Had an interesting question come up with one of my more... legalistic... preservation commissioners in regard to the motion procedure for a certificate of design compliance (you might call it a certificate of appropriateness) for building alterations in our historic district.
It is quite common for our Commission to modify proposals, typically with the consent of the applicant, and then approve. This particular commissioner has asked whether there should first be an up or down vote on the proposal as presented. His thought process is that it would speed the process and avoid unnecessary modifications when the majority of the Commission is comfortable with the proposal as presented. If the approval motion failed, then they could consider a new motion to approve with specified modifications.
I'm not sure what the best practice is in this case, so I'm punting to you folks for some feedback.