City of Santa Fe Historic Districts Review Board met Nov. 14.
Here is the agenda provided by the board:
CALL TO ORDER
A regular meeting of the City of Santa Fe Historic Districts Review Board was called to order by Anthony Guida, Vice Chair, on the above date at approximately 5:35 p.m. at a meeting held in the City Council Chambers at the Santa Fe Municipal Building, 200 Lincoln Avenue, Santa Fe, New Mexico.
A. ROLL CALL
Roll Call indicated the presence of a quorum as follows:
MEMBERS PRESENT:
Mr. Anthony Guida, Vice Chair
Ms. Madeleine Aguilar Medrano
Ms. Jennifer Biedscheid
Mr. John Bienvenu
Ms. Amanda Mather
Mr. David Valdo
MEMBERS ABSENT (EXCUSED)
Ms. Cecilia Rios, Chair
STAFF PRESENT:
Ms. Heather Lamboy, Assistant Land Use Director
Mr. Frank Ruybalid, Assistant City Attorney
Gary Moquino, Historic Preservation Division Manager
Paul Duran, Senior Planner
Lani McCulley, Senior Planner Ramon Sarson, Senior Planner
OTHERS PRESENT
Melissa Byers, Stenographer
NOTE: The Board packet for all agenda items is incorporated herewith by reference. The packet is on file in the Historic Preservation Office and available on the City of Santa Fe Website.
B. APPROVAL OF AGENDA
Ms. Lamboy said that Items H8 and H9 are postponed to December 12, 2023, Item H10 is postponed to November 28, 2023 and Item H11 is postponed to January 9, 2024.
MOTION: Member Biedscheid moved, seconded by Member Aguilar Medrano to approve the agenda as amended.
VOTE: The motion passed by (5-0) roll call vote with Members Aguilar Medrano, Biedscheid, Bienvenu, Mather and Valdo voting in favor and none voting against.
C. APPROVAL OF MINUTES:
1. October 24, 2023
Member Bienvenu said he and other Board members would like the minutes to contain more information because it is helpful to have a record of the discussion.
Ms. Lamboy noted that City Clerk left the City. She will reach out to the Interim City Clerk to express the concerns of the Board.
MOTION: Member Bienvenu moved, seconded by Member Aguilar Medrano to approve the minutes of October 24, 2023.
VOTE: The motion passed by (5-0) roll call vote with Members Biedscheid, Bienvenu, Mather, Valdo and Aguilar Medrano voting in favor and none voting against.
D. APPROVAL OF FINDINGS OF FACT AND CONCLUSIONS OF LAW None
E. MATTERS FROM THE PUBLIC
Adam Johnson, Executive Director, of Old Santa Fe Association said he agreed that there needs to be more extensive minutes. He also commented about demolition of buildings and what will replace them.
Richard Martinez said one of the projects that the Board had to go to City Council for exceptions approval. He is concerned that the case had not been scheduled.
F. STAFF COMMUNICATIONS
None
G. OLD BUSINESS
None
H. NEW BUSINESS
Chair Guida explained the appeal process.
1. CONSIDERATION OF BILL NO. 2023-24 (Councilor Signe Lindell) A Bill Amending SFCC 1987, Section 14-5.2, to Authorize the Historic Districts Review Board to Approve Additional Exceptions, Including Exceptions for Signs and Murals; and to Remove Certain Administrative Requirements for Land Use Staff Approvals and Disapprovals of Signs and Murals. (Heather Lamboy, Assistant Land Use Director)
EXECUTIVE SUMMARY
The Historic Districts Ordinance, Section 14-5.2 (C)(5), regarding design and signage standards, provides that the Historic Districts Review Board (HDRB) may recommend that the Governing Body approve exceptions. Per SFCC 14-5.2(C)(5)(b), all decisions by the HDRB on cases with exceptions to design and signage shall be in the form of a recommendation to the Governing Body. The Governing Body then approves or denies requested exceptions.
The proposed amendment to section 14-5.2 (C)(5) would provide HDRB the authority to grant design and signage exceptions. Currently, because the HDRB must recommend exceptions to the Governing Body, the review and approval period can take an additional 6-8 weeks. As there are standards regarding the HDRB membership, the board includes professionals in preservation and construction. As such, City staff recommend that the HDRB is best suited to consider exceptions to the ordinance. Additionally, per Section 14-2.6 (B), the Governing Body delegates authority to the HDRB regarding construction and preservation of buildings and structures in the historic districts. This amendment would align 14-5.2 (C)(5) on Exceptions with Section 14-2.6 (B) on delegation of authority. Lastly, this amendment will provide a quicker review of exceptions in the Historic Districts, which will serve the public as well as improve City Government function and efficiency.
The proposed amendment would also remove the requirement that City staff sign applications in Section 14-5.2 (D)(10), the section of code addressing “General Design
Standards for all Districts” as they relate to signs and murals. The amendment would also remove the requirement that staff report application approvals and denials at HDRB meetings.
Chair Guida confirmed that the Board will be providing a recommendation to the Governing Body.
Member Bienvenu said the revision should be limited to only resolving the awareness that developed that the Board had been approving exceptions and not making recommendations to the Governing Body.
Vice Chair Guida agreed that this should be a simple change.
PUBLIC HEARING
Adam Johnson of the Old Santa Fe Association supports staff approvals if there is oversight. In the future he would recommend that any staff approvals should have a mechanism that the Board is overseeing those. He agrees that the Board should recommend the most simplified text amendment,
John Lacava asked if exceptions to setbacks come before the Board. Vice Chair Guida said setbacks are not the purview of the Board. Ms. Lamboy said that’s under the purview of the Board of Adjustment. BOARD DISCUSSION/ACTION:
Vice Chair Guida said the Board has been clear on their direction on this. He also voiced the concern of applicants who have had the legal process changed and been penalized unnecessarily. He is in favor of getting this done.
Member Biedscheid asked about pending approvals.
Ms. Lamboy said the effective date of an ordinance is 30 days after it’s approved. The cases that will be heard after January 13, 2024, the Board will have the full authority to approve exceptions.
MOTION: Member Bienvenu moved that the Board strongly recommend to the Governing Body that the following proposed changes be made to the Ordinance and the remaining proposed changes not be made to the ordinance for all reasons articulated. In Subsection 5(B) Design Standards and Signage, the Board would recommend that all of those proposed changes be made, other than the language in the clause and in 14-8.10(H) for signs in historic districts, that would be not accepted; and that the language altering the last sentence prior to the subparagraphs that begins “the applicant for such exceptions shall conclusively demonstrate….” that no changes be made to that sentence as well then the reference to 14-3.6(B)(3) be changed to 14-3.1(H); and that the remaining proposed changes not be made to that section and that no other changes be made as proposed. The motion was seconded by Member Biedscheid.
Member Bienvenu said for clarification that he would convey, if the Board so agrees to this motion, this is not intended to disagree with any of the substantive proposals, it's just that the Board strongly feels this is not the time or place to be making those piecemeal amendments but they should be considered in the context of the larger amendment to Land Development Code.
VOTE: The motion passed by (5-0) roll call vote with Members Bienvenu, Mather, Valdo, Aguilar Medrano and Biedscheid voting in favor and none voting against.
To view the entire recording of this item, see the YouTube video at: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=kTowXumR29o (9:51 – 42:14)
2. 2023-007314-HDRB. 918-D Acequia Madre. Downtown & Eastside Historic District. Richard Martinez agent for Christopher Richter & Todd Davis, owners, requests a status review and primary façade designations on a contributing property. (Ramón J. Sarason)
Staff Report:
The residence at 918-D Acequia Madre is a single-family residence listed as contributing to the Downtown and Eastside. The pink adobe house sits on a little bluff overlooking a lane leading to a mix of old and new homes. Constructed likely in the late 1930s, it is situated near the end of the private dirt lane, approximately 470’ south of Acequia Madre. There is no public visibility of the house from the road. It is arranged on a north-south axis, with its main façade facing east.
In form, it is a flat-roofed rectangle with several trailing extensions. Based on aerial photographs, it took its current footprint by at least 1957. The building is approximately 1,348 square feet and has a modest Pueblo Revival style.
In historic records the house has had two addresses – 411 Camino del Monte Sol and 918 Acequia Madre. The property has changed hands over time. An addition was added between 1948 and 1958; the original form of the house was rectangular. Both sections of the house have gained historic merit in their own right. Now, the applicant requests the following:
1) Status Review
2) Primary Façade Designations.
Staff Recommendation
Staff recommends the historic status of the structure be maintained as contributing, per 14-5.2(C) Designation of Significant and Contributing Structures. Staff recommends the East and Eastern portion of the South elevation be designated as primary excluding non-historic windows and doors as described in the Historic Assessment NO. 918MAS-HA.
Member Bienvenu asked what the recommendation is for the primary façade. Mr. Sarson confirmed it was the entire east elevation.
Member Aguilar Medrano asked which doors and windows are not historic on the east façade are non-historic.
Mr. Sarson referred to the historic assessment that has diagrams of specifically what the doors and windows are and associated locations and whether they are historic or non-historic.
Applicant Presentation
Richard Martinez, 1524 Paseo de Peralta, Santa Fe, was sworn. He said he was unprepared to discuss the proposed primary façade because it was not published that way. In general, primary facades mean development or addition on that side is not allowed and makes it difficult to add on to a house. This house was originally off Monte del Sol. The rear façade was the front façade. The house was originally without plumbing. Given that the back was the front of the house, originally, it is apparent that the historic doors and windows were added in a self-conscious way because they don’t match. He referred to the east façade of the house. The door is beautiful, it has spindles and cut wood in a pattern. He thinks it’s the most historic façade. He asked that the overhang not be part of the historic part of the house because the roof drainage should be addressed. The eastern façade is off the kitchen. The kitchen façade is not publicly visible. He proposed that only the Eastern side of the house that is in front of the kitchen and the living room be primary and pointed to the side that should not be made primary because it's not publicly visible and it would preclude any design elements to be added.
Public Hearing:
There were no public comments.
Board Discussion/Action:
Motion: In Case 2023-007314-HDRB, 918-D Acequia Madre, Member Biedscheid moved to maintain the contributing status of this building and designate the longest portion of the Eastern façade, which is consistent with the HCPI report, which indicates that this may be the oldest portion of the house, it's roughly 34-inch-long wall as primary and no other facades as primary and including the historic windows A and B on this facade and excluding the non-historic overhang and door #3 on that facade as well as all historic doors and windows. The motion was seconded by Member Aguilar Medrano with clarification that door #1 is non-historic but it's interesting because it’s hand carved. She asked if that was excluded.
Member Biedscheid said she was trying to follow the window and door assessments, which indicates that is non-historic.
Mr. Martinez said it’s non-historic but character defining.
Member Aguilar Medrano said if it wasn’t included in the exclusions and it’s on the primary façade, then it would be protected.
Member Biedscheid agreed and confirmed she was just excluding the overhang and historic windows.
Member Aguilar Medrano confirmed that she seconded and stated that both windows (A and B) on that façade are historic, and she didn’t think there needed to be language to exclude them.
Member Biedscheid confirmed.
Vote: The motion passed by (5-0) roll call vote with Members Mather, Valdo, Aguilar Medrano, Biedscheid and Bienvenu voting in favor and none voting against.
To view the entire recording of this item, see the YouTube video at: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=kTowXumR29o (42:14 – 1:00:12)
3. 2023-007399-HDRB. 1-A Camino Pequeno, Downtown & Eastside Historic District. No status. Courtenay Mathey, agent for Ann & Kevin Cooney, owners request historic status review and designation of primary facades (Ramón J. Sarason)
Staff Report:
1‐A Camino Pequeno is a single‐family residence listed as not‐resurveyed in the Downtown and Eastside Historic District. Constructed in 1973 as a mother‐in‐law unit is a stucco‐on‐frame building. The dwelling is roughly square in footprint and encloses 1,178 square feet: two bedrooms, one bath, a living room, and a kitchen. The recent Santa Fe style home shows a mix of Pueblo and Territorial revival themes with a modern style cantilevered entrance portal to the south and north. Most windows are original to construction date and feature territorial style pedimented treatment.
Now, the applicant requests the following to determine future renovations: 1) Status review and designations of primary facades.
Staff Recommendation
Staff recommends the historic status of the structure be designated as Contributing, per 14‐5.2(C) Designation of Significant and Contributing Structures.
Staff further recommends the South and East facades be designated as primary.
Vice Chair Guida confirmed that staff’s recommendation is contrary to the HCPI report.
Applicant Presentation
Ann Cooney, 1-A Camino Pequeno, Santa Fe, was sworn, said she did not agree with staff’s recommendation. There’s a big difference between the HCPI and what staff is recommending. She’s not sure it rises to the level of being historic.
Vice Chair Guida said he’s dismayed by the idea that just because something meets a 50-year mark it would be designated as contributing to the Downtown & Eastside Historic District. It's the District that is a recognized historic resource. It's not to dismiss a building because it's old but it's to determine whether a building is contributing to the district because it is part of its period of significance or it's a comment on its periods of significance or it somehow changes the district in an important historic way.
Member Aguilar Medrano said it's difficult hearing these cases separate from the design. She said the applicant mentioned that this house used to be a guest house and it feels divorced from the primary. She asked if her intent going forward is to make it more in harmony with what once was the primary house or because now it's separated will the renovation have it stand on its own and separate from house.
Ms. Cooney said they would like it to look like the 1973 plans which she thinks is more beautiful and more appealing than what got constructed.
Member Bienvenu said on the general concept, the plans themselves were more striking than the house. Given that this house is almost 50 years, it’s an extremely modest house, he doesn’t see it as contributing. He commended staff’s zealousness into looking into this as a potential contributing structure.
Public Hearing:
Elizabeth West, 318 Sena Street, Santa Fe, was sworn. She said there’s an opportunity to do the right thing by not calling it contributing.
Board Discussion/Action:
Member Biedscheid thanked the applicant for having the HCPI completed. That is very helpful to the Board.
Motion: In Case 2023-007399-HDRB. 1-A Camino Pequeno, Member Biedscheid moved to designate the status as non-contributing consistent with HCPI report. The motion was seconded by Member Bienvenu.
Vote: The motion passed by (5-0) roll call vote with Members Valdo, Aguilar Medrano, Biedscheid, Bienvenu and Mather voting in favor and none voting against.
To view the entire recording of this item, see the YouTube video at: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=kTowXumR29o (1:00:12 – 1:15:29)
4. 2023-007468-HDRB. 826 Camino del Poniente. Downtown & Eastside Historic District. Non-contributing. Martinez Architecture Studio, agent for Larry Colton and John McCoy, owners, requests a historic status review with primary facade(s) designation, if applicable, for a residential structure. (Lani McCulley)
Staff Report:
The residence at 826 Camino del Poniente is a single-family residence listed as non contributing to the Downtown and Eastside Historic District. The structure is a Territorial Revival style residence and is a simple rectangle. The south was most likely historically an entrance however, with the enclosure of the porch the main entrances are now to the north and the east.
Property History:
According to the 1991 historic building inventory form, the structure is believed to be built in the 1930s, however it first appeared in the city directory in 1951. It was originally a guest house for the property located at 828 Camino del Poniente and was owned by the author, Elizabeth De Huff. There is some evidence that the residence was used as a school sometime prior to 1991.
The north and east elevation architecture is simple and unchanged.
A garage was constructed on the north and west elevations sometime prior to the 1983 survey though the date of construction has not been confirmed. Since the 1991 survey and prior to the 2000 case, the screened porch on the south elevation was enclosed. No historic case or permit was found for this enclosure of the porch. The staff wrote, “Staff believes the north elevation's simplicity and original window and door configuration exemplify the building's architecture.”
The property owner started a case, H-00-030A&B, in 2000 to request a status review and some remodel including additions. The case was postponed from the March 14, 2000, agenda and never came back to the HDRB for the status review. However, the staff report from 2000 shows that the staff felt that the structure should be listed as a contributing structure to the Downtown and Eastside Historic District and recommended the north and east facades as primary noting a portal had been enclosed on the south elevation. Given that the south elevation porch was enclosed, and the garage was added to the west elevation, and neither is historic, staff agrees that these elevations should not be considered primary.
Current Application:
The applicant requests a status review with primary façade designation, if applicable.
Staff Recommendation
Staff recommends the historic status of the structure be designated as contributing citing that the structure is a prime example of Territorial Revival style and recommends the north and east facades as primary citing that both facades are simple and unchanged since the structure was constructed per 14-5.2(C) Designation of Significant and Contributing Structures.
Applicant Presentation
Richard Martinez, previously sworn, said he agrees that the house should be contributing. He commented that facades may be simple, but they are not unchanged.
The north façade that faces the street has had windows replaced at least twice and should be replaced again. The east façade, perpendicular to the street should not be primary because the front is on that façade and the front door is unprotected and should have an entry portal. On the east side of the lot there is a possibility where changes and additions can be made. He proposed that the north elevation be the primary façade.
Public Hearing:
Lawrence Colton was on Zoom, however, could not be heard.
Mr. Martinez said Mr. Colton is one of the owners of the house who wanted to express the beauty of the house. His intention is to enhance that beauty and not to distract in any way from the historic designation of this house and for the house to be a contribution to the streetscape.
Board Discussion/Action:
Motion: In Case 2023-007468-HDRB. 826 Camino del Poniente, Member Bienvenu moved that historic status be contributing and the primary façade be the north façade, excluding the non-historic elements. The motion was seconded by Member Aguilar Medrano. She asked about excluding the north facade of the 1980s garage addition.
Member Bienvenu confirmed that would not be primary.
Vote: The motion passed by (5-0) roll call vote with Members Aguilar Medrano, Biedscheid, Bienvenu, Mather and Valdo voting in favor and none voting against.
To view the entire recording of this item, see the YouTube video at: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=kTowXumR29o (1:15:29 – 1:33:01)
5. 2023-007402-HDRB. 912 Old Santa Fe Trl. Downtown & Eastside Historic District. No status. Sunil Sakhalkar agent for Annmari Gallagher/James Collins, owners, requests historic status review and designation of primary facades. (Ramón Sarason)
Staff Report:
912 Old Santa Fe Trail is a single‐family residence listed as non‐contributing to the Downtown and Eastside Historic District. The structure straddles the Downtown and Eastside Historic District and the Historic Review Historic District, as such the structure falls under the more restrictive code guidelines in the Downtown and Eastside Historic District. The architectural style is mid‐modern, estimated construction date is in the late 1950’s. Documentational research shows no significant improvements or alterations.
Now, the applicant now requests status review and primary façade designations to inform future renovations.
Staff Recommendation
Staff recommends the historic status of the structure remain as non‐contributing, per 14‐5.2(C) Designation of Significant and Contributing Structures.
Applicant Presentation
Sunil Sakhalkar of Santa Fe was sworn. He agreed with Ramon’s assessment of the structure.
Public Hearing:
There were no public comments.
Board Discussion/Action:
Vice Chair Guida asked why staff was recommending non-contributing status.
Mr. Sarason said it hardly has any street presence on Old Santa Fe Trail and there is hardly public visibility. The other reason, aside from the brick chimney and this articulation of the entry porch itself the building is basically unarticulated and indistinctive.
Vice Chair Guida said this is a building that has integrity and they could have discussion about whether 1950s infrastructure is relevant. He was advocating for a more thoughtful approach.
Motion: In Case 2023-007402-HDRB. 912 Old Santa Fe Trl., Member Bienvenu moved that the Board adopt the recommendation of staff and based on the reasoning set forth by staff that the historic status be designated as non-contributing. The motion was seconded by Member Aguilar Medrano.
Vote: The motion passed by (5-0) roll call vote with Members Biedscheid, Bienvenu, Mather, Valdo and Aguilar Medrano voting in favor and none voting against.
To view the entire recording of this item, see the YouTube video at: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=kTowXumR29o (1:33:01 – 1:46:26)
6. 2023-007432-HDRB. 771 W. Manhattan Ave. Westside-Guadalupe Historic District. Non-contributing residence, Raul Dominguez, agent for Robert Sisneros, owner, requests to remove asphaltic roof material and replace with metal roof, color rustic red. (Ramón Sarason)
The applicant was not present.
Motion: In Case 2023-007432-HDRB, 771 W. Manhattan Ave., Member Aguilar Medrano moved that the case be heard and the end of agenda. The motion was seconded by Member Beidscheid.
Vote: The motion passed by (5-0) roll call vote with Members Bienvenu, Mather, Valdo, Aguilar Medrano and Biedscheid voting in favor and none voting against.
7. 2023-007474-HDRB. 412 Camino Cabra. Downtown & Eastside Historic District. Non-contributing. Jon Dick, agent for Tom Wilmoth, owner, requests historic status review with primary façade(s) designation. (Paul Duran)
Staff Report:
412 Camino Cabra is a single-family residence listed as non-contributing to the Downtown and Eastside Historic District. The structure was built in 1950 on a 0.147- acre lot and totaled 734 square feet. The structure was built in a modest Santa Fe vernacular style with an L-shaped form constructed out of masonry block, metal casement windows, and a wooden flat roof. A portal wraps around the northeastern façade comprised of wooden viga beams and corbels. Two alterations occurred after 1978, which includes the addition of a portal on the east elevation and a closet addition on the west elevation, but the core of the structure remains intact.
The structure, and a previous older adjacent structure which has since been demolished, was constructed by the Lucrecio Roybal family. One of the sons, Frank Roybal, resided on the property after returning from World War II and is the one that constructed the residence. Frank worked for Allen Stamm’s home construction company.
Staff recommends a contributing status due to the relatively minor changes to the building over time. Staff further recommends designating the east elevation (including façade 4 and excluding the portal) as well as the “orphan wall” between the subject building and the adjacent building to the west that hints at the history that once another house existed on the site.
A previous Historic Cultural Properties Inventory (HCPI) form was completed in 1984. The structure was given non-contributing status because it did not meet the 50-year historic threshold. The structure is now 73-years old and meets the historic threshold to be designated as contributing to the Downtown and Eastside Historic District.
Staff Recommendation
Staff recommends the historic status of the structure be upgraded to contributing with the east façades designated as number four and the southwestern wall designated as nine in the façade diagram as primary, per 14-5.2(C) Designation of Significant and Contributing Structures.
Vice Chair Guida confirmed that staff’s recommendation differs from John Murphy’s.
Member Aguilar Medrano acknowledged that staff is excluding the portal on the east façade. She asked about the blue fence that surrounds it and if it could be called out as non-conforming, even though it’s not being included in the façade.
Ms. Lamboy said it complies with zoning regulations with reference to fencing. As to non-conforming to our ordinance, when it is this low, she didn’t know that it could be argued that it would be non-conforming.
Member Biedscheid confirmed with Mr. Duran that Façade 9 is the wall which is described in the HCPI as a possible remnant of a former building. She said it seems unusual to designate a building remnant as contributing. She said she might disagree that the Board would designate that as something that has to be preserved.
Applicant Presentation
Jon Dick, 112 Camino Escondido, Santa Fe, was sworn. He said he didn’t agree with staff’s recommendation. He agrees with John Murphy’s HCPI report that indicates that the east facade be primary. The South facade is on a very narrow Street half of which is concealed by a garden wall.
Vice Chair Guida confirmed with the applicant that he agreed that John Murphy’s recommendation of this kind of east projecting facade is what captures the character defining elements of the house.
Public Hearing:
John Lacava, 1163 Camino San Acacio, Santa Fe, was sworn. He said he lives next door. There doesn’t seem to be a question that it's going to be designated contributing, it's just arguing about the façade. His concern was about the setback of the wall and if there is an addition that it would be within five feet of his walls.
Board Discussion/Action:
Motion: In Case 2023-007474-HDRB, 412 Camino Cabra, Member Biedscheid moved to designate the property as contributing with the primary façade designated as the east elevation projection of the living room, consistent with the HCPI report. The motion was seconded by Member Mather.
Member Bienvenu confirmed with staff that it was designated as Number 4 on the diagram.
Member Biedscheid said for clarification it was Façade Number 4 on the façade map,
Vote: The motion passed by (5-0) roll call vote with Members Mather, Valdo, Aguilar Medrano, Biedscheid Bienvenu, voting in favor and none voting against.
To view the entire recording of this item, see the YouTube video at: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=kTowXumR29o (1:47:47 – 2:02:48)
8. 2023-007490-HDRB. 1120 E. Alameda St. Downtown & Eastside Historic District. Contributing. Architectural Alliance, LLC, agent for Sam Gerberding and Amanda Crocker, owners, proposes to construct a 118 sq. ft. bedroom addition, a 431 sq. ft. portal, demolition of a portion of a wall on a non-primary façade, and relocate the gate and fence. (Paul Duran)
POSTPONED TO DECEMBER 12, 2023
9. 2023-007489-HDRB. 1369 Cerro Gordo Rd. Downtown & Eastside Historic District. Non-Contributing. Patrick McDowell, agent for J. Midyette, owner, proposes to alter a previous approval by constructing a 140 sq. ft. addition to a height of 12’-0” where the maximum allowable height is 14-7” on an accessory structure. (Lani McCulley)
POSTPONED TO DECEMBER 12, 2023
10. 2023-007222-HDRB. 123 & 135 Grant Ave. Downtown and Eastside Historic District. JenkinsGavin, agent for the Georgia O’Keeffe Museum, owner, requests approval for a 56,000 sq. ft. museum building. Theproposed height is 33’-0” and the permitted height is 33’-8” . (Paul Duran)
POSTPONED TO NOVEMBER 28, 2023.
11. 2023-007411-HDRB. 135 Grant Ave. Downtown and Eastside Historic District. Contributing. JenkinsGavin, agent for Georgia O’Keeffe Museum, owner, requests approval for two exceptions for the demolition and new construction of the existing white wood picket fence and demolition of the existing masonry stuccoed wall. An exception to Section 14-5.2(D)(1)(a) is requested. (Paul Duran)
POSTPONED TO JANUARY 9, 2024.
12. 2023-007360-HDRB. 1666 ½ Cerro Gordo Road. Downtown & Eastside Historic District. Contributing and Non-contributing. Denny Architects, agent for Clifford Ross and Jon Weaver, owners, proposes to demolish the portal and construct a 450 sq. ft. addition with a 150 sq. ft. portal to a height of 12’0” where the maximum allowable is 16’6” and a freestanding 400 sq. ft. carport to a height of 9’10”. Two exceptions are requested, to exceed the 50% rule and to construct an addition within 10’ of a primary façade (14-5.2(D)(2)(d)). (Lani McCulley)
Member Bienvenu recused himself from this case.
Ms. McCulley handed out a rebuttal document provided by the Applicant which is attached hereto as Exhibit “1”.
Staff Report:
The property at 1666 ½ Cerro Gordo is a single-family residence with three structures: two listed as contributing and one as non-contributing to the Downtown and Eastside Historic District. The northern structure is a contributing garage with a stone base and is not a part of this application.
Further down the hill to the south are the two residential structures. The eastern structure which will be referred to as Building A is non-contributing and sits further south than the western structure. The western structure which will be referred to as Building B is a contributing structure with the northern façade of the original structure designated as primary.
Property History:
Building A was listed as contributing until 1999 when under case H-99-004 its’ status was downgraded to non-contributing. This case approved the construction of a portal to connect the Building A’s northern façade to the contributing (Building B) structure’s east façade, altering the picture window on Building A to be replaced with French doors, removal of the frame protruding from around front door of Building A and on Building B alter the window opening to install French doors.
In 2001, under case H-01-067 a 485 sq. ft. addition in Spanish-Pueblo Revival style was allowed to be constructed on the western elevation of the Building B. The HDRB did require a 10’ setback and a 10’ separation from the primary northern façade which created the “u” shape of the structure.
Current Application:
Now, the applicant proposes the following exterior alterations:
1) Demolish the 1999 portal on the eastern elevation of the contributing structure.
2) Construct a 450 sq. ft. addition on the eastern elevation of the contributing structure to connect to the northern elevation of the non-contributing structure. Two exceptions are requested:
a. To exceed 50% of the historic footprint per section 14-5.2(D)(2)(d). b. To construct an addition within 10’ of the primary façade per section 14- 5.2(D)(2)(d).
3) Construct a 150 sq. ft. portal addition on the eastern elevation of the new addition and the north elevation of the non-contributing structure. 4) Construct a freestanding 400 sq. ft. carport on the northeast portion of the property.
Summary of square footage:
Contributing structure existing sq. ft. 460.
50% of contributing structure: 230 sq. ft.
Non-contributing additions total: 1,950 sq. ft.
2001 addition 485 sq. ft.
1999 Portal 300 sq. ft. (to be removed so excluded from total)
Eastern non-contributing structure 675 sq. ft.
Rear portal non-contributing structure 190 sq. ft.
New addition 450 sq. ft.
New portal 150 sq. ft.
The applicant has requested two exceptions to exceed 50% of the historic footprint and to construct within 10’ of the primary façade per section 14-5.2(D)(2)(d).
Staff Recommendation
Staff does not find that all the exception criteria have been met but the Board may find that they have upon further testimony. Otherwise, staff recommends approval of the application as it complies with 14-5.2(D) General Design Standards for all H Districts, and 14-5.2(E) Downtown and Eastside Historic District.
Applicant Presentation
Margaret Denny and Ken Payson 755 Acequia Madre, Santa Fe, were sworn.
Mr. Payson said the owners have lived in the neighborhood for a long time. He went over the rebuttal document that was submitted to staff and attached hereto as Exhibit “1”.
Ms. Denny said they were originally advised by staff that if downgraded to non contributing status this project would be fine. Then they were further advised by staff that it would be a better idea to try to go for exceptions because what Ms. McCulley stated was that the Board and the staff don't like to lose a contributing structure. In the applicant’s view the primary facade is what remains of that contributing structure based on previously approved additions, west and east and that's still not going to be touched so they went ahead and applied for the exceptions. Ms. McCulley was unconvinced by the applicant’s arguments, so they came back with what they consider is the reasonableness of this addition for this particular property and the lot coverage is well within the normal for that neighborhood.
Vice Chair Guida said it's an interesting question one would hope that alterations to a property that are approved by this Board and compliant with the Code, even with exceptions, that those approved additions, if executed correctly, would not diminish the status of the property.
Member Aguilar Medrano asked if they considered the option of reducing the size of the living room by roughly three feet that way only one exception would be needed.
Ms. Denny said the main reason for that was because if they were to go 10 feet back they would have to change the openings.
Member Biedscheid said she’d be in favor of granting both exceptions based on the rationale that the applicant hand shared with the Board.
Public Hearing:
Mary Ray Kate, 1677 Cerro Gordo, was affirmed. The improvements made by current owners were improvements. She’s looked at the plans and it will improve the appearance of the neighborhood.
Vice Chair Guida said the setback issue is easier to grant. The 50% rule is funny because it keeps coming back. The question is whether the addition overwhelms an existing contributing structure.
Ms. Denny commented that 50% creates a hardship.
Attorney Ruybalid read the 50% rule from the Code.
Board Discussion/Action:
Motion: In Case 2023-007360-HDRB,1666 ½ Cerro Gordo Road, Member Biedscheid moved to approve the application noting that the exception criteria for both exceptions have been met by the written and spoken testimony by the applicants; noting that the proposed addition matches the external dimensions of the existing portal minimizing the impact of the increased space which is already occupied by an open air portal; the hardship criteria has been met in addressing very limited small original historic space with a minimal connection that provides a livable space connecting the two buildings; and also the hardship is that the property contains two small buildings and that this connection is a reasonable way to respect what is an existing condition without touching the primary facade and then she also noted that this does seem to be the least negative impact act with respect to options available for increasing the size of the house. The motion was seconded by Member Mather.
Vote: The motion passed by (3-1) roll call vote with Members Aguilar Medrano, Biedscheid and Mather voting in favor and Member Valdo voting against.
Vice Chair Guida noted that exceptions would need to go to Council for approval.
To view the entire recording of this item, see the YouTube video at: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=kTowXumR29o (2:02:48 – 2:32:21)
13. 2023-007473-HDRB. 802 Don Cubero. Don Gaspar Area Historic District. Florian Griego, agent for Sarah Flores-Sievers, owner, requests a remodel consisting of replacement windows, on a contributing residence. (Ramón J. Sarason)
Staff Report:
Sitting on a corner lot in the Don Gaspar Area Historic District, 802 Don Cubero Avenue was constructed in the 1920s and altered some 80 years later. The hollow pentile house faces east onto Don Cubero with a modestly scaled porch. The mixed Spanish Eclectic and Pueblo Revival building encloses roughly 2,942 square feet including a finished basement. The property includes low street walls, a non-historic carport, and an original two-car garage. The house and garage are contributing to the Don Gaspar Historic District.
In Historic Districts Review Board case # 2023-007313-HDRB the Board designated the structure retain contributing status and the north and east facades of the main residence and the north façade of the original garage be designated as primary. The Board also designated the north and east site walls as contributing.
Now, the applicant proposes the following exterior alterations:
1) Replace 21 non-historic windows at 802 Don Cubero Ave with Simonton 6200 series. Colonial style with inside grilles, white vinyl duo-pane single-hung on the main floor and small sliding windows in the basement.
2) The color of stucco repair will match the current house, which is STO in Pueblo 01005.
The proposed replacement windows will not replicate the style of the windows that historically existed on the house. The August 1982 Historic Cultural Properties Inventory Form includes a photograph that reflects the historic windows on the house. The windows were divided lite wood windows and have a very different character of the current windows. It is also possible that the window openings were also changed in size with the installation of the windows in the 1990s. The proposed replacement windows may threaten the historic contributing status of the building.
Staff Recommendation
Staff does not recommend approval of the proposed project and finds that the application does not comply with Section 14-5.2(D)(5)(a)(i) General Design Standards for all Historic Districts and Section 14-5.2(D)(5) Windows, Doors, and Other Architectural Features. The windows in the 1982 Historic Building Inventory Form, which were the original historic windows, show wood divided lite windows.
In the 1990s wholesale replacement of the windows with aluminum sliders occurred. Staff was not able to find these replacements were permitted in the available records.
Vice Chair Guida asked Mr. Sarason what it would take to satisfy the design standards.
Mr. Sarason said he would like to see windows with divided lights.
Member Aguilar Medrano asked about the vehicular and pedestrian gates and asked Mr. Sarason if he found a record of why they are solid metal.
Mr. Sarason said he could not find any record approving the metal gates.
Applicant Presentation
Sarah Flores-Sievers, 802 Don Cubero, was sworn. She said she needs to replace 27 windows. She already purchased the windows, and they are in storage. The current windows leak and she worries about interior damage, She is hoping to install the windows before winter,
Member Bienvenu asked if she had knowledge as to the removal of the original historic windows.
Ms. Flores-Siever said they bought the house with the slider windows. Member Bienvenu asked about the metal gates.
Ms. Flores-Sievers said they were not informed they were in the historic district. The gates were installed in 2008.
Member Bienvenu asked if approval was given for the gate.
Mr. Sarason said he looked for a building permit and he was unable to find any document.
Ms. Lamboy said if there is something that was added without permission, the applicant would be required to come back to the Board.
Member Bienvenu asked that be followed up on. The gates are not harmonious with the district.
Public Hearing:
No public comment
Board Discussion/Action:
Motion: In Case 2023-007473-HDRB, 802 Don Cubero, Member Aguilar Medrano moved to approve the submittal under the condition that the applicant submit a new window type to staff that more closely mimics the historic windows with true divided lights. The applicant has the option in regard to material, they will not be required to be wood, except on the primary façade, they will be required to be wood. Member Mather seconded the motion.
Member Biedscheid said she feels like this is a different proposal. She would be more comfortable with a postponement.
Member Aguilar Medrano withdrew her motion.
Member Biedscheid wanted to hear from the applicant about what's possible here and if the applicant agrees with the condition that the windows on the primary facade be true divided light wood windows with the remainder being true divided light but with possibly another more affordable material such as metal clad wood
Ms. Flores said wood windows are more expensive. She doesn’t want two different kinds of windows.
Florian Griego, 9245 uh South Farmer Avenue, Tempe, Arizona was sworn. He clarified that for the options available, they do not have a wood exterior window option. Wood windows are either vinyl clad, or metal clad. The proposed cost would be doubled.
Motion In Case 2023-007473-HDRB, 802 Don Cubero, Member Bienvenu moved that the case be tabled and reset for a date certain for a resubmission meeting for window proposals that meet the consideration set by the Board this evening. Member Biedscheid seconded the motion.
Vote: The motion passed by (5-0) roll call vote with Members Aguilar Medrano, Biedscheid, Bienvenu, Mather and Valdo voting in favor and none voting against.
To view the entire recording of this item, see the YouTube video at: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=kTowXumR29o (2:32:21 – 3:03:26)
14. 2023-007428-HDRB. 600 Old Santa Fe Trail. Downtown & Eastside Historic District. Non-contributing. Souder Miller, agent for William Parker, owner, proposes to construct a 192 sq. ft. free standing shed. (Ramón Sarason)
Staff Report:
The 0.328-acre property was first built in 1900 and included a 5,209 square foot building and a 1,144 square foot canopy. Aerial photography from New Mexico Department of Transportation indicate the Old Trail Garage site was a retail fuel facility since at least 1958 to removal of the underground storage tanks in April 2009. The property is currently operated as an automobile repair shop.
Now, the applicant proposes the following exterior alterations:
1) `The construction of a temporary remediation shed (expected duration 3-5 years), 12 feet wide by 16 feet long (192 square feet) and 12 feet high (2,304 cubic feet). The shed will be constructed of 8-inch-thick concrete masonry units (CMU) with a wood frame and metal flat panel roof. The shed is to be of masonry construction to mitigate potential noise impacts to the adjacent residences. The exterior of the CMU will be finished with mud plaster (color Light Adobe 4023 or Sandalwood 4003 by Sika USA®) to match the existing Old Trail Garage building. There will be one entrance door, a garage style door (to allow equipment units to be installed), and an exhaust stack (14 feet high) for treated effluent to meet air quality and noise ordinance requirements. Stormwater and snowmelt from the roof will drain to gutters which then drain to the edge of the parking lot, similar to the existing building. There are no windows, fencing, or gates associated with the shed.
Staff Recommendation
Staff recommends approval of the proposed project and finds that the application complies with Section 14-5.2(D) General Design Standards for all Historic Districts, and 14-5.2(E) Downtown and Eastside Design Standards.
Staff recommends that, upon completion of the remediation project, the shed and equipment be removed. The structure is intended to be project-specific and temporary in nature. Should the applicant want to retain the building, it will have to be reviewed and approved by the Historic Districts Review Board.
Applicant Presentation
Scott McKendrick, 5454 Denise, Albuquerque, was sworn. He said the site is a historic leaky underground storage tank site contaminant. Of concern at the site is volatile organic HRS. It’s critically important that this shed be allowed to be built to ensure protection of human health and the environment. This facility is regulated by the New Mexico Environment Department. Traditionally once the remediation is complete and the site is ready to receive no further action status, they remove the structure most of the time. if the Board has the option to condition the approval that the building be removed, he would be amendable to that.
Vice Chair Guida confirmed that the color of stucco would be the same as the main building and the pull up door and main door are able to be painted.
Public Hearing:
There were no public comments.
Board Discussion/Action:
Motion: In Case 2023-007428-HDRB, 600 Old Santa Fe Trail., Member Bienvenu moved that the application be approved as submitted noting that in addition, the applicant has represented that it will be cementitious stucco to match the existing gas station building and that the doors will also will be painted to match; and that the approval is conditioned on the understanding that this structure will be removed as soon as the remediation is completed and the authority is given for removal and that if it has not been removed by five years from the date of approval that the applicant will return to the Board for the Board to decide how to proceed. The motion was seconded by Member Aguilar Medrano.
Vote: The motion passed by (5-0) roll call vote with Members Biedscheid, Bienvenu, Mather, Valdo and Aguilar Medrano voting in favor and none voting against.
To view the entire recording of this item, see the YouTube video at: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=kTowXumR29o (3:03:26 – 3:16:41)
15. 2023-007509-HDRB. 2024 HDRB Calendar Approval
Motion: In Case 2023-0074509-HDRB, Member Biedscheid moved to approve the 2024 HDRB meeting calendar. The motion was seconded by Member Aguilar Medrano.
Vote: The motion passed by (5-0) roll call vote with Members Bienvenu, Mather, Valdo, Aguilar Medrano and Biedscheid voting in favor and none voting against.
6. 2023-007432-HDRB. 771 W. Manhattan Ave. Westside-Guadalupe Historic District. Non-contributing residence, Raul Dominguez, agent for Robert Sisneros, owner, requests to remove asphaltic roof material and replace with metal roof, color rustic red. (Ramón Sarason)
Staff Report:
The building at 771 W Manhattan is a single-family residence listed as non contributing to the Westside-Guadalupe Historic District. The Historic Districts Inventory Form states that the building was constructed post-1945; staff has done some research on historic aerials of Santa Fe In the 1981 aerial, the site is vacant.
By 1985 the home was constructed. It appears to be of frame or CMU construction, has a pitched roof with rust-colored asphalt shingles, and anodized metal windows.
Now, the applicant proposes the following exterior alterations:
1) Replacement of the existing asphalt shingles with a Propanel roof with “Crimson Red” color, which will be similar to the existing accent color on the house as well as the existing shingles.
Staff Recommendation
Staff recommends approval of the proposed project and finds that the application complies with Section 14-5.2(D) General Design Standards for all Historic Districts, and 14-5.2(I) Westside-Guadalupe Design Standards.
Vice Chair Guida asked Mr. Sarason if he had discussed with the applicant about replacing the roof material in kind with asphalt shingles.
Mr. Sarason said his understanding is that the owner prefers the superior weathering and long-term life of the pro panel as opposed to the asphalt.
Member Aguilar Medrano asked if the finish is matte or shiny.
Mr. Sarason said it’s not shiny and he wouldn’t call it matte either.
Member Aguilar Medrano asked about the color because there seems to be another option for red. It was called rustic red which is a little bit more muted. Whereas the red they're proposing is described as bright red. She asked if Mr. Sarason ever talked to them about potentially using the rustic red as an alternative.
Mr. Sarason said he believes the applicant would be willing to substitute that color.
Applicant Presentation
Raul Dominguez, 3509 Jon Kim Lane, Santa Fe, was sworn.
Vice Chair Guida asked about the color.
Mr, Dominguez said the color choice was generally from the owner. But he would be willing to change the color at the Board’s request.
Public Hearing:
There were no public comments.
Board Discussion/Action:
Motion: In Case 2023-007432-HDRB. 771 W. Manhattan Ave., Member Aguilar moved to approve the application with the condition that the applicant uses rustic red as the shade of red rather than crimson red. The motion was seconded by Member Biedscheid.
Vote: The motion passed by (5-0) roll call vote with Members Mather, Valdo, Aguilar Medrano and Biedscheid Bienvenu, voting in favor and none voting against.
Member Bienvenu noted that this could have been a different outcome if this were a contributing structure.
To view the entire recording of this item, see the YouTube video at: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=kTowXumR29o (3:17:55 – 3:26-36)
I. DISCUSSION ITEMS
Ms. Lamboy updated the Board on the Geneal Plan Update and noted that there are lots of firms interested in working on that. She also provided a brief update on the Land Use Code update. update..
J. MATTERS FROM THE BOARD
Member Bienvenu asked about the tennis courts at St. John’s College. He asked if this came to staff for administrative approval.
Ms. Lamboy said it did come for administrative approval and screening is not permitted.
Mr. Moquino said he would check it out when he does the inspection.
Vice Chair Guida talked about staff reporting administrative approvals to the Board. They are a citizens Board and are not required to check the homework of staff. He doesn’t think staff needs to be policed in that regard. He said in light of these different roles, it will benefit staff and the Board have training on historic preservation.
Member Bienvenu said on the issue of staff recommendations versus Mr. Murphy’s, he thinks Mr. Murphy’s HCPI’s are informative.
11. NEXT MEETING: Tuesday, November 28, 2023
12. ADJOURNMENT
Motion: Member Aguilar Medrano moved to adjourn at 9:15 pm. The motion was seconded by Member Mather.
Vote: The motion passed by (5-0) roll call vote with Members Valdo, Aguilar Medrano, Biedscheid, Bienvenu and Mather ,voting in favor and none voting against.
https://santafe.primegov.com/public/portal
