 Okay, and we are live. Okay, great. Thank you guys. Welcome everyone to the April 7, 2022. Historic preservation commission meeting. As you've noted, we are still holding this meeting remotely. We'll have some further instructions for you. Those in the public later on. Let's go ahead. We'll call the meeting to order and can we miss those? Can we have the role, please? I'm in lane. Here. Commissioner hardies. Commissioner hardies. You may not be able to hear. Commissioner hardies. If you're there, I'm asking you to unmute. But perhaps walked away for a moment. Right. We'll go ahead and commissioner Norton. Here. Commissioner. Commissioner Goon. Commissioner Jacobi. Here. Commissioner Sibley and commissioner hardies. I guess we'll note that commissioner hardies appears to be. On his way into the portal, but hasn't formally arrived. All right. Thank you. We do have a quorum. Thank you. First item on our agenda is approval of the meeting minutes from March 3rd, which were regionally lengthy. Any comments or. Questions. On the meeting minutes. Okay. I only have one brief comment and somewhere in here. It was noted that I was trying to get the. Distorted preservation conference session that I attended on that demolition ordinance. Kind of deconstruction ordinance shared. At the moment, all I can do is go back in and watch it through my own log in. So I've asked a seven note to historic preservation. Inc. Down in Denver to see if there's a way that we can share that and package it to everyone. So I think that would be useful. I think that would be useful. I think that would be useful. I think that would be useful. I think that would be useful in the process. All right. If there are no comments or corrections, I'll entertain motion. I'll move to accept the minutes from April. From March of 2022. Yeah. I'll second them. Okay. Thank you. I have a motion to approve the minutes from commissioner Norton seconded by commissioner goon. And Miss. If you would call the roll for us. Because. Commissioner. Commissioner hardy. Commissioner Norton. Yes. Commissioner go. Yes. Commissioner Jacobi. Approved. Commissioner. Okay. Great. Thanks. We have a unanimous. Approval of the March. Third minutes. The package. Let's see. So then we have a report. The package. Let's see. So then we have a report. Let's see. Work from the chair. So this is again, my opportunity to tell anyone out there that we will have a public invited to be heard and potentially public hearing during that time. This information will pop up on your screen and you can call in using the number and the meeting ID. At that time and we'll call on you once we're back live comments are limited to three minutes for these sessions and we do ask that you state your name and address for the record prior prior to proceeding with your comments. And remember to mute the live stream so that we don't get nasty feedback. All right. Thank you. Let's see. Next is communications from staff liaison winner shoe marker. Do you have some information for us. Let me just note. Sorry, Brian. Just note that a commission hearties has arrived. Yeah, sorry about that. My computer froze and had to do some gymnastics. I don't know. I don't know. I don't know. I don't know. I don't know. I don't know. No worries. Welcome. We assume that we hope that you didn't have any objection to the meeting minutes because we approve them. Nope. That sounds good to me. Okay. Great. Too late anyway. That's right. All right. Well, I'll be brief. Since most of the items that we're planning to talk about are covered on the agenda items. There's just one item. I don't know. I think we have a list of items that are covered on the agenda items. So we have kind of a list of. Webinars that are hosted by history Colorado. A little while, maybe last month. There's one coming up on April 20th note. And I sent out another email with just as a reminder. It's regarding innovation loans. Again, it's April 20th over the lunch hour. So. Courage commissioners who are interested in that to participate. Okay. Thanks, Brian. You were busy last month. This is a, this is a. The packet for today's meeting was one of those careful, what you asked for kind of scenario. I appreciate all the work you put in. All right. Let's see. So this now is our public invited to be heard. So we have a motion of the meeting. This would be for anything that is not on the agenda. If there's anyone out there that would like to comment. To the commission. Again, for something not on the agenda, please go ahead and dial in now using the toll free number, enter the meeting ID number. And press pound. And then we will call on you based on your phone number to. So at the moment we'll take a five minute break while we wait to see if anyone calls in. And during that time commissioners can mute and turn off their. Videos. Thanks. Chair, we are about 20 seconds out from the five minute mark. Currently there are no callers. Thanks. No problem. Once I see the commission returns, I will. Confirm. If we have any more colors. Okay. Great. I do see that a caller did just join. So in that case, if you're ready, we can start this off. Okay. Let's see commissioners. You want to. Get back online here. Commissioner. Seconds here to see if commissioner. Get back with us. Sure. Start. That public comment. Commissioner Norton, if you are there. If you're not available to turn on your cam or your mic, you can feel free to. To maybe close out of zoom and then jump back on. Otherwise. Yeah, I'm, I'm pinging to start video, but think there might be something on their end. Okay. Well, I guess we'll move forward with the. Public invited to be heard portion of the meeting and hopefully commissioner Norton can. Either hear us or get back in. To the meeting. So again. Sure. Yeah. In that case, I can start with our caller. Caller with the last three digits. 414 caller 414. If you were there, please mute your live stream and hit star six to unmute your device. Caller with the last three digits of their phone number 414. Please hit star six to unmute. I saw you on mute and then go back to mute. Try one more time hitting star six. Hi there. Can you hear us? Yes. Alrighty. Do I begin? I don't see anyone on screen. Yes. If you would please state your name and address and then you have three minutes for comments to the commission. Welcome. And thank you. Okay. Thank you commission. This is Sharon O'Leary. 534 Emory street co-chair of the Sturkey side neighborhood. Start conservation commission. We're now moving into the second quarter of 2022. And where are you? And where are we headed? Where are you headed? Have you developed a work plan which you can move forward on for a long month? Have you looked into updating the demolition code? Do you want to make motions so that items move to the next level? As I've attended these meetings the last two years, motions aren't made. And to me, when I've served on boards, once a motion is made, seconded, and then there's discussion, typically that gets it moving along. So may I suggest that as commission members that you make motions to move things forward. So it does get on a timeline. I know that right now, as we enter the second quarter of the year, we're supposed to be getting the status on planning and creating guidelines for preservation. Where are we with that? I mean, I know it's just the beginning of the second quarter, but the wheels of bureaucracy move very slowly. So I just want to give you a little background knowledge as far as preservation. The historic west side has already been partially dismantled just due to the past 30 years of their zoning being significantly different than that of the historic east side. And there are some people who live there that want to capitalize on their present zoning. And they've lived there for a long time. The west side has less concerns or problems for the last 30 years because of their present zoning. They do have the benefit of not living so close to the train, and they don't have very large multi-family complexes, and they have not had a school demolished, like we had the Bryant school demolished at Longs Peak in Emory. And there's no east-west street closures. So license property values are good over there. Then there's Denver homing recently came under the preservation umbrella, and I would guess it was for financial benefit. I'm talking about our downtown. I'm sorry, not Denver downtown. There are many owners who maybe don't want you to tell them what to do, and then maybe other people it is, their belief system and financial gain. So back to Hanna. We just want what we had before you changed their zoning from RLE. Exploitation has started. We want to remain historically sensitive neighborhood with little both space. If someone wants an AUG, then it must follow the historic sensitive guidelines. We do not want to get our protect. If we do not get our protections back, we will be exploited with ADUs because there's space for it, and most likely they won't be affordable by the time they're built out. So what I'm asking is we've been good guardians, and we'd like to continue. And one side of guidelines is not going to be good for all. So as a historic preservation commission, please make some motions, move things forward, ask questions. And the demolished, the demolition code, I just want to say 830 was demolished because it said it couldn't support a second story. I think that was an error on Jade's part, something that maybe you might want to investigate to see if I'm off base or if Jade was off base. So please hurry up. Thank you. I appreciate your time and dedication for comments. All right, that was the only color we had. Is that correct? That is correct. Okay. We'll go ahead and close the public invited to be heard portion of our hearing and move on to the next item, which is prior business. Before we get into it, I just wanted to double check. This is an action requested item. So do we have a public hearing portion of this item? Sorry commissioners took me a while to get it muted. No, we do not. This is not a formal hearing item that. Requires a public hearing. It's basically a recommendation from the commission. That was approved on the condition of approval. That was approved by both time zoning commission and city council. Okay, great. Thanks. I just wanted to make sure that I didn't miss something because sometimes I get a little. Eager to move things along and sure that portion, which is bad. So, all right. Well, Brian, do you want to give us just a quick overview? I mean, I think we're all familiar with this, but in terms of what we're, what we're here again to talk about. Yeah. Yeah. Yeah. And we have several guests and I think. They were introduced as kind of the beginning of the meeting before we started the recording, but there's representatives from the property ownership group. United properties. Jamie Pollack and Mona Dillard are here this evening. I think somebody perhaps from dimension group was going to join us and not sure if they're able or on the call or not. Yeah. Yeah. And included in your packet was some background information regarding conversations that the commission had on this topic. I believe you discussed this. With Jade and the applicants. At least on a couple of instances. I think it started. Actually in 2020 and continued a couple of meetings in 2021 as well. We had a meeting with the commission in September 21. And I think in the packet, there's copies of those meeting minutes regarding that particular discussion. And at the time, the commission had recommended that the, the project, the 7-11 proposal, the commercial center not move forward because of the significance of the property under the four criteria of making it eligible on the national register. So the commission's recommendation was forwarded on to the plan zoning commission. When they held their public hearing on the. Rezoning and the overall development plan for the proposal. And as part of that hearing, as noted in the, in the communication, the, the plan zoning commission included a condition of approval. To develop a plan for preservation of the sites history through incorporation of appropriate references to be included with the development of the site. And so that was to be implemented in coordinates with HPC. And that's why we're here this evening. As well as city staff. The commission's recommendation was forwarded on to city council. As part of their deliberation on the item. This past winter. I mean, I think it happened in January and February. When the hearings were heard with city council. And I just will also note that the. Historic preservation commission's recommendation. Was also included in the information that was forwarded on to city council as well. So they were aware of. The recommendation that was made by. Not only plan zoning commission, but also the historic preservation commission. And the, the city council did approve in February, the rezoning and the overall development plan to allow the, the seven 11 is late in commercial center to move forward. With the, with the condition that was brought forth by the plan zoning commission regarding developing a plan as noted in the commission's recommendation. And so we're here this evening just to kind of talk about that. I know there's, like I said, there's representative from the ownership here. To respond to any questions that commission might have. As noted, and Dallas, if you wouldn't mind maybe putting up those, those slides. That were in the packet that might be helpful just for reference. Sure thing. Give me just a moment. Thank you very much. Thank you very much. Those who are here representing the owners. Do you have anything you'd like to present or talk about? To the commission. If you want to walk us through some ideas or. You're certainly welcome. Yeah. Hi. This is Jamie Pollack with United properties. We're the developer on this project. Our architect was actually. Sorry, I'm starting my video. Sorry, Dallas. Our architect was supposed to be on the answer a little bit more, but yeah, so I think over time we've kind of played around with some different stuff. We've done some structural integrity studies on the buildings and the barns and whatnot. And those did not come back very favorable. We also were worried about some of the riffraff that those structures were bringing to the property and whatnot, but very respectful to the history and want to do something here. And I think we kind of came up with a few different ideas here to throw out to you guys. In regards to, you know, how we could maybe show. You know, the history there and is there. I think is the next slide. Showing one of them. So this is just the project where the project lays there on 119th and Slayton. And then if you could keep going to the next slide. And if I could maybe just sorry, Jamie for, for. If I could just interject, I know that there's a note on here about the floodplain. And there is a local floodplain. It's not a FEMA recognized floodplain. So, you know, in terms of the process, there'd still be a process in terms of reviewing any modifications to the barn. But it wouldn't necessarily have to go through FEMA. So FEMA. So I just wanted to clarify that because I talked to our floodplain administrator today about that. Thanks, Brian. So that, yeah. So he, I guess, Brian hit on the floodplain. Can you go to the next slide, please? See. Again, I think this is slide here is just showing those existing buildings and the condition of those buildings. As we walk through them. And again, a little bit, you know, of our concerns with the structural integrity there, I think it was a whole lot of money to restore those buildings. I think if we keep going, we can get to the slides that show what we were proposing for. I think this is the start of it. Okay. All right. So I think one of the ideas here was to do some kind of concrete patches to show where, where the buildings were. So it was just a different architectural idea from our architect. The kind of, you know, within the paving show where those buildings were. To basically make it like a different color. Yeah. So in the, in the, I think the proposal as I've read it. In the area where there's pavement. There's a, a, a different contrasting material, perhaps or color to line the location of the structures that are being removed in those particular locations. And then for the other buildings that are kind of outside of the construction footprint, such as the barn and a couple of the other outbuildings that I think the proposal was to do a, maybe a couple of foot tall. So I think that would be a good idea. I think that would be a good idea. I think that would be a good idea. I think that would be a good idea. I think the concrete foundation to show where the. The buildings. Resided. Correct. I think King moved to the next slide there. So this shows that a little bit. Different for, for everybody there. Just some ideas on how that. That would show. Okay. See commissioner Norton has got her hand raised. Did you have a question about that specifically? No, I didn't. I didn't have a question. I didn't have any questions about this. First of all, this particular. I don't want to make sure. Yeah. About, about the concrete. Okay. Specifically. I'm sure I'll have questions about all of the proposals. I think, you know, one of my first questions is really about how. So thinking about how a convenience store like this. What kind of. Traffic and how people use it. You know, how would people use it? You know, how would people be directed out to the. Concrete pad structures that are outside of that. Parking area. What is the plan for long-term maintenance of that? Like, what does that look like with the longevity of the concrete? And then this site, one of the criteria under which it is eligible is D, which is an archeological criteria because of the data potential. How are you going to. Avoid and or take into consideration the archeological assemblages. If you're adding. Structures essentially in doing subsurface disturbance. Out in these areas. Again, my, my architect is not here. Well, on some of this though, like as far as I know, the structures that are out in the grass area. I'm sorry. I will start my video. There we go. Am I. Good. So as far as the structures in the grass area. We weren't looking to have people come. Out to those structures. We would actually. Prefer that that not be the case. Then what is the utility and how are we. Educating the public about the history of the site through these structures. Well, on one of our future slides, we were proposing to do more of an information panel on. The trail that's going to be in that greenway trail. So we were proposing that with information and we had also talked with Brian about even putting some kind of. You know, some kind of monument or something that offered some information we've talked. I think as far as. Information giving the public. It goes into probably more on the rest of our presentation here, but our architect was also doing something on the screens inside the store on the monitors. The TV monitors that give info. So we were just kind of looking for. Your guys's ideas and suggestions on that. We were just throwing out. A variety of ideas. So I'm asking specifically on this. Idea just a number one for installing custom concrete outlines depicting the existing foundation locations. What is the utility if we don't intend having the public actually see and visit those. Show where the barn was. But if you don't want the public out there, how are they going to see where the barn was? Well, it would be a raised surface so that they could see it from the paved area. I think it might be helpful to let you guys run through the rest of the ideas and then maybe. Continue the discussion. Yeah. And I think again, this is like an open discussion. You know, we, we want the input from you guys. We just came up with alternatives. We wanted you to know. That we were thinking about it. And we're open to. You know, suggestions from, from there. So next, next slide. So we did, we discussed, you know, putting a mural on the building. Something that we have done in some other locations of ours. Around in different cities and whatnot. And so we had just kind of. It's something that would be painted more or less on the side of the building. And we just put those pictures below, like, you know, basically showing the representation of the barns and whatnot. So that was just a different, different idea. Next one. And I think right there is kind of showing the location. We were thinking about that mural. On the side of the building there. So. Be the West elevation. And I think that was, you know, the one that was the oldest one on the side of the building there. So. Be the West elevation facing West there. So everybody who's coming in and turning into the, the project would be able to see it on the building. Next slide. So this is what Moana was talking about a little bit there about the TVs. That would could be mounted within. In the store that, you know, of different pictures and if people are visiting the store, they would see the historic meaning of this site there. Just so just a different idea of things that have been done in the past. Is that click on the right there, the videos or? Does that take you somewhere? It looks like it. I can mess around with it, but I didn't realize there was a video attached. So if it is something that needs downloaded, that'll take a second. Mona, is there a video on there? I don't know that. I don't know. Yeah, there's a video link embedded in there. Dallas, I don't know if you can have access to that or it's a couple of minute video and I don't know if any of the other commissioners were able to access that online. I also have it wouldn't work. Yeah, there's a link that or sorry, there's a I do not have permission to open the video link. If the commission is interested in seeing it, I have it on my screen if I could share my screen if there's any interest in seeing that. Yeah, let's do that again. Dallas, is it OK if I share my screen? Go ahead. Yeah. Assuming I get the right one. Can you see a blank screen on that? Yeah. Yeah. Right, let me see if this works. Brian, if there's audio attached to it, we're hearing it through your speakers and not through the actual video. So I pause it, Dallas. I don't know how to connect it to to the audio. OK, if you close it real quick, the next time you offer to share your screen, it should allow you to there will be a button at the bottom that says optimize for audio and video. All it is is music anyways. I don't know if that makes a difference. I don't know if the music is that important. Yeah. OK. So I'll try this again. Restart this. Now restart it. Continue from where I left off. All right, I think that's it. Thanks, Brian. Yeah, and I think that was, you know, just an idea of different things we could put up on those monitors to show the history and what existed there at one point. So again, just throwing out ideas and thoughts. And Dallas, OK, thank you. You can put the slides back up. Thank you. Maybe continue on to the slide. So we did we, Mona had mentioned we talked about the reader board along the Greenway there. There's there's also the idea of putting another reader one on that Greenway and also a reader on the backside of the development there. You know, maybe there's a little paved area that you could put it on with a bench or something that people could come and and look and see that the reader and the history of the site there. And I think as notes on the side there, but we we are making a contribution through the development of one hundred and forty thousand towards the Greenway improvements. So I think that would be part of that. Next slide. So again, that's showing that reader board in the backside of the property there where we could do a little, you know, a landscaped area. That that people could visit to see the history of it. So I believe that is all I've got. It might have been it. Yeah. OK, thanks. I guess I have one quick question for you in your mind. Is this something where you may be willing to do more than one of these? Or is this an either or kind of scenario from your perspective? What's what's your approach here? Yeah, I think we're kind of just open to to feedback here and what what you guys are looking for. Yeah, we're open to discussion. Obviously, financial impact. Affects the feasibility of the project, but I don't think we're talking about anything real crazy here. So OK, other commissioners have questions or comments you'd like to put out there? Yeah, Commissioner Jacobi. There you go. You can hear me. Um, I like the idea of the mural. A TV monitor, maybe showing videos would maybe be nice as well. But I don't think we have to show collapsed buildings. I think you could show a lot more of the agrarian side of what some of what it looks like before. I'm a little I like clarification on no improvements may be allowed in a flood plain. I'm looking at that barn and it's outside of your development, proposed development. The ridge line is arrow straight. It looks structurally sound. I realize it doesn't meet code and to meet code would be expensive and unfeasible since it's in the flood plain. Although it looks like it's the same elevation as the house and where you plan to develop. It's very close. Certainly, the barn has stood for over 100 years. I think it's pretty safe without doing improvements. Just preservation of the barn, I think would be feasible and maybe more appropriate. What would be more dramatic for individuals coming to see the history of the property? And I wonder if you considered that. So I'd like I'd love to see the barn preserved maybe with a plaque out there. That would give it and it has some again, flood plains open space around that. That would get more of feeling of the barn and the farm, I think, than outlines in the pavement. And I wonder if that would be something feasible, something you could think about. Well, a couple, couple inputs there. There are a couple of things. First of all, that there's been the riffraff that's been kind of hanging around those barns and whatnot. So, you know, that that's one thing. And then the other is being that there is some structural integrity issues there. It's it becomes a liability for the property owner that, you know, really falls on on them. So on us. So those are some of the considerations we've had within that. I can speak a little bit to you again. When you talk about the riffraff, appropriate use discourages inappropriate use. I've seen that in some local parks here. And I think you would see the same thing with the barn. I don't think you would have riffraff nearly as much of a problem with riffraff when you have traffic going in and out of a 7-11 all the time. Also, I think again, when I look at that barn, the doors are open, the windows are open, simply putting locks on the doors and locking the doors and maintaining that sounds like a minimal input that would have quite a bit of safety associated with that. I think that's something you could consider. I know that I don't know that it's the barn in particular, but one of the structures has been boarded up and on the boarded up windows have been removed. And there were individuals living in there, the barn and the other shelter there has, drug paraphernalia, alcohol, that kind of stuff. So I mean, it has, like I said, I can't speak 100% on if the barn is boarded up. I thought that everything was, but there has been problems with people removing the boards and still getting in there. I don't know the property like you folks do, but when I drive by the house is boarded up, but the doors are open to the barn. Gotcha. Yeah, I can't speak on that. So I don't know for sure, but I know when we had some of our environmental work out there done, they were a little nervous about it with, because someone had been living in there on where it was boarded up. Commissioner Hardies. I just wanted to agree with Commissioner Jacoby that the property is stabilized and it can be secured. And it's in a supervised area. Those kinds of abuses normally go away. I've never worked on, I shouldn't say never, most of the historic properties I've worked on in rehab and preservation did not meet code and did not, would never have passed current structural load calculations. They all require some work to stabilize them. So I don't think that's a good enough excuse not to put some effort into saving the barn. I'd rather that save than all the other measures. We did, I know, we did have somebody, a structural engineer go out there and I believe all of that's been provided as far as what it would take to make those safe structures. Oh, I wasn't implying that it's easy. I'm just saying that it is done all the time and I've done projects myself where we did that and totally replaced structure where necessary or supplemented it with new structure to reach the load requirements. The one view on the inside of that barn tells me that there's ample opportunity to add the kind of bracing and cable ties or whatever might be needed to fully stabilize the structure. There's some cost involved for sure, but I'm just saying that I think that that would be a much stronger statement of the historic character of the site than all of the concrete paving and raised concrete foundation walls and plaques that are proposed in the other schemes in my opinion. Commissioner Jacoby. And I, maybe I missed it, but in the previous discussion, what I saw was discussion of bringing the barn and the other structures up to code and that that was economically not feasible. But we're not talking about bringing it up to code, we're talking about just what structural needs does it have. And I don't recall seeing any assessment of just the required structural needs to maintain the barn as it is. Okay. Yeah, I don't think you provided any cost as far as that goes. It was more so to bring it up to code. Right. Brian, do you have, I know back in that September meeting, we did have, we were given a copy of the structural evaluation, which I don't know that we have available right now. I don't know if that's something that could be brought up and shout out to everybody or put up on the screen specific to the barn. But yeah. Let me see what I can track down while you guys are chatting. Okay. But right, I mean, there is a step of just pure stabilization, right? That is a potential. Other questions? And then, you know, they still sit in that flood plain. So we, you know, there is that problem going forward as it is. And I think bringing up again the liability that then lands on the property owner, you know, it's a significant little risk or impact that we have to worry about, right? Someone goes out, plays around in the barn, tries to get in whatever something happens and, you know, that falls on the property owner. Again, I think appropriate use discourages inappropriate use. If you plan to have a very busy 7-Eleven and gas station and restaurant there with eyes on that property all the time, I don't think people will be trying to break in actively. Maybe I'm wrong. Maybe at two in the morning, the traffic will be light enough that someone will try to do that. But it seems relatively unlikely to me. And again, the flood plain, it may technically be in the flood plain, but that building's been standing for over a hundred years. That has a straighter roof line, straighter roof line than some of the houses in my neighborhood here. I live in the historic district. I think it's held up quite well. I don't see that flood plain, frankly being practically a large issue. It does sit on the, it sits on the greenway. So, you know, I think that's where you know, some of that might drift in and it is going to be a building out there by itself. I don't know. I do worry, I still worry about it. So, I would- Sorry, can we just have just one second and I'll give you the floor. Can staff speak to any potential issue with that being just stabilized in the flood plain or that present a problem by itself or not? Yeah, I mean, I can talk briefly about it. Obviously, I'm not a flood plain administrator, but I did speak with Monica Bartolini, who is our flood plain administrator. And as I mentioned earlier in the discussion, it is a FEMA map flood plain. It's a local flood plain. So, there's more discretion in terms of what the city can or cannot require in terms of requirements. I think if the intent was to do substantial changes to the structure, then most likely or might need to be raised out of the flood plain, but if it's just stabilizing, I'm guessing that probably wouldn't need to be brought up out of the flood plain. Okay, thanks. So, I was able to find the structural assessment from the September meeting. And it looked like, I don't know, I can bring it up on the screen if you want, but it just said in summary and an appropriate budget to upgrade the structure, that's just from a stabilization standpoint, is $75 to $100,000. And that's specific to the barn. That's just the one, right? Yeah. Right, that's just the barn. I'm just kind of scrolling through here because I didn't participate in that meeting. So, I'm just kind of... Right. And it would be worth seeing if that talks about upgrading two existing structural loads, right? So, if you take an old structure and you have to make it meet minimum standards that we have today, that can be quite a bit more expensive than just pure stabilization, in which case, those snow loads and so on don't, wind loads are not met, but with a historic structure, it's simply stabilized. So, that is a little different, but I appreciate you digging in. If anything else crops up, let us know. In the meantime, I'll give commissioner Norton the floor. Thank you. I just wanted to kind of go back and revisit the significance of the property and remind the landowner of what we mean when we're asking for mitigations for historic preservation. So, even here in Brian's fantastic memo that is in our packet tonight, it says because the property is significant under all FAR criteria, it's eligible for the national register. You only need to be eligible under one criteria to be listed on the national register. And I think I've stated in previous meetings that in my professional career, I have almost never seen a property that is significant under all four criteria. So, this is an incredibly important property to long not into telling our history. So, any mitigation measures that the city agrees to should really be in line and scope with that significance. That's one of the reasons that I was puzzled and concerned with the first stipulation, identifying, installing these funky little concrete outlines that identify existing foundation locations. I feel like maybe I recognize that you all have been thinking about this and I appreciate that. I wonder if these have been in discussion with historic preservation professionals because I think that there are some significant issues. And I think that with some of these proposals that might not actually meet historic preservation ideals for preserving important places and important history. And I really urge you to think about why we're asking for the barn to be saved in this instance and why that is so important to a historic preservation commission for telling the history of long not. So, I agree with my fellow commissioners that that is the ideal for this because we will be losing so much of early long not with this development of a 7-Eleven. Thanks, Commissioner Norton. Other commissioner comments? Commissioner Jigobi? Again, I don't know how much you pursued the historical aspect as well. I get the sense that you, in developing this property, this has been seen as more of a road bump than an interesting avenue to explore. But again, it may cost $100,000 to stabilize the facility but the historical fund can provide up to $50,000 for rehabilitation expenses if it's approved. And again, if you pursued historic designation for the barn, you could get funds perhaps from the state historical fund, state tax credits of 20% to 35% for repairs. You know, the system is in place to try to make this easy for you to meet the needs that we see here as a historical commission. Thanks. A couple of my comments. I actually thought the notion of the concrete patterning of the structures that were moved was a pretty interesting approach. So I didn't have as much of an issue with it understanding that we're not in that particular case getting true preservation, that we're at least getting some sort of hint of history there. I didn't mind that. I thought that was an interesting way to approach it. I don't particularly like the mural idea, but I could see some combination of that concrete patterning and a video or signage or something. And if that barn wasn't sitting out there in a, you know, the barn is a bit of an issue because it's everything else in order to do your project needs to get done. I mean, those other structures have to go away and they're in pretty poor shape. And I get it, but it's pretty hard to say, you know, gosh, yeah, for, I mean, if it's 75,000 to bring the building up to code, it's probably less than that to stabilize. If it's $50,000 to stabilize it and you could get a grant from the state historic fund for the $50,000 to stabilize it. You know, it's a hard sell for us as a commission to say, well, yeah, we'll just let that go because it doesn't, there just doesn't seem to be a reason other than a reluctance and potential, I get the potential insurance risk, right? Other than that, financially, I'm not even sure there is a risk. So that's, it's a pretty hard sell, I think here. I do appreciate the thought that went into it. I think you've got some creative ideas for the rest of it, but that's a hard one for me. Brian, you'd get your hand up. Sorry, I was muted. When I was talking before, yeah, this is a very large file for whatever reasons. And it was kind of messing up on the screen when I was talking to the commission before. So I'm not sure if I gave you the full flavor in terms of the cost estimate that was provided by, and this assessment anyway. So maybe if I, and I can't really share that with you because it's such a large document. I'm happy to put it up on the screen if I can. So bear with me. And I think our architect is trying to join as well, which can also provide more info on what they've done to, when they went out there and did the structural assessment. So can you all see that on the screen? Yeah. Okay. So, so there's different aspects and I don't know which components, obviously the architects on the commission can certainly provide more feedback regarding this assessment. And I, I'm assuming you had an opportunity to take a look at it. The meeting in September. There's a discussion. And I'm sorry, I can certainly zoom in on the screen a little bit. There's a discussion about the different components of this building. And one was related to the, the roof. And it talked about some. Dental repairs. And I don't know if it's just to stabilize it or if it's just for additional upgrades that would be made needed to make it happenable. But anyway, I'm not going to read through this, but they provided a budget to upgrade the roof of approximately $200,000. I'm not an architect. I don't know what's all involved with that. If that's in fact, just for stabilization or if it's for code upgrades or whatever that might be. And then going on to the next page. There's talk about. Some posts that are into the foundation. That to the ground. That would need to be. Analyze in terms of their load capacity. And I think that's where I saw the $75,000 to $100,000 to upgrade the structure. That's what the, the, those posts that are providing support for the barn. So that assessment evaluation is about. And then. About. Repairs needed to the. The walls. And the number that's associated with that was $300,000. Whether that's accurate or not. I don't know. and then there was some additional second floor images. I think this is that second floor. I think their assessment was that it was second floor of the barn was in pretty good shape. They thought some of the beams might be were installed in size correctly so that's one good thing. They put an assessment of $50,000 for some repairs that might be needed on the second floor and then the foundation they showed some images of some cracking in the foundation. I don't know if that's substantial or not. So I apologize for my previous comment. They said that the over I mean the foundation repairs would be $300,000. Again, I don't know if that's again stabilization or bring it up to code. Their their preliminary total repair budget to upgrade this structure would be in excess of $1 million and then bring it up and make it a habitable would be $2 million. So all right. Thanks. Thanks, Brian. If there's anything else on that document you want to see, let me know. There's also assessments related to some of the other structures as well. Okay. Commissioner Norton, you'd get your hand up. Yeah. I think what's missing from this conversation about how much it would cost this for-profit company is what this overall project is costing and what the percentage of stabilization of this one structure would be in relationship to that. That is numbers that I have not seen presented at any point in these conversations. But also I don't have a lot of sympathy for discussing the budget for 7-11 and considering the historic preservation in terms of that. I'm sure that you will make plenty of money and the times that the 7-11 and Laredo Taco are in existence on the backs of the loss of our history. I'll say Commissioner Goon, you had a question. Go ahead. Well, I would just say that was pretty harsh. It is a lot of money and the backs of our history is disappearing every day that that place sits empty. So that is already happening and it's been happening for the last, I think it was 10 years that that place has been empty and no one has been wanting to purchase it. So I would ask, it sounds like, I mean, what you were reading, Brian, said it was to bring it all to commercial space. So that was the very first paragraph that you were showing on that very first page. It said it was to bring it to commercial space. So I am curious, I mean, if it's under a few hundred thousand and not into the millions, it does seem like that's worth preserving, especially with the help that you can get other places. And I recognize that grants and delays and everything else, it's that all cost money. And, you know, all of that stuff costs money as well. And we've already been delayed on this because of, you know, all of the rigmarole is going through, but it's all part of this major piece of Longmont's history that, you know, maybe maybe wasn't taken as seriously as we might have wanted to at the very beginning when you first purchased the place. And you didn't realize how deep of a piece of history that is. So I think it would be helpful to get an idea of how that barn could be preserved in a manner that isn't costing two million, but at least could stand there and, you know, what is the difference in your liability between this insurance and this insurance? That would be worth knowing when you're going forward. And if you need our approval, it sounds like it's past planning and zoning already. It sounds like the city of Longmont has no interest in it, which is odd to me. Maybe they could even subsidize some of that insurance as far as that's concerned. But there's other ideas out there that, you know, may be taken more seriously than a mural. And I love to read the plaques on walks, but it doesn't reconstruct. So when you do lose a big barn like that, that's kind of major. But we are losing it every day that passes without anything happening. So here's that. Thank you, Commissioner Gruner. Commissioner Sibley. Sorry. You guys have spoken beautifully about the barn, so I have nothing to add to that. I'm the smaller structures that we've got the outlines for. I think that's an interesting idea, especially in the parking lot and whatnot and combined with the signage. I think that's great. The buildings that are in the grass area, though, just an idea. Instead of concrete, what about doing some sort of shadow line building or not building, but like, you know, the outline of it or somehow doing roofing, even if it was like play slash picnic area, something like that. Just food for thought, basically, just kind of taking your idea and maybe doing something else with those structures anyway. So that's it. Thank you. I do think that based on experience that I've had working with historic buildings as an architect, that two million or three million number is pretty inflated in terms of what it would take for stabilization. Because again, if you're purely stabilizing, you could really take a decent look at the foundations. It's hard to tell from a few pictures, but my guess is, again, very often, these buildings have been there for a very long time. If they're not literally falling down, then they're probably reasonably stable. If you're not using the space inside, it could be stabilized with some pretty rough methods, which would be not particularly costly. So I think there would be an opportunity to stabilize that and repaint and just have that structure out there. So I guess one thing to ask is, is there any scenario under which you would accept or entertain such a condition? I think, again, it's just being in real estate and a property owner, I think, all that. And by the way, I think someone was mentioned. We don't actually own the property yet. We're just a developer going through planning to do this. But there's the liability. There's also the ongoing maintenance of such. I mean, we could get it to a certain condition, and then you also have that piece of it. I'm wondering if there was a way to dedicate these buildings to the city and that liability falls towards the municipality or whatever it might be. But I think there's different things that could be talked about, I guess, there. Brian, I'm wondering, it feels like obviously the commission's pretty adamant about the barn. If we were to make a recommendation to approve provided that they stabilized the barn and kept that on the property, that goes as a recommendation. What happens from there? Does it go back to planning? Is it just or P&Z? Is this just going to see council to both? Do they take our consideration and maybe if they don't like it, pick from some of the, I'm just trying to wonder, A, what's our, is it worth giving them a preferred and a secondary option? What's the process from here? Well, great question, Commissioner Lane. I think, depending upon the commission's recommendation, I'd have to talk with our staff and maybe legal and then it may end up, since council was the ultimate decision-making body on the approval of the rezoning and the overall development plan, I suspect it would probably end up, unless the property owner and applicant agree to the recommendation from the commission, I suspect it probably end up going back to the council for a final determination. Okay. And just to put it out there, I mean, my personal preference would be that there's a way to stabilize the barn. However, if that was the sole commission recommendation and it got ignored at the end and nothing happened, I think that would be worse. And so I'd be inclined to consider a backup plan at the risk of understanding that that might undermine the former. It's a tough position to be in. But if there were a backup plan, in my mind, it might look something like asking for the outlines. I don't particularly love the mural, but the video and or plaques. And then at an absolute minimum, a deconstruction and salvage of the barn materials just for discussion. Any comments, commission or commission or guru? Well, I have a question. The 141,000 donation to the greenway. Is that part of what you had to agree to get planning and zoning to pass it? Because maybe there could be some negotiation in there. You know, you stabilize the barn, give it to the greenway, and then the city covers the liability or something on there, you know, something along those lines. Sorry, continue to be in a row. No, I was I was done. Okay. I think my understanding is that the $141,000 payment to the city is actually a payment in lieu for future improvements for greenway improvements. And I do not believe that it's related to historic preservation. But is it a requirement to get the zoning redone for this project? So that would be a stipulation of in full entitlements of the of the project. Is that the developer would be responsible for paying the $141,000. It's kind of like a cash out instead of them constructing the greenway improvements. The city will construct those greenway improvements in the future. And that's what the cost to the developers. And greenway improvements are required. Yes, that's a requirement. See, to me, the city needs different priorities here. The greenway versus this historic site in where where it should be looking at its money. And I'm not sure how to fight that. I don't even know. You know, there's so many different pieces, all of them separated, and making decisions on something like this. If we could get the city to recognize that how great of a historic place this is. We have the write up of it, maybe sending that is Aaron Rodriguez around can he deliver that to the city council. And, you know, I'm not even sure what the steps are here. Sharon's always wanting us to do something. And this is partly why we're all separated. What do we do? Well, I suspect and like I said, we'd have to have additional conversation by we staff additional conversations after we hear what the recommendation is from the commission. If we end up going back to city council with a recommendation from the commission that the property owner developer object to then, you know, we would present that information in terms of the, you know, the fact that the property is eligible for destination on the national register. I think that was noted in the council communication. I'm not sure if the full report was presented to the council as part of the packet of materials, but I suspect that we'd want to provide that information. If in fact the commission recommended that the the barn remained and the like I said, the the the owner and developer did not agree to that that recommendation. Mr. Jacobi. Another thought again, the city is not interested in the property. Again, when you look at the details of that, when I spoke to Mr. Bell, the director of parks and open space, he was only peripherally aware of the property's historic value. When I discussed it with him, he was he sounded quite interested. And then he dropped it like a lead weight when he heard it would cost millions of dollars literally to upgrade the property. But he did not go into the detail that we're going to hear about preservation versus upgrading and improving the property. And he was we were looking at that time at the whole property as opposed to just the barn. Perhaps it may be beneficial to re-approach parks and open space and say, would you want to take over maintenance of the barn alone? Or take the property on or just take the maintenance of the barn alone on for historic purposes? And when I maintenance again, Mr. Pollock, you mentioned that you're concerned about that. If we're not using the interior of the barn, maintenance is putting a good roof on it and keeping the paint on it. There's again, the ongoing maintenance because his concern and your concern, I imagine is again, how much is this going to be a money pit? I think that the cost of structurally maintaining it should be reasonable. But we don't know that cost. Again, Brian, you went through some of the numbers, but again, you weren't sure if that was for improvements, bringing up to code, or is that just maintenance? My impression was that was to bring it up to code. We don't even have good numbers and it would really help me to know what we should do. If we had good numbers from someone who is experienced in preservation, not just an engineer looking at upgrading, but someone experienced in preservation, what would it cost to just structurally maintain this place? I think that would help all of us to move forward here. Commissioner Gundy, do you still have your hand up? So I haven't had the opportunity to speak with David Bell, who's the director of natural resources. I think that's not an official title. Generally, that's correct. And Glenn, I don't know if you're listening, if you had a chance to talk with David at all about the barn. Briefly, and I think his concerns are a lot of what we're hearing from the developer. We don't have a use for it and it's a bit of a liability and there's ongoing maintenance, but we didn't get into the real dollars to keep it from falling down or in a whole lot of detail. But yeah, he's parked some recreation, so it's about providing that trail and preserve in the open space, which was part of what the developer did as well, is dedicate a good portion of the land over there for the trail. But no, I haven't spoken in detail, but it was just additional costs that he was concerned about. And Glenn, did you have any other comments about kind of process? If in fact the commission recommends that the barn be retained on site, was my comments fairly accurate? Yeah, and Brian and I talked about it in detail, because you do have two boards that are recommending the city council. Do you have our Planning Commission and yourselves as the Historic Preservation Commission? I believe both those recommendations were presented to city council. They weighed them and they accepted recommendation from the Planning Commission. And at the end of that, it says historic references to be included in development of the site with implementation in accordance with the Historic Preservation Commission and city staff. So it kind of gave you another shot at it, and I think that's what we're doing here. If the applicant I think doesn't agree with your recommendation, I think Brian's right. We go back to council as the decider, basically. Thank you. Hey, Commissioner, sorry, Commissioner Lane, I believe the one of the members of the design team, Tanner Kinney, is on the call. Yeah, it looks like you have your hand up. Go ahead. Yeah, good evening. Also, I'm a little late. One thing I haven't heard mentioned and want to bring back up, and then maybe it was earlier, that barn is in the floodplain. So any improvements structurally to this will have to get reviewed separately. We do know that there could be environmental hazards in that floodplain with that building as is, especially if it does flood out and fall down. It could potentially pose some hazards that would be of concern to such as FEMA. But that is one additional wrinkle in all this. It needs to be considered, in my opinion, that again, in this barn is in a condition that we would have any improvements we make, or would have to make to keep it, would have additional reviews inside that floodplain. So, Tanner, just to update you, I know you were on the call, but I did speak with Monica Bartolini, who's our floodplain administrator. And she mentioned that that floodplain is not a FEMA floodplain, so it's a local floodplain. And so it would be under the city's jurisdiction to make a determination of what will be required in terms of stabilization or improvements to the bar. Thanks, Commissioner Norton, you get your hand raised. So from previous conversations, I believe I remember that the landowner has owned this property for at least a decade, and it sat vacant. Part of the reason that we are at the point where we are is because there hasn't been any sort of ongoing maintenance to these buildings. I don't understand how the city allowed that. As a landowner in Longmont, I'm not sure that I would be allowed to just let my property sit derelict for a decade, but I think some responsibility needs to be taken for that when you're thinking about the historic preservation of this. I think that that has been an ethical thing to do to this property, and then for us all to turn around and say it's too expensive to preserve and to walk away from it. And just if I could just interject, I know that I did speak with an individual who did approach the property owner, and this was probably five years ago or so, who had an interest in purchasing the property and rehabbing the house and all the outstructures at that time. But because of the zoning on the property, the property was asking a lot more than what he could afford in terms of purchase of the property since it was commercially or industrially zoned. In terms of your comment regarding the city not enforcing maintenance, that's, I mean, like I said, I don't know the history on that and whether we've had, I don't know exactly how long we've had a property maintenance code, but it typically a lot of times that's, you know, based on staff availability to enforce all that as well and complaints that we receive, so. Thanks, Brian. Any other questions or comments to be made? Then we are being asked for a recommendation. Well, I move we recommend more looking into the price of just maintaining, you know, keeping, getting the barn not up to code, but sound enough to, you know, a new roof, new paint job before approving. So would that be basically a motion to request the applicant to provide a structural stabilization cost only and come back to us with that information in our next hearing if that's possible? Yeah. And I know that costs money for you guys, I'm sorry, but it does seem like a reasonable request. Okay, so we have a motion on the floor, Commissioner Hardis. I'd just like to comment that if we request that kind of a report that'd be prepared by a historic preservation architect and not by an engineer or other party who's not experienced in preservation issues. So, Commissioner Hardis, could you maybe perhaps suggest a altered amendment then, just so we have some. And I would only request that you add a preservation architect or engineer. There are engineers that are very well versed. Yes, a lot. I would amend that motion to require that the additional study and report be prepared by a historic preservation architect or engineer. Okay, does that amendment acceptable to Commissioner Goon? I have no idea of costs. I mean, I don't know what the difference in costs in architects and engineers are, but you know, I just want something reasonable that can be done. So maybe I will report my amendment or my motion and Commissioner Hardis, maybe you can just start fresh, start a fresh one and we can go from there. All right, fair enough, let's do that. That's cleaner. And then I move that we recommend that the applicant prepare a new or supplemental report on the condition of the barn and the potential cost of stabilization and securing it to be prepared by qualified historic preservation architect or engineer. Okay, we have a motion on the floor. I'll second. All right, we have a motion and a second. Is there any further discussion? No. Then, Miss Yos, can you call the roll for us, please? Chairman Lane. How about yes? Commissioner Hardis. Yes. Commissioner Norton. Yes. Commissioner Goon. Yes. Commissioner Jacobi. Yes. Commissioner Sibley. Yes. Thank you. All right, so that motion passes unanimously. And that is our recommendation at the time being. I hope that the app, I realize that this is a cumbersome process, but I hope that the applicant, you get some sense of how important we feel like this piece is in part because of that history. It's a strong component and we're trying to, everything we lose is gone forever. So thank you for joining us and hope that you, in fact, follow that recommendation. I just want to make certain that you guys have, you guys have the history, the architect and the builders, you guys have the history that we received. Yeah, they would have that. All right. Well, then I will go ahead and close that particular agenda item and we'll move on to our next item, which is a series. It's a new business item. A would be HPC code amendments and design guidelines update. All right. Well, thank you, commissioners, for the discussion on the previous item. Um, so just a quick update, you guys may have some questions. I know, uh, Sharon O'Leary has some public comments earlier in the public invited to be heard regarding this topic. As mentioned at the, uh, last month's meeting as part of the commission's discussion, uh, to remove the, remove, reviewed, sorry, reviewed the, uh, HPC retreat minutes from March of 2021. And we continued that discussion in terms of kind of what the commission's priorities and interests were, particularly for this year and kind of going forward. And, uh, as noted towards the end of the meeting and I think they were kind of captured in the, the meeting minutes that you approved earlier, uh, during this meeting was that the main priorities, obviously, are the code amendments, the neighborhood design guidelines and developing a community historic preservation plan, which presently preservation plan is another topic on the agenda. Um, and, um, and then there was other things identified as time and staff resources permit. Um, and then also, as I mentioned at last month's meeting, we have hired a consultant to help us with the rewrite of the code amendments. And we did have a conversation regarding a number of topics with the code consultant, uh, late last month, a couple of weeks ago. Uh, there's a number of, uh, policy topics that I mentioned at last month's meeting that we need to discuss with city council and get, get direction on before we complete the drafting of the, uh, the code amendments and, uh, some of those are outlined in the, uh, in the staff communication and I'm happy to, if you have any questions about that, happy to chat with you about that. So our next step, um, obviously we don't have a red line for the commission to review, but we're working on that. Uh, we need to have a discussion with city council regarding, uh, certain policy topics to get direction because we don't want to go down a path with the commission and then hear back from the council that, well, we're not interested in considering that. So we'd like to get direction from the council first so we know we're headed down the right path. So, um, as noted in the communication, I think our target still this year is to complete the, the amendments during the second or third quarter this year. Um, and, I know we're also going to be talking with the council and getting some direction also regarding, um, the design guidelines topic as well in terms of the kind of the scope and applicability and, um, a variety of different topics related to that. So, so that's basically kind of a quick update in a nutshell. I don't know if you have any specific questions or comments at this point in time. Thanks, Brian. Uh, any comments or questions from commissioners? I know, I know you're anxious to get moving forward and I know things were delayed last year and, uh, so we're, we're trying to move it forward as, as quickly as we can. Appreciate that. And we have at least one person in the, um, citizen, in the outer citizenry that reminds us every month that we're not moving fast enough. So, I understand. Yes. Really understand that. I certainly appreciate the commission's interest in these topics. Okay. Um, well, yeah, if we can just keep getting, you know, an update, uh, as to status, uh, at every one of these hearings, that would be, uh, helpful. Uh, yeah, happy to do that as we have more information to share or we're certainly willing to share it. Okay. Uh, well, if there are no other comments or questions on that particular item, we'll move on to item B, which is the historic preservation plan. Okay. Yeah. And last month we talked about this item as well. And I know, um, it's, it's one of the, uh, one of the priorities for the commission. And I know before Jade left, she had actually been working on a potential grant application. I'm not sure if it was ever submitted, uh, for a state historic fund grant. I saw a draft in one of our folders. Um, I don't know, Holly, if you know if it was ever submitted through the state historic fund grant process. Um, I believe she submitted it to the CLG grant process. Um, fortunately, I think it, it wasn't chosen. So. Okay. Thank you. Um, and so what I wanted to do was just to have a kind of a brief discussion. I provided some examples that I just ran across it locally, uh, with Boulder, Lewisville and Lafayette, uh, which all seemed like, uh, you know, kind of similar in their scope. Uh, you know, they talk about kind of the community's history and history background of the historic preservation program, community outreach efforts related to preservation and preservation grants goals and objectives and then implementation strategies and timelines. Um, I don't know if the commission is aware, but one thing that's pretty Lewisville's program is that they actually have a dedicated sales tax, I think of a quarter of a percent for preservation programs. So they've been able able to utilize that for some pretty neat preservation projects in their community. And so, um, just wanted to see if, uh, you know, the examples that I provided in the PAC were generally kind of along the lines of what the commission was thinking in terms of what our objectives were in terms of a preservation plan for, for a month. Right. Uh, thanks. Thanks for that. I'm, I'll have to say, I wasn't able to spend quite as much time digging through all those, uh, you know, in the short time until we got this meeting, I'd like to spend some more time on it and maybe have this topic come up on the agenda next month where maybe I'd ask commissioners to really spend a little more time with those plans and, and come back with, you know, maybe a little more specific outline, uh, of what, you know, what we liked and, or didn't find appropriate, but, but certainly if there's any immediate comments from it, from anyone, I'd be happy to open that up now. Yeah. And I think that's a good suggestion, commissioner Lane. I know, you know, obviously you didn't have a lot of time to digest this and we could certainly bring this back for the main meeting for discussion. Great. Any immediate reaction or comments here? No. So let's do that. Let's, let's plan on having this on next month's agenda with, and then I, again, I'd ask commissioners to do a little more deep dive into those three plans provided and, uh, you know, be able to make comments regarding what, what we think might be appropriate for, for long month. And if you might, if I don't mind, I don't mind, I just wanted to, uh, probably should have just included a link as opposed to all the pages. I don't know your preferences and rather getting all the documents as part of the packet or if you prefer just to have a link to the plans. I don't know if you have care one way or the other. It didn't matter to me. Okay. Doesn't look like anybody. Yeah. Either way. Yeah. Okay. Great. Well, that's very helpful. Uh, give us some, some baseline to start with. And then we, again, we can continue that discussion. And I guess I would just want to be mindful of any, uh, grand opportunities out there to fund this plan, you know, fund the consultant that would be required to put this plan together. Um, would like to not lose track of, of those opportunities. I think Jade was pretty rushed at the end of, last year, trying to come up with, uh, come up with that. And that may or may not had any effect on whether the fact that we didn't get it, but, um, And I know we're open to put together kind of a schedule of potential available grants that we could share with the commission. And we can talk about that at the next meeting as well, if we have that available. And then we can kind of talk about time frames and what's, I mean, what's realistic in terms of time frames, because I know it takes a while to prepare these grant applications. And I know history, Colorado in the past, at least, has had an opportunity for, uh, different jurisdictions to share their draft grant applications and get feedback before they make a formal final application. And so I think, you know, in order to, uh, have a good submittal, I think that would be something that we certainly want to pursue if at all possible. Agreed. Well, that sounds great. I like the idea of, you know, having those grants out on the table to discuss as well. Sure. Okay. Thank you. Okay. Item C was, uh, Historic Preservation Month, which, um, is this May. And, uh, Brian, you've provided a memo here for us, with some information on the museum staff and their plans and, um, the Callahan House. At one point, uh, sort of pre COVID, we had talked about getting this commission to get a little tour of the Callahan House. So I don't know if that's still something that's people are interested in or, or what, but yeah, let's, is there anything you want to just kind of overview us on, uh, on the preservation month? Yeah, I'll be quick on this. I, as mentioned in the communication, typically we do a proclamation with city council regarding Historic Preservation Month. I know in the past, we've also both new museum staff and former planning staff. I know Karen Bryant did a number of historic walking tours in both the downtown historic east side and west side neighborhoods. And then Eric Mason, who's the curator at the museum, has also done the walking tours as well. He has some planned for this June. There's none currently planned for May. But, uh, there are several that are planned for, uh, the month of June, including the downtown area, as well as the historic corridor along 3rd Avenue. And then also, um, Jennifer and I met with Kathy Corpula, who's the Callahan House manager a couple of weeks ago, to talk about a, they got a fairly large grant from the State Historic Fund for some preservation work or on the restoration work, I should say, on different aspects of the, uh, the Callahan House. One large component of that is restoration of the original driveway, which is pretty unique, if you've ever seen pictures of that. And then also some work on the stained glass windows as well, and a few other components. And we actually invited Kathy to come to the May meeting, and she's accepted that just to provide kind of an overview of the Callahan House and then also talk a little bit about these restoration programs that are kind of underway, uh, with, uh, grant funding through the State Historic Fund. I believe the grant that was received was around $180,000, and then the city provided $60,000 of matching funds for that work. So, um, so I'm sure, Kat, you could, you know, maybe a next month's meeting, May, I think it's May 5th, we could talk about whether or not the commission's interested in having a tour of the Callahan House. And obviously there's other city-owned facilities that are also historic landmarks and several that are on the National Register, such as the Firehouse Art Center and then also the Carnegie Library. So, and then, yeah, so there's there's a few other city-owned historical landmarks as well, one being out at the Sandstone Ranch, the Morris Kaufman House, which is the visitor center out there, if anybody you've been out there, pretty neat place. So aside from that, I just wanted to see if the commission had any other ideas or suggestions, and obviously staff doesn't have a lot of time to prepare events, but if there's anything else that you're aware of that's going on in the neighborhoods, whether that's historic East Side neighborhood or anywhere else in the community that might have something in relationship to historic preservation. Yeah, just let us know, we can certainly put that information on our website. Great. Thanks, Brian. Commissioner Nukobi. Yeah, I don't know if you're aware, I was involved. I basically made a tour of the historic East Side neighborhood. It's a very involved tour. It's a three-hour long tour. Is that like Gilligan's Island? Yeah, yeah, exactly. That's what I thought of, but it's not as disastrous as the SS Minow. I did tour surveys, and I got glowing reviews. People loved the tour. It is very long, and it's not for everybody, but I put it online as well, and anybody can do the tour at any time in little bits, and it has a lot of history of Longmont in it. I've approached Eric Mason and asked last year during the 150th celebration, can you advertise this with everything else? He said no because the historic East Side neighborhood association, which technically I did it under that umbrella, is not officially part of the city. There's no way that I can advertise this tour as being available right now that I know of without putting ads in the paper and at personal expense. And if there is some way we can put the get word out that this tour is available online, I mean, you just go to the historic East Side neighborhood association web page, which is hena80501.org, and you can click on tour, and you can see the tour. I have the whole script there. You can click on the map of the tour, but I can't get the word out, and I'm not sure what I can do because everybody who's gone on the tour has said that they loved it and that they'd like to see more people go on it, but I don't know how to get the word out and make it official to get beyond that hurdle of being official. Yeah, thanks, Rick. I appreciate that. I think Sharon might have mentioned that briefly to me that you did a tour last year or the year before, and so yeah, let me check. I know we've got a neighborhood resources coordinator. I don't know, like I said, I don't know if there's limitations on our ability to advertise other organizations, tours or events, but let me let me do some checking on that and see if there's any opportunities related to that. I know that the museum has a website that says you can take these tours online. If they could just add a line that says something like, you know, we do not endorse. This was a privately made tour, but here's another historic tour. You know, I mean, that just takes putting one more line on a website. I don't... Sure. Anyway, I've given the tour to over 350 people, believe it or not, and it's amazing that the responses I've gotten, well, they start with 350, probably half to three quarters making it to the end, but once you make it to the end, like it. So again, if we can get the word out, I think that's a resource. Sure. Thank you. That's a... Maybe you should call it Histo Enduro. Commissioner Goon, you had a question? Well, I was just wondering if, as a member of the Historic Preservation Commission, isn't he under the guise of the town now? Couldn't that be an official... This is an official tour now. It's not just some guy on Emory Street. Well, that may be an end. I'll check that. And Commissioner Jacoby, maybe I'll write you later, but I was wondering if you're very good at writing maybe an article for the Times Call about that, you know, about the history of that place over on 119 might be a worthy... And we could all sign it for Historic Preservation Month. That might be something kind of exciting. I don't... People don't know that history. I certainly didn't. I've lived here my whole life. I've taken tons of history classes in about Longmont, and I did not know that piece of property was that special. You're suggesting writing an essay about Mary Dickens and the property out there, but then to say that it's going to be developed, you know, that's getting into a political kind of thing that I would, especially as a commissioner, I'm not sure I should be doing. I don't know. I don't know that you need to mention the development or anything. Just this is... Everybody's seen the place. Everybody knows what it looks like. And just leave it at that. This is the history of that place. You know, it's just an idea. And I know I do not have time to do storytelling from the information that was given to us in the next month. So, and you're a good writer. Thank you. I've found my... I've written to the paper probably more often than I should. You may have seen if you read the editorials sometimes, but their acceptance is very variable. I'm not sure what they would... Maybe I should talk to the paper first, see what they would want for that. Yeah, talk to John Donkamp or somebody about an actual, you know, news, not a news story, but a human life and lifestyle story, you know, not a letter to the editor. Nothing political, but yeah. Any other... Yeah, Brian, you've got... I was just going to mention, I know that I think history of Colorado is putting together a calendar of events around the state for Historic Preservation Month. I recall previously, and I'll have to check on this, that Historic Boulder Roundtable and then I think Boulder County also had event calendars. I'm going to check and see if they're also kind of keeping that going. And that may be another venue, Rick, for if, you know, the Roundtable, maybe it's not associated with a specific jurisdiction, that that might be an opportunity to advertise that particular event on that venue. So, I can check on that. Great. Thank you. Okay, let's go on to item 8D, which is our future HPC meetings. And we had that little kind of online survey. Brian gave us this kind of a summary about that. But I guess at this point, we, you know, is there a desire for our next meetings to be in person or continue online? So just a little background before you guys vote. You know, it probably won't be for a month or two before we actually have the capability. If the commission is interested in going back in person, there's some logistics behind the scenes regarding reservation of the council chambers. That hasn't really happened for the boards and commissions for a couple of years with the pandemic. And then, you know, there's probably some new training because there's new equipment since the council chambers was remodeled last year. So there's probably new training on the equipment for the commission as well. So I know that I think that, for example, the Planning Commission may be discussing going back, but I think that really they might be going back as in June. So anyway, just to preface it. Okay, thanks. Commissioners, any thoughts on that? Either way. Oh, sorry. I prefer to meet in person. I just, you know, staring at a screen is, it's a bit much, but if somebody is not comfortable meeting in person still, they did COVID and I totally understand and then fine. Yeah. And I'm kind of the same way. If we could get back in person, I think I'd probably prefer that, but not to the point that would, I mean, there are some minor conveniences here, especially with people checking in and getting in if you're running late or even some of the applicants coming in late. But I don't love the delays in getting public here. And I think there may be that might be a barrier to getting a little more public comment just because it's kind of feels a little cumbersome. So I'd like to see us get back in person, but I don't need to push it too hard. For my part, I'm happy to meet you all in person. You know, I haven't done that yet. It's often COVID. And as far as public invited to be heard, Sharon can walk down to the meeting just as well as calls. She knows where they're at. Any other comments? And we probably need a motion to meet back in person if that's what the direction is. I move that we start meeting back in person as soon as it's allowable through the city staff and training and all of that. Okay. I second it. All right. We've got a motion by Commissioner Goon, seconded by Commissioner Jacobi to move back to in-person meetings at the earliest time that sort of works out for the city. Ms. Jos, would you call the roll for us? Chairman Lane. I vote yes. Commissioner Hardies. Yes. Commissioner Norton. Yes. Commissioner Goon. Yes. Commissioner Jacobi. Yes. Commissioner Sibley. Yes. Okay. Great. Well, we'll put it in the hands of staff to let us know when that's the appropriate move and where we're going. So we would be back in Council Chambers because that work has been done and it's operational, you know, because it was closed for a little while before we, before COVID. Yeah. Yeah. The remodeling has been completed. And, you know, I know on occasion we met here at the Development Services Center when we had special meetings and such. But I think the normal location is in the Council Chambers. Okay. Great. And whatever is appropriate in terms of training, if it's, you know, I guess we can talk with commissioners about it. But maybe it's a half hour early start to just get some technology training versus a whole other session or whatever works. All right. Thank you. Okay. And then our last item under New Business 8E is Board Recruitment and Interviews. All right. So we discussed this a little bit last month as well and provided some updates in terms of some documents that the City Clerk's Office put together as well as the kind of amended Rules of Procedure of City Council. The City Council is interested in getting input from the Commission on the potential appointees for their particular Commission. It's a recommendation. They're not making the, you know, the Commission's are making the final decision. Ultimately, City Council make that final decision. But they're asking for a, the, each Commission and Board to interview the applicants and then also to make a recommendation on the applicants to the City Council. And so one of the questions for the Commission was whether or not the Commission would like to appoint a subcommittee of two members to do the interviews and then report back to the full Commission or to interview applicants as an entire Commission at a meeting. So we've got one mid-year appointment that is being advertised for a vacant position. And so that would be one interview only for the Commission that would have to be conducted in the month of May. So we just have to coordinate that for that mid-year. So there'll likely obviously there'll be additional end of year appointments as well, but this is just for the mid-year appointment that we need to do an interview in the month of May. Thanks. And just to clarify, this is moving completely from the City Council members being involved at all to only the Commission members, whether it's fuller or partial making that first recommendation? Yeah, normally in previous interviews, the commissions and the staff liaisons were not involved with the interviews at all. It was strictly Council members interviewing the, the applicants. So this is a new layer that Council has requested to get input from the Commissioners as they make their decisions on potential appointees. Okay, thanks. Any thoughts from the Commission on an approach here? And while you're contemplating that, there was also an attachment, there was a list of questions that was put forth in terms of specific questions that was recommended that the HBC asked to the interviewees, but there's also an opportunity for the Commission to add additional questions that you might feel is appropriate given kind of the nature of the Commission. And Glenn, did you have anything else you wanted to add? Yeah, I just wanted to add one thing. A part of your decision should probably be based on how many applicants you have. If you give one applicant, we could just knock it out at your next meeting. But if there's five, we might want to think about a subcommittee doing the interviews and then bringing it back to the Board. And we'd probably have to do like a special meeting with the subcommittee. But I think it's April 25th. Brian, is the date that we should know what that number is? Yeah, I think that's the deadline for applicants to submit their applications. I suggest we hold off until May then. I guess is there, maybe the, is there any sense of whether there's a preference to just have applicants come to an HBC meeting or the subcommittee or is Glenn's suggestion of making that flexible based on the number of applicants, the kind of a preferred path? Hey, everyone's time is valuable and sitting aside a second time during the month for interviews in addition to a time for the HBC meeting doesn't sound like a lot, but somehow it always seems to be a lot of effort on people's time. I think unless there's an overwhelming demand for people to be on the commission that we just do it together at the next meeting or at a meeting. Also, I'm not even aware of the requirements. I know that a certain percentage of commissioners need to have professional qualifications, which I don't in historic preservation. I don't even know the numbers. So I don't even know what the qualifications are in order to interview somebody. So I think as a doing it together as a commission might be better. So long with the numbers reason. Yeah, in terms of the qualifications, if you look through the interview guide, that's an attachment. It talks about 40% of the commission, at least three members need to be professional, which includes architects, historic preservationists, archaeologists, museum curators and such. Okay. Do we need a formal vote on this or not? I mean, I think if you want to defer until we see how many applicants we have, we can kind of make a decision at a later point. And, you know, we could reconvene like I said, as Glenn mentioned, if it's one or two applicants, we could we could cover it at the May 5th meeting, certainly. Okay. Does anyone object to that approach just basically planning on handling it at the next meeting provided the number isn't somehow I have a hard time imagining there are going to be 500 people lining up to the historic preservation commissioners. But I could be wrong. All right. I think that's what we're, I think that's what we're leaning towards is is handling at the meeting next month's meeting. Can I just say real quick, thank you for this guide. This is really thorough with the rubric and everything. And I appreciate the city staff writing this up and providing it to us. Sure. Yeah. Yeah, I agree that there's a lot of great information in this whole packet. And like I said, one thing I'd suggest before maybe before before the next meeting, if you do have any suggestions regarding any additional questions regarding the interviews that you would like to consider or have the commission considered for adding to the interview questions, that would be helpful to know. Okay. And is that something we could just email you, Brian? Yeah, just send me the name. Okay. Did I see a hand up or no? No. Okay. All right. I look away and then I go back and I try to make sure I'm catching everybody. That's the other reason why I wouldn't be in a person. My head on the swivel here. All right. Well, we'll go ahead and close that item of business, AE, and plan on addressing it at next month's meeting most likely. All right. So then we're down to comments from HBC commissioners. Are there any commissioners that would like to make comment about anything in particular? I don't see anyone. Just a quick one. I just wanted to really apologize to everyone for missing last month. That was a heck of a day. And so sincere apologies to everybody for not coming. No worries. Life happens. I have one comment and it was just kind of been twirling around in my mind here since the Latin item. And I wondered, we had some discussions about we're all kind of working in this little vacuum, right? And we have this real, in case anybody hasn't figured it out yet, we've got this collective kind of hot button about this barn being there. And I don't know if there's an opportunity for Brian or for Glenn to find out what the temperature is in other parts of the city about this. I mean, for example, parks, I mean, is parks going to... Is there an opportunity to say, well, potentially, could we take some of that money that they're having to put in the $140,000 and split the difference and have some go to parks and some go to preservation? Would the city in any way be willing to take over preservation or maintenance of just a structure that's there? I think back to, I don't know how it works. And it's not quite as iconic, but there's that barn at the base of Steamboat that's in every poster from the 60s on. And that thing doesn't do anything. It's just a barn that's sitting there. But I guarantee you that anybody who's ever proposed that thing going is met with just a blast of public opposition. Again, I'm not comparing the two per se, but that's an example of a structure that just is there because everybody got used to it. And it became kind of this little iconic structure. So it can happen. So I'd just be curious to know, because I'm sure those folks are going back and grumbling about what we're asking them to do. Is there support outside of this little group to try to make this happen? And if that's something you could find out, I think we'd really appreciate it. We can have a certainly a more in-depth conversation with them and see what possibilities there are that we could bring to help that happen. Yeah, I appreciate that. That's my only comment. Okay. Next is comments from City Council Representative, but I don't believe we have Erin on the meeting. And so that leads us to adjournment. I will move that we adjourn. Motion from Commissioner Gordon, seconded by Commissioner Hardee to adjourn. All in favor say aye. Aye. Thank you all. Thank you to staff. I appreciate your time and efforts here. Everyone have a good night.