►
From YouTube: Historic Landmarks Commission Meeting - May 05, 2022
Description
Salt Lake City Historic Landmarks Commission Meeting - May 05, 2022
https://www.slc.gov/historic-preservation/
https://www.slc.gov/boards/historic-landmark-commission-agendas-minutes/
A
A
A
A
A
A
A
A
A
B
Good
evening
everyone
we're
going
to
commence
the
meeting.
That
is
the
5th
of
may
salt
lake
city,
historic,
landmark
commission.
We
do
have
a
quorum
this
evening
with
fabs
delay:
john
uenoski,
aiden,
lilly,
kenton,
peters
to
my
left,
carlton
goetz,
michael
abrahamson,
is
traveling
and
amanda
delucia,
our
newest
historic,
landmark.
Commission,
commissioner
welcome
and
I'm
I'm
mike
vela.
I
wanted
to
announce
there's
a
this
meeting
is
held
in
person.
B
B
Please
email
your
comments
to
historic
landmarks,
dot
comments
at
saltlakecitygov.com
with
that.
Let's,
let's
begin
with
the
approval
of
the
minutes
for
the
7th
of
april
meeting
commissioners,
can
I
have
a
motion.
Please.
D
A
B
That's
right,
you
were
out
canton.
A
E
B
Michael
abrahamson
was,
is
traveling
and
amanda
was
here,
so
I'm
also
in
approval
of
that.
That's
that's
for
so
that
those
are
accepted.
I
don't
believe,
there's
a.
I
don't
have
a
report
from
the
chair.
Perhaps
did
you
have
a
chair
from
the
viceroy
and
I
didn't
think
so,
and
so
let's
have
a
report
from
the
director.
B
F
You
welcome
amanda.
I
can't
wait
to
work
with
you
further.
I'm
excited
to
have
you
here
and
I
just
wanted
to
tell
the
commission
if
you
weren't
there.
Some
of
you
were
there
at
the
preservation
utah
conference
on
friday
and
saturday,
but
it
was
a
packed
house
super
engaging
great
to
be
together
and
some
kelsey
and
I
had
the
honor
to
be
on
a
civics
101
panel,
just
overall
a
great
success.
I
just
wanted
to
say
thanks
to
preservation,
utah
and
everyone
else.
B
So
much
did
we
make
that
motion
now.
Yes,
please,
all
right.
So
commissioners,
I
believe
you've
received
emails,
indicating
that
and
most
people
were
able
to
do
that.
So
let
me
entertain
a
motion
to
move
the
meeting
from
schedule
meeting
from
the
2nd
of
june
to
the
1st
of
june.
A
D
B
A
B
A
B
I
feel
like
it's
at
the
back
of
my
throat
now
so
I'll.
Try
all
right.
So,
let's
go.
I
believe
the
the
next
order
is
general
public
comments.
G
G
It's
the
roar
of
the
ventilation
is
considerable.
So,
first
of
all,
I
want
to
remind
you
that
the
preservation
home
tour,
the
historic
home
tour
by
preservation
utah,
is
the
21st
of
this
month.
That's
a
saturday.
G
There
are
multiple
ways
to
participate
as
a
volunteer
or
as
a
ticket
purchaser,
and
you
just
go
on
preservationutah.org.
G
To
find
out
more
and
former
chair
of
the
landmarks
commission,
warren
lloyd's
office
will
be
in
adaptive,
reuse
on
the
tour.
That's
a
building
that
almost
fell
down
before
warren
took
over.
So
thanks.
I
have
made
some
comments
about
your
work
session
and
I've
addressed
the
term
limits
the
ability
of
the
chair
to
vote.
G
Potentially
what
I
see
is
doing
away
with
the
drop
box.
It's
not
clear
in
the
draft,
and
I
have
several
comments
if
you're
doing
away
with
the
dropbox,
because
I'm
very
dependent
on
the
dropbox,
as
you
know,
and
and
then
I
want
to
talk
in
a
little
bit
more
detail
about
closing
the
public
hearing
and
accepting
new
information.
G
G
G
B
B
There
is
the
certificate
of
appropriateness
for
new
construction
at
the
madeleine
choir
school
in
the
union,
pacific
hotel,
new
construction
approval
modification
request.
I
will
recuse
myself
from
item
number
three:
the
union
pacific
hotel
new
construction,
as
as
our
office
is
working
on
that
project,
and
I
will
return
for
other
business.
B
H
All
right,
I'm
presenting
a
minor
alteration
for
a
rear
edition
at
280
east
6th
avenue.
The
applicant
is
requesting
a
certificate
of
appropriateness
to
build
a
rear
edition
on
the
subject
property.
The
addition
requires
the
following:
zoning
modifications,
an
increase
in
maximum
lot
coverage,
increase
in
maximum
building
and
wall
height
and
a
reduction
of
side
yard
setbacks.
H
H
The
property
is
about
4
200
square
feet
with
a
lot
width
of
30
feet
which
allows
for
reduced
side
yard
setbacks,
and
the
property
is
similar
in
dimension
to
other
properties
at
front
5th
and
6th
avenue.
There's
a
detached
garage
at
the
rear
of
the
lot
and
it's
shared
with
the
property
owners
of
277
north
sea.
There's
an
access,
easement
off
of
c
street.
H
H
H
H
H
The
maximum
building
height
in
the
sr1a
zone
is
23
feet
and
the
maximum
wall
height
is
17
feet.
The
applicant
is
proposing
a
maximum
building
height
of
25
feet,
2
inches
and
a
maximum
wall
height
of
17
feet.
10
inches.
I
outlined
the
section
of
the
roof
that
would
be
above
the
23
feet
and
then
the
wall
height
is
also
shown.
H
The
typical
side
yard
setbacks
in
the
sr1a
zone
are
four
feet
on
one
side
and
10
on
the
other.
Although
there
is
a
calculation
in
code,
when
the
width
of
the
lot
is
less
than
47
feet.
So
when
that
calculation
comes
into
play,
the
subject-
properties,
side,
yard
setback
requirement
is
four
feet
on
one
side
and
five
on
the
other
and
because
it
has
a
narrow
lot
width.
H
I
I'm
dave
richards,
I'm
the
architect,
who's
been
hired
by
the
owners.
This
is
rebecca,
sears
and
paul
stratton.
I
think
amanda
did
a
great
job
on
our
staff.
Reports
very
thorough,
explains
all
the
issues,
so
I
don't
really
have
a
lot
to
add.
I
think
with
the
addition,
like
a
lot
of
those
lots
that
are
narrow.
We
always
have
height
concerns
property
coverage.
Concerns
setback
concerns,
it's
just
sort
of
the
nature
of
our
current
zoning
regs.
I
In
relation
to
these
old
little
subdivisions,
we've
tried
to
be
very
sensitive
to
maintaining
the
integrity
of
the
existing
house,
so
changing
the
roof
pitch
in
back.
So
it's
lower,
rather
than
matching
the
existing
help
with
that,
and
the
fact
that
it
slopes
down
tends
to
hide
it
from
views,
so
it
doesn't
really
affect
the
streetscape.
I
Probably
the
the
roughest
comparison
is
the
the
slide
you
showed
with
the
house
to
the
west,
which
is
very
close
to
the
property
line
and
very
big
and
bulky,
and
we're
sort
of
the
antithesis
of
that.
I
believe
so
mainly
I'm
here
to
ask
questions
and
if
you
have
anything
for
the
owners
that
can
respond,
we'd
be
happy
to
answer
that.
I
And
sort
of
our
opinion.
B
You
know,
I
agree
with
you
that
that
the
site
dimensions
were
tight
to
begin
with,
and
what
you're
doing
is
following
the
basically
the
footprint
of
the
existing
building.
Further
further
to
the
south
right.
I
B
All
right,
well
very
good,
then,
let's,
let's
close
the
public
hearing
for
for
this,
and
now,
let's
move
into
executive
session
commissioners.
Are
there
any
any
questions,
any
comments
that
we
have
concerning
this?
This
request.
A
Had
a
comment
regarding
the
slope
in
the
property,
I
I
appreciate
the
fact
that
it
is
away
from
the
public
eye
and
that
it
is
sloping
down
despite
the
increased
height.
So
I
think
that's
a
nice
element.
H
B
E
I
will
make
the
motion
based
on
the
findings
listed
in
the
staff
report,
the
information
presented
and
input
received
from
the
public
hearing.
I
move
that
the
historic
landmark
commission
approved
the
minor
alteration
petition:
p:
l,
n
h,
l
c
20
22
0
0
2
0
0,
as
proposed
subject
to
complying
with
the
conditions
listed
in
the
staff
report.
A
A
B
B
B
All
right,
let's
move
to
the
second,
and
this
has
to
do
with
the
madeleine
choir
school
field
house.
K
This
is
a
request
by
the
madeleine
choir.
Excuse
me.
K
Request
by
the
mattel
in
choir
school
to
construct
a
new
principal
building
on
their
campus
at
approximately
67
b
street.
You
reviewed
this
proposal
at
your
last
meeting
in
april
and
tabled.
L
K
In
order
for
the
commission
to
or
excuse
me
in
order
for
planning
staff,
allow
us
additional
time
to
review
new
con
new
information
that
was
submitted
by
the
applicant.
K
There
were
two
aspects
of
that
that
we
uncovered
then
a
discussion
of
additional
details
on
materials,
the
fenestration
pattern,
window,
details
and
profiles,
and
then,
finally,
we
had
to
do
a
little
research
on
the
the
proposal
in
terms
of
off-site
and
shared
parking,
the
arrangement
that
they
made
with
the
the
church
on
a
street
and
their
their
parking
lots.
K
Key
considerations
here,
the
second
avenue
entrance,
the
the
applicants
have
supplied
us
with
additional
information
on
window
locations,
full
elevations
of
the
entire
building
and
then
window
details
profiles
they're
all
in
your
staff
report,
and
they
also
clarified
the
intended
use
of
the
entrance
and,
as
shown
on
this
detail
of
the
site
plan,
they
propose
to
include
one
accessible,
ada
stall,
as
this
drop-off
point
for
their
early
childhood
learning
program.
K
That
requires
a
modification
from
the
commission
to
reduce
the
front
yard
setback
on
this
side.
Ordinarily,
it
would
be
20
feet.
This
would
reduce
that
setback
to
zero.
That
would
be
where
the
building
line
is,
and
there
is
an
existing
parking
lot
that
extends
past,
that
that
setback
line
that
wouldn't
ordinarily
be
allowed.
K
When
we
did
some
research,
we
found
that
there
was
a
1986
board
of
adjustment
case
that
allowed
that
so
there-
yes,
specifically
for
this,
this
parking
lot
that
and
it
was
the
same
situation
allowing
parking
in
a
in
a
required
setback.
K
So
here,
where
they're
going
in
with
a
similar
footprint,
that
the
space
will
be
reconfigured,
so
that
it
is
primarily
pedestrian
in
nature,
but
it
will
have
that
one
accessible
stall.
It
won't
be
a
drop
off
point
where
cars
are
coming
in
and
out,
cars
will
queue
up
on
the
second
avenue
side.
K
K
The
original
proposal
in
order
to
keep
the
height
of
the
building
down
below
the
maximum
35
foot
height,
was
to
have
that
safety
screen
at
about
four
and
a
half
feet
that
that
seemed
reasonable,
given
that
at
most
of
the
locations
that
that
that
safety
screen
will
be
set
back,
10
to
15
even
20
feet
from
the
the
wall
of
the
building,
so
kids
aren't
going
to
get
that
close
to
the
edge
upon
further
discussion.
K
They
have
proposed
to
raise
that
to
an
eight
foot
total
that
would
require
another
modification
to
the
the
limits
of
the
institutional
zone,
raising
the
the
height
of
the
building
from
35
feet
to
and
a
half
feet
total
considering
considering
the
setback,
and
you
can
see
here
the
the
a
little
more
detail
on
the
netting.
This
is
a
photo
of
the
the
same
type
of
protective
screening
that
is
used
at
judge
memorial,
catholic
high
school
on
their
building
or
on
their
football
field.
Just
off
of
11th
east.
K
This
photo
shows
a
much
higher
screen
than
would
be
proposed
here.
It
would
project
approximately
three
and
a
half
feet
above
the
the
parapet
wall,
so.
K
Okay,
so
the
the
height
is
measured
to
the
top
of
the
net.
We
detail
it
more
fully
again
in
the
staff
report.
We
would
recommend
that
the
hlc
approved
that
modification
as
well.
K
Finally,
a
quick
discussion
on
materials
and
design
details
here,
the
there
in
the
discussion,
you
had
a
previous
work
session
in
january
and
then
in
the
discussion
in
april.
There
was
talking
about
more
variation
on
the
the
wall,
planes
and
more
specifics
on
the
polychromatic
in
some
areas,
such
as
the
gymnasium
wall,
that
is
going
to
be
a
window,
it's
going
to
be
a
glass
a
window
on
the
north
side,
the
second
avenue
side,
those
will
be.
K
K
K
B
K
Yeah
and
we
we
sent
the
their
their
design
for
the
the
parking
space
on
second
avenue
and
also
there.
I
didn't
get
too
much
into
the
the
the
parking
but
the
the
off-site
parking.
The
transportation
division
has
reviewed
that,
and
there
is
some
re-striping
that
will
be
necessary
in
order
to
accommodate
those
stalls,
but
that
would
be
part
of
the
project
as
well.
B
K
Yeah-
and
that
was
certainly
an
issue
at
the
april
meeting-
there
was
a
lot
more
public
comment.
There
were
people
here
in
person.
The
the
zoning
code
has
has
two
requirements
for
parking
agreements.
One
is
for
off-site
parking
and
one
is
for
shared
parking
in
a
shared
parking
agreement.
They
require
and
correct
me
a
five-year
minimum
agreement
and,
if
they're,
using
off-site
parking
to
in
place
of
required
parking
that
would
ordinarily
be
on-site.
K
That
has
to
be
an
agreement,
that's
recorded
with
the
county
recorder
and
that
runs
in
perpetuity
with
the
land.
Unless
that
parking
is
then
relocated
elsewhere
down
the
road,
so
it
it
does
end
up
as
a
legal
document,
that's
recorded,
and
that
would
be
part
of
the
agreement
here,
something
that
we
don't
necessarily
get
too
much
into,
because
it's
a
zoning
issue,
but
certainly
worth
discussing.
B
K
Yeah,
if
there
were
a
development
down
the
road
that
that
someone
wanted
to
do
on
that
lot,
then
they
would
have
to
work
with
the
school
in
order
to
either
accommodate
that
parking
on
the
on
the
site
or
the
choir
school
would
have
to
find
the
required
parking
in
another
space.
C
K
It
would
increase
the
required
parking
based
on
the
additional
uses
assembly
space,
but
it
doesn't
that
the
parking
that
was
the
initial
parking
calculations
that
they
supplied
assumed
that
the
the
parking
for
the
school
itself
was.
We
would
figure
it
according
to
the
regulations
now,
and
so
they
they
did
the
calculations
based
on
that
the
as
we
researched
it.
We
realized
that
this,
this
property's
use
as
a
school,
goes
back
to
predating
any
sort
of
parking
requirement,
or
you
know
it
was
even
50
years
before
the
first
zoning
ordinance
in
1927.
K
B
N
N
See
can
you
hear
me?
Yes,
thank
you.
Nelson
commissioners,
nelson's
presentation
was
very
thorough.
I
think
covers
all
the
points
that
I
was
planning
on
presenting
tonight
I
mean
just
I
guess
quickly
on
parking
and
I
think
that
got
touched
on
at
the
end
was
that,
ultimately,
when
we
completed
the
shared
parking
analysis,
we
found
out
that
less
parking
was
required
than
what
we
initially
presented.
N
The
second
avenue
ada
stall-
I
think
how
we
were
seeing
this
was
really
this
allowed
the
campus
to
retain
the
same
level
of
accessibility
that
it
currently
has
which
seemed
important
to
us
top
screen
the
additional
height.
We
tried
to
keep
this
as
minimal
visually
as
possible
and
more
about
safety
for
students.
N
E
It
notes
it
as
four
six
and
then
eight
foot
and
I'm
assuming
the
eight
foot
is
the
dimension
based
on
what
was
mentioned
before,
with
a
three
foot,
six
parapet
that
looks
to
be
about
15
feet
in
front
of
or
further
to
the
edge
of
the
building
from
where
that
is
given
the
height
of
the
building
and
the
slope
as
you
hit
with
that
b
street
street.
I
believe
how
much
of
that
screen
wall
is
anticipated
to
really
be
visible
from
the
street.
L
B
Let's
now
open
the
public
hearing
concerning
this.
B
Very
well
then,
let's
close
the
public
hearing
and
let's,
let's
move
into
executive
session,
then
commissioners
we've
seen
this.
B
C
My
questions
have
been
answered.
I
think
things
are
well
resolved.
It's,
I
don't
have
any
objection
to
it
as
presented
john
aidan.
B
C
Which
is
a
proposal
for
the
new
construction
of
a
gymnasium
classroom,
building
on
the
madeleine
choir
school
campus,
with
the
condition
that
final
design
details
are
delegated
to
planning
staff
included
in
the
approval?
Are
the
following
zoning
modifications
one
exceed
the
35
foot
maximum
height
in
the
eye
institutional
zoning
district
by
approximately
three
feet:
six
inches
to
accommodate
a
safety
screen
for
a
rooftop
play
area.
C
C
And
yeah,
it's
yeah
the
condition.
Final
design
details
are
delegated
to
planning
staff.
Sorry,
okay,.
B
D
B
Thank
you.
Let's
vote
in
order,
please
babbs
aye
john
aye
ayden
aye
canton
hi,
carlton
hi
and
amanda
aye.
The
motion
passes
unanimously.
Thank
you
very
much.
J
This
slide
illustrates
a
rendering
of
the
revised
western
elevation,
and
it
also
highlights
the
removal
of
the
louvers
that
were
on
the
previous
approval.
That
will
be
clear
on
the
next
slide.
So
this
is
a
flat
elevation
of
what
was
approved.
The
red
box
illustrates
the
removal
of
these
louvres
louvers.
I
don't
know.
J
J
The
areas
of
requested
change
for
the
fenestration
recession-
it's
these
angled
on
the
left,
you'll
see
what
was
approved,
which
was
a
fairly
deep
recess
and
then
on
the
right.
It's
slightly
more
flush
with
the
building.
It
still
has
that
sawtooth
design
just
slightly
less
dimension,
okay
and
then
a
continuation
of
these
changes.
J
J
J
J
J
Included
in
this
submission
was
the
sign
package
for
the
new
development.
It
includes
a
marquee
sign
of
approximately
60
square
feet
in
size
that
will
go
on
the
historic
union,
pacific
building
on
the
eastern
elevation
and
then
a
monument
sign
cited
on
the
eastern
side
of
the
site
just
to
the
south
of
the
entrance
of
the
union.
Pacific
building.
A
D
J
L
Thank
you
I'll
try
to
keep
this
as
close
to
my
mouth
as
possible.
We're
really
excited
to
be
here
in
person.
It's
been
almost
three
years
today
that
we
got
disapproved
and
following
the
design,
development
completion,
kind
of
a
delayed
almost
spring
of
2020.
The
project
went
on
an
18-month
hold
due
to
obvious
reasons.
The
pandemic
hit
the
hospitality
industry
probably
harder
than
most.
L
We
have
restarted
the
project.
Last
summer
we
just
submitted
the
last
construction
documents
permit
set
to
the
city,
and
we're
really
excited
to
get
going.
L
So
this
is
just
the
summary
of
changes
that
klc
has
already
walked
us
through
we'll
try
just
to
maybe
elaborate
a
little
bit
the
reason
for
the
changes
and
from
our
perspective
as
the
design
and
project
and
we've
worked
really
hard
to
maintain
the
integrity
of
the
design,
despite
all
the
challenges
along
the
way
that
we
have
encountered.
L
L
L
That
was
actually
one
of
the
changes
that
was
affected
by
the
supply
chain
issues.
We
initially
specified
very
white
turkish
limestone
that
became
unavailable
even
before
the
pandemic,
and
so
we
had.
We
looked
at
a
variety
of
other
domestic
stones
that
didn't
quite
fit
the
pallet,
so
we
actually
wanted
to
specify
a
material
that
would
be
complementary
of
the
rest
of
the
facade,
which
is
the
reason
why
we
picked
the
metal
panel.
L
This
is
not.
This
is
a
very
durable
three
millimeter
aluminum
panel
very
similar.
Actually,
we
use
it
on
the
addition
to
the
capital
theater
that
some
of
you
may
be
familiar
with.
So
it's
a
very
high
quality,
durable
material,
it's
and
it's
impact
resistant
and
then
the
last
item
on
this.
It's
the
efa
soffit,
as
you
can
tell,
we
have
a
very
dynamic
facade
as
we
got
deeper
into
details.
L
So
this
kind
of
represents
the
current
design
that
kelsey
went
through.
I'm
not
sure
that
we
need
to
elaborate
much
more
on
that
couple
of
things
to
point
out.
These
are
the
sections
through
our
base.
Our
base
is
primarily
glass
because
we
wanted
to
have
a
visual
connection
with
the
street
and
really
activate
the
street
around
us.
So
the
metal
panel
that
we
re
the
stone
that
we
replaced
with
metal
panel
is
actually
a
very
small
portion
of
that
facade.
L
On
the
east
facade,
there
is
a
couple
of
changes
steam,
brick.
We
already
talked
about.
We
introduced
the
metal
panel
band
around
the
openings
and
then
same
reason
as
on
the
other
side,
these
kind
of
deep
window
soffits
were
initially
metal
as
well
and
we
proposed
to
replace
those
with
efas.
For
the
same
reasons,
this
is
just
another
rendering
a
newer
rendering
if
you
want
of
the
final
design,
and
we
feel
that
it
very
much
captures
the
original
design
intent.
L
The
reason
for
the
portal
reduction
before
I
forget
is
the
approval
said
that
we
were
trying
to
maintain
an
estimated
height
of
18
feet,
but
as
we
again
develop
the
design
further,
we
have
guest
rooms
up
above
the
portal
and
on
both
sides
of
the
portal.
So
we
have
drains
coming
out
of
the
guest
rooms.
L
We
also
have
hydronic
piping,
that's
crossing
that
portal,
which
is
the
reason
why
we
asked
for
the
reduction
I'd
just
like
to
point
out
that
the
main
soffit
area-
I
don't
know
if
I
can
operate
this
mouse
right
here-
it's
17
and
a
half
feet,
so
it's
only
six
inches
lower
than
the
originally
approved,
and
then
we
have
a
little
soffit
that
runs
on
both
sides
of
the
portal.
That
comes
down
to
16
feet.
L
This
is
about
two
and
a
half
feet,
and
then
we
have
an
additional
foot
recess
at
the
windows,
one
of
the
things
or
challenges
we
ran
into
as
we
started
detailing
the
design
is
that
these
triangular
shapes
are
really
hard
to
flash
out
and
maintain
the
integrity
of
the
waterproofing,
and
we
also
wanted
to
give
a
little
bit
more
space
to
the
guest
room
itself,
because
the
guest
rooms
are
fairly
small
and
we
had
a
lot
of
standards
to
comply
with.
So
that
was
the
primary
reason
for
that
change.
L
It
may
be
worth
pointing
out
that
the
the
two
and
a
half
foot
recess
that
we
were
showing
in
the
approved
design
was
actually
a
varying
dimension.
It
wasn't
consistent,
so
it
was
going
from
a
few
inches
to
two
and
a
half
feet
and
now
would
be
one
foot
consistently
across
the
face
on
the
east
facade.
The
only
change
is
really
the
new
window
size
as
we
started
really
coordinating
the
requirements
of
the
guest
rooms
and
the
brand
standards.
With
our
exterior
articulation.
L
The
reason
why
we
had
to
request
made
a
request
for
additional
11
inches
was
for
the
elevator
overruns
and
the
structural
requirements
to
support
him,
and
the
only
thing
I'd
like
to
point
out
that
that
11
inch
increase
is
limited
to
the
two
elevator
towers
here
in
here,
and
we
still
managed
to
maintain
our
building
height
within
the
maximum
approved
building
height
for
the
gateway,
as
well
as
below
the
mansard
ridgeline,
which
was
our
intent.
We
one
of
our
goals
was
that
we
never
exceeded
that
height.
L
L
We
changed
that
to
concrete,
we
maintain
the
same
design,
but
for
the
ability
to
be
able
to
sustain
vehicular
traffic.
This
is
also
our
fire
department
access.
Now
we
thought
that
a
better
long-term
solution
would
be
to
change
that
to
come.
Can.
L
D
So
that's
all
there
right
now,
where
is
your
portion
to
get
people?
Your
drop-off
area
is
where
fleming's
has
been
the
drop-off
area.
L
L
D
L
And
one
of
the
things
we
wanted
to
do
is
make
sure
that
we
create
a
demarcation
between
the
sidewalk
and
the
hotel
property.
If
you
want,
we
also
worked
really
hard
to
clean
out
the
jungle
of
light
poles
and
flag
poles
that
are
detracting
from
the
building
and
replace
that
which
is
really
part
of
the
signage
package
that
we're
showing
now.
L
We
actually
simplified
and
reduced
the
number
of
signs,
and
it
was
the
last
conditional
approval
that
needed
to
be
approved
by
the
landmark
historic,
landmark
commission.
We
are
relocating
a
few
of
the
existing
signs
because
we
have
to
accommodate
the
fire
department
access
to
the
building
which
currently
is
non-compliant,
and
then
the
basically
the
two
new
exterior
signs
of
the
east
elevation
is
the
main
hotel
sign.
They
will
be
replacing
the
gateway
sign
and
it's
a
new
monument
sign
for
the
hotel.
That's
actually
replacing
a
marquis
sign
that
used
to
be
the
old
urban
outfitters.
L
I
don't
know
if,
if
you
like
us
to
go
into
the
details
of
the
materials,
all
the
signage
complies
with
the
cb
ordinance.
We
have
worked
really
hard
to
pick
the
materials
that
are
complementary
of
the
historic
building
and
they
both
illuminated.
So
they
fully
integrated
in
terms
of
architectural
design,
as
well
as
the
lighting
design.
We
only
have
one
side
on
the
rest
elevation,
which
is
illuminated
azure,
adam
sign
that
you
see
on
this
rendering
again
still
within
the
sizes
that
are
limited
by
the
city
ordinance
and
that's
the
end
of
our
presentation.
L
D
L
D
Great
and
you
said
the
supply
chain,
so
you
just
you
were
going
for
limestone,
but
you
went
from
metal.
Metal
was
actually
cheaper
than
limestone
or
you
just
couldn't
get
it.
A
L
L
D
Other
questions,
commissioners,
hearing
none,
let's
go
ahead
and
see.
If
there's
any
public
comment,
do
we
have
any.
D
C
D
D
D
D
It
it's
been
years
for
these
guys
too
all
right.
So
let's
go
ahead
and
vote.
We'll
do
this
here
in
executive
session
now,
john.
C
D
D
C
D
Great
all,
right
now
that's
been
made
the
motion
and
seconded
let's
go
ahead
and
vote
john,
yes,
aiden,
yes,
kenton,
yes,
carlton,
yes,
amanda
aye,
aye
and
my
I
say
I
too
motion
passes.
Thank
you
all.
Let's
get
started
we're
waiting
for
you.
My
office
is
at
the
gateway,
his
office
gateway,
we're
waiting
for
you
come
on,
get
on
it
all
right.
We
have
other
business
now
our
chair
may
come
back
in.
This
is
an
update
to
policies
and
procedures,
policies
and
procedures.
D
From
cindy
kromer
at
the
beginning
of
the
meeting
on
her
thoughts
on
policies
and
procedures,.
F
Yes,
we
do
because
in
the
2022
utah
legislature,
a
bill
was
passed
that
required
us
or
any
public
body,
that's
holding
electronic
meetings
to
make
some
changes
to
policies
and
procedures
to
yes
to
determine
a
quorum.
Actually,
it
really
clarifies
things
determine
a
quorum
and
voting
when
members
are
attending
electronically,
and
so
with
the
assistance
of
our
attorney's
office.
F
F
F
F
So
the
proposal
that's
marked
up
is
that
we
remove
that
prohibition
and
allow
the
chair
to
vote.
The
chair
voting
at
the
end
of
the
row
call
so
it
doesn't
look
like
the
chair
is
leading
the
vote,
necessarily
thanks,
aubrey
and
then
some
other
minor
changes.
F
M
Provide
a
little
background
on
that.
Your
policies
and
procedures
in
a
a
former
time
actually
did
limit
the
chair's
term
to
to
one
year
and
we
had
a
circumstance.
I
don't
know
if
you
were
here
michaela,
where
warren
warren
lloyd
was
the
the
chair
of
the
commission
and
everybody
really
liked
war
and
thought
he
did
a
great
job
and
nobody
else
wanted
to
serve
as
the
chair.
So
they
amended
the
policies
and
procedures
to
allow
consecutive
years
of
of
chairpersonship
you're.
M
F
M
D
I
now
given
these
points
I
would
agree
because
sometimes
people
don't
want
to
be
chair,
and
so
you
end
up
being
chair
for
a
couple
of
times.
So
I'm
not
sure
we
need
that.
Necessarily,
I
see
both
sides
of
it,
but
I
don't
feel
real
strongly
one
way
or
the
other.
But
it's
a
good
point
that
cindy
brought
up.
E
B
B
B
D
What
about
the
doing
away
with
the
drop
box
that
she
recommended
you.
F
F
B
D
D
D
D
F
And
let's
see
what
else,
so
we
can
go
ahead
and
add
a
two-year
maximum.
We
do
want
you
to
vote
on
it.
F
J
A
F
B
B
M
M
You
do
not
have
to
have
the
exact
text
in
front
of
you
tonight.
I'm
sure
that
you
would.
L
M
Comfortable
with
that,
but
if
you
feel
like
michaela
and
kelsey
or
whoever's
gonna
be
making
that
actual
change,
we'll
take
your
direction,
then
we
can
go.
We
don't
need
to
bring
it
back
to
a
later
meeting.
What
we
could
do
is,
after
those
updates
have
been
made.
If
you're
not
satisfied,
then
you
can
ask
to
have
it
put
on
a
following
agenda
agenda
to
where
the
verbiage
is
exactly
like.
You
prefer
your
call.
A
B
A
A
M
M
M
C
F
C
Believe
will
you
add
to
that?
The
commissioner
should
be
issued
a
gavel.