[A. El Pueblo Motel - Phase 1 Cultural Resource Study, Amendment of Mitigation PROPERTY INFORMATION: Address: 3120 E. Route 66 Assessor's Parcel Number: 10808002 Property Owner: Nava Singam Applicant: Ideation Design Group - Architect City Staff: Mark Reavis HPO REQUESTED ACTION: Is for the Historic Preservation Commission Review to amend the mitigation for the Phase1 Cultural Resource report for the El Pueblo (Motor Court) Motel, allow for the demolition of the motel office building, while retaining the Route 66 significant sign and detailed porch roof structure as a feature along the road frontage. RECOMMENDED ACTION: Approve the amended mitigation for the Phase 1 Cultural Resource Study of the El Pueblo Motel by allowing: the demolition of the office building with construction of an interpretive wall structure that incorporates the Route 66 signage and existing porch roof as mitigation, Preservation of the remaining historic structures as hotel rooms with an alternative design that meets Secretary of Interior’s Standards for Rehabilitation, and Allow the HPO to review future submittals and the interpretive materials administratively.]

MOVE ON TO THE NEXT ITEM, WHICH IS PUBLIC HEARING.

THIS IS FOR THE EL PUEBLO MOTEL AND IS A PHASE ONE CULTURAL RESOURCE STUDY AND AN AMENDMENT OF THE MITIGATION THAT WAS PREVIOUSLY APPROVED.

AND EXCUSE ME, CHAIRPERSON HOUSEKEEPING.

GO AHEAD. YES.

COMMISSIONER KELLY. CAN YOU HIT THE BUTTON UP BY YOUR LEAVE BUTTON WITH THE WHITE SQUARE WITH THE X SO THAT YOU'LL STOP SHARING YOUR SCREEN? OR IT'S THAT BLACK SQUARE WITH THE X RIGHT THERE IN THE MIDDLE NEXT TO YOUR MUTE? ONE, MOREOVER, NOPE ONE MORE, IT SAYS IT'S THE EX THERE YOU GO, HIT STOP SHARING RIGHT THERE. THANK YOU, THAT WAS YOUR I.T.

ASSISTANCE FOR THE DAY.

THANK YOU. SORRY ABOUT THAT, EVERYONE.

I THINK WE'RE STILL GOT SOMEONE MS. WESTHEIMER, IF YOU WOULDN'T MIND TURNING YOUR CAMERA OFF.

SARA, ARE YOU ABLE TO DO THAT REMOTELY FROM YOUR END? I CANNOT.

I COULD. I CAN MUTE.

SO SHE IS MUTED RIGHT NOW, BUT NO, I CAN'T.

I THINK WHEN SOMEONE STARTS SHARING THEIR SCREEN, THEY'LL GO AWAY.

OK, ALEX.

SO MARK, IF YOU'D LIKE TO GO AHEAD AND GIVE US THE STAFF PRESENTATION ON THE EL PUEBLO MOTEL? YES, I WOULD.

MR. CHAIRMAN, THANK YOU. EL PUEBLO, I THINK EVERYBODY KNOWS WHERE IT IS ON ROUTE 66.

VERY IMPORTANT HISTORIC RESOURCE IN MY MIND THAT I FEEL IS ELIGIBLE AS A NATIONAL LANDMARK BECAUSE OF WHAT TOOK PLACE.

THERE WAS THE FORMATION OF THE NAVAJO CODE TALKERS THAT WERE USED EFFECTIVELY IN THE PACIFIC THEATER DURING WORLD WAR TWO.

IT'S KIND OF A UNIQUE APPROACH.

SO THAT WAS THE PLACE AND THE OWNER OF THE MOTEL BECAUSE HE CONCEIVED THAT CONCEPT THERE.

THE BUILDINGS THEMSELVES ARE SIGNIFICANT AS BEING EARLY ROUTE 66 MOTOR MOTELS,

[00:05:04]

AND THERE WAS A PHASE ONE CULTURAL RESOURCE STUDY THAT WAS DONE ABOUT TWO YEARS AGO, AND THE PREP WORK HAS BEEN DONE ON THOSE MOTOR COURT MOTEL ROOMS AS WELL AS THE OFFICE BUILDING, AND NOTHING IS IMPOSSIBLE, AND THIS IS IMPOSSIBLE IN HISTORIC PRESERVATION, BUT I THINK THE TERM WAS IMPRACTICAL.

I DID GO INSPECT THE OFFICE BUILDING AT THE MOTEL AND I DO UNDERSTAND STRANGE, UNDERSIZED ROUGH JOISTS UNUSABLE CENTRAL BEARING ON THOSE PARTITION WALLS, AREAS OF THE SHEATHING THAT ARE SUPPORTING THE STUCCO OR ROTTED, AND THEN THERE'S MULTIPLE FLOOR LEVELS AND THERE'S QUESTIONABLE FOUNDATION UNDERNEATH THAT BUILDING ITSELF.

SO THE ARCHITECT THAT TOOK ON THAT PROJECT, IT'S NOW A DIFFERENT ARCHITECT, TOOK ON THAT PROJECT AND MADE DETERMINED THE DETERMINATION THAT IT WAS INFEASIBLE TO FULLY SAVE THE OFFICE BUILDING.

SO THE AMENDMENT TO THE PHASE ONE MITIGATION IS TO ALLOW THE DEMOLITION OF THE MOTEL ROOM , BUT THE PRESERVATION OF THE 66 SIGNIFICANT MOTEL SIGN AND THE PORCH FEATURE ON THE FRONT AND THE REBUILD, A FEATURE WALL THAT PRETTY MUCH FOLLOWS THE PLACEMENT OF THE SOUTH FACADE THAT FACES ROUTE 66.

THAT DETERMINATION I WORKED WITH THE ARCHITECT.

WE HAD AN EARLY PLANNING EFFORT, A PRE-APPLICATION MEETING, AND IT BECAME IMPORTANT THAT TO HAVE MEETING THE CURRENT ZONING REVIEW CODES THAT YOU HAVE A BUILDING FORWARD DESIGN.

SO WE CAME UP WITH THAT CONCEPT OF REESTABLISHING A WALL.

THAT WALL GIVES THE ABILITY TO DO FUTURE INTERPRETATION OF THE SIGNIFICANCE OF THE SITE ASSOCIATED WITH THE NAVAJO CODE TALKERS.

I THINK IT'S A GOOD SOLUTION, AND I CAN PASS THAT ON TO THE ARCHITECT ON THE PROJECT. IF YOU DON'T HAVE ANY QUESTIONS FOR ME WITH THAT INTRODUCTION.

THANK YOU. MARK, DO ANY OF THE COMMISSIONERS HAVE ANY QUESTIONS FOR MARK BEFORE WE TURN IT OVER TO THE ARCHITECT FOR THE PUEBLO? I JUST HAVE A GENERAL QUESTION.

SOMEONE IS UNMUTED AND I KEEP HEARING NOISES, SO IF EVERYONE CAN DOUBLE CHECK THAT THEY'RE NEEDED, THAT WOULD BE GREAT.

WE HAD. THANK YOU, EMILY.

ANY OF OUR GUESTS WHO ARE IN THE CHAT, IF YOU MOVE YOUR MOUSE AROUND, YOU'LL SEE A BOX POP UP IN THE MIDDLE OF YOUR SCREEN, AND ON THAT BOX, THERE'S A LITTLE SYMBOL OF A MICROPHONE. IF YOU CLICK THAT, IT WILL MEET YOU.

SO LET'S TURN IT OVER TO THE ARCHITECT FOR THE PROJECTS AND IF YOU'D LIKE TO WALK US THROUGH YOUR CLIENT'S PLANS.

WELL, GOOD AFTERNOON, COMMISSIONERS CARL SCHAFFER, PRINCIPAL OF IDEATION DESIGN GROUP WITH THE NEW ARCHITECTS ON THIS PROJECT.

WE'VE ORIGINALLY THE ORIGINAL ARCHITECTS OF THE PROJECT BACK IN 2009, HAD APPROVALS ON BACK THEN. THEN IN 2020, KARL EBERHARDT WAS THE ARCHITECT ON THE PROJECT, AND NOW, SINCE WE WERE THE ORIGINAL ARCHITECTS ON BUILDING FOUR IN THE BACK OF THE PROJECT, THE CLIENT [INAUDIBLE] IN OUR OFFICE HERE TODAY HIRED US BACK ON THIS PROJECT.

SO ON THE SCREEN, I'M NOT GOING TO GO FULL SCREEN ON THIS BECAUSE I NEED TO BE ABLE TO MANEUVER IN POWERPOINT PRESENTATION.

SO THIS IS THE CURRENT PROPOSED SITE WITH THE INTERPRETIVE FEATURE WALL THAT MARK WAS TALKING ABOUT. I WILL JUST CLICK OVER TO THIS PLAN, WHICH IS WHERE THE OFFICE USED TO BE OR IS CURRENTLY, BUT IT NOW HAS 751 SQUARE FEET BUILDING, SO WE'RE TAKING THE SAME AREA IN THE FRONT OF THE BUILDING.

[00:10:02]

THE FOOTPRINT CREATING A 24 INCH THICK WALL, GIVING IT A PUEBLO LOOK.

WE'LL SHOW YOU THE ELEVATIONS HERE IN A SECOND AND THAT WILL HELP CREATE A THE STRUCTURE WILL ANCHOR THE STRUCTURE FOR THE SIGN.

THAT'S AN IMPORTANT PART OF THIS PROJECT AND ALL OF THETHE INTERPRETIVE ELEMENTS OF THE EXISTING OFFICE, THE THREE BUILDINGS IN THE BACK, WHICH EQUATE TO NINE HOTEL ROOMS THAT WAS PREVIOUSLY PRESENTED AND APPROVED, AND WITH KEEPING THOSE BUILDINGS INTACT, REMODELING THEM BACK TO THEIR THEIR ORIGINAL GRANDEUR.

WELL, IT'S A MOTEL OFF ITS GRANDEUR, BACK TO ITS ORIGINAL DESIGN, AND THEN THE BUILDING FOR WHICH IS IN A FUTURE PHASE HERE IN THE VERY NEAR FUTURE WILL BE THE NEXT.

THE REASON WE DID THIS HERE IS TO GET THE AMOUNT OF PARKING THAT WE'RE GOING TO NEED AND ALSO THE TRAFFIC AISLE THAT GOES TO THE BACK OF THE PROJECT FOR FIRE TRUCKS TWO WAY TRAFFIC. THE SITE PLAN THAT WAS APPROVED PREVIOUSLY WAS THIS ONE RIGHT HERE WHERE YOU COULD SEE WAS ONLY A 12 FOOT DRIVEWAY BETWEEN THE TWO BUILDINGS, AND THAT DOESN'T WORK FOR ANY OF THE CURRENT CODES.

SO ZONING CODES.

THE BUILDING HERE AGAIN, IS WHERE THE INTERPRETIVE WALL IS GOING.

WE REDID THE PARKING.

WE HAVE THETHE BLOCK WALL HERE THAT WAS REQUIRED FOR THE BLOCK, THE PARKING BEHIND, AND THAT IS. SO THIS IS AGAIN, THIS IS OUR CURRENT PROPOSED PLAN WITH THE INTERPRETIVE WALL HERE WITH THE TWO DROP THE DRIVEWAYS AND THEN DRIVEWAY AND ABOUT TRAVELING THE EXISTING SITE. THIS IS THE SIGNAGE, AND SORRY ABOUT THAT, WE DIDN'T GET PHOTOS BEFORE THE CHAIN-LINK FENCE WENT UP, BUT THIS IS THE OFFICE BUILDING, THE OFFICE.

NOT IT WASN'T A ROOM.

IT WAS ORIGINALLY THE OFFICE, THE GENTLEMAN AROUND THE PROJECT AND THEN THE HISTORIC SIGN. THE CLIENT HAS SINCE REFURBISHED THE SCIENTISTS RECENTLY.

WHEN WAS THAT PLACE, 2010 2010? OK, BUT YOU COULD SEE THAT THERE'S A LARGE POST THAT COMES DOWN JUST IN FRONT OF THE BUILDING. IT'S OUR INTENTION NOW TO TRY TO INCORPORATE THAT POST INTO THE INTO THE INTERPRETIVE WALL STRUCTURE.

LIKE MARK SAID, WE'RE PROPOSING KEEPING ALSO A LITTLE BIT OF THE LITTLE PATIO COVER OR THE FRONT ENTRANCE COVER IN THE BUILDING.

IT'S A PUEBLO DESIGN HEAVY, HEAVY TEXTURED STUCCO WITH THE LITTLE LATTICE STICKING OUT.

THERE WAS WINDOWS ALONG THIS WINDOW ALONG THIS ELEVATION, AND OUR DESIGN IS TO TRY TO PAY HOMAGE TO THOSE WINDOWS IS WE'RE READING SEE THROUGH PORTALS IN THIS WALL, THE REST OF THE SITE. THESE ARE THE BUILDINGS BEHIND THAT ARE GOING TO BE THAT START TO BE REFURBISHED SOON, AND THE AGAIN, THE SAME DESIGN, THE SAME SHARED ROOFS WITH THE CLAY TILE AND THE BUT PLENTY OF HOEGER HAYWARD I'VE.

FORGET THOSE TWO ELEMENTS GOING THROUGH HERE AND AGAIN.

SOME EXISTING SITE PHOTOS OF THE EXISTING BUILDINGS THAT BUILDING THERE IN THE BACK IS BEING DEMOLISHED, I THINK HAS ZERO HISTORIC SIGNIFICANCE.

IT WAS BUILT IN 1967, SO THIS IS THE PROPERTY ALONG ROUTE 66.

THE SIDEWALK IS OUT HERE.

THE WALL IS GOING TO GO RIGHT EXACTLY WHERE THE FOOTPRINT OF THE BUILDING WAS AND THEN, OF COURSE, IN THE BACK OF THE PARKING.

THE FOR THE HOTEL ROOMS MOTEL.

ANOTHER VIEW OF THAT PICTURE.

THE WE HAVE SOME PICTURES OF THE SURROUNDING PROPERTIES.

THE PROPERTY TO THE WEST IS ALSO ANOTHER MOTEL.

THE PROPERTY TO THE RIGHT IS A.

TRAIN AND ATV.

[00:15:03]

ACTUALLY, IT'S ALL MARINE ABOUT.

REPAIR SHOP ACROSS THE WAY IS THE RAILROAD TRACKS AND SOME ADDITIONAL HIGHWAY.

THIS IS ROUTE 66 HERE, AND THAT'S AGAIN WHAT YOU SEE ACROSS DIRECTLY ACROSS THE STREET FROM THE PROJECT. THE MITIGATION PROPOSAL AGAIN, IS THE IS THE WALL ELEMENT, WHICH IS 24 INCHES THICK. IT'S A LITTLE BIT OF THE PROFILE OF THE PUEBLO LOOK.

THESE WINDOWS ARE ALL THE WAY THROUGH WINDOWS, SO YOU CAN SEE BEHIND THEM AND THEN THE SHED ROOF PRETTY MUCH IN THE SAME FOOTPRINT THAT WAS THERE.

PREVIOUS. THIS IS THE VIEW FROM STREET SIX.

THIS IS THE VIEW FROM THE BACK OF THE OF THE UNIT FROM THE SIDES.

I HAVE SOME OTHER VIEWS OF THE OF THE HOTEL FOR THE FUTURE IF ANYBODY WANTS TO SEE THEM, BUT THIS IS WHAT THE MEETING IS ALL ABOUT HERE.

THAT'S ALL I HAVE TO SAY ABOUT THAT.

ANY QUESTIONS? THANK YOU VERY MUCH. THE COMMISSIONERS HAVE ANY QUESTIONS ? I DON'T SEE ANYBODY. SO CAN I ASK ONE OF THE ALONG WITH THIS CHANGE TO THE OFFICE AND ADDITION OF THIS INTERPRETIVE WALL AS MITIGATION FOR THE DEMOLITION OF THE OFFICE IS THE NEW MULTI-STORY STRUCTURE IN THE REAR? IS THAT NEW TO THIS APPLICATION AS WELL? IT WAS ORIGINALLY APPROVED BACK IN 2009.

OK, AND BUT WE ARE WILLING TO WORK WITH THE HISTORIC COMMISSION IF THERE'S ANY ELEMENTS THAT WE NEED TO ADD ONTO THAT BUILDING TO MAKE IT MORE TIE IN WITH THE REST OF THE NINE, THE NINE STRUCTURES IN THE NINE ROOMS FRONT.

SO WE'RE OPEN TO MODIFYING THE EXTERIOR ELEVATIONS, AND MARK, DO YOU MIND JUMPING IN AS THAT? HOW DOES THAT WORK IN TERMS OF APPROVALS WE'VE GIVEN ALREADY OR WHAT'S REQUIRED OF THE APPLICANT? MR. CHAIRMAN, IT'S IT'S REALLY NOT PART OF THE APPLICATION.

IT'S JUST GOOD TO KNOW WHAT'S BEING PLANNED AND AND WHY.

SOME OF THE PARKING AND WANTING TO BUILD BUILDING FORWARD DESIGN OF THAT INTERPRETIVE WALL, IT IS BEING LOOKED AT AS AN ENTIRELY NEW PROJECT, BUT OUR COMPONENT IS THAT IT WAS DETERMINED THAT THERE NEEDED TO BE A PHASE ONE CULTURAL RESOURCE STUDY, AND THAT'S STILL WHAT WE ARE FOCUSED ON AND THAT WE ARE SIMPLY AMENDING THAT, AND THEN FROM THAT POINT, IT IS REVIEWED AS A NEW PROJECT THROUGH, YOU KNOW, TYPICAL REVIEW PROCESS FOR THE CITY.

SO THEY NEED TO COMPLY WITH DESIGN STANDARDS AND PARKING AND ALL THOSE OTHER TYPE OF THINGS, BUT IT WAS GOOD THAT WE HAD A PRE-APPLICATION MEETING AND WE UNDERSTOOD THAT BUILDING FORWARD DESIGN, IF WE HAD LOST THAT, THAT.

PORTION THAT FRONTAGE THAT COULD HAVE CAUSED ISSUES, SO THINKING IT THROUGH AND SUPPORTING THAT AND DOING AN INTERPRETIVE WALL THAT RETAINS THAT LOOK AND FEEL, IT WAS IMPORTANT. SO THAT DOES HELP OUT WITH THE FUTURE REVIEW, I BELIEVE.

JOHN, THANK YOU, MARK. DO ANY OF THE COMMISSIONERS HAVE ANY QUESTIONS FOR EITHER MARK OR THE APPLICANT? I'M NOT SEEING ANY.

SO IF WE WANT TO GO AHEAD AND MAKE A MOTION TO FURTHER RECOMMENDED ACTION IN THE AGENDA, ANYONE WANTS TO DO THAT? THIS IS COMMISSIONER DEA, I MOTION TO APPROVE THE AMENDED MITIGATION FOR THE PHASE ONE CULTURAL RESOURCE STUDY TO INCLUDE THE DEMOLITION AND ADDING THE WALL, I'M SURE I NEED TO SAY THAT DIFFERENTLY, DON'T I? MARK, YOU CAN JUMP IN IF YOU NEED ME TO DO THAT DIFFERENTLY.

[00:20:01]

I CAN READ THE RECOMMENDED ACTION, WHICH IS THE RECOMMENDED MOTION.

OK, I HAVE IT HERE.

NO, NO, NO. I HAVE IT HERE, SO I A MOTION TO IT.

ALL RIGHT. WHAT'S THAT? IT'S. SO I NEED TO GO THROUGH ALL THE YEAH.

SO I'LL I'LL GO THROUGH THE WHOLE THING.

SO I MOTION TO APPROVE THE AMENDED MITIGATION FOR THE PHASE ONE CULTURAL RESOURCE STUDY OF THE EL PUEBLO MOTEL BY ALLOWING THE DEMOLITION OF THE OFFICE BUILDING WITH CONSTRUCTION OF AN INTERPRETIVE WALL STRUCTURE THAT INCORPORATES THE ROUTE 66 SIGNAGE AND EXISTING PORCH ROOF AS MITIGATION.

PRESERVATION OF THE REMAINING HISTORIC STRUCTURES AS HOTEL ROOMS WITH AN ALTERNATIVE DESIGN THAT MEETS THE SECRETARY OF INTERIOR STANDARDS FOR REHABILITATION AND ALLOW THE HPO TO REVIEW FUTURE SUBMITTERS AND THE INTERPRETIVE MATERIALS ADMINISTRATIVELY.

THIS IS COMMISSIONER HORN, I SECOND THE MOTION.

WE HAVE A MOTION AND A SECOND, ALL THOSE IN FAVOR.

AYE.

ANY OPPOSED? ANY ABSTENTIONS? A MOTION CARRIES UNANIMOUSLY.

THANK YOU VERY MUCH, AND BEST OF LUCK WITH THE PROJECT.

THANK YOU VERY MUCH. WE WILL MOVE ON TO THE NEXT ITEM, WHICH IS THE GARAGE AUDITIONED FOR

[B. 312 N Mogollon Garage Addition - Certificate Of Appropriateness PROPERTY INFORMATION: Address: 312 N Mogollon Assessor's Parcel Number: 100-07-008 Property Owner: Loescher Living Trust Applicant: Tyler Scantlebury - Architect City Staff: Mark Reavis HPO REQUESTED ACTION: For a Certificate of Appropriateness for an addition to the existing garage that adds an upper floor and small at grade back addition and includes the demolition of the alley encroaching stone building on the back of the parcel for a required yard. RECOMMENDED ACTION: Approve the Certificate of Appropriateness for 312 N Mogollon with the condition to provide a privacy fence at the east boundary of the parcel and with the following exemptions: The garage as an adaptive reuse is allowed “at the house frontage” and A cultural resource study letter report is not required for demolition of the stone structure.]

312 NORTH MOGOLLON.

WE WILL TAKE A PRESENTATION FROM STAFF, A PRESENTATION FROM THE APPLICANT.

ANY QUESTIONS FROM COMMISSION MEMBERS TO STAFF OR THE APPLICANT.

AND THEN WE WILL TAKE PUBLIC COMMENT.

AFTER THAT, BEFORE THE COMMISSIONERS PROCEED TO DISCUSSION AND THEN A VOTE FOR PUBLIC COMMENT, I WILL LET YOU KNOW WHEN IT'S TIME FOR PUBLIC COMMENT AND MS. DECHTER WILL CALL ON YOU ONE AT A TIME AT THAT POINT.

SO MARK, IF YOU'D LIKE TO GO AHEAD, PLEASE.

AM I SHARING MY SCREEN? YES. OK.

I USUALLY DON'T DO A POWERPOINT, BUT THERE WAS ENOUGH OF QUESTIONS ASKED OF ME VIA PHONE EMAIL CONCERNS THAT I FELT IT WAS IMPORTANT TO DO A SHORT, HOPEFULLY ENTERTAINING POWERPOINT HERE.

SO I LOOKED AT THIS UNDER THE EYE OF BEING THE HISTORIC PRESERVATION OFFICER AND DETERMINING ELIGIBILITY OF THE PROPERTY.

THIS IS THE GARAGE, THE TWO DOORS FACE LOGAN.

IT IS BEING USED AS CONSTRUCTION STORAGE, YOU'LL SEE A TRAILER, YOU'LL SEE A BACKHOE, AND ALSO APPARENTLY THE BACK OF STONE BUILDING IS ALSO BEING USED FOR STORAGE AS WELL.

OF THE WHEN YOU LOOK AT THE STONE BUILDING, YOU'LL SEE THAT THE ROOF WAS SIGNIFICANTLY MODIFIED AT CLEAR STORY TYPE OF CONFIGURATION, SO IT WOULD HAVE BEEN A MUCH LOWER TYPE OF BUILDING HAS KIND OF AN INTEREST IN HISTORY OF BEING A CHICKEN COOP, CHICKEN SALES EGGS, THAT TYPE OF STUFF IS HAS BEEN COMMUNICATED TO ME BY A NEIGHBOR.

THE SITE PLAN AND THE ACTUAL SURVEY, WHEN YOU LOOK AT THE DASHED LINE ON THE ALLEY, THE STONE BUILDING ACTUALLY ENCROACHES INTO THE PUBLIC RIGHT AWAY OR THE ALLEY BY MORE THAN A FOOT. WHEN YOU LOOK AT THE BUILDING, THE GARAGE IS REPRESENTED BY THE LIGHTER DASH, THE NEW ADDITION IS BEING ADDED ON TOP WITH A PORTION THAT'S ACTUALLY ON THE GROUND FLOOR.

THE FLOOR PLAN TO THE RIGHT THAT INDICATES THAT IT'S A SINGLE FAMILY RESIDENCE, THAT IT HAS LIVING, DINING, KITCHEN AND THEN AN UPSTAIRS FOUR BEDROOMS AND THREE BATHS.

SO TWO OF THE BEDROOMS HAVE THEIR OWN BATHROOM.

TWO OF THE BEDROOMS HAVE A SHARED BATH, SO THAT FLOOR PLAN INDICATES THAT IT'S A SINGLE FAMILY RESIDENCE.

IT'S AT AN INTERESTING INTERSECTION OF IT'S NOT IN THE TOWNSITE HISTORIC DISTRICT, BUT IT

[00:25:02]

IS IN THE OVERLAY ZONE, SO IT'S RIGHT AT THAT TRANSITION POINT.

OF A NEED FOR A CULTURAL RESOURCE REPORT.

I'M ASKING YOU TO SEE IF YOU THINK MY DETERMINATION IS CORRECT, BUT IN OUR STANDARDS FOR THE MUNICIPAL CODE AND ZONING, I CAN MAKE THE DETERMINATION OF WHETHER OR NOT A CULTURAL RESEARCH STUDY IS APPROPRIATE AND MY CONSIDERATION OF THAT PROPERTY IS THAT IT IN PARTICULAR THE GARAGE WOULD BE USUALLY WHAT'S EVALUATED THE BACK BUILDING, AND I THINK THAT THE STONE BUILDING WITH ITS MODIFICATION LACKS INTEGRITY, AND IT'S REASONABLE TO CONCLUDE THAT A CULTURAL RESTART STUDY ISN'T NEEDED.

UM, I MADE THAT DETERMINATION AS IF IT WAS IN THE HISTORIC DISTRICT, I WOULD STILL FEEL THAT THE INVENTORY FORM WOULD READ THAT IT'S NOT CONTRIBUTING.

SO I'M LOOKING AT IT FOR THERE'S TWO EXCEPTIONS WITHIN THE REVIEW OF THIS OF THIS GARAGE FOR THE OVERLAY CONSIDERATIONS.

BUT I DO BELIEVE THAT IT WOULD BE INELIGIBLE IF IT WAS ACTUALLY IN A HISTORIC DISTRICT.

CARL, LOOKING TOWARD THE DESIGN DOCUMENT, THE INTENT IS TO PRESERVE HISTORICAL PATTERNS OF DEVELOPMENT, INCLUDING SINGLE FAMILY RESIDENCES AND LOOKING AT THE NEIGHBORHOOD CHARACTER AND PROPORTIONS AND THE TRADITIONS OF RESIDENTIAL BUILDINGS AND FORMS. WELL, LET THE ARCHITECT GO INTO THE RESIDENTIAL FORMS AND THE ARCHITECTURE THAT HE USED.

THE DOCUMENT ALSO CALLS OUT WHAT IS THE PRIMARY STRUCTURE IN THE OVERLAY ZONE CRITERIA.

IT DOES SAY THAT THE BUILDING THAT'S FACING THE STREET CLOSEST TO THE STREET IS THE PRIMARY STRUCTURE.

DOESN'T WANT TO MOVE ON FOR ME, JUST SAID.

THERE WE GO. FROM TALKING TO OTHER PLANNERS, THEY DO NOT BELIEVE THERE'S ANY EXCEPTIONS TO THE WAY THE SITE PLAN WAS PRESENTED AND THAT IT IS IN COMPLIANCE WITH R1N ZONING.

THE GARAGE IS EXISTING NONCONFORMING GARAGE.

THE SECOND FLOOR IS BEING ADDED WITH THE REQUIRED SETBACKS.

THE PROPERTY'S DEFINITELY TRANSITIONING FROM THE COMMERCIAL STORAGE TO A RESIDENTIAL TYPE OF USE, WHICH WOULD BE APPROPRIATE WITH THE TOWNSITE.

THE WAY IT IS, I BELIEVED, INTENDED TO BE UTILIZED.

I DO NOT THE EARLIER INTERESTING HISTORY OF THE STONE BUILDING, BUT AGAIN, I DON'T THINK THAT IT IS CONTRIBUTING.

PROPERTY IS NOT WITHIN THE HISTORIC DISTRICT AND I FEEL THAT THE DESIGN MEETS THE INTENT OF THE OVERLAY WITH THE UTILIZATION OF THE ARCHITECTURAL ELEMENTS AND MATERIALS.

I DO REQUEST THE TWO EXCEPTIONS WHICH I'LL GO OVER AGAIN.

THE SITE PLAN MEETS R1N ZONING.

THE PROJECT HAS BEEN EVALUATED FOR COMPATIBILITY PER THE OVERLAND DOCUMENT.

THE FOCUS IS ON WHAT IS IS DESIRED RATHER THAN FORBIDDEN.

I THINK THE ARCHITECTURAL STYLE THE ARCHITECT REALLY LOOKED AT HOW TO BREAK UP THE MASS WITH DORMERS.

THOSE ARE CALLED OUT A LOT IN THE OVERLAY DOCUMENT.

THE PROJECT IS BEING EVALUATED AGAINST THE ENTIRE OVERLAY, NOT ONE PARTICULAR PROPERTY.

PARKING, SINGLE FAMILY RESIDENCE, THERE'S BEEN A CONCERN ABOUT SEWER RUNS THAT GO UNDERNEATH. THE PROPERTY, I WILL TRY TO HELP THE ADJACENT PROPERTY OWNERS WITH THAT, AND AGAIN, THE DOCUMENT TALKS ABOUT EXCEPTIONS.

YOU CAN'T COVER EVERYTHING.

SO THERE'S A CERTAIN LEVEL OF INTERPRETATION THAT I NEED TO DO WITH THAT.

I AM RECOMMENDING THAT IT IS APPROVED WITH A CERTIFICATE OF APPROPRIATE APPROPRIATENESS FOR THE NEW EDITION OR 312 NORTH MOGOLLON WITH CONSIDERATION OF PROVIDING PRIVACY FENCE.

AT THE EAST, I DID GET A CLARIFICATION FROM AN ADJACENT PROPERTY OWNER.

[00:30:03]

WHAT HE ACTUALLY MEANT.

AFTER SOME RESEARCH AND DISCUSSION IS THAT HE WANTED A PRIVACY FENCE ON THE SOUTH SOON AS YARD JUST ISN'T OPEN BEYOND THAT.

SO IT WOULD BE APPROPRIATE BOTH FOR THE ADJACENT BUILDING TO THE EAST AND TO THE SOUTH AND OF THE BOUNDARY OF THAT PARCEL, AND WITH THE FOLLOWING EXCEPTIONS TO THAT ARE SPELLED OUT IN THE OVERLAY ZONE DOCUMENT.

THE GARAGE IS AN ADAPTIVE REUSE IS ALLOWED AT THE HOUSE FRONTAGE, AND THAT A CULTURAL RESOURCE STUDY IS NOT REQUIRED FOR THE DEMOLITION OF THE STONE BUILDING.

QUESTIONS REGARDING THAT I COULD GO BACK TO SOME PHOTOS OR WE COULD MOVE ON TO THE ARCHITECT. MARK, THIS IS COMMISSIONER HORN, I JUST I HAVE ONE QUESTION IS SORT OF A PROCESS QUESTION, WHICH YOU TOUCHED ON A LITTLE BIT THAT REVIEWING THINGS LIKE PARKING AND SORT OF THE INTERIOR USE OF THE SPACE IS NOT NECESSARILY WHAT WE DO AS PART OF THE HPC. IS THAT CORRECT? AND HOW DOES LIKE IF THIS IS APPROVED, WHERE DOES IT MOVE THROUGH THE REST OF THE REVIEW PROCESS IN THE CITY? HOW DOES THAT WORK? THANK YOU, MR. CHAIRMAN. THE PROCESS IS AND I DO COMMUNICATE WITH THE PLANNERS THAT WOULD REVIEW SO IT WOULD GO DIRECTLY TO BUILDING PERMIT AND THEY WOULD MAKE SURE THAT SETBACKS, LOT COVERAGE, ALL OF THOSE TYPE OF THINGS WOULD BE LOOKED AT, BUT I HAVE TOUCHED BASE WITH THE PLANNERS AND THEY FEEL THAT THE WAY IT IS CURRENTLY PRESENTED IN ELEVATIONS, FLOOR PLANS AND SITE PLAN THAT IT DOES MEET R1N ZONING.

SO WE ARE LOOKING SPECIFICALLY AT THE COMPATIBILITY OF THE ARCHITECTURE IF IT FITS, AND ALSO SOME OF THOSE CONSIDERATIONS, SUCH AS PRIVACY, WINDOW ORIENTATION.

THERE'S A LOT OF THINGS IN THERE THAT ARE IN THE OVERLAY DESIGN REVIEW DOCUMENT, WORKING WITH THE ARCHITECT ON SOME EARLY STUFF, SUCH AS HOW THEY PULLED OUT THIS.

I'LL GET TO A FLOOR PLAN HERE.

OOPS! THEY PULLED OUT OF THE DESIGN REVIEW DOCUMENT, TALKS ABOUT HAVING A CONNECTION TO THE STREET, SO NOT THROUGH THE GARAGE, BUT THEY DID BUMP THIS PORTION OF THE BUILDING.

THEY ADDED A LITTLE PORCH AND A COLUMN DECORATIVE FEATURE, SO IT DOES ADDRESS LIKE A TYPICAL RESIDENTS IN THE AREA.

IT DOES ADDRESS HAVING A FRONT ENTRYWAY TO THE NEW ADDITION.

SO THINGS LIKE THAT, THE ARCHITECT WAS VERY RESPONSIVE TO, AND I ALSO THINK THE ARCHITECT WAS RESPONSIVE TO SOME OF THE CLUES THAT WERE IN THE OVERLAY.

REVIEW DOCUMENT. KIND OF WORDY, BUT THAT'S MY BEST EXPLANATION.

THANK YOU, THAT HELPS, AND THE OTHER COMMISSIONERS HAVE MANY QUESTIONS FOR MARK, JUST GO AHEAD. YES, I HAVE THIS, EMILY, I HAVE A QUESTION.

SO JUST TO CLARIFY, THE PROPERTY CONSISTS SOLELY OF THE STUCCO GARAGE AND THE ATTACHED STONE BUILDING.

A MR. DALE MR. CHAIRMAN. YES.

OKAY, SO THE LIGHTER.

AREA THERE IS THE STUCCO AND THEN THE STONE BUILDING PROJECTS OUT INTO THE ALLEY AND RUNS. ALMOST TO THE PROPERTY LINE, ALL THE WAY TO THE EAST.

SO THE CURRENT BUILDING FILLS UP VIRTUALLY THE ENTIRE LENGTH OF THE SITE RIGHT NOW.

OK. DO WE KNOW WHY THERE'S JUST RANDOMLY A GARAGE ON THIS PIECE OF PROPERTY, DID IT USED TO BE PART OF A LARGER PROPERTY? YES, AND OF THAT PROPERTY WAS SOLD OFF ITS ITS OWN PARCEL NOW.

OK. APPARENTLY, THE LARGE GARAGE WAS USED LIKE A FURNITURE WAREHOUSE AT ONE TIME.

THE STONE BUILDING, AS I SAID, WAS LIKE A CHICKEN COOP TYPE OF STRUCTURE.

THERE'S A RELATIONSHIP TO THE PROPERTY IMMEDIATELY TO THE SOUTH.

WE'RE LOOKING AT THE GARAGE RIGHT HERE WITH MY LITTLE CURSOR, AND THEN THERE'S A BACKYARD THAT WOULD BE OPEN PRETTY MUCH BACK TO THE ALLEY IF THERE WASN'T PRIVACY, AND THEN

[00:35:03]

THERE'S A BUILDING ON CHERRY STREET, A NICE OLDER BUILDING THAT HAS A HISTORY TO ITSELF.

SO ARE OTHER PARTS OF THE CHICKEN COOP STUFF ON ANOTHER PIECE OF PROPERTY.

I THINK IT WAS ONE PROPERTY AT ONE TIME AND THEN IT WAS SOLD OFF.

I MEAN, I GUESS MY QUESTION IS, IS THERE STILL STUFF RELATED TO THIS, THESE BUILDINGS THAT STILL EXIST ON THE LOT? IT USED TO BE A PART OF.

I DON'T BELIEVE, I THINK, THE MODIFICATION TO THAT STONE BUILDING IS A LOSS OF INTEGRITY OF WHAT ITS ORIGINAL USE WAS? I MEAN, I GUESS I'M JUST WONDERING IF THERE ARE OTHER PARTS OF IT ELSEWHERE.

THAT STILL HAVE INTEGRITY THAT IS CONNECTED, IF THAT MAKES SENSE.

YEAH, WELL, DEFINITELY THE HOUSE IS CONTRIBUTING ON CHERRY STREET, SO.

SO THE CHERRY STREET HOUSE WAS PART OF THE CHICKEN COOP THING.

THAT'S WHAT I AM TOLD.

SO BUT IS THERE THE OLDER GENTLEMAN THAT LIVES THERE? AND THEN THEY HAVE POINTED OUT THE SITUATION THAT THERE ARE THAT'S CALLED ORANGEBURG SEWER PIPE. IT'S BITUMINOUS PAPER KIND OF SEWER PIPE THAT APPARENTLY RUNS FROM THIS PROPERTY. 310 MOGOLLON LIKELY RUNS UNDERNEATH THE CHICKEN COOP, AND SO DOES THIS HOUSE'S SEWER AND THE SEWER IS DEFINITELY IN THE ALLEY.

SO THAT'S NOT A PART OF OUR REVIEW, BUT I WILL DEFINITELY HELP DISCUSS THAT SITUATION.

SO DO WE KNOW IF THERE ARE LIKE RELATED STONE WALLS AT 618 WEST CHERRY? NO, IT'S AN OPEN YARD, OK? OK, THANKS. ANY OTHER QUESTIONS BEFORE WE MOVE ON TO THE APPLICANT? I'M NOT SEEING ANY. SO IF I DON'T KNOW IF THE APPLICANT HAS...

SORRY, TYLER, I APOLOGIZE FOR CALLING YOU THE APPLICANT.

I DON'T KNOW IF MR. CANTERBURY HAS A PRESENTATION OR WANTS TO TAKE A MOMENT.

LET'S GO AHEAD. HEY, EVERYONE.

CAN YOU HEAR ME? YES.

GREAT. YEAH, I DO HAVE A BRIEF PRESENTATION.

MARK KIND OF COVERED A LOT OF GROUND THERE, WHICH IS GREAT.

SO I'LL TRY MY BEST NOT TO DOUBLE UP ON ON SOME OF THAT.

LET ME SEE IF I CAN SHARE MY SCREEN HERE , AND CAN YOU SEE THAT? NOT YET, TYLER, I DON'T SEE ANYTHING ON THE SCREEN.

THEY BOTH. SORRY ABOUT THAT, HOW ABOUT NOW? YES. YES.

GREAT. YEAH, MY NAME IS TYLER.

I'M REPRESENTING MR. PAT LOESCHER, WHO'S THE OWNER OF THE PARCEL, AND AGAIN, I KNOW IT'S A BUSY AGENDA, AND MARK WAS ABLE TO COVER A LOT OF GROUND THERE, SO I'LL TRY AND MAKE THIS RELATIVELY BRIEF.

JUST A QUICK BACKGROUND.

THIS PROJECT HAS BEEN IN THE WORKS FOR A WHILE.

WE ACTUALLY ORIGINALLY WENT THE TRIED TO GO THE TRANSECT ROUTE, WHICH IS ALLOWED ON THE PARCEL. LONG STORY SHORT, WORKING WITH THE PLANNING DEPARTMENT, WE WEREN'T ABLE TO MEET ENOUGH OF THE CRITERIA BASED ON KEEPING THE GARAGE BUILDING.

SO THE SCOPE IS TO GO THE DEFAULT R110 DESIGNATION, AND AGAIN, AS MARK SAID, TO DEMOLISH THE EXISTING STONE ATTACHED STONE BUILDING TO THE EAST, THE NEW CONSTRUCTION WOULD CONSIST OF A FIRST AND SECOND STORY EDITION BOTH IMMEDIATELY ADJACENT TO AND ON TOP OF THE GARAGE. YOU CAN SEE HERE, AS MARK POINTED OUT, WE'RE JUST OUTSIDE OF THE FLAGSTAFF TOWN SITE HISTORIC RESIDENTIAL DISTRICT.

WE DO, HOWEVER, FALL WITHIN THE DESIGN REVIEW.

MARK TOUCHED ON THIS A LOT.

AGAIN, ALL THE INFORMATION, THE PERTINENT INFORMATION WE HAVE OF THE REBUILDING IS THAT IT WAS ONCE SERVED AS A CHICKEN COOP.

[00:40:03]

YOU CAN SEE KIND OF AT THE BOTTOM LEFT PHOTO HERE THREE OR FOUR MASONRY ONE TOOLS THAT WERE INFELD THAT WE COULD ONLY ASSUME AT ONE POINT WERE HATCHES TO.

THE EGG PATCHES AND OR MAYBE RAMPS LEADING UP INTO THE COUPE, THE SECOND USE WOULD HAVE BEEN A FOUR STORY UNIT, SORRY, FOUR UNIT STORAGE BUILDING.

YOU CAN SEE TWO ENTRY DOORS HERE ON THE SOUTH SIDE.

THESE OPENING TO A KIND OF A VESTIBULE THAT IN TURN OPENED TO EACH ONE OF THE FULLER STORAGE UNITS, AND THE CLEAR STORY ABOVE WE CAN ONLY ASSUME WAS USED FOR PASSIVE SOLAR, DIRECT GAIN AND NATURAL DAYLIGHT.

THE BUILDING DOES NOT HAVE ELECTRICITY OR GAS OR ANYTHING.

OBVIOUSLY, THE FRONT GARAGE IS OF A LATER TIME PERIOD.

OUR GAS IS BETWEEN THE 70S, EARLY 80S CONSTRUCTION PERIOD.

MARKET REFERENCE TO SERVING AT ONE POINT A WAREHOUSE FOR HARBOR FURNITURE AT LEAST.

GENERAL THE CONSTRUCTION OF BOTH OF THEM WE'RE BUILDING IS KIND OF A CONGLOMERATION OF DIFFERENT MATERIALS, BUT OBVIOUSLY THE ORIGINAL THERE'S LARGE RUBBLE, MASONRY PANELS, HORIZONTAL SIDING WITH ASPHALT SHINGLE ROOF, WHICH IS A LATER DATE.

THE GARAGE FACING MOGOLLON ITSELF IS CONCRETE MASONRY UNIT CONSTRUCTION.

IT'S A SHELL, ESSENTIALLY WITH BAR JOISTS AND TO BUY MATERIAL MAKING UP THE FLAT ROOF WITH A SURROUNDING PARAPET.

UM, MOVING ON TO THE SITE PLAN AGAIN, MARK MARK TOUCHED ON THIS A LOT.

THE EXISTING REBEL BUILDINGS THE EAST ENCROACHES OVER THE NORTHERN PROPERTY LINE APPROXIMATELY ONE FOOT SIX INCHES.

AGAIN, THE PROPOSAL IS TO REMOVE THE ENTIRETY OF THAT STRUCTURE.

AGAIN, THE GRAY AREA REPRESENTS THE EXISTING GARAGE AND THE BOULDER DARK HATCH IS THE FIRST AND SECOND STORY ADDITION ON THE GARAGE.

WE ARE MEETING THE MAX ALLOWED LOT COVERAGE, WHICH IS 35 PERCENT.

THE OPEN SPACE, I BELIEVE IN R1N, THE MINIMUM WORKS OUT TO THE EIGHT HUNDRED SQUARE FEET.

THE TOWN SITE REQUIRES A MINIMUM OF 1000 SQUARE FEET CONTIGUOUS OPEN YARD.

YOU CAN SEE HERE WE'RE MEETING.

THIS COUNTS UP TO TWENTY ONE HUNDRED SQUARE FEET OF PRIVATE OPEN SPACE AND OR ABOUT 50 PERCENT OF THE EXISTING SITE.

THE FLOOR PLAN AND I SPENT A WHOLE LOT OF TIME HERE, BUT THE BIGGEST OBVIOUS CHALLENGE AND MEETING THE INTENT OF THE TOWN SITE OVERLAY AND KEEPING THE GARAGES THAT THE RESIDENTIAL CHARACTER OF THE DESIGN IS SOMEWHAT SECONDARY TO THE GARAGE.

SO WE TRIED OUR BEST TO EMPHASIZE THE ENTRY INCLUDED A PERMANENT PORCH OR AN INTEGRAL PORCH ELEMENT HERE TO KIND OF HELP DRAW PEDESTRIANS FROM THE PUBLIC WAY.

THE INTERIOR REALLY IS KIND OF AN OPEN DINING LIVING ROOM CONCEPT WITH THE PENINSULA KITCHEN. THE SECOND FLOOR KIND OF LEADS TO A COMMON SHARED CORRIDOR HERE THAT SERVES FOUR BEDROOMS AND THREE FULL BATHROOMS. UM, YOU CAN KIND OF MAKE OUT THESE DASH LINES HERE IN EACH OF THE BEDROOMS, THOSE MAKE UP THE GABLE DORMER ELEMENTS THAT WE'LL SEE IN A FEW SLIDES IN ELEVATION.

THERE'S ALSO A COMMON SOUTH FACING SOUTH FACING LARGE BALCONY HERE.

SOME OF THE DESIGN INSPIRATION WE PULLED FROM, I'D SAY THIS IS ROUGHLY TWO TO THREE BLOCK RADIUS FROM THE SITE.

OBVIOUSLY, YOU SEE A LOT OF ENHANCED GABLE ENDS WITH MEDIUM DEPTH OVERHANGS AND A LOT OF SUPPORTING CORE BOWLS, YOU SEE IN MOST OF THESE PHOTOS.

THE ROOF FORM IS USUALLY COMPOSED OF FOUR OR 12 SIX 12 SLOPE, AND WE DREW A LOT OF INSPIRATION FROM THAT, AS WELL AS SOME OF THESE KIND OF INTEGRAL PORCH ELEMENTS YOU SEE

[00:45:02]

THAT ARE RECESSED FROM THE FRONT FACADE.

THE MATERIALS ARE A MIX OF HORIZONTAL SIDING SHAPED SIDING, WHICH YOU SEE A LOT AND THE GABLE ENDS, BUT IF YOU CAN SEE MY CURSOR THERE, BUT THIS ONE HERE AND HERE AND THERE ARE A LOT OF STUCCO BASED BUILDINGS, THERE ARE SOME KIND OF ACCENT ENTRY FEATURES THAT UTILIZE A LOT OF HISTORICAL LOCAL MALACHI STONE OR VENEER.

YOU'LL ALSO SEE SOME RUSTED CORRUGATED SIDING AND ROOFING, WHICH YOU CAN SEE IN THE BOTTOM RIGHT PHOTO. I THINK THIS IS ON ASPEN STREET.

MOVING ALONG TO THE GARAGE IMPROVEMENT, THE EXISTING FACADE HAS THIS LARGE KIND OF STEPPED PARAPET FEATURE.

THE IDEA HERE IS TO REMOVE THE PARAPET AND THE ROOF STRUCTURE BEHIND DOWN TO A CERTAIN HEIGHT OR THINKING ABOUT 10 FEET ABOVE FINISHED FLOOR AND OR TWO.

WHAT YOU CAN KIND OF MAKE OUT TO BE A CAST CONCRETE HEADER HERE JUST ABOVE THE GARAGE DOORS. SO REMOVING THAT PORTION AND THEN DROPPING A SIX 12.

GABLED ROOF ON TOP OF A NEW THREE BY TOP PLATE.

FROM THERE, YOU CAN CLEARLY SEE HERE THE SHED AWNING EYEBROW FEATURE WE INTRODUCED TO HELP KIND OF BREAK UP THE GABLE END AND ADD A LEVEL OF INTEREST TO THE EXISTING GARAGE OPENINGS GARAGE DOOR OPENINGS.

FORTUNATELY, THOSE ARE ALREADY RECESSED, SO JUST BE A MATTER OF PUTTING SOME NEW GARAGE DOORS IN THERE A LITTLE MORE ATTRACTIVE.

BEYOND, YOU CAN SEE THE NEW ENTRY DOOR FACING THE FRONTAGE.

WE WENT AHEAD AND INTRODUCED A BATTERED COLUMN OR PIER.

YOU CAN SEE HERE THAT'S KIND OF A NOD TO SOME OF THE OTHER ENTRY FEATURES YOU SEE AROUND THE NEIGHBORHOOD. THE SOUTH ELEVATION GIVES YOU A KIND OF A BETTER VIEW OF THE EXISTING CONDITIONS AS IT RELATES TO THE NEW CONSTRUCTION, BUT WE FELT THAT HALF STORY GABLE DORMERS PAIRED WELL WITH THIS BALCONY THAT SPANS THE TWO REALLY HELPED TO KIND OF ARTICULATE THIS ELEVATION.

THERE'S ANOTHER GOOD VIEW OF THE ENTRY PORCH HERE WITH THE BATTERED COLUMN AND OBVIOUSLY THESE COBBLES, WE USED A LOT OF THOSE NOT ALL OVER, BUT SOME OF THE GABLE DORMERS ON THE SECOND FLOOR. THE NORTH ELEMENT ELEVATION IS MORE OR LESS MIRRORED FROM THE SOUTH.

THE. GARAGE IS A LITTLE MORE PROMINENT HERE, I THINK IT'S ABOUT TWO FEET PROUD OF THE NEW CONSTRUCTION YOU SEE BEYOND, AND WE HAVE SOME LARGER EGRESS WINDOWS AS WE DON'T HAVE A BALCONY LIKE WE DO HERE ON THE OTHER SIDE, SO WE NEED TO MEET CODE FOR THE BEDROOM EGRESS . MATERIALS, THEY MORE OR LESS SPEAK FOR THEMSELVES.

WE WERE TRYING TO BE METHODICAL IN SELECTING FINISHES AS THEY RELATE TO THE NEIGHBORING PROPERTIES. THE EXISTING STUCCO WOULD BE CLEANED, REPAIRED AND PAINTED.

YOU SEE A EIGHT INCH EXPOSURE HORIZONTAL LAP SITING AT THE MAIN LEVEL TO KIND OF HELP GROUND THE NEW CONSTRUCTION, AND THEN WE INTRODUCED A THREE BY HORIZONTAL TRIM BAND AT THE FLOOR LINE TO HELP TRANSITION TO A BOARD THAT CITING THAT MORE OR LESS ENCOMPASSES THE SECOND FLOOR.

I DON'T KNOW IF YOU DON'T SEE A LOT OF BOARD AND BAT IN THE AREA, BUT WE THOUGHT IT WOULD BE KIND OF FUN TO INTRODUCE SOMETHING NEW.

SAME GOES WITH THE CORRUGATED RUSTED WINGS COAT AND SHED ROOF ELEMENTS.

AS FAR AS THE COLOR GOES.

WE TRY TO SELECT KIND OF A BALANCE, GRAYISH BEIGE TONE.

THE ROCK BOTTOM YOU SEE IN THE UPPER RIGHT WOULD OCCUR AT THE SECOND LEVEL GABLE ENDS.

THIS BEIGE FELTED WOOL WOULD OCCUR AT THE MAIN LEVELS IN THE EXISTING STUCCO GARAGE

[00:50:06]

, AND THEN WE PICKED A THIS RESERVED WHITE, WHICH WOULD KIND OF POP AND CONTRAST AND WOULD OCCUR AT THE ALL OF THE TRIM BANDS AND PORTABLES AND SUCH MATERIAL.

OBVIOUSLY, THE TRADITIONAL, MORE TRADITIONAL APPROACH, THE ASPHALT SHINGLES, THIS WOULD BE A LOCAL [INAUDIBLE] VENEER OR STONE FOR THE [INAUDIBLE] COLUMN, AND HERE IT'S KIND OF A SWATCH IS WHAT WE EXPECTED FOR THE FOR THE WAYNE'S COAT AND THE SHED ROOF ELEMENTS.

UH, THAT'S MY LAST SLIDE, IT'S ABOUT KIND OF SUMS UP WHAT WE HAVE THUS FAR.

LET ME KNOW IF THERE'S ANY QUESTIONS OR COMMENTS.

I KNOW THERE ARE A FEW PUBLIC COMMENTS, SO I'LL PASS THE MIC TO MARK OR WHOMEVER TO ADDRESS THOSE.

ALL RIGHT, THANK YOU VERY MUCH, TYLER TONY OF THE COMMISSIONERS, HOW MANY QUESTIONS FOR TYLER? THIS IS COMMISSIONER DEA.

I HAD A QUESTION.

JUST WONDERING WHAT THE FUTURE HOLDS FOR THE STONE ON THAT CHICKEN HOUSING, YOU KNOW? YEAH, MARK AND I TALKED ABOUT THAT MONTHS AGO.

WE TALKED ABOUT HOPING TO INCLUDE SOME OF THAT INTO THE NEW CONSTRUCTION.

UNFORTUNATELY, IT'S JUST REALLY READILY AND SOMEWHAT UNATTRACTIVE, AND IT'S KIND OF COVERED IN MORTAR AND WE CAN CERTAINLY LOOK AT INTRODUCING THAT, ALTHOUGH IT WOULDN'T BE WELL USED AS A VENEER, YOU KNOW SUCH, BUT I THINK POTENTIALLY EVEN THAT BATTERED COLUMN WE WERE LOOKING AT, WE COULD AT LEAST SALVAGE SOME OF IT TO INTRODUCE IT AND THAT FEATURE , BUT WE DID TALK ABOUT FACING THE BUILDING, BUT IT'S REALLY A LARGE, CLUNKY MATERIAL.

I THINK THAT WOULD BE A CHALLENGE TO CONSTRUCT A GREAT CONSTRUCTION CHALLENGE TO UTILIZE THAT AS PART OF THE NEW.

OK, THANK YOU.

ANY OTHER QUESTIONS, COMMISSIONERS, JUST GO AHEAD.

TYLER, WHAT WAS THE REASONING BEHIND KEEPING THE GARAGE INSTEAD OF JUST DEMOING IT AND STARTING FROM SCRATCH? THAT'S A GREAT QUESTION.

WE OBVIOUSLY LOOKED INTO THAT WITH THE OWNER.

I THINK THERE'S SOME OBVIOUS SENTIMENTAL VALUE THERE.

I DO KNOW THAT GOING IN THERE, WE'VE BEEN IN THERE WITH A STRUCTURAL ENGINEER, AND IT DOES LOOK A LOT BETTER ON THE ON THE INSIDE THAN THE OUTSIDE.

SO THERE IS SOME STRUCTURAL INTEGRITY THERE, AND I KNOW IT MAY NOT NOT BE ALL THAT ATTRACTIVE, BUT THERE IS SOME HISTORICAL SIGNIFICANCE TO THAT BUILDING IN ITSELF.

HE WANTED TO ESSENTIALLY USE PART OF IT AS AS POTENTIAL SHOP, I GUESS, WOULD HAVE BEEN USED TO THIS DAY.

SO YEAH, I THINK THE GOAL IS TO JUST TRY AND SALVAGE IT AND WORK WITH PARTIALLY WHAT WE HAD. THANK YOU.

ANY OTHER. QUESTIONS FROM THE COMMISSIONERS.

OK, WELL, THANK YOU, TYLER.

SORRY, AMY, GO AHEAD.

YEAH, I JUST I JUST I KIND OF HAD ONE MORE PIECE OF INFORMATION THAT I FOUND THAT NO ONE HAS SHARED YET, AND THAT SAID, IN 1948, SANBORN FIRE MAP THAT SHOWS WHAT THAT LOOKED LIKE WITH THE POULTRY BUILDING BEFORE THE GARAGE WAS ADDED, AND I JUST KIND OF WANTED TO MAYBE SHARE THAT FOR A LITTLE BIT OF HISTORIC CONTEXT.

IF THAT'S RIGHT AND YEAH, GO AHEAD, BUT YOU'LL HAVE TO BEAR WITH ME AS I SHARE MY SCREEN, I'M NOT VERY PROFICIENT AT THAT.

[00:55:03]

LET ME KNOW, CAN YOU GUYS SEE MY SCREEN? YES. SO.

THIS IT SAYS 1916 UP HERE, BUT I THINK IT'S ANNOTATED THROUGH NINETEEN FORTY EIGHT.

SO THIS THIS IS CHERRY STREET AND THIS IS SIX EIGHTEEN AND THIS IS 312 MOGOLLON AND THIS SHOWS POULTRY BUILDING AND THE CURRENT HOUSE, AND I BELIEVE THAT'S A GARAGE OR SOME OTHER OUTBUILDING THAT'S STILL ON THE PROPERTY OF THAT HOUSE, BUT THAT KIND OF SHOWS WHAT IT LOOKED LIKE BEFORE. APPARENTLY, IT GOT SUBDIVIDED AND SOLD INTO SMALLER PARCELS, BUT AGAIN, THIS DATES TO NINETEEN FORTY EIGHT.

SO THAT IS OUTSIDE THE PERIOD OF SIGNIFICANCE, I THINK, FOR THE TOWN SITE HISTORIC DISTRICT. BUT IT'S INTERESTING.

IT LOOKS LIKE IT MADE THAT CLEAR LIGHT MAY ACTUALLY BE PART OF THE ORIGINAL.

I THINK THAT'S WHAT THAT MEANS, BUT I'M NOT AN ARCHITECT, SO DON'T KNOW FOR SURE, BUT JUST THOUGHT THAT MIGHT HELP PROVIDE A LITTLE CONTEXT.

INTERESTING. THANKS, ANDY.

YEAH, I THINK WE'VE SEEN THE COLOR, I THINK THE COLOR USUALLY DESIGNATES THAT IT'S LIKE A NONTRADITIONAL CONSTRUCTION METHOD OR SOMETHING LIKE THAT, AND IN TERMS OF THE INSURANCE, OK MIGHT BE IF WE DON'T HAVE ANYTHING ELSE FROM THE COMMISSIONERS, WE'RE GOING TO MOVE ON TO PUBLIC COMMENT, AND FOR THOSE MEMBERS OF THE PUBLIC WHO WANT TO MAKE A COMMENT, IF YOU CAN EITHER TYPE IN THE CHAT THAT YOU WOULD LIKE TO MAKE A COMMENT OR RAISE YOUR HAND USING THE RAISE HAND BUTTON AND MS. DECHTER WILL CALL ON YOU.

ONE AT A TIME.

IT IS A THREE MINUTE WINDOW FOR YOUR COMMENTS AND WE WILL BE KEEPING YOU TO THAT.

SO PLEASE DON'T DON'T MAKE US CUT ANYONE OFF AND TRY TO STAY WITHIN THE THREE MINUTES, AND BEFORE I COULD GO AHEAD AND START WITH PUBLIC COMMENTS.

MS. WESTHEIMER.

THANK YOU. THANK YOU, COMMISSIONER, FOR LETTING ME HAVE THREE MINUTES OF TIME.

I APPRECIATE TYLER [INAUDIBLE] DESIGN.

HE IS QUITE FAMILIAR WITH THE NEIGHBORHOOD, AND I THINK IT SHOWS BECAUSE HE'S PUT A LOT OF EFFORT INTO MAKING IT FIT IN, WHICH I REALLY APPRECIATE.

AND I ALSO APPRECIATE COMMISSIONER HORN POINTING OUT THAT THIS PROPERTY WAS PART OF 618 WEST CHERRY. HOPEFULLY, YOU RECEIVED THE PROPERTY INVENTORY FORM FROM CREATING THE NATIONAL REGISTER DISTRICT, AND THAT STONE BUILDING WAS MENTIONED THERE AS BEING A RESIDENCE AT THAT TIME.

SO IT WAS PART OF THE SIX 18 PROPERTY, AND THE SIX 18 PROPERTY HAS A REALLY INTERESTING HISTORY. IT'S MENTIONED IN FLATLINES BOOK THAT CAME TO THE MOUNTAIN, AND IT IS ACTUALLY TWO LEGACY FAMILIES IN FLAGSTAFF WHO MARRIED AND ARE LIKE THE FOURTH GENERATION ARE LIVING THERE SO THAT I THINK THEY REALLY DESERVE A LOT OF ATTENTION TO THEIR QUALITY OF LIFE. SO I APPRECIATE THAT SOMEONE BROUGHT UP ADDING A FENCE.

MAYBE MR. FAIRCHILD REQUESTED.

NOT FOR HIS PRIVACY.

I'M A LITTLE CONCERNED ABOUT THERE BEING A DECK FACING HIS YARD BECAUSE NO FENCE CAN.

I DON'T THINK I CAN GIVE HIM PRIVACY FROM A SECOND STORY BALCONY DECK.

SO LET'S SEE.

I THE OVERLAND DOES ADDRESS PARKING AND THAT HIS PROPERTY IS WEIRD BECAUSE IT'S ON THE ALLEY IN THE WAY THAT IT IS AND THEY'RE TRYING TO BUILD THEM INTO CONFORMING LOT, THAT'S NOT OUR NORMAL MINIMUM 50 BY 142, AND SO THEY HAVE SOME CHALLENGES, BUT I HOPE THAT NICE YARD IN THE BACK DOESN'T BECOME A PARKING LOT BECAUSE IF YOU LOOK AROUND THE STREETS OF THIS NEIGHBORHOOD, THEY'RE COVERED WITH PEOPLE.

I MEAN, THEY'RE JUST LINED WITH PEOPLE'S CARS.

WE HAVE A BIG PROBLEM WITH NOT ENOUGH PARKING IN HISTORIC PROPERTIES, SO WE END UP WITH A LOT OF PARKING ALONG THE STREET, EVEN THOUGH IT'S NOT ALLOWED.

IT'S THERE IN THE WINTERTIME.

SO I HOPE THE BACKYARD DOESN'T BECOME A PARKING LOT BECAUSE I THINK THAT SAYS IT SHOULDN'T, AND I'M ALSO CONCERNED THAT THIS MIGHT END UP BEING NOT SHORT TERM RENTAL, BUT RENT BY THE ROOM AND NO ADULT SUPERVISION, SO TO SPEAK, AND I WORRY ABOUT THAT OR THE

[01:00:01]

OWNER OCCUPIED PROPERTY SITS AROUND AND THEIR QUALITY OF LIFE IF THERE'S NO ONE ACCOUNTABLE TO THE LOCAL, TO THE ADJACENT PROPERTY.

SO I WILL BE VERY SAD TO SEE THAT STONE GARAGE DISAPPEAR BECAUSE ONE BY ONE, WE'RE GOING TO LOSE THEM ALL AT THIS RATE, AND I THINK THAT'S REALLY UNFORTUNATE.

WOULD'VE BEEN NICE IF THEY HAD INCORPORATED IT, BUT I'M GLAD THAT THE RESIDENTS IS MOVING TOWARD THE STREET, AND ONE OF THOSE TWO LEGACY FAMILIES IS THE HARPER FAMILY, AND THEY DID HAVE MANY BUSINESSES IN TOWN, INCLUDING PLUMBING AND FURNITURE STORE.

CAN YOU WRAP UP? YOU'VE HAD HAD THREE MINUTES.

OKAY, I'M USING UP MY TIME.

SO ANYWAY, I THINK THAT THIS ARCHITECT DID A GOOD JOB, AND I'M JUST CONCERNED THAT IT'S GOING TO INVADE PEOPLE'S PRIVACY IN THE SURROUNDING PROPERTY.

SO THANK YOU. THANK YOU.

DO WE HAVE ANY OTHER PUBLIC COMMENTS? I'M NOT SEEING ANYTHING IN THE CHAT OR ANYONE RAISING THEIR HANDS.

SO WE'LL MOVE ON TO DISCUSSION FOR THE COMMISSION MEMBERS.

I THINK. MR. PULL UP THE STAFF REPORT, MARK, SO WE CAN HAVE EXACTLY WHAT YOUR RECOMMENDED ACTION IS HERE. YOU GOT A TWO POINT PAUSE TO THIS MARK.

I DON'T HAVE ANY PROBLEM WITH THAT CULTURAL RESOURCE STUDY THAT A REPORT NOT BEING REQUIRED, AS YOU POINTED OUT, THAT IS YOU HAVE THAT AUTHORITY UNDER THE CODE AND I'M HAPPY AS A COMMISSION TO VERIFY YOUR AUTHORITY IN THAT REGARD.

I'M A LITTLE BIT MORE HESITANT ON THE EXEMPTION REGARDING THE GARAGE AT THE FRONT.

WELL, THE.

THE LACK OF NON FRONT LOADING OBVIOUS GARAGES AND GARAGE DOORS IS PERHAPS THE PRIMARY DEFINING FEATURE OF THE TOWN SIDE NEIGHBORHOODS, AND, YOU KNOW, ALL THE NEIGHBORHOODS OF THAT ERA, AND YOU KNOW THE IMPORTANCE OF THAT AND THE IMPACT IT HAS ON A NEIGHBORHOOD'S CHARACTER, YOU KNOW, IS REFLECTED IN, YOU KNOW, EVEN EVEN OUR MODERN, YOU KNOW, MOVEMENT TOWARDS, YOU KNOW, TRYING TO PUSH PUSH ZONING AWAY FROM A VEHICLE ORIENTED ARCHITECTURE, YOU KNOW, AND AS SUCH, IT DOES STRIKE ME THAT, YOU KNOW, THE DESIGN, WHILE ADMIRABLE AND DOING WHAT IT CAN WITH WHAT'S THERE, YOU KNOW, HAS EFFECTIVELY TAKEN, YOU KNOW, DEMOLISHING THE BEST PARTS OF WHAT'S PRESENT, EVEN THOUGH THEY MIGHT JUST BE A POULTRY HOUSE AND KEEPING AND EFFECTIVELY EMPHASIZING, YOU KNOW, THE LEAST APPEALING, YOU KNOW, IN THE PAST, WE, YOU KNOW, WE MADE SUCH EXCEPTIONS FOR THESE KIND OF NONCONFORMING STRUCTURES, RIGHT? WHICH ARE NEITHER.

WE'RE NEITHER LOOKING AT A SECONDARY BUILDING AT THE BACK OR AN ENTIRELY NEW BUILDING.

WE'RE LOOKING AT ADDITIONS AND RENOVATION OF AN EXISTING STRUCTURE, AND THERE IS REALLY KIND OF A GAP IN THE, YOU KNOW, IN THE TOWN SIDE DESIGN GUIDELINES IN THAT REGARD, BUT MY FEELING IS IF IT IF IT REQUIRES US TO PROVIDE AN EXEMPTION TO HAVE THAT GARAGE AT THE FRONT THERE, I'M I'M DISINCLINED TO DO THAT, AND I THINK THETHE APPLICANT AND I MEAN, AND I DON'T KNOW THAT OUR ARCHITECT IS FULLY CAPABLE OF COMING UP WITH A DESIGN THAT YOU KNOW IS IT PROVIDES ALL THE SAME AMENITIES AT THE SAME COST AND IS MUCH MORE FITTING, YOU KNOW, TO THE NEIGHBORHOOD.

THAT'S MY TWO CENTS.

ANY OTHER COMMISSIONERS, IF YOU HAVE ANY COMMENTS AND WANT TO JUMP IN? I HAVE TO SAY THAT I AGREE WITH DOROTHY'S ASSESSMENT THAT THIS DOESN'T SEEM 100 PERCENT LIKE A SINGLE FAMILY UNIT.

MY FIRST THOUGHT WHEN I READ IT WAS FOUR BATHROOMS OR, YEAH, THREE BATHROOMS AND FOUR BEDROOMS SEEMS MORE LIKE AN APARTMENT LAYOUT, AND SO I DON'T KNOW WHAT IS AVAILABLE TO US

[01:05:05]

TO MAKE SURE THAT IT IS WHAT IT CLAIMS TO BE, THAT MAKES SENSE, AND AGAIN, I DON'T KNOW IF THAT'S WITHIN THE PURVIEW OF OUR COMMISSION, BUT IT IS SOMETHING THAT STRUCK ME WHEN I WAS READING THE PROPOSAL, AND I DON'T THINK IT MATTERS, I MEAN, THEY.

YOU KNOW THAT IN SO MUCH THAT THEY'RE NOT REQUIRED TO BUILD A SINGLE FAMILY RESIDENCE, SO THEY'RE IN THE FOUR AND ONE ZONING THERE THAT I DON'T BELIEVE, TYLER SAID.

THEY WEREN'T USING THAT. THEY WERE USING THE STANDARD ZONING, BUT IN THE TRANSIT ZONE, YOU KNOW, THEY CAN GO ALL THE WAY UP TO AN APARTMENT BUILDING IF THEY WANTED TO.

SO, YOU KNOW, BUT THAT IS PART OF THE ZONING CODE, AND THEN THERE'S NOTHING THERE'S NOTHING IN THE TOWNSITE GUIDELINES THAT WE ARE RESPONSIBLE FOR THAT, YOU KNOW, DICTATE THE USE OF ANY OF THE STRUCTURES.

MARK SARA, YOU WANT TO VERIFY WHAT I JUST SAID IS CORRECT.

I MEAN, I GUESS FOR ME, IT'S JUST PART OF THIS LARGER PATTERN OF LOSING THESE UNIQUE PLACES LIKE WE SAW WITH THE GREEN BUILDINGS OF BUTLER IN ORDER TO BUILD NEW , AND THEN THAT'S SOMETHING THAT FLAGSTAFF DOESN'T NEED MORE HOUSING, WHICH JUST AGAIN, IT FEELS LIKE WE'RE LOSING ALL OF THESE PLACES THAT MAKE FLAGSTAFF FLAGSTAFF IN ORDER TO BUILD APARTMENTS, AND I APPRECIATE THAT YOU'RE DOING SOMETHING THAT FITS IN WITH THE NEIGHBORHOOD AND PAYING ATTENTION TO THOSE KINDS OF DETAILS, BUT AGAIN, IT'S LIKE I MENTIONED WHEN WE TALKED ABOUT THOSE HOUSES ON BUTLER, LIKE, WE JUST KEEP LOSING THINGS.

SORRY, SARA. GO AHEAD.

CHAIRMAN HAYWARD, MAY I MAY I TRY TO ANSWER YOUR QUESTION FROM EARLIER? I THINK YOU ASKED IF TO VERIFY WHAT'S ALLOWED ON THE PROPERTY.

IS THAT CORRECT? I JUST I WANTED TO VERIFY THAT TOWN THE TOWN SIDE GUIDELINES HAVE NO REQUIREMENTS AS TO THE USE OF THE PROPERTY.

RIGHT. SO I WHETHER IT'S SINGLE FAMILY OR MULTIFAMILY, BUT YES, THE UNDERLYING ZONING IS WHAT REGULATES, BUT THE TOWNSITE OVERLAY DOES SAY THAT A SINGLE FAMILY HOME IS THE PRIMARY USE FOR MOST LOTS.

THE CONCERN OF WHETHER OR NOT THIS IS A SINGLE FAMILY HOME, THIS THIS MEETS THE DEFINITION OF THE SINGLE FAMILY HOME.

THERE IS CURRENTLY IN THE ZONING CODE, A DEFINITION FOR HIGH OCCUPANCY HOUSING, WHICH THIS UNIT DOES NOT MEET.

SO IF IT WERE IF IT WERE A HIGH OCCUPANCY HOUSING, THEY WOULD NEED A CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT. WHAT IS PROPOSED TODAY DOES NOT MEET THAT DEFINITION.

IS THAT THE QUESTION MAYBE WE WERE DANCING AROUND THERE? YEAH, THAT SOUNDS ABOUT RIGHT.

THANK YOU. ANY OTHER COMMISSIONERS HAVE ANY COMMENTS.

AMY, GO AHEAD. I JUST HAVE A QUESTION FOR THE ARCHITECT ABOUT THE PUBLIC COMMENT THAT WAS RAISED ABOUT PRIVACY AND VISIBILITY OF THE DECK AND YOU KNOW, THERE'S NOT A WHOLE LOT OF BUILDINGS THAT HAVE SECOND STORY DECKS IN THAT NEIGHBORHOOD, AND I JUST WONDERED IF YOU CONSIDERED THAT AND HOW THE FENCING MIGHT HELP MITIGATE THAT, IF AT ALL.

OH, SURE.

YEAH, I KNOW THE PROPERTY OWNER HAS BEEN IN CLOSE CONTACT WITH ALL OF THE SURROUNDING NEIGHBORS THAT ARE CONCERNED WITH PRIVACY, AND HE HAS A GREAT RELATIONSHIP, I THINK SPECIFICALLY TO THE ONE TO THE SOUTHEAST WHO WAS A MAIN CONCERN TO THE OPEN YARD TO THE EAST. I CAN, YOU KNOW, INTERNALLY WE CAN CERTAINLY LOOK AT PUTTING THE BALCONY ON THE NORTH SIDE, WHICH WOULD BE THE AWAY SIDE IF THERE ARE CONCERNS WITH EITHER THE NEIGHBORS TO THE SOUTH, BUT REALLY, ARCHITECTURALLY SPEAKING, THAT WAS MORE OR LESS BROUGHT INTO THE DESIGN TO HELP, AS I STATED, ARTICULATE THAT FACADE.

WE'VE ALSO GOT A BIG CHALLENGE IN MEETING THE, AND SAY BUILDING HEIGHT, WHICH BELIEVE IS

[01:10:04]

TWENTY FIVE FEET.

SO WITH JUST HAVING TO LOAD GABLE DORMERS POKING OUT AND THEN A FLAT WALL MEETING THE EVE, I GUESS ESTHETICALLY PLEASING THE BALCONY.

I THINK WE LOOK AT THAT PREVIOUSLY, BUT THE BALCONY FURTHER ENHANCED, GREATLY ENHANCED, ARTICULATED THAT FACADE AND JUST MADE IT MORE PLEASING.

I CAN UNDERSTAND THE PRIVACY CONCERNS, THOUGH WE CAN CERTAINLY LOOK INTO THAT MORE DETAIL.

MAY I GO AHEAD? THIS IS COMMISSIONER DEA.

GO AHEAD. OK, THANK YOU.

I DON'T HAVE A LOT MORE TO ADD OTHER THAN I WANT TO JUST AGREE WITH SOME STATEMENTS THAT WERE MADE. I WOULD BE CONCERNED ABOUT THE DECK AND THE EMPHASIS ON THE LESS APPEALING PARTS OF THIS PROPERTY, LIKE THE GARAGE AND.

WELL, I APPRECIATE THE DESIGN ELEMENTS THAT WERE PUT INTO THIS PROPERTY FOR, YOU KNOW, THE ITS INTENDED USE, I I AM VERY SAD TO SEE THAT CHICKEN COOP AREA.

I MEAN, IT'S A VERY LUXURIOUS CHICKEN HOUSING AND THOSE STONES AND JUST NOT TO GET HUNG UP ON THOSE STONES, BUT I JUST WISH THERE WAS LIKE A REPURPOSE OF THOSE IF THEY'RE NOT GOING TO BE IN THAT FORM ANY LONGER.

THAT'S MY TWO CENTS.

DO WE HAVE ANY OTHER? THE QUESTIONS OR COMMENTS FROM MANY OF THE COMMISSIONERS.

I'M NOT SEEING ANY.

SO I THINK WHAT WE CAN DO HERE IS I AM GOING TO MAKE A MOTION THAT WE DENY THE CERTIFICATE OF APPROPRIATENESS BASED ON NOT WANTING TO PROVIDE THE EXEMPTION FOR THE GARAGE DOORS AT THE HOUSE FRONTAGE.

IF YOU AGREE WITH THAT MOTION, YOU CAN VOTE YES IF YOU DISAGREE AND THINK THE PROJECT AND WANT AND BELIEVE THE PROJECT SHOULD GO AHEAD AS PLANNED.

YOU CAN VOTE NO, AND THAT WILL EFFECTIVELY APPROVE THE CERTIFICATE OF APPROPRIATENESS.

SARA DOES THAT WORK FOR YOU? UM, I'M SORRY, MR. CHAIRPERSON HAYWARD, YOU ACTUALLY WOULD HAVE TO IF THE MOTION TO DENY FAILS, YOU WOULD HAVE TO MAKE A NEW MOTION TO APPROVE.

OK, WELL, THAT'S ALMOST ACTUALLY SIMPLEST.

SO LET'S DO THAT. SO I'M GOING TO MAKE A MOTION TO DENY THE CERTIFICATE OF APPROPRIATENESS. IF ANYONE WANTS TO AGREE, THEY CAN SECOND THAT I SECOND THAT MOTION TO DENY. COMMISSIONER DEA.

ALL THOSE IN FAVOR.

ALL RIGHT. AYE..

ANY OPPOSED? ANY ABSTENTIONS? SO, THAT MOTION, CARRIED UNANIMOUSLY IN THE STICKERED APPROPRIATENESS WAS DENIED FOR THE STRUCTURE BASED ON THE REASONS WE DISCUSSED.

YOU KNOW, WE DON'T DO THIS VERY OFTEN AND HOPE THAT YOU WON'T HOLD IT AGAINST US, TYLER, BUT I HAVE EVERY FAITH THAT YOU'RE ABLE TO COME UP WITH A DESIGN THAT MEETS MEETS THE DESIRE AND THE INTENT OF THE TOWNSITE DESIGN GUIDELINES WITHOUT REQUIRING THAT EXEMPTION FOR THE GARAGE. SO THANK YOU VERY MUCH.

THANK YOU, EVERYONE ELSE WHO JOINED THE MEETING, AND WE WILL MOVE ON TO THE NEXT ITEM, WHICH IS GIVE ME A SECOND.

THE RECONSTRUCTION OF THE BUILDING, KNOWN AS THE BIRD'S NEST, LOCATED ON THE GROUNDS OF

[C. Bird's Nest Building Reconstruction - Museum of Northern AZ PROPERTY INFORMATION: Address: 3101 N Fort Valley Road Assessor's Parcel Number: Property Owner: Museum of Northern Arizona (MNA) Applicant: MNA City Staff: Mark Reavis REQUESTED ACTION: This is a request from the Museum of Northern Arizona (MNA) for a Certificate of Appropriateness for the demolition of the Bird’s Nest building and its reconstruction with similar architectural detailing. RECOMMENDED ACTION: Approve a Certificate of Appropriateness with the following condition, the architectural plans should fully reflect the original character of the 1928 design and includes the unique birds nest detailing at the gable end ridge.]

[01:15:07]

THE MUSEUM OF NORTHERN ARIZONA AND MARK, IF YOU'D LIKE TO TAKE US AWAY.

THANK YOU, MR. CHAIRMAN. FIRST OF ALL, WHY IT'S CALLED THE BIRD'S NEST IS BECAUSE BUILT INTO THE ARCHITECTURE OF THE ORIGINAL BUILDING WAS A BIRD'S NEST AND KIND OF A UNIQUE FEATURE. THIS PROPERTY IS IN THE MUSEUM OVERLAY ZONE.

THERE ARE MULTIPLE PROPERTIES ASSOCIATED WITH THAT ENTIRE COMPLEX MUSEUM PROPER TO THE WEST AND THEN THE RESEARCH FACILITY WITH MULTIPLE BUILDINGS.

SOME OBVIOUSLY NEW, SOME POTENTIALLY HISTORIC.

SO TWO SIDES OF THE PROPERTY, AND CERTAINLY THERE WAS A SIGNIFICANT INTENT THAT THE MUSEUM PROPER WAS PROTECTED, BUT THE ENTIRE PARCEL WAS INCLUDED IN THE OVERLAY.

SO THERE IS A REVIEW OF THAT.

THERE WERE ARIZONA.

HISTORIC INVENTORY FORMS PRODUCED THAT PUT SOME INFORMATION ON THE FORM, BUT UNFORTUNATELY, NO ONE MADE THE DETERMINATION OF WHETHER THE BUILDING AND ITS CURRENT CONDITION WAS ELIGIBLE OR NOT FOR BEING A HISTORIC PROPERTY.

I WENT TO THE SITE, I READ ALL THE INFORMATION.

I LOOKED AT THE EXTENSIVE MODIFICATIONS OF ADDITIONS, CHANGES, SITING WINDOW CHANGE OUT.

THOSE THINGS WERE SIGNIFICANT.

SO AGAIN, I UNFORTUNATELY HAD TO MAKE THE DETERMINATION MYSELF THAT I FELT THE PROPERTY WAS NOT ELIGIBLE AS A HISTORIC PROPERTY.

THE CONCEPT THAT THE APPLICANT HAS DEVELOPED IS TO CELEBRATE THOSE UNIQUE ASPECTS OF THIS BUILDING THAT WAS CALLED THE BIRD'S NEST WITH A BIRD'S NEST AT ONE END OF THE BUILDING.

THEY HAVE PROPOSED SINCE IT IS A ONE WAY STREET.

WHEN YOU ENTER THE RESEARCH ARM OF THE MUSEUM, YOU WOULD APPROACH THE BUILDING AND SEE THE BIRD'S NEST INSTEAD OF BEING ON THE WEST FACADE.

IT WOULD BE ON THE EAST FACADE.

THE ARCHITECT HAS LOOKED AT THE ORIGINAL DRAWINGS AND THE LOOK AND FEEL OF THAT BUILDING AND IS CELEBRATING THAT ARCHITECTURE, RETURNING THE MATERIALS AND THE LOOK, AND THEN ALSO ACCOMMODATING THE NEED.

SO THE MUSEUM DEFINITELY NEEDS.

INSTEAD OF JUST A RESIDENCE, THEY NEED A SUITABLE PLACE FOR MEETINGS, FOR THEIR BOARDS, FOR DIFFERENT TYPE OF ACTIVITIES.

SO I DIDN'T FEEL THE BUILDING WAS CONTRIBUTING TO THE MUSEUM.

IT'S NOT ON THE MUSEUM PROPER AREA, IT'S IN THE RESEARCH AREA.

THEY ARE LOOKING CAREFULLY.

I THINK THE ARCHITECT HAS DONE A GOOD JOB ON THIS, SO I WILL TURN IT OVER TO TWO OF THE PEOPLE THAT ARE INVOLVED IN THAT PROJECT TO GIVE THEIR PRESENTATION, AND I BELIEVE WE NEED TO HELP THEM WITH THEIR POWERPOINT AND ADVANCE IT.

IT'S. CAN YOU HEAR US, DEAN AND ANDY? YEAH, MARK, WERE YOU ABLE TO DISPLAY OUR POWERPOINT? YEAH, JORDAN WAS GOING TO GIVE THAT A TRY HERE.

OK, WELL, I'LL START.

THANK YOU, MARK. MY NAME IS ANDY BRYANT.

I'M THE FACILITIES DIRECTOR HERE AT THE MUSEUM, AND I'M JOINED BY WITH DR.

DEAN TAYLOR, AND HE APPEARS ON YOUR SCREEN AS BT BOARD OF TRUSTEES? AND WHAT WE'D LIKE TO DO IS THIS PRESENTATION, IT REPRESENTS A REQUEST FOR US TO OBTAIN A CERTIFICATE OF APPROPRIATENESS, AND THAT WOULD INVOLVE DEMOLISHING THE EXISTING STRUCTURE AND BUILDING A NEW STRUCTURE IS SIMILAR AS WE CAN TO THE ORIGINAL DESIGN.

SO WITH THAT, I'LL TURN IT OVER TO DR.

DEAN TAYLOR, AND HE'LL GIVE YOU A LITTLE EXPLANATION.

YEAH, THANKS, ANDY, MY NAME IS DEAN TAYLOR, I'M ONE OF THE MEMBERS OF THE BOARD AND WHAT I'D LIKE TO DO IS IS GIVE YOU A LITTLE BIT OF THE BACKGROUND AS TO WHAT PROMPTED THE INTEREST AND THE UNDERSTANDING OF THE DESIRABILITY FOR WHAT WE WANT TO DO WITH THIS

[01:20:04]

PROJECT. THE MUSEUM WAS WAS FOUNDED IN 1928, AND AT THAT TIME IT ONLY CONSISTED OF A OF A CONSTITUTION AND BYLAWS, A SMALL BOARD OF TRUSTEES AND A FEW COLLECTIONS.

THERE WERE NO BUILDINGS AND THERE WAS NO THERE WAS NO CAMPUS OF THE MUSEUM.

ALSO IN 1928, DR.

HAROLD COLTON, WHO ACTUALLY IS THE HE AND HIS WIFE WERE THE FOUNDERS OF THE MUSEUM.

DR. COLTON AND HIS WIFE OWNED PROPERTY ON NOW THE NORTHEAST SIDE OF WHAT IS CURRENTLY FORT VALLEY ROAD AND RIGHT ON THAT PROPERTY DR.

COLTON BUILT AN EIGHT HUNDRED AND FIFTY SQUARE FOOT BUILDING, WHICH ON THE ORIGINAL 1928 BLUEPRINTS, WHICH STILL EXISTS, BELIEVE IT OR NOT, WAS CALLED THE TENANT HOUSE, AND HE BUILT IT AS A LODGING FOR VISITORS, PRIMARILY SUMMER VISITORS.

THE MUSEUM EXHIBITS BUILDING, WHICH IS ON THE OPPOSITE SIDE OF THE ROAD, WAS BUILT IN 1936 AND PROVIDED THE FIRST BUILDING FOR THE MUSEUM TO HOUSE COLLECTIONS AND SERVE AS AN ACTUAL MUSEUM BUILDING.

SO AT THAT TIME, WITH A GROWING STAFF, THE BIRD'S NEST BUILDING SO-CALLED WAS CONVERTED LARGELY FOR STAFF HOUSING AND WAS USED FOR STAFF HOUSING.

EVER SINCE THEN, AS A MATTER OF FACT, UP UNTIL THE 1990S PRIMARILY BEEN USED FOR HOUSING OF SENIOR AND JUNIOR STAFF.

IN THE NINETEEN FIFTIES TO HOUSE THE ASSISTANT DIRECTOR OF THE MUSEUM, THIS BIRD'S NEST BUILDING WAS EXTENSIVELY RENOVATED AND CHANGED AS AS MARK DESCRIBED TO THE POINT WHERE IT NO LONGER WAS IN ANY WAY RECOGNIZABLE AS THE ORIGINAL NINETEEN TWENTY EIGHT STRUCTURE, AND IT STAYED IN IN USED FOR STAFF HOUSING UNTIL THE 1990S, WHEN THE CONDITION OF THE BUILDING WAS SO DETERIORATED THAT IT WAS ONLY USED FOR STORAGE AT THAT POINT AND HAS ONLY BEEN USED FOR STORAGE SINCE THAT TIME.

AS MARK MENTIONED, THE UNIQUE FEATURE OF THE BUILDING WHERE IT GETS THE NAME IS THE BIRD'S NEST WAS ACTUALLY INCORPORATED INTO THE STRUCTURAL DESIGN.

MY MY GUESS IS THAT BECAUSE IT WAS CALLED ON THE PLANS, THE TENANT HOUSE, IT PROBABLY LOST THAT NAME FAIRLY EARLY ON AND JUST GOT TO BE KNOWN AS THE BIRD'S NEST BUILDING, AND EVENTUALLY THE BUILDING WAS DROPPED AND IT WAS JUST CALLED THE BIRD'S NEST, AND THAT'S WHY IT'S CALLED THE BIRD'S NEST NOW AND THE NAME THAT WE WOULD, WE WOULD KEEP ON IT.

SO THAT'S THE HISTORIC ASPECT OF THE PROJECT.

THE OTHER, THE NEXT, THE PROBABLY THE EQUALLY IMPORTANT ASPECT IS THE USE OF THE BUILDING. THE MUSEUM HAS SOME THIRTY NINE BUILDINGS ON ITS AS PART OF ITS CAMPUS ON TWO SIDES OF THE ROAD, BUT KIND OF AMAZINGLY, ALL DURING THE TIME THAT THESE BUILDINGS WERE CONSTRUCTED FROM ANYWHERE FROM THE 1920S TO THE THROUGH THE 1950S AND EVEN AS RECENTLY AS THE 2000S.

THERE HAS NEVER BEEN A WILL WELL-PLANNED, COMFORTABLE, PROPERLY TECHNOLOGICALLY OUTFITTED CONFERENCE ROOM, USE FOR USE, NOT ONLY FOR ADMINISTRATIVE USES BY THE BOARD AND BY THE MUSEUM STAFF, BUT FOR POSSIBLE EDUCATIONAL PURPOSES FOR SMALL LECTURES AND THINGS LIKE THAT. SO THE IDEA CAME TO SOME MEMBERS OF THE BOARD THAT THIS WOULD BE A WONDERFUL OPPORTUNITY TO DO TWO THINGS TO REBUILD A HISTORIC BUILDING FOR THE MUSEUM, BUT ALSO TRY TO KEEP TO THE ORIGINAL DESIGN, BUT WITH SUFFICIENT EXPANSION OF SPACE TO ACCOMMODATE A BOARDROOM CONFERENCE ROOM, A SMALL OFFICE AND A SMALL KITCHEN FACILITY WITH A COUPLE OF BATHROOMS. SO THAT'S HOW THE PROJECT GOT STARTED.

SEEING THAT, WE COULD PUT BOTH OF THESE TOGETHER AND COME UP WITH THE DESIGN, AS MARK MENTIONED, TO RECAPITULATE THE NINETEEN TWENTY EIGHT DESIGN STYLE AS CLOSELY AS POSSIBLE , AND THAT'S IT. THANKS, DEAN.

GO TO THE NEXT SLIDE.

THAT'S JUST A SUMMARY OF WHAT DEAN HAD JUST STATED.

WE CAN JUMP TO THE NEXT ONE.

DO THIS, OUR ARCHIVE HAS FOUND THE ORIGINAL BLUEPRINT, WHICH WAS DRAWN BY RALPH COLTON, AND AS YOU CAN SEE, THE ORIGINAL LAYOUT WAS APPROXIMATELY 800 SQUARE FEET AND IT CONTAINED TWO BEDROOMS, A LIVING ROOM, A BATHROOM IN A SMALL KITCHEN AND ON THE UPPER

[01:25:07]

LEFT DRAWING.

YOU CAN SEE HE'S REFERRING TO THE BIRD'S NEST THERE AS THE PIGEON HOUSE AND FURTHER ON DOWN, I'LL SHOW YOU WHERE.

FINALLY, WE FINALLY GOT DOCUMENTATION WHERE HIS FIRST NOTED AS THE BIRD'S NEST, BUT THE STRUCTURE AT THE TIME WAS BUILT ON [INAUDIBLE] COLUMNS TO SUPPORT THE FLOOR JOISTS, AND THERE WAS NO PERIMETER CURTAIN AROUND IT.

IT WAS ACTUALLY OPEN UNDERNEATH, SO I COULD ONLY IMAGINE WHAT WAS LIVING UNDER THERE, BUT GO TO THE NEXT SLIDE.

THESE ARE THE SECTIONS THROUGH THE THROUGH THE STRUCTURE, AND HE DOES NOTE ALSO ON THESE BLUEPRINTS, THE TYPE OF SIDING THAT WAS USED AND SO FORTH.

THOUGH HE DOESN'T MENTION WHAT TYPE OF ROOFING MATERIAL WAS USED.

SO AT THIS POINT, WE KNOW THAT THERE WAS VERTICAL BOARDS WITH BATON STRIPS ON THE GABLE ENDS AND ON THE NORTH AND SOUTH ENDS.

NEXT SLIDE. NOW, THIS IS A PICTURE TAKEN APPROXIMATELY TWO YEARS AFTER THE BIRD'S NEST WAS BUILT, AND THIS IS THE WEST FACING SIDE OF THE BUILDING, AND YOU CAN SEE THE BUILD OUT WHERE THE KITCHEN AREA IS AND AT THE RIDGE THAT IS THE ACTUAL BIRD'S NEST THAT WAS BUILT INTO THE STRUCTURE, AND THE PLANS DID NOTE THE VERTICAL BOARDS TO BE VARIOUS WIDTHS, BUT IT EVIDENTLY IT WAS BUILT WITH THE COMMON WIDTH.

IT APPEARS TO BE ABOUT A FOOT WIDE WITH BATON STRIPS AND.

THE WINDOWS ALL ARE MULTIPLE PANE WITH MUTTONS, AND THIS IS ONE OF THE ASPECTS OF THE NEW DESIGN THAT WE WANT TO CARRY INTO CARRY INTO THE NEW DESIGN.

NEXT SLIDE, PLEASE.

OK. THIS IS A VIEW LOOKING TOWARDS THE EAST SOUTHEAST.

SO THIS IS THE NORTH SIDE OF THE BUILDING AND ON THE BOTTOM LEFT OR THE LEFT SIDE OF THAT PHOTO, YOU CAN SEE WHERE IT WAS EVENTUALLY ENCLOSED THERE.

SO THE ADDITION STARTED AS EARLY AS 1930 AND ALSO ON THE ROOF THERE.

IT'S ONE OF THE BETTER PICTURES WE HAVE OF THE OF THE ORIGINAL ROOF.

THEY APPEAR TO BE RECTANGULAR SHAPED TILES OF DIFFERENT COLORS.

NOW WE DO NOT KNOW IF IT WAS A CLAY TILE OR FIBER CEMENT TILE, BUT WE WILL TRY TO MIMIC THAT ALSO. NEXT SLIDE.

OK, THIS IS A VIEW LOOKING SOUTHWEST, ANOTHER VIEW OF THE NORTH SIDE, AND THAT ACTUALLY IS A LITTLE BETTER VIEW OF THE ROOF, BUT YOU CAN ALSO SEE THE VERTICAL WOODEN BOARD SIDING IS WAS ON ALL SIDES OF THE BUILDING.

NEXT SLIDE. NOW, THIS WAS ANOTHER DOCUMENT FOUND, AND THIS IS THE FIRST INDICATION THAT IT'S CALLED THE BIRD'S NEST, AND THE DATE WAS WRITTEN ON THEIR 1954, AND WHAT THIS IS IS A PROPOSAL FOR SCOPE OF WORK TO MAKE TO ADD ANOTHER ADDITION ONTO THE BUILDING, AND THE ADDITION WAS ADDED ON TO THE NORTH SIDE OF THE BUILDING, AND THAT'S WHEN THEY FIRST NOTED OR WAS FIRST NOTED AS BEING CALLED THE BIRD'S NEST.

NEXT SLIDE. THIS IS NOT DATED.

IT'S ANOTHER DRAWING.

IT APPEARS IT'S SOMETHING THAT OCCURRED BETWEEN 1930 AND 1954 BECAUSE THE FRONT ENTRY DOOR IS STILL IN THE SAME LOCATION, WHICH IS THE SOUTH FACING SOUTH FACING BUILDING PART OF THE BUILDING. IT LOOKS LIKE THEY THEY INTENDED ON RENOVATING THE KITCHEN BECAUSE THIS DRAWING CALLS IT A DENETTE.

THE ORIGINAL PLAN SHOWS A KITCHEN, AND IT LOOKS LIKE THEY WERE GOING TO PUT SOME KIND OF ISLAND IN AND MODIFY THE KITCHEN AREA.

NEXT, NEXT SLIDE.

[01:30:04]

NOW, ARCHITECT HAS SPENT A LOT OF TIME DRAWING UP SOME CONCEPT PLANS FOR US, AND WHAT HE'S DONE IS SHOW THE OVERLAY AREA.

THE MUSEUM IS THE DARK STRUCTURE ON THE LEFT THERE AND THE SLASHED AREA IN THE CENTER, YOU CAN SEE THAT'S THE LOCATION OF THE BIRD'S NEST, AND NEXT TO IT IS A GARAGE INTO THE WEST OF IT, DIRECTLY WEST OUTSIDE THE SLASHED AREA.

THAT'S A LITTLE DUPLEX APARTMENT BUILDING.

NEXT SLIDE. THIS IS THE SITE PLAN, AND IT'S THE FOOTPRINT OF THE PROPOSED NEW LAYOUT AND PROPORTION OR IN RELATIONSHIP TO THE ACCESS ROAD.

THE ACCESS ROAD IS WEST RESEARCH CENTER DRIVE.

IT'S ONE WAY IN THE DIRECTION WOULD BE FROM EAST TO WEST, AND YOU'LL SEE THAT'S WHY WE MOVED THE BIRD'S NEST FEATURE OF THE BUILDING FROM THE ORIGINAL DESIGN, WHICH WAS ON THE WEST. WE MOVED IT TO THE EAST SIDE, WHERE IT WOULD BE VISIBLE BEING THAT'S A ONE WAY ROAD. THE THROUGH TRAFFIC WOULD STILL BE ABLE TO SEE THE BIRD'S NEST STRUCTURE.

NEXT SLIDE. NOW THIS IS THE LAYOUT.

OF COURSE, THE ORIGINAL CONSTRUCTION WAS HOUSING FOR GUESTS AND OTHER TENANTS, BUT GIVEN DEAN'S DESCRIPTION, WHAT WE'VE COME UP WITH WAS PRIMARILY AN AREA FOR A BOARDROOM, A SMALL CONFERENCE ROOM AN OFFICE, KITCHENETTE I WOULD CALL IT.

IT'S JUST GOING TO HAVE WARMING OVENS PRIMARILY FOR CATERERS, AND IT'LL HAVE RESTROOMS, MEN AND WOMEN'S HANDICAP RESTROOMS, AND NEXT SLIDE.

ON OUR STAFF, WE HAVE A BOTANIST.

HER NAME IS JAN BASCO, AND SHE'S GOING TO BE HEADING UP OUR LANDSCAPING WITH OUR ARCHITECT, AND OUR GOAL IS TO ONLY USE NATIVE PLANTS.

AND JAN IS GOING TO DEVELOP A PLAN FOR US, SORT OF FOR OUR GARDEN AREA, WHICH IS ON THE LOCATED ON THE NORTH SIDE OF THE BUILDING.

IT'LL BE A GARDEN AREA AND A SITTING AREA OUTSIDE SITTING AREA AND ALSO ON THE SOUTH SIDE, THE PLANT LANDSCAPE PLAN IS TO ADD NATIVE PLANTS, INDIGENOUS PLANTS AND PRESERVE AS MANY OF THE EXISTING PINE THAT ARE THERE.

NOW WE DO ANTICIPATE ONE LARGE PINE TREE TO HAVE TO BE REMOVED, AND THAT WOULD BE ON THE EAST SIDE OF THE BUILDING, AND IT'S A LARGE PINE, AND WE'RE CONCERNED NOW THAT WE COULD TRIM IT AND MAINTAIN IT, BUT WE FEEL DUE TO THE CONSTRUCTION, IT'LL PROBABLY EVENTUALLY KILL THE TREE. WE WILL BE WITHIN A FEW FEET OF THE TRUNK.

SO THE PLANS ARE RIGHT NOW TO REMOVE IT BEFORE CONSTRUCTION BEGINS, AND NEXT SLIDE.

NOW, THIS IS THE ORIGINAL CONCEPT PLAN FOR MY ARCHITECT.

WHAT YOU WILL SEE, THAT'S THAT WE HAVE CHANGED AND I DO NOT HAVE HIS NEW PLAN YET, BUT THE TOP TWO PICTURES THERE.

EAST ELEVATION AND WEST ELEVATION.

WE ARE GOING TO CONTINUE THE VERTICAL BOARDS ALL THE WAY UP TO THE RIDGE.

HE'S SHOWING SHINGLES ON THE UPPER HALF OF THE GABE WINS.

WE'RE GOING TO STICK WITH THE ORIGINAL DESIGN FROM RALPH COLTON AND RUN THE VERTICAL BOARDS WITH BATTEN STRAIGHT UP TO THE RIDGE.

THE NORTH ELEVATION, YOU'LL SEE A SMALL GABLE AND THAT IS THE INTERIOR IS THE BOARD ROOM AREA, AND THE SAME WILL BE FOLLOWED.

HERE WE'RE GOING TO RUN THE VERTICAL BOARDING UP TO THE RIDGE, THE SOUTH ELEVATED ELEVATION. THE ONLY DIFFERENCE BETWEEN THE ORIGINAL DESIGN AND THE NEW DESIGN IS THE ENTRY DOOR NOW IS LOCATED ON THE PORCH, SO YOU ENTER FROM THE PORCH WHERE THE ORIGINAL

[01:35:05]

WILL ONE THE ENTRY DOOR FACED DIRECTLY SOUTH AND YOU ENTERED FROM THE SOUTH WEST CORNER OF THE BUILDING, AND THAT'S ABOUT ALL I HAVE.

WONDERFUL, THANK YOU VERY MUCH.

DO ANY OF THE COMMISSIONERS, HAVE ANY QUESTIONS FOR EITHER THE APPLICANT OR STAFF ? WELL, I HAVE A QUESTION.

ARE THERE ARE ANY PLANS TO REUSE ANY OF THE ORIGINAL BUILDING MATERIAL IN THE NEW CONSTRUCTION? I APOLOGIZE IF YOU ALREADY ANSWERED THAT.

NO, ACTUALLY, WE WILL BE TRYING TO USE SOME OF IT.

THE BUILDING, AS IT SITS NOW HAS A [INAUDIBLE] CURTAIN WALL AROUND THE PERIMETER, SO WE WILL BE USING SOME OF THAT [INAUDIBLE] IN THE WHEN WE CONSTRUCT THE GARDEN AND SITTING AREA. GREAT, THANK YOU.

I COULDN'T TELL FROM THE PLANTS, ARE THEY THE PORCH POSTS, ARE THOSE GOING TO BE PEELED LOGS AGAIN, LIKE IN THE ORIGINAL PHOTOS, BECAUSE THOSE ARE REALLY COOL.

YES, THEY ARE, IT'S SAPLING WOOD, THE ORIGINAL PLAN CALLED FOR SAPLING WOOD, ONE OF OUR MAJOR CONCERNS DURING THIS THESE PROJECT DISCUSSIONS WAS HOW CAN WE MAKE THIS BUILDING AS SAFE AS POSSIBLE? AND WE DECIDED TO GO WITH A LOT OF FIBER CEMENT PRODUCTS FOR THE SIDING, THE ROOF.

AND THE DISCUSSION WAS BROUGHT UP, WHAT ARE WE GOING TO DO WITH THE COLUMN SUPPORTING THE PORCH? WHAT WE INTEND ON DOING IS TRYING TO FIND A PRODUCT THAT WILL MIMIC THE ORIGINAL BUT WITH A HIGHER FIRE RATING.

YEAH, THE POST SHOWN IN THOSE HISTORICAL PHOTOGRAPHS ARE PROBABLY A LITTLE TOO SMALL IN DIAMETER, LIKE YOU SAID, BUT I WOULD IMAGINE THAT A PEELED LOG THAT, YOU KNOW, IS A SIX TO EIGHT INCH DIAMETER WOULD MEET THE FIRE RATING YOU'D NEED GIVEN THE SOLID LUMBER FIRE RATINGS TEND TO BE RELATIVELY HIGH, BUT THAT'S WONDERFUL NEWS.

ANY OTHER QUESTIONS OR COMMENTS FROM ANY OF THE COMMISSION MEMBERS? I'M NOT SEEING ANY, SO DOES ANYONE WANT TO PUT FORWARD A MOTION? I'LL MAKE A MOTION TO APPROVE THE CERTIFICATE OF APPROPRIATENESS WITH THE FOLLOWING CONDITION THAT THE ARCHITECTURAL PLAN SHOULD FULLY REFLECT THE ORIGINAL CHARACTER OF THE 1928 DESIGN AND INCLUDE THE UNIQUE BIRD'S NEST DETAILING AT THE GABLE END RIDGE.

I'LL SECOND THAT MOTION.

THAT WAS A MOTION FROM COMMISSIONER DALE AND A SECOND FROM COMMISSIONER DEA.

ALL THOSE IN FAVOR, AYE.

AYE. ANY OPPOSED? ANY ABSTENTIONS? THE MOTION CARRIES UNANIMOUSLY.

THANK YOU TO THE TEAM UP THERE AT THE MUSEUM.

WE LOVE THE WORK YOU DO, AND HOPEFULLY THIS BUILDING AND THIS PROJECT CAN BE AN INSPIRATION TO OTHER FOLKS IN THE COMMUNITY WHO WANT TO RESTORE THEIR HISTORIC STRUCTURES. THANK YOU VERY MUCH FOR WHAT YOU'RE DOING.

THANK YOU ALL.

[01:40:05]

ALL RIGHT, THAT IS THE END OF OUR REGULAR BUSINESS, AND WE WILL MOVE ON TO REPORTS AND

[6. REPORTS Per Flagstaff City Code 10-30.30.030, the Historic Preservation Officer shall regularly review consent matters with the Heritage Preservation Commission. Consent approval by the Heritage Preservation Officer is an administrative review and approval that occurs outside of a public meeting.]

CONSULTATIONS. MARK, IF YOU WANT TO GO AHEAD AND GIVE US THE REGULAR, PLEASE? THANK YOU, MR. CHAIRMAN.

ACTUALLY, WE HAD THREE LARGE DISCUSSIONS.

IF THERE'S ANYTHING IN PARTICULAR THAT STRIKES YOUR INTEREST THAT I CAN EXPLAIN.

I DO WANT TO BE RESPECTFUL OF YOUR TIME.

SO I'VE BEEN BUSY.

I'VE NOTED WHAT I'VE BEEN WORKING ON THERE.

SO IF THERE ARE ANY QUESTIONS OR CONCERNS WITH WHAT IS ON THE AGENDA, SPEAK NOW.

THANK YOU. COMMISSION, HAS ANYONE GOT ANY QUESTIONS OR JUST WANT TO TAKE A MINUTE TO READ DOWN THAT LIST AND SEE IF YOU HAVE ANY QUESTIONS ON ANY OF IT? I'M NOT SEEING ANY, MARK, SO THANK YOU VERY MUCH.

LET US MOVE ON THEN TO MISCELLANEOUS AND SARA IF YOU WANT TO KICK US OFF WITH THIS

[7. MISCELLANEOUS ITEMS TO/FROM COMMISSION MEMBERS Introduce new Planning Director, Michelle McNulty. Interim Zoning Code Manager Update.]

EXCITING INTRODUCTION.

YES, HI, EVERYONE.