it
there's
only
addition
of
a
few
inches
per
width.
G
Thank
you,
madam
chair
harley.
Do
you
think
there's
any
possibility
that
the
city
will
be
able
to
identify
locations
outside
of
the
historic.
C
Madam
chair
never
been
venue,
yes,
I
do
think
so.
I
think
I
think
currently,
and
I
think
that
is
an.
K
C
Activity
right
now,
because,
generally
the
effort
is
being
made
to
make
sure
this
has
a
very
good
kind
of
sequential
design
that
gives
each
one
weight
properly.
G
So
it
seems
to
me
that
maybe
it'd
be
fair
to
say
this
is
almost
coming
before
us
as
an
emergency
exception
for
this
year,
because
of
the
unusual
circumstances
that
the
banners
had
already
been
ordered.
It
was
belatedly
found
out
that
they
could
not
be
installed
where
they
were
intended
to
be,
and
this
is
the
solution
for
these
banners
this
year.
Is
that
fair
to
say.
G
I
think
that,
in
my
own
personal
view,
is
that
it's
a
wonderful
undertaking,
of
course,
to
civically,
recognize
those
santa
fans
who
have
sacrificed
in
service
to
this
to
the
country.
But
it
is
a
little
difficult
for
me
to
see
that
these
conform
with
our
not
only
our
historical
ordinance,
but
just
the
general
conception
of
how
we
maintain
the
historic
district
and
its
cultural
heritage.
G
The
designs
themselves
seem
to
be,
and
the
whole
concept
of
the
banners
is
a
banner
company
in
pennsylvania
that
sells
the
banners
to
towns
that
want
to
put
them
up,
and
so
the
designs
clearly
do
not
in
any
way
seem
to
say
santa
fe
or
the
history
of
santa
fe
or
the
aesthetics
of
santa
fe.
G
So
I'm
completely
in
favor
of
the
recognition,
and
certainly
in
favor
of
this
year,
an
exception
being
granted
that
it
would
be,
from
my
perspective,
on
the
condition
that
the
governing
body
be
told
that
the
the
historic
division
and
the
board
would
not
approve
these
particular
designs,
location,
size,
etc.
G
If
it
were
to
come
to
us
next
year,.
C
Madame
mountain
chair,
matt,
murphy
and
the
new.
So
on
that
note,
that's
why
that's
exactly
why
I
thought
it
was
necessary
to
bring
it
to
the
board
that
that
and
in
order
to
not
create
a
precedent
for
banners
that
when
we
look
at
a
historic
district,
there's
a
difference
in
scale,
there's
a
difference
in
character
and
that's
baked,
that's
very
much
in
our
code,
and
so
that's
why
it's
before
you
tonight.
E
One
last
question:
what
what
number
of
banners
will
be
in
the
historic
district
out
of
how
many
banners
total.
C
We're
looking
at
I've
got
my
numbers
here.
I've
got
120,
but
let
me
make
sure
we're
looking
at
35
in
the
downtown
the
east
side,
7
and
that
would
be
47
out
of
120.
K
A
I
will
allow
the
public
to
speak
on
this
issue
and
if
you
want
to
come
forward,
come
up
now
and
if
melissa
or
carly
will
you
help
me
with
I'll
allow
a
minute
anybody?
It's
not.
It
appears
nobody
wants
to
speak
on
this
issue.
I
will
entertain
a
motion.
C
Madam
chair
tonight
the
assistant
land
use
director
lamboy,
who
will
be
running
the
zoom,
so
she
will
allow
alert
us
to
speakers
online.
L
A
G
You,
madam
chair
and
case
number
202205633
hdrb,
south
guadalupe
street
west,
plaza
in
various
locations,
downtown
historic
district,
downtown
and
east
side,
west
side,
guadalupe
and
historic
transition
districts.
G
I
move
that
the
board
wrecked
specifically
phrases
properly
and
you
correct
me
if
I
don't
have
it
right,
really
that
the
board
recommend
approval
of
the
application
by
the
governing
body
finding
that,
under
the
unique
circumstances
of
this
year's
banner
program,
where
the
banners
had
already
been
ordered,
with
the
expectation
that
they
were
approved
for
installation
in
locations
in
the
city
that
turned
out
to
be
unavailable
and
that
these
are
the
only
alternative
locations
that
have
been
identified
by
the
city
that
under
those
unique
circumstances,
we
recommend
that
the
governing
body
approve
the
banners,
as
an
exception
to
the
historic
coordinates,
with
the
understanding
that
the
board
does
not
believe
that
the
design
size
or
colors
of
the
banners
or
their
location
necessarily
comply
with
the
standards
of
our
historic
ordinance
for
these
districts
and
would
not
necessarily
approve
these
banners.
H
A
B
A
Thank
you
very
much
next
case
is
located
at
1500,
canyon,
road
and
that's
carly's
case.
Please
present
thank.
C
C
And
here's
our
site
plan,
so
this
is
the
garage
that
we're
looking
at
tonight.
The
furthest
south
structure
on
the
property
and
the
north
elevation
is
right.
There.
C
D
C
It
sits
on
a
property
with
a
significant
building
for
the
main
house,
and
the
barn
is
also
significant
again
you'll.
Remember
that
this
is
a
part
of
the
former
matthias
martinez
farm
where
the
and
the
house
was
constructed
in
1890s,
but
this
structure
was
built
in
the
in
1937
on
july.
12Th.
The
board
designated
this
is
contributing
to
the
north
facades.
Primary,
as
mentioned
here,
is
that
north
elevation.
C
So
the
proposal
before
you
tonight
is
to
replace
the
overhang
roof
which
overhangs
on
the
east
elevation.
The
proposal
is
to
continue
it
on
the
east
elevation,
rather,
which
is
right
here
and
you'll,
see
it's
sticking
out
there,
but
adding
a
parapet
on
the
north
and
the
south
facades.
C
A
Carly,
I
have
a
question
for
you.
Obviously
this
is
a
garage
and
it
was
designated
as
contributing
with
the
north
facades
primary.
What
is
being
proposed
this
evening?
In
your
estimation,
do
you
feel
that
it
reads
as
a
garage.
C
And
no,
it
doesn't
necessarily
read
as
a
garage.
I
want
to
say
that
you
know
this
simple
box
farm
earlier.
C
C
C
Let
me
look
back
at
my
new
mountain
chair.
The
height
would
be
adding
two
feet:
four
inches
so.
D
C
Two
feet
is
so
relatively
and
oh
there's
one
more
thing
to
note
about
that.
The
height
of
the
house
is
quite
a
bit
higher,
though
I
think
we're
looking
at
maybe
five
feet
higher
than
than
then.
E
E
C
C
D
C
C
C
C
As
you
can
see
in
earlier
design
iteration,
we
went
through
some
a
couple
different
design
iterations
on
this,
to
get
it
a
little
bit
more
closer
to
the
structure
that
it
is
right
now.
I
With
respect
to
criteria,
number
one
which
you
did
not
find
was
met
is
your:
if
the
same
roof
style
was
being
proposed,
a
slight
pitch
would,
with
that
in
your
mind,
would
that
alleviate
the.
C
The
applicant
responds
to
the
in
the
design.
This
is
where
it
becomes
a
little
tricky.
It's
excuse
me,
madam
chair
number,
be
straight:
let's
get
down
to
the
third
criteria
because
they
too
go
hand
in
hand
whether
or
not
a
full
range
of
design
options
were
being
explored.
C
C
Whether
the
applicant,
the
criteria
is
fully
met
on
this
one,
I
it
puts
staff
in
a
very
difficult
position
of
both
designs,
have
challenges
with
them
and
so
for
close,
but
the
roof
overhang
of
nearly
a
foot
does
give
it.
This
modern.
D
G
M
N
G
On
the
other
hand,
we
have
we
come
to
criteria
number
three,
and
you
find,
I
suppose,
rightfully
that
the
other
options
that
were
explored
were
explored
but
were
not
satisfactory,
and
so
it
seems
to
me
that
if
we
find
that
the
first
criterion
is
not
met
and
we,
but
we
find
the
third
is
and
all
three
have
to
be
met.
In
essence,
it's
a
finding
perhaps
that
it
needs
to
stay
a
garage,
because
there
is
no
design
alternative.
G
C
Go
back
to
the
language,
sorry
remember
being
venue,
let
me
go
back
to
the
language
of
our
criteria,
real
quick,
so
I
can
make
sure
I
answer
this
appropriately.
C
So
a
full,
a
full
range
of
design
options.
I
think
staff.
I'm
very
concerned.
I
try
to
be
very
considerate
on
how
how
much
we
really
try
to
make
these
designs
work
and
work
with
what
the
applicant
can
bring
forward,
whether
or
not
there's
a
closer
option.
C
I
I
do
think
a
a
large
array
of
that's
that
an
amount
of
design
options
have
been
explored.
It's
just
a
very
tricky
one.
G
G
It
is,
I
think,
it's
maybe
just
a
conundrum
of
this
situation,
because
I
was
trying
to
come
to
a
solution
where
that
would
not
be
the
solution.
Because
to
me,
that's
not
an
acceptable
alteration
to
the
primary
facade,
but
then
we'll
hear
from
the
applicant
that
it.
The
applicant,
has
indicated
that
the
other
solutions
either
won't
work
or
would
be
worse
as
far
as
altering
the
appearance.
G
G
E
G
C
A
Thanks,
who
is
the
applicant
please
come
forward
and
get
someone
in.
B
A
O
O
Not
really
appropriate
for
the
building
it
tends.
The
building
is
1937..
We
know
that
the
north
wall
is
original,
adobe,
the
I'm
sorry,
the
south
walls
original
adobe.
The
north
wall
is
1960s
block.
It
might
even
be
1970s
the
roof.
That's
on
there
now
is
asphalt,
shingle
just
draped
over
so
where
we
have
the
walls.
We
have
like
a
two
inch
grape
on
a
true
root:
that's
substandard
construction,
so
putting
a
flat
roof
on
the
building.
O
G
K
O
O
O
O
O
O
O
J
K
O
There
is
a
retaining
wall,
and
this
dashed
line
represents
that.
So
the
only
way
you
would
really
see
this
window
is
it
under
a
small
crevice
between
the
retaining
wall
and
the.
F
K
F
If
it
were
on
the
south
side
blocking
the
sun
from
from
melting
it
so
that
it
doesn't
have
to
have
such
a
big
overhang,
so
it
could
have
a
few
inch
overhang,
but
it
would
be
the
fact
that
it
would
be
slightly
higher
than
the
rest
of
the
roof.
So
the
water
wouldn't
be
going
that
direction.
K
O
F
O
F
So
that
you
could
build
it
so
that
the
north
side
of
it
or
maybe
just
the
north
edge
of
it,
is
higher,
but
it
doesn't
have
to
be
much
higher
and
then
you
don't
see
the
rest
of
the
roof
anyway,
even
from
even
from
now,
because
you're
standing
lower
down
on
canyon,
road
and
it's
above
what
your
line
of
sight
is.
F
O
M
B
F
O
O
K
O
K
O
A
E
K
E
M
E
Would
have
a
thickness
to
that
roof
plane
because
you're
insulating
above
the
deck,
and
so
we
would
see
a
fascia
of
at
least
what
four
or
five
inches
okay,
so
so,
but
I
I
think
that
you
know
what's
been
suggested
would
work.
I
think
you
know
not
just
looking
at
the
roof
to
solve
the
problem.
You
know
perhaps
pouring
a
concrete
swale
against
the
base
of
the
building.
If
you
know
water
were
to
run
over,
it
could
be
shut
away.
I
think
those.
E
You
know,
I
think
I
think
the
look
you're
hearing
from
other
board
members,
the
look
of
that
kind
of
shed
roof
low
slope
shed
roof
on
a
simple
structure
is
what
we're
after-
and
I
think
you
know
my
impression
is
that
the
parapet,
and
particularly
the
one
with
the
with
the
pronounced
chimney
you
know,
looks
like
any
guest
house
on
the
east
side.
This
is
such
a
special
property
to
see
you
more
closely
match
the
original
appearance
of
the
building,
I
think,
is
doable.
G
You,
madam
chair
yeah,
I
echo
those
comments.
I
think
that
actually
looking
at
your
design
there
for
the
flat
roof,
it
really
it
it
does
work
much
much
better.
It
is
a
slight
modification,
of
course,
as
you
point
out,
and
your
points
are
well
taken
that
you
know
if
that
was
exaggerated,
it
would
start
to
look
mid-century
modern,
but
as
in.
G
With
the
ideas
that
were
just
suggested,
I
think
it
looks
like
something
that
would
have
been
built
on
this
garage
at
the
time
by
someone
that
was
actually
thinking
about
the
fact
that
it
needs
an
overhang,
and
so
I
think
it
would
be
very
consistent.
I
think
from
the
outside.
It
will
look
very
much
like
it
does
now,
but
be
much
more
functional,
because
I
agree
I
mean
what
you're
saying
makes
perfect
sense.
O
Can
be
trimmed
back
right?
It's
a
foot
in
half
as
drawn
for
sake
of
durability,
of
the
building.
If
you're
looking
at
the
building
dead
on
and
where
I
think
this
is
going,
could
we
keep
the
foot
in
half
for
the
durability
of
the
building,
because,
when
you're
looking
at
the
building
dead
on,
I
don't
know
that
this
or
this
is
really
going
to
change
much
as
you're
viewing
the
building.
So
I'm
just
sticking
up
for
the
longevity
of
the
building,
not
really
the
aesthetics,
something.
N
G
To
that
that
you
have,
there
is
a
strong
view
coming
down
upper
canyon,
road
of
the
north
east
corner,
and
so
I
do
think
you
would
see
that
overhang
pretty
distinctly
coming
down
canyon
road,
especially
because
it's
always
not
oriented
completely
square
to
the
road,
but
it's
actually
off
kilter.
So
I
do
think
that
you
do
see
that.
O
O
O
K
O
O
G
G
J
O
G
E
K
E
O
Chair
just
for
clarification,
this
drawing
that
we're
looking
at
was
never
submitted.
This
was
a
study
between
myself
and
the
homeowner
and
we
both
mixed
it,
and
so
it
did
not
find
its
way
in
the
packet.
I
brought
it
because
I
had
a
feeling
we
were
going
to
be
discussing
this
and
I
wanted
to
show
you
the.
E
K
I
Functional
and
recommended
would
be
what
to
do.
I
think
you
know
this
achieves
the
goal
of
trying
to
keep
this
facade
as
consistent
with
what
is
existing,
the
east
and
west,
I
believe,
have
protruding
and
if
you
call
them
vegas
or
wooden
elements,
are
those
maintained
on
this
iteration.
O
Yeah,
the,
as
you
know,
this
dimensional
number
that's
exposed.
H
H
O
For
vegas,
of
course,
that
is
a
change
in
the
roof
style.
Let's
see
here
so
you
can
see
the
vegas
show
themselves.
O
I
A
Other
questions,
anyone
from
the
audience
wishing
to
comment
please
come
forward
and
get
someone
and
then
speak
right
into
that
mic.
J
J
A
simple
metal
smoke
chimney
as
such
would
be
seen
on
a
vernacular
shed,
can
work
on
this
building
and
would
not
undermine
the
character
of
the
building,
because
it
would
be
what
someone
these
people,
if
they
had
the
money,
they
would
have
put
a
metal
chimney
stack
here.
They
would
not
have
built
a
masonry
chimney.
The
masonry
ties
to
the
building,
but
I
believe
that's
inappropriate.
J
This
is
simply
a
vernacular
shed.
It
needs
to
remain
that
way.
The
original
proposal
that
was
brought
with
it
with
a
built
up
everything
built
up
around
it
simply
changed
this
from
a
tulsa
which
is
a
shed
to
a
casita
which
is
over
gentrification
in
this
case.
So
forgive
me
for
speaking
strongly,
but
I
feel
very
strongly
about
this.
Thank
you.
B
P
Bonnie,
paul,
hey
armijo,
thirteen
b
plus
c
tobacco,
I'm
a
general
contractor,
and
actually
I
was
in
the
historical
board
with
will,
but
in
what
you
guys
were
talking
about
the
the
best
way
to
get
the
least
amount
of
overhang
and
still
keep
it
flat
is
to
create
the
pitch
at
the
center.
P
P
P
K
O
Pitch
roof
certainly
wins
out
here
in
our
climate.
I
don't
know
how
accurately
it
represents
the
building
as
it
was
constructed.
Originally,
it's
a
good
question.
I
it
would
significantly
change
the
way.
The
house,
sorry,
the
small.
J
J
K
O
Is
I
kind
of
draw
that
and
study
it?
I
couldn't.
I
couldn't
just
my
mind,
can't
see
it
right
now.
It's
such
a
small
structure
that
the
pitch
would
not
be
very
high,
but
it
wouldn't
look
like
the
same
building.
I
I
would
almost
say
we're
going
to
entertain
pitching
the
roof.
What's
wrong
with
the
pair
of
pivots.
O
A
K
E
Verbally,
you
know
we
have
a
process
here
for
the
benefit
of
the
public
and
the
applicants
to
show
drawings.
Fortunately,
we're
able
to
see
drawings
of
an
earlier
scheme
and
to
me
that's
enough
for
the
board
to
understand
this
particular
option,
as
opposed
to
the
other
particular
option
that
was
that
was
expressed.
E
I'd
like
to
end
the
conversation
of
other
details
or
or
configurations,
because
that's
not
our
job
here.
My
feeling
is
that
if
the
applicant
is
willing
to
pursue
this
design,
that's.
E
With
the
flat
roof
slightly
sloped
that
we
go
ahead
and
make
a
motion.
F
Well,
my
concern
is
a
little
bit
that
the
third
criteria,
that
is
considered
all
options-
and
I
I
I
just
had
this
nagging
feeling
that
we
haven't
considered
quite
how
it's
going
to
look-
and
I
appreciate
remember
greatest-
you
know-
reluctance
to
just
workshop
this
to
death
at
a
meeting
like
this.
I
don't
know
that
it's
appropriate,
but
I
I
think
that
we'll
understand
that
you
know
we
want
to
look
as
much
exactly
like.
It
looks.
K
H
G
You
man
with
those
comments.
I
think
that
we
have
a
pretty
good
sense
as
to
what
the
board
would
like
to
see
here,
but
I
think
we're
getting
into
details
that
are
a
little
difficult
to
know,
for
example,
to
what
extent
that
earlier,
iteration
that
we've
been
looking
after
flat
roof
is
still
actually
something
that's
consistent
with
the
applicant's
desires
with
respect
to
the
other
parts
of
the
application
that
are
before
us.
I'm
a
little
unclear
still
about
the
what
the
least
amount
of
height
increase
would
be.
G
I
appreciate
mr
eddie's
comments
about
the
chimney
and
persuaded
by
it
that
it
does
that
did
stand
out
to
me
and
I
hadn't
thought
about
the
fact
that
a
stove
pipe
would
be
a
perfect
solution,
and
I
actually
also
agree
now
that
the
vegas
have
been
pointed
out
that
that
looks
inconsistent
with
the
structure
as
it
originally
existed.
If.
M
E
E
Ideally
in
line
with
the
with
the
option
that
was
presented
during
the
hearing
of
a
low
slope
flat
roof
with
the
following
recommendations
that
the
the
overhangs
on
the
north
and
likely
south
facade
would
be
reduced
to
12,
inches
or
less
that
the
chimney
be
considered
to
be
brick
ore
or
a
galvanized
stove
pipe
and
and
that
the
expression
of
vegas
not
be
round.
A
Okay,
roll
vote.
Please
just.
B
O
Sure,
when
I
resubmit
I
want
to
get
it
correct,
you're
asking.
N
E
A
The
first
case
underneath
your
business
is
located
at
127,
127
and
a
half
east
of
argus.
Is
it
east
of
august
or
west
of
argus.
R
Thank
you
good
evening,
members
of
the
board
and
the
public
and
other
staff.
This
is
a
case
for
historic
status
and
primary
facade,
designation
that
involves
two
buildings
and
several
yard
wall
structures
at
127
and
127
and
a
half
east
devarta
street.
R
R
R
R
K
R
Owner
added
two
adobe
rooms
and
converted
it
into
an
apartment
in
the
1950s
per
the
applicant
recent
applicant
commissioned
historical
historic,
cultural
properties.
Inventory
form
the
hickpie.
The
former
garage
was
a
square
brick
building
laid
in
an
english
pattern
of
alternating
courses
of
headers
and
stretchers
its
north
south
and
west
walls
are
topped
with
a
high
parapet,
obscuring
a
wire
glass,
skylight
and
tapping.
The
walls
is
a
simple
coping
made
of
a
course
of
row,
lock
bricks,
topped
with
another
row
of
headers,
and
this
construction
is
exposed
along
the
west
and
the
south
elevations.
R
R
R
R
R
The
murals,
the
that
I'm
referring
to
the
faded
paintings,
are
located
on
that
far
east
far
west
end
of
the
north
elevation
and
the
cider
press
sign
is
faded,
paint
above
the
box
when
the
blue
boxed
windows.
R
R
It
was
built
in
the
1960s
as
a
storage
room,
it's
rectangular
flat,
roof
and
stuccoed
with
the
portal
and
spanish
pueblo
revival,
style,
which
is
on
the
west
elevation.
The
north
elevation
has
one
window,
there's
no
windows
on
the
other
elevations
and
the
building
faces
west
towards
the
new
mexico
supreme
court's
parking
lot.
R
R
D
R
I
see
it
up
there,
okay,
so
the
pointer
is
up
to
the
top
left
corner.
I'm
just
going
to
go
from
this
site
plan
yard
walls.
There
are
eight
the
main
yard
wall
is
this
north
fronts.
The
the
building
at
the
river
is
a
low
rock
wall.
That's
historic!
R
This
is
the
east
low
rock
wall
that
is
along
the
east
perimeter
of
the
property
that,
above
the
state
land
office
parking
lot.
There's
a
portion
of
my
cursor
go,
make
it
brighter.
R
Okay,
so
there's
a
portion
here,
that's
not
historic,
then
this
is
a.
This
is
new
coyote
fencing,
not
historic
on
the
west
perimeter
is
a
higher
rock
wall
and
it
is
not
historic
within
the
property.
You
have
an
interior
yard
wall
that
runs
between
the
cider
press
house
that
connects
to
the
storage
unit
and
then
picks
up
back
again
here
and
that's
a
low
continuation
of
that
historic
low
river
rock
wall.
There
are
two
other
walls
on
the
property
that
are
not
historic
and
they
frame
the
parking
lot.
The
parking
out
to
the
west
so.
R
R
According
to
the
hickpie,
in
addition
to
meeting
the
historic
preservation
age
threshold,
the
buildings
in
the
original
low
river
rock
walls
continue
to
project
a
history
of
city
through
historic
material,
styles,
building,
site
pattern
and
scale
as
an
early
20th
century
settlement
of
multiple
uses
in
downtown
santa
fe.
It's
like
uniquely
sandwiched
between
these
buildings,
the
supreme
court
and
the
general
and
the
state
land
office
while
continuing
to
function
as
a
residence.
R
Staff
also
recommends
that
yard
walls,
the
north
yard
wall
number
one
and
the
east
yard
wall
number
three
on
the
east
side
and
then
the
walls,
five
and
six
that
run
an
interior
on
the
property
of
the
low
rock
wall.
That.
L
R
With
respect
to
primary
facade,
designations
staff
recommends
facades,
one
the
north
and
two,
the
west
and
three,
the
east
elevations
of
the
cider
press,
building
that
they
be
designated
primary
and
that
the
studio's
number
one
west
elevation
with
the
with
the
portal
would
be
designated
its
primary
facade.
And
with
that
I
conclude
my
report
stamp
questions.
Thank.
A
You
angela
any
questions.
Yes,
member
of
the
anthony.
A
G
R
Oh
thank
you
for
the
for
the
clarifying
question
member
bienvenue,
the
yard
walls
were
misnumbered
on.
I
think
my
guide,
I
went
by
yard
wall
number.
One
is
the
north
yard
wall
and
yard
world
number
four:
is
the
east
yard
hall
not
three
so
and
five
and
six
are
the
interior
walls
so
recommending
that
the
following
four
yard
walls?
They
designated
contributing
numbers,
one
four,
five
and
six
and
then
and
that
two
three
seven
and
eight
are
not
historic.
G
R
So
to
amend
my
recommendation,
I
say
that.
M
R
R
Corresponding
diagram
there
is,
there
was,
and
it
was
attached
to
my
staff
report
and
which
I'm
seeing
in
the
packet
I
printed
out.
Maybe
you
don't
have
that.
B
Q
F
M
A
River
rock:
are
you,
including
that.
R
F
I
I
thought
I
had
heard
you
say
on
the
cider
press,
building
facades,
one
two
and
three
three
being
the
east
wall,
but
on
the
l
on
the
diagram.
Three
is
the
south
wall,
so
I
am
just
worried
that
we
are
not
going
to
have
a
record.
That's
going
to
be
very
clear
on
that.
I
mean
it.
North
west
east.
R
Correct,
so
to
clarify
for
the
record,
I'm
reading
into
the
record
to
address
the
the
discrepancy
and
the
numbering
it
is.
It
is
the
yard
wall
that
runs
along
the
north
perimeter.
R
G
Just
for
clarification,
angela,
since
we're
trying
to
be
clear
on
this,
is,
as
you
is
wall
three,
the
east
wall,
that
you
can't
see
the
number
on
in
this
diagram.
R
G
R
D
K
D
Is
on
page
four,
the
staff
report
stated
that
we
were
looking
at
the
diagram
on
page
five,
just
for
clarification.
I
You're
recommending
the
north
west
and
east
facades
of
the
cider
press
house
as
primary,
the
building
only
has
four
facades.
I'm
just
wondering
what
about
the
south
rules
it
out
just
a
significant
building.
R
Thank
you
for
the
question
member
beach
hide.
Yes,
I
believe
those
three
walls,
the
north
east
and
west
are
primary
the
south
wall,
while
it
has
obviously
defining
their
historic
features
and
character.
If
I
were
to
recommend
designating
that
a
primary,
then
that
would
kick
it
into
a
significant
status
and
it
does
not
warrant
a
significant
status.
R
G
You,
madam
chair,
but
we
could,
as
a
board,
put
into
the
record
that
certain
features
of
that
facade,
though
the
facade
itself
is
not
primary.
Our
character
defining
correct,
such
as
the
window
opening
the
brick
facing,
and
the
header.
R
I
The
reason
I
asked
about
the
south
is
the
hickpie
actually
called
out
the
south
and
its
evaluation
of
the
status,
saying
that
on
the
south
elevation
communicates
admirable
elements
of
the
pueblo
revival
style.
I
I
just
wonder
if
that
one
shouldn't
be
primary.
Based
on
that
recommendation,
and
I
don't
quite
understand
explanation
for
why
it's
not
warranting
a
significant
status.
R
To
answer
the
first
part
staff
believes
that
the
east
facade
embodies
that
spanish
pueblo
revival
character,
as
well
as
the
historic
elements
with
the
low
river
rock
wall
as
integrated
with
the
upper
stucco
wall.
So
staff
differs
from
the
hippie
author's
opinion
on
that,
and
the
south
elevation,
like
remember
bienvenue,
just
brought
up,
is
there
are
features
on
that
south
elevation
that
the
board
may
call
out
as
worthy
of
preservation.
A
Anything
else
please
we're
in
the
applicant.
B
Q
A
Fails,
do
you
agree
with
staff's
recommendations.
K
M
M
Q
N
Q
This
as
faithful
as
possible
to
their
history
of
this
property
and
to
not
to
relinquish
the
property
ever
again
to
any
to
anybody.
There
is
some
unique
history.
K
M
K
G
G
Q
This
distinction,
probably
being
the
first
or
parked
in
that
garage,
so
that's
kind
of
cool,
also
the
property
was,
is
sandwiched
between
two
state
buildings
and
back
in
the
80s.
The
supreme
court
had
their
eye
on
this
building
and
there
just
happened
to
be.
A
couple
of
attorneys
were
now
retiring
judges,
but
they
alerted.
P
Q
Certainly
location
is
amazing.
Jimmy
caldwell.
Q
M
K
Q
Q
Q
Q
Building,
although
it's
it
is
just
for
storage,
and
we
certainly
agree
with
the
western
side
of
that
being
over
here,
and
we
don't.
Q
Q
This
gets
a
little
tricky,
but
I
think
I
do
agree
with
the
east
walls
going
all
the
way
down
facing
the
river,
the
east
north
wall,
I'm
sorry
and
the
east
wall
coming
all
the
way
in
front
of
this
state
land
office.
I
agree
with
that.
Q
The
wells
in
between
I
think,
there's
designated
five
and
six
so
yeah
here
they
are.
She
has
some
sizes,
you
may
know,
but
the
yard.
Q
Collapse
opening
closing
raised
lower
than
a
lot
of
things,
and
I
think
that
the
location
of
that
wall
certainly
will
our
intent
is
to
keep
that,
but
the
other
intent
we
have
now
that
they
are
going
to
be
occupying
this
compound
is
to
be
able
to
open
up
that
east
garden.
So
from
that
courtyard,
you
can
kind
of
make
visual
connection
between
those
two,
so
they
would
probably
ask
that
that
will
be
have
the
ability
to
be
at
another
height,
maybe
slightly
lower.
I
can't
I'm
not
asking
for
that
tonight.
I'm
just
talking
about
designations.
Q
We
can
discuss
that
there
is
a
proportion,
there's
a
portion,
that's
not
identified
by
a
number
and
it's
from
the
buttress
to
the
property
line
on
the
south
side,
the
southwest
corner.
Q
Q
Prime
city
attorney
sitting
here,
I
would
really
like
that
entire
wall
on
the
south
side
going
all
the
way
up
to
129
to
be
designated,
but
that's
not
really
in
front
of
you
and
it's
all
from
our
property.
But
I'd
like
the
record
to
show
that
that
wall
has
a
significant
significance
in
terms
of
the
context
of
this.
Entire
property
is
129
and
127..
A
Q
So
I'd
give
john
two
minutes
to
be
honest,.
A
K
A
Correct
so
board
members,
who
is
the
courageous
person
that
wants
to
make
a
motion?
Mr
rita,
I'm.
E
A
I
have
to
say
something
about
that
in
reference
to
time.
We
are
not
here.
This
board
is
not
here
to
rush
through
things.
This
board
is
here
to
review
a
project,
and
so
we
have
to
go.
We
have
to
get
all
the
facts
before
us
and
have
an
understanding
of
what
we
are
looking
at
and
not
all
of
us
are
architects
or
may
understand
or
recognize
certain
things
on
a
property.
A
That's
why
you
ask
questions
and
that's
what
we
are
here
for
to
clarify
things
and
to
make
sure,
because
after
things
are
after
we
make
a
decision,
and
then
we
see
that
something
is
built
and
you're
hitting
your
head
and
going
oh,
my
god.
We
actually
approved
that
we
just
didn't
ask
the
right
questions.
A
E
K
E
K
A
Thank
you,
I
think,
sometimes,
when
things
are
complicated
in
terms
of
deceiving
this
case
in
terms
of
the
walls,
it
tends
to
be
a
little
complicated
and
we
have
to
clarify
everything
to
make
sure
that
we
have
everything
in
proper
order
to
make
the
proper
motion
with
that
being
said,
I
will
entertain
your
motion.
E
Manager
in
case
2022,
005,
473,
127
and
127
and
a
half
east
of
argo
street,
I
move
that
the
board
designate
both
structures
as
contributing
with
the
following
building
facades
as
primary
on
the
studio
building
the
west
facade
on
the
main
building
the
west,
north
and
east
facade.
F
G
You
man,
I'm
sure,
just
for
I
don't
know
if
this
needs
to
be
stated.
But
it
was
pointed
out
in
the
staff
report
that
the
primary
facade
on
the
north,
the
north
primary
facade
of
the
main
house,
that
the
records
specifically
reflect
that
that
designation
include
a
wall-mounted
sign
stating
cider
press
as
well
as
the
murals.
A
And
did
you
want
dale
indicated
that
that
south
sidewall
has
significance
that
you
just
want
to
indicate
that
in
the
motion.
A
Okay,
roll.
B
M
A
Thank
you.
All
next
case
is
located
at
571,
garcia
street.
A
And
that
is
carly's.
A
K
K
C
This
is
a
request
for
status
downgrade
and
that
is
the
staff
recommendation.
Okay,
so
we're
looking
at
a
current
aerial
view-
and
here
is
the
1978
aerial
image.
You'll
notice,
that
the
front
guest
house
is
not
there
and
yard
walls
most
of
the
area
doors
that
you
see,
they're,
not
there,
that
you'll
see
in
the
current
area
here,
especially
along
these
sides
here,
okay,
so
2005
was
when
this
guest
house
was
approved
and
we'll
take
a
look
at
that.
So
it's
there's
lots
of
step
backs.
C
So
this
front
portion
here
is
part
of
the
taller
portion
here.
C
This
is
the
west
facade,
that's
designated
as
primary
in
the
records,
but,
as
you
can
see,
there's
also
the
change
in
the
opening
from
2005..
These
photographs
were
from
2000
or
2022,
and
then
we
also
have
the
change
of
the
main
house
in
the
back.
The
addition
in
2005
and
2015.
C
D
The
additions
to
the
main
house-
they
are
less
than
50
of
the
footprint,
but
not
by
much,
but
due
to
the
fact
that
you
have
a.
C
Large
guest
house
in
front
spaced
by
a
little
over
10
feet,
10
to
it's
a
little
over
15
feet
there
and
that
and
the
the
guest
house.
C
C
C
B
E
M
M
A
feeling
of
being
a
little
contemporary
and
and
yet
it's
very
traditional,
you
know
so
it's
a
very
it's
a
hybrid.
You
know
it's
a
hybrid
house
right
now
and
my
you
know
my
clients
just
interested
in.
N
M
A
Any
questions
for
the
applicant
anyone
from
the
public
wishing
to
comment
on
this
case
it
appears
not.
I
will
entertain
a
motion
member
or
remember.
I
Thank
you
in
case
number
20
2200
5447
hdrb
at
571,
garcia
street.
I
moved
to
adopt
us
recommendation
to
downgrade
the
status
of
this
building
from
contributing
to
non-contributing
due
to
the
additions
that
overwhelm
the
historic
facades
and
obscure
them
from
the
street
view.
J
A
L
So
just
one
moment
I
see
that
there's
a
problem
with
the
zoom,
so
I'm
going
to
check
with
it
really
quick
and
if
we
can
just
have
a
quick
pause.
A
couple
minutes.
L
Thank
you
good
evening
and
members
of
the
board.
Hopefully
there
will
be
no
lightning
to
accentuate
a
point
that
I
make
and
start
rolling,
but
I'm
here
to
present
the
status
proposals
for
many
buildings
at
mount
carmel
and
milk
carmel
is
located
just
to
the
south
of
camilo,
cruz
blanca
west,
I'm
sorry
east
of
cumino
montesol.
L
L
The
first
building
that
that
we'll
be
discussing,
which
is
a
primary
building
in
the
history
of
the
mount
carmel
campus,
is
santa
maria,
and
then
there
are
other
buildings
that
are
that
have
been
built
at
different
times
throughout
the
campus.
The
other
ones
include
fatima,
which
I
will
go
into
detail.
The
office,
which
was
one
of
the
earlier
buildings
on
the
campus
san
juan,
which
is
similar
to
a
dormitory,
the
chapel,
which
is
at
the
center
of
the
campus
casita,
as
well
as
san
miguel
and
cardboard.
L
L
The
forms
that
you
receive
relate
more
to
federal
regulations
and
not
local
guidelines
or
standards,
and
so
the
staff
recommendations
that
you
have
before
you
are
based
on
city
code.
While
they
might
not
always
completely
agree
with
federal
regulations,
they
might
be
more
strict
and
some
of
those
status
recommendations
differ
from
what
the
applicant
has
proposed
on
those
forms.
L
So
the
buildings
on
mount
carmel
are
a
record
of
time.
Place,
use
and
relate
to
significant
events
in
history
and
people
in
the
history
of
santa
fe,
and
you
can
see
the
evolution
of
the
property
is
significant,
so
it
started
out
as
a
sanatorium
and
the
lungers
as
they
used
to
be
called
came
to
new
mexico
and
other
points
in
the
west
to
recover
from
tuberculosis.
Just
like
my
grandfather
did
and
not
at
sun
mouth,
but
in
new
mexico.
L
So
the
sun
mount
sanatorium
lasted
until
about
1937.
There
were
some
modifications
to
the
campus
that
started
as
a
temporary
tent
type
of
compound
with
some
with
the
construction
of
an
office
and
administration.
Buildings
came
after
that,
after
1937
john
gome
and
others
decided
to
remodel
the
campus
or
the
santa
maya
building
to
be
the
santa
fe
inn
didn't
last
very
long
and
eventually
was
taken
over
by
the
bruins
army
hospital.
L
As
an
auxiliary
during
world
war
ii
after
world
war
ii,
the
archdiocese
established
the
immaculate
heart
of
mary
seminary
and
a
school
was
established
there,
which
is
part
of
the
fathema
building,
and
since
then
it's
evolved
and
has
been
a
main
central
campus
for
the
order
of
carmelite
sisters
to
begin
with
santa
money
app,
it
was
designed
by
isaac,
rapp
and
modified
by
john
gamim.
So
it's
a
building
that
really
you
know,
speaks
to
its
history.
In
many
ways
it's
instructed
in
1920.
L
This
photograph
here
is
the
north
elevation
of
the
building
facing
towards
the
central
portion
of
the
campus
historic
additions,
include
yard
walls
and
entrance
gate,
and
the
mary
sculpture
in
the
courtyard
staff
finds
that,
while
there
have
been
some
changes,
including
window
replacements,
the
primary
form
and
architectural
character
remain
so
the
story
of
the
building
is
still
there,
and
so
therefore,
staff
recommends
significant
designation,
the
primary
facades
being
the
west
and
south
elevations
moving
forward
to
san
miguel,
which
is
located
immediately
to
the
east
of
santa
maria.
L
It
was
designed
in
1962
according
to
the
applicant
and
historic,
divided
lights.
Windows
are
part
of
the
fabric.
The
enclosed
porch
illustrates
sort
of
some
of
the
1960s
architectural
elements,
and
staff
recommends
that
this
building
be
designated
as
contributing
with
the
west
and
south
elevations
as
primary
to
capture
that
historic
porch
that
speaks
to
1960s
architectural
design.
L
The
chapel
is
a
center
point
of
the
the
campus
and
has
some
distinctive
characteristics,
which
includes
the
termination
of
the
main
entry
road
and
sort
of
a
prominent
standing
on
the
campus.
It's
something
that,
as
one
approaches,
the
campus
sees
the
visitor
sees
immediately
and
that's
accentuated
by
the
mosaic.
That's
on
that
western
elevation,
it
was
designed
in
1962
the
mosaic
facade
and
the
bell
tower
element
helped
to
identify.
L
This
is
the
chapel
and
provide
a
distinctive
presence.
The
massing
elements
on
the
north,
facade
and
historic
carved
doors
are
the
reason
that
staff
is
recommending
that
to
be
a
primary
facade
when
one
thinks
of
the
tafs
church
and
others.
The
form
of
the
church
is
really
important
in
communicating
how
you
know
the
building
was
designed,
but
also
constructed,
and
all
of
that,
and
it
is
on
the
sort
of
primary
central
court
or
campus
of
of
the
of
mount
carmel.
L
L
That
attachment
is
one
of
the
reasons
that
we
are
not
requesting
that
that
elevation
plus
the
restroom
addition
that
elevation
be
designated
as
primary.
The
visitor
was
actually
originally
a
dairy
building
and
was
constructed
in
1900.
So
it's
one
of
the
oldest
buildings
on
the
site,
but
it
has
been
modified
quite
a
bit
over
time
and
is
currently
serving
as
a
residence
and
staff
recommends
it
as
not
contributing
because
it
does
not
speak
much
to
its
history.
L
San
juan,
which
is
located
on
the
eastern
portion
of
the
campus
and
terminates
the
at
the
end
of
a
roundabout,
was
also
built
in
1962,
but
of
somewhat
historic
fabric.
So
additional
information
is
needed
on
the
divided
lights,
which
are
characteristic
of
the
building
and
help
to
define
the
building.
L
In
many
ways
there
are
architectural
elements
that
include
the
bell
tower,
as
well
as
the
brick
ornamentation
on
the
south
elevation
that
make
this
building
distinctive
staff
recommends
that
it
be
contributing,
and
the
west
and
south
elevations
be
primary,
as
I
mentioned
before,
the
office
is
located
in
the
central
portion
of
the
campus
is
one
of
the
older
buildings
on
the
site.
It
is
connected
to
the
fatima
building
with
a
breezeway,
and
it
was
an
addition
that
was
made
after
the
construction
of
the
original
building.
L
Staff
recommends
that
it
be
contributing,
and
the
east
and
south
elevations
be
designated
as
primary
due
to
their
characteristic
historical
details
and
window
patterns.
I
know
this
is
a
lot
that
I'm
going
through.
So
please
ask
me
questions
as
they
go
along.
If
you
have
them,
fatama
was
constructed
in
1952
and
it
was
constructed
as
a
high
school
for
the
immaculate
heart
of
mary
seminary.
L
There
is
an
attached
yard
wall
that
extends
west
and
adjacent
to
the
parking
lot,
which
is
historic
and
has
some
historic
car
doors,
and
therefore,
staff
is
recommending
that
that
wall
be
contributing,
as
well
as
the
west
and
south
elevations.
This
is
a
correction.
L
The
staff
report
says
east
elevation,
and
that
is
intended
to
be
the
east
elevation
of
the
courtyard
so
on
the
south
elevation.
That
courtyard
is
what
is
most
important,
not
necessarily
you
know
the
entire
area
of
the
south
valley
elevation
and
then,
of
course,
the
western
side
of
that
classroom
area.
L
A
Heather,
thank
you
very
much.
This
is
a
very
interesting
property
and
very
significant.
I
would
say
to
to
santa
fe.
It
has
a
lot
of
history
with
all
those
buildings
in
it.
It's
very
interesting
that
a
lot
of
people
came
here
that
had
tuberculosis
and
that
they
had
a
tent
city
first,
and
then
they
eventually
built
the
building,
so
that
john
gaming
was
one
of
those
persons
that
came
here
and
I
think
they
in
the
report.
They
listed
quite
a
number
of
people
that
were
prominent
within
santa
fe.
A
That
came
here
because
they
had
tuberculosis,
and
then
they
decided
to
stay
here
because
they
fell
in
love
with
with
our
beautiful
city,
even
way
back
when
heather,
okay.
So
I
was
thinking
about
this
entire
project
and
we
have
seven
buildings
and
we
have
a
cardboard
and
a
yard
wall
that
we
have
to
go
through.
So
I
was
going
to
ask
board
members.
A
So
because,
then,
if
we
start
skipping
all
over
the
place
that
it
gets
a
little
confusing.
G
Thank
you
manager.
I
agree.
I
think
that's
the
only
way
we
can
proceed,
but
I
would
just
take
this
opportunity
to
ask
a
question
of
heather.
You
know
we
are
going
to
address
these
individually
because
they
came
before
us
in
that
aspect,
but
it's
pretty
clear
that
the
significance
of
this
property
is
the
ensemble,
not
just
the
individual
buildings,
and
it's
an
incredibly
well
preserved
ensemble.
G
G
Is
that
something
that
staff
has
addressed
at
all
because
designating
something
like
this
as
an
historical
compound
then
creates
preservation
for
the
spatial
relationships,
the
landscaping,
the
not
just
the
individual
structures,
but
how
they
all
interact
with
each
other?
It's
not
exactly
clear
to
me
what
the
procedure
is
under
our
code
for
that
designation,
but
it
strikes
me
that
this
would
be
an
ideal
candidate
for
that
designation.
L
Carly
might
have
more
insight
on
this.
I
need
to
look
at
the
definition
of
historical
compound.
First,
I
think
it's
relative
to
residential
development,
but
maybe
carly
can
save
me.
G
Actually
calls
out
family
compounds,
rental,
placita
and
commercial
as
being
the
four
recognized
types,
and
this
would
presumably
fall
within
the
commercial
because
it
was
a
hospital.
It
was
a
school.
It
was
a
sanitarium,
of
course,.
D
Remember
the
infinity,
madam
chairman,
it
you
know,
I
think
I
think
part
of
it
is
what
we're
looking
at
is
scale
and
and
what
we,
our
discussion,
was
more
on
the
lines
of
historic
district,
just
based
on
this
generally,
wouldn't
fit
so
much
into
compounds.
But
the
commercial
aspect
is
more
institutional
than.
D
The
way-
and
I
want
to
look
at
I'll-
take
another
look
at
the
code
definition
to
make
sure
while
we're
in
discussion
on
this,
but
that's
where
we
diverted
between
when
we
looked
at
the
whole
of
the
campus
and
unfortunately,
as
a
district,
it
the
district's
a
little
bit
harder
to
at
least
procedurally
to
get
there
but
district
as
a
district.
There's
several
different
overlays
and
hanging
kind
of
hanging,
its
hat
on
one
historical
overlay,
becomes
a
little
bit
more
difficult
because
there's
so
many
layers
of
that
history.
D
A
Heather,
in
reference
to
some
of
the
comments
that
number
of
mv
made
where
everything
relates
to
one
another,
would
you
say
that
that
the
roadway
within
that
animal
skull.com
within
this
area?
How
do
you
think
that
that
relates
to
the
buildings
and
do
you
think
it's
an
important
part
of.
L
L
Over
time
you
know
has
changed
significantly
and
originally
that
roadway
served
the
you
know
not
only
sanatorium
but
the
inn
and
then
as
the
rooms,
access
for
the
auxiliary
facility.
So-
and
it
was
previously
referred
to
as
yale
avenue.
F
F
The
the
board
has
never
made
a
recommendation
to
the
governing
body
as
to
which
property
should
be
registered
as
compounds,
and
the
governing
body
has
never
acted
on
that.
Maybe
this
is
something
that
would
spur
that
kind
of
action,
but
I
think
that
the
original
concept
was
that
there
were
several
compounds.
I
think
we're
actually
going
to
deal
with
one
of
them
a
little
bit
later
in
the
meeting
and
that
they
would
all
be
discussed
in
a
recommendation.
F
A
Wouldn't
do
it
this
evening.
It
is
something
that
we
can
look
at
and
you're
right,
frank
that
seriously
there's
a
lot
of
places
here
that
we
we
refer
to
as
compounds
but
they're,
not
really
compounds
within
the
ordinance
that
have
been
adopted
as
such.
Yes,
remember
thank.
E
You,
madam
chair,
I'm
a.
M
E
K
E
Is
something
that
that's
also
a
little?
We
don't
have
a
definition
for
necessarily
beyond
historic
district
might
be
a
better
fit,
and-
and
that
has
less
to
do
with
the
idea
that
this
is
not
was.
M
E
E
Route,
slash
fire
lane
that
doesn't
really
hold
as
much
water.
For
me
in
that
regard,
I'm.
K
E
To
see
that
this
is
the
discussion
of
the
board,
I'm
glad
to
see
that
that
staff
have
been
thinking
about
this
and
making
their
recommendations
heather.
With
regard
to
your
designations
or
recommendations
for
santa
maria
and
the
chapel,
to
be
significant
in
your
verbal
presentation,
you
recommended
facades.
E
We
know
that
significant
buildings,
all
facades
are,
are
primary,
just
to
clarify
what
staff
is
recommending
in
these
cases
that
these
two
buildings
are
to
be
significant
is.
Is
it
your
recommendation
recommendation
that
we
exclude
certain
facades
rather
than
say
that
you
know
just
these
two
are
primary.
L
Chair
rios
commissioner,
I'm
sorry
board
member
guido.
The
the
situation
is
that
some
of
those
facades
have
been
modified,
like
the
breezeway
to
san
miguel
from
the
chapel
and
the
restroom
edition,
and
then
on
santa
maria
there's.
Also,
the
you
know
the
changes
that
have
been
made
over
time.
Some
of
them
are
historic
in
their
own
right.
L
So
that
is
why
staff
is
agreeing
with
the
applicant
on
the
santa
maria
and
then
the
the
chapel
in
their
major
it's
a
simple
building.
L
L
It
was,
you
know,
has
historic
buildings
and
was
developed
and
that's
not
a
compound,
but
when
you
think
of
the
the
saint
francis
cathedral
in
downtown
and
it
used
to
have
a
school
and
then
the
sanitarium
and
all
the
different
associated
type
of
activities,
we
don't
traditionally
consider
that
a
compound
so
as
staff.
I
would
recommend
against
that
designation.
Based
on
on
that
experience
and
insight.
G
G
G
H
L
Carrios
board
member
bienvenue,
certainly
that
is
the
prerogative
of
the
board
and
carly,
and
I
while
the
applicant
is
speaking,
can
do
a
little
additional
research.
But
I
really
appreciate
your
your
insight
and
yeah.
A
Thank
you.
I
do
feel
that
that's
something
that
needs
to
be
explored,
at
least
that
we
need
to
talk
about
it
further,
even
though,
if
we
may
not
come
to
any
conclusions
this
evening,
yes
carly.
C
Any
conclude
any
conclusions
on
this
we'll
have
to
have
a
written
analysis
and
justification
as
to
why
why
the
compound,
essentially,
why
this
is
defined
as
the
compound
and
as
historic
according
to
the
code,
so
that.
K
A
F
I
mean
the
whole
provision
on
compound.
Has
the
final
section
says
that
the
whole
section
will
not
become
effective
until
30
days
after
the
approval
by
the
governing
body
of
the
historic
compound
register?
That's
never
happened,
so
this
whole
section
on
compounds
is
not
effective
yet,
and
so
it's
you
know,
I
I
think
it
should
be.
I
think
the
governing
body
should
do
it.
I
think
we
should
all
be
working
on
it,
but
it
ain't
effective.
Yet.
F
Madam
chair,
I
am
still
remain
confused.
We
can't
do
that.
We
could
say
that
it's
significant
and
that
there's
some
aspects
to
it
that
are
not
historic
and
so
that
they
could
be
changed
if
they're,
not
historic,
but
we
don't
have
just
two
primary
facades
on
a
significant
building,
they're
all
primary,
and
it
may
be
that
what
was
being
referred
to
is
the
fact
that
there
are
some
non-historic
additions
or.
L
A
member
of
cats
with
reference
to,
I
think
that
the
the
board
can
consider
this
as
significant
without
any
type
of
designation.
L
My
attempt
there
was
to
identify
the
sort
of
features
that
are
most
worth
preserving
because
and
like
you
mentioned,
there
have
been
alterations
over
time
and
you
know
those
can
be
changed
and
I
guess
that
would
just
be
part
of
the
dialogue
of
a
development
proposal
and
maybe
not
part
of
this
dialogue.
But
maybe
we
can
say
instead
of
saying
that
their
primary
we
can
just
put
on
the
record
that
these
are
the
most
important
facades
or
something
to
that
effect.
C
Identify
a
recommendation
as
well
for
primary
facades,
and
so
it's
important
to
at
least
note
the
most
prominent
ones
for
us
in
these
staff
reports,
and
I
think
we
and
otherwise
assistant
land
use.
Director
lamboy
has
done
a
good
job
with
like
just
noting
where
there
has
been
changes
and
if
something's
excluded,
like
the
windows
in
santa
maria.
A
F
A
You
we
please
swear
and
lisa
hi
visa.
B
You
do
you
swear
under
the
penalty
of
perjury
that
the
testimonies
you're
about
to
give
are
the
truth,
the
whole
truth
and
nothing
but
the
truth.
Thank
you.
Please
state
your
name
and
address
for
the
record.
C
Addresses
130
grant
avenue,
suite
101
santa
fe
new
mexico
87501
good
evening.
Madam
chair
members
of
the
board,
it's
good
to
see
you
all.
I
won't
go
into
great
detail
to
avoid
redundancy
here,
but
we
can
go
through
structure
by
structure.
We
do
have
all
those
materials
queued
up
in
our
slideshow
of
interest,
so
just
an
overview
vicinity
ariel
of
the
property.
C
Again
we
are
in
the
historic
review
district
and
here's
a
slightly
zoomed,
more
zoomed
in
version
of
the
aerial
property
as
an
existing
condition.
C
Again
the
site
plan,
the
buildings
here
are
numbered,
and
so
we
can
go
through
one
by
one
and
talking
about
these
I
don't
know
if
we
need
to
go
through
the
timeline
or
if
we
want
to
hit
some
highlights.
Are
you
interested
in
a
little
more
detail
or
no.
A
I
think
if
we
just
go
talk
to
us
about
the
building
and
if
you
agree
or
disagree
in
reference
to
the
designation
or
the
recommended
designation,
sure.
C
So
here's
a
summary
table
of
the
the
hickvie
findings
and
the
staff
recommendations.
I
want
to
point
out
that
the
the
hickpie
forms
can
be
a
little
confusing
because
they
are
based
on
on
national
standards,
but
are
are
historian,
and
I
do
want
to
just
pause
and
introduce
who's
with
me.
Tonight
is
jennifer
jenkins
principal
of
jenkins
gavin.
C
Rachel
prinz
is
our
historian
and
eric
infield
from
architectural
alliances,
our
architect,
but
rachel
did
do
hickpies
for
each
of
the
buildings
and
she
did
evaluate
based
on
local
standards,
we're
forced
to
use
a
form
that
uses
national
standards.
But
so
it's
a
little
bit
of
a
mismatch
in
terms
of
you
know:
slight
subtle
differences
between
the
national
standards
and
the
local
standards,
but
the
evaluation
and
recommendations
were
made
based
on
local
standards.
C
So,
just
to
summarize,
and
and
there
are
a
couple
of
discrepancies,
I
want
to
point
out
between
the
the
information
that
was
generated
by
the
historical
research
and
what
was
presented
by
staff.
Just
a
couple
of
discrepancies
there
so
I'll
highlight
those
when
we
come
up
upon
them.
So
for
santa
maria,
it
was
constructed
in
1920
as
part
of
the
sun.
C
C
So
christian
miguel
going
back
santa
maria
is
recommended
as
significant
both
by
our
historian
and
by
staff.
San
miguel
was
appears
on
the
1961
master
plan
from
the
queue
interrupting.
Yes,.
A
And
so
would
you
tell
us
when
you,
if
you
agree
or
disagree
with
staff's
recommendations,.
C
Okay,
well
with.
C
Thank
you
absolutely
for
sam
miguel
constructed
in
1962
as
part
of
the
seminary
expansion
on
the
master
of
the
1961
master
plan
by
mchugh
and
associates.
C
We
accept
the
contributing
recommendation
by
staff
chapel
again
19
part
of
the
1962
seminary
expansion,
2005
restroom,
addition
to
that
south
facade,
as
noted
by
staff,
and
we
do
accept
the
significant
recommendation
from
staff
the
casita
I
want
to
be.
I
want
to
be
clear
that
we've
done
a
little
bit
more
historic
research
on
the
casita,
since
we
submitted
our
application
and
that's
we're
also
working
with
a
preservation
group
out
of
austin
on
a
national
register.
Nomination
process.
That's
ongoing.
C
So
so
we've
had
additional
information
come
up
as
as
the
process
has
continued,
we
do
not
believe
that
this
building
was
built
either
on
the
site
of
the
historic
area
and
certainly
there's
no
historic
material
in
the
building.
I
walked
through
it
completely
last
week
we
could
not,
and
eric
was
there.
We
could
not
find
any
historic
material
in
that
building.
So
we
don't.
We
don't
really
know
exactly
when
it
was
constructed.
C
We
believe
it
may
have
been
constructed
as
part
of
the
1962
expansion
of
the
seminary
campus,
but
we
don't,
it
doesn't
appear
on
the
master
plan.
It's
it's
hard
to
it's
hard
to
date
that
structure
particularly,
but
because
it's
not
publicly
visible,
which
is
important
for
this
district,
and
it
doesn't
really
have
much
in
the
way
of
historic
character
materials.
C
The
san
juan
building
again
part
of
the
1962
seminary
expansion
won
that
1961
master
plan
and
we
accept
the
contributing
recommendation
by
staff
the
office
was,
we
don't
have
an
exact
construction
date
for
the
office.
We
believe
it
was
built
around
1900
at
that
time,
probably
as
a
residence,
maybe
stables.
C
The
courtyard
walls
associated
with
that
structure
were
also
built
at
that
time
and
by
the
courtyard
walls.
Here,
I'm
referring
specifically
to
the
south
court
yard
wall
and
there's
a
courtyard
at
the
northeast
corner.
So
those
are
the
two
walls
we're
talking
about
constructed
at
that
same
time
and
we
do
accept
the
contributing
recommendation
by
staff.
C
So
just
want
to
speak.
If
I
may
a
little
bit
about
the
carport
first
is
that
that
building
we
we
also
do
not
agree
with
with
staff's
recommendation
of
contributing
status.
So
the
carport
is
located
here.
Just
just
southeast
of
the
santa
maria
building.
C
This
this
western
end
of
the
carport
was
enclosed
non-historically,
perhaps
in
the
70s
based
on
the
materials,
the
entire
building
has
been
wrapped
in
this
probe
metal
pro
panel
siding.
Originally,
it
was
born
batten
and
for
the
reasons
of
non-historic
modifications,
in
addition
to
the
fact
that
it
is
not
publicly
visible,
it
is
not
of
santa
fe
style.
C
It
is
it's
important
for
to
note
that
we
are
in
the
historic
review
district,
where
it's
really
more
of
a
design
review
district
most
of
the
buildings
in
the
historic
review
district
are
not
status
and
most
of
the
modifications
to
buildings
in
the
review
districts
are
administratively
approved
by
staff.
Unless
there's
some
exception,
that's
needed.
C
So
I
think
you
just
think
that's
important
that
it's
an
important
context
to
note
in
terms
of
the
the
conversation
that
we're
having
that's
just
an
aside-
and
I
can
come
back
to
that
so
for
the
carport
we
do
have
some
historic
elevations
that
are
part
of
the
construction
drawings.
The
carport
was
not
was
notably
not
on
the
1961
master
plan.
C
C
So
I
want
to
go
back
for
just
a
moment
to
the
historic
review
district,
because
again,
I
think
it's
important
to
note
that
this
is
not
the
same.
The
historical
view
district
is
not
the
same
as
the
other
historic
districts,
in
that
the
primary
purpose
of
the
historic
review
district
is
to
create
sort
of
a
character
buffer
from
the
from
the
core
historic
areas
of
santa
fe.
There's
not
specific,
I
mean
if
preservation
were
the
primary
purpose
of
the
historic
review
district,
the
buildings
would
be
status.
K
C
B
C
C
C
C
Thank
you
so
now
you
can
see
that
this
portal
here,
where
meme
reconfigured
the
entryway
this
area
here
being
the
north
portal
that
has
been
non-historically,
enclosed
and
this
area
here
being
the
south
portal.
It
has
also
been
enclosed,
non-historically
second
floor
plan,
so
you
can
see
as
that
many
of
that
the
sleeping
rooms
associated
with
this
building
had
sleeping
porches
attached.
Those
have
were
probably
originally
open
or
screened,
and
now
they
have
been
infilled
with
windows,
non-historically.
C
And
there
are
the
elevations,
so
this
being
the
portal
on
the
west
elevation,
this
being
the
portal
that
meme
added
to
reconfigure
the
entryway
for
the
santa
fe
inn
on
the
south
elevation.
This
is
the
portal
that
was
enclosed.
Non-Historically
was
open
when
meme
did
his
1937-1938
renovation
and
on
the
north
elevation.
C
This
is
that
northwest
courtyard
the
portal
enclosure-
and
this
is
the
new
entryway
portal
and
new
main
1937-38
portal
entryway.
That
was
added-
I
mean
the
original
entry
to
the
building
was
here
below.
The
bell
tower
also
important
to
note
that
when
the
archdiocese
took
over
the
building,
they
did
add
this
cross
to
the
bell
tower.
On
top
that
was
not
original
to
the
building.
C
K
L
C
Thank
you.
This
is
the
east
side
of
the
north
elevation.
I
wanted
to
note
here
that
this
this
little
edition
was
placed
in
the
1970
or
1937-38
renovation
by
meme
west
elevation.
C
This
is
the
south
elevation,
notably
looking
at
this.
What
was
originally
in
1937-38
an
open
portal
with
beautiful
views
out
to
sun
mountain,
as
has
been
enclosed
with
non-historic
windows,.
C
Don't
know
but
we're
looking
at
the
material,
I'm
sorry
I
met
him.
Chair,
remember,
cats.
We
don't
know
exactly
the
date
of
the
enclosure,
but
we
do.
We
do
feel
based
on
the
material
that
was
used.
It
was
probably
1970s
1980s,
which
would
jive
with
the
date
of
the
windows
as
well.
So
that
would
be
our
educated.
C
C
East
elevation,
the
south
side.
We
do
believe
that
this
is
a
non-historic
addition
to
the
building.
We
don't
have
a
date
on
that.
We
have
really
good
drawings
because
from
the
sort
of
period
of
significance
for
the
building,
we
don't
have
a
lot
going
to
go
from.
After
that,
the
elevation
is
said:
lisa,
that's
the
east
elevation
on
the
south
side
and
as
we're
just
talking
about
this
little
low,
slung
flat
roofed
edition,
it's
got
aluminum
slider
windows
in
it.
I
believe.
C
This
is
the
east
elevation
on
the
north
side.
Again,
looking
at
this
little
meme
edition
here
and
sleeping
rooms
with
sleeping
porches,
moving
on
to
the
san
miguel
building,
do
you
want
to
pause
for
a
comment
or
discussion.
E
The
manager
just
a
question
about
procedure,
and
this
is
also
a
question
for
staff.
I
mean,
if
we're
going
to
go
through
these
one
by
one,
which
I
agree
is
the
right
way
to
do
this.
Do
we
want
to
break
these
into
individual
motions?
Do
we
want
to
just
keep
a
a
kind
of
running
tally
of
submotions
that
we
vote
on.
A
Do
you
all
think,
okay,
so
we're
going
to
go
one
by
one
and
then
I'll
ask
them
to
make
a
motion
after
they've
asked
their
questions
or
have
comments
and
anybody
from
the
public
that's
going
to
speak
come
forward,
because
I
will
also
ask
you
to
speak,
seems
like
he
left
and
he
probably
may
be
the
only
one
that
was
going
to
speak
so
board
members
right
at
this
time.
Do
you
have
any
questions
for
lisa
in
reference
to
santa
maria
building.
A
Anyone
from
the
public
wishing
to
comment
on
this
particular
building
santa
maria
located
in
the
mount
carmel
area.
G
C
E
Will?
Second,
with
a
friendly
amendment,
that
we
also
exclude
the
one-story
addition
on
the
east
side
of
the
building
and
the
infill
that
we
see
at
the
north
portal?
The
south
portal
and
the
sleeping
porches.
H
What
were
also
doesn't
mean
there
are
certain
non-historic
elements
right,
says:
non-historic
elements.
E
The
windows
and
then
I
added
the
infill
at
the
north
and
south
portals,
the
one-story
addition
to
the
east
facade
and
the
infill
of
the
sleeping
porches,
all
of
which
are
non-historic.
I
F
I
fully
understand
that
or
that
we
fully
have
dealt
that
and
I
guess
I'd
be
more
comfortable,
saying
just
excluding
non-historic
material,
non-historic
enclosures,
and
if
it's
going
to
come
up
because
something
wants
to
be
replaced
at
that
time,
there
needs
to
be
the
evidence
that
in
fact,
yes,
it
is
non-historic
rather
than
just
oh
yeah.
I
think
that
was
added.
F
Later
I
mean
I,
I
feel
it's
been
a
little
casual
on
how
we've
dealt
with
that,
and
god
knows
I
don't
want
to
prolong
it
tonight
and
have
you
know
a
discussion
of
every
window
in
every
building.
A
B
C
C
A
I
I
do
have
a
question:
I'm
just
wondering
in
comparison
to
santa
maria.
The
islamic
gala
stated
by
the
applicant
is
unchanged
and
we've
the
staff
recommendation
is
for
contributing.
Can
we
maybe
discuss
that
difference
and
approach
or
the
characteristics
of
this
building
that
make
it
different
from
the
santa
maria.
D
C
D
One
of
the
reasons
in
looking
at
the
previous,
oh,
I
was
just
had
the
code
up.
D
Maria
building
the
definitions
is,
while
the
integrity
is,
there's
there's
some
lacking
integrity
on
of
the
normal.
What
we
would
consider
for
significant,
but
due
to
those
other
definitions
on
how
it
can
be
significant,
this
really
pitch
in
now
that,
because
it's
relationship
to
an
individual
that
really
holds
a
lot
of
strength
here,
the
other
one,
there's
less,
there's
there's
less
ground
for
that
to
stand
on
it
does.
T
R
L
R
L
You
know
historic
window
design,
I
suppose,
and
so
that
that's
why
I
recommend
it
primary.
K
I
I
A
B
I
I
C
A
C
We've
had
a
lot
of
conversations
about
this
matter
of
chair
conversations
with
the
historians
that
are
working
on
the
national
register
nominations
conversations
with
the
ship
I
was
on
this.
It
is
on
the
original
drawings
we're
not
really
sure
it's
made
to
sort
of
look
like
a
buttress
or
an
orno.
It's
making
references
secret.
I
K
A
Thank
you
frank,
any
other
questions
for
lisa
regarding
the
chapel,
anyone
from
the
public
or
from
zoom
wishing
to
speak.
It
appears
not.
I
will
entertain
a.
N
A
Thank
you
eric,
so
the
rest
of
you
that
have
been
sworn
in,
if
you
need
to
speak,
remember,
go
to
the
podium
motion.
Please
board.
E
I'll
make
a
motion.
In
the
same
case,
I
move
that
the
board
designate
the
chapel
as
significant,
noting
that
the
accessible
ramp,
the
restroom
edition
and
the
portal
attachment
on
the
south,
facade
or
non-historic.
I
E
K
B
M
C
Thank
you,
madam
chair.
The
casita
is
located
here
that
is
southeast
of
the
chapel.
It
is
built
into
a
steep
slope
that
is
a
man-made
slope
that
is
probably
created.
I
imagine
when,
when
the
1962
campus
expansion
happened
in
order
to
level
out
the
earth
for
the
construction
of
san
miguel,
the
chapel
and
the
san
juan
dormitory.
C
So
we
don't
have
drawings
of
the
casita
we
do
have.
We
do
have
photographs
of
the
casita,
so
it's
burned
into
the
hillside,
so
the
north
facade
is
completely
obscured
by
the
hillside,
as
is
the
west
facade.
This
is
the
south
elevation
of
the
building.
You
can
see
the
aluminum
slider
windows
again,
it
is
built
of
its
frame
frame
and
drywall
construction
with
a
flat,
a
flat
roof.
A
C
To
reiterate,
we
do
not
believe
that
this
that
this
that
this
was,
as
was
stated
in
the
application.
It
was
speculated
at
the
time
by
historians
that
we
were
working
with
on
the
national
register
nomination
that
maybe
that
this
was
the
location
and
the
structure
of
the
of
the
historic
dairy
associated
with
sanatorium.
C
I
C
C
A
No
questions
and
I
did
ask
for
public
comment
and
I
don't
probably
comment
to
anybody:
whether
it's
on
zoom
or
actual
okay,
no
public
comments,
so
promotion.
Q
A
Hear
anything
about
this
song.
C
Thank
you,
madam
chair.
The
san
juan
building
is
located
here
at
the
north
east
corner
of
the
campus.
C
Elevations,
you
see
the
east
at
the
top
north
south
with
the
interesting
brick
detail
in
the
south,
and
then
the
west
elevation
is
really
the
front
of
the
building.
I
want
to
know
that
this
window
below
the
bell
tower.
We
believe
that
grill
has
been
modified
non-historically,
so
just
wanted
to
note
that
that's
the
only
major
alteration
that
we're
aware
of.
I
N
F
On
on
the
self
facade,
you're
recommending
primary,
but
only
on
the
left
portion
of.
N
C
I'm
madame
chair
member
katz,
I'm
not
recommending
the
primary.
I
A
B
K
A
So
tell
us.
K
T
C
Done
in
our
presentation
here
is
kind
of
we'll
go
through
the
office
and
fatima
since
they
are
connected,
but
noting
that
we
recognize
that
there
would
be
separate
motions
for
each
of
these.
I
C
C
C
On
the
east
side
being
a
1962
edition,
the
courtyard
wall,
here,
we
would
like
to
have
that
have
a
status
designation
as
well
and
the
courtyard
wall
on
the
south
side,
so
the
north
northeast
courtyard
wall
and
the
south
courtyard
wall
associated
with
fatima.
C
The
requesting
status
and
going
through
the
elevations
again,
the
elevations
for
the
for
fatima
and
the
office,
are
together
since
they
are
connected
by
the
here's,
the
breezeway
on
the
south
elevation,
which
is
the
front
of
each
of
these
buildings.
So
this
being
the
fatima
building
on
the
left,
the
office
building
on
the
right
connected
with
a
breeze
right
here,.
C
C
C
A
They're
together,
though,
okay
that
makes
sense
remember,
greedy.
E
Madam
chair,
I
think
we
could
probably
do
a
combined
motion
on
these
two
buildings.
Just
a
point
of
clarification.
Lisa
would
you
just
summarize
what
that's
recommendations
were
and
and
your
recommendations
for
primary
facades.
C
The
south
and
east
would
capture
the
courtyard
walls.
Okay,
thank.
K
L
Via
new
the
yes,
the
discussion
was
that
the
east
elevation
of
that
building
didn't
have
a
unique
architectural
character.
L
L
And
also,
I
would
suggest,
adding
in
the
yard
wall
clarifications
to
have
a
small
objection
to
those
yard
philosophy.
A
E
I'm
happy
to
unless
somebody
else
wants
to
so
same
case,
move
that
the
board
designate
both
the
fatima
building
and
the
office
as
contributing
with
the
south
facade
of
the
fatima
building,
inclusive
of
all
courtyard
walls
as
primary,
as
well
as
the
portion
of
the
west
passata
butting.
The
parking
lot
as
primary.
G
B
C
The
carport,
as
mentioned
earlier,
is
located
behind
the
santa
maria
building
to
the
south
east
right
on
the
edge
of
the
arroyo
constructed.
We
believe
in
1962,
as
a
sort
of
maintenance
shed
for
the
seminary
do
believe.
The
western
two
most
the
westernmost
two
bays
have
been
enclosed,
non-historically
and
metal.
Pro
panel
siding
has
been
applied
to
all
sides
of
the.
C
C
A
Not
contribute
to
anything
within
the
with
the
other.
C
Buildings,
madam
chair,
we
do
not
feel
that
this
building
contributes
in
any
way
I
mean
if
you're
looking
for
evidence
of
the
evolution
of
the
campus.
I
believe
that
samuel
and
the
chapel
and
the
san
juan
buildings
do
that
much
more
overtly
than
a
maintenance
shed
that's
located
behind
santa
maria.
That's,
not
even
you
could
walk
throughout
the
campus
and
and
miss
it
entirely.
I
would
say
rachel:
do
you
have
anything
you
want
to
add
about.
A
Okay,
thank
you.
Questions.
G
My
comment
is
that
I
agree
with
the
applicants
that
the
sheathing
has
dramatically
altered,
whatever
historical
significance
that
prop
that
structure
ever
had
and
the
addition,
if
it
was
still
you
know,
boarding,
baton
or
whatever
it
was
originally,
it
might
be
a
different
story,
but
it
I
don't
believe
that
at
this
point
in
time,
it
continues
to
have
significance
and
I'll.
G
A
Be
invisible
from
the
comments
anyone
zoom
or
in.
G
Thank
you.
In
the
same
case,
I
would
find
that
the
structure
does
not
have
sufficient
historic
integrity
to
be
contributing.
It
would
move
that
it
be
designated
non-contributing,
and
this
is
the
carport.
B
C
It's
a
tough
shed
there.
It
is,
and
now
it's
glory
it's
located
behind
the
san
juan
building,
obviously
as
storage,
and
so
we
request
status
for
this
shed.
A
D
E
I'm
sure,
in
the
same
case,
regarding
the
tough
shed,
I
would
move
that
the
board
note
that
it's
non-conforming
temporary
structure.
B
C
And
one
more
thing,
just
one
more
thing:
I
promise.
Oh
the
wall,
the
wall,
the
west
wall,
which
is
non-historic
so
the
west
wall
that
we're
talking
about,
is
here
separating
the
what
is
now
the
santa
fe
prep
parking
area
from
the
carmelite
associated
parking,
and
here
are
some
photos
north
side
on
the
south
side.
Again
it
was
constructed
in
2010..
We
have
that
on
good
authority
from
carmelite
sisters.
L
The
reason
that
was
included
as
a
contributing
structure
is
because
they're
on
the
1962
master
plan,
there
was
a
football
field
in
the
area
and
it
seemed
like
there
was
a
wall
that
was
there,
but
provided
that
the
applicant
can
provide
evidence
of
that
being
built
in
2010,
then
staff
withdraws
the
recommendation
for
any
type
of
contributing.
Q
P
The
noise
level
going
through
the
carmelites
carmelites,
all
they
do
is
pray
all
day,
so
they
need
quiet
and
santa
fe
prep
was
driving
right
through
the
property.
So
we
had
an
agreement
and
a
handshake
agreement
with
the
archbishop
to
have
that
wall
built
and
for
them
to
drive
to
the
parking
lot
for
prep
before
going
in
front
of
the
chapel
of
the
carmelites,
which
is
separate
from
the
archdiocese.
P
P
A
C
D
A
C
Yes,
madam
chair
and
it's
a
separate
parcel
and
it's
not
the
subject
of
the
status
review,
but
but
suffice
it
to
say
that
we
that
that
our
client
has
a
very
close
working
relationship
with
the
carmelites
and
we're
doing
everything
possible
to
maintain
their
privacy
and
even
enhance
their
privacy
through
site
modifications.
G
C
G
Okay,
okay,
so
in
the
same
case,
I
would
move
that
the
west
yard
wall
be
continued
to
be
on
status
based
on
the
state
of
the
record.
Yes,.
L
I'm
sorry
I'm
showing
that
skyler
would
like
to
speak
I'll.
Allow
him
to
talk
okay,
I'll.
B
S
I
just
wanted
to
to
follow
up
on
the
the
conversation
of
the
of
the
wall.
I
had
spoken
with
mother
marie
bernadette
about
that
wall
and
she
she
confirmed
that
they
that
they
installed
it
in
2010,
actually
entirely
consistent
with
the
gentleman
who
spoke
about
the
the
santa
fe
prep
traffic
and
looking
to
to
address
that.
So
it's
something
that,
as
lisa
said,
we're
very,
very
focused
on
how
to
enhance
their
privacy.
Above
and
beyond
that.
G
R
Good
evening
again,
okay,
the
last
case
is
at
4
esekia
madre
unit
one.
I
am
going
to
read
the
background
in
summary,
and
the
applicant
will
be
up
here
to
present
her
designs,
440
seiki
madre
unit,
one
is
a
3
000
square
foot,
building
designed
by
katherine
stinson
otero
in
the
plaza
chamisol
compound
office
asakiya.
R
R
R
A
R
Officially
per
the
discussion
yeah
earlier,
it
is
in
historic
documents,
but
not
per
our
code
as
it
stands.
I
don't
I
don't
know
for
sure
if
there
are
but
likely
that
there
are
guest
houses
within
the
residential
structures.
R
The
compound
has
a
history
of
many
of
the
homes
were
built
after
stinson
otero
built
a
two
story
and
lived
there
with
her
husband,
the
the
rest
were
built,
and
they
were
rental
units,
that's
just
a
little
factoid,
but
there's
we.
I
don't
know
about
whether
what
proportion
our
guest
house
guest
is
in
that
compound.
C
B
T
Well,
I
did
a
book
back
in
2003
about
this
property.
I
was
just
asking
my
clients
if
there
were
guest
houses
cheerios
and
they
are,
there
are
other
properties
in
this
pro
in
the
compound
that
have
guest
houses.
T
So
let.
K
T
T
Main
house
is
under
renovation
and
you've
approved,
and
then
there's
been
some
admin
approvals.
We
are
taking
out
the
carport
eventually.
T
In
the
meantime,
my
clients
who
are
here
also
want
to
have
more
casita,
even
though
we're
calling
it
a
casita.
This
is
actually
two
different
units
of
the
compound,
so
it
was
when
the
compound
was
created
in
2003-ish.
T
This
was
a
separate
lot
essentially,
even
though
the
owners
the
their
matching
owner
the
same
owners
when
we
began
designing
this,
we
wanted
to
to
have
a
carport
and
then
a
couple
of
bedrooms
and
so
forth,
but
also
we
wanted
to
really
fit
in
with
the
streetscape
and
the
compound
itself.
T
So
I'm
showing
these
pictures
right
now,
because
the
sidewalk
at
a
seiko
madre-
and
I
also
have
a
photograph
of
it
just
to
give
you
a
hint
of
the
layering
that
we
were
trying
to
do.
That
is
also
in
the
streetscape
on
the
other
side,
the
compound,
the
way
that
the
walls
undulate
with
trees
and
the
massing
of
the
buildings
behind,
and
so
that's
really
where
we're
headed
with
this
design.
T
The
story
polls
that
I
know
you've
seen
and
angela
talk
to
me
a
little
bit
about
it.
We
can
move
and
we
would
like
to
move
the
casita
closer
to
the
street,
so
it's
further
away
from
the
main
house,
so
it
will
impact
the
main
house
less
and
then
the
in
terms
of
the
heights.
I
think
that
once
we
move
it
away,
then
the
six
inches
that
we
are
lower
of
the
main
house
will
be
apparent.
T
K
T
K
T
The
floor
plan,
so
you
can
see
where
the
the
carport
is
the
ramada.
This
will
be
the
portal.
These
two
are
ramadas
and
then
the
entrance
into
the
living
space
and
the
two
bedrooms.
On
your
side,
we
added
a
fireplace
again
for
the
messing
to
evoke
the
massing
of
the
main
house.
T
We
also
have
some
outdoor
storage
and
then
we
are
planning
on.
You
can
see
somewhat
on
this
plan
that
there
is
a
gate
coming
from
the
carport.
So
at
this
point,
you'll
come
in
and
you'll
turn
into
the
carport
and
there's
parking
here
and
then
guests,
and
then
other
people
will
walk
through
this
gate,
which
is
on
axis
with
a
wall
fireplace
sitting
area
that
is
in
front
of
the
main
house
garage
kitchen.
T
D
T
T
So
I've
addressed
the
setbacks
and
we
would
like
to
move
the
further
away
from
the
main
house,
the
heights
of
the
yard
walls.
At
this
current
yard
walls
at
the
street
are
between
five
and
six
feet
at
the
corner.
It's
at
five,
the
existing
yard
walls
in
front
of
the
house
are
42
to
48
inches,
as
well
as
the
ones
across
the
driveway,
and
we
will
emulate
those
walls
also
in
what
we're
doing
the
gates
will
be
similar
to
the
main
house
and
then,
as
angela,
had
recommended
in
her
staff
report.
T
That
there'd
be
a
four
inch
separation
between
the
wall,
the
existing
wall
and
the
new.
I'm
not
exactly
sure
how
we'll
build
that,
but
I
would
ask
the
board
if
we
could
attach
him
with
a
different
height
or
some,
maybe
a
indentation
of
some
kind.
So
we
do
demark,
the
old
and
the
new,
but
we
still
have
an
enclosure.
T
R
Thank
you.
I
just
wanted
to
jump
back
in
and
read
my
recommendation,
which
is
that
I
approve,
I
believe
the
project
is
consistent
with
it
complies
with
the
downtown
and
east
side
historic
district
standards,
as
well
as
the
general
design
standards
for
all
the
historic
districts,
and
so
I
recommend
approval
with
the
condition
that
the
new
yard
wall
is
at
least
four
inches
separated
from
the
existing
original
historic
yard
wall
of
the
main
house.
E
Just
a
quick
question
for
gayla,
where,
where
is
this
four
inch
gap
being
proposed
or
not
a
gap.
T
Here
maybe
I
can
stay
right
here,
so
it's
right
here,
so
let
me
go
in.
T
This
is
the
existing
wall
and
it
comes
around
and
hooks
into
the
west
or
actually
the
north
facade,
and
so
we
would
make
a
space
or
an
indentation
of
some
kind
to
be
able
to
continue
the
wall,
basically
at
the
same
height
around.
K
E
Just
note
to
the
board,
you
know:
we've,
I
think
we
we
downgraded
a
building
tonight
because
of
a
kind
of
similar
discussion
about
this.
You
know
semantics
of
not
touching
a
a
contributing
structure
or
significance
or
a
primary
facade.
E
You
know,
I
I
think
that's
a
it's
a
silly
thing
I
mean
in
essence
the
wall
is
intending
to
come
up
and
meet
the
building.
You
know,
for
all
intents
and
purposes
it
does.
I
think
we
should
defer
to
practicality
and
and
and
provide
latitude.
So
in
this
case
you
know,
four
inch
gap
is
not
feasible
either,
for
you
know,
pets
or
whatever,
then.
E
Treatment
could
be
could
be
pursued
such
as
a
recess
or
reveal
that
still
allows
a
structural
attachment
that
is
reversible
because
it's
a
wall,
it's
a
yard
wall
and
not
a
building
and
then
and
but
that
pursues
the
intent
of
separating
old
from
new.
That
seems
to
be
a
reasonable
accommodation
and
perhaps
more.
T
The
west,
it's.
I
T
I'm
just
trying
to
think
if
I
have
a
picture
somewhere
that
that
has
a
courtyard
in
the
front
and
then
it
sort
of
steps
around
to
the
street
it.
I
think
it
also
has
the
walls
similar
to
this
house.
So
I
guess
in
my
opinion,
it
would
be
of
the
language
of
that
house.
A
M
A
Agree.
Okay,
thank
you.
Also,
you
indicated
you
were
wanting
to
move
in
order
to
save
the
trees,
to
move
the
house
closer
to
the
wall,
how
much
we're
gonna
move
it
by
how
much.
T
Five
feet
right
now:
it's
twelve
feet
from
the
property
line.
We're
allowed
up
to
seven
or
minimum
setback
is
seven,
so
we
would
do
we
would
move
it
five
feet
towards
the
wall.
T
We're
not
saving
those
trees,
however
they're
in
not
good
shape,
so
we'll
be
doing
a
different
landscape
plan
that
will
not
will
be
more
in
keeping
actually
with.
What's
on
the
other
side,
on
the
west
side
of
the
compound,
which
is
more
fruit,
trees
and
perennials
that
are
indicative
or
have
more
to
do
with
the
open
space
that
it's
defining
these
street
trees.
T
Ironically
in
the
1990s,
when
they
did
the
hickby,
somebody
had
already
cut
down
similar
trees,
and
it's
so
and
then
here
they
they
planted
them
back,
and
so
I
think
the
street
tree
concept
in
this
location
is
actually
not
a
historic
east
side
concept
for
landscape.
A
Anyone
from
the
public
wishing
to
speak
with
a
resume
or
in
person
it
appears
not.
I
will
entertain
a
motion
or
I.
F
Have
a
comment
or
a
concern,
I
I
think
there
was
a
bit
of
feeling
when
we
were
out
there
at
the
scene
that
this
was
a
fairly
large
building
right,
close
to
seiki
madre
and
I'm
a
little
concerned
about
moving
it
even
closer
to
a
psychiatric.
A
To
the
other
building
I
was
having
that
sense
of.
I
F
T
The
matuchi
gallery
across
the
street
from
mistake
is
25
feet
tall
and
it's
right
on.
I
mean
there's
a
little
bit
of
a
sort
of
a
gravel
strip
there
that
sometimes
I
think
I
should
park
in.
But
it's
you
know
it's
right
there.
Also
all
of
the
walls
along
essequia
on
both
sides
are
more
than
I
think
we
measured.
One
of
them
today
was
12
feet.
So
there's
a
lot
of
close
in
buildings
along
essekia
and
also
along
paseo.
A
Any
other
feelings
remember:
guitar,.
K
E
E
I
think
the
the
impulse
to
kind
of
separate
this
from
from
the
the
main
house
is
a
good
one,
rather
than
have
not
only
for
its
kind
of
separation
from
historic
building,
but
rather
than
have
like
two
narrow
alleys.
Let's
have
one
really
good
communal
space
between
the
two
buildings.
That
seems
to
be
a.
M
E
T
This
is
a
view
of
the
the
walls
of
the
compound
going
west,
so
you
can
see
the
closeness
of
the
buildings
and
the
to
the
walls
and
the
undulations
of
the
wall
in
the
in
the
landscaping.
G
Since
you're
asking
for
comment,
thank
you,
madam
chair,
I
yeah
I
mean
in
an
ideal
world
that
would
remain
vacant
land
and
you'd
have
some
nice
space.
You
certainly
want
wouldn't
want
it
to
be
as
tall
as
the
netuchi
building,
because
you'd
have
a
very
narrow
passageway
without
any
light
coming
in.
G
If
that
were
the
case,
but
it's
not
it's
well
within
it's
within
the
height
limitations
and
I
think,
having
some
separation
and
some
breathing
room
between
this
and
the
main
house,
because
it's
important
and
I
think
that's
what
will
be
visually
most
apparent
as
much
as
walking
along
the
sidewalk
next
to
the
wall
is
looking
in
through
the
entryway
into
plaza,
chamisal
and
then
you'll
see
a
nice
separation.
So
I
think
it's
fine.
A
I
believe,
if
I
did,
I
will
entertain
a
motion.
E
475
hdrb,
440,
sequel,
madre.
I
move
to
the
board
approve.
The
application
has
submitted
green
with
staff's
determination
that
this
meets
district
standards
and
I'll
note
two
things
that
that
the
board
is
is
supportive
of
the.
K
E
Relocation
of
the
building
closer
to
the
sakia
madre
within
the
required
setbacks.
Of
course,
and
we'll
note
also
that
the
intersection
of
the
new
proposed
yard
wall
with
the
existing
contributing
structure
and
building
can
be
articulated
as
a
4-inch
gap
or
as
a
4-inch
reveal
or
some
other
detail
that
differentiates
new
from
old.
A
K
G
Beat
it
again
that
I
do
think
it
would
be
useful
to
to
be
able
to
activate
that
historic
compound
section
of
the.
G
Remember
cats
pointed
out
it's
inactive
right
now
because
there's
no
approved
registry,
but
it
seems
that
it's,
the
land
use
department's
initial
obligation
to
set
that
in
motion,
and
I
don't
mean
at
all
to
put
any
extra
burden
on
anybody.
So
much
is
just
to
say
it
would
be
nice
to
to
start
that
process
at
some
point
whenever
it's
something
that
land
use
feels
that
they
can
take
over
sure.
D
Sharia's,
the
member
being
banana,
I
I
appreciate
that
and
I
think
it's
more
maybe.
C
Day
for
a
while,
heather's
made
me
very
aware
that
there's
been
some
efforts
that
have
happened
in
the
past.
D
D
On
that
note,
I'll
just
throw
out
there
that
I
think
one
big
effort
is
we
want
to
make
sure
that
hcpis
go
public
sometime
this
year
as
well
and
get
some
of
those
into
public.
Some
of
this
information
republican.
L
L
K
L
I
can
strategize
about
that
one,
but
I
think
that's
going
to
be
a
much
greater
opportunity
and
we
are
about
to
sign
a
contract
with
the
consultants,
so
hopefully
they'll
be
launching
here
in
the
next
month
or
so.
A
Anything
else
our
next
meeting
is
tuesday
august.
The
9th
we'll
see
you
all
then,
and
I
will
entertain
a
motion
to
adjourn.