 I think he wandered away. Okay, we'll check with him in a moment. Welcome, Board Member Sharon. We're doing a sound check and make sure you can hear us and that we can hear you. I can hear you. Can you hear me? I can hear you clearly. Thank you. My video there, good there? I see your video. Okay. Yeah. I'm gone. Okay, Patty, is any other meeting running long right now or do you want us to start right at 4.30? We could start right at 4.30. I think we're waiting for one more Board Member. There are no meetings after this and there were no meetings making us start late. Were we waiting for Warren, Patty? We are, we're waiting for the Vice Chair and it looks like we had some technical issues with the slides and we're gonna fix that. Okay, cool. We can pause and starting if you'd like for what, five minutes? That sounds good. Sounds good. Okay, thanks. This is Suzy. I thought I'd do a sound check right when, while we have a delay. Hi, Suzy, we can hear you loud and clear. Thanks a lot. Hey, Henry, can you do a sound check for Patty? She was asking you earlier. Hey Patty, can you hear me? Oh, I can hear you loud and clear. Thank you. All righty. Hey, Drew. So I think everybody's here. Yes, everybody. Did we get the slides resolved? We did get the slides resolved and now that we don't need the slides, but yes, the slides are resolved. Well, so let's have everybody turn their videos on and we'll get rolling then. Okay, looks like we have a quorum here even with Warren not having his video on. So it is 433 and I would like to call the regular meeting of the design review board of the city of Santa Rosa to order and I'm going to do a little reading to remind everybody why we're here in this virtual setting. Due to the provisions of the governor's executive orders N2520 and N2920, which to spend certain requirements of the Brown Act and the order of the health officer of the county of Sonoma to shelter in place to minimize the spread of COVID-19. The design review board will participate via Zoom webinar. Members of the public can participate in the meeting virtually and you can find the number in the phone call there website. So Patty, can I get a roll call? Let the record reflect that all board members are present. Great, and then did everybody have a chance to review the March 18th minutes? Does anybody have any objections or changes? Hearing none, we'll enter those minutes into the record, Patty. At this time, we would like to invite public comment. Oh, you know what? It's missing, our statement of purpose here is missing from my agenda. Yes, Chair Weigel, there were changes made to the agenda template. So the statement of purpose is on the chair script. Okay, I know where that is. I got to go take that up. So we'll postpone that and we'll take public comment on items germane to our purview, but not on items on the agenda this evening. Are there any public comments at this time? Chair Weigel, let me check the participants. I don't see any raised hands at this time. Zero public comments at this time. Hey, hearing no public comment, we'll close public comment at this time. And then I found my script here with the design review board statement of purpose. And so I'd like to read that to remind everybody what our purpose is here this evening. Design review board statement of purpose, zoning code chapter 2052.030F, project review. The review authority shall consider the location, design, site plan configuration, and the overall effect of the proposed project upon surrounding properties and the city in general. Review shall be conducted by comparing the proposed project to the general plan, any applicable specific plan, applicable zoning code standards and requirements, consistency of the project within the city's design guidelines, architectural criteria for specific areas in other applicable city requirements, e.g. city policy statements and development plans. Do we have any board member reports this evening? All right, hearing none, we'll go to other board business. Do we have any other board business this evening? I don't think we do, or do we, Bill? I don't believe we have any board business and I can just jump ahead. There's no department reports either. Okay, perfect, yeah. And then statements of abstention on item 7.1 this evening. Does anybody have an abstention on this item? Perfect, all right. So without further ado, we will move forward to a scheduled item 7.1, concept design review for Meadowood Ranch 2853 and 2875, Dutton Meadow, file number DR21-018. And at this time, I think we'll turn it over to Planner Murray for a staff presentation. You're muted, Patty, Susie. Give me a second to share my screen, let me just say that again. Let's see, can you see the presentation? I'm muted. There's always two options. So bear with me, that's why I don't gamble. We're in business now. We've got your presentation on the screen. Oh, you do, okay, great. We do. Is it now in presentation mode? It is, we're good to go. Okay, well, the project before you tonight is a concept design review for the Meadowood Ranch, which occupies two parcels at 2853 and 2875 Dutton Meadow in the Southwest quadrant of the city. The project proposes to actually construct, well, 90 residential units of which several of them include accessory dwelling units. And this slide doesn't represent those dwelling units, I just realized. So it's 2.6 plus percent of the regional housing needs allocation assigned to the city of Santa Rosa. Here we go, the project will subdivide the two parcels into 90 individual small lot parcels, construct six detached single family dwellings, 84 attached single family dwellings and 48 accessory dwelling units for a total of 138. So the two parcels are here located here in an area that has quite a bit of development right now. It's all designated for housing at different densities. General plan land use designation is split. The yellow portion of the two parcels that are under that star are low density residential. And then in the Southwest corner of those two parcels is a little green and yellow cross hatching that represents low density residential and open space, which generally means there were wetlands found there at some point in time. On the image on the right, that's your zoning, which the site is zoned to R16, which is single family residential, typically, although attached housing is absolutely allowed and that the pink color there indicates that it has been designated at some point for small lot residential development. So here's the conceptual site plan. On the right is Dutton Meadow and on the left is other development. We did receive some public comments about the project and that there was some concerns about traffic issues, non-traffic related infrastructure and overpopulation of the area. A copy of that email was provided to the board today. And pretty much what I wanna highlight is I don't wanna dismiss those concerns, but these concerns are within the purview of the planning commission. We don't have a formal application for the project yet. So you can certainly keep this in mind, but the purpose of today's meeting is really to look at the architecture, look at the site design and get the design review board's guidance. So with that, I'll conclude my presentation and hand it off to the architect. I do wanna say to members of the public who can't see the screen and are just listening in. I'm the project planner. My name is Suzy Murray. I can be reached by phone at 707-540-540. 434348, and my email address is SMURRAY at srcity.org. And I welcome questions. And again, that concludes my presentation. I'll hand it off to Peter Johnson, the project applicant. Good evening, everybody. Can you hear me? Yes. Well, first of all, I wanna thank you all for taking the time and giving the time to review these projects. As many of you probably are aware already, this is a project that was previously approved in 2006, I believe. We came to the game a little bit late. Unfortunately, the previous approvals expired in 2019 after a number of extensions were granted. We've recreated the project almost identically to what it was originally approved as. It's a small subdivision and we've taken and created some new and we think exciting architecture, which rather than bore you with my piece, I'm gonna pretty much be brief and turn over this presentation to our architects who's, I believe on the line, Sean Richardson, who can talk you guys through the architecture and when he's finished with that, I'd like to ask that our landscape architect say a few words and just kind of explain the concept of how we arrived at the site platform you have before you. I'm happy to answer any questions before that. Otherwise, I'll go ahead and turn it over to Sean. Is it possible for us to share our screen? This is the recording secretary, the planner typically does the screen share for the applicant team. If you have a presentation that's different from what was loaded to the online agenda because of new Brown Act restrictions from COVID, we really aren't allowed to present items that were not previously loaded online. No problem, Susie. It's actually the same. We just weren't sure who actually did the screen sharing. So if you can share the renderings, that would be perfect. Hold on one second. Let me bring up those project plans. Thank you. Sure. Well, it's downloading. Bear with me. Page of the plans, do you know? Let's see. It would be probably page, is probably page about 15 is where the renderings would start. It's 15, 16 and 17. Okay, looks to me like it might be a little bit. Yeah, it looks like page 10 and what I'm looking at online, iPad and Susie. Yeah, that's exactly what I just just got. Okay, now let me find the meeting again and I'll, this new world that we live in. You know, and I am just not the talented one here. I apologize. Sectavius, there you are. Okay, now let's get this up. Let's see. We're in business. There we go. Yay, okay. Do I, and I don't know that I'm gonna be able to put this in presentation mode. Is this the? It's fine, yeah. Yep, so this is Sean and Chelsea. We both work with the Jeffery Dameron Associates when we work with Peter on this project. And we as well would like to thank you for your time this evening till I just kind of walk through this. So as you mentioned in the overview, this is a series of paired single family. Basically we call them duets. The old school name would be a duplex. But we've got two base plans that we're working with here and plans that we're working with here. And one of the working with Peter that he was very keen on was making sure that we had enough variety in the streetscape so that we didn't get repetition of elements or colors or materials. And along with that was we wanted to give some unique and individual kind of expressions for the front porches where the entries are. So to that end, what you're seeing here and on the next couple of pages, I don't know how easily we can flip, but you'll see that we've got a variety of different roof forms that are paired together to give us the variety in the street scene. So you've got a combination of gables and shed roofs. One, the middle one here on your screen. So the second one from the far left even has kind of a blade wall at that center. So it gives a little bit of more of a modern expression. And then utilizing a palette of materials that are horizontal siding, board and batten siding. So you've got both vertical and horizontal siding element. And then as kind of the palette cleanser in all of that, there was also some stucco that we're utilizing to kind of break the street scene up a bit as well. The major roof material is a architectural composition shingle that we're using. And then we've also introduced some elements of metal roof on the entries to help break those up as well. And then the final fun kind of element to this is we've got a palette of different kind of jewel colored front door colors that we're introducing as well so that you can have some, an additional layer of individuality as you go through the street scene on these. And I think the other two slides after this Susie, I don't know how easy it is to scroll or not, but they could just kind of demonstrate a couple of different views of that. So you can see the different roof forms, how they're paired together to create what we think is a fairly animated street scene. It's got a lot of what we call roof bounce, where you've got a lot of play between the actual buildings so that there's not a monotonous roof line anywhere. And the other component to this is that we've got, one of the floor plans is a single story, the other floor plan is single and two stories. So that really helps to give us the animation that you're seeing here as well. And then the other component, and I think Susie you mentioned this in your presentation is there is an accessory dwelling unit that is paired with some garages that's actually on the alleys. That's part of your packet, but those exteriors are matched to these. So we've got a couple of different expressions of those that can carry the paint schemes and material schemes that you're seeing on the residences as well. So that also creates a really nice animated alley escape, which sometimes is tough on alleys because you just have rows of garage doors. This actually gives you some play back and forth from a landscaping standpoint and we'll let the landscape architect cover that, but also trying to animate that alley way, not only animate it, but activate it because you do have a residence back there. So it's not just a dead alley for vehicles, it's actually animated with residents as well. That's our brief overview. If there's any questions, we'd be happy to answer, but I think we can maybe let our landscape architects kind of describe overall landform and go from there. Hi, good afternoon everyone. Can you hear me okay? Yes. My name is Dustin Maxim. I'm with Civil Design here in Santa Rosa and I'm thrilled to share a little bit about our landscape concept with you today. If we could go to sheet 13, I believe, just to give you a quick overview. The project's landscape is designed to be attractive and maintenance friendly while enhancing the walkability of the homes in the community. We're providing a number of amenities, both active and passive recreation spaces. And Burgess Drive, which goes down the center, will serve as the main pedestrian corridor. And it's been given a treatment of wider parkway planners and canopy shade trees. This road linked the homes with the community rec center and the outdoor amenity spaces that are located on the west side of the project. On the south side of the project, we're connecting to the Ryder Homes Development currently under construction. And on the north side, we're preparing for future projects. Some of the landscape in these spaces a little bit light and the idea is we'll be pairing with the project that's coming online soon. On the west edge, along Rain Dance Way, the homes are set back about 40 feet and there's an existing eight foot wide. It's a public multi-use trail, which is really an enhanced concrete sidewalk. And we're gonna rebuild that and realign it and extend it southward to connect with Common Way. So that's sort of that bold knuckle where the road takes a right in the southwest corner. So this trail that we're extending is gonna create a connection between LCL and high school to the south and the neighborhoods and the community park to the north. This is a difficult alignment. There's an existing transmission power line that goes along Rain Dance Frontage. And we're gonna have to do a lot of coordination with PG&E to see through our design goals and make sure we can find trees that work in that space. These amenity areas, they basically function as a buffer and enhancement to the surrounding neighborhood in our community. If we can go to the next sheet just briefly, yeah, I'll mention that the plant pallet was chosen to contrast the architectural materials. We kind of went with classic plants in order to pair with the sort of modern farmhouse aesthetic that's coming through with the architecture. In addition to plants for color and texture, we're heavy on the evergreens and this is to provide screening, privacy, basically year round interest. If we can go to the next sheet, 15. So we have an enlargement here of the rec center. And it's gonna provide both indoor amenities as well as feature a pool, a lawn for informal play, a pergola with a barbecue area, a shaded outdoor lounge and a flexible use patio. This center is gonna be separated from the existing homes to the west by both the trail that we're extending southward and the parking lot. The parking lot is utilizing the space underneath the transmission lines. And we're gonna separate the trail and the parking lot with enhanced landscape and sort of a white vinyl rail farm fence. There's an enlargement at the bottom of that sheet and that is a pet park that we're proposing in the southwest corner of the site. And it's gonna be pretty simple. It's gonna consist of shade trees, seating and screening. And it sort of backs on to the knuckle of the street being extended through on the development to the south. We're gonna go one more sheet to sheet 16. So this is the Rain Dance Frontage on the west side of the project, the West Edge. And we are shifting and rebuilding the eight foot wide. I'll call it an enhanced public multi-use trail which is really a large sidewalk. It's not built to like a class one Caltran standard. And again, we're gonna separate our amenity space from this trail with a three foot high, two rail white vinyl fence, that's what we're proposing. The power lines fall just to the east of the new sidewalk alignment. And underneath this, it's a large power line easement and in this space we're envisioning both passive and active uses here really. We've got a bachi court. We've got patios with seat walls. We're proposing an ultra dwarf fruit orchard and an informal play lawn. Again, trees will need to be low canopy, accent varieties and we'll have to coordinate approval with PG&E. The amenities have been placed in this area to correspond with the intersection that's just across the street to the west and the side yards across Rain Dance Way. And so the bachi court wouldn't be directly in front of say somebody's front yard, it would be across from side yards in the intersection. So on the bottom of that sheet, I don't know if we can zoom in or not, but if not, that's okay. We've got some sort of typical landscape enlargements and each unit is being provided with a private outdoor space and connections to the rear alley where you'll find the covered parking with the ADUs above. Additional private parking is being provided with decorative gravel pads and we're proposing like a Sonoma gold chip shale and basically to bring in a material to break up the space and provide interest and it also creates permeable pavement to aid infiltration. So we don't have a ton of room here, but between the architecture using different materials and getting creative with our plant pallet, perhaps espaliers and vines and the fence, we're hoping to make this a pleasant alley space that's comfortable to utilize every day for the units that face the alley. So that pretty much sums it up. Thank you for your time. I'm happy to answer any more questions. If you want me to go over the lighting concept a little bit, I can. And if you wanna get into details on street trees, I'm happy to do that too. Okay, thank you, applicant team. So as this is a concept item, we're not required to do public comment, but our board has long allowed the public to make comments on concept design review items. And so I'd like to open up for public comment on this item specifically. So if anybody is in the waiting room there, you could raise your hand so the recording secretary can note you and allow you to speak. And we'll give you three minutes. Thank you, Chair Weigel. We have one raised hand. We just need to get the clock timer set up on the screen. So it'll be just a couple of minutes here. So while we're doing that, I guess we can do the board questions of staff. If there are any questions of staff real quick. So we'll just go around the horn. Board member Wicks, any questions of staff on the project? No questions. Is this the only time we're gonna see this project though? Being a housing project, we're gonna see it again, Susie, after this. Let me check on that for sure because I think because it's in a priority development area, it may be approved for going to the zoning administrator. Can I take a couple of minutes and I'll get back to you on that? Yeah, we'll just, we'll go around and see if anybody else has a question here real quick. And then while we do the public comment, you can, does that sound good? Yeah, that's fine. All right, board member Sharon, any questions of staff? Yes, one question of staff. And I know Susie's practically doing research as well. So sorry to bug you again, Susie. But thank you for your presentation, Susie, and to the point, I liked it. Question that, so we've seen a number of developments down in this area of the city and traffic always comes up. I'm wondering if this is kind of a general question. Can you maybe just kind of give a brief summary if there are any kind of traffic, vision plans, the things that are happening to go along with the development that's happening down in Saragatown? Is there anything that you can brief us on, whether that's city or county? Or I know that these are kind of like long-term vision tracks and I'm wondering if having some idea that there is some movement, some thought happening to traffic down here that it might, at least delay some concerns. Yeah, well, first of all, I want to say that the city staff has not done any analysis on the project yet. And we get to the point of public hearings for a project review. I'll be much better equipped with answers. That said, I do know that there is, there was a huge project designing a new circulation pattern for this area, where that is on the agenda in terms of when it will be implemented, that I don't know at this point. And again, when we come back through the public hearing process, more likely to be seen, to be discussed at Planning Commission, I'll have a much better answer for you, but yes, there is a circulation concept for that area. For that area. And in general, so that, yeah, thank you also for referencing that this, that the traffic concerns are not under our preview as it is our board. I think that was, I'm glad that you made that very clear. But then also there is the bike and pedestrian master plan that the city has. And so there are a vision documents for this that are happening around there. So I just wanted to make it clear and give you an opportunity to say that this isn't happening just in a vacuum, or not just developing without plans. Correct. Yeah, and I think when this does come to Planning Commission, it'll be great to see a little more context to that. So thanks. I'll just add one quick thing on to Board Member Sharon's question about, you know, kind of area plans. I think the biggest one we have, which is the biggest type of area plan that we use our general plan. So that's beginning the update right now. So it will take a couple of years to do that. So in terms of looking at circulation in that area, the general plan will most definitely do that in addition to the projects that Susan mentioned. Board Member McHugh, do you have any questions of staff? Not at this time. Thank you. Board Member Birch, any questions of staff? Any questions? Cool. And Vice Chair Hedgepath, any questions of staff? Oh, you just muted yourself. No questions of staff. All right. Patty, do we have the countdown figured out now? Yes, we do. We're loading the timer right now and we have one raised hand. We have M. Stewart. And as soon as we get the, oh, there it is, we're ready. M. Stewart, I will go ahead and give you the ability to unmute yourself. You can start when you're ready. Hi, actually, my name is Marie Stewart. Just a habit with the M. Stewart. So just really quick. So originally it was 76 and then at the last meeting it's 90. Did I hear right? Somebody said 138 units. Yes. Where did it go from 90 to 138? Accessory dwelling units. And those are the garages? Yeah. Okay. Awesome. Also the last meeting, it said that there would be no storage of the garages that they had to have vehicles in it because there is a traffic impact problem there. I mean, there truly is. And I'm just wondering if that's still the same. And it also mentioned that this was going to be an HOA project that, you know, the homeowners will be HOAs. And how many lanes comes through Burgess? So to let you know exactly where my property is, based on the maps that I've been looking at, I'm on Dutton Meadow and my home is right across the street. Matter of fact, it looks like my entire lot will be impacted by street lights and car lights, headlights all day, all night. And I'm a little concerned about that along with the other residents who have had properties there for 60 years and plus. So I would really like that the people who have been there and have been there from the beginning when they first started the development and general plan of this development of the Southwest area to take more concern regarding the current and long-term homeowners. You know, everything's been piecemealed. And so we are all very skeptical that our concerns and our needs will be taken into consideration, like laterals and the sewer hookups, you know, because as you build on this project, this project sits right on top of the, where all the water runs for the water recess. So there it goes again, we're talking water. So our issues are water, traffic, sewer. We're all really concerned about that because nothing was talked about that. It's just, you know, it's very pretty, but it's not 76 single unit dwellings. It's now duplexes. And so, you know what, how did that happen? Thank you. Thank you very much, Ms. Stewart for your comments. Patty, do you have any other public comment raised hands this evening? I don't see any more raised hands. So if anybody would like to speak, if you could raise your hand now. All right, yeah, I'm seeing any more raised hands. We're gonna go ahead and we'll close the public comment here. And before I bring it back to the board for questions of the applicant, I'd like to ask Ms. Stewart's question of the applicant to just perhaps describe a little bit more what a small lot subdivision is and why you chose to do duplexes with ADUs and the advantages and perhaps disadvantages of that sort of density in this type of development. Do we have the applicant team available to speak? I'm sorry, I don't know. Can you hear me? Looks like we can. Go ahead, Mr. Johnson. Sorry, I apologize for that. So the smallest subdivision is specifically designed to encourage or to manage the development of smaller, slightly more dense residential properties within the city. We believe that the, we know that the city has a dire shortage of medium range affordable housing and we believe that this is one way to provide a significant amount of additional new housing that can fit that, what we know is the missing middle in housing. We're excited that our project fits within that framework, the allowable density for residential single-family homes within this area is actually eight per acre. And we're at that number before you include the ADUs, which technically don't count towards the density as I'm sure you're aware. We think this is a potentially a great solution to delivering a broad array of more affordable housing and more housing period to the city and particularly in this part of the city, so. Thank you very much. So if you'll just stay on the line there, I'm gonna go through our board here with questions of the applicant real quick. And so we're gonna go with Board Member Wicks. Henry, do you have questions of the applicant? I think he's muted. You're muted, Henry, yes. How about now? That's better. Thank you for that explanation and hopefully that can alleviate some of the concerns. The density I'm sure is consistent with the zoning and I wanted to ask you a question about your design if I could get, it's page six, your A4 drawing elevation, I could get that up on the screen. You gotta find that plan again. It was a huge document and I think I may have closed it. So I'll bring it up, maybe we could, oh, here we go. And Chairman Weigel, forgive me if I'm speaking out of turn here, but I thought I'd just dive into some architectural questions and comments and just... Yeah, that's fine. Yeah, but let's just, yeah, let's do questions and comments, that's fine. Keep it rolling, yeah, that works for me. What page was that? It would be page six of 41. Here we go. Great, thank you. My question relates to the modern cottage and if you could scoot down to the next page, Susie. Okay. It's a large document, so I apologize. It kind of, there's a delay. So... Yeah, no, you're doing great. So the next one down is the mid-century cottage. Subtle differences to it, but I wanted to focus on that unit because it gets cut in half. At least that's my interpretation. Took me a little while to figure it out, but if you'd skip down to page 10, Susie, and actually 11 shows it better. On the far right-hand side, there is a single standalone unit, and I like the architectural solution you came up with for that particular unit used in two variations, but the monolith that bisects the two units on that in-unit, it stands alone by itself. And maybe if we had all four elevations, my questions might have got a little more succinct, but I'm just a little concerned about that monolithic wall. And I was hoping the architect could speak to, why he chose that unit to cut in half versus the one that had a pitch roof to it, which would maybe give it a little bit more of a lower sense of scale from the neighbor's point of view. So if you could kind of elaborate on why you selected that and help me understand how that monolithic unit will bear itself out when and if it's built. Yeah, I mean, the simple answer is, I think that this was this work in progress. So we were dealing with a couple of lots that I think were a little bit narrower than others and looking at the potential for this to be a zero lot line. And so that was the best solution for that particular scenario. I believe there are other standalone lots that are slightly wider, which would give us more of an opportunity to do the pitch roof because we have a larger setback to deal with. But we can certainly look at that as a refinement. And if it's possible to plot the pitch roof as opposed to the shed with the monolith, we would certainly do that. Yeah, I like the monolith when it has the other shed roof dying into it at a lower elevation. I don't want you to come up with changing the shed roofs and the monolith of it. I guess I can speak to that if I'm still unmuted. You're good, Peter. Sorry, the site plan actually does show a side yard setback on those end units. And I don't see there's any reason why we would not mix and match. I think the intent of this drawing was probably to show some examples. But if, and I think you're, I agree with your comment, Board Member Wicks, that the pitch roof probably would help soften that end. I think that would be something we'd like to do. Yeah, and I don't want to mess up the rhythm because you've got kind of the farmhouse and then the mid-century in the center, I'm sorry, modern cottage. I like the breakup of the cottage and the farmhouse. And I see why it is a cottage at that end if it's next to a farmhouse. So I guess my only, and I don't want to play architect here, however I am one, so I'm going to anyway. The, and this is when I really wish we had the laser. We were in the chamber and I had my laser pointer. I could make this go a little quicker. But if you just take a look at potentially taking that monolith on that A9 sheet and move it to the center, like it, it splits two units and it's normal configuration. But if it split with lower shed, dove up and then lower shed, it might be an effective solution to my little nitpickiness here. So. Absolutely. Other than that, I don't, I think project is well thought out. I wish we did have all four elevations so I could nitpick further, but I get the concept, especially when you take it to the level of doing renderings like this, it really helps with understanding it even better than all four 2D elevations in some ways. So those are my comments for now, pending hearing some of the other board member comments. Thank you. All right, let's go to board member Sharon, Adam. We're doing questions, correct? I think, you know, Henry kicked it off and find Henry fashion and he did questions and comments. So just have at it and be efficient. Okay. Okay, sounds good. Well, I'll start off with my question. On the landscape, like Henry said to not play landscape architect, but you know, and one, so I guess we will. But just a question about L1 versus the call out on L4. I see the botchy court on L1, but I don't see the ultra dwarf orchard and little gathering area. I assume that that's, it's just not on that rendering there for the on L1, it's just not included on L1. And of course, understanding that the plans are work in progress. So sorry that was corrected. I think one was really intended to address the overall site plan and the stream trees and the circulation, but you're correct. It's not shown on that particular exhibit, but it's our intent to build that micro orchard. You think it's a great idea? Yeah, I think so too. I just wanted to make certain that it was over there. And like I said, you know, yeah, I appreciate that L1 is much more of the overall view. Just want to make certain it was there where the call out said it was. And let's see, some comments. Yeah, I really appreciate the thoroughness of your package and your design. I just think for concept, you're at a really good point. Granted, the second, you know, go around second iteration within a number of years over a decade. So you've had some time, but I appreciate the thoroughness of the package that you're bringing us and all of the sheets in the detail. This is great to see in concept review. And my, yeah, I was wondering, you know, kind of about all of the, in terms of the architecture, the kind of busyness of all of the angles and the slopes and the blades. But in Henry's just a little talking it through and in examining a little bit more, I do appreciate the rhythm of what you've got here. And I do like the, I think that the variety that you're bringing and proposing to bring in here is going to give some nice diversity to the feel of this, you know, a good use of space and a good hearty development. You're putting a lot onto the site. And so I think that having this, you know, four types of variety are solving problems while also solving them with some good aesthetic principles behind it. So I do appreciate the up and down rhythms, the nods to history and to the nods to kind of, it makes me think of, you know, the layering of the hills when you're looking out over, you know, the large landscape. I think that this is going to provide some nice layering effects, both of trees and of the buildings. So I appreciate the options and diversity that you're bringing here. To that point, also my first overview of the overall plan was how nice and leafy it is. I really enjoy that you're proposing a lot of trees and a lot of diversity of trees as well to really fill up the site and to not have it be just kind of crammed the buildings and it's actually going to be, it brings the human scale in, it softens all of the structure that you have there. So I really do appreciate that you're thinking it through that way and the integration of the team sounds really good. Yeah, it is a classical plant pallet. I would encourage you to think a little more creatively about it. Think about doing some more interesting trees than kind of the standard, you know, crepe myrtles and, you know, maples and plums. It's, you know, think about something different. Make it, make continue with the general feel of that variety and diversity. I do, I think that there are nods in here to previous uses of the site with the orchards that were around. And so, you know, I think that, you know, they're not fruiting trees, but, you know, something that kind of plays with it with previous uses of the site and also the natural aspect of things that were there too. I mean, there are some nice oaks that are around and down in that area and even on the site as well. And the wetlands that were observed there. So I think that having some oak species, something in here could be good. Just kind of complicate things with the smaller site, but I would just encourage you to think a little more creatively with that plant pallet than with kind of, you know, the standard, as you say, the classic, you know, street tree pallet and with the tree pallet in particular, because you've got a lot of trees. Make them interesting, make them, make it really beautiful and unique. Cause I think this could be a really unique little new part of the neighborhood. I do like that you are including the rec center. I think the rec center layout is a good one. The pool is a nice amenity to have. I do think that you can push that, that you did that community feel. You're having a lot of family homes here. I think that you can bring in some more family amenities to this whole site and to the general idea that it's here. Bachi courts are fun, but not very many people get to use them at all times. And there's gonna be a lot of people here. There's no play structure on the site. That could be a real nice place for a play structure. You can have a lot of families, like kids, you know, there's schools around there. So there are many needs to be had right in the neighborhood, but this could be a really nice place if there's a play structure near the rec center or over on that far side over by Rain Dance Way. The mini orchard is a nice touch, but I think that it could be rethought to bring in some more diversity of uses to make it more, and that could be more just general open space. And so it could be that unprogrammed space that you could have families and kids be able to just activate how they will. Or it could be kind of programmed out space, maybe a small sport court or, the raised beds are a little gathering spot with like a little kind of small barbecue and then like a small seating area where a family could come and beautiful night like tonight, bring their dinner outside. The thing about, you know, these beautiful summer evenings also is that you send the kids out to the play in the playground while you're making dinner and so you have something that's right next to all of these houses provides some more amenities for families. I think this is sort of the short, shorter comment that I would have with this. And so yeah, I think this is a really nice start and really think about those diversity of uses and diversity of spaces and the people of a different diversity of ages that you're going to have here. And I think it's a really great use of space. I like the addition of the ADUs also at the end here. And yeah, thanks for doing this. This is going to be hopefully a good addition to the neighborhood and we'll fit in. I think that these three streets are going to fit in and it's going to mesh well and provide circulation will be effective. So thanks for a good package. Thank you. All right. Board member Bikyu, do you have any questions or comments for the applicant team? I really don't have any questions, but I have some comments. One, I think that the project in my judgment meets the neighborhood design goals for development in Southwest Santa Rosa, particularly with respect to infill projects. I like the good mix of market rate and affordable and I like the design, the basic design. And I also, in terms of traffic, I mean, there seems to be, it's well-designed in the sense that there's easy entry and exit from the neighborhood. And so overall, I mean, I'm supportive of the project. I think it's attractive. And also I agree with a member, Shannon, that some amenities for children and play structures, that sort of thing ought to be considered. And those are my comments. Thank you. Board member Burch, you're up. Great. Yeah, I do have a couple of questions. We're not gonna, it looks like we're not gonna see the rec center building design just as a, I don't see it in the elevated here or planned out. Don't know the building height. I'm curious about that. I can speak to that if that's the right time. Sure. You're right. We have not followed up on the elevations for that building yet, but our expectation is that it will fall within the same vernacular of sort of modern farmhouse architecture with complimentary colors and materials to the rest of the buildings on the site. There will be a single story with maybe an opportunity for some from high ceilings on the interior with some piffed roof. So don't call it a maybe a barn allegory. I don't know if that answers enough of your question, but I think we expect that it will be a complimentary look to the, all of the modern farmhouse element of the architecture. Great. I'm unfamiliar as to whether or not there's a requirement for parking for the rec center. And I don't, so on one level is there requirement on another level, is there a logic behind that much parking and looking back to board member Sharon's comments about added opportunities for public spaces. Is that a typical amount of parking? Is that some, I heard also that it's underneath the existing power lines. I'm not just sure how that would impact that as a space that was for recreation. I'm just curious. It seems like quite a number of parking spaces for a rec center or a private community that I'm going to assume most people are going to walk to from their home, but maybe I'm wrong about that, so. We're happy to build less parking, but there never ever seems to be enough, whatever you do. This building will house our management offices. So there will be a fair amount of coming and going for uses other than strictly driving to the pool. We like to see more less around the rec center because there always seems to become a lack of it, but we'd be glad to consider eliminating some of those spaces if you think that's appropriate. It's just a question. I didn't know if it was a requirement and I didn't understand the management function, but it looks like low hanging fruit for adding a bit of recreational opportunity, especially at the rec center. So just a thought and just a question. My last question relates to the rear elevation of the ADU. I don't see any windows on the back of the garage or the ADU units and it seems like a pretty, that is going to be a pretty significant blank wall facing the backyards of those units. I'm all for density and I'm going to provide, certainly have some compliments here in just a minute, but I'm curious about that back wall of the ADU and what your thoughts are on the scale of that. It's certainly, maybe I'll stop trying to be the architect and ask Sean to speak to that. Yeah, I mean, that's a lot of that is strictly before privacy because you're going to have another family or person up over in that ADU looking at the backyard of someone that's in one of the paired homes. And so that is really more of a privacy to separate those two uses. And then just at the garage level, it's not something that we typically like to do with putting glass in those garages. So, and then the way it's on the site, those ADUs actually do bump up against the property line on one side. So you do have a zero lot line circumstance on some of those. And then others, they're actually paired together. So there's no windows on that wall for that reason. Yeah, and I understand that about the windows. And I probably misspoke when I said windows, I guess it would be interesting to see elevations and how you might break down that with some simple, break down that wall with some simple detailing that would not necessarily be windows. And I'm, again, I'm all for adding the ADUs. I believe in the density. It's just, I wonder if some thoughtfulness around the pattern, the, you know, any kind of a break in materials or something would be interesting rather than just, you know, ending up with two stories of, you know, siding. So I just, it's just a thought. I'd like to have you look at before you're in front of the zoning administrator should this continue on. So. Michael, Michael, and I would also add, I think there's an opportunity for clear story windows. I think perhaps on that side because of the monoslope roof. So it does have a high side on that side. So not affecting the privacy. I think maybe going towards that route to tag on that, what you're commenting on. Yeah, and then perhaps, you know, marrying the clear story is something that's got a little vertical feel to it. That's all. I recognize you're just advertising to a backyard, but it is the backyard of a home. So anyway, I'm sure you guys can do something, do something nice with it. I really liked the project overall. I love the view from the street. I think that the architecture from the street has got a, I think somebody said it's not forced. There's a nice variety, but it's not forced and it's not pastiche and sort of separating styles. There's a good rhythm. And I think the bouncing roofs was a good comment that you made. I love the scale and shape of the windows. I think that that openness and the amount of glass that faces the street and at the very thoughtful and intentional size and variation is really, really open and appealing. You know, I hate the appearance of windows that are placed only for function and these seem to just really have great style. And I think that it's gonna be a street that you drive down and you feel there's just a nice warm character to these facades. So those are the facades. Those are great. I think a couple of other people have commented about the execution of some of the details when you're this intentional and strong with an elevation view and then you have to solve all the problems going from there back to make sure that you don't get funky angles, corners, strange conditions. The devil's in the details there. So good luck in resolving that. But I think overall this is a great project. Again, love the density. Love what this would do for the area. And good luck getting through the rest of your processes here. And you know, should we see you back again? Great, should we not? I trust this team to take this forward and add a really great neighborhood to Southwest Santa Rosa. And Vice Chair Hitchpeth. Okay. So you can hear me? Yes. Okay. I wanted to remark back at one of the neighbors. There's a fascinating thing that Santa Rosa's been doing. I was at a presentation. This ties in with growth and density. In the last 10 years Santa Rosa's grown 35% in its size. Yet there's been a reduction of 14% of water use. In the 1990s, there was a drive to look at higher density. If you go to a typical subdivision from 1966 in Santa Rosa, the net houses are larger. What's heroic about the applicant here? You have a 990 square foot, one-story two-bed. A lot of developers wouldn't do that. The larger two-story is the one that typically gets the ADU. Now, if you had a son, nephew or uncle living in the back, you'd probably welcome windows. But what's interesting is that how that backcourt is developed. Whether you espalier up, I like the clear story idea a lot, but the idea of populating, humanizing that back wall, it's the stewardship of the larger unit. And I just wanted to compliment the design team that on the basis of variety, allowing someone to someday leave an apartment and get that fighting weight 900 foot house is brilliant. And the diversity, the bounce, the zoom of going two-story to the difference and allowing an ADU in a way, the whole program of humanity and generosity drives the architecture. That's where you get in the realm of authenticity. So I also wanted to say that in small subdivision zoning, you're not required to have community buildings. You're not required that typically what happened was a general plan looked at large parks. And as I understand it, the idea to move ahead with the community building and park that, whether parking is needed there, but it's a voluntary thing. It's not mandatory with the understanding that city parks would be close by. I think this is a neat model. It's expensive for the city to have massive parks mowed and cared for as we all know. But my general understanding of what has happened here is it's above and beyond requirement. And the soft gravel for the parking is wonderful breaking up the pavement. I think in general, my comments here echo everyone else's. I think for the few awkward units as Henry mentioned, where you have kind of the stove pipe effective of the two-story that doesn't get to handshake with the one-story unit, that could go a lot of ways. It could be back to front shed, whatever. I think that can be simply handled. So my closing comments are, I love between the purposefulness of the window patterning, this kind of relaxed. Much of Santa Rosa that wasn't that messed up was built between about 57, 68. The cultured stone was not there or the bottle glass front doors, stained glass, the octagons, all that weird stuff in the 80s, something toxic happened. This is a non-toxic project, in my opinion, owning back to when people were real and people will be real in the future. Thanks, Warren. I actually don't really have any comments. I do have a question for the applicant. This is small at subdivision, but with the inclusion of a community building with management, is your intent to sell some units and lease some units then? I guess, I'm just kind of curious about that. Yeah, our current intent is to build this project and hold it as a for rent, a single family community, which we think is the largest gap in the housing supply in Santa Rosa today. Cool. Yeah, the reason I ask is, my family lives in a duplex with an ADU behind us and we all know each other and we're friendly bunch and I think there's a real nice sense of community when you do that and I wouldn't be so... The comment I would give to the architect is don't be afraid of privacy concerns. I think when people choose to live in places like this, they understand that they're gonna have to get to know their neighbors because of the proximity and they're choosing to live here because it's either new, close to school, the rent is the right price. There's a million different reasons why people would choose to live in something like this. And I think as the applicant said, this does seem to fit a need kind of in that middle, that missing middle that we talk so much about on our board here and I think in general in the area. So, but yeah, it's an interesting project. I think everybody's made some pretty much every comment I would have made and with that, does the applicant team have any questions of the board on any of the comments that we've made today? Did any of them seem far-fetched or undoable? Thank you for your time. Sorry, go ahead, Shalmer. Oh, I was just gonna say again, thank you guys for your time. We are fortunate to experience these kinds of meetings on a fairly regular basis over many years and I think your feedback is probably some of the most constructive we've had. So thank you very much. Cool, and thank you for a great presentation. And with that, we will adjourn the meeting. Thanks everybody and have a great new Thursday. Thanks everyone. Thank you.