Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!
Get email alerts on the Votes And Actions topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
Historic Districts Review Board: votes and case outcomes — meeting roundup
Summary
The board approved minutes, findings, and a slate of status reviews and design exceptions across the downtown, East Side and West Side districts. Several applications were approved with conditions, one applicant withdrew earlier demolition request, and the board deferred appointments to a state subcommittee.
Get email alerts on the Votes And Actions topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
The Historic Districts Review Board approved minutes, findings and multiple case decisions at its meeting, acting on status reviews, design exceptions and site alterations across the downtown, East Side and West Side historic districts.
Key outcomes at a glance:
- 878 East Palace (case 2025009719): Staff recommended retaining the main residence as a contributing structure and designating the east and north facades as primary; the board approved the recommendation. Roll call recorded Member John Mather, Member Benvenu, Member Adela Medrano and Member Degnan voting yes; Member Bishai and Vice Chair Guida voted no. The motion passed.
- 1525 Canyon Road (case 2025009690): The board granted an exception to replace two historic windows on primary facades with in‑kind wood windows and approved replacement of other windows as proposed. The roll call was unanimous in favor.
- 1A Camino Piqueno Unit A (case 20259689): After an initial failed motion, the board approved the applicant’s proposal with conditions. The approval requires the front yard wall along Camino Piqueno to be a coyote fence with a staggered top (horizontal supports on private side) and requires the garage door to be wood rather than metal. The motion passed on roll call.
- 127 Durán Street (case 20259773): The board retained the residential and accessory structures as non‑contributing. The board also voted to designate the visible portion of a historic acequia wall on the property as contributing; that vote was tied and the chair provided the tie‑breaking vote in favor. Members noted debate over the board’s jurisdiction regarding acequias and recommended coordination with acequia authorities for preservation.
- 925 Acequia Madre (case 2024009202): Staff recommended and the board approved maintaining the main residence as contributing with the south facade (excluding non‑historic materials) designated as primary.
- 502 Cerrillos Road (case 2025009748): The board approved an exception to enclose an existing portal on a non‑primary facade, subject to a condition that the final design include two double‑hung windows similar to existing north‑elevation windows (set back appropriately) and that revised jamb details be submitted to staff before permit application. The motion passed; Vice Chair Guida recorded a no vote.
- 1182 Cerro Gordo (case 2024009613): The board approved retroactive review and exceptions for a deck over a contributing shed, replacement of the shed roof not in kind, and associated railings and stairs. Staff findings and the motion to approve were adopted.
- 202 Irvine Street (case 2024009650): The board approved additions and relocation of an accessory shed to meet zoning, and noted that the existing blue shed color may remain at the owner’s request.
- 1184 Cerro Gordo (case 2025009774): The board approved a small addition and new yard walls/fences consistent with the existing recent Santa Fe‑style residence. Roll call passed with one no vote recorded.
Minutes and findings: the board approved December 2024 minutes as amended and adopted findings and conclusions for earlier cases (September and December 2024) where staff had prepared revised documents; a small number of abstentions were recorded on the minutes vote.
Why it matters: the decisions affect status of contributing and non‑contributing designations, allowable alterations in historic districts, and whether demolition or major exterior change will be considered in context of final designs. Several approvals included conditions intended to protect historic fabric and ensure appropriate detailing.
What’s next: applicants should submit final permit applications reflecting board conditions (for example, revised fenestration details or fence materials). The state Executive Office Building team will return with a formal package, including any demolition request, and the board will appoint a subcommittee for design consultation by email.

