►
From YouTube: H-Board Meeting 11/8/22
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
in
case
you're
wondering
you
are
at
a
meeting
at
the
historic
District's
review
board
and
I
am
calling
this
meeting
to
order
and
we
are
Tuesday
November,
the
8th,
2022
Melissa
roll
call.
Please
chair,
Rios.
B
C
B
D
Thank
you,
madam
chair.
We
have
one
item.
Number
four
under
old
business
will
be
postponed
to
the
first
Hearing
in
December.
D
G
A
Emotion
has
been
approved.
Thank
you
very
much.
We
have
minutes
of
October
the
25th
2022
or
any
changes
to
any
news.
I
have
a
couple
here
and
I'll
go
quickly.
On
page
eight
paragraph
three
second
sentence
should
read:
she
asked
Miss
Wagner
to
comment
on
the
elevator
page.
Eight
paragraph
eight
correct
the
word
Aguilar.
It
was
misspelled
page
16,
paragraph
six
terrios
asked
if
she
felt
the
doors
were
not
in
keeping
with
insert
the
word.
H
A
And
then
finish
the
sentence
page
16
second
to
last
paragraph,
starting
with
chair
Rios
and
make
openings.
Plural
openings
was
proposed.
What
were
the
openings
that
were
were
proposed?
I
guess
and
that's
it
for
me
and
if
there
are
no
other
changes,
I
will
entertain
a
motion
to
adopt
these
minutes
as
just
amended.
B
E
Moves
to
approve
the
findings.
E
J
Cheerios
members
of
the
board-
you
all
know
me,
but
for
the
record,
I'm
Adam,
Johnson
executive
director
of
the
Old
Santa
Fe,
Association
and
I
just
have
a
few
brief
comments
and
questions
about
the
process
that
the
New
Mexico
School
for
the
Arts
dorm
must
follow
you.
The
H
board
gave
a
list
of
concerns
and
recommendations
for
the
nmsa
dorm
project.
J
We
believe
that
the
school
will
be
sending
responses
to
board
members
concerns
and
then
send
those
along
to
osfa
my
organization
as
well
we're
very
keen
to
look
over
the
changes
based
on
your
recommendations
and
we're
wondering
when
we
can
expect
to
see
them.
This
is
our
understanding,
State,
State,
Statute
and
city
ordinance
calls
for
collaboration
and
consultation
to
review,
nmsa's
responses
and
resolve
any
remaining
differences,
so
nmsa
and
the
H
board
negotiate
and
if
nmsa
returns
with
all
questions
answered,
then
the
project
goes
forward.
J
If
it
does
not
answer
concerns
and
recommendations,
then
the
H
board
will
ask
the
governing
body
to
send
the
project
to
a
state
and
local
H
board
appointed
by
city
and
state
Personnel.
Do
I
have
that
right
and,
if
not,
can
staff
clarify
osva
hopes
that
the
consultation
and
collaboration
will
genuinely
occur
between
all
interested
parties?
Some
of
my
board
members
gave
feedback
to
nmsa,
as
well
as
staff
and
I.
Believe.
Nmsa
also
intends
to
write
a
response
to
our
suggestions.
We
hope
this
response
process
will
not
be
delayed.
J
We
see
that
nmsa
has
already
started
some
form
of
construction
in
the
old
borders
parking
lot
off,
Market
Street,
several
large
trees
have
been
removed.
It
appears
we're
we're
not
trying
to
delay
the
dormitory.
Everyone
agrees
that
the
school
should
have
one,
but
osva
is
always
looking
for
transparency
in
such
processes,
since
this
area
does
lay
within
the
historic
districts.
A
Thank
you,
Adam
and
also
osva
as
you're
the
representative,
the
CEO
yes
Heather
and
Heather,
while
you're
addressing
his
comments.
Would
you
quickly
also
address
the
60-day
period
when
that
starts,
and
also
the
five-day
period
in
reference
to
capital
outlay
projects.
G
A
G
G
You
I've
had
extension
extensive
discussions
with
City
attorney
Aaron
mcsherry
about
this,
as
well
as
with
Ms
picarella,
the
historic
preservation
director
pursuant
to
section
14-5.2
M,
that
60-day
consolidation
period,
which
ended,
which
started
on
September
27th
well
actually
and
on
a
Saturday
which
is
November
26th.
G
Now,
of
course,
the
city
is
has
vacation
days
on
the
24th
and
25th
and
under
a
rule
of
statutory
construction.
If
a
deadline
ends
on
a
Saturday
or
a
legal
holiday,
then
the
deadline
is
extended
to
the
following
working
day,
which
would
be
the
Monday
I
believe
that
would
be
November
28th.
G
Tuesday,
that's
the
next
H
board
meeting
and
at
that
time
the
H
board
will
have
to
decide
whether
to
recommend
to
the
governing
body
of
the
city,
whether
or
not
it
should
invoke
The
Joint,
State,
local
historic
district
review
board
and
the
last
opportunity
the
city
will
have
to
do.
That
is
on
the
last
Wednesday
of
November,
which
is
a
November
30th.
G
So
the
historic
district
review
board
should
plan
on
November
22nd
deciding
whether
or
not
there
is
an
agreement
between
the
hdrb
and
the
nmsa.
As
to
the.
H
G
H
G
H
H
G
Subsection
f:
according
to
City
attorney
Aaron
mcsherry,
the
governing
body
has
the
discretion
whether
to
accept
or
reject
the
hdrb's
recommendation,
but
nonetheless
the
notice
to
the
city
I'm.
Sorry,
the
notice
to
the
state
has
to
come
from
the
governing
body
after
the
governing
body
votes
too,
except
the
recommendation
of
the
hdrp.
H
H
G
But
nonetheless,
that
is
what
we're
looking
at
additionally
on
November
22nd.
If
the
age
board
decides
not
to
accept
the
design
standards
or
the
designs
that
are
submitted
by
the
agents
for
the
New
Mexico
School
for
the
Arts
for
the
proposed
dormitory,
the
H
board
has
one
or
two
appointments
to
make
to
that
state:
local
governing
body
Review
Committee
and
since
that
is
the
last
H
board
meeting
you
will
have
within
that
60-day
consultation
period.
You
should
also
consider
on
November
22nd.
K
G
The
hdrb
will
recommend
and
I
re
and
we
need
to
figure
out
whether
you
have
one
or
two
I
looked
at
it
and
I
thought.
I
saw
one
Aaron
mcsherry
looked
at
it
and
thought
she
saw
two
so
I
would
recommend
on
November
22nd
you'd
be
prepared
to
vote
a
primary
nominee
and
a
secondary
nominee,
because
there
will
not
be
another
hdrb
meeting
until
December
13th,
which
is
after
the
five-day
period
that
the
state
of
New
Mexico
has
to
nominate.
The
members
of
that
board
does.
C
G
Answer
your
question,
sir,
and.
H
J
Thanks
Frank,
yes,
that
that
does
answer
most
of
my
questions.
Thank
you.
A
Frank.
Thank
you
very
much
for
that.
I
do
have
to
ask
a
quick
question
other
than
the
two
members
of
this
board
that
will
be
appointed
to
the
state
board.
Who
are
the
other
members
that
comprise
that
board.
G
M
M
A
Thank
you
Heather
and
I
will
say
your
public
comments
are
limited
to
two
minutes
and
Heather.
Will
you
help
me
with
that?
Thank
you.
E
A
You
can,
let
us
know
in
a
little
while
anything
under
staff,
Communications.
D
I
believe
we
have
one
announcement.
Thank
you,
madam
chair,
from
assistant
director
lamboy
exceptions,.
M
Certainly
go
ahead
and
take
it
all
right.
Another
item
of
direction
that
we
received
from
the
city
attorney's
office
was
that
we've
done
some
research
and,
with
reference
to
exceptions
related
to
design
those
exceptions
are
actually
going
to
have
to
be
recommendations
to
the
governing
body.
So
I
looked
back
to
the
1957
ordinance
and
that
was
in
place
then.
M
So
over
the
years
the
hdrb
has
gotten
into
the
practice
of
granting
exceptions
being
the
final
Authority
and
with
doing
some
research,
it's
not
completely
clear
that
the
governing
body
gives
or
delegates
that
Authority
completely
to
the
age
board.
I.
M
Imagine
it
was
set
up
that
way
to
discourage
exceptions
and
to
encourage
people
to
work
within
the
confines
of
the
you
know
ordinance,
but,
and
so
as
we
are
in
this
place
now,
I'm
informing
you
all
that
those
exceptions
that
you're
hearing
tonight
will
be
a
recommendation
instead
of
a
final
action
and
then
it
will
have
to
be
scheduled
for
the
governing
body
I'm
going
to
be
working
with
the
city
attorney's
office
as
to
how
that
would
look
for
governing
body.
M
A
To
repeat
all
any
case
that
comes
before
us,
that
has
exceptions,
those
will
be
recommendations
from
the
board
to
the
city
council.
Is
that
correct
that.
M
D
I'm
going
to
provide
a
little
clarification,
sorry
yeah,
it's
it's
specifically
14-5.2
d
d,
as
in
dog,
one
through
eight
and
ten
and
eleven
and
then
14-5.2
e
through
I.
So
this
would
not
impact
item.
D
M
G
Government
historic
review
board
and
I'm
looking
at
New
Mexico
statute,
3-22-6
subsection
g,
a
local
government
historic
review
board
shall
be
formed
consisting
of
eight
members
as
follows:
one
member
appointed
by
the
capitol
building's
Planning
Commission,
who
shall
chair
the
board
and
he
shall
vote
only
if
there's
a
tie
among
the
other
board
members
present
to
one
member
appointed
by
the
cultural
properties,
Review
Committee,
three,
the
state,
historic
preservation
officer
or
a
designee
of
the
officer
d,
one
member
appointed
by
the
agency
or
other
entity
that
reviews
projects
within
the
area
zoned
as
a
historic
district
or
Landmark,
provided
that
if
the
municipality,
our
county.
H
G
We
do
have
that
agency.
That's
the
sport
for
three
public
members
who
have
demonstrated
interest
in
historic
preservation.
Let's
say
I
guess
this
would
be
five
three
public
members
who
have
demonstrated
interest
in
historic
preservation
appointed
as
follows:
one
member
appointed
by
the
Secretary
of
General
Services,
one
member
appointed
by
the
governing
body
of
the
municipality
or
County
one
public
member
appointed
by
the
other
two
public
members.
A
E
Question
for
staff
Heather
there's
nothing
I
like
more
than
talking
about
legal
minutia
on
this
board,
but
what
exactly
prompted
the
city
attorney's
office
to
reverse
Decades
of
precedent
and
decide
that
they
would
reverse,
or
at
least
take
away.
Authority
from
the
sport
is.
C
G
Was
extensive
review
with
respect
to
the
appeal
on
I
believe
that
addresses
57
Old
Santa.
G
In
front
of
that
building,
or
you
know
mounted
to
the
building,
we
went
through
some
old
materials
that
were
formulated
between
former
assistant,
City
attorney,
Sally
pies
and
the
previous
land
use
director
and
as
well
I
believe
his
name
was
Aaronson
and
as
well
as
previous
historic
preservation,
director
Lisa
Roach,
and
we
realized
that
there
was
an
ambiguity
as
to
whether
or
not
signs
had
to
go
before
or
District
review
board.
G
Or
was
a
representative
of
the
age
board
as
an
informational
item
and
upon
reviewing
subsection
c5b,
it
does
read
the
board.
May
recommend
exceptions
to
the
various
sections.
C
G
Flamboy
just
read
to
you
or
the
construction
or
alterations
within
the
historic
district.
The
recommendation
for
exception
shall
be
made
to
the.
C
G
E
Understood
it's
a
big
change
and
not
one
that
I
agree
with.
Thank
you,
madam
chair.
E
M
With
reference
to
the
concern
that
commissioner
I'm
sorry
board,
member
Guida
brings
up,
you
staff
acknowledges
that
concern,
and
we
feel
that
this
is
something
that
should
be
addressed
quickly
and
not
wait
for
any
zoning
code
update
or
anything.
We
should
be.
M
What
has
been
the
practice
and
what
is
the
expected
from
our
you
know,
Community
as
well,
so
we
will
be
immediately
starting
on
a
text
amendment
to
address
this
concern.
Great.
E
M
Cheerios
that's
correct.
Actually,
when
Mary
gracekoviak
and
I
were
working
on
that
Mary
Reagan's
back
in
the
late
1990s,
we
wanted
to
make
it
clear
that
the
board
that
there
was
no
additional
sort
of
thought
about
the
rest
of
the
code,
but
for
the
hide
ordinance.
When
we
were
inserting
that
ordinance.
A
Thank
you,
heather.
We
are
going
to
move
on
to
Old
business
this
evening.
I
would
like
to
ask
for
the
cooperation
of
all
participants
that
includes
board
members,
City
staff.
Anybody
that's
going
to
speak
this
evening.
We
do
have
11
cases
and
I'm
sure
we
all
want
to
get
home
to
find
out
who
won
or
lost.
A
If
you
disagree
with
the
decision
that
this
board
makes
this
evening,
you
do
have
the
option
to
appeal
to
the
city
council.
The
staff
can
help
you
in
reference
to
the
time
constraints.
You
would
have
15
days
after
the
findings
and
conclusions
have
been
adopted
and
approved
so
moving
on
Madam
sure,
yes,
Carly.
D
Would
would
you,
like
me,
I,
heard
two
minutes
for
public
comment?
Would
you
like
me
to
time
tonight.
A
Yes,
if
you
want
to
do
it,
I
had
asked
Heather,
but
if
you
will
do
it
for
me,
that
would
be
wonderful
and
the
first
case
this
evening
is
located
at
127
and
127
and
a
half
east
of
Argus
Street,
and
that
is
Angela's
case
Angela.
Would
you
give
us
the
info
you
have
on
this
case.
Q
Yes,
chair
good
evening,
everyone
this
case
before
you
127
and
127,
and
a
half
east
of
Vargas
Street
you've
seen
this
a
few
times
before.
One
was
for
a
historic
status
and
primaries.
One
was
for
the
construction
of
a
detached
storage
unit
and
the
applicant
returns
to
the
board
for
a
remodel
of
the
studio,
which
is
a
contributing
structure.
This
is
the
aerial.
This
is
located
along
the
river,
and
these
are
the
photographs
of
the
subject
site.
Q
These
are
pictures
of
the
storage
unit
itself
or
it's
a
building.
The
primary
facade
of
the
storage
studio
is
the
West
elevation
and
it
has
an
existing
portal.
The
portal
is,
a
new
portal
is
proposed
for
the
north
elevation,
so
this
is
a
site
plan.
Q
I'm
gonna,
let
I'm
just
going
to
list
summarize
the
changes
to
the
to
this
structure
that
are
proposed
in
addition
to
a
portal
there's
Window
and
Door
alterations
as
I
said
and
there'll
be
some
refurbishments,
some
restoration
of
wood,
an
additional
some
rooftop
equipment
and
some
ground
mounted
heating
and
air
conditioning
equipment
known
as
mini
splits
in
the
business.
As
I've
learned,
one
of
the
windows
calls
for
a
stained
glass.
It's
a
decorative
stained
glass
window
that
is
30,
says
32
inches
by
42
inches.
Q
I
think
that's
summary
of
the
project
and
our
applicants
here
to
talk
about
it.
Staff
recommends
approval,
with
the
condition
that
the
proposed
primary
excuse
me.
The
proposed
portal
on
the
North
elevation
be
set
back
at
least
10
feet
from
the
West
primary
facade
for
Section
14-5.2
D
to
Little
D,
regarding
the
proximity
of
additions
to
primary
facades
and
with
respect
to
the
stained
glass
window
that
it
comply
with
30
inch
rule
in
I
recommend
approval,
otherwise
everything's.
It
meets
all
standards.
Q
A
B
P
I'm
glad
I'm
not
asking
for
an
exception,
I
think
the
the
change
that
the
portal
is
fine
with
my
client,
my
assumption
was
not
a
good
one.
Was
that
the
10
feet
since
the
primary
facade
included
the
portal,
the
10
feet
from
the
front
included
10
feet
from
the
portal,
but
apparently
it's
from
the
primary
facade,
so
that
change
is
perfectly
acceptable.
We'll
resubmit
those
drawings
I
have
nothing
else
to
say
about
them.
I
A
A
Well,
here's
a
second
thank
you
Laura
Madrona
seconds
anything
further.
There's.
B
A
Thank
you,
Mr
Zinn
next
case
is
located
at
1204.
Canyon
Road
is
that
applicant
here
the
applicant
is
here,
and
this
is
also
Angela's
case
Angela.
Please
tell
us
about
this
case.
Q
Yes,
this
is
another
property
in-house
you're
familiar
with
some
of
you
on
the
board.
The
applicants
return
this
evening
to
describe
the
changes
that
were
made
to
a
previously
approved
case
already
in
the
field
and
their
responses
to
requests
or
exceptions
or
their
requests
for
exceptions
to
some
of
the
rules.
I
will
walk
you
through
quickly,
those
elevations
where
changes
have
been
made
and
then
briefly
describe
the
changes
and
then
turn
it
over
to
our
applicant
and
owner
for
additional
clarification
or
questions
you
have.
Q
So
this
is
the
house
facing
Canyon
Road
and
that's
from
coming
down
the
road
coming
down
to
Canyon
Road
on
Chris
Blanca.
Q
So
this
is
the
floor
plan
of
the
existing
home
as
approved,
and
the
garage
was
approved
where
the
red
circle
is
at
the
upper
left
corner
and
due
to
building
conditions.
The
applicant
did
not
build
the
garage
in
that
location
and
has
is
proposing
to
build
it
on
the
excuse
me.
This
Southeast
corner
and
I'll
show
that
as
well.
So
that's
one
change.
Q
This
is
where
the
garage
is
proposed
to
be
built
now
in
the
yellow
Square.
It's
a
two
Bay
garage
attached
to
the
house
on
the
west
elevation,
and
this
is
looking
at
the
front
of
the
house
from
Canyon
Road,
the
north
elevation.
Q
Q
And
on
the
south
elevation
the
as
you
from
up
up
above,
it's
all
dotted
because
now
that
new
garage
is
proposed
to
be
at
the
at
the
West
End
of
the
South
elevation,
the
portals
size
was
changed
a
little
bit
and
you
can
see
the
configuration
of
Windows
is
a
little
different,
also
on
that
East
End
of
the
South
elevation
on
the
East
Elevation,
which
it
was
approved
in
the
case
up
elevation
above
for
those
two
windows
on
the
North
End.
Q
They
have
installed
three
Windows
below
one
of
well.
They
exceed
30
Dimension
inches
in
dimension
without
divided
light,
and
the
for
this
North
window
is
less
than
three
feet
from
that
outside
corner.
Q
And
the
west
elevation,
which
is
really
the
new
entrance
to
the
house,
it's
reoriented
to
enter
the
house,
that's
the
up
above.
It
shows
that
garage,
that's
a
proposed
not
built,
but
the
front
door
and
the
portal
and
the
window
configuration
below
is
as
built,
and
so
it
shows
no
garage
and
the
window.
Excuse
me.
The
portal
first
was
shifted
towards
the
north
as
well
as
the
window
that
was
previously
outside
the
portal
is
now
under
the
portal.
Is
that
right?
Yes,
so
those
are
I'm.
Q
Summing
up
those
changes
in
general,
we've
worked
together
a
long
time
to
capture
all
the
changes
and
make
sure
the
drawings
were
all
all
correct
and
that
the
applicants
have
addressed
some
of
the
criteria
for
exceptions
that
they're
their
construction.
Q
Obviated
or
the
need
for
they
have
also
in
their
application,
proposed
Solutions
to
each
of
these
three
exceptions
and
that's
in
your
packet
and
staff
reviewed
the
acceptance
criteria
and
responded
both
in
in
agreement
that
they've
met
criteria
and
some
not-
and
it
is
up
to
the
board,
to
to
weigh
that
and
I
think
it's
everybody's
goal
here
tonight
to
find
find
a
way
to
get
this
project
back
under
construction
and
finished,
but
that
that
remains
to
be
seen
based
on
questions
you
all
have,
but
I
recommended
approval
of
this
project
now,
as
submitted
so
see.
Q
If
there's
I
can
show
you
more
pictures
of
the
house
itself,
maybe
or
for
better
reference.
This
is
the
the
north
east
corner.
That's
now
the
front
door
portal
that
you
see
there
and
there's
no
violations
in
that
photograph.
This
is
again
the
reconfigured
west
elevation,
which
is
the
front
now
the
entrance
and
that
portal
changed
shifted,
there's
no
garage
and
the
window
is
I,
guess
outside
the
portal.
Now
this
is
the
the
South,
the
Southwest
elevation
portal,
and
this
is
also
the
South
Side
the
other
portal.
Q
These.
This
doesn't
capture
all
three
of
the
windows,
but
this
is
the
East
Elevation,
where
the
in
the
foreground,
those
two
windows
exceed
38
inches
in
the
diagonal,
without
being
divided
lights,
they
have
installed
stained
glass
and
they
are
are
proposing
that
they
will
put
in
some
kind
of
a
grid
to
make
that
divided
light
and
staff
doesn't
agree
with
that
solution.
Q
Just
in
and
that's
the
one
exception
that
this
I
I
don't
think
meets
the
spirit
of
the
code.
The
third
window
to
the
would
be
to
the
right
is
closer
than
three
feet
to
the
corner
and
they
they
have
offered
to
move
that
so
that
it
meets
the
standard.
Q
These
are
those
windows.
This
is
a
full
set
of
the
three
windows
that
were
approved
originally
for
two
divided
light
and
meeting
the
three
four
three
feet
from
the
corner
rule,
and
this
is
the
north
side.
The
original
entrance
the
portal
there
that
that
that
window
is
installed
closer
than
three
feet
to
that
corner,
as
you
can
see
and
they're
proposing
to
increase
the
size
of
that
wall
and
and
sort
of
narrow
the
portal
right
there,
so
that
it
meets
the
letter
of
the
code
and
that's
it.
For
that
case.
A
Thank
you,
Angela
clarification.
Is
there
just
one
window
that
is
not
three
feet
from
a
corner?
Is
it
or
is
it.
Q
More
than
one
there's
two,
the
one
on
the
East
Elevation
and
then
that
one
on
the
North
elevation
by
the
portal
that
I
just
showed
you
in
the
photograph.
Maybe
the
photos
are
the
best.
A
And
in
reference
to
the
stained
glass
windows,
what
is
the
public
visibility
of
those.
Q
Those
that
is
the
East
Elevation
northeast
corner
and
it
is
publicly
visible
from
Canyon
Road.
This
sets
up
high
from
Canyon.
So
when
you
look
up,
you
can
see
the
building
at
the
top
at
the
top.
Let's
see,
if
I
have
it
there.
Q
I
You,
madam
chair,
so
Angela
I'm,
just
a
bit
confused.
You
said
you
are
recommending
approval,
but
the
staff
report
says
that
staff
does
not
find
that
the
exception
criteria
have
been
met.
So
are
you
saying
that
you
recommend
approval
with
them
making
changes
in
order
to
comply
with
the
code?
That's.
I
Q
Are
they're
definitely
seeking
exceptions
to
all
three
of
those
things
and,
as
far
as
legally,
how
that
goes
here,
I
think
we
can.
I
Q
You
for
that
clarification,
I
know
it
sounds
fuzzy.
Yes,
the
answer
is
that
they
are
willing
to
remedy
two
or
three
of
those
exceptions
and
they,
but
one
of
them
does
not
meet
the
criteria,
and
so
that
exception
needs
to
be
considered
here
and
that's
the
one
for
the
stained
glass
windows.
C
Q
Q
I
One
thing:
that's
not
it
so.
I
One
thing
that
I
think
is
very
striking
about
the
way
this
house
was
built.
Is
that
change
on
the
North
facade?
I
You
know
it
really,
in
my
opinion,
detracts
from
the
original
design,
particularly
that
center
part
of
the
facade
where
they've
made
this
highly
symmetrical
very
flat
facade
facing
Canyon
Road
and
one
of
the
things
that
particularly
exaggerates.
That
effect
is
the
fact
that
the
windows
seem
to
have
very
little
if
any
reveals,
and
if
I
can
read
that
correctly.
I
I
think
that
we
I
recall
that
when
we
approved
this
project,
we
were
very
concerned
that
the
massing
be
demonstrated
throughout
the
building
and
bullnosing
all
the
corners
because
of
its
adjacency
to
the
Crystal
Ray
Church,
and
that
was
agreed
upon
and
I
think
there's
a
notation
on
that,
drawing
that
the
windows
were
required
to
be
set
back
as
far
as
possible.
Is
that
correct
correct?
Did
they
do
that.
Q
I
believe
that's
what
they're
doing
that's,
but
that's
you
can
ask
the
applicant
about
that.
You.
I
F
Q
Aguilar
thanks
for
the
question
it
was,
it
was
a
board
case,
2019
I,
believe
and
they
began
construct.
It
was
approved
as
approved
in
these
drawings
and
as
shown,
and
it
was
under
construction
in
the
owners,
made
quite
a
bit
of
change
without
getting
approval,
and
then
it
was
caught
in
the
field
as
not
meeting.
You
know
that,
and
so
it
came
back.
I
think
I
visited
it
a
year
ago
and
looked
walked
around
and
looked
at
all
the
different
changes
that
had
been
made
from
what
was
approved.
Q
So
it
took
some
time
to
be
set
together,
got
it,
and
so
that's
that's
what
happened
and
they
you
know,
there's
this
story
about
how
the
garage
wasn't
able
to
be
built
where
it
is
and
things
like
that
during
construction.
Fine,
but
so
that's
bringing
it
to
you
with
the
as
approved
as
built,
and
then
you
know,
specific
requests
for
those
changes
that
have
been
made
that
didn't
follow
the
code.
F
Thank
you
for
that
clarification
and
my
second
question:
could
you
go
back
to
the
existing
photo
of
the
north
elevation
I
just
want
to
make
sure
I
understand
the
proposed.
What
the
remedy
correctly.
F
Yeah
so
I'm
just
so,
are
they
a
proposed?
Is
there
a
proposal
to
bring
that
wall
out
the
full
depth
of
the
per
tall
so
that
the
window
is
three
feet
from
the
corner.
Q
Their
proposal
is
to
bring
that
wall
out,
I
think
a
foot,
a
foot
and
a
half
so
that
it
meets
not
completely
diminish
the
width
of
the
portal.
It.
F
A
Any
further
questions:
it's
not
well
the
applicant
for
applicants.
Please
come
forward
and
gets
forwarded.
B
S
Name
is
Gerald
Valdez
I
live
in
11,
Ranch,
Road,
Cedar,
Crest,
New
Mexico,
and
we're
here
to
find
some
solutions
to
this
problem.
That
kind
of
started
off
with
I
think
the
board
doesn't
really
totally
understand
the
project
and
I.
Don't
know
if
you
guys
remember
it
being
explained
back
a
couple
of
years
ago
and
started
happening,
but
we
had
to
change
the
garage
as
we
were.
Constructing
the
retaining
wall
in
the
back.
S
The
operator
broke
the
sewer
line
because
there's
a
sewer
there
was
an
existing
sewer
line
easement,
so
he
punctured
the
the
line.
So
we
had
to
stop
and
we
found
out
by
running
a
camera
through
there
that
the
sewer
wasn't
going
down
that
direction.
It
was
actually
turning
and
connecting
to
the
sewer
line
at
1204.
S
S
So
the
owners
had
to
get
a
survey
had
to
relocate
the
the
alignment
of
the
sewer,
so
they
they
re-established
the
eight
foot,
sewer,
easement
and
so
that
opened
the
opportunity
for
the
homeowner
to
be
able
to
move
the
garage.
Because
right
there,
we
were
right
on
the
corner
of
the
sewer.
S
That's
right
on
the
corner
there
and
there
was
an
anchor
coming
from
the
top
angling
into
the
ground,
and
so
I
had
a
pnm
go
out
there
and
take
a
look
at
it
and
they
said
that
wasn't
gonna
be
able
to
be
approved
by
them
and
so
because,
even
though
it
looked
it
appeared
to
be
that
it
was.
C
E
E
A
S
Yes,
one
of
the
board
members
mentioned
that
you
know:
why
did
they
have
to
make
these
changes
in?
You
know,
Angela
didn't
go
into
detail
and
you
know
I'm
sorry,
I'm
going
into
detail
and
taking
all
your
time,
but
to
make
a
long
story
short,
it
provided
a
a
better
opportunity
to
get
a
a
better
garage,
so
in
that
the
plans
changed
and
because
I
live
in
Cedar
Crest
and
the
contractors
here-
and
you
know
miscommunication-
and
it's
probably
my
fault.
S
You
know-
and
you
know
I'm,
not
blaming
anybody
else,
but
me
so
we
we
got
an
approval
by
the
city
to
re-establish
that
easement.
Then,
let's
focus
now
on
that
Okay.
So
that
caused
a
lot
of
problems
to
change
and
then
I
guess
at
one
point,
the
homeowner
decided
to
put
these
stained
glass
windows
and
the
contractor
kind
of
spaced
them
out
and
didn't
take
in
to
regard
the
three
foot
setback
from
the
corner
to
the
window.
S
So
we're
willing
to
move
that
first
window
to
the
right,
which
Angela
was
mentioning
it's
only
off
five
inches,
so
we're
willing
to
move
it
five
inches
over.
We
had
originally
proposed
a
curved
pony
wall
and
I.
Don't
know
why
that
wasn't
looked
into
I
was
told
it
wasn't
going
to
be
approved,
and
this
pony
wall
was
going
to
start
at
the
northeast
corner
and
be
a
curved
wall
step
down.
There's
a
lot
of
designs
for
this
wall.
S
It
could
be
stepped
or
it
could
be,
but
high
enough,
so
it
can
obscure
the
windows
on
the
east
side,
and
so
we
are
working
with
another
planner
and
oh,
no,
that's
not
going
to
be
that's
not
going
to.
You
know.
Take
that
out.
Take
that
out.
So
you
know
whatever
so
we're
here.
You
know
trying
to
find
a
solution.
S
S
These
are
non-operable
windows,
they're
fixed
windows,
so
we
could
make
them
look
like
the
grills
that
are
present
and.
A
D
Madam,
chair,
I'm,
sorry
I,
we
can,
we
can
get
into
some
of
excuse
me.
We
can
get
into
some
of
those
other
issues
how
walls
do
not
qualify
as
obscuring
visibility
or
how
applying
grills
onto
Windows
aren't
true,
divided
light,
but
I
think
that
that's
all
work
that
staff
does
behind
the
scenes
to
try
to
get
these
applications
here
and
and
order
to
the
in
order
for
the
project
not
to
be
workshopped
in
this
hearing.
D
So
I
just
want
to
make
sure
that's
stated
before
we
continue
to
go
further
down
this
road.
A
E
This
I
thought
certainly
appreciate
and
can
understand
owners
making
changes
to
a
project
due
to
discoveries
in
the
fields
or
changes
that
that
are
just
occur
as
a
natural
part
of
the
design
process,
challenge
here
and
and
I'm
even
sympathetic
to
the
to
the
idea
that
our
traditional
form
of
architecture
was
very
much
done.
That
way,
and
very
forgiving
in
that
sense
problem
is
that
we
have
a
An
approved
design.
This
board
acts
on
behalf
of
the
public
to
approve
buildings
in
the
historic
districts.
E
Changes
that
have
been
made
to
this
project
that
have
been
executed,
in
my
view,
have
have
ruined
any
of
the
design
Integrity
that
this
board
approved.
I
I
I
agree
that
the
the
the
main
one,
the
main
elevation
of
the
house,
was
much
more
successful
as
proposed
than
as
executed
and
I'm
really
struggling
tonight
with
two
things.
E
One,
the
you
know
that
all
the
Valiant
effort
of
staff
to
make
corrections
to
bring
these
things
into
compliance,
but
I,
don't
see
those
changes
as
being
things
that
actually
improve
the
design
only
that
they
allowed
the
design
to
meet
the
letter
of
the
law
and
not
result
in
a
better
product
in
any
way,
it's
only
more
compliant
I'm
also
really
frustrated
with
the
applicant
in
you
know,
in
the
amount
of
time
that
City
staff
has
had
to
apply
to
this
case
because
of
these
changes
that
were
made
without
board
approval
and
the
amount
of
time
that's
being
given
to
this
case
in
front
of
the
public
tonight,
my
general
recommendation
would
be
to
just
approve
what
has
been
built
exceptions
or
not.
E
A
Other
board
members:
do
you
have
other
comments
or
anything
in
specific
to
to
recommend
or
to
speak
on
in
reference
to
the
project?
Remember
benvenue.
Thank.
I
You,
madam
chair,
well,
I,
would
like
to
just
come
back
to
the
windows
and
get
your
input
on
that,
because
that
was
one
of
the
things
that
was
uppermost
in
the
board's
mind
when
this
came
before
us,
the
last
time
where
the,
where
the
corners
of
the
structure
and
the
reveals
on
the
Windows,
because
we
were
very
concerned
about
this,
having
appropriate
mass
and
because
of
the
incredible
prominence
of
this
location
and
the
changes
that
have
been
made
really
I
mean
that
flat
facade
with
those
very
shallow
reveals
it
just
it.
I
S
Reason
why
the
utility
room
was
right
there,
where
the
original
garage
was
so
they
we
needed
the
utility
room
and
the
fireplace
was
on
that
corner
of
the
utility
room.
So
we
didn't
want
the
fireplace
right
next
door
to
the
utility,
so
I
guess
the
contractor
made
that
decision.
I
I
wasn't
there
and
it's
my
fault
for
not
approaching
the
city
and
before
the
work
was
done.
S
It
was
to
my
surprise,
but,
like
I,
said,
I'm
taking
full
responsibility
for
the
lack
of
communication
and
we're
willing
to
work
with
whatever
you
guys
want
us
to
do,
which
leads
us
to
another
proposal
of
removing
those
windows.
If
that's
a
problem,
it
seems
like
the
stained
glass
is
issue
and
then
the
divided
lights
that
you
code
no
divided
light,
so
we're
willing
to
install
the
divided
lights.
S
But
if
that
still
isn't
going
to
be
approved,
we're
going
to
off
option
A,
don't
work,
we
don't
work,
we're
going
to
option
C
and
that
would
be
removing
those
windows
and
replacing
them
with
windows
that
have
grills
and
that's
probably,
the
least,
option.
That's
desirable
for
the
homeowner,
because
it's
gonna
cause
a
lot
more
time
expense.
This
thing's
been
going
on
for
two
and
a
half
years
already
right
and
so
we're
anxious
to
come
with
right.
Some
solutions.
I
Well,
I
completely
sympathize
with
the
with
the
cost.
Factor,
that's
involved
at
this
point
now
that
it's
been
done,
but
to
some
extent
I
feel
that
we
as
a
board
have
to
over
or
disregard
that
I'm,
not
saying
completely,
of
course,
we're
human.
We
want
to
take
that
into
account.
I
know
that
the
owner
had
no
intention,
I'm
sure
of
violating
probably
didn't
even
realize
they
were
making
changes
to
something.
I
Sure,
but
from
my
perspective,
it's
not
just
the
stained
glass
windows,
I'm
much
more
concerned
about
the
the
massing
of
the
building
or
the
impression
of
mass
in
our
code
specifically
requires
that
it
specifically
requires
in
our
core
historic
district
that
we
that
these
buildings
have
the
appearance
of
depth
and
mass,
and
so
that's
the
reason
for
the
rounded
Corners.
I
That's
the
reason
for
the
the
setbacks
from
the
corners
and
it's
the
reason
for
mandating
the
Deep
reveals
on
the
exterior,
and
we
were
all
pretty
excited
about
the
as
I
recall
about
the
plans
when
they
were
submitted
and
I
know.
I
You
were
I,
recall
you
being
a
very
open
to
all
suggestions
and
wanting
to
make
this
a
real,
a
beautiful
Jewel
on
that
location
and
your
client
wanted
to
as
well,
and
it
was
certainly
a
big
improvement
from
what
was
there
before
so
I'm
just
disappointed
and
wondering
if
we
can
get
back
to
do
something
to
make,
especially
that
facade
that
faces
Canyon
Road,
which
is
so
visible.
Well,
it's
right
up
up
close
to
the
road.
It
stands
up
high
over
the
road
it
faces
the
park
it
faces.
I
Crystal
Ray,
it's
it's
just
an
extremely
prominent
location
and
that
face
has
become
very
problematic
in
my
mind
and
if
we
could
set
those
when
remove
the
Windows
and
set
them
back,
I'd
be
much
happier
and
if
there's
anything
else,
you
could
do
to
recover
some
of
that
massing
on
the
well
side.
I
know
it's
an
expense,
otherwise
it
can
be
done.
Anything
could
be
done
right.
It's.
S
That
versus
building
this
wall
that
I
proposed
actually
I,
didn't
propose
it.
It
was
Angela,
came
up
with
the
idea
of
putting
a
pony
wall
and
there
can
be
a
lot
of
designs
for
that,
but
that
would
provide
mass
that
you're
talking
about,
and
it
would
be
more
of
like
a
garden
wall
or
another
idea
that
the
homeowner
came
up
with
is
a
buttress.
We
could
do
something
like
not
quite
a
wall,
but
something
more
of.
S
A
So
member
of
17
did
you
have
an
idea
of
what
the
reveal
would
be,
how
many
inches
back
well.
S
What
surrounds
it?
By
providing
that
for
the
windows
that
are
on
either
side
of
the
fireplace
facing
Canyon
Road,
we
proposed
and
I'm
not
I'm,
still
a
little
confused
of
what's
proved
and
what
isn't.
S
But
we
had
proposed
the
building
just
another
wall
out,
putting
a
Vega
post
with
another
corbel
and
increasing
that
space
to
meet
the
three
foot
setback
from
the
corner
of
the
not
the
Vega
but
from
the
quarter
of
the
house.
I
Okay,
I
mean,
from
my
perspective
that
I
was
I,
can
see
why
you
probably
have
that
as
such
as
a
suggestion.
I,
don't
think
that
was
very
success.
Successful
I
would
prefer
just
to
leave
that
minimal
difference,
as
is
I'd,
be
much
happier
if
we
could
get
the
windows
set
back,
and
you
know
if
there
was
some
other
way
to
add
something
to
overcome
that
very,
very
flat,
symmetrical
facade.
That
would
be
great,
but
it's
the
windows
I'm
mainly
concerned
about
otherwise
I
think
your
proposal
in
the
garage
and
everything
else
is
perfectly
fine.
F
So
I
was
inclined
to
agree
with
staff
that
the
proposed
amendments
to
violation,
one
in
two
were
agreeable
with
what
the
applicant
had
recommended.
I
was
also
stuck
on
number
three
I.
Don't
want
to
see
a
window
great
over
that
window,
I,
don't
think
that's
the
solution,
so
the
board,
if
we're
stuck
on
violation,
number
three:
have
you
come
up?
What
would
another
solution
be?
Could
that
stained
glass
be
removed
and
cut
down
to
be
30,
inches
or
less.
S
I'm,
not
sure
I'm,
not
sure
if
that's
possible,
it's
it's
a
custom
made
stained
glass
window.
I
haven't
really
gone
up
close
to
to
look
at
it
to
see
how
it
was
constructed.
The
homeowners
present
here.
She
may
have
a
little
bit
more
information
on
that,
but
the
other
proposal
was
just
to
remove
those
windows.
You
know
and
in
the
process
of
removing
all
those
windows
move
that
window
that's
to
the
right
closer
to
the
corner,
five
inches
over,
so
it
meets
the
three
foot
setback.
That's
all
it's
yeah.
S
A
F
No
just
so
just
so,
you
guys
know
where
I
stand.
My
issue
is
violation
number
three,
so
I'd
either
want
to
see
that
window
reduced
in
size
to
be
under
30
inches
or
for
it
to
be
divided.
Light
of
some
sort.
I
agree
with
member
Guida.
That
I,
don't
think
you
know
the
proposals
at
any
design
Integrity.
F
F
If
you
wanted
to
focus
on
the
North
Assad
and
make
some
of
the
improvements
that
member
van
venue
suggested
and
then
maybe
we
could
focus
on
that
and
forget
about
the
other
that
you
know
approve
the
other
exceptions
for
the
other
facades.
But
I
would
want
to
see
the
treatment
on
all
of
the
windows
on
the
North
facade
the
same
with
that
recess,
not
just
the
two
on
the
right
hand,
side
of
the
front
door,
but
I
would
be
open
to
either
Solutions.
S
I
just
wanted
to
mention
also
that
there's
going
to
be
that
coyote
fence
is
coming
down
and
what
was
approved
was
an
adobe
wall
right
where
that
fence
is
stepping
down
with
the
terrain,
and
you
know
that
I'm
not
sure
that's
gonna
help.
S
A
Let's
see
member,
thank
you
Mr
Valdez
member.
Do
you
put
anything
further.
E
I
would
say
you
know
that
we
approve
all
of
the
items
one
through
twelve
and
look
at
the
number
one
per
of
the
of
the
exception
requests
for
the
north
elevation
to
pursue
member
benvenues
suggestion
of
setting
those
windows
back
a
little
bit
further
in
the
stucco
rounding
the
corners
and
all
that,
but
I
would
suggest
in
lieu
of
extending
the
wall.
E
Putting
in
narrower
windows
that
would
meet
the
requirement
of
the
distance
from
the
corner
should
not
require
an
exception
number
two
that
the
window
on
the
East
Elevation
just
be
eliminated,
or
that
we
return
to
what
was
approved
previously
and
then
and
then
it's
and
I
think
that's
also
the
same
exception
as
number
three
correct.
We
eliminate
the
stained
glass
windows
and
go
to
what
was
submitted
and
approved,
and
the
applicant
is
willing
to
do
that.
We
would
have
a
solution
here.
A
Thank
you
for
your
comments.
I
will
ask
for
public
comment
at
this
time.
Anyone
from
the
public
wishing
to
comment
on
this
particular
project
I
see
Mr
John
Eddy
coming
forward.
B
T
Thank
you,
madam
chair,
at
the
root
of
the
difficulties,
and
this
is
kind
of
the
bear
in
the
room
that
we're
not
really
addressing
is
the
fact
that
the.
H
T
T
I
think
the
other
objectionable
thing
about
the
north
facade
that
board
member
Bienvenu
is
having
a
hard
time
with
is
the
fact
that
they've
driven
up
the
parapet
so
high
I,
don't
know
that
that's
been
discussed.
Yet
a
clarification
from
staff
is
an
exception
being
asked
for
that
parapet.
Having
been
raised.
M
I
You,
madam
chair,
just
a
clarification
on
that
point
that
was
just
raised
about
the
raising
of
the
parapet
in
addition
to
raising
the
parrot,
but
the
other
thing
I
find
very
disconcerting
about
that
facade.
Now
is
the
fact
that
the
stuccoing
around
the
chimney
is
not
set
back
at
all.
It's
actually
on
the
exact
same
plane
as
the
front
facade
I'm,
not
sure
why
that
is.
Can
that
be
can
could
that
be
set
back.
I
I
think
you'd
be
pulling
it
back.
In
other
words,
in
other
words,
the
chimneys,
obviously
coming
up
through
the
roof.
You've
you've
stuccoed
that
right
up
to
the
front
facade
and
made
it
flush
with
the
front
facade,
normally
there'd,
be
some
kind
of
a
setback.
I
would
assume
I'm
just
wondering
if
that
could
still
be
done
since
you're
going
to
have
to
if
we
do
approve
this
with
change,
with
condition
that
the
windows
be
altered,
you're
going
to
need
to
re-stucco
that
front
facade
anyway.
Well,.
S
I
E
E
E
For
the
case
of
the
windows
on
the
North
elevation
in
lieu
of
extending
the
wall
and
compromising
the
portal,
I
I
moved
that
the
board
recommend
narrowing
those
windows
setting
them
deep
into
the
wall
and
making
sure
that
those
have
one
and
a
half
inch
radius
corners
and
that
the
resulting
narrowed
Windows
would
be
a
compliant
distance
to
three
feet
from
the
corner.
E
Along
with
that
that
the
the
board's
suggestion
of
differentiating
the
plane
of
the
chimney
mass
in
that
facade
happen
by
building
it
out
from
the
existing
facade
and
stuccoing
it
and
then
for.
E
East
Elevation
the
plate,
glass
windows
that
they
be
eliminated
entirely
and
be
replaced
with
the
windows
as
originally
submitted.
This,
too
would
not
require
an
exception.
I
I
would
second,
with
the
friendly
Amendment,
that
the
condition
that
the
windows
that
are
being
modified
be
set
back,
be
consistent
with
what
was
originally
approved
and
mandated,
which
was
as
far
as
possible
at
a
minimum
of
one
and
a
half
inches.
Rather
than
one
and
a
half
inches
accepted.
F
Discussion,
yes,
question
clarification
on
the
East
facade.
You
had
previously
approved
two
windows:
I
think
it
would
be
okay
if
the
applicant
wanted
to
maintain
the
two
smaller
stained
glass
windows
in
the
original
layout.
That
was
proposed
just
to
be
clear
that
they
don't
have
to
be
clear,
correct.
A
Anything
further,
all
those
in
Hope
of
the
motion
will
have
a
roll
call
vote.
B
A
You
Mr
Valdez
and
please
get
together
with
City
staff
so
that
that
both
of
you
are
on
the
same
page
as
to
what
exactly
is
going
to
happen
per
the
motion.
Okay,
thank
you.
Good
luck
on
the
project
next
case
is
located
at
5.
30
Camino
military
is
that
applicant
here.
A
The
applicant
is
here-
and
this
is
Carly's
case
Carly
made
me
hear
your
case.
D
Thank
you,
madam
chair,
so
we
saw
this
case
a
couple
hearings
ago.
It
is
530
Camino
militaryz,
the
a
guest
house
at
the
set
right
back
here
adjacent
to
the
main
house.
One
of
the
board's
requests
was
for
further
pictures
of
the
existing
main
house
and
then
and
I
will
State
for
the
record.
D
D
And
the
buildings
in
the
three
masses,
as
we
saw
before
that,
has
not
changed.
We
are
looking
at
the
east
and
south
elevations.
We
now
see
that
the
style
has
been
changed
from
a
Southwest
contemporary
and
to
remind
the
board
of
the
location
we
are
in
the
historic
review,
District,
but
kind
of
kind
of
on
the
edge
there
of
the
downtown
and
East
Side.
The
proximity
Is
is
rather
close.
D
So
that
said,
this
change
in
the
design
style
from
Southwest
contemporary
to
a
recent
Santa
Fe
Style,
more
better
matches
the
streets
are,
is
in
harmony
with
the
streetscape
and
with
the
main
house
that
it
sits
next
to
okay.
So
we
are
looking
at
a
stuffed
massing
with
a
flat
roofs
raised.
Parapet.
D
We
still
have
a
couple
poor,
talls
and
one
has
been
enclosed
on
the
second
floor,
so
the
applicant
took
some
opportunity
to
make
a
couple
more
changes:
I'm,
sorry,
not
on
the
second
floor,
but
now
there's
no
longer
for
tall
on
that
lower
level.
Okay,
let's
skip
past
the
floor
plan.
D
We
can
come
back
too
if
we
have
questions,
but
they're
renderings
show
this
pretty
well
now,
so
we
have
now
wood
detailing
we've
got
some
wall
massings
that
have
changed
around
around
the
house
and
the
wrapped
portal.
That
was
once
there
on
that.
South
that
you
would
see
on
the
Southwest
facade
is
no
longer
there
we're
also
looking
at
the
height
now.
D
This
image
has
not
been
changed
since
the
reduction
of
height
by
the
two
foot
ten,
so
that
red
outline
was
what
you're
seeing
you
would
see
less
of
that
now,
even
okay,
and
then
we
have
an
updated
color
palette,
which
includes
the
stucco
color
modero
and
some
some
Chestnut
stain
for
the
wood
elements,
the
TPO
roof,
and
we
have
this
characteristic
long
windows.
But
the
circular
excuse
me,
the
circular
window
has
now
been
removed.
D
So
that
said
tonight,
for
this
exception,
this
will
not.
This
would
not
be
a
recommendation
to
the
governing
body,
but
instead
approval
or
disapproval
staff
does
see
that
are
recommended
that
the
exception
criteria
have
now
been
met
based
on
the
changes
and
we've
now.
This
is
not
only
that
this
is
not
just
the
second
design,
but
now
the
third
design
that
staff
has
seen
from
this
building,
so
they
have
brought
forth
more
designs
to
fulfill
that
qualifier.
A
D
They
are
on
a
sloping
site,
we
apply
the
exception
originally
and
we
kept
the
exception
in
order
to
meet
the
newspaper
posting.
But
generally
we
go
for
a
height
allowance
as
we
go
down
the
slope,
but
they
are
facing
StreetWise
and
we
are
seeing
the
height
go
this
way.
So
it's
just
a
different
way
that
we
calculated.
That
said,
once
we've
had
an
exception
in
the
paper.
D
B
R
Evening
board
members
and
Madam
chair,
thank
you
for
having
us
back
to
get
the
different,
revised
design
proposed
to
you.
We
I
wanted
to
quickly
respond
to
the
last
meetings
or
repeat
what
the
last
meetings
concern
was
were
and
and
I
think
we
for
the
most
part
established
a
a
design.
That
said
that
would
that
were
discussed
last
time
that
will
be
acceptable,
so
I
just
wanted
to
quickly.
R
Remember
what
member
Aguilar
said
last
time.
This
dial
should
complement
the
main
building.
We
did
that
the
the
style
is
took
the
same
type
of
round
edges
and
and
a
pair
of
pet
Heights
and
how
it
tapers
in.
We
will
do
the
same.
Stucco
finish
the
windows
on
the
main
building
the
window,
clad
colors
vary,
but
the
most
prominent
Cloud
colors
is
the
bronze.
So
we're
going
to
do
that,
the
exposed
Woods
will
have
a
similar
stain.
R
The
next
one
was
the
exception
criteria.
When
bravular,
you
were
worried
about
that
or
you
didn't,
you
agreed
with
with
staff
daddy,
didn't
meet,
and
now
that
we
are
stepping
down
with
the
slope
and
because
we're
adjacent
to
the
to
the
downtown
historic
district
we
have
it.
We
we
we're
not
as
contemporary
as
we
was.
We
were
before
so
I
hope
we
met
your
concerns.
There
we
reduced
the
ceiling
Heights,
we
reduce
the
height
because
we're
stepping
down,
and
so
that
was
another
concern
that
you
had
last
time.
R
We
considered
different
siding
closer
to
the
road
that
we
did
not
do
and
for
two
reasons
one
is
closer
to
the
road
we
are
in
the
30
slope
plus.
We
also
have
a
lot
of
mature
trees.
That
would
actually
cover
the
view,
and
so
we
feel
that
the
siding
is
the
best
location
for
that
building.
The
way
it
is
I,
remember
which
she's
not
here
tonight,
but
she
just
did
not
want
the
secondary
club.
We
had
a
secondary
color
underneath
the
portal
that
was
white.
R
We
took
that
away,
so
it's
all
the
same
color
the
mid
era
to
match
the
existing
building.
We
had
inconsistent
shapes
with
the
windows
with
a
round
shape,
and
so
we
took
that
out.
We
took
the
same
similar
shapes
the
elongated
shapes
that
you
see
on
the
renderings
is
actually
you
can
see
that
on
the
main
building
as
well.
R
So
we
did
that
and
then
board
member
Gita
again
styling
consistent
the
roof
type
from
the
existing
house
was
different,
so
we
did
raised
a
pair
of
pets
to
have
that
consistency,
the
style
inconsistency.
You
also
mentioned
that
the
wrap
around
portal
wasn't
didn't,
have
much
to
do
with
the
portals
on
top
of
the
second
floor,
so
we
took
that
away
also
to
make
the
structure
a
little
bit
smaller
or
to
the
appearance
a
little
bit
smaller
and
that's
and
board
member
Larson,
the
four
height
exception
was
too
excessive.
R
I
just
wanted
to
say:
I
would
try
to
lower
it.
We
load
it
a
little
bit.
We
still
need
an
exception
because
of
the
slope.
It's
the
site,
as
when
you
were
out
there
is
very
difficult.
We
have
it
in
the
lowest
portion
of
the
property,
and
it
is
not.
It
can
hardly
be
seen
by
anyone.
It's
can
see
be
seen
from
Camino
military
and
from
the
neighbor
Camino
at
526,
Camino
military,
but
from
other
places,
and
we
were
on
other
roads-
it's
you
can't
see
it
because
it's
just
too
low.
F
You,
madam
chair
I,
can
definitely
tell
that
you
that
you
put
effort
into
addressing
all
of
our
comments.
So
thank
you
for
that.
I'm
still
struggling
a
bit
with
granting
a
high
exception
for
a
three-story
guest
house.
So
can
you
give
us
some
more
information?
What
are
the
interior
Heights
of
each
of
the
three
levels
now
I
know
you
mentioned
that
one
of
them
may
have
been
reduced
since
the
last
time
we
saw
it.
R
It's
not
a
three-story
guest
house,
there's
a
basement
that
you
will
not
see
from
the
exterior
and
then
instead
of
putting
a
garage
at
this
on
the
same
exterior
level
where
it's
visible,
we
stuck
it
underneath
it
to
have
that
storage.
So
it's
an
unheated
basement
to
safe
on
Space
to
not
develop
more
on
that
property.
We
put
it
underneath
it.
So
it's
two-story
that
is
heated
and
the
heights
are
on
the
lower
level,
are
eight
feet
and
down
the
upper
level.
It
is
nine
foot
and
then
we're
stepping
down
one
foot.
R
No
because
well
it's
if
we
step
it
down,
I
mean
the
the
where
the
entrance
is
the
the
great.
So
when
we
do,
the
Great
height
is
the
most
restrictive
grade
from
the
existing
grade
or
the
new
grade,
and
so
the
existing
grade
is.
If
we
stick
it
down,
it's
it's
not
going
to
help
the
height
because
we
have
to
be
but
the
entrances
that
will
remain
at
the
same
height,
so
the
overall
height
from
the
top
of
the
parapet.
F
C
R
Right,
but
what
what
where
the
existing,
what
the
finish
grade
will
be
coming
and
and
to
meet
with
with
the
lower
level
door
that
is
at
at
the
grade
at
the
existing
grade
right
now,
so
we
would
have
to
dig
in
and
then
have
I
mean
I,
don't
know,
I
mean
that
would
be
a
lot.
I
mean
everything
can
be
done
right,
but
this
would
have
a
bigger
impact
with
drainage
and
Grading.
A
Is
the
building
at
the
highest?
It's
17
feet
around
70p
someone
takes.
L
D
D
And
now
on
the
North
elevation
we've
got
a
height
that
is
just
a
little
bit
beyond,
because
if
we
go
a
little
bit
further
out
to
the
for
this,
the
tallest
edge
of
the
North
elevation
we're
going
to
be
going
over
17
1..
D
And
that
is
that
is
to
the
outside
of
the
stepped
wall
there.
So.
A
Thank
you
thank.
E
You,
madam
chair
I,
think
these
are
I,
appreciate
the
effort
that
went
into
making
these
Corrections
that
I
really
think
you've
arrived
a
a
really
nice
design
that
we're
seeing
tonight.
E
One
of
the
you
know,
for
me
the
height
exception,
really
isn't
a
big
issue
I'm
looking
at
the
elevations,
and
particularly
that
line
of
the
street
elevation
of
Camino
military,
which
is
well
above
the
house,
I
appreciate
the
efforts
to
make
this
house
more
sympathetic
to
the
main
house
and
to
the
neighborhood
and
the
district
that
lies
on
the
other
side
of
the
property.
I.
Think
it's
a
very
successful
design.
A
E
Make
a
motion
in
the
case
of
2022-005867,
hdrb,
530
Camino
military
I
moved
that
the
board
approved
the
application
as
submitted
finding
that
the
height
that
the
criteria
for
the
height
increase
requests
have
been
met.
A
E
A
L
Q
You
chair,
the
subject
of
this
case
is
the
known
as
many
too
many
of
us
is
the
first
interstate
plaza
building
it's
at
the
corner
of
Marcy
Street
in
Washington
you're.
Looking
at
the
two
blank
facades,
both
the
East
and
the
and
the
North
yeah
the
building
was
built
and
I
believe
86
82
83,
it's
non-contributing
based
on
age.
It
has
three
stories.
Q
Q
They
have
divided
light
windows,
there's
ground
floor
retail
and
office,
and
the
applicant
is
proposing
to
fenestrate
those
two
blank
facades
at
that
corner
and
has
provided
the
simulated
rendition
or
that
might
be
redundant
with
windows
that
match
the
rest
of
the
windows
in
the
rest
building
and
at
the
corner,
which
is
currently
a
little
recess
there.
It's
sort
of
a
it
has
some
sculpture
used
to
be
a
running
water
sculpture
that
will
now
be
a
door
facing
the
street
out
to
the
ground
level.
Q
This
is
the
rendering
of
both
facades
and
as
proposed,
to
match
the
same
windows
and
type
design
trim
Etc.
This
is
the
windows,
schedule
and
I
believe
that
concludes
my
presentation.
I
recommend
approval
as
it
meets
the
downtown
and
Eastside
historic
district
standards,
14-5.2
e,
and
also
the
general
design
standards
for
all
the
H
districts.
14-5.2
d.
A
B
U
U
The
lentils
wasn't
something
that
I
had
initially
remembered,
and
so
we
added
that
added
those
lentils
in,
and
so
really
it's
just
a
facade
that
I'd
never
really
noticed
how
blank
and
larger
it
is
right
now,
and
so
what
we,
the
intent,
was
to,
of
course,
match
the
existing
Windows
to
this
new
facade
and
opening
up
the
the
ground
level
in
a
generous
fashion,
similar
to
the
rest
of
the
building,
to
create
a
retail
space
and
I.
U
Think
just
enliven
that
corner,
which
I
think
will
be
a
benefit
to
just
the
urban
streetscape
and
for
you
know
the
pedestrians
as
a
whole
experiencing
that
corner.
I
Course
yeah.
Thank
you,
madam
chair,
for
the
applicants,
so
this
this
raises
the
same
concerns
I
had
with
the
the
building
that
you
probably
heard.
The
discussion
on
on
Canyon
Road,
which
is
the
the
very
flat
facade
and
I,
have
a
feeling
that
the
recesses
on
the
Windows,
both
the
top
and
the
bottom,
are
probably
consistent
with
the
upper
windows
on
the
Washington.
Street
side
am
I
correct
in
that.
Yes,.
I
But
I'm
just
not
sure
if
that's
the
appropriate
solution,
particularly
for
the
lower
Windows,
because
you
know
what's
odd
about
that
facade-
is
that
there's
no
portal
there,
whereas
the
whole
Washington
facade,
has
a
very,
very
deep
portal.
So
they
may
have
windows
that
are
similar
to
that
that
go
to
the
ground
and
that
have
shallow
reveals,
but
they're
under
portal,
of
course,
which
is
an
entirely
different
situation
and
I.
Just
look
at
that
and
I
think.
First,
first
of
all,
I
think
it.
It
is
an
improvement
and
I
I
agree
with
you.
I
I
haven't
really
noticed
how
extraordinarily
blank
that
corner
is,
which
you
know
Angela
called
it.
The
first
interstate
plaza
building,
but
most
of
us
noticed
the
ugly
building,
based
on
the
fact
that
that
word
was
spray
painted
on
it
when
it
was
built
and
and
depicted
in
the
New
Mexico,
but
at
any
rate
the
it
just
seems
to
me
that
those
windows
could
be
improved
on
the
ground
level
if
they
were
set
in
in
some
fashion.
U
Course,
that's
actually
our
our
intent
and
my
my
rendering
may
not
necessarily
reflect
that.
But
I
do
know
that
when
I
was
trying
to
put
up
the
the
H
board
signs,
that's
a
solid,
concrete
block
and
probably
eight
inches
and
potentially
12
inches
thick.
Because
of
the
height
of
that
the
overall
height
of
that
35
foot
wall.
So
I
would
it
would
be
my
preference
to
recess
those
windows.
Generously.
U
I
usually
prefer
a
two-thirds
one-third
recess
of
at
least
four
and
a
half
five
inches,
even
at
six
inches
as
deep
of
a
reveal
as
possible,
even
though
they
don't
match.
As
you
say,
the
other
windows
underneath
the
portal
along
Washington,
given
the
character
of
the
downtown
I,
would
agree
with
you
entirely
that
we
will
recess
those
windows
both
ground
level
and
the
upper
level.
As
much
as
we
reasonably
can
that's
great.
I
Yeah
I
think
that
would
really
help
this
project
and
I
I
meant
to
look
on
the
way
over
I
think
that's
allowed
if
you're
driving
by
what's
further
on
the
building
to
the
West
on
the
Marcy
Street
side,
because
I
think
I
think
they
are
potentially
deep
set
on
that
side
of
the
building.
But
I
just
can't
recall
for
certain
I.
U
Don't
think
there
recess
very
much,
but
on
the
on
the
Marcy
Street
side
on
that
West
End,
that
is,
that
is
another
portal
it
is.
They
are
underneath
the
portal-
okay,
that
makes
sense
yeah,
but
as
a
qualification
for
approval,
I
would
be
more
than
happy
to
quantify
any
approval
by
us
having
recessed
that
those
windows
as
much
as
possible.
I
A
You
any
other
comments
or
questions.
Anyone
from
the
public
wishing
to
comment.
Mr
Eddie
has
already
been
sworn
in
and
he's
going
to
comment.
T
Thank
you,
madam
chair
board,
members
I
really
appreciate
again
the
Acumen
of
board
member
bienvenue
and
the
details
that
he's
picked
out.
I
do
agree
that
the
addition
of
Windows
on
this
building
is
going
to
make
it
a
much
more
hospitable
partner
in
the
streetscape
there.
So
I
applaud
where
they're
going
with
this,
but
I
would
also
add
that
the
windows
in
question
being
set
back
as
have
been
proposed
by
board
member
bienvenue
I
also
believe,
should
not
go
to
the
sidewalk
and
should
end
at
a
stem
Wall
height
above
the
sidewalk.
T
A
E
Guida
I
understand
I,
appreciate
Mr
Eddie's
comments
and
understand
his
reference
to
previous
discussions.
I
I,
you
know
for
the
building
that
we're
considering
the
massing
the
form
of
fenestration
and
expression
at
the
ground.
Floor
I
agree
with
the
applicant.
This
is
a
hundred
percent.
The
right
way
to
express
a
lower
floor.
I
think
shortening
the
height
of
those
windows
would
result
in
a
building.
E
That's
far
more
pedestrian,
looking
than
what
is
being
proposed
or
and
and
would
diminish
the
amount
of
friendliness
that
is
contained
in
this
design
proposal.
So
I
am
100
behind
the
height
of
the
lower
floor
Windows
as
designed.
U
U
I
U
I
I
tend
to
agree
that
these
are
kind
of
classic
storefront.
Looking
windows.
We
find
that
in
a
commercial
districts,
that's
why
we
approved
it
rightly
or
wrongly,
on
the
corner
of
Old
Santa
Fe
Trail
was
because
there
are
storefront
windows
in
that
area
that
traditionally
existed
and
I
think
that,
under
some
circumstances,
I
would
agree
with
the
idea
of
bringing
them
up
and
I'm.
Just
looking
at
the
plan
and
I
think
in
this
particular
instance
on
that
corner
that
six
to
eight
inches
would
be
satisfactory
and
actually
elegant.
I
Sure
I'll
make
a
motion
so
in
case
number
2022-005980
hdrb,
150,
Washington,
Avenue
I
move
to
approve
the
project
as
submitted
with
the
understanding
that
the
windows,
all
windows
and
doors
will
be
set
in
as
much
as
possible.
Consistent
with
the
applicants
representations
I.
Frankly,
don't
remember
exactly
how
deep
you
said.
You
thought
it's
inches,
five
to
six
inches
I'm
glad
you
wrote
that
down
and
that
they
be
set
at
least
the
ground
on
the
ground
floor
that
the
windows
would
be
at
least
six
to
eight
inches
above
ground
level.
E
Q
Thank
you,
chair,
492,
Arroyo
tenorio
is
a
non-contributing.
Q
Excuse
me
getting
mixed
up
here:
non-contributing
building
in
the
downtown
and
East
Side
historic
district,
see
if
I
had
a
these
are
photographs
of
the
house.
We're
talking
about
along
Arroyo
tenorio.
The
applicant
is
proposing
to
build
a
the
top.
Two
photos
are
the
street
view
and
the
location
of
where
the
single
car
carport
is
proposed.
Where
that
car
is
and
then
below
is
what's
behind
the
garden
walls.
Just
that's.
What's
Behind
the
Walls,
but
there's
no
changes
to
the
house
other
than
to
add
a
carport.
Q
That's
attached
at
that
East
wall
there.
It
is
in
plan.
Q
More
about
the
building
is
that
it
is
in
in
the
Old
Santa
Fe
Style,
with
a
flat
roof
and
a
parapet.
It
was
built
originally
in
the
1900s
buried
deep
within
that
that
has
undergone
many
alterations
in
2003
and
2000
2007.
It
was
pretty
much
engulfed
by
new
new
construction,
so
it
is
not
contributing
anymore.
Q
It's
right
at
that
corner
where
asicia
intersects,
with
Garcia
Street
and
Arroyo
tenorio,
like
I,
said
it's,
you
could
see
it's
enclosed
by
a
tall
front,
stucco
yard
wall
and
a
pedestrian
gate
with
a
slight
Arch.
So
the
applicant
is
proposed,
proposing
to
add
a
single
bait
to
213
square
foot,
single
Bay
carport
at
that
Street
location
to
a
height
of
nine
feet,
11
inches,
where
the
maximum
allowable
height
is
11
feet,
7
inches
the
also
the
proposed
carport
is
below
the
existing
height
of
the
parapet.
Q
The
existing
parapet
height
at
11
inches
excuse
me
feet
the
simple
construction
the
West
posts
will
attach
to
the
house
East
Courtyard
wall,
which
is
six
feet.
Nine
inches
tall
and
extend
East
over
one
of
the
two
existing
parking
spaces.
Q
Q
Q
11
7
is
the
the
height
of
the
existing
house,
and
fourteen
four
is
the
maximum
allowable
height
in
this
okay
Escape.
Thank.
A
You
any
clarification,
questions
for
Angela.
Not
at
this
time
will
will
you
come
forward
and
guess
what
name
please.
B
N
A
Good
evening,
what
do
you
have
anything
more
to
ask
what
Angela
just
told.
V
Us
no
just
that
we're.
This
is
a
case
where
the
seems
like
back
in
maybe
the
mid
80s.
This
was
one
property
that
was
split
in
two
and
there's
492
shares
a
common
wall
with
the
house
to
the
east,
which
is,
and
so
one
of
the
reasons
we're
doing
just
a
single.
V
Just
a
single
parking
space
there
is
that
the
neighbor's
kitchen
window
is
facing
that
parking
area,
and
so
just
providing
light
for
the
neighbor,
where
a
carport
going
all
the
way
across
would
create
a
shade
there
in
in
Jim's
Kitchen
to
be
on
to
avoid
so.
V
Simple
here
that
and
and
light
visually
light,
so
that
it's
thank.
C
V
Any
part
of
the
the
existing
house-
let's.
E
I
will
this
is
very
nice
design
and
I
I
agree
it's
very
sensitive
to
the
existing
house
to
the
neighbor's
house.
It's
done
very
minimally
and
sensitively
just
a
quick
question.
E
What
is
what
is
the
exposed
underside
of
of
the
carport
roof?
What
are.
V
We
going
to
it's
going
to
be
one
by
six,
probably
roughs
on
decking,
but
but
wood
decking,
wonderful
yeah.
Thank
you.
T
A
F
A
Thank
you
and
thank
you
will
next
case
is
located
at
600
aquafria
and
we
have
Ramones
saracen,
who
will
be
presenting
and
he's
a
senior
planner
and
I
think
this
is
the
first
time
of
presenting.
W
Yes
might
be
a
little
rough
around
the
edges,
but
oh
don't
you
always
says
time
goes
along.
Thank
you,
madam
chair.
This
is
a
primary
designation
for
600
Agua
Fria
foreign
directly
west
of.
W
W
W
There's
a
site
plan
with
North
is
to
your
left,
so
the
car
where
the
car
is
located.
That's
the
South
elevation.
W
A
I
think
you
also
included
the
shared
roof
portal.
A
I
You,
madam
chair,
so
Ramon
just
I,
don't
know
if
this
is
really
a
question,
but
just
following
up
on
our
field
trip
today,
one
of
the
things
we
talked
about
was
the
facade
2
is
also
I
mean.
I
Obviously
it
mirrors
to
some
extent
the
solid
four,
so
the
saw
two
being
on
the
West
Side
could
also
be
considered
for
a
primary
facade,
correct
and,
in
your
opinion,
I
know
that
you're
recommending
the
other
at
this
time,
but
I
have
a
feeling
that
might
be
primarily
because
of
the
sort
of
the
expressences
all
over
that
facade
of
the
pipes
and
the
so
forth.
But
otherwise
it's
a
very
you
know
it's
a
very
distinctive
aspect
of
the
building.
It's
even
the
fact
that
the
windows
have
different
reveals
in
them.
I
Some
of
them
are
very
deep,
and
some
of
them
are
less
so,
but
still
deep
to
me.
It
strikes
me
as
being
very
characteristic
and
that
corner
of
those
two
facades
together,
because
unquestionably
the
front
is
going
to
be
a
primary,
is
very
visible
from
Agua
Fria,
whereas
the
other
facade
is
almost
invisible
because
it
has
a
fence
and
a
lot
line
that
are
almost
up
against
the
building.
I
W
Correct
it
was
kind
of
a
tough
choice
there
and
I
think
the
decision
really
came
down
to
the
flu,
the
gas
meter,
the
electrical
meter
mailbox
and
it's
up
to
the
board's
discretion
to
determine
which
facade
I
considered
primary
okay.
A
A
So
if
your
way
in
between
the
west
and
the
East
I
would
go
with
the
West,
that's
my
opinion
and
I
I
love
the
reveals
there
they're
very
deep.
I
Yeah
and
it's
kind
of
an
interest:
the
windows
are
interesting
arrangement
of
their
kind
of
eccentrically
placed
on
that
facade
and
but
in
an
aesthetically
pleasing
way,
so
I'm
I'm,
probably
in
favor,
if
that
is
the
second
primary
as
well.
But
thank
you.
A
Any
other
comments
or
questions
for
Ramon.
No
will
the
applicant
please
come
forward
and
that's
Mr
Chris
Purvis,
please
get
sworn
in.
B
L
A
Chris
good
evening,
do
you
agree
with
Ramones
recommendations
or
what
do
you
think
of
the
west
elevation
in
lieu
of
maybe
the
East
Elevation
I'm
guessing
and.
L
Chair
I
guess
I
always
assumed
it
would
be
the
west
elevation,
because
that's
when
you
can
see
the
photograph
on
the
East
Elevation
I
took
by
leaning
over
a
fence
and
holding
my
phone
it's
very
hard
to
see.
So
in
terms
of
the
way
it
presents
to
the
city
into
the
neighborhood,
the
west
and
the
north
are
the
ones
you
can
see.
I
understand
why
they
might
have
said
that
East,
because
those
windows
look
a
little
while
they
were
a
little
older
until
the
plate.
Glass
was
put
in
on
the
northernmost
window.
L
A
E
Thank
you,
madam
chair
case
2022-006017
hdrb
600
Agua
Fria,
Street
I
moved
at
the
board,
maintain
The
house's
statuses,
contributing
designate
the
north
and
west
elevations
as
primary,
including
the
shed
roof
front.
Porch.
E
A
Q
The
property
consists
of
three
contributing
buildings,
the
main
house,
the
guest
house
and
a
garage
it
is.
It
has
been
before
the
board
before,
and
the
North
Assad
of
the
main
house
was
designated
primary,
as
was
the
garage
is
North.
The
main
entrance
to
the
garage
was
also
designed
primary
designated
primary
and
the
west
elevation
of
the
guest
house
designated
primary.
Q
It's
kind
of
marked
I'm
going
to
go
to
some
pictures,
even
though
it's
kind
of
a
lot
okay,
so
at
the
top
left
is
the
front
of
the
house,
and
the
lower
left
corner
is
excuse
me,
the
west
elevation
of
the
main
house
and
then
in
between
there's
a
space
between
the
garage.
Excuse
me,
the
main
house
and
the
guest
house
that
Center
picture,
and
at
the
top
you
have
the
the
South
facade
of
them
of
the
main
house
and
then
below
that.
Of
course,
the
garage
is
over
there
too.
Q
This
one,
the
front
of
the
house
so
Kaya
corvo,
is
a
unique
little
street.
It's
it's
actually
like
a
1940s
version
of
infill.
It
was
originally
called
Hughes,
Lane,
I,
believe
and
it
links
Delgado
Street
over
to
asekia,
Madre
and
curves.
Thus
kayakorbo
many
of
those
many
of
those
homes
were
small
Adobe,
a
two-bedroom
flat,
roof,
very
modest
it.
The
they
were.
The
homes
along
that
street
were
built
at
different
times.
Kind
of
like
subdivisions
are,
but
this
particular
cluster.
Q
It
also
has
its
original
low
stucco
yard
wall
and
the
previous
case
approved
a
in
addition
to
the
front
of
the
house.
The
primary
facade.
The
portal
is
non-historic,
it
retains
its
historic
status
and
the
current
windows
and
doors
were
installed
in
the
1980s,
so
it
doesn't
have
original
windows.
Q
So
the
applicant
proposes
to
replace
all
the
windows
on
on
the
main
house
and
the
guest
house
with
new
divided
light
patterns,
single
hung,
white
metal
windows
and
the
applicant
proposes
to
replace
all
the
exterior
wood
doors.
Q
So
those
are
circles
of
Windows
on
the
front
facade
that
are
proposed
for
change.
You'll,
see
that
there
are
aluminum
Sliders
in
the
below
existing
above
this
true
divided
light,
and
then
the
applicant
proposes
to
replace
the
the
front
door.
Q
The
applicant
also
proposes
to
replace
the
screen
doors
on
all
three
facades
and
they
vary
in
different
wood
designs
and
appear
historic,
and
so
the
replacement
screens
will
match
the
frame
pattern
and
of
the
existing
doors
and
Frames
painted
white
there's
a
window
that
they
would
like
to
infill
and
a
that
is
on
the
garage
on
the
East
elevation
of
the
garage,
as
well
as
infill
a
door
on
the
main
house.
In
the
back.
The
South
elevation
primary
they're
planning
to
re-stucco
all
three
buildings
and.
Q
There's
a
lot
going
on
here,
but
in
some
staff
recommends
approval
of
the
of
the
of
the
project,
except
for
replacement
of
the
historic
front
front
door
on
the
North
elevation,
the
primary
elevation,
because
it
it
is
the
same
door
that
was
probably
put
in
originally
as
a
couple
of
the
houses
within
right
next
door
to
it,
have
the
same
type
of
crafted
wood
panel
door
and
other
than
that
staff
does
recommend
approval
of
the
proposal
because
it
conforms
to
the
downtown
and
East
Side
District
standards,
as
well
as
the
general
standards
for
all
age
districts.
A
Would
you
talk
to
us
about
the
colors
that
the
existing
color,
that
is
there,
is
straw,
and
would
you
compare
that
with
what
is
being
proposed?
Fawn.
C
F
Q
F
So
my
question,
the
third
one
over
the
white
one.
If
we
know
the
front
door
is
historic,
it
seems
like
that
that
one
that's
been
painted
is
very
similar.
Is
that
one
historic
or
oh?
Do
you
know
any
more
information
about
that
white?
One
you're.
Q
F
Q
Aren't
the
garage
has
that's
correct:
the
garage
has
a
original
casement
and
that's
one
of
the
windows
that
they're
proposing
to
Enfield,
but
that's
also
in
a
non-primary
facade,
okay,
and
thank
you
for
that.
I
wanted
to
point
out.
The
fourth
door
in
this
picture
is
on
the
guest
house
on
a
primary
facade
and
it
is
at
a
historic
door.
The.
Q
Q
You're,
welcome
and
I
forgot
to
add
this
just
in
terms
of
the
historicity
of
the
doors.
These
are
the
neighbor
stores
to
the
West,
the
top
right.
It's
it's
the
same
crafts
person
and
style
door,
as
is
the
the
house
adjacent
to
that
as
well,
and
the
doors
proposed
door
is
in
the
gray
and
it's
their
proposed
wood
doors
with
divide
two
divided
lights
and
those
are
the
two
stucco
samples
they
both
look
pretty
pale.
There
may
be
some,
you
know
some
difference.
Maybe
the
applicant
can
speak
to
that.
B
X
With
regards
to
the
other
elements,
the
stucco,
we
chose
a
slightly
warmer
color,
but
it's
very
very
close
to
the
existing
and
I.
Don't
know
what
else
I
can
help
you
with.
A
X
The
the
owners
are
here,
they
can
tell
more
about
the
history,
but
we
did
not
think
they
were
historic
doors.
Okay,.
A
Just
as
it
is
as
a
piece
of
History
very
familiar
with
the
house
that
was
built
in
the
30s
40s
and
they
have
that
exact
door
and
it
is
a
contributing
house,
it
is
a
very
similar
door.
A
So,
whatever
that's
worth
so,
are
the
owners
wanting
to
speak
or
do
you
have
any
questions
for
for
this
gentleman?
It
appears
not.
Let's
see,
go
right
ahead.
B
H
The
matter
about
the
doors
and
specifically
the
front
door,
is
for
us
more
of
a
safety
concern,
because
that
door
has
been
repaired
and
modified
several
times
over
the
years.
This
is
my
grandfather's
home
and
my
dad
grew
up
there
and
we
grew.
H
So
I
know
the
door
has
been
modified
and
so
I
come
to
you
with
the
concern
of
the
swelling
of
the
door.
Now
that
we've
installed
cooling
to
the
house,
that
makes
the
door
swelled
to
a
level
that
we've
had
to
shave
it
and
it
doesn't
open.
So
that
gives
me
a
concern
as
a
homeowner
for
egress
and
egress,
because
it
is
a
short-term
rental,
and
so
is
there
any
alternative
that
we
could
have.
It
is
primarily
that
front
door,
it
happens
occasionally
on
the
kitchen
door
of
the
main
house.
H
The
back
house
seems
to
be
okay,
so
that
would
be
the
only
comment
that
I
would
have
regarding
that
door.
A
Board
members,
do
you
have
other
questions
or
comments.
A
It
appears
they
do
not
anyone
from
the
public
wishing
to
comment.
I
You,
madam
chair
I'll,
go
ahead,
make
a
motion
in
case
2020,
2005-993,
hdrb,
518
and
518,
and
a
half
Kai
gorbo
a
move
to
adopt
staffs
findings
and
recommendations
for
approval,
as
submitted
with
the
exception
of
the
replacement
of
the
front
North
elevation
doors
and
all
the
screen.
Doors
in
less
documentation
is
provided
to
the
satisfaction
of
staff
that
the
door
and
screen
doors
are
not
historic.
I
D
Through
the
code
that
is
on
window
and
doors
alone,
no,
but
if
you,
if
the
board,
finds
that
there's
a
potential
for
status
downgrade
based
on
the
loss
of
more
historic
material,
that
is
another
reason
for
potentially
being
able
to
to
preserve
these
doors.
Now.
D
I
say
that,
based
on
being
out
on
site
today
and
noticing
that
the
amount
of
historic
material
loss
over
time
is
pretty
dramatic
for
this
particular
property
that
the
historic
status
looks
like
it
could
be
threatened
by
more
so
that
I
think
is
likely
the
only
basis
that
you
can
in
this
scenario,
okay,.
I
B
A
You
and
thank
you
all
very
much
next
case
is
located
at
802
East
Palace,
and
this
is
Angela's
case
right.
There.
Q
This
case
comes
to
you
because
the
approval
they
got
for
the
changes
that
they
would
like
to
make
now
expired
in
a
2015
case,
and
they
have
done
all
of
what
they
proposed
to
do
and
got
approved
to
do,
except
for
the
addition
of
a
studio
in
the
rear
and
coyote
fencing
and
just
by
the
pictures
the
front.
The
top
is
the
palace
Avenue
view
of
the
house
in
the
front,
the
North
and
Below.
It's
a
two
there's
two
levels
below
our
photographs
of
the
backyard
and
the
site
for
the
addition.
Q
So
that
is
the
site
plan.
The
red
box
shows
where
the
Studios
proposed.
Q
The
506
square
feet
Edition
the
studio
and
the
other
part
of
The
Proposal,
is
to
con
to
construct
the
new
coyote
fencing
to
a
height
of
three
feet
at
the
East
Street
facing
lot
line
and
to
a
height
of
five
feet.
Eight
between
the
proposed
Studio
Edition
and
the
rear
lot
line.
Q
I
do
want
to
note
about
the
house,
so
this
was
built
in
the
late
1950s
early
1960s
and
it
was.
It
was
a
mid-century
version
of
Spanish
Pueblo,
Revival
style
and
it's
been
very
Pueblo.
Puebloized
I
had
some
photographs,
I,
don't
know,
maybe
they're
on
the
back
end
of
this,
but
just
to
show
you
what
we
can
do
here
in
Santa
Fe.
That's
what
it
looked
like
on
the
left,
the
black
and
white
photograph
very
slow,
slung
flat
and
then
that's
the
current
house.
Q
Now
the
it
was
a
carport,
and
now
it's
more
Adobe
iced,
just
to
note
the
app
they
obviously
made
it
meet
downtown
and
East
Side
historic
district
standards
and
I.
Think
that
concludes
my
report.
If
you
have
any
questions.
B
O
A
A
E
A
Next
case
is
located
at
523
Armijo
Street.
This
is
for
a
status
review
and
it's
Carly's
case.
D
Thank
you,
madam
chair
members
of
the
board,
we're
looking
at
523
Armijo
Street.
So
that's
at
the
corner
of
Armijo
and
Hillside
that
juncture
well
and
Tony
there.
So
we
are
looking
at
a
quite
vernacular
house.
It
has
an
enclosed
front
porch
that
was
enclosed
in
1937.
That's
in
this,
that's
in
the
hick,
P
historic
cultural
property
inventory
form
and
there
was
changes
to
Windows
some
and
kind
of
various
changes,
but
not
too
many.
You
can
see
there's
one
there
on
the
East
Elevation,
but
changes
from
the
1940s
through
80s.
D
So
we
have
the
South
front
porch,
which
is
a
log
cabin
Edition.
It
was
owned
by
someone
who
worked
for
the
forest
service
and
who
brought
their
work
home.
D
So
it
is
a
unique
and
vernacular
building
that
doesn't
necessarily
fit
squarely
within
the
code.
There
are
two
ways
to
go
with
this
one
which
I'll
address
in
just
a
moment,
but
the
recommendation
for
this,
because
we
have
several
structures
on
the
property.
We
have
the
main
house,
we
have
the
little
garage
or
out
building
and
then
we
also
have
the
rock
wall
rock
wall
sweater.
D
There
are
several,
so
the
recommendation
is
in
South
is
pointed
towards
the
right,
but
for
the
South
facades
and
that
South
facade
would
include
the
Log
Cabin
feature
or
a
designation
of
as
primary.
Currently
this
case
or
the
the
property
of
the
subject
matter
of
this
case
is
non-contributing,
so
we're
looking
at
a
status
review
and
primary
facade
designation.
D
So
the
recommendation
for
staff
is
to
see
the
south
facing
facade,
including
the
enclosed
porch
that
was
done
in
1936,
as
the
primary
facade
include
include
the
outbuilding,
while
very
simple,
simple
structures.
If
we
think
back
to
the
Mateo
Martinez
case,
these
ancillary
structures
are
important
to
the
property
and,
while
they're
simple,
it
doesn't
mean
they're,
not
less
important,
and
then
we
also
have
the
rock
wall
that
we're
recommending
recommending
is
contributing.
D
But
I
said
there
were
two
ways
to
go
with
this
case.
You
could
do
a
recommendation
for
contributing
with
primary
facades
or
because
this
is
a
very
unique
case.
You
can
look
at
this
as
non-conforming,
but
that
is
under
a
chapter,
14-5.2
A6
and
that's
just
a
little
bit
more
complex,
it's
preserving
it
for
architectural
interest.
D
So
and
then
a
third
route
is,
of
course,
to
maintain
non-contributing
status,
and
that
said,
there
are
historic
features
on
the
west
facade
as
well,
but
there
is
a
replacement
door
there
and
there's
a
small
edition
of
the
the
little
area
you
get
used
to
get
kind
of
downstairs.
D
So
that
said,
really
the
main
character
feature
of
this
strange
little
vernacular
building
is
the
south
facing
facade
nut,
staff's
recommendation.
I'll
stand
for
questions.
E
Thank
you,
madam
chair.
Thank
you
Carly,
so
the
second
option
contributing
non-conforming,
what's
what's
at
stake,
if
we
were
to
go
in
that
direction,
well,.
D
It
wouldn't
be
contributing,
it
would
be.
A
non-conforming
preserved
is
non-conforming
so
for
some
members
who
either
are
do
not
remember
this
case
or
how
we're
not
on
the
board.
Two
Camino
Pequeno
fell
under
this
and
we
went
back
and
forth
quite
a
bit
because
it
doesn't
set
fair
squarely
within
the
code.
Now
this
is
an
adobe
building,
so
it's
a
little
different
that
one
had
Adobe
features
as
well
that
building
it
was
white
stuck.
D
It
was
in
downtown
in
east
side
and
it
was
kind
of
prairie,
modern,
and
so
it
the
style
was
quite
different
than
what
is
acknowledged
within
the
code.
So
that
said,
this
is
an
adobe
building
with
particular
Adobe
and
vernacular
features,
but
it
has
this
very
uncharacteristic,
enclosed
porch
on
it,
so
I
will
leave
it
to
the
board
to
deliberate,
which
side
to
go.
But
if
you
do
go
the
A6
non-conforming
route,
it
would
be
non-contributing,
but
we
would
have
to
specify
what
architectural
interest
would
be
preserved
on
this.
I
You,
madam
chair,
so
Carly
I,
guess
I
think
that
there's
another
way
to
go,
which
was
actually
what
I
would
propose,
which
is
to
designate
it
as
contributing,
but
then
have
a
finding
that
it
is
non-conforming,
but
has
special,
architectural
and
historical
interest
for
future
purposes.
When
there's
an
effort
to
make
changes
to
the
property,
if
ever
because
I
think
that
the
word
contributing
doesn't
necessarily
mean
that
it
conforms,
it
just
means
that
it
adds
to
the
historical
associations
of
the
streetscape,
and
in
this
case
it
you
know
it's.
I
D
Maybe
that
strict
reading
over
time
has
very
much
changed,
you
see,
maybe
the
Peterson
Center
wouldn't
have
been
contributing
seen
as
contributing
in
the
past.
That
has
been
a
change
in
how
we
really
look
at
that
heterogeneous
nature
of
our
our
historic
districts
that
they
are.
They
don't
all
all
fit
that
one
mold.
So
that's
why
stats
recommendation
is
for
contributing,
but
I.
Think
stating
the
architectural
interest
and
characteristics
is
always
very
helpful
for
preserving
the
building
and
providing
extra
rails
for
applicants
and
staff.
Sure.
A
You
for
your
comments,
any
further
comments.
Chris
you've
been
sorted.
L
L
A
Thank
you
Chris
any
questions
for
Chris
or
comments.
Member
of
them
and
you.
I
Madam
chair
just
Krista
just
question:
what
about
the
rest
of
the
recommendations?
Specifically
the
garage
and
the
stone
walls.
L
L
Well,
the
only
issue
would
be
that
the
garage
doors
are
funky
and
need
repaired,
so
by
making
it
primary
as
long
as
we
can
bring
it
back
to
you
without
an
exception.
Given
the
discussion
earlier
today,
then
I
see
no
problem
with
leaving
it
the
way
it
is
okay,.
T
Madam
chair
board
member
I
do
agree
with
staff's
recommendations
and
just
wanted
to
drive
home
the
fact
that
this
house
has
contributed
its
presence
on
the
streetscape
as
far
as
I
can
remember
in
Santa
Fe.
So
as
such,
although
there
are
non-conforming
elements,
obviously
they
really
add
a
tremendous
amount
of
architectural
interest,
as
has
been
stated
by
staff
and
I
appreciate
the
recommendation.
Thank
you.
It's.
A
A
My
life
and
yes
I'm
a
little
bit
ancient
and
I,
never
I,
didn't
know
the
gentleman
Tony
Martinez,
but
unheard
family
members
say
that
we
were
related,
so
I'm
not
I
would
not
be
surprised
if
I'm
related
to
many
people,
even
within
this
room
still
but
I
found
that
interesting
and
I
do
look
at
that.
Little
cabin
I
think
it's
interesting.
L
A
You
anyone
Miss
Denver,
remember:
go.
E
E
You
case
2022-005984
hdrb,
523,
Armijo,
Street
I,
move
that
the
board,
except
staff's
recommendation
regarding
the
historic
status
of
the
main
house
and
garage
paint
designated
as
contributing
with
primary
facade
designated
as
the
South
elevations,
including
the
log
porch,
and
the
stone
walls
as
the
contributing
structures.
I
O
L
D
Okay,
so
we
are
thank
you,
madam
chair
members
of
the
board.
We
are
looking
at
1149,
East,
Alameda
street,
so
I've
got
an
image
of
kind
of
how
this
lays
out.
We've
see
East
Alameda
street
the
way
to
get
there
is
by
turning
left
towards
Camino
Pequeno
going
north
and
then
at
the
end
of
the
strive
here,
I'm
pointing
that
out
because-
and
we
are
in
the
D,
the
downtown
and
East
side.
D
This
building
already
has
it's
non-contributing,
but
it
already
has
non-divided
lights
and
because
of
where
it's
located,
it
is
not
visible
from
the
streetscape
and
it
is
blocked
by
other
portions
of
the
building.
So
as
just
as
a
reminder,
vegetation
and
walls
don't
count
for
screening
in
this
District,
but
this
is
one
of
those
scenarios
where
we
see
that
we
see
non-divided
lights
on
houses
that
are
built
further
back.
So
this
was
built
in
the
1990s
and
it's
a
two-story
building,
it's
a
very
light.
Color
stucco.
D
It's
got
a
little
garage,
Edition,
we're
looking
at
the
South
elevation
on
the
top,
the
East
Elevation
and
the
East
elevation
of
The
Little
Garage.
So
as
you
pull
into
that
drive,
that's
what
you're
seeing
first
is
that
garage
on
the
left
and
then,
if
you
turn
around
and
look
to
the
right
you're
seeing
the
South
elevation
there,
okay,
so
what
we
are
looking
at
specifically
on
this
property
is
to
editions.
D
So
there's
it's
a
flat,
roofed
raised
parapet
stepped
massing
building,
but
those
The
Proposal
is
for
massings
to
get
filled
in
just
a
couple
of
them,
particularly
when
we're
looking
at
the
South
elevation
they're
dotted,
and
you
can
see
that
they're
building
out
towards
this
chimney
that
kind
of
sticks
out
on
that's.
If
you
look
on
to
the
right
side
of
the
South
elevation
and
then
in
filling
on
the
front
of
that
South
elevation,
there.
D
The
windows
will
match
and
size
it'll
match,
the
other
other
existing
windows
and
they'll
also
match
and
color
sample
swatches
were
taken
from
the
actual
existing
paint
cans.
D
A
You
Carly
questions
for
Carly
board
members,
not
any
at
this
time
applicant
or
applicants.
Please
come
forward
and
get
sworn
in.
B
E
Thank
you,
madam
chair
hi.
Taylor.
Did
you
considered
any
other
options
for
enclosing
these
upstairs
balconies
in
terms
of
the
outward
expression
of
the
building
other
than
white
stucco.
E
I
I
say
that,
just
because
I'm
you
know
I
know
this
is
a
non-contributing
building.
I
know
it
has
limited
public
visibility
or
even
no
public
visibility.
I
I,
don't
think
it's
an
uninteresting
building
in
its
current
location
and
I.
Don't
think
that
the
floor
plan
adjustments
that
you've
proposed
are
in
any
way
bad
I.
Just
think
that
something
is
lost.
E
When
the
house,
the
house
is
massing,
changes
in
this
way,
that's
stepping
seems
to
be
a
characteristic
feature
of
the
existing
residents.
Right
now
we
had
another
case
where
we
talked
about
massing
and
asymmetric.
Fireplace
placement
there's
something
really
nice
about
the
rear
balcony.
E
E
Is
there
the
opportunity
to
maybe
think
about
an
alternate
means
of
enclosure,
as
if
it
had
a
port
as
if
it
once
had
a
roof
and
then
got
closed
in
so
that
we
would
still
with
a
different
material
which
I
would
so
that
we'd
still
get
the
impression
of
the
original
massing.
E
Y
Well,
I
would
I
would
respond
by
saying
that
you
know
the
the
first
floor
is
Adobe
and
the
second
floor
is
framed,
and
you
can
pick
up
some
of
those
details
on
the
outside.
With
some
of
the
tapering
that's
going
on
in
the
outside,
it
was
discussed
that
we
try
to
soften
up
that.
You
know
the
upper
second
floor
so
that
it
doesn't
feel
quite
like
a
enclosed
end
deck
or
something
like
that.
Y
Y
Y
This,
okay,
you
can
see
it
on
the
East
Elevation,
there's
some
of
that
tapering!
That's
coming
down
by
the
front
steps,
it's
not
showing
up
so
much
in
the
in
the
cad
drawings,
but
we
were
considering
like
tapering,
some
of
the
Upper
Floor
toward
the
parapet,
just
to
soften
that
up
as
much
as
we
could.
Y
One
of
the
other
things
we
were
trying
to
do
on
this,
so
this
would
be
the
other,
roughly
50
square
foot
Edition
we're
going
to
you
know,
try
to
retain
the
articulation
of
the
fireplace
the
chimney
because
that
will
be
incorporated
into
the
bathroom.
So
there
will
be
a
fireplace
in
the
bathroom,
but
that
chimney
will
be
articulated
and
it
may
be
sculpted
a
little
bit
more
to
to
the
that
to
that
shape
a
little
bit.
A
If
you're,
not
I,
will
entertain
a
motion.
Please.
T
G
F
Thank
you,
madam
chair.
In
case
number
2022005982
hdrb
1149
East
Alameda
street
I
moved
to
approve
the
application
as
submitted,
but
would
welcome
any
friendly
amendments.
Remember
Guida
about
some
of
the
architectural
details
that
were
discussed.
E
C
E
Discussion
between
the
board
and
the
applicant
tonight
ways
to
retain
through
massing
details,
tapering
setting
back
of
planes
some
of
the
existing
visual
interest.
That
is
part
of
the
current
massing
associated
with
those
two
balconies
that
are
being
filled
in.
But
we
don't
arrive
at
just
an
extrusion
of
the
first
floor,
as
is
suggested
by
the
drawings,
but
that,
along
the
lines
of
some
of
the
existing
details
in
the
house,
that
there
be
a
kind
of
change
of
plane
and
a
visual
interest
to
these
additions.
F
I
B
E
A
D
Thank
you,
chair
members
of
the
board,
so
we
saw
this
case.
We
saw
not
this
case,
but
we
saw
this
property
come
up
for
a
status
review
in
the
late
spring,
so
we
are
looking
at
834
Allendale
Street,
it's
in
the
Don
Gaspar
area,
historic
district
and
is
situated
on
the
corner
of
West
Helton
Street,
which
is
almost
like
an
alley
and
Allendale
Street
there.
So
it
faces
East.
D
D
Okay,
we
have
a
couple
ancillary
structures:
the
chicken
coop
Tool
Shed
has
an
East
primary
facade.
We
are
also
looking
at
to
the
left,
the
back
side
of
the
house,
which
is
the
1990s
editions
and
then
there's
that
South
South
elevation,
which
will
be
the
subject
of
part
of
the
remodel.
D
Here
are
the
images
of
the
garage,
some
historic
images,
because
the
applicant
is
looking
to
change
the
doors
to
be
more
in
keeping
with
the
historic
photographers
okay.
So
we
are
looking
at
a
it's
simplified
primary
facade
diagram.
D
D
Okay,
we're
seeing
propose
an
existing
plan
so
or
the
site
plan.
So
what
we're
mainly
seeing
on
the
main
part
of
this
Edition
is
on
to
the
main
house,
and
up
is
West,
and
so
we
see
the
house
growing
to
the
west
and
in
filling
inside
of
that
yard,
that
tall
yard
wall
on
the
back,
which
is
a
non-contributing
yard
wall.
D
Okay,
we
can
see
in
the
floor
plan
that
a
little
bit
more
clearly
has
that
Westward
growth
happens
and
on
the
South
Side,
there's
facade
changes
there,
and
also
on
that
north
side
we're
seeing
some
de
minimis
changes
of
the
four
inches
on
the
front
facade.
That's
why
there's
not,
in
addition
to
a
primary
facade
for
the
board
that
east
facing
facade,
but
we
do
see
some
parapet
height
increases
as
the
building
goes
back
towards
the
West.
D
We
have
window
changes
and
excuse
me
we
also
have
other
facade
changes,
particularly
you
can
see
on
that
west
elevation
and
then
we
also
have
a
yard
wall
change,
and
so
this
is
part
of
the
condition
in
the
staff
report.
So
we're
looking
at
a
couple
of
things
here.
D
One
is
an
exception
to
addition
to
a
contributing
yard
wall,
so
that
is
the
increase
in
the
yard
will
height,
that
is
on
the
mostly
on
the
south
side
and
as
it
wraps
onto
the
east
side,
so
bringing
the
request
is
to
bring
it
up
in
height
and
then
on
the
east
side
to
end
fill
the
gate.
D
Now
the
east
side
is
a
non-contributing
portion,
but
that
excuse
me,
but
the
issue
here
that
and
that
I
see,
is
that
when
we
increase
in
height
and
infill
that
gate
opening
that
changes,
the
the
harmony
with
the
streetscape
big
part
of
the
Down
The
donga
Spar
area
historic
district-
is
we
have
lots
of
low
yard,
low
front
yard
walls,
they
all
have
Gates.
D
That's
that's
a
big
characteristic
feature,
and
so
seeing
that
this,
this
higher
yard
will
height
and
then
the
infill
the
gate
that
seems
rather
concerning
to
the
harmony
of
the
streetscape
and
generally
how
this
property
fits
in
with
the
historic
district.
So
that's
why
we
have
see
a
couple
there's
a
few
reasons
why
we
don't
see
that
I
don't
see
that
conditions
aren't.
C
D
For
the
height
of
the
yard
wall,
but
there's
also
a
concern
about
that
in
fill
the
gate,
I'm
racing
with
a
hype
that
said
anytime,
we
look
at
the
increase
in
a
stone
or
historic
yard.
Wall
height.
There
is
the
concern
about
a
potential
for
structural.
If
we
go
much
higher
than
a
de
minimis
height
increase,
then
sometimes
later
on,
we
see
a
request
for
administrative
approval
to
basically
rebuild
the
wall,
to
add
a
footing
underneath
because
there's
always
question
about
funding,
so
that
is
also
raised.
D
That
issue
is
raised
in
the
exception
responses
to
the
exception
criteria,
then
we're
looking
at
proposed
changes
to
the
shed
and
we're
looking
at
window
changes.
There
is
a
window
assessment
in
the
packet
and
then
we're
looking
at
door,
changes
and
window
changes
or
sorry
there's
the
window,
restoration
on
the
garage,
but
changes
to
the
doors
so
that
they're
more
in
keeping
with
what
this
historic
photographs
show.
D
D
That
said,
all
other
changes
staff
sees
as
oh
one
other
item
the
applicant
stated
that
they
would
clarify
the
material
change
of
the
windows
because
in
the
staff
report
it
shows
that
the
staff
report
and
the
scope
letter
it
shows
that
these
windows
are
wood
windows
with
aluminum
cladding,
they're,
all
metal,
casement
windows.
D
So
they
need
to
be
replaced
in
kind
with
material
and
dimension,
and
so
that
is
something
that
the
applicant
has
stated
that
they
would
clarify
this
hearing
that
they
would
go
with
metal
as
well.
Other.
F
D
Is
technically
also
in
addition
to
a
contributing
wall
because
it
attaches
into
the
yard
wall,
it's
it
does
impact
the
harmony
of
the
streetscape.
So
it's
not
something
that
you
normally
see
on.
These
is
very
quaint,
dongasbar,
Area
Properties.
D
There
is
one
non-conforming
wall
on
that
streetscape,
that's
really
really
tall,
but
generally
the
rest
of
the
of
the
Allendale
streetscape
is
really
low
and
then
be
just
to
State
beyond
that
the
property
actually
sets
lower
than
the
sidewalk
of
the
street.
But
yes,
you,
the
harmony
with
the
streetscape,
is
where
these
squarely
fall.
D
Approval
with
conditions
conditions
that
the
that
the
East
Side
yard
wall
is
lower
to
be
more
in
keeping
with
a
store
Yard
wall
there.
The
gate
opening
remains,
did
not
see
that
the
conditions
were
met
for
addition
to
the
contributing
wall
and
the
metal
casement
windows
are
in
kind
with
metal,
so
other
than
that.
The
rest
of
it
is
a
pretty
good
package.
A
So
with
your
recommendations,
you
feel
that
the
building
would
still
remain
contributing,
correct.
D
I
do
I.
Do
it's
it's
a
hard
call,
I
I
hate,
giving
up
Windows
anytime.
We
give
up
this
many
windows,
that's
very
difficult.
That
said,
for
when
particular
ones
are
non-operable.
D
I
I
It
seems
to
me
that,
based
on
the
staff
report
that
with
regard
to
the
house,
the
only
big
issue
is
the
is
the
replacement
of
the
windows.
Everything
else
you're
fine
with
it,
looks
like
it's
consistent
with
our
code,
but
the
replacement
of
the
steel
frame
windows
on
the
primary
facades
are
the
ones
that
are
at
issue
and
that's
pretty
much
it
for
the
main
house
right.
D
D
D
I
Okay,
that's
helpful,
but
with
regard
to
the
steel
windows,
at
least
in
the
application,
it
sounded
as
if
the
issue
was,
we
were
able
to
establish
that
they're
non-repairable,
but
they
wanted
to
replace
them,
not
in
kind,
and
that
was
where
they
needed
an
exception.
Now,
where
is
there
a
clarification
that
they
are
planning
now
to
replace
them
in
kind.
D
Yes,
okay,
member
bienvenue.
They
provide
clarification
to
me
late
last
week
that
that
was
that
they
would
confirm
that.
Okay,
that's.
I
In
that
case,
with
regard
to
the
walls,
there
are
two
issues
I
think
one
is
they
want
to
increase
the
height
of
the
contributing
stone
wall,
so
that
requires
an
exception
if
it
were
to
be
permitted
because
it's
contributing
and
then
second
and
it's
historic
right
and
secondly,
they
want
to
increase
the
height
and
remove
the
gate
in
the
non-contributing
while
on
the
East,
Elevation
or
the
east
side
of
the
property
right,
and
that
doesn't
actually
require
an
exception,
because
the
height
they're
asking
for
is
within
the
appropriate
calculations,
but
staff
still
recommends
that
that
be
denied
or
a
condition
be
given
that
it
not
be
as
high
as
requested
and
that
the
gate
opening
remain
do
I.
D
I
I
D
That
would
not
require
that
that,
and
they
have
the
assessment
saying
that
it's
frauded
okay.
D
No,
there
was
no
exception
required
for
that.
One
all.
I
A
Last
question:
what
is
the
increase
proposed
for
the
Stonewall.
D
Is
it
is
slightly
different
throughout
it's
maintained
at
the
corner
due
to
the
site
triangle?
Now,
let's
see
we're
going
410,
the
application
is
for
410
on
the
east
side,
but
the
contributing
yard
wall.
Do
you
have
five
seven?
Thank
you
just
not
keeping
the
number
in
my
head.
Five
seven
is
the
height.
D
B
Z
H
Z
We
do
recognize
that
the
property
has
been
subject
to
substantial
deferred
maintenance
over
the
years
and
when
my
client
bought
the
house,
we
wanted
to
bring
it
more
up
to
the
neighborhood
style
and
standings
and
so
on,
which
is
why
we're
proposing
to
change
the
steel
sash
windows
and
we
are
we'll
be
using
the
Colby
Vista
Lux,
which
is
the
steel
sash
same
kind
of
profiles.
The
same
width
of
the
of
the
muttons,
so
they'll
look
very,
very
similar
in
kind.
Z
Of
Carly
already
actually
covered
a
lot
of
things.
I
was
going
to
say
which
we
were
working
together
to
make
sure
that
our
Heights
and
elevations,
and
so
on
so
the
character
of
the
house.
Actually,
in
my
opinion,
if
you
look
at
the
old
elevations
and
new
elevations,
it
does
kind
of
maintain
that
kind
of
character.
It
steps
up
a
little
bit
on
one
side,
we're
not
raising
at
all
the
front,
we're
maintaining.
We
are
going
to
maintain
the
steel
sash
window,
that's
under
the
front
portal,
because.
J
Z
Does
operate
so
we're
agreeing
to
leave
that
window
there?
The
portal
itself
is
not
is
not
considered
part
of
the
primary
elevation,
but
we're
leaving
that
except
raising
up
the
four
inches
that
we're
allowed
to
do.
I
Z
Z
Carly,
that
is
correct.
Is
that
correct,
I
understood
it
different,
but
that's
okay,
it
doesn't
matter.
As
for
the
visual
triangle,
on
the
front
walls,
that's
because
the
city
traffic,
because
we
do
want
to
raise
the
walls
they
were
they
required
that
visual
line.
So
you
have
to
have
when
you're
coming
down
Houghton,
you
have
to
have
the
line.
Z
So
that's
why
that
diagonal
wall
is
there,
but
the
planter
it
will
be
a
planter
in
the
front
which
will
maintain
part
of
that
lower
streetscape
wall
that
Carly's
talking
about,
but
the
wall
itself.
You
know
we
do
want
to
have
a
little
bit
of
privacy
and
it
is
within
the
height
that
is
in
the
neighborhood.
So
that
would
tell
you
that
that's
in
keeping
with
the
neighborhood,
because
that's
the
average
height
of
the
walls
in
a
neighborhood.
Z
Let
me
address
the
stone
now
in
the
Stonewall,
we're
only
proposing
to
raise
about
32
feet
in
length,
starting
from
where
the
visual
line
begins
back
30
approximately
32
feet,
and
it
will
mean
when
it
steps
back
down
to
the
original
wall.
It's
following
the
same
style
that
the
existing
wall
has
now
which
it
has
an
angle
to
go
when
it
raises
up
as
you
go
down
the
street
now
as
you
go
down
the
street
Houghton,
the
wall
becomes
higher
because
Houghton
is
dropping.
Z
So
by
the
time
you
get
to
the
back,
it's
probably
closer
to
I,
don't
never
measured
it
totally,
but
I
believe
it's
pretty
close
to
Six
Feet.
By
the
time
you
get
to
the
back
of
the
property,
so
the
stone
wall
does
already
have
a
lot
of
height
from
the
streetscape,
but
we're
in
a
great
way
we're
proposing
to
raise
it
up
to
that
five
foot,
seven
allowable
step,
it
back
down
to
its
original
height
and
go
on
back
and
to
keep
it.
In
the
same.
Look
at
this
historic
look.
Z
We
will
repoint
the
entire
wall
to
take
care
of
any
failing
routing
and
someone
that's
taking
place
right
now
with
well,
because
it's
not
been
maintained,
it's
probably
since
it
was
built
and
as
for
structure,
I've
actually
found
that
the
Stonewall
they
have
a
stone
foundation
underneath
them
and
the
wall
does
not.
But
you
know
we
can
certainly
get
our
structural
engineer
they're
the
ones
that
will
be
going
over
that.
So
if
they
find
there's
an
issue,
we
can
put
spot
footings.
We
there
are
several
different
recommendations.
We
can
do
that.
Z
D
Madam,
chair
I
have
a
measurement
of
on
the
drawings
two
foot
three
at
the
corner,
where
we're
looking
at
the
short
wall
going
up
and
jumping
and
I'll
pull
up
that
drawing.
F
Thank
you,
madam
chair
quick
question
for
curly
on
the
stone
wall,
because
it's
contributing
if
the
board
were
to
let's
say,
approve
the
roughly
two
foot
increase.
Is
there
any
risk
of
that
wall
losing
its
status.
D
With
change
with
changes
that
are
well,
if
you
think
about
the
proportionality
of
how
how
much
you're
adding
I
think
that's
considerable,
that
is
a
reasonable
question.
It
would
throw
into
question
that
I.
F
Think
yeah
that
that's
my
concern
with
the
addition
of
height
on
the
stone
wall
I'm
also
in
agreement
with
you
on
the
front
wall.
I
think
you
know
having
these
lower
walls
with
the
gate
in
the
center
add
to
the
friendly.
You
know
a
friendly
nature
to
the
streetscape,
I
I,
think
more
and
more
in
Santa
Fe
we're
starting
to
walk
down
the
streets
and
have
taller
and
taller
walls
on
either
side
and
I.
F
Just
think
it
takes
away
from
the
streetscape
and
doesn't
make
it
as
an
inviting
neighborhood
as
they
used
to
be
so
I'm
I'm
in
agreement
with
staff
on
both
walls.
I
would
also
add
that
I
think
the
diagonal
wall
at
the
forefoot
10
I,
don't
know
if
that's
something
the
applicant
would
still
be
proposing
if
this
board
found
that
we
wanted
to
keep
all
these
walls
shorter,
but
I
think
that
also
distracts
from
the
streetscape
and
isn't
something
that
we
would
typically
see
of
a
house
like
this.
E
Guida.
Thank
you,
madam
chair.
Just
one
more
question
for
the
applicant.
The
I
understand
on
the
primary
facade,
the
retention
of
the
existing
steel
casement
window
under
the
forts
Hall
and
and
that
you're
proposing
just
to
clarify
you're,
proposing
that
all
other
metal
casement
windows
are
being
replaced
with
these
new
Colby
All
Steel
Windows.
Yes,.
C
K
Thank
you,
chair
Rios
members
of
the
board
Joseph
Kearns
summer
Kearns
and
Associates
125
Lincoln
Street
over
the
last
day
or
two
we've
had
six
letters
of
support
submitted
by
neighbors,
rather
than
read
them
into
the
record.
I'll
just
read
their
names
and
addresses
and
a
couple
of
quotes
from
the
letters
I'll
submit
the
six
letters
to
the
clerk
now.
D
K
Oh
okay,
just
to
make
my
record
I'll
just
read
the
names
and
addresses
and
a
couple
of
quotes
I'll
be
brief.
Paul
and
Ellen
biederman
across
the
street.
From
the
subject
property
at
829
Allendale.
K
They
said
the
proposed
work
will
make
these
areas
far
more
attractive,
removing
the
rundown
structures
and
fixtures
that
are
currently
there.
Jenna
Ritter
at
18,
819
Allendale,
just
down
the
street,
says
that
834
Allendale
has
been
neglected
by
past
owners
in
his
needs
of
serious
repair,
again
supports
the
application.
Grace
Brill
at
984,
Don
Manuel
across
blacksmith
alley
on
the
west
side
of
the
property
says
we
welcome
people
making
a
commitment
to
improving
older
properties
that
have
been
languishing
and
Anthony
Egan
who
lives
at
828.
K
Allendale
says
from
what
we
understand
these
proposed
changes
would
go
a
long
way
in
restoring
the
Aesthetics
and
utility
of
the
house
as
it
currently
stands,
as
well
as
the
whole
portion
of
the
neighborhood
corner.
It
would
also
be
wonderful
to
see
the
house
inhabited.
It
has
not
been
inhabited
for
a
number
of
years
and
then.
Lastly,
there
was
Mona
K
and
Ken
Bush
who
live
adjacent
to
the
subject.
K
Property
on
the
north,
they
share
the
common
driveway
I,
understand
they're
here
in
the
audience
tonight,
so
I
won't
take
their
thunder
away
and
they
each
submitted
a
letter
and
I
also
want
to
point
out
that
the
owners
of
the
property,
John
and
Betty
amaranth
are
here
tonight
as
well.
I'm
just
going
to
speak
briefly
to
the
exceptions.
K
Initially,
as
Carly
mentioned,
we
worked
with
staff
and
we
appreciate
them.
Carly
indicating
staff's
concerns,
primarily
with
respect
to
the
height
of
the
structure.
The
allowable
height
is
14
feet
feet.
K
Most
of
the
house
will
be
at
12
feet
a
little
bit
of
his
12
foot
feet,
six
as
Mr
Odell
described,
so
the
Apple
can
start
making
a
meaningful
effort
not
to
maximize
this
property
they're
substantially
below
the
maximum
height
limit
and
also,
as
was
pointed
out,
Mr
amaran
found
a
1940s
photo
of
the
original
garage
door
on
the
left
hand
side
facing
the
garage,
and
we
used
that
as
the
model
for
the
proposed
replacement
garage
door
and
we
worked
with
Carly
on
that
as
well.
As
far
as
the
walls
go.
K
There
are
two
areas,
as
was
pointed
out,
the
area
in
front
of
Allendale
is
not
contributing
the
the
Eastern
portion
of
the
yard
wall,
the
average
height
of
guard
walls
on
the
streetscape,
is
four
feet.
Ten
and
there's
no
exception
required
for
the
improvements
to
that
non-contributing
yard
wall
Carly
pointed
out
the
existing
gate
on
the
East
facade
of
the
wall
or
the
East
portion
of
the
wall.
K
I
submit
to
you
around
the
corner
on
the
Alley
side
is
the
proposed
main
entry
into
the
yard
if
you're
going
Southbound
on
Allendale,
which
is
the
primary
approach
given
Houghton,
is
a
one-way
street
that
your
that
gate
is
plainly
visible
from
the
street
and
I
think
it
can
would
continue
to
contribute
to
the
streetscape
harmony
that
exists
in
that
area.
There
was
discussion
of
the
height
of
yard
walls.
K
Well,
the
average
height
is
four
feet
ten,
so
the
proposed
height
is
not
out
of
character
of
the
existing
yard
walls
in
the
area
and,
finally,
that
gate
on
the
front
facing
Allendale
is
really
not
used.
As
you
saw,
the
parking
for
the
property
is
in
the
back
of
the
property.
So,
there's
no
reason
for
somebody
to
use
that
gate
that
small
metal
gate
on
the
front,
East
facade
on
the
side
wall
along
West,
Howton,
The
Stonewall
that
we've
been
talking
about
that
does
require
the
exception.
K
The
average
height
of
walls
in
that
streetscape
is
five
feet.
Seven.
This
is
primarily
a
security
issue
for
the
amaranths
sidewalls
are
typically
higher,
as
is
shown
by
the
higher
height
along
how
West
Houghton,
Street
and
properties
Don't
Front
on
Houghton
houghton's
West
Houghton
Street
is
about
10
to
12
feet
wide
along
the
the
South
property
line.
It's
a
narrow,
one-way
Street,
and
these
are
side.
Walls
and
security.
Again
is
an
important
issue,
so
we're
trying
to
provide
some
security
along
that
side.
K
Given
that
there's
not
much
traffic
in
that
area,
it's
dark
at
night
that
is
important
to
my
clients.
As
with
respect
to
the
design.
As
you
know,
River
Walk,
Rivers,
stone
walls
are
common
in
the
district,
and
this
addition
to
the
wall
existing
in
wall
will
retain
the
harmony
within
with
the
streetscape
and,
as
you
saw,
the
bat
wall
is
in
badly
in
need
of
restoration
and
repair.
K
A
Any
questions
for
Mr
Collins
member
of
the
menu
thank.
I
You,
madam
chair,
so
thank
you
for
all
that.
It's
all
helpful,
I
guess
I
can
just
lay
my
cards
on
the
table
and
you
know
the
contributing
stone
wall.
All
I
get
the
security
issue,
but
once
it
was
designated
as
contributing
I
think
that
you
know
we
kind
our
hands
are
somewhat
tied
because
I
do
agree
that
it
certainly
would
no
longer
be
contributing
if,
if
it
was
subjected
to
the
change
that's
being
proposed,
so
that
issue
I
think
is,
is
a
concern.
I'm,
not
sure
you
can
really
solve.
For
me.
I
Almost
everything
else,
you're
doing
I
think
is
not
just
okay
but
I.
Think
you're,
really
improving
the
property
and
I
commend
you
all
for
the
work
you're
doing
on
it,
except
I'm,
still
a
little
stuck
on
the
front
wall,
which
is
raises
some
interesting
issues.
So
I'd
be
curious.
What
your
perspective
is,
because
you
know
we
you
are
within
the
height
there's
no,
the
height.
That's
allowed
you're,
it's
non-contributing
it.
I
I
Are
you
it's
not
a
huge
change
that
you're
proposing
I
think
it's
three
six
now
maybe
and
you're
proposing
to
go
to
410,
do
I
have
those
numbers
directly
right
something
along
those
lines
but
in
the
site
visit.
What
one
thing
that
really
jumps
out
at
you
is
that
the
house
is
set
down
from
the
street,
and
so
you
could
you
can
get
a
lot
of
privacy
without
necessarily
going
up
to
the
tallest
amount
of
Wall
height.
That
would
be
permitted
under
the
code.
I
Is
there
some
place
in
between
what
you're
asking
for
and
what
is
there
now
that
you
could
accept
somewhat
lower
than
what
you're
asking
for,
and
would
you
consider
the
possibility
of
retaining
the
the
opening
for
the
the
gate
which
I
do
understand
is
maybe
not
being
used
but
from
staff's
perspective,
which
I
think
is
it's
a
good
point
that
does
add
to
the
sense
of
the
streetscape
that
this
is
an
open
and
inviting
environment
for
people
walking
by
and
that
this
is
an
open,
neighborhood.
I
K
You
chair,
Rios
member
of
bienvenue,
I
I,
heard
two
questions,
one
relating
to
the
side
wall,
the
the
Riverwalk
wall.
I
I
was
kind
of
more
than
what
my
position
is
so.
K
Understood
and
I
I
just
have
a
question.
What
we
have
today
is
a
St
is
a
Riverwalk
wall
of
x,
height
and
we're
proposing
to
add
in-kind,
an
additional,
approximately
two
feeders.
So
I
forget
the
number
exactly,
but
can
you
help
us
understand
how
that
would
change
the
effect
of
the
existing
wall
with
respect
to
its
contributing
status?
You
had
a
Riverwalk
wall.
You
will
have
one
after
the
proposal.
So
what's
the
basis
for
saying
it
would
not
be
contributing.
At
that
point,.
I
K
AA
One
way
was
they
had
a
flange
on
them.
They
were
attached
to
a
buck
when
they
did
the
CMU
walls,
the
other
way
those
steel
casements
were
set
and
and
the
block
stacked
as
the
window
was
set
in
place.
So
the
window
frames
were
mortared
in
to
the
cutout
of
the
blocks,
so
in
order
to
repair
those
windows
and
or
Flash
them,
so
they
quit
leaking
because
I
think
when
you
were
out
there,
you
happen
to
notice
that
there's
a
lot
of
stains
on
the
inside
plaster.
AA
The
other
thing
is,
the
stains
are
from
the
windows
of
the
age.
They
are
of
not
being
flashed
at
that
time.
They're
when
you
bid
when
you
use
steel,
casement
windows
and
you
built
with
CMU,
there
was
no
flashing.
They
were
just
set
in
and
mortared
so,
like
I,
said
to
repair
those
windows,
because
the
one
on
the
south
elevation
is
set
so
far
out
of
Plum
that
the
bottom
of
the
window
touches.
AA
The
top
part
sticks
out
is
to
remove
those
frames
and
in
order
to
remove
those
frames,
the
stucco
and
the
plaster
have
to
be
chipped,
but
more
so
than
that
the
frames
you
cannot
get
out
of
that
block
without
either
dismantling
the
wall
or
bending
the
frames.
If
you
go
in
there
and
bend
the
frames
they're
not
going
to
be
any
good
they'll
be
useless
now,
so
the
other
part
of
that
is
I.
Looked
at
a
lot
of
the
steel
casements
that
are
in
the
historic
district.
AA
AA
I
Thank
you,
madam
chair,
well,
I
appreciate
having
you
here,
because
we
read
your
reports
and
you
know
I
I.
It
might
be
just
helpful
to
kind
of
clarify
how
we
read
your
reports
and
what
we
look
for
and
how
we
use
them
and
reaching
decisions
here,
and
anyone
who
presents
reports
as
an
expert
on
the
windows.
It's
really
it's
not
so
much
that
we're
looking
for
a
recommendation
as
to
what
a
good
solution
would
be
as
we're
looking
for
someone
to
say.
I
Is
this
window
repairable
or
restorable
or
not,
and
then
we
go
to
step
B,
which
is
okay.
Well,
first
of
all,
if
we
don't
get
to
that
that
it's
not
repairable
or
restorable,
if
that
it
is
repairable
or
restorable,
then
we
have
to
within
our
job
under
our
ordinance
is
to
say
you
need
to
repair
it
or
restore
it.
But
if
we
are,
we
have
on
the
record
valid
evidence
that
it
is
not
repairable
or
restorable
and
there's
no
contrary
evidence.
I
Then
we
go
to
step
two
under
our
ordinance,
which
is
we
do
allow
it
to
be
replaced,
but
it
has
to
be
in
kind.
So,
really
that's
how
we
look
at
it
and
when
you
reach,
so
we
we
kind
of
rely
on
you
to
give
us
an
objective
opinion.
That's
not
so
much
based
on
you
know
a
view
of
what's
good
in
the
world,
but
just
more
a
simple
question:
is
this
window
repairable
or
restorable
under
our
code
and
I?
Understand
your
testimony
and
report
to
say
these
are
not
that.
I
A
AA
There
is
a
two-page
section
of
all
my
reports
that
we'll
go
through
and
and
says
whether
it's
restorable
or
unrestorable,
and
it's
a
and
it's
after
the
descriptions
of
what
the
windows
are
and
so
I've
put
that
in
the
newer
reports
and
the
these
past
reports
to
make
it
much
simpler
for
you
when
you're
looking
through
that,
okay
I've
read
all
he's
got
here
and
I
know
that
you're
looking
at
a
lot
of
information
for
all
aspects
of
these
residences,
so
those
two
page
deals
is
part
more
of
a
condensed
version,
so
you
can,
when
you're,
going
out
to
the
site
that
you
can
run
through.
AA
Oh,
this
is
written
on
repairable.
All
this
is
restorable.
Oh,
this
is
non-historic
and
for
these
reasons,
so
that
should
make
it
simpler
for
when
you're
looking
through
that
stuff.
Thank.
A
T
A
Yes,
we
have
been
if
I
can
interrupt
you,
we
have
been
seeing
your
name
for
a
long
time
and
it's
nice
to
meet
you
in
person.
Absolutely.
T
I
know
that
the
vernacular
stone
walls
and
the
height
of
the
walls
is
going
to
be
very
important
to
you
and
I
appreciate
the
fact
that
you've
dialed
in
on
that
I'm
wondering
if
there
could
be
a
solution
in
leaving
the
height
of
those
walls
as
is
stabilizing
them,
as
has
been
proposed
and
repointing
them.
Is
there
room
between
those
walls
and
the
house
to
place
a
coyote
fence
or
additional
privacy
and
security,
and
not
affect
those
walls
at
all?
Leave
them
as
they
are?
B
AB
832
Allendale
Street
Santa
Fe.
Thank
you.
Okay,
my
husband
and
I
bought
832
Ellen
jail
24
years
ago,
so
I'm
very
familiar
with
8
34..
It's
been
in
a
terrible
state
of
neglect.
The
entire
time
we've
lived
there
and
I'm
delighted
that
the
new
owners
have
decided
to
restore
this
property,
live
in
it
and
become
part
of
the
neighborhood.
It's
certainly
going
to
be
a
compliment.
AB
I've
lived
in
New
Mexico,
my
entire
life,
the
last
42
years
in
Santa
Fe
I've,
lived
in
a
lot
of
old
houses.
When
I
was
a
student
at
UNM,
those
old
casement
windows
leak
they
did
45
years
ago
and
I'm
sure
they
really
do
today.
So
I
really
feel
that
they
should
be
replaced
with
new
material
I
support
everything
they're
doing
regarding
the
rock
wall.
I
do
have
to
disagree
with
the
staff
report
regarding
saying
that
there
are
all
low
walls
in
our
street.
AB
I'd
say
at
least
50
percent
of
the
walls
on
Allendale
Street
are
five
to
six
feet.
Tall
in
front
of
the
houses.
I've
lived
next
to
that
corner
for
many
many
years.
Security
is
an
issue.
This
isn't
the
Santa
Fe
of
40
50
years
ago.
We
have
a
lot
more
foot
traffic,
a
lot
of
people,
you
don't
usually
see
a
lot
of
being
airbnbs
people
in
and
out
just
people
wandering
around
from
downtown
I
feel
that
there
should
be
a
solution
for
them
to
raise
that
wall.
AB
In
regards
to
the
fact
that
so
many
other
houses
on
the
street
do
have
taller
walls
and
have
more
privacy.
I
understand
that.
There's
an
issue
about
whether
or
not
it's
going
to
be
contributing
anymore.
It
seems
to
me
that
you
can
take
something:
that's
contributing
improve
it
and
it
still
has
the
basis
of
being
contributing.
AB
I,
don't
think
it's
going
to
be
detrimental
other
than
that
I
do
understand
the
need
to
keep
what
we
have
leftable
Santa
Fe,
my
husband
and
I,
were
instrumental
in
Saving
the
two
back
garages
from
being
destroyed
by
the
by
former
owner
in
2016,
and
we
advocated
for
for
them
to
stay
and
we're
very
happy
that
they
are
and
that
the
new
owners
are
going
to
use
them
as
garages.
AB
So
all
I
can
say
is
again
we're
very
happy
that
they're
or
that
they're
going
to
go
forward
with
this.
After
such
a
long
time
of
waiting
and
revising
so
I
give
my
full
support
to
them
and
I
I
hope
you
might
take
my
recommendations.
Thank
you
very
much.
Thank.
B
N
Name
is
my
name:
is
Ken
Bush
and
I
live
at
832,
I'm
Mona's
husband,
so
we
live
in
the
same
house
next
door.
I'm
here
to
express
my
support
for
the
applicant's
plans
for
the
remodel
and
alterations
seems
like
the
big
issue
is
the
wall?
The
height
increases
to
the
existing
yard.
N
Walls
at
the
front
of
the
property
are
necessary
because
the
front
yard,
which
is
really
the
only
yard,
is
very
exposed
to
the
street
and
any
passing
cars
and
pedestrians,
and
that's
what
you'll
feel
if
you
stand
in
that
yard,
there
is
zero
privacy.
This
is
clearly
a
hardship
safety
issue
for
the
applicants
and
their
request
to
increase
the
Wall
height
as
it
is,
is
within
allowed
limits
should
be
granted.
Staff
has
stated
in
this
response
on
page
four,
that
quote:
streetscape
characteristics
of
the
district
is
a
low
yard
wall
in
the
front
yard.
N
Unquote.
This
is
not
correct.
10
of
the
16
yard
walls
in
the
immediate
neighborhood
on
Allendale
and
Houghton
have
walls
of
equal
or
greater
height
than
what's
proposed
here.
Most
of
those
are
actually
a
little
over
six
feet.
The
proposed
increase
in
Wall
height
is
also
within
the
average
height
rule.
The
streetscape
will
not
be
negatively
impacted,
aesthetically
or
from
a
historic
perspective.
N
I
believe
the
exception
should
be
granted.
I
also
might
note
that
the
addition
of
a
couple
of
feet
of
stone
on
top
of
the
historic
stone
wall
I
believe
that's
not
the
entire
length
of
the
wall.
It's
it's
only
the
20
feet
towards
the
Eastern
end.
That's
it
by
the
front
yard,
the
rest
of
the
yard
wall
I
believe
stays
the
same.
N
To
my
view,
I,
don't
think
that's
the
addition
to
the
the
height
on
the
stone
wall
is
going
to
impact.
This
fact
that
it's
historic
I'm
totally
in
favor
of
the
applicant's
other
proposals
for
renovation,
such
as
parapet,
Heights
and
the
addition
and
the
entry
doors
and
repairs
at
the
garage
in
the
tool
shed
I,
think
their
plans
show
careful
consideration
of
the
historic
aspects
of
the
property
in
the
neighborhood
and
I'll
leave
it
at
that.
Thank
you.
A
Thank
you
very
much.
Is
this
the
owner
of
the
house,
this
gentleman?
Yes,
okay,
I
just
want
to
say
something
very
quickly
to
the
owners,
and
that
is
to
compliment
to
you
for
wanting
to
remodel
and
improve
your
home.
We
do
encourage
people
to
do
just
that
and
to
continue
living
in
our
neighborhoods,
and
this
is
an
old
neighborhood
and
I
do
compliment
you
on
that.
However,
traditionally
those
neighborhoods
have
lower
walls
and
I'm.
A
A
And
I'm,
looking
at
the
the
neighborhood
and
I'm
not
seeing
very
high
walls
as
as
was
indicated,
Carly.
D
We
have
our
inspector
actually
go
out
and
measure
all
the
walls
now
when
they
do
that
they
do
not
count
non
non-conforming,
unpermitted
walls
and
that's
kind
of
hard
for
us
to
do.
I
mean
it
takes
it's
we're
very
careful
about
how
we
do
this
so
non-conforming
walls
walls
that,
basically,
someone
does
maybe
on
a
weekend
that
whenever
someone
a
property
owner
actually
comes
back
and
works
on
that
wall,
they
will
have
to
bring
it
back
down
into
conformance
those
do
not
count
towards
that
streetscape
application.
D
If
we
did
that,
then
we
would
be
increasing
the
Wall
height
over
time
excretionary
and
we
would
lose.
We
would
lose
the
Integrity
of
our
historic
districts
and
potentially
lose
our
historic
districts
altogether.
The
nominations
all
together
just
want
to
state
that.
A
Thank
you,
madam
chair.
Thank
you
and
I
do
want
to
remind
people.
You
know
we
are
all
stored,
some
of
our
properties,
of
our
historic
properties
here
and
one
day,
we'll
all
be
gone,
but
hopefully
those
properties
will
remain
and
our
ancestors
will
continue
to
take
care
of
those
properties.
K
Thank
you,
chair
Rios,
in
response
to
member
bienvenues
comments.
We've
listened
to
the
good
conversation,
that's
taken
place
and
have
a
thought
about
both
the
Stonewall
on
the
south
side
and
on
the
East
wall,
where
changes
are
proposed
initially
on
the
sidewall
along
West
Houghton
Street
I
want
to
make
clear
I
think
it
was
mentioned,
but
the
proposal
it's
about
33
feet
of
wall
that
is
proposed
to
be
raised
west
of
the
view,
visibility
triangle.
So
it's
not
the
whole
wall.
It's
about
33
feet.
K
We
heard
comments
about
the
idea
of
instead
of
Inc
increasing
the
Wall
height
in
that
area,
to
put
a
coyote
fence
on
the
inside
side
of
the
wall,
with
the
same
design
as
the
as
was
proposed,
the
applicant
would
be
amenable
to
a
coyote
fence
rather
than
raising
the
stone
wall
in
that
33
or
so
put
area.
As
far
as
the
front
or
eastern
wall
that
is
non-contributing,
there
was
a
request
or
a
thought
about
an
intermediate
height.
Rather
than
going
up
to
four
foot
ten,
as
proposed.
K
The
applicants
are
amenable
to
a
four
foot
high
wall
along
along
that
non-contributing
section
that
wraps
around
to
the
driveway,
provided
the
gate
that
is
really
useless
for
the
applicants
be
filled
in
on
the
street
side
and
recognizing
that
they're
presently,
two
gates
on
that
wall.
For
those
of
you
who
are
on
the
field
trip
maintaining
the
gate.
That
is
the
gate
with
some
utility
that
can
be
seen
from
the
street
and
that's
what
we
would
propose
so
a
four
foot,
high
wall
and
filling
in
the
gate
area
on
the
streets
on
Allendale
Street.
E
Just
a
comment
Madam
chair,
you
know
and
I'd
be
willing
to
make
a
motion
and
surely
adjust
it
with
other
board
member
comments.
You
know
this
discussion
of
the
character
of
that
wall
of
the
stone
wall.
You
know,
I.
Think
I
think
it's
important
to
note
that
this
board
observed
that
Not
only
was
it
old
and
historic
and
a
stone
wall,
and
but
that
it
has
other
characteristics
that
are
contribute
to
the
streetscape
in
terms
of
scale.
E
So,
in
my
view,
you
know,
while
it
may
be
acceptable,
sometimes
to
modify
a
contributing
all
I
think
in
this
particular
case.
The
length
of
this,
the
changing
the
profile
of
this
wall
would
be
meaning.
The
vertical
profile
of
this
wall
would
really
be
detrimental
to
to
what
we
recognized
in
it
as
contributing
changing
it
to
have
a
a
view
triangle.
E
All
of
that
stuff
really
does
take
away
from
the
character
of
the
wall
in,
in
my
view,
the
the
low
I
agree
with
you
matter,
chair
that
the
low
wall,
the
the
low
front
yard
walls,
even
the
non-contributing
ones,
are-
are
part
of
the
streets
cave
and
part
of
the
character
of
the
neighborhood
and
shouldn't
be
lost
here.
I
wouldn't
agree
with
with
adding
a
coyote
fence
to
accomplish
what
was
originally
proposed.
I
think
I
think
that
that
we
should
retain
the
low
wall
character.
E
Be
happy
to
make
a
motion
case:
2022-005
983
hdrb,
through
834
Allendale,
Street
I,
move
that
the
board
approved
the
the
application,
as
submitted
noting
the
following
conditions
for
items
one
through
nine
approve
all
of
them,
noting
that
the
applicant
has
changed
the
proposal
from
aluminum
clad
wood
windows
to
thermally,
Broken,
All,
Steel
windows
items
10
through
12
for
item
10..
There
should
be
no
increase
in
height
to
the
River
Rock
Yard
wall.
E
No,
addition
of
a
coyote
fence
in
the
front
yard
number
11
that
the
applicant's
suggestion
that
raising
the
non-contributing
front,
slash
e
stucco
wall
to
four
feet
is
acceptable
and
that
the
applicant
retain
the
two
existing.
The
the
existing
openings,
the
one
on
the
street
and
the
one
on
the
driveway.
The
non-historic
gates
could
be
replaced
with
solid
gate,
material
and
number
12
that
the
CMU
block
patches
in
the
river
rock
wall
I
would
propose
instead
of
veneering
them
in
river
rock,
that
they
be
stuccoed.
E
To
note
that
historic,
those
historic
openings
and
retain
that
that
use
pattern,
items
13
through
18,
we
approve
I,
think
that's
it.
F
I
For
clarification,
since
the
motion
requires
the
retention
of
the
opening
on
the
street
for
the
gate,
would
they
be
permitted
to
have
a
gate?
That's
that
you
don't
see
through,
so
that
they
could
still
obtain
the
Privacy
that
they're
seeking
absolutely.
B
A
You
very
much
thank
you.
Applicants
and
other
persons
had
spoken
reference
through
this
case.
Any
discussion
items.
G
I
have
an
item
I
wanted
to
bring
to
the
board's
attention.
There
was
an
appeal
for
an
approval
that
was
granted
last
year
in.
H
G
G
Regarding
1160
Camino
had
made
it
a
Cruz
Blanca,
which
is
the
edge
of
the
campus
at
St
John
College.
That
was
for
a
65-foot
cell
tower.
You
might
recall
that
that
was
before
the
board
in
2020
and
it
was
denied
it
was
redesigned
then
presented
to
the
board
again
in
2021
and
approved,
and
the
applicant
of
that
is
a
the
outcome
of
that
is
out
of
southern
New
Mexico
and.
G
All
right,
so
the
applicant
is
gravity
pad
LLC
that
was
appealed
by
the
upper
Community
Cruise
Blanca
Association
and
Mr
durkovich,
who
was
both
a
resident
of
that
neighborhood
as
well
as
an
attorney,
and
that
was
a
the
appeal
from
the
governing
body
denial
of
the
of
the
appeal
from
the
h
board.
Let
me
start
that
sentence
over
again,
so
there
was
an
appeal
from
the
h
board's
approval
of
that
cell
tower.
G
Mr
dirkovic
and
the
neighborhood
appealed
that
to
the
district
court
pursuant
to
New
Mexico
rules,
an
appeal
from
a
governing
body
of
an
administrative
decision
of
a
land
use
board
is
appealed
to
a
district
court
and
judge
Francis
Matthew,
granted
the
appeal
and
has
ruled
against
the
city
and
in
favor
of
Mr
jerkovich
and
the
neighborhood
and
remanded
that
appeal.
A
remanded
that
hearing.
G
H
G
W
G
Law
on
the
rules
and
the
motion
to
reconsider
is
due
I
believe
it's
Saturday
November
26,
which
is
a
Saturday
November
26th,
which
is
a
Saturday.
We
will
try
to
submit.
A
Any
comments
in
reference
to
that
in
our
College
anything
else
under
discussion,
anybody
from
staff
no
Madison
the
board
I
will
not
be
here.
I
think
I
will
not
be
here
and
the
reason
I'm
saying
I
will
not
I
think
is
because
I,
if
I
can
insert
some
personal
stuff
I
have
to
take
one
of
my
sisters
to
the
or
one
of
my
sisters,
who's
taken
to
the
hospital.
Today
she
lives
with
me
and
I.
A
Don't
I
have
a
trip
planned
to
go
to
see
my
daughter
in
Austin,
I
and
I'd,
be
there
for
November
22nd
Which
is
my
my
birthday
and
Thanksgiving,
but
under
the
circumstances
I
don't
know
what
I'm
going
to
do
so
you
might
have
to
share
and
I'm
sure,
you're
ready
and
capable
of
doing
that.
So
our
next
meeting
is
on
my
birthday,
November
20th.
A
And
it's
almost
Sunday
I
was
born.
2022
no
and
I
will
entertain
a
motion
to
adjourn.
A
B
A
A
A
C
A
A
I
know
and
someone
needs
to
adjust
some
tall
person
or
somebody
with
a
ladder
needs
to
adjust
that.