►
From YouTube: Historic Landmarks Commission Meeting - 06/01/2022
Description
Salt Lake City Historic Landmarks Commission Meeting - 06/01/2022
YouTube:
https://www.slc.gov
https://www.slc.gov/historic-preservation/
https://www.slc.gov/boards/historic-landmark-commission-agendas-minutes/
A
A
A
A
B
B
B
B
C
B
A
A
A
E
E
F
If
you
recall
those
we
did,
there
was
a
petition
initiated
by
the
planning
commission
to
clarify
some
language
with
with
regard
to
adus
and
the
text
of
aws,
we've
also
received,
you
know,
obviously,
feedback
from
the
development
community
or
homeowners
with
just
some
code
strangeness
or
issues
that
we
had.
So
the
planning
commission
initiated
a
petition
to
do
a
text
amendment
to
make
some
minor
tweaks
to
the
adu
code.
F
And
city
council
also
discussed
adus
when
we
gave
an
adu
report
to
the
council
and
our
direction
was
like.
Yes,
let's
move
forward,
let's
remove
the
conditional
use
process
for
adus;
it's
they.
They
just
for
they've,
been
going
to
planning
commission
with
really
not
much
changing.
With
regard
to
that
that
process,
let's
make
them
quicker
easier
to
build.
F
One
thing
that
council
brought
up
was
activating
alleyways
that
they
wanted
to
see
some
design
considerations
if
there
were
adus
at
the
back
of
a
lot
looking
at
entrances
and
lighting
just
to
help
activate
alleys
and
remove
the
conditional
use
process.
Those
are
kind
of
the
big,
the
big
things
there
and
some
minor
tweaks,
so
that
proposed
code
was
put
on
our
website
maybe
two
weeks
ago,
and
we
can
go
ahead
and
send
that
out
to
you
in
an
email
too,
if
you'd
like
to
just
peruse
it,
it's
still
allowed
in
local
historic
districts.
F
That
one
can
actually
build
an
adu
on
that
lot,
so
to
just
kind
of
open
it
up
for
more
options
other
than
just
residential
zoning
districts.
So
if
an
underlying
zoning
district
allows
residential-
yes,
that's
a
possibility
that
one
can
go
ahead
and
have
an
adu
without
the
owner
occupancy
in
that
particular
state.
F
A
F
E
F
E
F
F
F
You
had
also
asked
us
to
look
into
notification
for
property
owners
and
properties
in
our
local,
historic
districts
right
and
our
graphic
designer
who's.
Amazing
brian
maya
actually
put
together
a
postcard
for
each
specific
district
like
welcome
to
central
city
or
welcome
to
the
avenues
or
you're
in
the
avenues
and
there's
a
qr
code.
F
There's
a
reminder
on
the
postcard
that
exterior
changes
need
to
come
to
the
commission,
but
we
also
created
a
landing
page
off
of
that
postcard
for
just
other
questions
that
come
up
that
come
up
whether
you're
a
new
property
owner
or
what's
the
landing
page
on
our
website.
Let
me
can
I
send
that
to
you
right
after
this
just
a
sec,
my
computer
is
moving
super
slowly
today,.
F
I
can
I
can
find
it
and
announce
it
yeah
in
a
little
bit,
if
you
want
that,
just
kind
of
goes
over
exterior
alterations
and
what
our
review
is.
I
made
sure
that
there
was
a
sentence
or
two
in
there
regarding
windows
and
brick
painting,
just
because
those
are
kind
of
the
big
things
that
you
all
see
as
far
as
enforcement
cases,
yeah.
B
F
B
F
F
I
guess
we
haven't
decided
on
that.
We
just
sent
out
our
first
round
based
on
the
ask
from
the
commission,
but
if
you
have
more
input
on
that
and
we'll
go
ahead
and
send
you
the
proofs
for
those
so
that
you
can
see
them
because
they're
they're
catchy,
I
guess,
they're
very
attractive,
and
hopefully,
if
you
have
any
comments
about
them,
please
do.
F
So
we'll
see
if
it's
effective,
I
hope
so,
but
if
not,
even
if
someone
I
mean
we'll
still
see
enforcement
cases,
but
if
it
provides
the
public
some
local
pride
for
their
actual
district
and
just
a
landing
page
that
hey,
we
have
these
experts
at
the
city
that
can
come
out
and
help
advise
us
on
a
project
we
may
or
may
not
want
to
do.
Then
that
would
be
stellar.
G
F
F
B
C
H
I
Good
evening,
commission
I
took
over
this
project
for
caitlin.
She
has
actually
moved
on
to
a
planning
position
up
in
park
city,
so
this
is
a
request
from
gary
van
branken
for
he's
the
owner
of
the
property
for
a
certificate
of
appropriateness
to
remove
an
existing
porch
on
the
rear
of
the
structure
and
construct
a
new
three-story
addition
onto
the
rear
of
his
property
at
approximately
641
north
200
west.
I
The
roof
pitch
of
the
existing
structure
is
much
steeper
than
the
roof
of
the
proposed
edition,
which
will
be
a
412
pitch.
The
roof
was
the
roof
of
the
proposed
edition
is
designed
to
appear
like
a
dormer
and
to
be
compatible
with
an
existing
dormer.
That's
on
the
south
side
of
the
structure,
the
applicants
requesting
two
modifications
as
part
of
this
certificate
of
appropriateness
related
to
height.
The
first
is
for
overall
building
height
and
the
second
is
for
wall
height.
I
The
proposed
materials
for
the
addition
are
concrete
for
the
basement
level.
Brick
veneer
for
the
second
level,
smooth
hardy
board,
siding
and
hearty
shake
for
the
third
floor.
Double
hung
windows
proposed
for
the
side,
elevations,
north
and
south
and
casement
windows
and
a
picture
window
are
proposed
on
the
rear
elevation
of
the
edition.
I
A
white
epdm
rubber,
roofing
materials
proposed
for
the
addition
information
submitted
by
the
applicant
is
located
in
attachments,
c
and
d
of
the
staff
report.
Staff
is
recommending
approval,
impart
and
denial
in
part.
We
are
recommending
approval
for
the
addition
and
including
the
additional
building
height
and
wall
height
and
denial
for
the
proposed
epdm
roofing
material.
I
This
slide
shows
the
existing
rear
of
the
subject
property
and
the
proposed
rear
elevation
of
the
addition,
and
this
slide
shows
the
north
elevation
of
the
property.
There
are
currently
slider
windows
shown
on
the
drawings,
but
the
materials
the
applicants
submitted
indicated
that
those
windows
would
be
double
hung.
I
I
All
the
all
the
structures
surrounding
the
site
are
identified
as
contributing
structures
in
the
survey
in
terms
of
key
considerations.
Staff
looked
at
the
height
modifications
if
you
visit
the
site
and
you
can
see
from
some
of
the
photographs
the
site
slopes
down
substantially
towards
the
rear
of
the
property.
So
staff
is
of
the
opinion
that
the
modifications
for
additional
height
are
compatible
with
the
existing
structure
and
the
site
in
terms
of
massing
and
scale.
I
Although
the
proposed
roof
slope
of
the
addition
is
much
less
steep
than
the
existing
roof
to
provide
for
adequate
living
and
headspace
for
the
residential
dwellings,
staffs
of
the
opinion
that
the
addition,
as
viewed
from
the
public
way,
will
is
designed
to
appear
like
dormers,
and
it
will
not
have
a
negative
impact
on
the
integrity
of
the
historic
house.
Viewing
the
west
rear
elevation
of
the
plan.
The
overall
height
of
the
addition
is
approximately
five
feet
lower
than
the
top
of
the
existing
roof
and
is
designed
to
be
subordinate
to
the
existing
structure.
I
It
would
also
not
be
compatible
with
the
existing
roofing
material,
which
have
a
uniform
texture
pattern
and
profile
and
staff
found
that
the
proposed
roofing
material
failed
to
comply
with
the
all
the
applicable
standards
of
approval
for
a
certificate
of
appropriateness
in
regards
to
the
standards
for
a
coa
staff
did
find
that
the
proposal,
with
the
exception
of
the
roofing
material
as
mentioned,
does
comply
with
the
standards.
First.
Certificate
of
appropriateness,
notice
of
the
public
hearing
was
mailed
out
to
residents
and
property
owners
within
300
feet.
I
There
was
also
a
public
notice
sign
posted
on
the
property,
as
of
today,
staff
has
not
received
any
public
comments
in
regards
to
the
proposal
and
again,
staff
is
recommending
approval
in
part
and
denial
in
part
approval
for
the
addition,
with
the
exception
or
denial
for
the
proposed
rubber
roofing
material.
The
approval
does
include
modifications
for
building
and
wall
height.
I
do
have
a
sample
of
the
proposed
rubber
roofing
material
that
the
applicant
provided.
I
E
D
B
J
B
B
B
J
Well,
you,
you
saw
what
the
back
porch
looks
like
it's
on
a
doesn't,
have
a
foundation
on
it
under
it.
I've
been
I've
wanted
to
fix
this
thing,
for
I've
owned
the
property
for
over
40
years,
and
so
you
know
I
feel
like
I'm
in
a
position.
I
can
take
it
down
and
improve
the
neighborhood,
and
I've
always
tried
to
take
good
care
of
my
property
so
and
so
I'm
kind
of
in
a
dilemma.
J
If
I
can
come
out
with
the
height
of
the
building
the
height
that
it
is,
then
I
have
enough
pitch.
I
can
use
shingled,
you
know
asphalt,
shingles.
I've
got
enough
pitch
that
that'll
work,
but
they
want
me
to
match
the
dormer
that
comes
out.
That
comes
down
a
little
bit
lower
and
it
makes
the
pitch
about
a
two.
It's
about
a
two
five
or
two
three.
So
it's
you
know
212.
J
and
I've
been
fighting
that
dormer
to
the
south
side.
In
fact,
the
person
that
lives
in
that
upstairs
apartment
can
verify
this.
I
just
can't
keep
but
I've
re-roofed
it
several
times
and
it
works
for
a
couple
of
years.
But
then,
every
year
I
go
up
there
with
tar
and
it's
just
it's
getting
scarier
and
scarier.
For
me
to
be
on
that
steep.
You
know
it's
a
12
12
the
regular
roof
and
it
lasts
forever.
J
J
And
it's
just
it's
just
not
worth
it.
If
you
have
a
flat
roof,
I'm
sure
you've
fought
the
same
thing
if
you've
been
in
construction
or
you're
an
architect.
Is
that
right?
So
you
probably
understand
so
that's
that's
kind
of
where
I'm
at
I'm
stuck.
I
either
need
to
come
out
and
keep
the
pitch
so
that
I
can
have
the
the
height
to
put
shingles
on
or
use
something
that'll
work.
That's
really!
Where
I'm
at
I'm
not
fighting,
you
know
I
like
the
the
area,
and
I
want
to
keep
improving
it.
E
Yeah
is
it?
Could
you
put
drawings
up
on
the
on
the
screen?
There
give
us
a
cross
section
to
give
us
a
side
view,
because
we've
been
told
now
that
the
roof
slope
is
4
and
12,
and
we've
also
heard
it's
2
and
a
half
12.,
and
that
makes
a
big
difference
in
what
kind
of
roofing
material
can
go
on.
There
is.
E
I
J
J
B
J
B
J
I
I
E
I
I
C
J
E
E
E
E
J
J
G
J
E
I
B
J
J
B
J
B
I'm
just
asking
questions,
so
how
did
you
go
from
from
the
existing
height
to
this
height
that
that's
shown
on
the
drawings?
Wouldn't
a
height
midpoint
satisfy
both
sides,
because
what
what
what
I
think
staff
was
wanting
is
that
there
would
be
an
existing
higher
roof
and
an
addition
that
would
be
somewhat
lower.
Well,
it
doesn't
have
to
be
this
low.
It
can
be
somewhat
lower
a
little
bit
lower
than
the
existing.
A
J
B
J
B
B
I
And
met
with
him
on
site,
I
I
do
remember
the
initial
plans
that
were
proposed.
I
don't
believe
that
they
were
the
exact
same
pitch
as
the
existing
roof
of
the
structure,
so
I
believe
staff
gave
them
the
advice
to
lower
it
to
match
that
existing
dormer
to
in
order
to
get
the
pitch.
I
think
that
he
wanted
and
also
have,
I
guess,
adequate
head
space
and
living
room
for
this
building
currently
has
three
units.
I
That's
why
it
was
proposed.
This
way.
From
my
understanding,
I
don't
think
we
would
be
opposed
to
having
the
addition
meet
the
height
of
the
existing
roof,
but,
as
I
remember
as
it
was
initially
proposed,
the
addition
was
not
subordinate
and
the
roof
lines
did
not
match
and-
and
there
wasn't
like
it
didn't
appear
like
a
dormer
the
way
it
was
initially
designed.
I
I
don't
know
if
that
helps,
but
if,
if
we
do
end
up
going
this
route,
we
would
need
to
put
in
some
leeway
for
the
additional
height
they're
already
requesting
additional
height,
and
they
would
potentially
need
a
little
bit
more
in
terms
of
a
modification
and
I'm
not
quite
sure
how
much
I'm
also
I'm
not
quite
sure
if
there's
a
discrepancy
on
the
plan.
But
the
plan
for
the
addition
indicates
that
it
is
already
a
412
pitch.
So
I
just
wanted
to
point
that
out.
J
A
B
B
G
G
G
E
Yeah,
I
think
the
solution
is
pretty
straightforward.
You
increase
the
pitch
to
where
you
can
put
asphalt,
shingles
on
to
re,
reassure
the
applicant
and
to
make
it
a
better
application.
I
would
completely
coat
the
top
of
the
sheathing,
the
roof
sheathing
with
ice
and
water
shield.
The
thing
not
just
stop
at
the
eve
line
as
most
builders
do
completely
cover
the
roof
with
that
put
asphalt,
shingles
on
as
long
as
it's
at
least
a
3
and
12
pitch
you're
going
to
be
fine,
so
I
would
suggest
we
send
send
him
out
with
those
recommendations.
C
B
Hang
on
hang
on
so
we
have
we
have.
I
think
I
can
speak
for
both
of
us.
We
have
used
epdm
roofs
on
multiple,
multiple
office
buildings
and
things
like
that.
Where
there's
a
parapet,
a
quarter,
inch
foot
half
inch
per
foot,
you
know
towards
the
drains
with
crickets
and
everything
else,
but
it's
really
not
meant
to
be
seen
and
they're
they're.
You.
A
B
C
Meeting
packet
june
1.
here
we
go
minor
alteration
and
motion
sheet:
okay,
so
motion
sheet,
I'm
not
making
a
motion,
I'm
just
reading
it
for
you
that
we
move,
approve
the
request
for
certificate
of
appropriateness
in
part
for
the
proposed
rear
edition,
associated
modifications
for
increased
building
and
wall
height.
C
We
find
the
addition
generally
complies
with
the
standards
for
approval
of
blah
blah
blah
blah
final
design.
Details
regarding
the
proposed
edition
are
delegated
to
planning
staff
and
based
on
the
analysis
and
finding
the
staff
report,
the
information
presented
and
the
input
received
during
the
public
hearing.
I
wouldn't
deny
the
request
for
certificate
of
appropriateness
in
part
for
the
proposed
epdm
rubber
roofing
material
on
the
edition.
B
A
I
do
have
some
concerns.
I
understand
what
has
been
discussed
relative
to
shingles
and
roof
pitch
just
looking
at
this,
and
if
it
was
a
two
to
two
to
twelve
pitch,
then
you'd
have
about
six
increments
of
run
for
every
bit
of
rise
and
just
looking
at
the
dimensions
on
that
image.
It
looks
closer
to
a
4
out
of
12
because
you
have
about
three
increments
of
run
for
every
every
rise,
so
I'm
not
entirely
sure.
A
A
I
I
would
also
note
that
I
think
that
if
I
understood
correctly,
the
reason
for
this
pitch
was
to
reflect
the
pitch
of
the
dormer
on
the
south
side
so
that
when
you're
looking
at
the
building
in
elevation,
you
would
have
a
consistent
view
and
you
wouldn't
see
anything
other
than
the
additional
roof
other
than
the
slope
on
the
north
side
to
mimic
the
the
dormer
on
the
south
side.
So
I
adding
adding
a
little
height,
I'm
not
entirely
clear,
also
what
that
would
do
other
than
adding
more
additional
roof
visibility.
A
C
C
C
E
Request
for
a
certificate
of
appropriateness
for
a
rare
edition
at
641,
north
second
west,
based
on
the
analysis
and
findings
in
the
staff
report,
the
information
presented
in
the
input
received
during
the
public
hearing.
I
move
that
the
historic
landmark
commission
approved
the
request
for
a
certificate
of
appropriateness
in
part
for
the
proposed
rear
edition,
not.
A
B
K
K
K
Well,
I
will
say
I
went
to
grad
school
at
the
university
of
utah
for
architectural
studies,
with
with
a
focus
in
historic
preservation.
So
historic
preservation
is
something
that
I
really
like.
I
care
about
it's
something
that
I
think
about
a
lot,
and
so
it's
it's
wonderful
to
be
able
to
do
preservation
work
as
part
of
my
career.
Now
I
moved
here
in
october
from
in
the
indianapolis
indiana,
where
I
was
working
for
a
historic
preservation
nonprofit,
but
I'm
grateful
to
be
here-
and
this
is
my
first
public
hearing
here
in
salt
lake.
I
F
F
K
K
It's
connected
to
it's,
a
commercial
building
which
is
connected
to
a
historic
single
family,
home
staff
is
recommending
approval
of
the
project
with
the
conditions
listed
in
the
staff
report,
and
the
motion
sheet,
which
you
should
have
here
is
an
here,
is
a
an
overview
of
the
subject:
property.
It's
located
on
the
southeast
corner
of
500,
south
and
500
east.
K
K
One
of
the
larger
one
of
the
larger
alterations
was
to
remove
the
existing
stucco
and
replace
it
like
for,
like
with
a
traditional
hard
coat
stucco
on
the
west
and
north
sides
of
the
well
just
outside
of
the
west
property
line,
and
then
on.
The
north
side
of
the
property
plans
called
to
install
outdoor
dining,
and
this
is
subject
to
an
encroachment
permit
for
the
west
dining
area
and
then,
lastly,
to
install
canopies
on
the
west
facade,
and
this
is
also
subject
to
an
encroachment
permit
from
the
city
of
salt
lake.
K
K
K
K
Here
is
the
sign
proposal.
It's
a
wooden
sign.
It's
proposed
to
be
backlit.
The
sign
does
meet
the
standards
within
with
found
within
the
zoning
standards,
and
then
here
are
a
couple
historic
photographs
of
the
building.
We
believe
that
initially
the
building
was
constructed
as
as,
what's
shown
here
on
the
left
as
a
wood
frame
building
it
has
that
really
interesting
kind
of
old
west
style
false
front,
and
then
it
was
remodeled
substantially.
We
believe
we
believe
remodel.
K
I
don't
I
don't
believe
it
was
torn
down,
but
we
believe
to
be
remodeled
substantially
into
the
art
modern
style
that
you
see
on
the
right
hand,
side,
and
you
see
that
really
neat
sign
and
those
doors
that
are
shown.
We
believe
to
be
the
doors
that
are
excellent
on
the
accident
on
the
building
today.
K
Finally,
staff
is
recommending
that
the
historic
landmark
commission
approve
the
proposal
to
remove
the
existing
windows
on
the
building.
The
shortened
glass
block
windows,
install
new
doors
and
larger
storefront
windows,
install
canopies,
outdoor
dining
and
replace
existing
stucco,
like
for,
like
with
the
with
the
conditions
listed
in
the
staff
report
and
motion
sheet.
K
K
C
K
K
C
K
It'll
be
tacos,
of
course,
I
believe
it's
the
same.
It's
the
same.
It's
victor
galindo
and
I
believe
it's
the
same.
Victory
that
owns
victor's
tires.
Okay,
they've
been
very
responsive
and
and
amenable
to
working
with
us.
They
actually
initially
had
proposed
a
very
thin
brick
veneer
on
the
building,
and
that
wasn't
in
that
wasn't
in
harmony
with
the
design
guidelines,
because
because
the
the
current
structure
does
have
the
stucco-
and
that
is
a
historic
feature
of
the
property.
D
K
Yeah,
the
fifth,
the
fifth
east
outdoor
dining
will
be
outside
of
because
I
believe
the
I
believe
the
west
side,
that
property
line
is
right
against
the
building,
so
they'll
need
an
encroachment
permit
from
the
city
in
order
to
to
install
that
they're,
not
they're,
not
they're,
not
they
can't
block
the
sidewalks
and
then
on
the
the
north
side,
they're
they're
planning
on
on
on
paving
within
the
property
lines
and
putting
the
outdoor
dining
there,
and
that
does
adhere
to
our
zoning
standards.
Okay,
so.
D
K
B
H
These
are
heavy
chairs,
you
know
so.
First
of
all,
this
is
the
block
that
I
talked.
This
is
the
block
that
I
talked
to
you
about
before.
Regarding
the
redevelopment
of
the
western
garden
site,
I
took
you
on
a
tour
around
this
block.
This
is
a
fabulous
block
in
the
central
city,
historic
district,
with
a
tremendous
number
of
historic
resources.
This
is
one
of
them
hales
market,
and
this
afternoon
I
sent
you
a
page
from
the
design
guidelines
for
commercial
buildings
that
addresses
specifically
house
stores
as
a
building
type.
H
H
H
H
I
think
what
it's
doing
in
terms
of
its
fenestration
is
going
close
to
the
1942
version
of
the
commercial
building,
and
I
don't
really
have
a
problem
with
that.
I
will
also
tell
you,
as
the
owner
of
a
house
store,
the
current
configuration
of
fenestration
does
not
lend
itself
to
many
adaptive
reuses,
except
maybe
photographic,
dark
rooms.
H
So
you
know
you
have
to
think
about.
Well,
how
are
you
going
to
reuse
this
building
and
it
doesn't
have
a
future
as
a
small
grocery
store,
and
it
would
not
be
a
good
idea
to
make
it
a
convenience
store
for
a
whole
lot
of
reasons,
and
so
I
think
you
have
to
look
at
how
changing
the
fenestration
opens
up
some
other
possibilities
for
adaptive,
reuse
and
this
proposal
does
take
it
back
to
more,
like
the
fenestration
that
it
had
in
1942.
H
C
H
C
F
E
H
H
H
B
F
K
F
K
Yeah,
I'm
sorry
and
the
the
the
fence.
If
you
can
see
my
cursor,
the
fence
will
be
well
first
off.
Here
is
the
existing
fence
right
here.
This
is
outside
of
the
property
lines.
The
current
fence
will
will
be
on
the
the
the
west,
north
and
east
property
lines
right
here
to
to
to
to
have
the
outdoor
dining
inside
of
it
right
and
I'm
guessing.
The
tree
is
probably
somewhere
right
around
here.
K
E
What
I'd
suggest
is
that
I
think
these
drawings
are
insufficient.
They
aren't
providing
us
with
all
of
the
information
that
we
need
to
make
an
intelligent
decision.
I
think
if
the
tree
is
to
be
cut
down-
and
this
is
a
complete
submission-
we
need
a
dotted
line
saying
existing
tree
to
be
removed,
but
that's
not
there
if
the
trees
remain
I'd
like
to
see
where
it
is.
K
E
E
B
B
On
just
that,
a
tree
that
size,
you're,
you're,
really
protecting
the
the
drip
line
of
the
tree
and
the
only
way
to
get
water
into
into
all
of
that
drip
line,
is
to
have
a
porous
material,
a
wood,
a
trex
or
something
that
has
has
openings
in
it.
So
when
it
does
rain
or
when
you
irrigate,
then
you're
irrigating,
not
just
the
base
of
the
tree,
but
the
entire
drip
line
it.
B
If,
indeed
it's
not
in
our
purview,
then
it's
not
in
our
purview,
and
we
can't
you
know
we
can
all
have
opinions,
but
that's
not
that's
not
for
something
we
would
do
if
we
were
allowed
to
voice
our
opinions.
I
think
there's
at
least
four
of
us
that
would
want
to
keep
the
tree
and
would
want
to
to
have
paving
that
would
keep
the
tree
viable.
D
F
D
I
would
I
would
I
would,
I
would
consider
a
different
type
of
material
for
the
outdoor
dining
space
that
would
allow
for
the
retention
of
the
very
old,
I
would
say
historic
tree.
That
would
can
that
would
maintain
the
character
of
the
neighborhood,
which
is
ultimately
what
we're
trying
to
address
here.
Are
we
not.
E
B
That's
that's
going
to
be
planned
and
we're
the
applicant
here
we
might
say,
would
we
you
know
we
would
consider
leaving
the
tree,
certainly
having
some
kind
of
shading
umbrellas
or
things
like
that
and
paving
material
that
that
would
would
keep
the
tree
viable.
So
I'm
I'm
asking
for
a
little
bit
of
help.
E
B
Finish
in
a
checkerboard
pattern
or
any
one
of
a
number
of
things,
but
that's
a
design
issue
and
that's,
I
think,
we're
not
going
to
design
this
plaza
for
for
this
applicant.
I
think
we
can
make
recommendations,
but
but
they're
only
recommendations
and
what
we're
here
to
do
is
is
to
review
what
staff
has
recommended
and
what
staff
has
recommended
is
that
this
that
you
know
I'll
just
read
what
you've
recommended
is
that
that
we
should
approve
a
certificate
of
appropriateness
in
part?
Excuse
me
wrong
one
that
we
should
approve.
What
is
there?
B
We
go
that
planning
and
staff
recommends
that
the
historic
landmark
commission
approve
the
major
alteration
request
with
the
conditions
listed
below
and
there's
two
additions
to
that
you
listed
and
has
to
do
with
like
for,
like,
with
which
we
talked
about
previously
concerning
the
stucco
and
the
final
design
details
would
be
delegated
to
the
planning
staff.
Now
we
can
make
suggestions,
but
but
they're
only
suggestions
we're
only
here
to
to
respond
to
the
recommendation
that
staff
has
made
okay,
so,
commissioners,
any
other
comments.
E
A
D
D
Major
alterations
at
approximately
511
south
500
east
I
want
to
make
based
on
the
findings
listed
in
the
staff
report,
the
information
presented
and
input
received
during
public
hearing.
I
move
that
the
historic
landmarks
commission
approved
the
minor
alteration
petition,
plnh
lc
2022-00164,
as
proposed
subject
to
complying
with
the
conditions
listed
in
the
staff
report.
One
being
all
replacement
stucco
shall
be
replaced
like
for
like
using
traditional
stucco
and
three-part
application
method,
as
well
as
the
same
finished,
texture
and
number.
Two.
The
final
design
details
are
delegated
to
planning
staff.
E
A
E
A
C
A
K
B
A
A
F
F
C
B
B
E
A
E
C
E
C
F
I
don't
really
have
anything
to
present,
but
if
you
recall
the
state
has
the
state
has
some
new
requirements
to
make
sure
that
we're
allowed
to
that
all
the
commissions
in
the
state
need
to
be
able
to
update
their
policies
and
procedures
so
that
we
can.
We
have
the
right
language
in
there
to
run
electronic
meetings.