Don Hotchkiss has joined.

Thank you, Commissioner.

I can hear you.

Thank you.

Like to officially call the December 10th, 2025 meeting of the City of Las Vegas Historic Preservation Commission to order.

Will the cook please call the roll and determine if we have a quorum and which commissioners may be on the conference call.

Thank you.

Chair Stotl.

Present.

Vice Chair Laramie.

Commissioner Levine.

Here.

Commissioner Hotchkiss.

Hotchkiss here on the phone.

Commissioner Serfus?

Here.

Commissioner Cosgrove.

Commissioner Cosgrove on the following year.

Commissioner Palacios.

Commissioner Moody?

Here.

Commissioner Purdue.

Here on the um Commissioner Grimmer.

Commissioner Harper.

Here.

Commissioner Siebrant.

Here.

Commissioner Gillespie.

Here.

Thank you.

We have three members on the phone.

And we do have a quorum.

Yes, we do.

Thank you.

Agenda item two again to the city clerk.

Uh has the announcement of the meeting of the Historic Preservation Commission.

Are we in compliance with the Nevada State Open Meeting Law NRS two forty-one point zero two zero?

Yes, we are in compliance.

Move on to agenda item three.

This item on the agenda is the first public comment period.

Comments made during this portion of the agenda must be limited to matters that are on the agenda for possible action.

If you wish to be heard, please come forward and give your name for the record.

Would anybody like to address the commission at this time?

Seeing and hearing none, we'll move on to the fourth item on the agenda, which is chair's announcement, and the chair at this point does not have any announcements.

So we'll move on to agenda five.

Seeing none, look for a motion.

I'll motion passes.

Item number six is subject uh is 25-0565-HPC one.

A report by Jay Dapper, principal of the Dapper Companies regarding the status of the Hunter's Theater located at 1208 East Charleston Boulevard.

This is a report and discussion agenda item.

It is not an action item.

The purpose and agenda of this item, the historic 1944 Hunter's Theater was purchased by the Dapper Companies on March 31st, 2021.

A portion of the sales agreement that the new owner signed is a settlement agreement that transferred the responsibilities of reviewing and monitoring the rehabilitation of the Hunterage Theater from the state of Nevada to the city of Las Vegas and the Historic Preservation Commission.

Among other obligations of the Dapper Company, uh it was to nominate the property of the Hunter's Theater to the City of Las Vegas Historic Property Register.

The HPC voted at the theater to the Las Vegas Register on May 26, 2021.

As part of the review and monitoring of the property in the settlement agreement, Mr.

Dapper is legally required to report to the Historic Preservation Commission on a quarterly basis on the rehabilitation of the Hunterge.

The four reports from the Dapper Company are not simply a request by the HPC, they are legally binding part of the agreement.

This report is the third for the year.

The first was made in January of this year.

The next report was made on August 27th.

No backup material was supplied for today's report.

Dr.

Siebrent.

And Mr.

Dapier's here to give his update.

Great.

Thank you very much.

For the record?

Hi, Mr.

Chair, Jay Dapper, uh Dapper Companies.

And do you need my address?

No.

Okay.

Nice to see the board.

Thank you for your time today.

So I I know I was here a couple of months back.

Uh since then, I'd like to give you guys all a little bit of an update.

Um we've conducted a in-person uh walkthrough of the property with uh with uh Diane.

Um and I don't remember what the date on that was, but I and I and I actually I believe uh Seth Floyd was also at that that walkthrough as well, um, which I think that you guys do that annually, correct?

Yes.

So and I don't know if that's in any of the materials, but uh we did meet on site, we did do that walkthrough together, and that that was uh completed.

Um for the record, the uh the legal agreement calls for a inspection at least twice a year.

Uh and I think this is the second uh if I'm correct that you Dr.

C.

Wright, you've made uh Seabrant for the record.

Uh no, the first walkthrough was scheduled in April, and I was out of commission with a medical issue, so was unable to do that walkthrough.

So we did our walkthrough in October.

But but this was an issue for the the city, not for Mr.

Dapper that we had uh planned to do that.

So he's okay, great.

Thank you.

Thank you.

Okay.

And uh and then so we we did that walkthrough as a little bit of an update from the last time that I was here.

Um the uh architectural firm that I hired to do the plans for the renovation of the theater, uh, Ginsler, they have completed their plans and they have the ability to turn those into the city.

Um, but as part of um uh well I'll say a greater update.

Um we've been in talks with a lot of uh great local uh organizations that are in the arts and the theater uh space, uh both some theater and then some that are uh musically oriented and some others, and uh there was a new uh consultant that was hired that specializes in both um performing arts and music, and that consultant has made some recommendations to change some of the plans that we've created, and so we are right now evaluating whether or not to make some of these changes that they've recommended.

Um if we do make these changes, you know, it will take a little bit of time for us to make the make the changes to the plans, and so we're in the process of doing that as as as we speak.

Uh the group is called FDA, and they're I I'm not really sure where they're out of, but they're a national firm and they they specialize FDA specializes in uh you know these kinds of projects.

When you're talking about are these changes to because we're our we're really confined to the Hunter's theater, of course there's some other elements of the exterior and so forth.

But are you talking about changes to Huntry?

Yeah, so this is not, these are not changes that would be made on the outside.

So these are more functional changes on the inside.

So for instance, um it's seating configurations, the way that uh, you know, and I'm I'm not a theater buff, but the way that um uh props and things move on and off the the stage um areas that maybe weren't originally designed where you know they've identified some some deficiencies and having certain performing arts groups, you know, they need these things, and those things weren't in the plans, and so they had a long list of recommendations.

Um the changes they understood that the changes or suggestions that they make, they they couldn't affect the exterior.

They would ex they they you know they may take a bar that was designed for a certain area and they may move that you know over a little bit, shrink it, make it larger.

There's a lot of little nuanced things that are inside that they've made recommendations to.

So let me uh there are two items you have on the agenda, items six and seven, and they kind of questions kind of go together.

Uh so I'm hesitating asking too many questions at this point, but but while this commission, according to the uh the city ordinance, we have uh some oversight of the exterior of the building.

Yeah, according to the settlement agreement, we have additional oversight to the lobby.

Sure.

And so if you could kind of focus, keep the energy on on those two things where we have some jurisdiction.

We're of course interested in the historic nature of the uh of the property in general.

But yeah, I was just trying to give you some basic context, but um uh uh Mr.

Chair, so the the there will be no changes that we're we're suggesting that we're making to the exterior or the lobby, okay, at this time.

Um and you know, we were very specific with FDA and told them that they couldn't make those changes.

Um and you know, but there's there's still I would say some negotiation going on on what what changes we do make and what changes we don't make.

With that being said, um uh because Ginsler has completed their set of plans, and then there has been this recommendation of some of these these alterations.

We're not turning in those set of plans right now because to turn them in and then just come right back in and turn in a revision wouldn't make sense.

It's not wouldn't be productive.

Um in addition to that, um the city uh uh is has a large project, I believe uh Dr.

Seabran, it's called the Charleston's sewer project or Charleston the C Bank for the Records, the Charleston Storm Drain.

Storm drain, sorry, this uh Charleston Storm Drain Project.

Um the the uh somebody from uh I guess the the city or the public works department uh through uh the general contracting firm that I guess is running this project uh for the city.

I believe it's a city project, right?

Or is it a county project?

It's a city project.

City, okay.

Um approached me uh and asked if they could use the parking lot for staging and setting up uh different, you know, I don't really know to be honest what they're doing, but they're utilizing the parking lot right now for that large project.

They have the street all torn up uh up and down Charleston, as I'm sure a lot of you know, because if you traveled up and down Charleston in either direction, um there's a lot of construction going on.

So uh this group is currently utilizing the parking lot all the way around the building.

Um they've installed fencing and um there's you know some construction uh materials there and right now that that agreement is a month to month agreement.

They want to be there for two years.

They know that they can't be there that quite that long.

So we have uh an ability to give them notice at any time during the you know period of and say, hey, we need you to get off the property, we're gonna start construction.

So that's gonna that's not gonna slow your the project down.

No, not at all.

But it but it's but it is important to note because we've had quite a few calls from people asking what what's going on, and so you know, I I don't believe that I uh talked about that in my last update.

I'm not sure if I did, but just wanted to put that on the record.

Um and then in addition to that, the the last part of it is you know, there's been a lot of talk about the cell phone tower um and kind of the controversy surrounding that.

And so we've now um there was some legal action that was going on.

Um that has the lawsuit has been um not completely settled, but there's no pending litigation going on now with that.

We're in contact with the group um that operates the cell tower.

They're called Crown Castle, and they are a vendor of ATT.

And there is a very good chance that they will be moving the cell tower into the corner of the property.

And we're in the very final stages of confirming, you know, that they want to move forward, construct a new cell tower and be at the back of the property for a very long time.

That's a very good thing because the cell tower currently is just a few feet off the back of the Huntridge Theater, kind of looms over the top of it.

And although their lease is coming to an end, so if we do nothing, you know, in the next couple of years, their cell cell tower will just have to go away.

And then other than that, um, you know, we continue to maintain regular security at the property.

Um now the entire property is fenced.

Uh the security is 24 hours.

Um we actually have a our our security office is inside one of the retail buildings that's there, which is you know, uh on the same property, but just outside of your purview.

Um, but our security and maintenance office um is in there, and those guys are in and out of that building all the time.

Um it's alarmed, fire sprinklered.

Um, we get regular inspections, you know, from our our fire sprinkler company.

And as um uh Dr.

Siebran and uh Seth Floyd saw, um, you know, the the property is in good condition from you know when we originally cleaned it up.

Uh Jack Levine for the record.

Um what is the timing now?

I mean, what what do you what do you see until there's something that the public could actually attend to as a uh an event or uh a performance or whatever.

What it would what would what do you think is the the best that could be done to make that happen?

Yeah, so it's you know, it just renovating the building isn't, you know, when I say the final answer, um when we first started down this pathway of you know, trying to bring the building back to life, um, you know, we were talking to one organization, and we didn't when I say one organization, the Soho Playhouse, we I've since now met with many different local nonprofit organizations that don't currently have a home.

Some have temporary homes, some you know, are what I would consider couch surfing.

You know, there's a lot of really great community-oriented theater and musical organizations that um don't currently have a place to go.

And I think that the Huntridge Theater on the long term can be that place.

Um we've met with Maggie Plaster and Seth in reference to a lot of those groups.

Um one of the things that we're doing is understanding how all of those groups can live and and interact and work in the space together.

And part of some of those changes that I told you that FDA was recommending was because you know they're taking into consideration that there's a lot of different groups doing a lot of different things.

And um it's when I first started this project, you know, I didn't quite understand any of the those things.

Like, you know, I just thought of a theater as being kind of one-dimensional, and now I'm realizing that there's a lot of different needs that each group has.

And so um to to answer your question, I'd love to say, okay, we're gonna be breaking ground by you know, this month of next year.

But the first thing we have to do is complete the set of plans.

We have to make sure that the plans are are all um, you know, they work for the entire the entire body of and and group of people that could be operating in the theater, and then make sure that the proper funding is in place, make sure that we've got you know all of the right people involved and and then move the project forward.

So um I would say that there's a very good chance that we'll hopefully break ground next year.

Um, but I mean, I don't have a specific date that I could share with you or say like we're shooting for this right now.

We're just trying to get the changes done that FDA is a uh recommended and get those set of plans into the building department to to process.

All right, so two questions.

So it it could be a year until we break ground, and then there's a year of construction, six months of construction of controlling those plans and then yeah, construction uh typically on a project like this takes about a year.

Um I I broke ground about 10, eight, eight to ten months ago on Mission Linen, which is in the arts district, uh, where the Evil Can Evil Museum is going, and we've got a couple of other great tenants going in, and that project will be very close to completion by February.

So it took about probably 13 or 14 months to complete.

I would say it's about the same size and scope as this project.

And so I would say that from the start of construction to completion, it'll take somewhere between 14 and 16 months.

All right, so we're still several years out before we'd ever go sit in the audience and uh watch performance.

It it it's it's it's possible.

All right, that was one question.

Is the is the um uh soho playhouse deal off the table now?

Is that what I'm understanding?

No, well, we're we're really hopeful that SOHO, in it in addition to a lot of the other great um groups that are you know here looking for a home, all participate in the in the project.

Um when we originally envisioned this, it was gonna be just Soho Playhouse, just individually, but I think that we quickly realize that there's a far greater need than just one group, and so um, you know, it's our hope that the Huntry becomes the place where all of these groups and organizations kind of cohabitate.

All right.

Well, I'm all in favor of that, but uh say again.

I'm all in favor of that.

So um okay, thank you.

Thanks.

Other questions?

Please.

Um, Commissioner Laramie, and this is actually I think more of a question for Diane.

Um, so it was mentioned that our purview on HPC is in regards to the exterior and the lobby space.

And I know we did approve a certificate of appropriateness for the exterior, but I don't remember reviewing the lobby.

So what does the process look like that on that?

Uh Crunch for the record.

So that one um was a little bit uh convoluted because um Mr.

Dapper applied for historic tax credits.

Uh SHIPO has the purview for that.

We do not, um, regardless of the settlement agreement.

So SHIPO did approve those plans.

Um, and since they already approved them, we cannot disapprove them.

Okay, thanks for clarifying.

Yeah, and I just want to add one thing.

We we also um submitted the project to the federal government for historic tax credits, and we were approved for those historic tax credits.

Um, in order for us to move that forward in the final phase, um, we have to have a completed set of plans that we submit because you submit your your initial set of plans.

They want to make sure that what you initially submit and then what you end up moving forward with are consistent.

And so that is currently in place.

Um they've been approved.

We hired a consultant to do those for us.

And those uh that approval was in conjunction with um the SHIPO approval.

So I don't know exactly how they worked together, but you know, somebody on the federal government side and the SHIPO side were working together uh to go through that approval process, and it was a pretty lengthy process.

Um it took took us uh almost a year in total to get that done and uh tremendous amount of work, so well.

I'll just add that that's that's great.

I'm glad you were able to secure those tax credits.

I know that's a great funding source.

But it does stroll off of the record, does confuse me.

And while I'm easily confused, I'm gonna read from the settlement agreement specifically.

It says the city agrees to assume all responsibilities for the supervision and monitoring of the rehabilitation of the Huntridge Theater upon execution of this agreement as long as we remain the CLG.

All obligations for supervision and monitoring uh are come to the city of Las Vegas.

So I'm I'm a little confused as to why uh SHIPO went around the corner and we were not part of that process.

Well, Stephen, for the record during that certificate of appropriates application, I'd have to go back and pull it up.

Um the interior designs were part of that presentation.

So the approval was given for the exterior, but because of the federal requirements that SHIPO re and and um National Park Service reviewed those, they approved them as well because we are not part of the historic tax credit review board.

And that supersedes our settlement agreement.

Yeah, and and I just want to add one thing.

So it I don't think that so there the SHIPO's um involvement was just for our our federal uh historic tax credits, and that's it.

It didn't have anything to do with the approval of the you the approval of the design was before this board.

Everything that you guys approved were what we put in our package and submitted um to in order to get the historic tax credits.

And so um I don't I don't believe that they were you know if we weren't getting historic tax credits, I don't believe that it would have ever went to SHIPO.

It's only because we applied for the historic tax credits.

Please see for the record, yes, that is correct.

So are there any other processes that need to go through SHIPO regarding this tax credit?

Not that I know of.

We we've already received the so we submitted our application to the Fed to I believe it's the Park Service, and then the Park Service in turn um submits our application to SHIPO, and then SHIPO approves it, it goes back to the Park Service, and then the Park Service issued us uh uh a historic uh tax credit commitment, I guess is what you call it.

Yeah, I guess I I was just concerned with the word uh that the city assumes all responsibilities and and whether or not the the tax credit should have come before the HBC and before the the the city uh the city council before it was was approved.

But uh it it sounds like we're legally in compliance uh through the tax credit process.

Uh I will continue to revert back to the word all responsibility has been shifted uh because it provides the HPC.

This legal agreement provides the HBC with additional oversight that it normally doesn't have.

And that specifically uh we look at the exterior of the building rather than the interior, except this agreement provides us with responsibilities for for the lobby and the theater itself.

That's what was shifted down to the to the HPC.

So my questions are not going to be limited to the exterior, they will be with uh with the interior.

So I'm I'm gonna bounce back to the to page uh five of the uh uh the legal agreement that was signed.

And it says from and after the closing of the acquisition of the Huntridge Theater, Dapper agrees to exercise reasonable diligence to cause significant progress towards the rehabilitation of the Hunters.

So my question is for this past year, what significant progress have you made towards rehabilitation of the Hunters?

Sure.

Um I think probably the most important part, which is the set of plans that have to be turned into the city in order for us to be able to move the project forward.

So that set of plans includes civil engineering, life safety, mechanical, electrical, plumbing, um, all of the things that are required in order to be able to renovate it a building, and it's probably the most complicated part of it.

Uh it's the plans for the um uh landscaping, um, the civil engineering right now.

So a big part of our civil engineering actually changed with the the project that's going on right now.

So two major projects that happened the the one that's going down Charleston, which is the storm drain project, and then also um there's the BRT project that went down Maryland Parkway, and so we actually ended up having to do a small revision to our civil engineering plans because where we had our curb cut on Maryland Parkway, the BRT project, they ended up wanting to install a large bus stop, which we weren't super happy with right in front of the Huntridge Theater.

So if you go by there today, there's a big structure that's been erected and that's there.

We actually had to move our curb cut over in order to accommodate the BRT, the uh regional transportations BRT project.

So the significant progress I would say is very significant because we we're now from a plan perspective, without these changes, we could conceivably submit those plans and move things forward.

But as I said, there are some small revisions that we're making.

So the plan that was submitted to SHIPO, the construction plan, I think was part of the uh the tax incentive.

Uh well, yeah, the overall plans, but the can see construction drawings, which are the CDs, those you know, include the mechanical, electrical, plumbing, life safety, civil, yeah.

And so yeah, I would say that we made significant progress the beginning of the year, you know, maybe those plans were at 50% or 60%.

You know, today those plans are completed, um, except for these revisions that we're talking about.

Further questions, comments and m Mr.

Chairman Seth Floyd for the record.

I so I I think you're kind of going into the next item.

If you want, you can open both at the same time, or you can close the report and open item number seven, uh, which is the item where you'll be voting on uh the reasonable diligence to cause significant progress toward rehabilitation.

Thank you for that.

Um I had other questions that deal with uh six, which is the quarterly report, and of course it overlaps into the next item, which is whether or not Mr.

Dapper has complied for the year with with all of the elements, but this is specifically dealing with rehabilitation in his report for this quarter.

Um but I think I think you're right, the questions can be asked uh both in item six and item seven.

So we'll unless there's further comments or questions from the commission, we will move on to agenda item seven.

So we will start uh uh with that.

Uh or no, I'm excuse me.

Is this agenda item we want to be uh seven?

And is this a is this I stay here for this?

Okay, yes, please.

Okay, or you can get up and come back, but no, no, no.

And chair, could you please read the item?

What's that?

Could you please read the item number seven?

Well, that was my plan.

Okay, thank you.

Uh we're now on agenda item seven.

The seventh item on the agenda is 25-566-HPC 1 discussion for possible action gear and approval of the Dapper Company, ownership of the historic Huntridge Theater.

The question before the Historic Preservation Commission is whether or not the Dapper Company has complied with the elements of a legal agreement that was signed by Mr.

Dapper and approved by the state of Nevada and the City of Las Vegas.

Key legal obligations of Mr.

Dapper are included in the background section of the agenda memo.

More than a year of negotiations, the Hunter's Theater, uh, after more than a year of negotiation between the state of Nevada, the city of Las Vegas, the previous owners, and the new owners of the Hunter Theater, an agreement was signed as part of the purchase agreement.

Uh it's a legal settlement agreement, and it requires Mr.

Dapper, among other actions, to report, as we had in item six, four times a year uh to the Historic Preservation Commission that he in fact has exercised, quote, reasonable diligence to cause significant progress towards rehabilitation of the Hunter's Theater.

This agreement adds that quote progress towards rehabilitation is for the following, but not limited to the items.

And it goes on to limit uh to list four or five different things, including the marquee and the lobby and so forth, uh, but but not limited to those things.

So the the responsibility of the HPC uh includes both the lobby and the theater itself, the marquee, the monument signs, and the interior configuration of the lobby and the theater spaces.

So it's not just the lobby, it's the theater itself.

And and I don't think we have uh uh seen that in uh a previous reports.

The the bottom line to this is this is a significant agreement, unique in that I have not in my research seen another document uh legal document overseeing the uh the state's responsibility being traveled or transferred to the city's responsibility.

So this is a learning process for all of us, but the details of the responsibility of both is it the DAPRA company or brass monkey LLC?

Yeah, that's just our our legal entity.

Yeah, it's just uh it's an LLC that we created as single purpose entity to purchase it.

We use we use that name because it's a one of the names of a Beastie Boys song, and they were one of the big last big acts that played at the end.

When we when we see Dapper Company, we're talking about the the brass monkey at LC.

Correct, great.

Thank you.

So there are three separate parts of the of the obligation in the agreement.

There's a period that we're in now, which is the called the pre-uh rehabilitation.

Then there is after you're done uh uh a requirement that you follow certain things, and then there's a third category that's listed as others.

We have a very distinct responsibility today in that if the commission feels that you have complied with all the rules and regulations that are in this legal agreement for the past year, then we'll be able to reduce the judgment that is against that.

And and I am quite frankly surprised that that important part of the responsibility today is not listed in the agenda memo to the point that I was gonna ask for an abeyance of this item until we have the full information.

For example, we don't know how much the judgment is currently.

What how much that that's not listed in the uh uh in the the agenda memo.

Uh Steven, for the record, I can rectify that right now.

For when Mr.

Dapper was here last time, uh we did uh 2021, 22, 23, and 24.

Uh the original amount of the liquidated damages is 389,925.

So 389,925, and we did reduce it by 38,992 and 50 cents for all four of those uh previous years because the commission did approve uh the um compliance, and the new liquidated damages are in the amount of two hundred and thirty-three thousand dollars and two hundred thirty-three thousand nine hundred and fifty-five.

The dollar figure is is is increased but interesting, but the fact that that the commission doesn't was not made a prize of that in this motion or or in this in this in this action item that this if we approve this, it's going to have a significant impact on the dollar figure.

And that just that uh threw me off to the point that I might post it note says here let's obey this item until we have an updated proper agenda motion.

So, Mr.

Chair, uh Seth Floyd for the records.

I I think the the question would be is is the item properly noticed uh for purpose of the commission voting.

I think that it is because your the finding that you are required to make that I think is captured in item number seven is whether under the pre-rehabilitation obligations did uh Mr.

Dapper exercise reasonable diligence to cause significant progress towards rehabilitation.

Your answer to that question then triggers another part of the settlement agreement, which is the reduction or not, if you were to say that he has not made that progress.

Um and so we can't really answer that question until you vote on whether he's made uh exercise reasonable diligence to cause significant progress.

I have to keep reading that because I can't remember it.

But uh, so I I think it's properly noticed.

The your vote will have an effect then on what happens in another part of the contract.

Uh to me that's not a satisfactory answer in the fact that that is is the most important element, one of the most important elements of this item, and it's not listed here.

We can say thank you very much, nice job in this past year uh all done, you can go now, but what it triggers is a substantial reduction in the financial judgment that currently it's not really against you, you just had to accept that it was from the previous owners, and as part of the legal agreement, you you had to accept that, so to speak.

Um so it wasn't anything you did, it's what the previous owners didn't didn't do.

So it's not a slap at you, but the adjudgment is part of the legal agreement.

I was I was very surprised that that wasn't that wasn't listed in here.

And and I I would we can move on.

I'll ask the city attorney if if we can move on.

Uh otherwise I'll ask for this item to be obeyed until January.

Paul Mossad deputy city attorney.

Um I agree with Mr.

Floyd's um analysis.

I think the item has been noticed properly.

I think I I understand why you think that information is important for the commission to make its decision.

So if you want to move to obey the item, you're within your right to do so, but um it can't be it can't be forward as as noticed in the agenda item right now.

So uh I just asked the uh uh the commission the the key element if you could uh Dr.

C brand if you could give us the numbers again.

I didn't write them down, I was too busy listening to myself.

Okay, Seabrant for the record.

So the original agreement, the Dapper liquidated damages in the amount of 389,000 925 dollars.

We are able to reduce that number by an amount of 38, 992 dollars and 50 cents each year.

Okay.

And so because we did reduce it for 2021, 2022, 2023, and 2024, it reduced it in a sum of 155,970.

That resulted in a new liquidated damages in the amount of 233,955.

And Mr.

Mr.

Chairman Seth Floyd for the record, I did take a look at how the item was agendized last December when you approved those numbers or the when you found that the reasonable diligence had been exercised last year and they are agendized almost identically.

That the number or the effect of your vote was not included in the uh header for either of the two items.

You did two items, one for the first uh three years, December of 21, or excuse me, March of 21 through December of 23, and then one for 2024.

So we agendized them in the same manner that we did last time.

To me, it's uh as as chair, it is a fundamental element of this action that we are looking at reducing it by uh close to 40,000.

This, by the way, within the legal agreement that Mr.

Dapper, the mayor signed, the state signed, says that the historic preservation has a sole discretion to reduce this.

And that's award those that's a phrase that's in the in the document.

So this is a significant responsibility of the historic preservation commission to review uh the the things that uh Mr.

Dapper, the Dapper company was supposed to do and this this past year, including the fact that uh uh what bothered me even more about this item is you go to the second page and it says backup documentation, and the backup documentation it says is March 2025 update, August 2025 update.

They're not there.

Uh C Mark for the record, I don't understand why they aren't there.

They were um they should be part of the backup.

Those are the updates that Mr.

Dapper gave on his previous um updates in order for the commission to um make that determination.

Uh I honestly don't know why they're not there, but I will check it out.

Well, and March you weren't you weren't here March.

No, Mr.

Chair, if it was it was it was obeyed and then it was struck because it wasn't uh Mr.

Dapper wasn't able to appear as a second time either.

No, it was obeyed twice.

So Mr.

Chair, if you if you'd like me to come back at the next meeting, I'm I'm in you know, I don't I'm not sure what has to be you know put into the record, but I'd be happy to do that since I'm supposed to come in uh once a quarter, and you know, I I guess I would ask the city staff this, but uh happy to come in, I guess in January, and I don't know if that would also suffice for you know one one of the quarterly updates, or you know, if I would then have to come in, I guess the pre the next month.

Well, I uh this is a matter not for me, it's a matter for the this is an item, an action item, uh and and both uh uh Seth and the city attorney have Mr.

Chairman by the way we so those those items are in the backup when you go to the agenda and you click on it.

There isn't the agenda memo memo page that you referred to references the two updates, those two documents are then uh linked to the agenda item well so there they are there available.

They weren't there before.

There's one item in there that is uh uh uh and I and I copied it.

It's it's called uh maybe we're talking about seabrent for there.

I are you talking about item six or item seven, because item seven item seven, the two backups are included in the agenda, and this is the agenda that the city clerks send to everybody seven days prior to the meeting.

If you looked at anything prior to those seven days, it's not going to be in there.

But once the city clerk and then Teresa again sends the email that says these are the agenda items and the backup documents, they are there.

So I'm not sure why they weren't there.

Um when you look, but they were they are there.

Well, they're clearly there today.

Okay.

So with the uh the support of the vice chair, Dr.

Cebranch, and the city attorney's office, uh, I will withdraw my comment regarding not seeing the March uh or August uh uh report.

So with that, I think uh I I don't is there any feeling we should move this to January?

We'd rather go ahead today.

I have a feeling that we'd like to go ahead today to see any head shaking that we want to obey this item today today.

Okay, so we will move forward today.

Thank you.

Uh and and Mr.

Dapper, it's all yours.

Say again.

It's it's uh you have a report to give us under uh sorry, C Brent for the record.

So I think we that we combine these two items, and so Mr.

Dapper has given the update to explain what has been done um for this entire year, and then there is no PowerPoint for this.

Um there's just the backup that shows the progress that has or has not been made is what um the HBC is going to uh vote on today is if you feel he has expressed the um again, I have to look at it just like Seth does the due diligence to make um the rehabilitation efforts, and it's either the we as staff are recommending approval, so you can either approve it or not approve it as a board.

So there is a backup material that is here.

Any questions from for uh Mr.

Dapper, please.

Um, Commissioner Laramie.

So just a couple of clarifications quick, and then I do have a couple of questions for Mr.

Dapper.

So just to make sure I'm understanding the kind of the numbers right that you presented, the remaining amount um that at this point in time, Mr.

Dapper is responsible for that we have the ability to reduce with this approval is 233,955.

And with an approval this year uh on this item, we would reduce that by 38,992.50 and for every year subsequent until that's gone.

That is C Bart for the record.

That is correct.

Okay, great.

So then um, Mr.

Dapper, I'm just looking at your um presentations from earlier in the year, um, and just trying to kind of clarify some of the the milestones that you mentioned earlier.

So if I'm understanding, it sounds like this year in 2025, you completed your financial stack, you got approval of the historic tax credits um through SHIPO and kind of got all of that in line.

You're finalizing your drawings, but still kind of working through some final changes and haven't submitted for permits yet, correct?

Correct.

Okay.

Um great.

So I I'll just follow up and say that I personally think getting the financing kind of all in place and complete is a major milestone, um, and does demonstrate substantial process.

Um excited to see the permitting drawings submitted.

That's obviously your next major milestone that we'll look for next year.

Um, and I would support approval of the item.

Just a quick question.

Uh you have all the money you need to do what you need to do.

Well, um, when you say have all the money, so part of this is uh bank financing, and then part of it would be incentives.

So we've gotten you know a great deal of incentives, but there's still parts of that that we have not gotten.

So um uh Commissioner Laramie, so when you said um are I think you used the word capital stack, but so there's a lot of pieces and parts to that.

So one of the things that you have to be is permit ready in order to be able to, you know, put financing in place.

It's very difficult to go get bank financing for any project when you don't have a set of permits, and so one thing doesn't happen before the other, and so um understand that you know we have gone out and and seeked you know various um you know things like the historic tax credits, which is part of our capital stack, so that it that's accurate.

Um today.

No, I don't have my bank loan to do this, but I'm gonna need to have a set of fully approved plans before I can do that.

I guess we're both reading from the same where it says the uh financing completion of financial uh uh stack to fully fund the hundreds project was due in the fourth quarter of this year.

When you say due, no, I mean it's well it just it's just the chart that you gave us.

Yeah, so that that's we were showing a timeline, and I mean, you know, that's contingent upon us completing a set of plans, and that set of plans, as I've said, you know, has changed.

So unfortunately, you know, one of the things that we have to do, I mean, just even some of the civil changes that we've had to make to accommodate the BRT project, it's not like we just draw those plans, and you know, we have to have coordination with both um the regional transportation commission, um the person who's running the BRT project, and then also the city.

And so I I wish that you know things went much quicker through the planning process.

But this what we've been working on this past year is probably one of the most important parts of the project.

You know, it it's hard to see physical progress, you know, very similarly to the mission linen project.

That project sat idle for a number of years.

I I know we walked it together.

Right, but today if you go there, you know, there was significant pro uh progress, but the majority of the progress that happens from a planning standpoint happens on the front end when you're you know uh producing your set of plans.

So I I guess when you submit this, yeah.

Which which says that permitting is going to be done by the third quarter of this year, financing the fourth quarter, construction begins in the first quarter of next year, and by the end of 2026, we're gonna be open.

Yeah, so this is not correct.

Well, no, but that was submitted quite some time ago, and there's been some changes since then in which I've given updates to.

So, you know, as time go goes on, I mean, you know, a project evolves and changes, and when those changes happen, you know, I I'd love to just say we could just make a quick change and you know, go out and get a permit, but it just doesn't work that way.

So, yeah, I I acknowledge the fact that you know we put together a timeline, and some of some of those times have changed a little bit.

Other questions?

Comments, please.

Commissioner Harper.

Um you mentioned that you're expecting to have the plans completed in 2026, the first, second, third quarter.

Do you do you have an idea on that?

Well, yeah, so the plans are current they're currently completed.

Um the only thing that we have to do is just firm up the changes that FDA has made a recommendation to.

Once those can be agreed upon, um, you know, part part of the the recommendations that they've made, you know, like we we have to make sure we're working within in the bounds of the approval that this board has given us.

Um we also have to make sure that the city, you know, is okay with you know any changes that they suggest.

So um it's my hope that we get those completed and in, you know, as quickly as possible.

Um making changes to plans is never uh it's not ever something that I want to do because it takes time and money.

And listen, I you know, I have debt service and property taxes that I pay on this property every month.

There's cost to keep security around the building.

It's it's not like you know, for me, I mean, advancing the project is a very positive thing, and that's what that's what we want to do.

So, but we also when you're dealing with an old building in you know, all of the older buildings that I've rehabilitated in downtown, it takes a lot of work and time and dedication, and you know, it hasn't uh been ideal.

There's been a lot of major projects that have happened around the theater.

Um, you know, we thought that uh the BRT project wasn't gonna really interrupt us.

In fact, you know, we had a uh bit of a commitment from the people who ran that project that they were gonna relocate the bus uh structure away from the front of the theater, and you know, we ended up losing that battle or fight, whatever you want to call it.

And um, you know, it caused us to have to make some changes to our project.

And so, you know, each one of those uh those things that happen, it pushes the timeline out.

So if not, would look for a motion.

I'm not really okay.

I'm not really sure how to what we're actually motioning with other than to approve the item.

See if I'm willing to do that.

Stephen for the record, I believe Commissioner Laramie already has an approval on on the record.

I don't know.

That was not a motion.

You just said it wasn't a motion.

Yeah, I was just expressing my um willingness to approve the rest of it.

Thank you.

So um, Commissioner Levine, the item to approve or not approve is if uh Mr.

Dapper is in compliance with due diligence and making the um rehabilit significant rehabilitation towards the theater.

All right, I would go for that, and I would uh express that I think the opinion of the that we're in a hurry, and we hope you'll take that into account that we would like to see this done just as quickly as possible.

I don't believe there's been any intention for you to stall the project or hold things up.

Uh so in my opinion, uh I move for approval.

Thank you.

Further discussion of the commission.

Please.

Commissioner Grimer, for the record.

Um I would agree that uh I'm pretty impressed that with the progress has been made this year.

Um, and in like Jack said, you know, obviously we'd like to see those plans get approved as soon as possible, even with the edits.

Um, and also I'm pretty supportive of the efforts that you all have made to include a lot of the nonprofit organizations in this, you know, having having a lot of buy-in to it is gonna help its success in the future.

Thank you.

Further qu further questions, comments, general public.

Hearing none, all those in favor of the motion say aye.

Aye.

Aye.

One more.

Is that it?

Do you want to ask if anyone is opposed?

Oh, I thought there was one more person on the telephone.

No, there's only three.

Motion carries unanimously with the chair voting in favor.

Mr.

Dapper, thank you very much.

Look forward to uh uh hearing the next update.

Thank you, Mr.

Chair.

Okay.

Thanks.

I would request that staff expand this memo when we uh read it next year at this time.

Thank you.

Agenda item eight uh is 25-0567-HPC one.

This presentation by the staff of the National Museum of Organized Crime and Law Enforcement, popularly known as the Mob Museum, is a report and discussion item only.

This is not an action item at this time.

The report focuses on a planned expansion project for the museum, which will entail adding a new approximately 25,000 square foot two-story addition to the west side of the building.

The museum is housed within the former U.S.

post office and courthouse, and that is listed on the National Register of Historic Places as well as the uh State Register of Historic Places, as well as the City of Las Vegas Historic Property Register.

The museum is working with Chattel Incorporated Historic Preservation Consultants on the project to ensure that the national state and Las Vegas standards for treatment of historic properties are properly posted.

A certificate of appropriateness of plaque application will be submitted.

Anyway, uh a series of appropriateness application will be submitted to this commission for approval at the appropriate time.

Staff from the museum, along with their historic preservation consultants, are providing an information report to the HBC regarding their upcoming work.

Dr.

Siegbrand.

Thank you, Seabrant for the record.

So as you said, Chairman Stodle, that this is just an information item.

Um I have had several discussions with um Jonathan and his crew about this project, and so the discussion focuses on expanding the museum and um to come in front of the HPC before a certificate of appropriateness is um applied for and submitted that he comes before this commission to provide an update so that you can um provide any comments, feedback, or um more importantly, understand what's happening.

In this case, however, our responsibility is confined to the exterior.

That is correct, yes.

Great, thank you.

Welcome.

Please introduce yourself for the record.

Thank you.

So for the record, I'm Jonathan Allman.

I'm the president and CEO of the Mob Museum.

Uh I'm here uh joined with um Theresa Mears, who is our project architect.

Theresa's with LGA that is the firm doing our design work.

Uh, and then we also have Robert Chattle, uh historic architect.

And uh Robert Um, I'm I'm pleased to say has as much history with our building uh as as anyone having uh served in in this capacity for the original rehabilitation that preceded our opening in 2012, as well as um our improvement project in 2017 and back again with us today.

So to uh I'd like to talk a little bit about why we're doing this and uh and then I'll pass it on uh to Robert and Teresa to talk a little bit more about the historic um considerations and the uh uh more specific design plans that we have.

But we uh uh so I'm sure everybody uh on the commission is familiar.

We we opened in 2012 and uh um we are uh we've been very fortunate to have enjoyed a lot of success uh since then.

So we welcome on an annual basis more than 400,000 guests.

Um we uh in addition to our daily operations uh a lot of programming and special events uh occur in our building in our museum uh on a regular basis.

Um we've done a lot to try to extend what we do as a museum out into the community.

So as much as uh we're proud uh and and highly focused on those guests that that come uh through our doors every day.

We also do a lot to go out uh through community outreach through our educational programs that are largely targeted uh to student groups uh who we would like to be more and more welcoming to the museum as well.

Uh and the organization has grown considerably.

So uh our staff has doubled uh in size, more than doubled in size for the past 10 years.

Our volunteer group um uh contingent continues to increase in size, um, and uh we're quite proud of that.

Uh and the role that we play uh in terms of economic development and economic impact, particularly in the downtown area of Las Vegas, uh is considerable, and we um you know see that as an important component of what we do.

You know, we are a mission-driven organization, we're 501 uh 503c uh nonprofit.

Uh but we also recognize that uh one of the driving forces behind the city in the original um conception uh of our museum was to help revitalize downtown.

So that is a role that we take very seriously, uh and giving back to the local community is something that we care about quite a lot as well.

So and we see that in our free days uh and other ways in which we engage local residents.

Um now with with that success come a lot of challenges.

So as much as we love the fact that we welcome as many guests as we do uh for a building of our size, a museum of our size, um that's that is a lot of people.

So you know, in terms of industry standards, we welcome more than double uh what is typical of a museum of our square footage.

Uh and we see it in the guest comments that you know, if you if you look at our areas for improvement when we survey our guests, uh typically the top thing that we will see as uh and a challenge for the organization is crowding.

So and we know that we could do a much better job of kind of you know providing more space for gathering, as well as giving people the proper orientation uh to the museum journey so that we can help people customize their visits, you know, make it, you know, as the the dwell time in the museum continues to grow more and more we should be guiding our guests uh to be really seeking out those areas of of the museum that are of particular interest to them, and that's something that simply can't be done within the space constraints that we have right now.

We've also have been in this fortunate spot where over uh over the decade plus that we've been operating, we continue to learn more and we continue to collect more in terms of objects that we could be putting on display.

And there's there's a lot more that that having more space uh can do for us, you know, in terms of additional exhibits um and uh and really achieving our mission uh and also then being able to encourage people to come back more than more than once, you know, repeat visitation to see more, do more, and learn more in the uh in the museum.

And we also have increasingly found that we uh we often compete with ourselves uh for space within the museum.

So currently our courtroom is uh you know it's the historic core of the building, it's a very special space, it's the largest gathering space that we have in the museum, and so uh it's really important for part of the regular visit um when guests come to uh purchase a ticket and explore the museum.

It's also the space that we use for our public programs, it's also a coveted space for private events, and we know that if we were to expand, then that that allows us to free up these spaces that we are you know now nice problem to have constantly asking ourselves what is the best you know, highest and best use of those uh of those spaces.

So we've been working on a plan, and uh I'm going to turn it over to Robert now to provide a little bit more of the context, you know, before we get into the uh the actual design.

Thank you, Jonathan.

Uh so in these two images, you see a historic image on the left showing the uh former uh post office and courthouse in the city park with the uh very early uh city hall to the east.

Um as you know, the property was developed by the federal government and transferred to the city of Las Vegas through a federal surplus properties transfer in 2002.

So the city of Las Vegas owns the building and leases it to the parent company of the mob museum.

Um the project that was completed in 2012 obviously was a different um environment in downtown Las Vegas.

Um and interestingly enough, as uh you may be aware, the uh mob museum um has purchased the adjacent property.

So that's now privately held by the mob museum adjacent to the city owned parcel.

So these are both opportunities and challenges uh for the team, but you should be aware that that's the uh primary basis of um expansion um plans.

So it's a little bit difficult for us at the outset to build over that line between city-owned property and privately held property, and Teresa will cover some of that.

Um just a couple of uh comments about the uh 2012 uh completed project.

Uh the uh grant deed that transferred the property from the General Services Administration to the City of Las Vegas requires ongoing review from the National Park Service, basically in perpetuity.

Um interestingly, to kind of riff on the item that was before us.

Um the 2012 project used federal historic tax credits, and we continue to have uh dialogue with the National Park Service through the course of that project and the 2017 project, and we've reached out yet again to the National Park Service uh for review of this proposed project.

We have received some informal comments.

We're expecting something more formal.

Um we've also been communicating uh with the Nevada State Historic Preservation Office.

The project in 2012 received um it's at least eight uh grants from the state of Nevada, um, and those each have um covenants that run, I think 30 to 50 years, so we're well within still that period of review.

So we've been working closely with uh staff in Carson City to review the project.

We've not received um comments as yet.

I do believe that uh liaison is listening to our conversation today.

Um so we're we're thrilled to be at this point, but know that we are actively reaching out uh to receive comments.

Um so maybe just a few things about the image that you're seeing, you know.

The the building was completed in 1933, it's a neoclassical design that incorporates both architectural terracotta, um glazed in this case of uh a buff yellow color, if you will, um, and um uh brick, um, which is a blended uh sort of sandstone color brick.

It is finished on all elevations.

There's certainly a primary south facade along Stewart Avenue, um, which uh is the most important of those elevations, but the secondary elevations are also uh let's say well finished.

And the that the first image I showed was principally the south and west elevation.

This is principally the north and west elevations.

We were very careful, I think, in the first projects to really take a restoration approach to the facade.

So it's uh and the elevations, it's very much celebrated and celebrated as part of the history of the building.

Um we did take some liberties.

Um, the loading dock in uh this particular image was infilled with new construction, it's done in a contemporary way.

Teresa will show some of the other alterations that we uh completed in 2012, and our approach there would be reapplied to this expansion.

So just a little something about the review process.

Uh, we've mentioned the Secretary of the Interiors standards for the treatment of historic properties, those are the standards that govern this new expansion.

Um, there's a substantial amount of written guidance from the National Park Service on how to make an appropriate addition.

Um, and you'll see that we've studied where the best placement for the addition would be, and we're taking the approach that it's of a contemporary compatible nature.

So we'll discuss a little bit more of that.

Thank you, Robert.

This is uh Theresa Mears, LGA for the record.

I'm gonna share two topics with you today.

I'm gonna start with some of the study and thought process that the design team has undergone in developing this initial concept so that the board is aware of where some of the design decisions have come from, and then I will share the preliminary design drawings in their current state for your comment.

So we begin the process by looking at precedent to analyze common threads of successful additions to historic buildings.

And so this slide is just highlighting some of the things we identified, including scale being subordinate in both the scale of the addition and in the siding being set back from that primary facade using a hyphen to articulate the separation between old and new.

And then I think importantly, connecting sensitively.

One of the primary precedent projects we looked at is the Wallace Annenberg Center for the Arts in Beverly Hills.

I I share this with you just it's a similar example of a project providing an expansion to a 1930s post office and doing so in a contrasting style but with sensitivity to the original building.

For this project, one of those critical details that we identified is the need to connect into the building.

So looking at strategies for converting a window opening into a door opening in a way that's sensitive.

This is a summary of several of the approaches considered.

So at the jam using a contrasting material, such as they did at the Wallace Annenberg Center, mashing the existing material in place, or simply providing an open threshold to maximize circulation.

Luckily for the design team, we have precedent on site for this, as Robert mentioned.

In the previous renovation or rehabilitation, uh three openings on the east side of the north facade were modified.

I believe there was a non-original exit stair in this location, but specifically that first floor window was converted into a door opening using sensitive removal of the material at the sill and replacement with a matching terracotta facade to create the new jams, resulting in a finished final installation.

And this methodology would guide the design team in our proposed connections that you'll see further into the presentation.

We also did a pretty significant study of where the expansions should sit on the site.

Because the existing building is not actually centered on its parcel, there is less space available to the east.

So the primary areas of focus in this study were expanding to the north or expanding to the west.

As Jonathan mentioned, one of the challenges the museum faces is crowding.

And that crowding is especially evident in the arrival sequence in the ticketing and lobby.

So locating the building on the west allows us to have that proximity to Stewart Avenue and to keep any new entry sequences on the primary facade of the historic building, retaining the importance of that main facade.

Two different strategies were considered for entry.

The first I'll talk about is the possibility of reusing the continuing to use the historic stairs and the entry that the mob museum uses today.

Several challenges with this approach.

First is accessibility.

There is a wheelchair lift at these stairs, but that's not a preferred accessible route.

Also, in the 1930s, this was perfectly acceptable, but there is no vestibule, which does not really meet modern environmental standards for building entry.

And any work that would be undertaken to provide more space at this lobby would have significant impacts on the historic interior and the operations of the museum.

So the other strategy considered was creating a new main entry off of a plaza on Stuart, allowing for a democratic entrance where any guest could enter the building unassisted.

The historic stairs in this case would remain in use, but just not as your primary entry for ticketing at the museum, still in use for special events or potentially access to the retail store.

Looking at using fewer stories to reduce the height and divide the new addition from the original building with a glass hyphen.

For the exterior material palette, the intention is to balance continuity and reinterpretation of the historic material palette.

So using warm masonry materials to reference the brick and terracotta facade of the building and introducing a new architectural metal screen that draws its geometry from the classical facade.

So now I've covered some of the initial study and thinking.

On the site plan, you can see the addition is sited to the west of the building, set back to create a main entry plaza on Stuart, allowing for new entry to the museum and a dynamic public space, also creating secondary plazas to the north and east of the historic building.

Pushing the site traffic to the perimeter of the campus will allow the museum to truly have a campus feel and have a pedestrian core to provide continuity between the plazas and the interior spaces.

On the first level of the building, the entry leads you into a lobby where ticketing and arrival functions would be taken would take place and then connects into the program spaces in both the addition to the north and west and in the historic building.

On the first floor, the proposed connection is in the northwest corner of the historic building, identifying three window, current window openings that would be replaced with doors.

On the second floor, a upper lobby provides a vantage point both into the atrium space, allowing for views of the west facade of the historic building and through glass to the exterior of the historic courtroom.

This space has a connection proposed on the second floor, utilizing this just the center window on that level, allowing the space to function as a pre-function space for the historic courtroom and a setup for the museum program spaces located on the second floor of the edition.

A very minimal basement is proposed purely to provide staff access from the new edition into the historic building.

And the connection at this level is proposed to be a current exterior door, which is currently accesses an exit stair and would be uh enclosed in a new basement enclosure.

All right.

We have some preliminary renderings to share with you today as well, starting with the new front elevation.

The goal is that the expansion responds to and contrasts the existing building, telling a story about all that the mob museum has to offer.

The lobby serves as a hyphen between old and new, both creating separation and allowing the west facade of the building to be expressed and viewed from the exterior.

As you enter the new edition, we're in a multi-height lobby space with the west facade of the historic building on your right, and new program spaces for the museum on your left.

This space gives you an opportunity to experience the historic building in a new way and um includes columns that would support the roof independent of the historic building structure so that the roof is not bearing on the historic building.

We're currently showing those columns with a fluted encasing to reference the fluted ionic pie lasters on the historic facade.

As you move through past ticketing towards the northwest corner of the historic building where the lobby touches that area.

Those are the two items that I highlighted on the floor plan for points of connection.

So in the image on the right, we're looking at the first floor, and on the image on the left, we're looking at the second.

The proposal for these connections is to provide a new door that matches the geometry and styling of the original window, and to replace the jam with similar terracotta materials to result in a finished clean facade that retains its um continuity.

From the second level, you have an opportunity to view the historic building from a new vantage point, both within the building and through the glass to the historic courtroom.

Moving outside the alley plaza refurbishes a currently service space for public use, giving the public an opportunity to experience that historic loading dock and to see the mob museum from a perspective that they don't currently see it.

The new addition and the main entry plaza provide a new arrival to the mob museum, not to diminish the grandeur of the historic building, but to add new layers to the experience.

Referencing the historic building, but also speaking to the contemporary neighborhood and the space the specific Las Vegas feel of both downtown Las Vegas and some of the stories that the mob museum tells.

Questions or comments from the board.

Please.

In this new arrangement.

Yes.

We uh uh we very much expect our visitation to continue to uh to rise.

Um and we have um extrapolated that um visitation level um considerably.

Uh so as we've we've go through um our planning and not just architecturally but also in terms of kind of you know financial considerations for the expansion planning, um you know, multi-year attendance growth is uh is factored in, and the plans that we have here are intended to not just address the challenges that we have today, but to give us space to continue to grow over the next five to ten years.

Uh Commissioner Gramer for the record, um, it's good to see you guys.

You know, I've been down to the museum and have a lot invested in the museum.

Um so I know that our purview is primarily the exterior of the building, but um have you thought about how you plan to repurpose the post office?

Because I mean when currently you you come up those stairs and you come into the post office with the windows and all of that, and that really makes quite a statement.

Um if the entrance is is moved around to the side of the building, which it totally makes sense that it would be, because you're right, it's a small entryway the way it currently is.

But what are your thoughts on how to really still highlight that post office in section of the building?

Uh I'll I'll take that again for the record, Jonathan Alman.

Um thank thank you for making that point because the uh the history of the building is is something that we celebrate uh and take extremely seriously at the museum.

So uh and you see that in a in a number of forms.

There are um are exhibits on the second floor about the building.

Um there are graphic and text panels on the first floor that explain aspects of the uh historic building.

We've done a documentary about the building.

Uh we've just launched uh a new section of our website that is all about the history of the building.

Uh one of the things we absolutely do not want to lose in all of this uh is a sense of uh what is this building that people uh have entered.

Um as well as the fact that that one of the things that we we really love about the way in which people engage with the building right now uh is on those front steps, the historic steps.

Uh any time you go past the museum in the nicer weather, you see people lingering out there sitting on the steps and really enjoying themselves.

And um, and I think um, and it is you know I we can't quantify this, but if if it is not the uh single greatest uh spot, it is uh you know uh high on the list of where people are taking photographs, you know, in and around the museum, appreciating uh the grandeur of the building from the exterior.

So um we have not gotten into the details of you know, once we liberate the box office function from the the existing lobby, if that is repurposed into a new entry, as um we would like to do in this plan because uh what we do see uh in terms of congestion on any busy day is there is uh there's way too much going on in the current lobby.

People come up the front steps, uh they uh don't necessarily have familiarity with what we're all about and what they're supposed to do next.

Uh we are trying to direct them to the box office, they get on a get on the line, we're explaining the different options they have, we're then sending them down the corridor to go get on the elevator to go start their journey.

Uh at the same time, other guests who have been in the museum and are now circ circulating across the first floor are either going back out the front doors or they're going all the way back to the uh west end of the lobby to go downstairs uh into the uh the basement area.

Um in some ways, the uh um because of uh uh all of that kind of um activity going on in that space, uh even though that entry up the front steps and into the his you know into the uh historic lobby and where the uh where the post office boxes are is you know seems like the ideal way to to explain to people where they are.

Uh there really isn't time to engage with the surroundings.

I mean, people are uh, you know, there's a lot of transacting and moving.

Um one of the things that excites us about this plan is that as we make more space in that area and we're no longer trying to do box office transactions and having all of the guest flow uh compounded by um welcome um reception tables for special events and groups gathering, if we're able to relocate that, there's more opportunity for us to do um activities in the lobby area that you know provide interpretation about where people are uh and allow them to appreciate that better.

Without the stairs, uh it's almost just another building.

The stairs are are uh an important part of the structure and to have an arrow pointing this way to uh enter or the doors blocked off to me is not satisfactory.

But again, I don't not sure that's under our purview, but it is the exterior of the building.

Uh I'm not sure if steps come into uh our our purview, but it sounds like you're working on it.

And uh uh I think that's uh to me they're they're very very important.

The other thing I'm concerned about is are we losing the west side of the building?

If I want to take a photograph of this building, am I losing the the the west side?

Uh looks like we've got three poles um standing there.

I ask ask you, are we losing the west side of the building to photographs and visually uh because that's one of the things that comes before this board.

Uh Teresa Mears, LGA.

Thank you for that question.

I think that that was a a very big consideration that we had as well when we're taking on connecting to any side of this building is what is the impact we're having on that facade.

And so a couple things that we have studied to kind of minimize that impact.

One, setting that back so you still get the expression of the corner of that building, and we do not kind of relegate the building to just a flat south facade.

Um another is that those columns are aligned with the building pilasters and referencing them so that there is some connectivity between the column and the design of the historic building.

And then finally, although this west facade does become enclosed, we think that there's still a great opportunity to experience it from the interior of the building.

Um and leaving it uninterrupted, it can be expressed from the lobby space both on the ground floor and viewed from the second floor as well.

And and memory serve me right that this is a uh uh hoop we have to jump through with the federal government as far as what we're doing connecting to the building, touching it and and losing some visual impact.

Yeah, Robert Chattle for the record, I would just add we've already received a comment from the National Park Service about this exact point.

Um so it's likely um as we look at refining um the proposed project that uh um at least the addition portion, the roof and the first column may very well move further back.

Okay.

Um their comment was uh very much aligned with Chair Stotl's comment about the west elevation um being less visible.

Um but I think it would still be, I think uh it I think it's dynamic and interesting way of still incorporating the facade as part of the interior space, but when viewed from the southwest um uh uh setting this slightly further back um will allow that the the fullness of the building to read even if the atrium is still uh attached at this point, it will just be further back.

John, I understand that there's a moving project and there are things that uh changes and adjustments are made and and appreciate this this update, but if we could uh any time there's a major substantial change, uh if you could come be so we're in the loop, so to speak, information-wise.

So when the final decision comes in, it's not all uh uh a brand new and uh Jack Levine for the record.

My first my first impression was the same thing I thought when I saw a picture of the pyramid in front of the Louvre in Paris.

And how but I will say that that's grown on me over the years.

I've never seen it in person, but I've seen it in a thousand movies and pictures and uh news reports and and it's grown on me.

I my my objection here I think is just the color of the white that feels like a an Illuma wood patio cover that you'd see on the back of a house.

Uh I think if it blended and matches more to the old building, I I don't know that it would be as objectionable, but it is there in white, it is objectionable.

Okay, so maybe that's just an easy cure for that.

Um my biggest fear is that this is what the ballroom is gonna end up looking like.

Okay, so I'm done.

Thank you.

Commissioner, if I may, and I I'm not going to comment on the ballroom, but um the uh, you know, and I think all of these comments, um, we we've been wrestling with this a lot.

I mean, clearly there's a trade-off here.

If we uh uh and anything that you add uh is going to impact the external visibility of uh of the building.

Um what what we do like in that trade-off though, uh, and I think you know, both Theresa and Robert uh spoke to this, um, that it does afford somebody uh inside that atrium to engage with the facade of the building in a way that they can't now.

I mean, you uh you can't get as close to the building now uh because of the landscaping, because of the drive.

Um you can't get the higher perspective that you would from a second floor uh angle uh as you know, and I know we went through the presentation quickly, uh, but there is one of the uh renderings of the second floor, kind of what we've been regarding as the upper atrium that allows you to look down and out and appreciate the west facade um from um from a higher vantage point.

This is um I think maybe even on this slide, you can see the the people that are up there on the uh kind of that that balcony um being able to you know to look out and take in that facade uh and both on the first floor and the second floor, providing us with additional space in which we can put interpretation that help people understand um the importance and the impact of this building and the history of this building.

So you know, again, there's there's absolutely a trade-off there, and I think your your commissioner, your comments about the you know, the the appearance of specific uh materials is something that we uh um will put a lot more um time and thought into um you know, far more than what we've done here with these uh simple renderings.

One more.

Um this one more um if I could uh uh the big issue downtown, I especially it's affecting over in the arts district, but it's everywhere is parking.

You're losing a lot of your parking the last three times I've been to the museum.

Uh and it is other than the sphere, it isn't the number one place that I take my out-of-town guests and and visitors.

So I I do appreciate that you're there and I love what you have.

But the last three times I went, I they I had to pay to park, but there was nowhere to park.

I ended up in a casino museum and walking through I'm a casino uh parking garage and uh and walking three blocks to get to you.

So what is the parking?

You're losing a lot of your parking in doing this.

That uh commissioner, that that is true.

Um, and thank you for your visitation, and we hope to get to be number one.

Um the uh um as you can see on this the uh the site plan here, uh the plans do include uh new parking on what you know as Robert had mentioned early on, the parcel that we have purchased, the Southeast parcel.

So if you you see where um on this plan it's labeled event plaza um with the uh with the car kind of off uh about kind of two-thirds to the I wish I had a pointer here.

Um but that is that is uh effectively the property line, right where the uh where that drive is, you know, where the plaza ends.

And uh the current plan has the uh a brand new parking lot that is on that southeast triangular uh parcel, as well as additional spaces to the to the north um behind where it's where the uh alley plaza is labeled, where you can see that kind of truck backing into the loading dock.

Um and then within this plan, there is still uh, although we can't be certain of how things are going to develop on the property that's adjacent to us, but there is still additional parking that is um the the city parking spaces that are uh farther to the west.

At some point, um, you know, you know, to your point, uh parking is limited.

Um there have been some conversations with city staff about the addition potentially of another public parking lot that would be near us uh that would hopefully offset some of the demand, not just for us but for additional development in the area.

Um but um this is the answer that we have right now.

All right, well, don't forget about parking.

Okay.

Uh you go back to the original or the slide that showed the front or the west side.

Are you no the next one?

There you oh, that's no the one that showed the steps.

There you go.

Uh I like the steps as I said.

Well, what are you dealing with handicapped?

I don't see any slopes here.

No, um commissioner the um so there are on the uh far west side on the west side, yeah, behind the trees.

So there is there is a ramp there.

So the these plans, this entry plaza uh has both the stairs that go directly towards the vestibule, um, as well as slightly to the uh to the west, you can see the ramp that will also have people uh meet at the top of the stairs that come off the sidewalk.

So everybody is going uh much more easily right into the new addition into the new vestibule.

But it's also the furthest one.

Yeah, I'd I uh have become experienced with uh uh with ramps, including the one in front of the city hall, which seems to be an afterthought.

Um but this is seems to be the longest route to get to the front.

It would be nice if there was a short ramp or something that would be uh as well as of the structure.

So I'm sure you're you're looking at the handicapped opportunities within within the building.

Uh thank you.

No, uh Commissioner Absolutely that's absolutely very important to us, and we will continue to look at that more carefully.

Um again, one of the reasons why we uh have been attracted to this plan in the first place is to be able to accommodate all of our guests uh in a way that is makes it easy um and also doesn't separate people, you know.

And and you know, we you know the the current entry into the um into our building right now requires guests that are in wheelchairs or using walkers uh to go up that external lift, which um is you know frankly not as reliable as it should be.

Uh it is a single person, uh really a single wheelchair lift at a time, um, and and really doesn't provide the access with the kind of ease and dignity that we would like to have for all of our guests.

So um I promise you that we will look at this carefully.

Great.

That's great.

Any other question, please?

Uh Commissioner Harper, um briefly, is a cantilever roof or the atrium feasible at all.

Teresa Mears, LGA, um, could you clarify?

Do you mean removing the columns in there and pure cantilever?

Um I as a not a structural engineer, um I'm not sure that I could confidently say yes to that, but I will say our thought process, including the columns, is that a cantilever of that extension would be um uh a serious cost investment.

And so we did locate that line of columns um using there is currently a kind of recess light well for the basement windows on that west facade.

So we did set that column line just just outside of that light well.

Um and are looking at putting a glass floor in the light well to kind of tie that whole area together.

But um where the columns sit and how that roof is supported is something that could continue to be um studied, especially if this hyphen becomes shorter or becomes set further back, there may be additional opportunities for how to support that roof.

If if I could please um uh Chair Sudley, you you started to ask another question about the uh federal and state review um uh in our process, we have already engaged um Diane Cybrand in the calls we've had with SHIPO.

We anticipate to continue that to be a collaborative effort.

I I would just say it's a little bit more difficult with the National Park Service.

I I would just say it's a little bit more difficult with the National Park Service, um, but they have been um even in the last few days responsive to us, so we anticipate that we'll have comments, and when we come with an action item for the certificate of appropriateness, we will absolutely be sharing the comments we received from them and how we've addressed their comments and yours.

Excuse me, your mic, please.

Thank you for all of that uh uh that that work.

But I would also hope that we would hear what what is your drop no that's not the right word.

What is the deadline that uh that you have to move forward or the current working to where you want to have a final plan?

Uh I I guess what I'm asking for is is rather than you presenting us with this is the plan, if we could get an update like we talked before as we move forward, anything significant that Dr.

Siebrand feels that uh could be brought before the commission, that would be great.

So when we get closer to the final, we're up to date on what's going on.

All right.

So uh uh absolutely.

I mean, I think um uh our goal for being here is to be able to incorporate the commission's feedback into uh into our plans.

So the last thing we're going to do is alter the plans in some significant way, and then you know, come for the you know, effectively for the first time uh seeking approval from the commission.

So either we're we're we're either going to stay very close to the the course that we have now incorporating the feedback that we get from the commission and then provide that as um effectively the plan that we're seeking approval for, or if that were to change in some meaningful way, uh we would be seeking feedback again before submitting uh an action item.

Great, thank you.

Any other comments, questions?

Hearing seeing none, thank you all for uh for for the work you're doing and for the presentation.

Look forward to the next uh report.

Thank you.

Let's move to uh agenda item number eight nine.

I'm on nine.

Uh agenda item nine is 25-0568-HPC one.

This is an action item regarding a request for a certificate of appropriateness application for the repair and restoration of windows, doors, and succo at the main house of the historically listed Harrison House at 1001 F Street.

In a nomination funded by the City of Las Vegas Historic Preservation Commission, the Harrison House located as I said at 1001 F Street.

It was is listed on the National Register of Historic Places.

That was back in May of 2016.

It was placed on the state register on June the 27th, 2014, and before that, or at the same time on August the 20th of 2014, you're on the city's register of historic places.

Uh with that, Dr.

Siebrand.

Thank you, Seabrant for the record.

So correct.

This is a certificate of appropriateness application to approve um or not approve as the commission sees fit.

It is the repair of seven windows, replace six windows, replace three doors, and do spot repairs of exterior stucco and remove and replace the mortar joints on the chimney.

And the PowerPoint that is going to be presented today is um exactly what's in the certificate of appropriateness.

So hopefully everybody looked at the backup of the COA.

Um there is the first page is the um key that shows the image numbers on the second page is the site plan for the house that shows the elevations, and then the images of the um elements that need to be either repaired or replaced, and then examples of the doors and colors that uh will uh potentially be used and our guests please introduce yourself.

Good afternoon, Chairman Stodal and Commission.

I'm Catherine Duncan at 1001 F Street in the Harrison House.

Afternoon.

Good afternoon, uh Chair and Commission.

Thank you for this opportunity.

I'm Anthony Parnell, executive director of the Urban Chamber Community Development Corporation, which is serving as a fiscal agent for the Harrison Guest House.

Good afternoon, Robert Bazak from Top Builders LLC.

We are the chosen contractor to do the work.

Thank you.

So as the fiscal agent, we're just sharing uh here, as you see the site map is on the first slide.

We also have photos of the different aspects of what we're seeking approval for, which has the pictures of the window here, the porch, door photos are here as well.

Well this includes a picture of the outside with the chimney, and as part of uh submitting everything that we need and what needs to be replaced, these are other sample images of replacement.

All right.

Any other comments?

Any other elements you want to present?

Well, I didn't know how much you wanted to hear today, but as you know, we just celebrated Sammy Davis Jr.'s what would have been his 100th birthday.

The um Sammy Davis family and a state have um contracted with um our organization to be the to provide future funding to um so that we can further program the house.

So all year this year we'll be celebrating Sammy Davis Jr.

And particularly we'll be looking at how to bring about better um better relationships between the African American and the Jewish community, and so that's our programming for this next year.

So we'll be giving the Sammy Award next year for excellence in entertainment, the arts and and social impact.

Thank you.

Really quick comments.

Um Commissioner Laramie, I do have yeah, some questions.

Um regarding the windows that you're showing to be um fixed, it looks like there's like two slightly different styles of what I'm assuming are wood windows on the property.

One of them, um I was just looking for the numbers here in the back up, but um like one or two of them, the 8F window kind of have that diagonal cut at the sash, whereas some of the others don't appear to have that detail.

So is it do you know why there's different windows on the property?

Is that kind of part of the context of the property?

And I'm I'm just curious why you may why you wouldn't decide to maybe uh restore and um potentially replace all of the windows to be within the you know the same workmanship and cra and construction style.

I can I can probably answer that.

So the the uh goal will be to make every uh window consistent.

The inconsistencies that we've seen is with the casing of the window.

Some of them are cased down below, so you can see the thicker frame, if this is what you're referring to, and some of them just have a simple um rectangular finish without having uh a casement at the bottom.

The goal would be to uh restore it the way that you see the one on the right hand side that has that thick um base casement on the bottom.

And I apologize, I'm probably not using the right terminology, but I'm looking more at the midpoint of the of the window um where you know the um the window is kind of sliding up under it, and it has those two almost like ear kind of diagonal points in the middle of the window versus where the other windows are.

It's each pane is just right rectangular.

I guess the question is also the one windows on the right with uh with the uh the little diagonal or the triangle thing.

Are those original?

Can you tell which is the oldest uh uh windows and structures?

And are you going to match that with the other one?

The one that kind of throws me off is the is the horizontal one.

Okay, so on window eight F, that window is what you see the brown, that's tape where they taped it so that they could paint around the window.

They just never finished that.

So that's not actually what the window pane looks like.

It's actually covered with a thin coat of paint and uh and some tape, brown tape.

I I'm thinking more of the of the the frame, uh the the three-dimensional frame.

That is an original, that's the original window from the next edition.

What you're seeing is three separate editions on the house.

Right.

So the 1942 windows don't look like the 1963 windows.

So you have three separate buildings all attached together.

And the one on the right is from what era?

So the window on 6F was the second edition.

The window on 8F was that's the bathroom to the original 1942 house.

Yeah.

Okay, that um I mean that helps clarify it a bit.

So it sounds like there's just different additions from different time periods on the house.

So I think it would be fine then to kind of showcase that.

I would just double check because that 1940s window does have a different style and craftsmanship than that 1950s window.

And so just making sure that your decisions on the different eras of the properties are are matching the correct workmanship from that period.

And I I don't know offhand if you know I haven't gone back to double check or not.

Um, but you may want to consider replacing additional windows if they're not within the the correct period for that particular piece of the property.

Okay.

So if I may ask a question, if there's a window from 40s and the window from 50s, your interest would be to keep the same and the same windows there, restore them, but keep the same era you know, per era, as opposed to changing the 50s window to match the 40s window.

Yes, I I think that would be fine because you do want to keep the integrity from when the construction happened, so they could be yeah, different throughout and uh Jack Levine for the record, I would have a different opinion.

I I would I would love to see the 1940s, the 8F window, okay, reproduced in all places throughout the house.

Let's even though there were additions, they weren't that far apart.

But that that's the window that represents the real house, and and and that requires carpentry and and and masterful, you know, uh a real craftsman to actually create something like that.

You're not gonna buy that at Home Depot Lowe's.

So somebody's gonna have to actually build it, but that's what I'd rather see happen there than six, which just looks like a store-bought window from you know from a big box store, and and seven hours even worse, and okay, so I guess my question would be a follow-up to that.

Uh I understand the different the building of of each as it expanded, and there's a lot of history to that.

The the question is for me, have any of these windows been replaced in the past with sort of uh I was gonna say Von Tobo, but I better say Lowe's or or uh Home Depot, and these are not the original design that was put in in the 60s or the 50s or whatever, and some research that could be done with photograph to see whether or not more uh 8F windows would be would be appropriate for that particular side of the building or that particular uh uh uh effort.

But I uh this is a great project, and and I think these windows really represent a strong visual element, as is the door.

Uh yeah, I am still I don't I can't remember historically that we had that many horizontal windows.

Um what era are is that?

Is that a replacement for something else that was there?

Window 6F.

Uh yes, please.

Okay, that's a 1953 single pane window that slides up and down.

It opens up.

And what was there before?

Nothing.

It was uh an addition to the house.

The whole that whole that window was part of the 1953 edition.

I think it was 1953.

Comments, please.

This is Commissioner Grimer.

I guess uh I I guess I lean uh in the same direction of Commissioner Laramie that if that the House has had additions on it, that's part of the history of the House as well.

Um and so in those windows that are in 6F are very similar to the windows I have in my own house, which I'm also you know, kind of protective of, even though they're single pane and terribly inefficient.

But um so yeah, I I I would lean the same way to sort of maintain all of the history of the house.

I mean, the one that I but I'm curious about image nine Rat does not look like a historic window at all.

No, that's a metal, I would say home depot or lows.

Yeah, so in those I guess similar to what the chair was asking.

In if there's windows like that, is the intention to replace those to make them match whatever either the 1953 or whatever it was and the 1940.

So our goal on 9R, since that's part of the 1942 house, is to make it match the window that's on the bathroom, the one that we saw earlier that was eight F.

Just to clarify, anything marked with an R is a window that's not historical and will be replaced with a historical window.

Okay.

Okay, thank you.

Great.

Further questions, if not, look for a motion.

Um Commissioner Laramie, I would I think make a motion to approve, with the exception that we just double check that the window styles being proposed are appropriate to that year of the property.

Um, and we can you know just have that go through staff.

I don't think it needs to come back to us.

Great.

I can I can think of that.

Uh exactly by now thinking that.

Okay.

All right, we have a motion uh before us.

Further question from the commission.

General public.

If not, all those in favor, please say aye.

Telephone.

Commissioner Cosgrove and Purdue.

I voted Commissioner Cosgrove.

Thank you.

Motion is passed as unanimously with the chair voting in favor.

Thank you very much, and would really like to see the finished product uh uh when you're all done and painted and it's a great project and an important piece of our history.

So thank you for all the work you've been doing over the years.

And we can't wait to have you come and visit all of you.

Look forward to that.

Right.

Thank you.

Thank you very much.

Thank you.

Thank you.

Let's move on to agenda item number 10, which is 25-0569-HPC 1.

This is a discussion and action item regarding the approval of the final report titled The Intensive Level Historic Resources Survey of the Cliff May Homes, roughly bounded by Evergreen Avenue, Aaron Avenue, Easy Street, Upland Boulevard, and Idle Avenue.

During the June 28, 2023 HPC meeting, the commission approved funding to hire the Crown Environmental Consultant, a cultural resource management firm to conduct an intensive level historic research survey of the Cliff May homes as a potential historic district.

The commission reviewed the first draft at a public meeting on July 24, 2024, and the second at another public meeting this past September 24th, 2025.

At each meeting, the commission submitted a series of recommended elements to be included in the report.

This report was submitted to the state historic preservation office for review.

SHIP will return the survey with no recommended edits.

And I turn it over to Dr.

Siebran.

Thank you, Stephen, for the record.

I have nothing further to add to other than what Chairman Stodle said, other than for our consultant to give the final report.

And this project was very delayed because of the um staffing issues over at SHIPO.

So that's why it seems like you've been waiting for this report.

So it was no fault of our consultant.

Welcome.

Thank you so much.

So Ann Campana from Coutts Environmental Consultants for the record.

Yeah, I feel like it's been a year since this report was in front of everybody.

Questions, comments.

Excuse me.

Your mic, please.

Chapter 6 is titled Recommendations.

One of the goals of this survey and inventory is to determine whether properties in the report are eligible who are listing on the National Register of Historic Places.

At the end of chapter six on page 84 is section 6.4 titled summary.

There are two recommended recommendations listed.

The first one calls on the city of Las Vegas to pursue a nomination for the listing of the Cliff May homes as a historic district on the National Register of Historic Places.

The second recommendation is to pursue a listing on the City of Las Vegas Historic Property Register for the Cliff May homes.

What's the next step?

How do we respond to is this Dr.

Shebrand?

For the record, uh correct.

So that would be on staff and HPC that the consultant has provided the report.

Our hurdle with that is getting the property owners on board with this.

Fortunately, we don't have interest from the property owners right now.

Initially, when we proposed this, there was interest from some of them.

So we have to just revisit and sometime next year after the holiday season is trying to reconnect with the neighbors again to see if this is something they'd want to approve or pursue because as you know we cannot put it on the register unless they do agree.

Is that both for I understand individual homes?

But is that also correct for the district?

Um, I know that's correct for a local district.

As far as the national district, it's less gaining resident uh or property owner approval and more um making sure you have less than 51% disapprove of the nomination.

That's right.

Yeah, yeah.

Uh well, should I mean the question is whether or not we should well two we got to approve this, and then the question within this is whether or not this commission should approve the funding uh for a nomination for a district.

Um thoughts?

Stephen for the record.

My thoughts is not to commit any further funding to this until we have the neighbors on board.

Commissioners, uh does that require do we need money to print flyers to do all that, or is that like just uh you know, out of the arbitrary budget or so we we use our outreach uh funding for doing flyers.

Um, as far as meeting with neighborhoods, that's myself, Teresa and Mike just arranged that, and we go out and and meet with the neighbors that costs nothing but our time.

Um so if until we can get at least a 51%, either the local or national register, um, it's best not to commit any more money to this until we know for sure that um this is something that we do have the property owners on board with.

I got it.

Well, the report sure points out the importance of this uh uh of this of these homes.

Yeah, Commissioner Um Laramie.

So I I agree with not moving forward with the full report, but in the circumstance of applying for a national register nomination, um, and this might you know require some additional research and and potentially even you know checking with our council to see if there's support, but if there is support for doing this, I don't think it would cost that much to send out mailers, just like we would for planning commission.

Um we can I don't know what the process for collecting opposition is, but it seems like we could make the proposal and gain you know for a national register nomination, which has much less um you know restrictions for living in the district, gain kind of an idea of if there's significant opposition and if not move forward with it at that time.

Superman for the record, yes, we can do that.

Our our issue is though we had what maybe two property owners even contact us after we did our door knocking and sending out the flyers.

So I mean, I we are happy to pursue that.

Um it's just that it's reliant upon the input from those homeowners if that they want to do it.

Uh but we can certainly we we can do that, yes.

The other approach that we've taken in the past has been that we uh spend the money uh to do the research, and we make that at a public meeting.

Uh and we've had several of those over the years to where the public showed up and and a vote was taken, and sometimes it was a negative vote, and and we didn't move forward like the we did move forward on the Las Vegas High School District, but there was quite a debate.

I think we had two or three public meetings.

Uh uh, and it came in and and there were adamantly opposed to it, but the majority of people said said yes, and so we sent the district off.

I mean, that's another approach that that we can take if we feel like uh it's worth doing, and and again, the report just is really uh uh uh I I've been I've drive through that neighborhood any number of times just to just to see those houses, but um, and if I may add, I can clarify the process for it, the national register district as far as gathering um opposition uh or objections.

Basically, what happens is the state historic preservation office sends notices to all the property owners, and it's up to the property owners to respond with an objection if they object.

So they don't really collect uh votes in favor.

Um, and if they don't receive rejections or they receive less than you know 51% of or less than 50 percent objections, um then the district can't go through.

But uh more often than not uh in the districts I've been involved in nominating, uh we don't hear back from a whole lot of property owners.

What's the biggest negative that a property owner would have?

I mean, what control there's nothing, it's more of an honor.

It's totally an honor, yeah.

There are no property restrictions, um there are really no downsides.

I think statement for the record um from the feedback I've received is um that they are perhaps unadvised or aren't familiar with the process because every time you say they these owners here, oh, it's gonna be on the historic register, they feel like there's the government control over that.

Right.

So we do try and emphasize that that's not the point.

However, keeping in mind that putting it on the national register does not provide a protection if somebody wants to alter that property or demolish that property.

Right.

Only the our municipal local ordinance can protect it.

Right.

I still would like to move forward.

Uh but that's not our agenda item for the day.

We can get we can get to that later on in the in the report.

But so any questions regarding the report.

If not, look for a motion.

Commissioner Surface, I'll make a motion to approve the report.

And thanks for all your dedication and patience and working for it.

Any other questions?

General public board.

If not, all those in favor, please say aye.

Aye.

Motion carries unanimously with the chair voting in favor.

Thank you very much for a great report and uh look forward to uh moving forward uh uh with this uh as a as a district.

Thank you.

Uh you're gonna stay here.

Okay, you don't want to get up and sit down.

No, I think I'm okay.

Thank you.

Agenda item 11 is 25-0570-HPC 1.

This is a discussion and action item regarding the second draft of a report titled The Lush Oasis in the Desert, the history and the development of Floyd Lamp Park at Thule Springs.

Based on existing outdated and often inaccurate reports of the area known as Thule Springs, the Historic Preservation Commission requested a fact-based report needed to be reproduced.

The report would be based on historical documentation covering the period from the 1800s to its cursing current status uh as a city park with a state required name of Floyd Lamp Park at Thule Springs.

At the July 24th, 2024 meeting of the Historic Preservation Commission, the Commission has voted to approve funding to hire the counts environmental consultants firm to produce the report.

First draft was presented to the commission at its October 22nd meeting.

At that meeting, the commission made several recommendations, which are now contained in the second draft before the commission today.

The second draft of the Tooley Springs report is part of today's board packet.

Any approved revisions at today's meeting will be incorporated in the final report, which is scheduled to be presented to the commission on March the 25th, 2026.

Dr.

Seabrand.

For the record, uh really nothing more to add than what the chairman uh discussed.

I know uh Chairman Stole, you sent some comments.

Um I did receive the email, but I haven't read it yet because I just came back from uh being on leave, and I believe those were sent to Zoanne as well.

Um so we'll go through those and uh this is um again we do have one more.

This is just the second draft, so more changes can be made, and those can be made before the final uh report is due.

Right.

The uh the the notes that I sent in that uh would like to get approved today is one is uh suggested that the definition of Thule uh with a history uh that word uh some brief research, it goes back to Mexico pre-Spain and pre-France, and uh then it was adopted by the Spanish, uh then adopted by California, Utah, and Nevada Travelers and Residents.

And to me, there's a nice history of just the word uh and how it was used, and so I suggested that that uh be added to the report, and and the others were sort of nickel and dime nitpicking things, but one of the suggestions was that when appropriate lowercase Thule be used before it becomes an actual name.

Um and then there were a couple of small things with the date ranges that I felt needed to be adjustments.

The other major thing, which is always a challenge on these history reports, is the quality of the images, and there's some fantastic photographs that you were able to find.

Uh, but there's also some photographs of clippings out of the newspaper that I think uh unless they're really necessary, kind of distract from uh from from the other photographs.

So I don't know if there's any other questions or comments.

Uh did you have any uh thing you wanted to add?

Uh no, I don't think so.

Just incorporated all those comments from the first draft and um open to any other revisions you might have please no again.

This is a very substantial report, and I think is going to be the the primary document as the city moves forward on any number of projects at this important location.

This is the document, the primary source that they're going to rely on.

Is my understanding they're going to be working on changing the or updating some of the plaques there are out there with with information.

Um so again, thank you for all the work and we look uh forward to the final report.

Any suggestions or changes or improvements, please send them the Dr.

Siebrand, and we will move forward.

But today we need a motion to approve uh the document with uh the suggested changes.

Commissioner Surface, I'll make a motion to approve the document, the second draft with the noted uh changes and revisions requested by staff and by the my fellow commissioners.

We have a motion, further comments.

All those in favor, please say aye.

Aye.

Aye.

Motion carries unanimously with the chair voting in favor.

Again, thank you for all your hard work.

Thank you so much.

I'm on item 12.

The 12th item on the agenda 25-0571 HPC 1 is an action item regarding the election of the historic preservation commission's chair and vice chair.

The purpose and background of this item is stated in the agenda memo that the current chair and the current vice chair, Michelle Laramie are at the end of their second two-year term in their individual office.

According to the 6A of the City of Los Vegas Historic Preservation Commission bylaws, the chair and the vice chair shall be elected biannually at the first regular meeting in January.

The chair and the vice chair shall be elected by a majority vote of the entire commission.

Close quote.

Al states that the term of the chair and the vice chair is two years.

States no commissioner may serve more than two consecutive years, either as chair or vice chair.

The historic preservation commission bylaws do not provide a process for the nomination or voting on the two officers.

In the past, as an action item, the commissioners put forth the names of commissioners that were nominated for the two positions, and then an election was held uh at the first meeting in January.

So my reading is that we have uh nominations today, and those will be voted on because according to the bylaws, it has to be done at the first meeting in January.

So C Burn for the record, and I'll let um Paul jump in here as well.

We were late in doing this, um, so you are both a little bit over what your um you're allowed to be, so that's why we're having uh the um the vote today.

So it's not it's we need to elect the a new chair and a new vice chair today, and that way starting in January, those new positions will be um you'll be at whoever the the new people are those will be starting those positions in our January meeting.

But the item for today is to uh do the election.

So if you want to wait until January to do the election, then this will be need to be obeyed.

But Paul, can you please weigh in on that?

Yes, Paul Motta Deputy City Attorney.

The bylaws do say that the uh election shall be held at the first regular meeting in January, and I did talk to Diane about this, but I I think it still meets the theme of uh of that this portion of the bylaws, but technically the election I I I read it to mean that the officer will start in January, so I think there is some leeway to have the election today, but if if you wanted to take a more strict interpretation of that section of the of the uh bylaws, you could obey this item until the January meeting.

Well, I I tend to be a little strict.

I mean it says January, to me, that's January, and there's no harm in having the nominations today, and it's on the January ballot or on the January agenda.

Um I guess what I was concerned.

We need to get back in line, and and I think if we do it in January, we'll be back in line.

Again, there's no there's no beyond what the few sentences in the in the bylaws are no.

I understand that, but because this is agendized to do the election today, um, we're not here to take nomination, so they we would need to obey this to January.

Well, this is part of the election process.

I mean, if we can interpret January as being December, then we can certainly interpret the election as a nomination process.

The agenda item is for possible action regarding the election of historic preservation commission officers, so I think um that indicates that there would be an election of those offices.

So I think if we're not electing those offices today, the appropriate item would be to obey this action if we're not prepared to elect those positions today.

All right, and the process to make nominations is what for the record that's that's not defined.

Um since I have been here, what the process has been as the just like we were planning to do today, is um, you know, we had announced it at the last meeting to have somebody in mind to elect, but we don't have like an official nomination process.

Uh it's just to elect the officers at the meeting.

Jump in, please.

But I guess we can do anything we want.

Uh doesn't have to be January.

Thoughts, comments?

Is it already been predetermined?

You can't run for president, you can't run for the but she could run for chair and yes.

All right, I I don't know if there would have been previous discussion where we were going with this.

Uh uh can we just nominate Michelle to be the next chairman?

You can well you can, yes.

Okay, I do that.

So Chairman Stodle cannot run as chair again, and uh Vice Chair Laramie cannot run as vice chair again.

But anybody can elect anybody for either of those positions at this point.

Okay, all right.

So Jack, you're suggesting that we go through and and with the nomination and the election process today.

Let's do it.

Anyone else have a comment?

Hearing none, that would be uh sounds like uh uh with uh with the lack of any voices, it sounds like we're gonna move forward with the election today.

The nomination um uh so we have one nomination for chair.

Uh any further nominations for chair.

Well, hearing none, all those in favor um uh of the motion, please say aye.

Excuse me.

I'm sorry.

What was the motion and who made it?

Uh I I'm nominating uh Jack LeBlanc for the record.

I'm nominating Michelle.

Okay, and now we're calling for a vote on that nomination.

Just to sorry to clarify, nomin you know, nominating or elect nominate to elect uh commissioner Laramie as the chair.

Correct.

Further discussion.

Hearing none, all those in favor, please say aye.

Aye.

Aye.

I should have aye or by motion carries with the chair voting in favor.

And so officially at our first meeting in January, we will be back on the correct cycle.

Great.

That's great.

The next uh item is uh for vice chair.

Look for nominations.

This is Commissioner Laramie.

I nominate um Commissioner Levine for Vice Chair.

Further discussion.

Hearing none, all those in favor of the motion made by Vice Chair Laramie.

I think there is a nomination, but I don't know if there was a motion.

Okay.

Made so I'll I'll expand to nominate to elect, or I guess to elect um Commissioner Levine to Vice Chair.

Did you mean move?

You'll make I move I motion, yes, to elect Commissioner Levine.

Further nominations for vice chair hearing seeing none.

All those in favor, please say aye.

Aye.

Aye.

Commissioner Hodgkiss and Purdue.

And Purdue vote have I on the phone.

Thank you.

Motion carries with unanimously with the chair voting in favor.

Congratulations.

You get the gap in a minute.

All right, let's move on to the next item, which is item 13.

Item 13, a report.

I'm sorry, yes, you're right.

Go ahead.

A report from Seth Floyd, executive director of community development, updating any work by the city as it relates to historic preservation.

Well, Stephen, for the record, um Director Floyd had to leave for another meeting.

Um, but I know at our last uh meeting that Commissioner Harper had asked about uh city policy for um demolition violations, and it is a layered answer.

Um, but uh he will be prepared to talk about this uh at our our next next meeting because there can be doubled fines, um, but it could depend on the property, so um he'll get back to us on that.

So um he'll get back to us on that.

So other than that, unless Mike, did you have anything?

That's everything for the director's update.

Go to agenda item 14 as a report from Dr.

Siebrant, the City of Las Vegas Historic Preservation Officer regarding updating preservation projects as well as other information relating to the historic preservation commission.

Crent for the record, so I don't have a slide for this since right now we are almost cut up with everything.

Um our last two projects uh were the um Cliff Mays and the uh Floyd Land Park reports, and so we did have those updates today from Zoanne.

The only announcement I have is starting on our January 22nd meeting.

Um, unfortunately, we're going back to city council chambers.

Um I advocated for us to stay here because it is a much better space for us, but I don't make those decisions, so we will be back in city council chambers uh for the duration uh starting in January.

All right.

Questions?

Why why is that better for the city than to be here?

That's not my decision.

I think it's just um perhaps logistics to run the meetings.

Okay.

This is a nice room.

Uh yeah, I I want to know who we talked to, did get that reconsidered.

I like this room better.

Okay.

Agenda item 15 is a report 25-0572-HPC one.

This is not an action item, simply a report prepared by the community development department regarding historic resources and local media.

The commission has requested staff to uh compile articles, and if there's any additional articles that are identified by the commission, they should communicate them with staff so they can be included in future agendas.

Again, just a report, no action required, and great detail.

Uh lots of these I personally had missed and and didn't see or hadn't hadn't read, and so thank you for this is especially deep report.

So I don't know who prepared this, if it was Therese.

Dr.

Crand.

Wow.

Great report.

Further comments from the commission.

No.

Seeing none, action item 16.

This is a discussion item only regarding future topics for the City of Las Vegas Historic Preservation Commission.

Comments made during this portion of the agenda by individual members shall refer solely to proposals for future agenda items, and any discussion shall be limited to whether or not such proposed items are within the purview of the commission and or whether such items uh shall be placed on future agendas.

No further discussion regarding the substance or any of the proposed topics shall occur, and no action shall be taken.

Anything that uh commissioners would like to see on future agendas, please.

Um, Commissioner Laramie, just revisiting our conversation from earlier about adding a conversation on potentially um going through the process or exploring the process to nominate the Cliff May um appropriate areas to the National Register.

Um, and then this is just a comment on our recurring hunched um reports and updates.

I think it would be helpful because this has been um you know a multi-year process now.

If we could just kind of develop a high-level timeline of of where we're at and what decisions have already been made versus um not necessarily versus what's moving forward, but just kind of a history of what we've done and and that's a quick reference.

So as we have these recurring updates and conversations, especially for some of our new members, we can kind of know where what the decision points have been and what milestones have already been completed.

Um we get to that annual report um next December, I think it would be helpful as well to for um our presenter, Mr.

Dapper, to just morely more clearly identify what are the milestones that were completed versus what's left in the process, because that can get a little lost and become a little confusing as you know there's obviously many understandable changes, but it it tends to become a little confusing when we're looking at old slides, but then getting new updates and not quite having anything to reference about where we where we are current day.

Any other comments, thoughts just a quick note.

Uh uh it it truly has been an honor to serve as chair for the last uh couple of years.

Uh, and lots of work has taken place over the last several years, uh largely responsible uh by Dr.

Seabran.

I mean, just some tr tremendous things have taken place, and with all the other responsibilities and people pulling at you within the seventh floor or the entire building for that matter, uh it's been an honor working with you uh and in many projects and having very frank and and open discussions on lots of topics.

So thank you for all the work that uh that you have done and appreciate that and thank the commission uh for putting up with a lot of my uh odd questions and and deep dives into topics that uh were slightly off uh kilter, but uh but thank you for all of that.

Uh and with that, let's move to 17 citizen participation.

Uh that was my public comment during this portion of the agenda.

Uh no subject matter may be acted upon by the commission unless that subject is on the agenda scheduled for action.

If you wish to be heard, come forward and give your name for the record, the amount of discussion any single subject as well as the amount of time any single speaker is allowed, maybe limited.

Uh see nobody in the audience.

Uh, but one thing I did leave out in my thanks, and that's a thanks to uh the city's attorney uh office uh questions from somebody who at one point wanted to be an attorney.

So I'd a lot of the questions come from from that wish in my past.

So thank you for all the help and and uh putting up with my uh uh again odd quote legal questions.

So with that, we are adjourned.

Okay, thank you for all your doing all right.

I gotta run.