►
From YouTube: Historic Landmarks Commission Meeting - March 7, 2019
Description
No description was provided for this meeting.
If this is YOUR meeting, an easy way to fix this is to add a description to your video, wherever mtngs.io found it (probably YouTube).
A
B
A
D
The
only
thing
I
wanted
to
bring
to
the
Commission's
attention
is
some
of
you
may
have
heard.
Last
night
there
was
a
fire
in
one
of
the
contributing
apartment
buildings
in
the
Central
City
historic
district,
521,
South,
500,
East
I
can't
remember
the
actual
name
of
the
apartment
building,
but
just
want
to
let
you
know
that
building
official
and
fire
investigators
have
gone
out
and
it
was
a
transient
started,
fire,
the
third.
It's
a
three-story
building
was
vacant
and
boarded.
D
The
third
storey
apparently
had
fairly
extensive
fire
damage
to
it,
and
the
fire
department
had
to
breach
the
roof
in
order
to
fight
the
fire.
We
don't
know
the
full
extent.
Most
of
the
damage
is
not
visible
from
outside
of
the
building,
but
just
one
wanted
to
let
everybody
know
that
that
we're
looking
into
making
sure
that
we
can
do
everything
we
can
to
secure
that,
so
that
any
deterioration
of
the
building
is
kept
to
a
minimum.
So
hopefully
we
can
get
the
roof
tarp
and
it
is
not
it's
a
privately
owned
building
and
property.
D
So,
just
let
you
know
that
that
we
are
we've
been
working
all
day
with
the
building
official
and
Fire
Department,
and
the
people
who
board
buildings
for
the
city
to
do
what
we
can
with
that
I.
Don't
think
that
we
can
get
on
the
roof
quite
yet,
but
hopefully
sooner
rather
than
later,
we
can
work
with
the
owner
to
get
that
taken
care
of
okay.
A
E
Thank
you
good
evening,
members
of
the
Commission.
This
is
a
request
from
Trolley
Square
Ventures
to
relocate
the
structure
located
at
665
East
Ely
placed
at
636
East
Seigo
Avenue
in
the
Central
City
historic
district.
The
receiving
site
is
down
the
street
to
the
west
from
the
structures
current
location,
the
HLC
has
decision-making
authority
in
relocation
matters.
This
is
a
second
request
that
the
landmark
Commission
has
entertained
for
the
relocation
of
the
structure
on
December
7th
to
2017.
E
The
landmark
Commission
approved
the
relocation
of
the
structure
to
the
northwest
corner
of
600
south
and
600
East.
Subsequently
that
location
became
unavailable.
Hence
the
request
before
you
this
evening.
The
request
meets
the
standards
outlined
in
the
zoning
ordinance
for
relocation
of
a
contributing
structure
in
a
local,
historic
district.
F
E
F
G
A
H
A
I
A
I
Sure
was
very
thorough.
This
is
all
part
of
the
trolley
square
expansion
project
and
this
was
actually
approved
once
before,
but
as
to
another
location,
and
we
have
the
lady
meant
Wendy
Mendenhall
that
owns
this
lot
in
the
sr3
zone,
where
we
intend
to
put
this
will
be
here
very
shortly,
I
suppose,
and
but
we
think
this
is
a
good
location
for
that
house.
We
think
that
this
house
has
actually
really
never
had
a
streetscape
to
it
because
interesting
enough
it
it's
kind
of
turned
around
backwards.
I
The
front
door
is
headed
directly
north,
it
doesn't
abut
the
street
at
all.
What
you
see
is
the
sight
of
the
house.
We've
had
the
house
moving
folks
look
at
this
more
than
once
they
have
said
that
it
cannot
be
picked
up
and
moved,
as
we
had
hoped,
has
major
cracks
through
the
brick
and
the
Foundation's.
The
total
house
only
has
706
square
feet
in
it,
basically
a
one
bedroom
and
a
bathroom
that
not
as
big
as
this
table.
I
I
We've
done
a
dr
team
meeting
on
it.
They
say
it
can
be
done.
Although
the
sewer
connection
still
has
to
be
approved,
you
may
not
know
it
and
I
don't
know
if
like
cover
this,
but
the
sewer
is
in
the
back
of
the
houses
along
C
go.
Are
you
aware
of
that
and
I?
We
have
proposed
in
our
meetings
with
developers
and
what
not
is
to
move
the
sewer
line.
I
What
we're
doing,
and
that
gets
a
little
complicated
and
meeting
with
the
DRT
folks
and
viewing
this
as
a
part
of
the
big
project
on
the
on
the
3.75
acres
there.
The
thinking
right
now
is
to
do
a
PUD
and
what
a
PUD
on
the
3.75
acres
and
include
this
in
with
it
and
have
that
all
presented
to
you
at
one
time.
If
that
doesn't
look
feasible
by
the
developers,
it
will
then
be
a
standalone
subdivision
on
that
side.
I
A
I
G
E
F
A
A
J
J
There
is
an
inconsistency,
and
maybe
when
we
get
to
the
motion,
but
maybe
you
can
clarify
in
the
proposed
motion
sheet
item
five,
a
professional
building
mover
will
be,
will
move
the
building
and
protect
it
while
it's
being
stored.
Is
that
is
that
and
is
that
an
accurate
statement
or
if
it's
being
disassembled,
is
that
that
intended
to
mean
that
a
professional
will
disassemble
the
building
and
protect
it
while
it's
being
stored
and
then
rebuilt?
It's
item
five
on
the
motion.
I.
E
J
And
I
might
be
a
finer
point,
but
I
just
want
to
make
sure
that
we're
not
creating
in
a
rift.
If
you
will
later
on
in
terms
of
what
you
said,
you
were
gonna
move
it
and
not
dissemble
it
in
or
at
least
emotion,
I
propose
that
and
I
just
want
to
make
sure
that
we're
not
I
mean
this
may
be
Paul
question
for
you
as
much
as
anybody.
J
B
B
A
A
A
I
That's
the
timing
issue.
Of
course
we
have
discussed
that
really
depends
on
the
developers.
If
we
could
do
it
simultaneously.
That's
what
we
would
try
and
do,
but
there's
gonna
be
a
lot
going
on
over
there
when
that
happens,
and
it
is
possible
that
we
could
we've
talked
about
having
to
actually
disassemble
the
house,
put
it
somewhere,
get
everything
hooked
up
and
then
put
it
in
there
right.
So
that's
what
they're,
addressing
and
so.
A
A
H
Just
equipment-
and
this
is
the
same
building
where
time
by
moving
to
sixth
and
sixth
right
as
Iram
I,
remember,
asking
a
really
pointed
question
of
the
architect
saying
you're:
how
are
you
gonna
do
this
and
he
said
we're
gonna
meticulously.
Take
it
apart
kind
of
brick
by
brick
label.
It
move
it
and
then
reassemble
it.
So
I
just
want
to
be
clear
right.
The
last
time
we
approve
this
you're
doing
essentially
the
same
thing.
It's
just
a
different
location.
Thank.
I
I
B
A
L
You
so
my
name
is
still
Cindy
crumber
and
I
spent
approximately
two
years
of
my
life
working
on
this
project
a
little
hiatus
recently.
The
tax
photograph
that's
coming
around
is
one
that
I
located
three
years
ago
and
the
archives
out
at
Hunter
for
the
county
tax
records
on
you
know.
I'm
I
brought
it
in
today,
so
you
could
notice
that
there
are
prominent
basement
windows
on
the
structure
when
it's
not
all
overgrown
and
that
will
get
relevant
as
you
look
again
at
the
proposed
remodeling
on.
L
But
let's
start
where
what
really
matters
and
that
there
were
four
houses
proposed
for
demolition
and
we're
now
looking
at
the
relocation
and
renovation
of
two
of
them
in
my
world,
those
aren't
bad
numbers,
they're,
not
optimal
numbers,
but
one
of
the
houses
of
the
four
is
in
very
bad
condition
and
the
other
one
has
been
deemed
non-contributory.
It
always
looked
funny
to
me
it's
up
on
a
podium.
It's
already
been
moved
once
so.
This
is.
L
This
is
the
most
important
from
my
perspective,
of
the
four
houses,
because
it
is
unique,
I,
don't
know
of
another
structure
in
Salt
Lake
like
this.
It's
also
characteristic
of
the
the
statement
of
the
central
city,
historic
district,
which
is
modest
working-class
housing.
So
this
is
a
very
important
structure
to
keep
intact.
It
is
wonderful
to
have
it
relocated
on
the
same
block.
That
is
absolutely
the
best.
We
can
do.
I
really
appreciate
the
commitment
of
the
developers
to
get
this
done.
L
I
have
some
concerns
that
it
may
get
kind
of
disney-esque
as
we
move
forward
and
I
hope.
It
continues
to
look
like
an
old
house
and
not
something
fabricated
for
a
movie
set,
but
for
where
we
are
now,
it's
really
quite
remarkable.
It's
been
a
long
haul
and
a
lot
of
meetings,
but
this
is
as
good.
We
can
do
for
this
structure.
That
certainly
deserves
to
remain.
Thank
you.
Thank.
A
F
Let
me
just
I'll
start
with
I've
already
made
the
the
kind
of
the
question
the
query
about
the
definition
of
relocation
and
I'm
Paul
I.
My
memory
is
not
as
sharp
I,
don't
remember
it
being
a
dismantling
and
a
reassembling
at
the
sixth
and
six,
but
it's
possible
I
wish
it
wasn't.
I
have
some
similar
concerns
that,
as
we're
just
expressed,
I
think
in
making
sure
that
it
goes
back
carefully
and
retains
its
its
integrity.
I
will
have
to
massage
the
motion
because
I
think
there's
a
lot
of
things
here
that
don't
apply
exactly
and.
A
F
G
You
know
I
kind
of
hold
my
nose
on
this
one.
It's
in
an
interior
block,
it's
just
great
that
it's
getting
recreated
but
I
I
personally,
don't
have
high
hopes
and
that's
based
on.
If
you
look
in
the
staff
report,
which
has
very
very
few
pictures,
I
might
add.
There's
only
one
photograph
in
this
staff
report
that
I
see
on
the
architectural
drawings
there
are
two
building
sections
and
to
the
best
of
my
knowledge,
this
is
a
masonry
building.
G
F
F
E
I
assumed
that
this
was
still
fresh
in
the
memory
of
the
Commission
and
that's
my
fault,
the
extensive
photographs.
The
report
regarding
how
the
building
would
be
moved
was
included
in
the
staff
report
for
the
December
7th
of
2017,
when
this
was
first
heard
so
I
apologize
for
that
I,
probably
in
retrospect,
should
have
included
that
if
that
was
important.
F
Because
I
have
specific
concerns
about
guardrails
there's,
as
Tom
pointed
out,
there's
a
optional
reference
about
a
rooftop
patio
on
this,
and
yet
it
has
para
putts
that
aren't
guardrail
height.
You
know,
what's
a
guardrail
going
to
add
to
this
building
there
there
are
large
window
wells
proposed
yeah.
E
E
Mind
they
would
need
a
certificate
of
appropriateness
once
they
submit
a
building
permit,
and
the
question
in
my
mind
tonight
is
is:
does
this
meet
standard
for
relocation?
I
think
it
is
in
the
city's
best
interest
that
this
question
move
forward
positively,
as
opposed
to
a
demolition
and
and
I.
Think
that's.
What's
the
question
tonight
the
particulars
of
when
how
this
gets
reconstructed.
You
know,
I
I
have
not
thought
that
far
through
I.
Don't
know
that
I
can
answer
that
for
you,
how
that
happens,
we
see
so
few
of
these
I've
never
done.
A
G
A
D
Whether
or
not
that's
something
we
do
at
the
staff
level
or
at
the
Commission
level
really
depends
on
what
those
changes
are
at
that
time
that
are
put
in
that
building
permit
tonight,
we're
you're
approving
the
ability
to
relocate
it.
The
details
will
come
as
part
of
that
building
permit
process
and.
D
If
it's
something
that
we
don't
think
that
at
the
staff
level,
that's
appropriate
or
approve,
or
it
doesn't
meet
some
standards
or
something
like
that,
it'll
come
back
to
the
Commission.
If,
if
it's
things
like
the
window
wells
and
things
like
that,
you
know
those
are
probably
things
that
we
would
be
addressing
it
at
the
staff
level.
But
if
they're
soon,
if
we
can
changes
the
roof
lines,
things
like
that
that
would
that
would
be
more
of
a
red
flag
for
us.
H
J
Another
question
for
staff-
and
this
may
have
been
a
question
that
was
discussed
last
time,
but
is
there
a
timeframe
for
reconstruction
that
comes
with
the
dismantling
of
this
I
mean
I?
Think
I
would
hate
to
approve.
You
know
the
dismantlement
only
to
have
it
sit
in
the
warehouse
for
without
having
the
city
have
any
ability
to
you
know.
E
I
can
add,
a
I
can
answer
a
couple
things
there.
Okay,
this
whole
trolley
project
is
a
Rubik's
Cube.
There
are
so
many
moving
parts
to
this
and
the
timing
and
and
and
all
the
processes
that
they're
gonna
have
to
go
through
with
the
city
not
only
before
the
landmark
Commission
but
subdivision
plants
stuff
before
the
Planning
Commission,
and
they
have
been
working
to
try
to
get
there
in
terms
of
timing.
I
I,
don't
know
what
their
timing
is
on.
E
H
I
A
J
I
mean
I
think
you
know
to
Lexus
point.
It
is
part
of
a
Rubik's,
Cube
and-
and
you
know
twelve
months
may
not
be
a
reasonable
timeframe
in
terms
of
you
know
what
it's
actually
dismantled
and
you
know
and
and
whatnot
I
don't
know
because
again
it's
that's
something
that
I
think
they
would
be
more
appropriate
for
the
developer
to
bring
that
timeframe
to
the
to
the
table
or
to
have
some.
J
You
know
some,
you
know
teeth
and
whether
it's
the
bond
or
you
know
that
it's
tied
to
you
know
a
certificate
of
occupancy
if
it
goes
to
like
a
PUD
or
you
know,
that's
this
is
part
of
that
right
and
I'm.
Just
you
know,
just
you
know
kind
of
the
the
worst
case
scenario.
You
know
type
of
thing
that
you
know
we.
J
I
mean
you
know
again:
I
we
approved
this
once
and
I
was
one
of
the
ones
that
approved
to
relocate.
I
voted
in
approval
of
the
relocation,
but
you
know
not
to
you
know
whether
whether
it
was
to
be
dismantled
and
rebuilt
or
whether
it
was
moved
I.
You
know
that
quest
you
never
crossed
my
mind
back
then.
A
J
A
E
D
For,
for
example,
that
subdivision
has
to
be
finalized
before
we
can
allow
authorize
the
structure
to
be
put
on
that
site
anyway,
the
zoning
wouldn't
allow
it,
and
so
that
would
have
to
take
place.
We
generally
will
not
issue
the
certificate
for
any
or
approval
for
any
demolition
of
any
building,
regardless
of
it
where
it
is
and
I
would
I
would
consider
this
dismantling
to
be
subject
to
those
same
rules
until
the
building
permit,
for
the
relocation
is
ready
to
go.
So
that's
something
they're
gonna
have
to
work
out.
D
That
could
take
some
time
for
sure
good.
You
know
I
think
just
to
give
you
some
perspective.
I
believe
the
last
structure
that
went
through
this
was
actually
the
sand
house
at
Trolley
Square.
When
they
redeveloped
there
were
two
contributing
facades
on
that
the
whole
building,
I,
don't
think
was
but
very
similar.
They
dismantled
it
actually
shaved
off
the
outer
layer
of
brick
and
had
to
rebuild
it
and
then
relocated.
D
H
I'm
ready
to
make
a
motion
if
people
are
based
on
the
analysis
and
findings
in
the
staff
report,
that
the
standards
for
approval
of
a
certificate
of
appropriateness
for
relocation
have
been
substantially
met.
Testimony
and
the
proposal
presented
I
move
that
the
Commission
approved
the
request
for
the
relocation
of
the
structure
located
at
approximately
665
East
Ely
place.
Specifically,
the
Commission
finds
that
the
proposed
project
substantially
complies
with
the
standards
for
a
certificate
of
appropriateness
for
a
relocation
of
a
landmark
site
or
contributing
structure.
H
Considering
the
application
for
a
CoA
for
relocation
of
a
landmark
site
or
a
contributing
structure,
the
HLC
finds
that
the
project
substantially
complies
with
the
following
standards.
The
proposed
relocation
will
abate
demolition
of
the
structure
proposed.
Relocation
will
not
diminish
the
overall
physical
integrity
of
the
district
or
diminish
the
historical
associations
used
to
define
the
boundaries
of
the
district
proposed
relocation
will
not
diminish
the
historical
or
architectural
significance
of
the
structure.
The
proposed
relocation
will
not
have
a
detrimental
effect
on
the
structural
soundness
of
the
building
or
structure.
A
A
H
F
Think
the
only
issue
if
I'm
not
mistaken,
is
that
these
numbered
items
here
are
actually
standards.
Is
that
correct
I
mean
City
standards,
I
think
just
eliminating
the
one
about
a
mover
is
the
more
appropriate
approach
and
we
assume
that
there's
professional
construction
personnel
involved
in
the
process
I
think
that
was
just
so
specific
on
moving.
That
would
be
my
my
request.
My
suggestion
to
amend
that
would
be
to
simply
eliminate
number
five
as
list
it.
B
C
F
C
F
A
M
M
So
this
is
a
request
for
new
construction
and
special
exception
at
approximately
170
West
600
North
in
the
Capitol
Hill
local
historic
district
photos
of
the
existing
site
can
be
seen
here,
there's
a
garage
on
the
site
and
there's
also
a
driveway
that
will
be
removed
to
accommodate
the
new
construction
proposal.
This
project
is
before
the
historic
landmark
Commission,
because
new
construction
of
a
single-family
dwelling
requires
your
approval,
as
do
the
special
exceptions
that
are
associated
with
this
request.
M
This
slide
shows
the
subject:
property
and
adjacent
properties.
The
subject
property
is
starred
there
in
the
top
photo,
and
the
proposed
single-family
dwelling
has
a
footprint
of
approximately
989
square
feet
with
a
basement
and
two
storeys
above
ground.
Second-Level
balconies
are
proposed
on
both
the
front
and
rear
facades.
The
primary
building
material
is
slate
and
stucco
windows
are
aluminum,
clad,
wood
and
sloped
portions
of
the
roof
is
a
standing,
seam,
metal,
roof
and
flat.
Portions
are
a
roof
membrane;
entrance
doors
are
fiberglass
for
the
Adu
as
well,
and
the
Adu
structure
is
a
two-story
structure.
M
The
accessory
structure
is
a
two-story
structure.
The
bottom
has
a
two-car
garage
and
the
top
is
a
accessory
dwelling
unit.
The
footprint
of
the
accessory
structure
is
approximately
644
square
feet
and
vehicular
access
to
the
property
is
from
Clinton
Avenue,
which
is
a
Street
north
of
the
property
to
the
rear
of
the
property,
and
it's
access
via
an
alley
stems
from
Clinton
Avenue
and
then
the
pedestrian
access
to
the
property
is
along
the
east
side
of
the
elevation
or
along
the
east
elevation
of
the
property
and
the
pathway
extends
back
to
the
proposed
accessory
structure.
M
The
applicant
again
is
requesting
special
exception
for
window
wells
that
it
exceeds
six
feet
wide.
Those
are
all
located
on
the
West
elevation
of
the
property.
The
applicants
indicated
that
those
are
the
minimum
size
necessary
to
meet
Building
Code
requirements
for
egress.
All
of
the
egress
windows
are
proposed
on
that
elevation
and
then
the
again.
M
The
second
request
is
for
a
footprint
that
of
the
accessory
dwelling
unit,
that
is,
that
is
larger
than
50%
of
the
house
on
the
property,
so
the
house
on
the
property
50%
of
that
would
be
495
square
feet
for
that
accessory
structure
and
they
are
proposing
six
hundred
and
forty-four
square
feet.
Analysis
has
been
provided
in
the
staff
report
related
to
those,
as
well
as
just
some
considerations
regarding
the
site
constraints
and
the
width
of
the
property,
as
well
as
maneuvering
into
that
accessory
structure.
M
M
The
project
on
the
right-hand
side
is
another
project
that
was
recently
completed
by
the
supplicant
staff
has
received
six
public
comments
in
relation
to
this
project.
Those
were
all
added
after
publication
of
the
staff
report
and
those
should
have
been
included
in
your
Dropbox.
One
of
those
comments,
as
opposed
five,
are
in
support
of
that
project
and
staff
has
reviewed
the
proposal
for
compliance
with
the
new
construction
standards,
as
well
as
the
special
exception
standards,
and
the
recommendation
is
to
approve
the
project
with
conditions.
As
listed
in
the
report.
M
The
two
special
exceptions
that
are
being
requested.
The
first
is
for
window
wells
that
exceed
six
feet
in
width,
so
window
wells
are
regulated
under
Lawton
bulk
and
the
landmark
Commission
has
the
authority
to
make
adjustments
to
Lawton
bulk
and
on
this
particular
law
because
of
the
width
of
it,
the
it
allows
for
the
setbacks
to
be
rather
narrow
and
with
the
pedestrian
access
on
the
east
side
of
the
property.
M
The
thinking
is
that
it
would
be
safer
access
for
those
pedestrians
to
just
walk
on
a
path
as
opposed
to
over
all
of
those
window
wells
if
they
were
on
either
side
and
so
I
think
the
increased
width
is
being
requested
so
that
all
of
those
can
be
provided
on
the
west
ton
on
the
west
side
of
the
property.
So
the
requirement
is
that
they
be
6
feet
wide
and
the
applicant
has
requested
three
of
the
four
of
those
exceed
that
width
and
I
think
that's
analyzed
and
see.
M
An
attachment
G
of
the
staff
report
and
then
the
second
request
is
the
accessory
dwelling
unit.
Ordinance
allows
for
the
accessory
dwelling
unit
to
be
50%
of
the
footprint
of
the
primary
structure
on
the
property.
In
this
case,
the
primary
structure
on
the
property
is
495
square
feet
or
would
result
in
an
accessory
dwelling
unit.
That's
495
square
feet
and
the
applicants
requesting
to
exceed
that
with
the
proposal
being
644
square
feet.
M
Recently
passed
an
accessory
dwelling
unit,
ordinance
accessory
dwelling
units
are
actually
just
a
permitted
use
in
this
zone.
They
do
have
to
go
through
a
process
in
a
single-family
zone,
but
that's
not
applicable
here,
because
the
sr1,
a
zoning
district,
allows
for
accessory
dwelling
units.
There
are
some
requirements
in
terms
of
registration
and
owner
occupancy,
and
that
would
all
be
done
just
as
part
of
the
permitting
process.
That's
not
something
that
goes
through
a
planning
process
in
this
particular
case,
because
it's
an
allowed
use
in
that
zone.
N
N
N
N
Thanks.
Thank
you
when
I
add
a
couple
things
real,
quick,
Jack
Reinhardt
here
has
lived
in
the
neighborhood
about
ten
years
now
about
ten
years
so
and
he
will
be
the
his
wife
full
live
in
the
primary
residence,
which
is
actually
one
of
the
requirements
for
an
Adu
I
think
there
might
be
a
little
confusion
to
some
in
the
report.
N
There
were
a
couple
mentions
to
Rama
rentals
and
with
the
word
rental,
but
it
will
be
owner
occupied
as
required,
clear
that
up
second,
to
address
the
window
wells,
we
again
as
amy
said,
got
all
the
windows
on
the
west,
so
you
don't
have
to
walk
on
them.
Another
thing
we
wanted
to
do
was
standardize
the
windows.
Yes,
technically
we
could
have
eight
windows
of
eight
different
sizes,
but
wanted
to
keep
some
regularity.
So
the
two
of
the
rooms,
the
in
most
room
in
the
southernmost,
the
windows
are
sized
for
egress
lighting
and
ventilation.
N
N
It's
we're
within
there's
two
two
parameters
going
on
the
650
square
foot
maximum
and
the
50%
of
the
house
footprint.
We
stayed
within
the
650
square
foot,
we're
somewhat
limited
on
the
site.
The
width
of
the
site
is
less
than
50
feet,
which
is
the
the
minimum
for
the
sr1
a
zone.
So
we
started
out
narrow
and
with
the
4
foot
and
the
9
foot
setback,
we
could
get
that
down
a
little
bit.
We
we
have
so
far
to
go
with
house
width
so
that
limited
the
overall
size.
N
We
also
wanted
to
at
least
have
a
bit
of
yard
space
in
open
space,
both
for
Jack
for
the
neighbors.
Also,
we
could
conceivably
increase
the
house
footprint
so
that
the
644
foot
ATU
was
50%,
but
we
thought
it
might
be
better
for
the
neighbors
to
have
a
little
more
open
space
there
next
to
them.
So
that's
that
factors
in
our
decision
and.
N
K
F
N
Preliminary
ly
approved
and
it
before
the
building
permit,
it's
pulled
we'll
have
that
all
record
and
everything-
and
you
know
that
the
alley
is
there
now
and
is
accessed
and
that
actually
helped
reduce
the
driveway
cut
in
front
of
the
house,
and
we
know
city,
especially
its
traffic.
That's
not
keen
on
too
many
driveway
cuts
on
the
street,
so
we're
actually
reducing
that
a
bit
also.
H
Just
a
quick
question
on
that
yeah
you
saw
him
proposed.
Well
me,
I,
don't
know.
Do
you
see
the
proposed
motion
in
the
staff
report,
one
they,
okay,
there's
a
item
in
it
about
that,
isn't!
Does
having
that
in
there
screw
you
up
at
all
to
me
that
doesn't
really
seem
like
your
landmarks
issue.
That
seems
like
a
some
other
building
permit
issue.
N
H
N
K
H
K
A
O
Hi,
my
name
is
Scot
Christensen
we
restored
and
live
in
the
historical
home
at
594,
North
Center.
This
proposed
structure
is
directly
across
the
street
from
the
back
of
our
house.
I
have
grave
concerns
about
the
proposal.
I've
read
the
staff
report
and
I'm
mystified
was
why
there
was
no
acknowledgement
of
the
historical
asset
of
the
back
of
the
property.
The
1920s
garages,
nearly
a
hundred
years
old,
this
garage
as
a
historical
outbuilding,
helps
to
define
the
historical
character
of
the
neighborhood.
O
The
only
mention
of
this
asset
in
the
staff
report
was
the
following
quote:
the
applicant
is
proposing
to
remove
the
existing
driveway
and
accessory
structure
on
site.
End
quote
at
minimum.
There
should
have
been
research
done
to
determine
the
value
of
the
structure,
and
it
should
have
been
presented
to
you.
You
can
still
require
that
it
is
not
good
policy
or
practice
to
derrida
to
tear
down
contributing
historic
buildings
within
a
historic
district
I.
Just
reread
Salt
Lake
City's
design
guidelines,
paying
special
attention
to
chapter
12
which
governs
new
construction
within
historic
districts.
O
The
proposed
structure
fails
to
comply
with
a
following.
First
and
I
quote
these
sections
directly
from
the
guide
designs
that
seek
to
contrast
with
the
existing
context.
Simply
for
the
sake
of
being
different
are
unlikely
to
be
compatible
and
are
discouraged.
The
goal
is
to
protect
this
Doric
and
architectural
character
of
each
neighborhood,
while
allowing
new,
compatible
design,
then
the
section
12.5,
a
new
building
should
be
designed
to
reinforce
a
sense
of
human
scale
and
a
building
macon
vein,
a
sense
of
human
scale
by
providing
a
porch
in
form
and
in
depth.
O
12.7,
the
reform
of
a
new
building
should
be
does
design
to
respect
the
range
of
forms
and
massing
found
within
the
district
to
0.8
a
front
facade
should
be
similar
in
scale
to
those
seen
traditionally
in
the
block.
12.15
overall
facade
proportions
should
be
designed
to
be
similar
to
those
in
a
historic
building
in
the
neighborhood
12.16,
the
pattern
and
proportions
of
window
and
door.
Openings
should
fall
within
the
range
associated
with
historic
buildings
in
the
area.
This
is
an
important
design
criterion.
O
End
quote:
this
proposal
is
a
two-story,
mostly
flat,
roof
box,
most
structures
in
the
neighborhood
and
all,
but
one
on
the
street
are
either
one
or
one
and
a
half
story,
buildings
with
pitched
roofs
and
a
front
porch
I'm
not
opposed
to
modern
design,
but
beg
you
to
hold
this
applicant
of
the
same
design,
standards
that
are
required
of
everyone
else.
The
defining
character
of
a
great
neighborhood
can
be
lost
when
the
design
standards
are
ignored.
Thank
you.
Thank.
P
Okay,
thank
you.
It's
appropriate
that
Landmarks
is
meeting
in
this
wonderful
historic
structure,
largely
saved
and
restored
by
efforts
of
visionaries
like
Bob
bliss,
the
original
Dean
of
the
University
of
Utah
of
architecture,
the
University
of
Utah
School
of
Architecture,
who
worked
with
modern
architects
like
Sugden,
Hallett,
Hermanson,
Mitzi,
Asti,
Quigley
and
others
page
one.
There's
a
picture,
there's
historical
neighborhood
context.
As
Scott
mentioned,
it
refers
to
scale
rooflines
windows,
porches
setbacks,
materials,
not
a
stucco
and
glass
box.
That
would
be
more
suitable
for
an
industrial
park.
P
You
look
across
the
street
and
that's
more
of
what
you
have
a
page.
There's
a
picture
in
the
foreground
of
an
unfinished
Drive
with
the
residual
filled
dirt
by
the
way
that
never
got
cleaned
up
by
the
current
this
the
same
builder
and
developer
okay,
so
there's
fill
dirt
still
over
the
gravel
that
we
have
before
there.
In
the
background,
this
is
an
1880s
brick
home
with
historic,
barn,
garage
and
there's
adventure
tree
and
there's
a
hill
hill.
P
Excuse
me,
the
profile
of
the
other
hill
behind
the
third
picture
shows
the
same
builder
architect
as
this
is
the
same
builder
architect
as
165
west
six
and
north.
A
maximum
footprint
close
to
the
street
setback
with
a
height
variance
the
one
year
when
you're
prior
to
the
construction
is
building.
The
owners
of
the
adjacent
home,
Kendall
and
Jason
good
are
are
now
distraught
because
they
lost
the
mature
trees
and
the
view
of
the
Great
Salt
Lake
and
the
ana
plan
Island
removed.
P
P
There's
a
picture:
the
unstable
fill
patio,
an
apron,
not
compacted
concrete,
not
properly
reinforced
example
for
poor
workmanship
builders
sold,
as
which
degrades
the
neighborhood
and
I
got
two
more
things:
a
street
view
of
not
the
owner-occupant.
By
the
way,
I
must
say:
Jack
has
mentioned
to
the
owner
of
the
house
next
to
it,
which
he
also
owns,
he
told
Lily.
He
and
his
lovely
family
are
going
to
be
moving
there.
This
is
how
developers
operate.
P
They
they
skirt
the
the
rules,
but
they
say
we're
going
to
live
there,
and
that
is
one
criteria
for
the
approval
of
the
project:
okay,
so
by
the
way
he's
not
living
there
in
the
1880s
house,
okay
and
E,
and
so
now
we
have
my
tree
March,
mature
trees
and
hillside,
which
would
be
compromised
by
oversized
architectural
insensitive
proposal.
Finally,
there's
a
map.
The
ravit
reveals
easement
conflicts.
The
easements
are
on
fully
owned
properties.
They
can't
make
such
agents
for
cannot
be
allowed
by
these
prospective
by
these
owners
if
they
don't
own
the
property
outright.
P
Okay,
that's
one
thing
that
this
body
doesn't
have
to
deal
with,
but
I
know.
That
is
the
case,
and
so
access
to
water,
sewer,
water,
routing
and
loss
of
off
street
parking
for
the
original
1880
structure
needs
to
be
considered
by
the
way
the
cars
are
not
for
the
a
teenage
structure
now
get
to
park
on
the
road.
P
A
Can
you
come
back
up
before
the
applicant
does
cause
we're
closing
the
public
comment?
I
have
a
question
about
the
the
existing
structure.
It
would
be
an
accessory
if
there
was
a
house
there,
but
when
there's
not
a
house
there,
how
do?
How
is
it
viewed
by
my
staff,
the
the
garage-
that's
there,
maybe
a
hundred
years
old,
but
does
that
matter?
M
So
somebody
can
jump
in
if
I'm
not
saying
this
correctly,
but
for
my
understanding,
the
existing
situation
is
a
non-conforming
situation
because
there's
an
accessory
structure
without
a
primary
structure
on
the
law
and
it's
a
separate
lot
for
the
purpose
of
looking
at
contributing
and
non-contributing
buildings
and,
with
the
exception
of
things
like
carriage
houses,
that
are
identified
in
our
surveys
and
actually
surveyed
as
part
of
the
historic
integrity
of
the
property.
For
my
understanding,
we
don't
look
at
accessory
buildings
for
their
historic
significance.
D
Thank
you
so,
just
on
the
accessory
structure
on
accessory
lots
kinds
of
things,
that's
not
unusual.
We
have
that
in
the
city,
it's
very
common,
particularly
in
the
avenues.
So
you
know
we
do
view
this
as
an
accessory
building
on
I
mean
it's
a
legally
existing
lot,
but
and
I
don't
know
if
we
know
how
it
came
to
be,
but
but
it
clearly
is
an
accessory
building.
Even
though
there's
not
a
primary
building
on
the
line.
Okay,.
A
F
B
F
G
A
N
Q
A
N
B
Just
regarding
Brian's
half
of
the
things
that
he
said
like
about
the
home
across
the
street
that
I
built
and
I
think
he
mentioned
a
piece
of
concrete,
that's
sinking
Justin
that
lives
there.
He
he
has
a
warranty
on
that
house
and
I'm
in
constant
communication
with
him
and
we're
just
waiting
for
the
ground
to
thaw,
and
that
happened
from
a
sprinkler
leak.
So
in
fact
he
said
that
he
was
gonna,
send
a
me
an
email
because
he
couldn't
make
it
to
the
meeting,
but
that
wasn't
till
after
5:30
when
we
started
okay,
that's.
A
B
H
B
B
K
We
acknowledged
it's
a
unique
design
in
the
neighborhood,
we're
not
trying
to
stand
out
actually
trying
to
fit
within
the
scale
and
messing
and
the
the
facade
width
is.
You
know
within
that
range
I
think
we're
26
feet
wide
to
the
west.
It's
25
and
a
half
to
the
right
is
32
so
and
we're
meeting
the
height
requirement.
So
just
by
sure
you
know
nature
of
the
the
small
lot
we're
doing
the
best
we
can
to
fit
a
livable
family
house
in
that
odd
shape.
Okay,.
A
B
A
H
H
H
A
J
Well,
I'd
like
to
just
I'd
like
to
ask
just
a
couple
of
questions
of
the
rest
of
the
Commissioner,
maybe
just
open
some
conversation,
the
you
know
special
expect
its
special
exceptions.
You
know
or
things
that
I
always
think
that
we
ought
to
be.
You
know
talking
about
and
really
evaluating,
personally
I
think
with
the
the
window
wells
and
the
move
to
provide
to
address
a
scale
that
Paul
just
touched
on
and
yet
provide
additional
usable
living
space
down
below,
as
seems
handled
well
and
quite
appropriate.
J
You
know
I
wonder
whether
you
could
create
a
livable,
one-bedroom
and
and
to
two-car
garage
at
four
hundred
and
ninety
five
square
feet
and
stay
within
the
criteria.
It
seems
that
while
I
echo
many
of
the
comments
that
you
made
Paul
that
that
that's
something
that
we
ought
to
be
careful
about,
you
know
that
allowing
it
here
versus
perhaps
in
a
different
location,
I,
don't
know
that.
That's
one
that
bothers
me
a
little
bit
just
in
terms
of
square
footage.
F
I
think
Tom
in
response
to
that
I
think
the
I
guess
the
the
constriction
of
the
site.
I
guess
is
the
is
the
one
rationale
for,
for
that
special
exception
of
there's
only
so
much
of
a
house.
You
can
build
here
that
allows
that
though
I
I
do
have
I
have
my
concerns,
I
guess
on
the
ad
you
and
the
garage
are.
F
Just
on
that
on
that
aspect
of
it,
the
glazing,
you
know
it's
and
you
all
know
that
I've
in
the
past
I've
also
had
concerns
about
the
the
comments
in
in
some
of
the
standards
and
guidelines
of
window
configurations
and
such
that
were
read
to
us
and
to
have
the
entry
and
there's
actually
two
South
elevations
on
on
201.
But
the
correct
one
is
on
the
upper
the
upper
level.
F
C
I
think
I'm
troubled
by
the
absence
of
anything
close
to
a
porch
and
I
realized
that
we
approved
the
structure
across
the
street
without
one.
But
if
you
look
at
all
of
the
houses
surrounding
it's,
it's
really
a
feature
that
is
there
and
all
of
them,
and
you
know
I
recognize
this
as
a
modern
structure
but
at
the
same
time
I
think
there
has
to
be
some
nod
to
the
neighborhood.
So
that
would
be
my
concern.
F
I
think
the
one
across
the
street
didn't
end
up
with
I
mean,
has
a
predict,
projecting
canopy
of
sorts
I
believe.
C
F
M
B
A
G
A
A
H
One
approval
of
all
final
design
details,
including
specific
direction
expressed
by
the
Commission,
shall
be
delegated
to
planning
staff
and
prior
to
the
issuance
of
a
building
permit.
The
applicant
shall
complete
the
lot
line
adjustment
process
through
the
recordation
so
that
the
parcels
lot
lines
reflect
what
is
shown
on
the
submitted
site
plan.
The
following
must
be
met.
A
adjustments
made
to
170
was
600
North.
H
F
K
F
J
I
think
I'm
speaking
for
myself,
I
think
the
the
three
comments,
the
Shelly
and
myself
and
Charles
raised
there.
They
are
very
close
and
I.
Think
I
would
like
to
see
some
additional
evaluation
and
design
on
those
I
think
that
there
are,
as
I
said,
initially
I
think,
there's
a
lot
to
be
commended
by
this
project
and
I
think
there's
a
but
those
those
three
items
I
think
deserve
a
second
look.
H
J
J
H
F
K
J
C
A
K
J
F
N
F
J
And
I
think
I'm
just
again,
I'm
speaking
for
myself
I've,
we
get
a
lot
of
requests
for
special
exceptions
and
they
I've
always
I
mean
I.
Think
some
of
them
are
always
deserved.
You
know,
because
of
because
of
unique
considerations,
and,
and
certainly
the
lot
with,
as
you
suggested-
maybe
one
the
their
other.
You
know,
but
but
I
think
that
it
was
not
at
least
presented
to
me
in
in
a
way
that
was
compelling
enough
to
approve
without
you.
N
K
F
Right,
I,
think
and
I
think
it's
kind
of
a
joint
I'll
say
probably
between
the
two
of
us
I
think
just
the
entire
porch
definition
and
and
treatment,
just
I
think
reevaluate
some
options.
There
I
think
consider
what
the
standards
and
guidelines
call
for
in
a
porch
and
an
entry
and
a
front
entry
to
the
house,
it
has
the
front
entry.
How
can
that
be
defined?
F
You've
gone
to
a
length
to
the
left,
with
a
with
a
tall
planter
box,
and
things
like
that
I'm,
not
suggesting
that
that's
the
solution
at
the
porch
at
the
porch
area.
But
what
are
the
options
to
realize?
A
more
compatible,
more
reflective
porch
than
than
this
pretty
stark
commercial
entry
I
think
that's
presented
here.
Oh.
A
A
N
To
get
enough,
we
start
at
the
front
setback
and
we
go
porch
and
then
a
house
facade,
that's
pushing
things
back
enough.
It
gets
kind
of
narrow
towards
the
back
of
the
house
there
and
that
that
did
limit
us
somewhat.
So
we'll
take
another
look
but
I
don't
know
how
much
depth
on
the
porch
we
can
get
just
because
it
gets
so
narrow.
Back
in
your.
F
N
A
K
That
was
I,
guess
we
sort
of
flipped
things
a
bit
and
the
upper
the
balcony
off
the
living
space.
That's
sort
of
our
front
porch!
That's
where
the
living
room
is
so
things
are
a
bit
inverted
in
this
design
and
the
floor
plan
and
I
understand.
You
don't
have
that
here
to
see,
but
the
main
entry
is
really
sleeping
spaces
and
the
living
area
is
above.
So
that's
your
kind
of
public
street
face
engagement,
and
so.
F
F
Unique
unique
challenge,
unique
sight,
unique
challenges,
I
think
and
so
but
I
don't
know,
maybe
one
other
encouragement
in
in
when
you
come
back
well,
the
well.
The
bird's-eye
perspectives
help
explain
the
project
real
quickly.
It's
really
the
ground,
you
know
it's.
The
eyesight
level
up
is
the
way
we're
going
to
experience
it
and
I
think
those
will
be
more
effective
if
that
makes
sense.
Okay,
we'll.
N
F
N
A
N
K
A
The
last
last
agenda
item
on
our
on
our
Commission
meeting
is
a
work
session,
4th
Avenue
pumphouse.
This
is
not
a
it's
a
public
medium
and
it's
not
a
it's,
not
a
public
hearing.
There
won't
be
any
public
comments
tonight.
This
is
a
work
session
in
it
to
help
everybody
before
we
actually
entertain
an
actual
application.
So
we'll
turn
the
time
over
to
Kelsey.
R
A
R
Good
evening,
so
this
is
a
work
session
to
discuss
the
proposal
for
a
new
construction
and
the
associated
special
exceptions
for
a
pump
house
located
at
300
North
Canyon
Road,
the
historic
landmark
Commission
held
a
work
session
with
staff
in
Salt
Lake
City
public
utilities,
on
September
6
2018
to
review
and
discuss
issues
associated
with
the
proposed
construction
and
the
special
exceptions.
The
primary
discussion
points
from
that
work
session
are
listed
on
page
1
through
2
and
the
staff
memo.
R
The
changes
which
will
be
discussed
by
the
applicant
are
listed
as
the
following:
the
reduced
footprint,
relocated,
a/c
units,
elimination
of
fluoride
room,
elimination
of
the
on-site
generator,
elimination
of
the
driveway
and
the
replacement
with
Drive
strips
upgrade
of
proposed
materials
and
the
reduction
of
the
proposed
tree
removal.
The
request
incorporates
new
construction
and
special
exception
approval.
R
The
requested
special
exceptions
include
building
setbacks,
landscape
yard
requirements,
the
utility
box,
location
and
parking
in
a
corner
side
yard
the
following
slide:
demos,
the
billable
area
on
the
site
and
I
have
included
plans
and
elevations
within
this
PowerPoint.
After
this
slide.
Just
for
reference
during
the
discussion
and
at
this
point,
I
will
turn
the
time
over
to
the
applicant.
Unless
there
are
any
questions
for
staff.
A
S
We're
gonna
get
while
Kelsey,
so
I
introduce
my
team.
My
name
is
Jessie
Stewart
I'm,
the
deputy
director
at
Selleck,
City,
Public,
Utilities
I've,
also
got
Kirk,
Begley
or
Bagley
here
with
Bowen
Collins
and
associates
they're.
Our
design
engineer
and
we've
also
got
CRS
a
architecture
here.
This
is
John
UNL
ski,
so
I'm
gonna
do
a
brief
introduction
and
then
turn
a
lot
of
the
time
over
to
CRS
a
to
go
through
the
current
depiction
we've
got
here
and
how
that
adheres
to
city
and
to
Commission
standards
and
criteria.
S
S
First
off
I
want
to
talk
about
real,
quick
Kelsey
said
there
were
some
design
elements
shown
in
here.
Also
so
I
want
to
I
want
to
clarify
a
few
things
on
the
design.
The
design
is
by
no
means
final,
it's
more
of
it.
It's
still
conceptual
at
this
point
as
we
work
through
what
the
final
footprints
gonna
look
like,
or
what
the
final
outsides
gonna
look
like:
we've
laid
it
out,
so
we've
got
pipe
dimensions
and
lengths,
so
we
can
accommodate
flow
meters
and
other
pertinent.
S
A
final
design
at
this
point,
I
think
there's
been
some
questions
that
that
might
be
finally
or
not.
We
may
run
even
at
30%
at
this
point,
as
Kelsey
mentioned,
since
we
were
last
year
for
our
last
last
work
session.
Again,
thank
you
for
letting
us
having
us
back
for
another
one.
We've
done
some
things.
We've
got
CRS
a
architects
on
board
we've
also,
as
Kelsey
mentioned,
remove
the
electrical
generator.
So
it
done
some
things
operationally.
There'll
be
some
operational
impacts
to
that.
S
For
us,
we
won't
have
emergency
generation
on
site,
well
trailer,
one
in
if
there
is
an
emergency
and
sure
that
went
in
periodically
to
test
the
switchgear
and
to
make
sure
everything
works,
we've
also
removed
fluoride,
we've
done
some
modeling
and
given
the
background
concentrations
and
how
we
how
we
manage
our
overall
system,
we
feel
good
that,
given
how
we
currently
run
a
well,
we
can
meet
our
fluoride
regulations,
which
is
by
sauly
County,
Health
Department,
and
then
we've
also,
if
you've
been
out
to
the
site.
Recently,
you've
had
a
lot
of
activity
out
there.
S
We
had
a
witness
and
turbine
company
out
there
pulling
the
well
and
doing
an
assessment
of
the
well
case.
You
want
to
make
sure
the
casing
is
good
and
reason.
What
we
found
out
is:
we've
got
with
casings
in
good
shape.
Right
now,
it's
got
twenty
to
thirty
years
of
life
left
in
it
we're
gonna
slip
line,
it
keep
the
same
production
and
we
could
have
seventy-five
to
a
hundred
years
more
life
out
of
this
as
we
go
forward
so,
and
we've
also
had
Hanson
Allen
lose
do
some
evaluations.
S
We
just
got
the
report
today
and
that
will
become
public
once
we
do
a
review
and
it
becomes
final
from
them
and
then
finally,
we
just
see
this
as
a
very
vital
portion
of
our
water
infrastructure.
It's
a
big
big
producing
well,
and
we
see
this
as
an
investment
for
future,
and
this
is
a
critical
Parshin
of
that
as
we
mix
and
match
all
of
our
water
sources
from
surface
water
to
ground
water.
So
with
that
I'm
going
to
turn
things
over
to
John,
my
team
will
be
here
for
answering
questions
but
I'm
gonna.
Q
So
CRS
a
was
brought
on
after
the
last
work
session,
which
was
in
September
and
were
brought
on
to
really
consider
a
lot
of
the
the
Commission's
input
from
that
previous
work
session
and
how
we
can
better
work.
This
building
into
the
existing
historic
district.
They
have
new
historic
district,
so
our
first
task
was
really
to
prepare
for
an
open
house.
We
had
with
the
community
at
the
Marmalade
library
after
some
internal
kind
of
discussions
about
the
design.
Q
Q
We've
tried
to
be
transparent
throughout
this
process,
including
to
open
houses
and
meeting
with
individual
citizens.
Regarding
this
project,
our
overall
design
scheme
is
to
have
this
simplified
form
that
starts
to
retreat
into
the
background
of
the
park
in
the
middle
of
this
street.
Going
into
memory
grove
are.
We
are
selecting
materials
that
reference
the
surrounding
historic
district,
without
conveying
a
false
sense
of
history
and
we're
trying
to
balance
pregnant
pragmatism
of
a
water
well
and
pump
with
aesthetics
and
security.
Q
So
I'm
gonna
kind
of
go
zoom
in
from
the
skeleton
neighborhood.
The
order
is
following
the
city
code,
chapter
21,
a
historic
preservation,
overlay
district
outline.
You
also
have
a
checklist
that
is
more
in
the
order
of
chapter
12
of
the
Commission's
guidelines,
new
construction
in
a
historic
district.
So
it's
talking
about
the
settlement
patterns
and
neighborhood
character.
This
is
where
the
avenues
grade
kind
of
collides
with
City
Creek,
so
there's
well.
A
lot
of
the
houses
are
orthogonal
to
the
north/south
grid.
Q
At
this
point,
we
start
to
get
into
houses
that
are
kind
of
turned
oriented
towards
City
Creek.
This
building
is
generally
oriented
north-south
with
the
short
end
along
4th
Avenue
in
the
long
end
against
Canyon
Road.
We
fill
this
slot
and
sight.
Pattern
is
in
character
with
the
surrounding
houses,
topographic
constraints
and
historically,
small
parcels
have
led
to
this
density
that
we
are
maintaining.
Q
Setbacks
are
technically
difficult
to
achieve,
as
we've
outlined
in
some
of
our
special
requests
that
we
will
be
seeking
and
the
principal
entrance
is
facing
south
similar
to
the
house
at
236
North,
Canyon
Road,
but
in
general,
the
houses
in
the
area
their
front
door
faces
the
street
which
in
this
case,
is
4th
Avenue
looking
at
site
access
parking
and
services.
I
just
want
to
note
that
you
know
public
site
access
isn't
necessarily
desirable
in
a
public
water
facility
for
security
reasons.
Obviously,
but
the
site
is
open.
Q
Q
Looking
at
the
landscape,
there
are
three
trees
that
are
slated
to
be
removed
because
they're
drip
lines
are
within
the
building
footprint.
There's
a
30
inch
London
plane
tree,
that
is
in
good
condition.
There's
a
20
inch
caliper
a
sir,
which
is
in
poor
condition
and
would
be
recommended
to
be
removed
in
any
case,
and
there's
a
8
inch
caliper
cherry
tree.
We
are
working
with
the
city
or
the
urban
forester
to
match
those
values
and
plant
new
trees
in
in
kind
and.
Q
Q
Speaking
about
the
building
form
and
scale,
it's
a
similar
rectilinear
form
similar
to
many
of
the
houses
in
the
surrounding
neighborhood.
We
came
to
the
scale
based
off
the
minimums
of
equipment
that
exists
within
the
building,
we're
really
trying
to
reduce
the
scale
of
this
building
as
much
as
as
is
feasible.
The
parapet
height
is
15
foot
4
inches
comparable
to
surrounding
buildings,
much
of
most
of
which
are
one
or
two
storey
houses.
Ottinger
Hall
is
just
down
the
street.
It's
obviously
taller.
Q
C
Q
B
A
few
pieces
of
equipment
inside
the
building
that
are
driving
the
height
on
it
one
there's
a
it's
called
a
vertical
line:
shaft
pump,
so
it's
so
inside
the
well,
where
it's
being
proposed
that
we
have
is
a
well
that
goes
down
in
the
ground,
but
the
motor
sits
on
top
of
it.
That's
between
that
and
then
the
chlorine
tank
that'll
be
in
there
for
batching.
Those
two
things
are
driving
the
height
of
the
building.
Q
F
Before
you
leave
it,
it's
I
think
I
read
and
I'm.
Looking
at
the
section
building
section
I
think
I
read
in
a
description
in
here
I'm
trying
to
remember.
Well,
it
said
that
the
the
parapet
height
was
was
driven
for
architectural
reasons,
I
think
the
statement
was
and
I
look
and
the
section
shows
the
I
believe.
Probably
the
equipment,
access,
hatch
on
the
on
the
roof.
I,
don't
know
if
that's
it's
a
single
line,
so
I'm
not
sure.
If
that's
only.
F
Obviously,
but
is
that
the
actual
height,
because
it
looks
like
the
parapet
is
still
a
foot
or
more
above
the
height
of
that
and
I've,
even
wonder
if,
if
it
could
be
yeah
that
sheet
I'm
on
em?
Oh,
you
know,
I,
think
just
the
exploration
of
what
overall
height
yeah
and
be
or
should
be
right.
Yes,
maybe
the
sort
of
the
feedback
a
little
bit.
Q
Q
So
the
building
character
I
want
to
note
that
this
being
a
pump
house
a
pump
station,
it
inherently
will
have
a
unique
character
compared
to
the
surrounding
houses.
It's
a
utility
building
and
we
want
it
to
look
like
a
utility
building.
The
openings
are
at
pedestrian
scale,
with
special
consideration
for
building
security
and
noise
reduction,
so
we're
planning
on
using
a
Cal
wall
type
product
that
is
translucent,
but
not
so
it's
not
opaque,
but
it's
also
not
fully
transparent
and
hollow
metal
doors.
First,
security
and
noise
considerations.
Q
The
rhythm
of
the
fenestration
is
not
out
of
character.
There's
a
couple
of
windows
along
the
long
side
of
the
building
similar
to
surrounding
houses,
and
we
feel
a
solid
void
ratio
is
not
out
of
character
either
it's
about
2080
canopies
over
door.
So
where
the
green
screen
is
affixed
to
the
facade,
we
feel
like
that
acts
in
a
similar
way
as
canopies
at
porches
of
surrounding
houses.
We
don't
want
to
necessarily
create
a
shelter
for
four
people
to
inhabit,
because
this
is
a
secure
building.
Q
Q
Most
surrounding
buildings
have
double-hung
sash
windows,
but
we
feel
this
is
inappropriate
for
this
building
type
and
aesthetic,
so
we're
we're
picturing,
fixed
translucent,
multi,
pane
windows
as
a
reference
to
other
buildings
of
this
typology,
and
other
elements
meant
to
relate
the
building
to
the
surrounding
historic
district
context
include
the
articulated
cornice
exposed
concrete
foundation,
and
these
are
in
many
cases
rendered
in
modern
materials
to
celebrate
the
past.
While
differentiating
this
as
new
construction
and,
lastly,
some
of
the
signage
the
locations
were
going
to
propose
a
date
sign.
Q
You
can
see
it
above
the
window
here
on
the
right
side,
which
will
include
some
text
on
the
function
of
the
building
the
year.
The
well
was
opened
in
1949,
I
believe
and
the
date
of
construction
on
the
building
once
it
once
again
to
differentiate
kind
of
the
well
function
from
the
from
the
shell
of
the
building
itself.
A
G
G
G
Guess
that
was
my
question
of
being.
It
saves
a
lot
of
problems
for
a
lot
of
people.
If
maybe
that
base
II
thought
that
hit
me
pretty
heavily
was
looked
into,
and
that's
just
why
I
asked
the
question
I
mean
this
could
look
like
about
anything
you
wanted
to
and
still
be
a
public
utility
building
correct.
Q
S
When
I
think
one
thing
that's
what
we're
looking
for
for
guidance
here
is
from
the
Commission
standpoint.
Is
it
something
to
become
part
of
the
scenery?
Is
it
something
to
stand
out
or
is
it
something
to
try
to
reflect
the
the
local
flavor
or
is
it
something
that
should
meet
its
function?
So
really
that
again,
I
think
your
question
is
great
and
it's.
G
Q
S
S
If
we
want
to,
we
want
to
do
something
again
from
a
public
safety
standpoint.
We
want
to
make
this
a
viable
well
for
the
future.
You
know
pressures
water
quality,
water
quantity,
but
from
a
neighborhood
perspective,
we
want
to
do
something.
That's
best
for
the
neighborhood
and
that's
again,
I
think
where
we're
looking
for
some
guidance
here
is
that
is
that
to
make
it
true
to
its
function
or
is
it
to
make
it
try
to
look
like
a
historic
home
and.
L
R
Would
say
that,
generally
just
from
a
general
preservation
for
new
construction,
we
try
to
deter
a
false
sense
of
history,
and
so
a
residential
structure
wouldn't
necessarily
be
appropriate
in
the
middle
of
a
park
for
a
utility
function,
but
were
open
to
feedback.
But
I
just
wanted
to
jump
in
Oh.
F
F
There
were
two
paid
for
two
or
three
pages
of
photographs
of
all
photographs,
some
many
modern
utility
buildings,
pump
houses
and
different
things,
and
then
a
page
of
historic
examples
and
and
John
I
appreciate
and
and
don't
disagree
necessarily
with
the
with
a
lot
of
your
concepts
that
you've
expressed
the
thing
that
struck
me
about
those
historic
examples,
however,
were
that
the
buildings,
if,
in
fact
they
were
all
pump
houses
or
whatever
they
were
in
a
sense,
they
look
like
normal
buildings.
They
looked
like
a
bank,
they
looked
like
an
office
building,
something
like
that.
F
It's
it's
one
approach,
I
found
them
to
be
all
of
those
examples
to
be
quite
cohesive.
You
know
in
the
in
the
building
itself,
which
I
think
is
an
important
goal,
I
think
in
that
structure
and
there
are
ways
I
think
there
are
a
range
of
ways
and
whether
this
turns
into
a
it
probably
won't
turn
into
a
glass
box
that
that
celebrates
the
pump
and
the
pipe.
But
you
know
that's
perhaps
one
approach
and
then
there's
I
think
there's
a
range
of
opportunities
here.
Yet.
Q
There's
we
completely
agree
as
a
design
team
that
there's
a
range
of
options
here.
One
note
I
would
like
to
make
about
the
glass
box
is
that
you
know
we've
we've
talked
about
this.
What's
going
on
inside
actually
isn't
very
exciting.
It's
it's
a
pipe!
That's
that's
horizontal
and
it's
mounted
to
the
ground.
There's
no,
like
there's
really
no
motion
happens
that
you
can
see
through
this
pipe,
but
we
do
think
that
there's
opportunity
for
coming
at
more
of
an
educational
piece
to
it
where
plaques
that
are
maybe
mounted
inside
the
building
you
can.
F
If
I
may
I'll
make
it
observation,
tonight's
proposal
versus
the
presentation
before
a
lot
of
progress.
I
think
you
know
the
previous.
The
previous
footprint
was
convoluted
and
challenging
and
and
the
removal
of
of
the
generator,
if
nothing
else,
I
applaud
you
for
that.
Hopefully,
that
all
works
out
in
the
long
run
the
there
was
again
in
the
public
comment.
There
was
one
letter
and
and
I
only
have
I'll
only
semi
quote
it,
but
it
was
from
a
gentleman
who
was
a
petroleum
engineer.
B
You've
got
to
have
five
pipe
diameters
upstream
and
three
pipe
diameters
downstream
of
laminar
flow
in
order
to
get
an
accurate
reading
and
it's
necessary
that
this
pump
station
have
an
accurate
reading
because
we're
using
that
meter
to
dose
the
chlorine
off
of
it.
So
we've
got
to
have
an
accurate
readings
off
of
that.
Now
that,
like
you,
said
there,
there
might
be
an
opportunity.
Those
are
just
general
engineering
rule
of
thumbs.
B
If
and
we've
talked
with
the
city
about
this,
if
we
were
to
go
with
them
and
and
we
select
a
specific
meter,
there
might
be
opportunity
to
shrink
that
space
a
little
bit
for
the
pipe
I,
don't
know
what
it
will
do
exactly
as
we
refine
the
design
on
the
on
the
electrical
panels.
So
I
mean
those
are
the
two
things
that
are
driving
the
length
of
the
buildings,
the
length
of
the
pipe
that's
needed
for
the
flow
meter,
that's
in
there
and
then
all
the
electrical
gear.
That's
got
to
be
on
that
wall,
okay,.
S
C
Just
like
to
add
the
idea
of
making
it
look
like
another
house
in
the
neighborhood
is
a
bit
odd
to
me
just
because
it's
in
the
middle
of
a
park
in
the
middle
of
the
street,
but
I
do
like
what
I'm
seeing
today
versus
what
we
saw
before.
So
it
is
an
improvement,
but
I
think
there's
also
room
for
just
a
bit
more
and
I
guess
in
some
sense,
you
are
going
in
the
right
direction
now.
So
thank
you
for
that.
G
Q
G
S
But
but
I
think
I
mean
if
that,
if
a
water
feature
is
something
that
again
City
Creek
right
now
for
the
bulk
of
Citigroup
flows
into
gigantic
pipes
beneath
this
facility,
its
surface
expressed
for
the
Tetra
call
that
goes
through
there,
but
but
but
it's
something
again.
If
that's
something
that
becomes
a
an
element
that
this
commission
would
want
to
see,
it's
not
I
wouldn't
say
it's
out
of
the
question
to
put
some
off
to
the
side
right
now.
G
A
F
To
brainstorm
off
that,
you
know,
and
I'm
just
kind
of
I've
got
a
red
pen,
so
I'm
still
redlining
everything.
Of
course
you
guys
didn't
take
the
red
pen
away
from
me
what
about
a
really
wonderful
drinking
fountain
on
this
corner?
You
know
this
is
a
real
provider,
something
like
that.
I,
like
the
idea
of
the
marker.
However,
that
interpretive
aspect
comes
about
I,
think
that's
important
to
help,
explain
and
about
what's
happening
here,
a.
G
B
S
F
F
Q
F
F
I
read
about
you,
know
a
placement,
hopefully
to
minimize
impact
of
trees,
and
things
like
that
so
I
think
there's
you
know,
there's
some
good
good
efforts
there.
They
always
just
end
up
this
carbuncle
in
the
landscape,
sometimes
and
sorry
to
all
the
electrical
engineers
in
the
world,
but
that's
what
they
are.
S
F
J
I
think
where
that's
going,
though,
is
and
I
saw
it
in
some
of
the
comments
is
the
idea
of
mitigation,
because
you
know
I
think
that
I
share.
You
know
many
of
the
you
know
the
the
opinions
that
you've
heard
and
I
know
that
other
commissioners
expressed
it
last
time,
which
is
you
know
it's
a
loss
of
of
a
prime
gateway,
piece
and
I
know.
We
all
know
that
there's
equipment
there
right
now,
but
the
visual
impact
of
that
is
significantly
less.
J
And
so,
and
you
know
we
are
losing
you
know
green
space,
and
how
can
that
be?
You
know
mitigated
if
you
will
what
what
can
be
offered
to
offset
that
to
a
degree
and
I.
Leave
that
to
you,
I
I
would
like
to
you
know
again
commend
that
it
has
moved
significantly
better
than
the
initial
proposal
would
still
love
to
see
it
be
somewhere
else,
but
the.
J
The
you
know
with
the
fact
that
that
that
is
likely
out
of
the
Commission's
control
I
think
that
the
continued
efforts
and
evaluations
of
how
to
work
the
scale
and
whether
that
is
you
know,
perhaps
you
know
and-
and
you
know,
Stanley
was
kind
of
running
with
the
idea
of
you
know.
Can
it
look
more
residential,
I'd
I,
wonder
whether
maybe
a
gabled
roof
would
have
provide?
J
You
know
what
a
peak
that
would
provide
some
of
that
height
that
perhaps
is
required
at
the
pump
and
and
because
of
the
tank,
but
gives
the
appearance
and
the
perception
of
a
much
smaller
low.
You
know
more
low
hung,
building,
I
think
that
some
of
the
details,
the
cal
wall,
the
service,
hollow
metal
service
doors,
which
look
very
industrial
and
are
out
of
sync
and
out
of
character,
with
the
attempts
to
make
this
I
think
blend
more
with
the
architectural
character
that
and
detailing
that
I
see
with
a
brick.
J
F
J
I've
been
trying
to
kill
I've
been
trying
to
kill
Boston
Ivy
for
the
last
20
years
of
my
in
and
I
have
not
had
success
yet
so
there
are
exceptions,
but
I
do
you
know
I.
Think
of
the
new
Public
Safety
Building,
which
to
the
south,
has
significant
concrete
walls
at
the
at
the
vehicle.
Sallyport
that
you
know
I
mean
it
was
supposed
to
be
a
green
wall.
J
It's
not,
and
that's
been
now
five
to
seven
years
and
I
see
plenty
of
architectural
efforts
to
create
green
roofs
and,
with
the
exception
of
the
line
where
the
the
drip
irrigation
is
you've
got
a
dirt.
You've
got
dead
dirt
with
rows
of
six
inches
of
of
living
plants.
Maybe
it
it's
something
that
you
know
I
guess
I'd
like
to
hear
you
know
if,
if
that
were
to
be
something
that
is
proposed,
I
sure
would
like
to
be
convinced
that
it
was
in
fact
viable,
and
then
you
know.
B
J
Having
dealt
with
in
my
career
issues
with
laminar
flow
and
and
fire
fire
sprinkler,
risers
I,
you
know
I
I
respect
your
your
experience,
but
again
is
there
are
there?
Where
are
there
places
where
that
probe
could
be
put
or
that
that
would
be?
You
know,
maybe
you
know
in
alternate
locations
that
what
is
actually
within
the
pop
house
above
grade
can
be
again
shortened
so
again,
I
encourage
and
the
engineering
creativity,
as
well
as
the
architectural
creativity,
to
continue
to
try
and
downsize
this
as
much
as
possible.
J
C
J
Well,
Shelley
I'll
jump
in
just
a
little
bit.
We
continue
to
see
on
the
east
side
of
the
building,
I
believe
it
was
a
fair
number
of
the
you
know.
Utilities
and
I
do
think
that
yeah
there
we
go
and
I
think
that
you
know
the
continuum
again
it's
much
less
than
it
was,
which
is
a
great
move,
but
I
think
the
continued
effort
to
create
a
rhythm.
F
It
and
it
might
I,
think
I
share
Tom's
concern
though
Ivy
can,
and
but
it
takes
time
and
I.
Think
that's
yeah.
That's
the
challenge!
Now.
What's
this
building,
in
fact,
maybe
it
should
say
what
was
this
building
gonna
look
like
in
five
years
and
ten
years,
I
think
are
some
some
factors
that
if,
if
we're
dependent
on
greenery
to
arrive
at
this,
you
know
is
this:
is
this
year
twenty
red.
Q
F
Challenge
you
know
it
is
a
utility
building,
but
John
you
made
the
comment
about
the
front
of
the
building.
Is
the
South,
which
is
good
I,
don't
know
if,
if
that's
the,
if
those
are
the
doors
that
will
the
doors
only
get
used,
I
recognized
once
a
day
and
two
hours
every
month
or
something
like
that,
I
mean
this
is
not
a
place
where
people
are
going
in
and
out
all
the
time,
but
if
it
is
a
front
I
think
it
kind
of
goes
back
to
this.
F
F
One
of
the
thoughts
that
I
had
in
in
the
elevations
was
should
all
of
these
doors,
which
I
also
agree.
There
are
pretty
darn
slabs
slab
like
they
are
slabs,
they
have
transoms,
but
they're
they're
blanked
out,
should
those
be
glazed
in
some
manner.
Would
that
that
may
just
looking
at
the
South
elevation
if
that
was
glazed
and
it
started
to
advertise
itself
in
a
sense
with
you
know,
this
is
123
4th,
Avenue
water
pump
house.
Q
Q
F
At
the
same
time,
I
don't
know
that
and
I
think
your
your
explanation
that
the
that
the
green
screen
being
some
number
of
inches
away
from
the
face
of
the
building
starts
to
provide
that
enclosure
that
that
we
look
for
in
a
porch
and
maybe
that's
and
I
see
it
with
shadow
and
such
on
the
South
elevation,
the
West
elevation,
those
are
pretty
much
sucide
slab
utility
entries
and
what
could
they
have?
Could
they
have
a
projecting
frame
that
doesn't
provide
weather
protection?
I,
don't
know
this.
F
F
Q
F
Q
F
Any
case
you
know
where
I'm
going
it's
following
materials,
I
think
really
quality
detailing
top
to
bottom,
which
I
think
is
where
a
lot
of
our
comments
have
come
from.
I
think
I'd.
Second,
Tom's
comments
about
about
mitigation
and
I,
even
I,
even
in
parentheses,
put
off-site
and
I
know.
This
is
really
painful
from
a
from
a
manager's
perspective
to
say:
oh
yeah,
we're
gonna
take
some
of
our
dollars
that
we're
projecting
for
this
building
and
we're
gonna
spend
them
on
something
up.
The
road
I
know
that
really
hurts,
but.
S
F
As
well
mitigation,
you
know,
does
there's
there's
a
loss
of
green
space,
there's
a
there's,
a
loss
of
character
and
usability
of
this
space.
What
can
you
give
back
to
the
neighborhood
across
the
street
up
the
street
I,
don't
know
I
think
it's
just
explore
some
options
too
it
doesn't.
It
doesn't
make
this
building
any
smaller,
but
it
may
make
it.
You
know
less
painful
way.
F
Q
J
And
and
that,
although
I
would
say
that
I
think
transparency
is
as
opposed
to
you
know
this
really
a
lack
thereof,
even
though
there's
some
translucent
elements
to
it,
I
don't
consider
it
Cal
wall
to
be
even
really
translucent
from
the
exterior,
but
that
building
does
include
incorporate
transparency
and
granted.
It's
as,
as
you
indicated,
there's
no
real
moving
parts
in
there,
but
it
does
I
feel
that
it
helps
addressed
scale
and
and-
and
you
know,
sort
of
bring
down
the
perception
of
scale.
If
you
will
and
quite
successfully
granted,
it's
probably
a
lot
quieter.
F
F
A
G
G
A
G
C
C
F
B
S
I
just
appreciate
the
opportunity
to
come
and
get
some
feedback
to
go
back
and
look
at
things
like,
like
we've,
been
saying
we're.
Looking
at
doing
some
transparency,
we
want
to
explore
that
a
bit
more
as
far
as
moving
the
well
or
splitting
it
up
and
doing
the
chlorine,
chlorine
treatment,
someplace
else,
so
we're
just
finishing
part
of
the
evaluation
that
we
did
with
looking
at
the
well
itself.
We
also
had
Hansen
a
loose
who's
that
engineering
firm.
Just
do
a
you
know:
what
are
the?
What
are
the
costs?
S
What
are
the
pros
and
not
just
cost?
What
are
all
the
pros
and
cons
of
doing
something
like
that?
So
it's
it's
having
chemical
treatment,
not
part
of
the
mean
I,
mean
part
of
the
mean
well
house
itself.
There's
risk,
there's
risk
involved
with
that.
There's
there's
cost,
there's
risks,
there's
impacts
to
public
health,
so
the
the
scenarios
were
looking
at
is
doing
nothing
just
lining
the
well
like
I,
said
taking
it
from
a
20
to
30-year
well
to
100
to
a
75
to
100
year.
S
Well,
that's
something
that
this
well
we'll
get
a
lining
as
part
of
what
we're
going
next
option
would
be
to
do
what
we're
proposing
here
and
put
everything
in
one
one
location.
Other
options,
then,
would
be
to
separate
the
chlorine
and
the
well
house
itself
and
what
are
the
risks
pros
and
cons
of
that
and
concluding
costs
moving
it
within
300
feet,
so
we
don't
have
to
mess
with
our
water
rights
what
that
entails.
S
As
far
as
property
purchase
demolition
of
existing
homes,
just
to
get
a
drill
rig
in
there
to
drill
it,
and
then
how
did
we
get
it
back
into
our
system?
Or
do
we
move
it
someplace
else
in
the
city?
Where
will
we
find
that
same
volume
of
water
that
same
quality
of
water
and
will
it
be
someplace
we
need
it?
Will
it
be
able
to
provide
adequate
fire
flow
and
pressure
for
downtown
or
all
the
areas?
S
So
it's
a
there's
a
lot
of
a
lot
of
facets
to
that
that
study
or
to
doing
these
different
things,
and
it's
not
an
in-depth
study,
but
it's
a
it's.
What
are
the?
What
are
the
pros
and
cons,
whether
it's
a
cost
or
whether
it's
a
worker
safety
or
a
public
safety?
So
we,
we
are
just
finishing
that
we
actually
I
got
the
draft
today
ad
and
a
chance
to
read
it.
S
But
it's
something
we
are
looking
at
and
it's
a-you
know
again,
I'm,
not
optimistic
that
my
conclusions
gave
me
anything
but
to
what
we're
proposing
here
and
that
stems
from
public
public
safety
worker
safety.
And
you
know
cost
people
say
cost
should
be
an
issue,
but
I
have
a
fiduciary
responsibility
to
the
taxpayers,
to
the
ratepayers.