 So before I call the meeting to order, ladies and gentlemen, we are waiting on the vice chair. We're still expecting her. I'm going to give her a couple of things to make her way here and then whether or not she's here, we're going to get started. So thanks for your patience. Okay. Thanks for waiting, everybody. I'm going to call to order a meeting of the cultural heritage board of the city of Santa Rosa and ask for a roll call, please. Let the record reflect that all board members are present except for vice chair Fennell. Next, we move to the approval of the vice chair. Next, I'll read the statement of purpose. The cultural heritage board shall consider the following matters, standards, guidelines and criteria to the extent applicable in determining whether to approve or not approve or not approve. Next, we move to the approval of the minutes for February 5th, 2020 meeting. Board members, any comments on those minutes? Okay. Those will stand as printed. Next, we move to the approval of the minutes for February 5th, 2020 meeting. I'll read the statement of purpose in determining whether to grant or deny a permit. Whether the proposed change is consistent or incompatible with the architectural period of the building. Whether the proposed change is compatible with any adjacent or nearby landmark structures or preservation district structures. Whether the colors, textures, materials, fenestration, architectural features or features. The secretary of the interior standards for rehabilitation and guidelines for rehabilitating historic buildings and such other matters, criteria and standards may be adopted by resolution of the cultural heritage board. Next, we will move to public comment. If you are here to wanting to give comment on the public hearing item tonight, there will be an opportunity to do that when you have the opportunity to speak. Public comment time is for anyone wishing to comment on another matter of interest to the board to go to one of the microphones at the top of the room. You will have three minutes to speak. With that, I will open public comment. I'm not seeing anybody wanting to speak. Yes, sir. If you will start by stating your name for the record, please. I believe that the shed fence and arbor project that you are apparently looking over today, I think it's a great idea. Thank you. Thank you very much, sir. We can . Would it be proper to move that comment into the minutes regarding the item? I think it's fine. We can just acknowledge it after the item is heard. Great. All right, next we're gonna move to statements of abstention. Board members, is anybody abstaining from any item tonight? Okay. And we'll move on in order today and we're gonna go to item six, the public hearing for landmark alteration permit for 832 Tupper Street. This is an ex parte disclosure. Board member Garrett, any non-public information to disclose? Member McHugh. Remind the board to please use your microphone so everybody can hear you outside of here as well. Sorry. I went by the site twice and took pictures and actually walked around. Went by the site once and took a couple of pictures. Board member DeBalker. Thank you. Yes, I visited the site as well. I walked in the neighborhood quite often so I've been by there quite a few times. I did visit the site and I have nothing further to report. And I also visited the site and I have nothing further to report. We will ask for public comment after the staff and applicant presentations and the staff presentation this evening will be a new face for us here. Monet, if you would introduce yourself and deliver the staff report, please. Thank you, Chair Edmondson and members of the Cultural Heritage Board. My name is Monet Shea Coley. I've been planner for City of Santa Rosa for four years, two years as a consultant and two years as official. So today's project before you is a major landmark alteration permit for the property located at 832 Tupper Street. This project is to legalize a newly constructed fence with its arbor and to construct a new accessory storage on the east side of the property. The reason this project is before you today is because the height of the fence exceeds three feet and when a fence is higher than three feet it needs to be reviewed by cultural heritage board. Otherwise, this would be a minor landmark alteration permit and it would need to go to zoning administrator for approval. The site is located in Central Santa Rosa in the northeast quadrant within Burbank Garden Preservation District. The zoning for the property is R318 combining historic district and it is consistent with the general plan land use which is medium density residential and the site is surrounded by similar residential uses. This is a site plan that shows the location of the fence and the proposed storage and gates which will be the gates and also let me add this line here and shows the location of the proposed storage shed that will be on the east side of the property and will be aligned with the front of the house so it will not be closer to street than the main house. This is an elevation of the proposed structures. It shows the location of the fence and arbor along the Tupper Street. The height of the fence for the pickets will be 43.5 inches and the height of the post will be 48.5 inches. As you can see the caps are not already added because the fence is not completely constructed. Those caps will be added later. The height of the arbor is 8 feet and 7 inches at the center and it will be set back it is already set back 18 inches from back of the sidewalk to make sure no portion of that arbor is encroaching into the sidewalk and as you can see on this elevation the location of the proposed accessory storage. Regarding this accessory storage the height of it at the center is 11.5 feet it will be 10 by 12 feet and it will be built to match with the existing house and garage and it will include a pitch roof original restored craftsman wood door and window cedar lap siding and eaves and shingle roofing the picture on the left shows the purchase salvage all wood door and window that are craftsman style to coordinate with the main house. The project it's qualified for California Environmental Quality and it qualifies for section 1503 in that the project consists of construction accessory structures for an existing residence I have received two comments from neighbors one of the comments was in favor of the proposed fence and the storage another comments I received was opposing it because he believed that the structure and fence are not fitting in that historic district and they are making the site too dense with that it is recommended by the planning and economic development department that the project be built for the property located at 832 topper street I am available to answer questions and I know the applicant is also available thank you thank you very much do you know if the applicant is here and wishing to make a presentation it's by no means mandatory but I wanted to afford you the opportunity if you wanted to make any comments about the project do that my wife trinity and I are here today with some of our neighbors who came to kindly support the project there's basically two things that we went into great consideration and thought about in this project one was the aesthetics and the other was safety so without waiting one before the other I'd like to talk about each just a little bit this is a a lovely 1930 vintage simple bungalow historical house one of the things that attracted us to this area was the availability of this house we love the craftsman look that it embodies and so in choosing this design that was paramount in our thinking the rectangular look the style of the arbor the mimicking of the house in the shed we're all designed to work aesthetically and you've all been there the cedar stain on the fence will age will gray out it was important because a lot of times they say you're kind of green wood and it can warp so putting some oils into the wood at the first is a good idea it looks great I must say that in terms of aesthetics I probably had 50 people as I was working on that shed not the shed isn't there the arbor and the fence I probably had 50 people on the sidewalk I had people stop their cars in the middle of the street many times roll down the window and say that's wonderful I love that you are doing something great with this end of the street now I'm going to talk about the other issue and I don't want to you know it's 50-50 here but safety this is a kind of difficult location as we were walking over here today there was argument breaking out once again across on the street between homeless people seven of whom now live across the street fire was lit across the street last summer in literally across the street and the creek by people who've now moved back into that area sleeping outside at night and it's tragic but the problem we've had people defecate under the window we've had people try to break into the car in the driveway et cetera et cetera it's a long list of things that we had to get in the other day when we were out of town part of the problem for this house it was evident when we moved in was that without that I don't know if you have a picture without the old picture without the fence but this long big open yard this garage in the back in this kind of dusty weed-strewn terrible open stretch was an invitation it's there's no law or chain link fence or arm guards that are going to keep people out if they want to get in but psychologically there needed to be some kind of statement of there's a property line here to discourage people from walking onto the property the fence has helped with that the garden that's going in is helping with that the shed is part of the garden plan I can't do the garden in that whole side yard until the fence because I want the demarcation for the garden in front and stuff in back and I want people not to be looking at that garage and thinking I can just walk people were living back by that garage when we moved in there was somebody camped out back there I had to remove their belongings and we've had to remove people's belongings since moving in who have come onto the property and left their entire belongings down there along that strip in several ways the aesthetics balance the little garden shed and the house I think are going to look great together I think the fence is going to accentuate the craftsman the rectangular craftsman elements of the house I think it does that now we love this house we appreciate the fact that you have historical guidelines we appreciate the fact that you're concerned about those things and I want you to know that we are too thanks thank you very much if you don't mind I don't know if board members will have questions for you but they might if you're kind enough to stay up here and answer them great I think before I open it up to board members to ask questions I'm going to give the public opportunity to be heard so anybody who's here and wishing to speak on the project I'm going to open the public hearing and if you'll please approach either of the microphones at the top of the room of course and if it's your one and only I'm not very good at public speaking I usually hire people to do this but I'll give it a shot thank you for asking me to speak on behalf of my neighbors and I'm a big advocate of what they're doing to clean up the neighborhood in terms of their property they've gone out of their way to increase the value of their home the value of the neighborhood and a lot of us just walk by there on a daily basis and tell them how lovely their home is and I think that under the circumstances you should seriously consider his application we need more people like these people coming into the neighborhood that are really encouraging and spending their time and money and effort to clean up the neighborhood I know I was born and raised here the house that I own born and raised one block over so I understand Burbank Garden I understand that it's had its trials and tribulations but let's be honest these people you want them in these neighborhoods you want them to spend money and you want the real estate agents to be more disclosure friendly when people move into the neighborhood and tell them that there's a 20 page document online with the city cultural heritage board that lists all the things that they need to take into consideration when they go to renovate their homes God know I bought a house that should have just been destroyed but I've spent about $150,000 to at least put some pain on it so it looks like a pig with the silk purse but she's a pretty home and I love the neighborhood it's a great neighborhood I don't want more people like us moving in and taking care of that I'm not, again I'm not very good at public speaking but I left my office to come down here encourage, you know be supportive of them, my neighbors and tell them thank you so much and God bless you for doing what you're doing wish more people did anyway that's my three cents feel permit me a comment I thought those were excellent remarks thank you very much should we get back to the record staff do we need to have it it's not required it's not required learn something new every day thank you very much ma'am is anybody else wishing to speak yes sir, you'll approach either microphone and state your name for the record please hi my name is Bob I'm grateful to say I'm a close neighbor of both Chris Trinity I'm not going to talk about the renovations or all the qualifications that have to be met for the building I'm going to talk about the spirit that they bring to the place and what their home brings to the place at least for me I'm doors away from them and I go to the little corner store and I'm always thrilled every time I look at it it's more than just the physical design it's a joy to it even a child a child in me awakens when I look at it they are in my experience too very creative very sensitive people I know this is about cultural heritage and I'm not so much aware of what your heritage is or what you want to stick by but I think they bring a creativity and a sense of beauty and responsibility that certainly enhances my life and I think it will be a great contribution to our neighborhood which is the most wonderful neighborhood I've ever lived in thank you thank you very much okay I don't think is anyone else supposed to speak yes sir I don't know if this needs to go on the record but Mike Southworth and these are good friends of mine and I really am glad that they moved to our area Chris is a wonderful musician and an author and he brings a lot of good cultural mojo to this city as far as I'm concerned so I mainly just showed up to see if anybody was going to pose this thing to say something in that event but I'll just say that I wholeheartedly support these guys in what they're doing and we need more people like this in San Rosa thank you thank you very much okay let's bring it back for any questions that the board has for staff or the applicant board members any questions board member Gronigan if you're ready for staff on this in walking the neighborhood I noticed down the street there's a couple homes that had fences that one was a white picket fence looked in I didn't measure it but it looked like it was higher or taller than three foot and then further down perhaps on the corner there's quite frankly a hodge podge of fencing on that street one of the houses probably directly across from Bethlehem towers do you know whether either of those fences or those were brought before cultural heritage board not that I know board member or abuser regarding the neighbor that's on the property line that's closest to the accessory building I guess this question would be to both the applicant and staff has there been any correspondence or any feedback or any communication with that neighbor positive or negative comments from that neighbor thank you board member thank you chair I've got a number of questions for staff and one for the applicant potentially first of all the question is permit going to be required for this project a building permit for a storage shed that is 120 if they don't have any electricity no they won't need that one but if they don't have a three-feet fence that is not higher than seven feet it doesn't require building permit they might require building permit only for the arbor so this was brought to us only because of the fence not because they're building an accessory structure in the front of a building in a historic district the storage if it was only an accessory storage and the three-feet fence it brought to you here for approval second question was this a red tag on this project for there's not a stop work on it at this point okay confirming this is a contributor to the historic district is that correct the properties contributor and the properties on the base and east are also contributor the property on south is not contributor okay another question is to confirm this is not an ADU which has dispensation for going in the front yard of historic districts this is a shed that's correct storage shed correctly okay is the board were we issued copies of the comments that were received by email or letter the one that I received was today by the phone and the other one I received by email is that correct is it possible to get a hard copy of the board at the beginning of the meeting perhaps in the future we can do that okay thank you um I think those are my questions for staff at this time uh vice chair before you arrived I gave an opportunity for board members to make a comment on the board members is there any non-public information you have to disclose I am a member of the bourbon gardens neighborhood but I'm farther than 500 feet from the subject property so I have no issues okay board members any other questions for staff of the applicant board member Garrett in the past we've all public comments in the packet and is it possible you could read the other read the email to us and give us a juice of the verbal comment that was made so we have and if you have the names who provided those so I will read it really close by the address in question so I will read it regularly passed by walking our dog we have watched the residents improve their property over the last year for the better in our opinion we have set high in passing a few times we have no problem with their installing a shed as described in the notice of the public hearing on the postcard sent neighborhood recently Paul Larkin and they live at 924 Clark street that was a comment that was the email and the comment I had today it was at close to noon it was from a neighbor did not provide the name they were opposing the project because they believe it's not fitting into this neighborhood and it will make the property look too dense but this was an anonymous phone call okay thank you thank you I think that's all my questions because the call was transferred to me I didn't have the name was Leon Lynch yeah and the address was 800 okay so no address just name okay that was the name Leon Lynch we're member McHugh any questions I'm curious as to how this got before us it seems to me that the fence has already been constructed and how did it come to your attention okay so the project came as in as a minor lamua cultivation permit the fence was not like a the admin who took the application in they did not notice that the height of the fence is three feet so they treated it as a regular minor lamua cultivation permit but when planners start reviewing it they notice that the height of the fence is more than three feet and per our zoning code when the fence is higher than three feet it needs to go to cultural heritage board for approval that's why it came in front of you today okay the other question I have about the shed why did you decide to place the shed there when it seems to me from the in the back of the property you could put it put a shed which would be hidden from the from view a couple things it was a consideration because this is a gardening shed and I'm trying to outline gardening space and it would have actually provided more gardening space in front of the shed between the shed and the fence however aesthetically it seemed to me that the balance of the small building in parallel with the front building was preferable plus such as very small house it's 560 square feet house there's very tiny backyard in just living life we need a little space behind the shed to just put stuff that can't be seen from the street that side yard is a wreck and I don't want and I want to be able to get anything the garbage can I mean just whatever be able to put it out of site and I thought the balance would look really good and that was the primary reason for putting the shed there on the other side of the fence from the shed is a driveway a two car driveway and then there's a group home on the corner of E and Tupper 11 people live in the halfway house next to us so there's nobody living on the other side of the fence right there there's a big wide driveway and then a house the the crowdedness of the neighborhood it's interesting if you look at the picture if you go to the north the other side of the house between our house and the neighboring bungalow there's about this much space these houses I mean these old houses they're just lying up on that block sometimes they're like this so actually there's an advantage aesthetically and consistent with the neighborhood to putting it in line with the other houses because otherwise there's this sense of you're walking along these houses and all of a sudden our yard goes in and that's the thing I was trying to avoid is this because I've seen what happens people go in people are going in all the time so I might understand then by putting up the fence that you're putting a psychological barrier in effect to have people not come in people would just walk before the fence people would just walk into the yard all the time do they walk into the yard now? no because there's a fence there but the well we were gone the other day and somebody did come in and try to get through the passageway between the garage and the house somebody came down the driveway there's a gate on the driveway I want to put the fence you can see the balance aesthetically I mean it's we thought about a lot of things a lot of factors and this design meets all of those factors the aesthetics, the safety we could have avoided this hearing by going with a 36 inch fence and because the shed isn't really we wouldn't be having a conversation about the shed we want a 42 inch fence there are many 42 inch fences in the Burbank Gardens and they tend to be the ones with the kind of squared look as opposed to the picket the Gothic pickets I like the rectangular look because I think it echoes the rectangles of the windows that's part of the craftsman look for me the 42 inch fences not only tend to have the rectangular look they tend to have the posts that come above the fence they tend to be more substantial looking fences so we noticed many of those including the Burbank House which has a fence about this tall and posts about this tall and sets the design aesthetic standard for the entire neighborhood I think that was actually we went out and walked around and so this design reflects what we think the aesthetics needs, the historical needs of the neighborhood and the safety needs it's not easy to build something like this given this process we applied in July the difficulty of constructing a 42 inch fence when there are so many in the neighborhood is a little frustrating it really works well in the neighborhood among other reasons because the bungalows in the Burbank neighborhood are tall I've been in other craftsman neighborhoods bungalow neighborhoods where the bungalows tend to sort of be kind of they kind of move this way, sideways they're all on little lots narrow lots and they're all tall so a tall fence and we have numerous 9 and 10 foot arbors in the Burbank for the same reason this is part of the the Burbank look and it's a great look thank you board member Garrett please I have two quick questions for you Mr. Beyer did you I don't have a problem with the height of your fence at all I think it's appropriate did you consider the direction of the peak on the arbor when you put it on if you look at the vintage arbors the horizontal pieces in all of them run parallel to the street they never run at right angles to the street they always run across Santa Rosa the old large arbors almost always have there some of them have flat tops with like four by fours and then kind of shaped triangular shaped angled ends but they all run that direction and I opted to find a very high quality craftsman style arbor the best one I could find and it's a gorgeous arbor I have another question about the entry structure are you going to have a gate on that as well I think it's it's an ongoing struggle we're aware of that and so all of these pieces work together and that's why we decided to it was another $1,000 worth of permit fees for six inches of fence and I thought about it and I thought no, our plan is a good plan thank you members any other questions right now member debaker please just one more question to the applicant I agree that the fence and the arbor are generally okay but I did have one question the slap thickness is quite thin it's a little bit thin it's a little bit thin it's a little bit thin on the fence maybe a half inch had you considered thicker slats on the fence we're a little bit limited by what is commercially available I used western red cedar when we moved into the house the redwood was fine so I was impressed from Nevada so it really impressed me that moisture and rot and termites can be an issue here so I did my research and you want western red cedar and you want redwood and that's what that is, that's western red cedar so it will last and the stain will stabilize it as the air drying continues that kind of yellowish look will fade and the pigment and oils that have been put down into the wood will help stabilize it so I think those are going to do real well thank you I really wasn't questioning your choice of wood which was entirely appropriate it's primarily the dimension of the lumber used that's not a historical thickness and cedar and redwood are both available in thicker boards as standard I didn't find any pickets available and I went for the thickest ones I could find in pre-cut pickets I mean if I had the board I used is thicker than most of the gothic style ornate pickets the white ones that are on the street it's at least as thick than most of those those are typically one buys and yours is I'm pretty happy with if for some reason they did not hold up I would either have to replace them or go to a different picket I wanted to just ask you a question a little bit about the fact that the fence site is why this was elevated to a major you look at the code it's the only type of project among those listed that categorically requires this major review it's not even a discretionary bump up by the zoning administrator and it doesn't seem like there's really any reasonable basis for it obviously the council that passed it, whenever that happened thought differently but I don't know if there's any comment you could give generally about whether it's a common or whether a requirement like this we might do without in the future I don't have my personal opinion doesn't really matter but I will agree with that I think that right now it's very clear that anything over 36 censures does require a landmark alteration if this was in a standard zoning district not a generic preservation district it would require a conditional use permit but because it's over 36 inches so if there's a fence or any other structure is placed within that front yard setback that exceeds 36 inches it requires either a conditional use permit or because this is a landmark alteration it's kind of the more restrictive of the two of the two entitlements it requires the landmark alteration and I think the applicant acknowledged that it was by choice he had the option to reduce the overall height of the fence I don't know that that would have done justice to the project so I understand why he didn't but does that answer your question? Yeah it does thank you and I want to comment briefly on the setbacks and the code I am looking at the staff reports and page five and the citation to section 20-28-040 which is the setback reduction findings these look like mandatory findings and we were mandated to find both of them the review authority is mandated to find both of them were the review authority for the project so I just want to make sure that those are considered by the board and make their way into the resolution looks like we've got stuff that is similar but maybe not quite as detailed as that and we don't want to leave any stone unturned so to speak okay Can I ask do you want to cover those findings and establish the comfort zone for making them in this meeting or I think the findings can be made if you would like to Yeah I mean board members might have different opinions on it but I think we've got the code language here and the resolution could be written to follow the code language and if board members think they can make the findings based on the evidence presented then we don't need to elaborate on the reasons why but maybe we could open that up to any kind of counterpoint from any other board member because that sounds okay all right okay I don't have any other questions whether it's about that last matter or any other matter before we go around for final comments any last questions from board members anybody no okay all right board member Veronica if you want to get us started I don't want to blow people's ears out in terms of comments I find this a particularly nice project and I intend to vote for it and I think the applicants have done everything that they possibly could to make it not only for their own home but also for the neighborhood as well and so it has positive value I appreciate even though the shed is not under consideration in essence for the alteration permit that it does that you're attempting to tie it back to the architecture of the home and with the doors and window system that you're choosing there and I would assume that the 42 inches creates a bit more of a psychological barrier going for security so on and so on and I would probably encourage you in the future to investigate the need for the game no further comments from the board member if you'd like to comment so I probably should disclose earlier I live on a corner of Wheeler and Brown Street so I understand the neighborhood I also restored a house on the corner of Seventh and Humboldt that started out without a fence I understand issues living downtown without a fence and I also understand some of the issues you're dealing with that you so delicately tried to describe to us I believe the fence is open it's airy there's a lot of gap between the slats I don't think it visually obscures the house or the property at all I think you used high quality materials I applaud you for that and I think it's an appropriate design with regards to the Arbor the fact that you took the time to research a craftsman style Arbor and also go to the expense and the materials to build a craftsman style Arbor I applaud you for that also I also know from being in the neighborhood that there are many many Arbor's in our neighborhood and I agree with you that it does add to the fabric of the neighborhood and add to the character of the neighborhood even though it may not be in compliance but with regards to the accessory building I guess my understanding with the accessory building why we were here or why this was part of the landmark was mainly because of the setback you know two feet from the property line on one side and 18 from the front now the 18 doesn't bother me at all because the house is 18 so you're right even with that I don't have any correspondence from neighbors which both of you said no and the fact that it's been noticed there's been a big old billboard out on your beautiful fence nobody has come and said hey we don't want this accessory structure to feed from our property line then and also in consideration of the building materials that you've chosen the intent that you have to make it match the only consideration I would just throw out as another restore is I would consider putting a gable vent maybe and the gable just kind of like your house has just a match even if it wasn't a real vent it was just an architectural feature it would look nice that's the only comment I have with that so anyway with all those comments I support the fence I support the arbor and I will support the accessory building or remember Tabakar thank you chair project is a mixed bag for me first of all wonderful intents for the project generally good choices on the fence and the arbor I think that they definitely do add in our consistency I'm delighted that you didn't automatically default to a point to pick it on the fence as is so common in the neighborhood I'm concerned staff didn't think that needed to come before the board. I'm going to quote from the design guidelines. This is a section that I think is more appropriate to the architecture that you've got going there. And ultimately, some of the biggest issue I have is with some of the decisions about the design guidelines is section 1a, very beginning of the design guidelines. Excuse me, I'm going to go back to the design requirements section 6 at the beginning of World Renewal 6. And it lists what kind of projects aren't to be reviewed by the board. Projects that are exempt. I'm on page 22. There are sometimes a project that doesn't require a building permit. These exempt projects involve normal maintenance or minor improvement procedures that often do not require a building permit. These exempt projects include repair of existing siding or trim prior to painting, replacement of siding is not an exempt project. Repainting the house, installation of gutters or downspouts, replacement of the building permit. That's the extent of things that are exempt from cultural heritage review. If it's visible from the street on a contributor in a historic district. An accessory building in the front yard is problematic. When it's an ADU accessory dwelling unit, we have special dispensation we give. But this is a shed. We have a lot of work to do. We talk about generally is that the lack of scale drawings presented to us today. I know you were told by staff that you didn't require it, but it makes very difficult for us as a board to review the proportions that you're proposing. And that you've thought through the project completely. I think the accessory building's roof pitch is to match the building. It doesn't in that drawing. So we've got at best inconsistencies. Second, we know that you're planning to put the building up on pier blocks and on a wood floor. Which means the floor line is going to be something between minimum of eight and perhaps a foot and a half above the ground. And that's the way that you're going to get in and out of that structure. That's the things we would want to know about. Whether there's going to be handrails or steps, that sort of thing. I very much applaud your reuse of existing doors and windows. It's brilliant. I can't give you enough support but our purview is pretty rigorous about what's visible from the street in historic district, particularly on a contributor's site. So I'm concerned we don't have enough information which we would need from scale drawings in order to say your proportions and that you've thought through the elements that are going to affect the look of the structure have been thoroughly thought through today. I think that's the last issue that I have to say today on that. I think you're on the right direction. I am concerned about having a new structure. I don't think it's going to take much to do that but I think that some of the materials prepared for today are going to make that potentially difficult. I think that's the last issues that I have to say today on that. I think that's the last issue that I have to say today on that. I'm concerned about having a new structure. I'll talk about that a little bit. In the design reviews section 6 it does talk about accessory buildings. Let me correct that. This is part 2 design guidelines. It does talk about accessory buildings. I don't know if that was offered to you by the staff to guide you in your presentation today. But that's one thing and it also falls under new construction which is section G of part 2 section 1. In which we're supposed to look at the aspects of how it falls in the neighborhood pattern, the footprint of structures that are in there. The buildings that are in there are not historically consistent. That's a problem. We go back to the older plans. Small buildings in the backyards were quite consistent. But this one here in the front is not something that was done in the historical period of significance in that neighborhood. So from that reason I'm going to move on to the next slide. This is a go today. So thank you. Thanks, chair fennel. Would you like to make any comments? Excuse me. I'm just getting over a sinus infection. I lost my voice. As a real turn as someone who lives in the Burbank gardens, I can totally appreciate what you've done. Thank you. Thank you, chair fennel. I can see where you would want to put a garden shed because of the close proximity to that house. It's kind of a looming house next door. I like this project. I like what you've done. I've enjoyed driving by every day and seeing the changes that have happened at your house. Thank you. Thank you. I've never had an opportunity to thank you, but I do think that what you've done there is wonderful. An example of what we would like to see happen with the neighborhood. I appreciate and have seen and watched as a board member for the Burbank gardens neighborhood watched illegal fences go up in the neighborhood and there's a lot of traffic. There's a lot of traffic code and that are over four feet and different things like that and I appreciate that you're doing this the right way and we are trying to let the neighbors know what is the responsibilities and rights through the newsletters and stuff like that that go out and we will continue positioning on that garden shed and I do think that if anybody deserves a 42 inch fence where your property is located in the things that you've had to undergo with neighborhood problems, I get it and you have my support. Thank you. Board Member McHugh. I appreciate Member DeBocker's comments and I wonder if I could ask a question relative to those comments and could you please explain to me what's going on relative to some of the sightings that Member DeBocker stated in his comments. I can. We have a lot of different documents to refer to for direction on especially on properties within preservation districts. There are they're not always aligned we get our marching orders in terms of permit requirements from the zoning code the design guidelines assist we do refer to them absolutely but what entitlements are required come from the zoning code and Monet was correct when she said that the zoning code does not require a major landmark but it does require a major landmark for the preservation for an accessory structure I've brought the code section up if you'd like me to read it but it is here because the fence exceeds that and therefore the accessory structure is included in the scope of the project. So does that help clarify? We have lots of documents. I know it is in some ways difficult and the issue of safety and all of the concerns you've expressed so I'm supportive of the project. I like the design I like the fact that you're attempting to make the shed compatible with the house and the property around it and so I'm going to support the project but I just was curious about what seemed to be a conflict between the different sections or ordinances relative to this kind of project. So thank you. Member Garrett. Thank you. I agree with you Mr. Beyer that you have a charming home and I also see why you have a problem with security. That corner is always busy and there are always undesirable people at that corner at E and Tupper and I completely support your fencing. I actually think it would be improved if you painted it so it conformed with the historic district fencing which is predominantly painted. I and I definitely would like to see a gate at that harbor at some point and I think it would help you with your security for sure. I completely concur with Board Member Dabalker on the issue of the shed and wondered while I was reviewing it why it didn't come up in the staff report that this was not appropriate with the historic district fencing and I think the contributor it puts the shed on the same level as the contributor and makes it seem as important as the home which it clearly is not and there definitely architectural issues with the height and all of that but I was wondering and this is a question for staff to I think you could have a zero lot line at the back of the lot next to the garage and put this shed back there it seemed to me there was something on your neighboring property to the east that was right up next to that fence am I incorrect or was that just parking a shed that's like three inches from the fence at the back of the property our garage is maybe seven feet from the fence there would be roof issues I think trying to build a shed in that little we'd end up with two roofs colliding or a shed roof into the fence that was three feet high when I hit the fence because of the slope and then in the back of the house there's this little tiny backyard I get the point about the prominence the aesthetic prominence of the shed being that far forward that does make some sense to me and my concern for balance between the two buildings was genuine I debated a lot of debate went into this so if I could see moving the shed back a couple feet towards the garage somewhat if kind of the problem I have is that when it's a reflection of your comment is that while there is that line that now includes the shed if the shed is at parallel to the house and there's the shed in line with that house it's like this is the end of the subdivision our house was built at a point when this was the end of town and they didn't build it to the end of the property line there was this field that went out and that field is still there filling that field with a line I guess the point I'm making is we're special this is a unique a unique position in the development history of this community where almost precisely for the octopus a reason putting something in line with the house actually makes some sense even though it's just a shed because we're not going to build another residents there it's just a shed it seemed to keep that drop off from happening and that's the way it's been for almost 100 years this field of weeds is there any way you could consider moving that shed to the back of the property behind the house we wouldn't have a backyard the backyard is about the size well it's about 20 by 12 it's a tiny little property and we need some space we need a backyard we have anywhere from 3 to 7 people with dual diagnosis sitting on the curb smoking cigarettes staring at our house all day every day we need to be able to get away we need a backyard so I don't want to get rid of our backyard it would fill the backyard there would be no backyard it's tiny and it's a good place to live I would say it's a good place to live okay thank you I really like this project a lot thanks for bringing it to us I think what we have run into here with the comments about the review authority for the shed it's funny that it seems to me that everybody has a pretty decent argument but it's funny that the time I've been on the cultural heritage board a slew of documents with language that is sometimes seemingly in conflict and imprecise and has what some people might characterize as outmoded or silly exceptions that apply on an uneven basis as time goes by they get around to it when they get around to it and we are left to grapple with some of the difficulties that we've inherited from the past so there is a good case to be made that anything that is a new structure that's visible from the street that constitutes a different lot development pattern that should perhaps always be elevated to the board but I saw a language in there that points the other direction there's the language in the zoning code about an accessory structure so this would be a court case that would last 50 years if there was enough money involved because you could find lawyers on either side to drive you insane and waste your time arguing either side of it and it's why it's so important to be very very clear when you make the law and when you have a resolution that you have conditions that are easy for people to comply with because the last thing we want to do is take a great neighbor and impose excessive time consuming and uncertain stressful requirements where we've got tremendous staff here in the planning department and it takes every bit of energy to find the right interpretation of these things and I can speak because I try to get to someone close to that level when I'm up here figuring out how to vote so on the substance of the project I like the fence quite a bit maybe if it had come here for a concept review or something in a different universe there would be little tweaks and quibbles I would make but it's not worth bringing them up I think it's a beautiful project and I've volunteered at Legal Aid to write a stone's throw away for a while many years ago and I'm familiar with the neighborhood and I think that one thing we need to do when we're looking at different sites within a historic district and this came up on the Caritas village matter not long ago was I think that it's a mistake to think of every nook and cranny of a historic neighborhood is exactly the same or having the exact same considerations and we don't do that but things on the boundaries are things that have special considerations and streets and different issues it's not wrong to take those into account with the zoning code so I can certainly make the findings all the necessary findings including the findings regarding the setback that I brought up earlier so now that everybody's commented we'll give any opportunity for any last comments for board members but first I'd like to ask for board member to please move the resolution we've got one can we have comment after it's moved and seconded? yeah great if a board member would please move the resolution with the new sections added that follow the language of the I think it's 28-040 I think that we could probably put those in as maybe a new D and a new E and reorder E as F would it be helpful if I read those findings out loud now? sure that'd be great the review authority first finds that the reduced setback will not significantly impair the residential privacy of the proposed structures or any adjacent existing or anticipated residential structures or use and two the review authority first finds that the reduced setbacks enhance and protects the historic development pattern of the preservation district excuse me or any adjacent contributing properties and that the approving a reduced setback facilitates a superior project great thank you does any board member wish to move the resolution as amended? I can do that give it a shot for the first time alright please I move the resolution of the cultural heritage board of the city of Santa Rosa approving a landmark operation permit for offense with an arbor and a storage shed for the property located at 832 Tupper Street in the Burbank Gardens preservation district assessor's partial number 009-253-008 file number LMA19-012 and waive the reading of the text second okay the resolution as amended was moved by board member Muser and second by board member Groninger board members any final comments that you wish to make before I ask for your votes board member Tabacher thank you chair I'm wondering if it's possible to do a friendly amendment to the resolution for approval of the fence and trellis but withhold approval for the accessory building pending more proper drawings to evaluate them by and so that goes back to the makers okay board member Muser there's been a request to make the friendly amendment that was just described by board member Tabacher do you have any comment I don't support the friendly amendment and so without the maker the friendly amendment was not agreed to is that correct any other board member Garrett please who seconded the second we usually respond to board member Groninger if you'd respond to please I would not support the friendly amendment either thank you board member Garrett my understanding of the purview of the cultural heritage board is that we are to protect and enhance the cultural the historic districts and in that sense I would make a friendly amendment to move the shed three feet or five feet further back from the frontage of the house so that becomes less important than the contributor on the property board member Muser again a friendly amendment by board member Garrett was requested do you have any comment is it possible to get comment from the property owner before making this decision great minds think alike I just asked and the property owner has agreed to I would accept the three feet not five and I would guess that probably is because it's squeezing a little too close to the garage I would accept the three feet I think that's a good compromise could I ask that we just talk through how we're going to phrase this is it going to be by you know greater than two but no greater than three feet something like that how do you get the three feet yeah I know the property well okay so you've got your answer board member Muser how do you react to the friendly amendment I support that friendly amendment and board member I support it as well okay so the friendly amendment has agreed to and the resolution before the board now includes the friendly amendment to add a condition affecting the site plan and three feet toward the real property line for the accessory structure I would just well at the end of all the discussion if there are other conditions I'll go ahead and do a read back of what I've got and give you the opportunity to approve or not all right board members anything else board member Garrett I would like to make sure that the accessory building does not equal the height of the front porch pitch the roof pitch at the top of the front porch or so in other words that it is it is not as high as that as that roof is that please thank you I mean it functionally makes no difference in terms of a garden shed your 120 square feet 120 square feet my only concern is I just like the idea the pitches were all the same it was there's I take to heart the concern for the rise of the piers I can bury the piers 30 I can bury them and then you have a 4x4 that sits on a 4x6 you are up about a foot and you got to have some air under the floor do you have a step at the front porch oh yes there's two steps up to the porch and there's a huge rise to the roof of the porch that it's easy to do I'm just saying that I can't guarantee that I can do the same pitch well the pitch in the drawing doesn't match the pitch on the house anyway I know but I it would match when it was done so if I if I can if I can match the pitch and keep it lower I'll do that and if I have to bring the pitch down because it's a pretty steep pitch it can come down some I'll do it yeah it's a shed it's not I just do was aesthetics totally thank you yes for remember debacle just a question germane to the issue I agree with trying to keep the pitch the same if you can did you consider putting it on a slab like most people do for their sheds rather than raising it what what's why did you feel necessary to raise it rather than put it on a slab I basically did a lot of reading about shed construction and everybody was basically putting and putting them on piers in and you know laying down gravel and putting piers in and building a floor and that's how sheds are constructed the alternative would be to pour concrete you know which would you know can do it that way I think that you would find that almost all the sheds in Santa Rosa are on slabs particularly the ones done in the 20th century so thank you thank you remember me sir I would say though that knowing most of the sheds in the neighborhood most of them are on piers are on wood and don't have found in fact most of our houses are on piers so don't have foundations so in a way historically on the on the piers it would be more accurate this is why there's seven of us board member Garrett was there a friendly amendment with in connection to this height or pitch issue I wasn't sure where we left that I wanted to be clear and or Susie miss Murray I if there is a friendly amendment I need some clarification because it sounds to me like if we lower the height of the shed we may lose the same pitch roof pitch so if you could just be clearing your friendly amendment that would be appreciated I don't see a problem because I can't imagine how that shed could be as high as the pitch above the the entry I mean if there are three steps that has to be a foot and a half or more from the ground up and so I don't think it will be a problem but I would ask that you try and keep it below that pitch so it doesn't take on the same importance as your house thank you board members any other matters we're members of awkward I don't want to hold the project hostage to the advice that you receive that it was okay to put accessory buildings in the front viewshed on the historic district and I think you've done a great job with coming up with the design and reuse of existing components to accomplish that so I I think it's it's gonna be good okay if there aren't any more comments from board members I'll ask Miss Murray for a reading of some phrasing for the friendly amendment regarding the site plan if board member Garrett made a friendly amendment I think we still have to go through do I miss the accepting process if if I'm mistaken the the height and pitch issue was left out of an encouragement basis and not a friendly amendment is that correct or member good okay so as two conditions of approval one which was added through the friendly amendment process the first which has moved the shed back to 21 feet behind the property line it's currently proposed to 18 that adds to three feet and number two the shed height the shed height shall be lower than the the porch roof and retain the pitch the same as the residential structure does that need an amendment or it can not stand that way it condition of approval I I think that is done through the amendment process so I would recommend that that be added through the amendment process okay then I would like them to make a second friendly amendment that the peak of the shed building be lower than the peak of the entry the porch peak sorry and do you want to add maintain the same and the same roof pitch thank you okay board member Muser I accept that I agree with the friendly amendment yes okay all right so the friendly amendment is agreed to and we have now before us a resolution that was amended to include the setback conditions it also includes the two friendly amendments that were just read by miss Murray one regarding the site plan and the second regarding height and pitch and board members your votes please I'll need to do a roll call I always read for the button okay the buttons don't they work anymore excuse me before before we do the vote thank you money just added me I had a note that about the addition of a gate at the arbor do you want to add with the board consider adding a condition that would enable the applicant in the future to add that gate without it having to come back to the board that would be painful I think it does require another friend friendly amendment that would be friendly in many ways remember we're willing to make that amendment I would be willing to do it since I was the one who suggested and I highly agree that it would be I mean I have a gate at my front and and I don't live in I live in an historic district but we don't have as many homeless as you do so my I would I would like to make a third friendly amendment that should the applicant in the future wish to have a gate at that arbor entry that that be allowed and I would second that thank you board member miser any comment on that agree with that remember Veronica I support the latest friendly amendment it's the next best thing we can do to getting rid of that major language in that law so and while the laws on the books that is the solution thank you we're very friendly okay again resolution was moved by board member muser and seconded by board member granica as amended by the two amendments prior to the discussion and the three friendly amendments board members your votes please sorry roll call if you'd take a roll call vote please okay board members granica I muser I debaker I garret I mcku I fennel I Edmondson and I also vote I and the resolution is passed with seven eyes thank you very much for a great project and for your patience and thanks everybody for your support you know helping make our neighborhoods better and more neighborly and you know this is exactly what we need more of and you know thanks for taking the time out to come watch our democracy in action thank you staff so we do have a couple of last items here as usual let's move on to board member reports and I'll give staff just a minute to get gathered monay thank you very much for all your help and welcome to chv as you can see we're very friendly all right thank you and anytime you're ready miss murray it's board oh so board member reports this is the board that's the staff board members anything to report this week board member mcku when the staff does a report and what I would like to see in that report is the statutory authority that they use to make the decision either to recommend or not to recommend so they have some sense of of the documents you're using to support the staff report whatever the staff report is that would be helpful to me noted thank you you know can I just follow up just a second on that and I don't disagree with that is it the case that it's it's a staff determination about sort of which category it falls into and you know ordinarily we would not have an opportunity like this to to find out about it one way or the other is that correct yes yeah it is so in terms of the shed that's correct but the same findings apply so no matter who the review authority is we have to make the same findings so and we consult all the different documents the secretary of the interior standards for rehabilitation we consult the design review guides the processing procedures for owners of historic properties and as chair admin send pointed out earlier they're not always aligned there are contradictions direct contradictions and there's some that just seem a little different but so we do the best we can with that but we and I believe that one a staff report in this case addressed most of those those documents we are in the process of refining the staff report and trying to do that in a way when it's not very redundant and at the same time not eliminate information for board members so I appreciate the comment it should be done through the findings and supported by the documentation in the staff report yeah and I agree with your comment board member mckew I you know there's the action that's in front of us which is you know the permit in this case but then you know there's also what what authority you know by which authority is it before us in the first place and I think the more information that we have about the law that we're applying the better so thank you very much any other board member reports vice chair I just have one thing and it's been something that I brought up about a year ago and that is that as in real estate we're not providing owners in these historic districts enough information about the responsibilities and the rules and regulations that come with purchasing a home and I would like to see the city implement a form or an affidavit or a disclosure form there's a something that Sonoma County that provides it's like a 22 page thing about everything from grapes growing in the region and oceans I mean like it's just to cover your rear end type thing but we do need to come up with something because we have so much I guess ignorance in these neighborhoods about what they can and can do once they buy their homes and they think they can plop the fence up and they can plop in vinyl windows on a saturday night and they can we need to have something that is signed so that the city has the ability to come back and prove to these people that they signed something and they knew what their responsibilities were and I really feel strongly that we are not updating people as to the responsibilities in these historic districts and it's to our peril we've seen things come before the board in the last couple of years that were just things that had not and had never they didn't know that they needed to come to us and then it's like trying to fix something that's already been wrecked and so I'd love to see the city come up with something or there the the rules and regulations sent over and required you know signing and then you can get them from the the real estate companies if something comes up and you know they plop a fence up that's four feet or you know just something we need to do something more to and you know teach people about the responsibilities so the first thing I I want to I'm going to kind of address this in my comments and that is there's a way to get these discussions on to future agendas and that's one of the things that I'm going to talk about when we get to our department reports but I am also going to comment on this one and that is I I agree with you I would love to do the outreach but I don't know that we don't know when a property is being sold so I don't know that we're the mechanism but we can talk about that there is a way and I will when we're done with our board member reports and department reports I'll talk a little bit more wouldn't that be a disclosure issue for the seller can can I interject I'm gonna I'm gonna just kind of jump into my next comment and that is about these discussions there's a way to get them on to the agenda and it's it's actually it's it's there let me let's let's table this comment for after my comments if we could yeah so let's move on to department reports and it's all blended and open open forum open season thank you I'm new to this position so I'm learning too I apologize if I try to go by the script too much here but so during the last meeting there were several items brought up by board member debaker thank you very much and to talk about those things on a future agenda we have a council policy that sets that process it's a three step process and while it may seem a little cumbersome and that's this will address this process or this item as well it may seem a little bit cumbersome it's very intentional and deliberate that we do that in that way you know staff's use of time and and yeah just how we approach each of these items is is real transparent so it's a three step process and the first part of that is that during report items one member request future agenda something be added to a future agenda a topic and another member concurs okay so that gets it open for the board to discuss at a future meeting so in this case uh vice chair fennel could could go ahead and ask that this be added to the next agenda and uh board member garret could go ahead and and second that and that would table the conversation for the next agenda when um at that the future meeting the agenda item is discussed by the board and the board votes on whether to add as a future agenda item or study session or report item and if the board board votes yes as you know a group it can it can set um it can be set for a later meeting okay so at that next meeting it would require a majority vote to add it to an agenda for more in-depth conversation i would also say that once it's agendized um we'd also need to know the scope of what staff needs to come back with okay and and considering of course budgets that's a sensitive word at this time of year um and whatnot so so um to keep all that in perspective there is a way to get it on to the agenda and there there's a process now i want to just throw something another comment and and that is uh coming up on march 12th and 13th we have council goal setting um coming up and every one of you has a council year so i mean i personally would take advantage of that opportunity and try to get some of those um um once uh maybe not as a first priority but second secondary priorities for the council um so there is just a that's just my opinion again and gosh i think that summarizes or that is my department report can you repeat the third part of the process is that the in-depth oh i'm sorry yeah um the third part of the process is the item is agendized for discussion at a later meeting and patty i have an email that i can give you okay uh any questions comments open season open forum board member debaker please thank you um so so uh a i would like to see some of the items that were brought up last meeting if we could get someone to raise it and and second it to move forward for further discussion and b um i'm hoping that uh what we did today is not going to set a precedent for staff on ex uh buildings in the view shed on historic districts uh there's multiple documents you know that we have that say that if it's going in a historic district and it's in the front view shed uh it does need to come before the board um and so i'm troubled that the shed would not have come to us if it hadn't been for the fence matter i understand but i think this has to be go through the same process that three-step process to get it on to the agenda i will commit though that i will do a little bit more research and come back and report to the board on that next time because i i i understand the knee jerk reaction and i went back and looked at the entitlements the the required entitlements and i i confirm that in our zoning code and that is the ordinance that we follow the other design guidelines we have a lot of other documents but we have the ordinance that directs us i will do some research however but i think that this is like anything else this is a process that we're going to have to add to um it could you know add to a future agenda and there are ways to um correct the language in the code or change the language in the code if that's what you wanted to do but again that is the process three-step process certainly then i just bring to the attention that um it is pretty clearly spelled out in the uh secretary standards and also if we're looking for precedents in 20-28-040 it does say on section e in the event of any conflict between the following standards and those of the primary zoning district the applicable those applicable to the h combining district shall apply and that that seems to set the precedent so like i said if we want to continue the discussion we can add it to another agenda i will do the research though i have a question go ahead i'm sorry no please go ahead um when i was previously on the board um all of us had a copy of the um all the guidelines and um i don't think we had that now and i actually turned mine in when i left thinking they would be there we had binders with everything um in them thinking that they could then be reused um is that something that is done or um can i request that i get a copy of the guidelines yeah go ahead and send me an email and i'll get something to you and um if for those of you that are savvy on the website all of those guidelines are available with links but i'm not so savvy i have hard copies i'm happy to share good i would love those thank you all right anything else everyone part member runnega since it's open season here um when i previously served on the uh cultural heritage board a number of years ago i'm not certain if each of the members but several of the members had a liaison responsibility either with a specific district my case it was with the uh the railroad square association as i recall uh do those still exist and do you need anybody those do still exist uh come to think of it there's been the turnover lately and i think we could probably revisit uh how those are allocated so i know that mine is taken but we might want to reshuffle them so perhaps this is one of those things that could make its way onto an upcoming agenda i'll add it to next week's agenda or next the next agenda not next week's i have a next agenda and i have two people agree we'll add it to the next agenda great thank you board member runnega we are getting the hang of it discipline i would like to um to say that board member debaker um did ask if anybody wanted to second any of the four items that he brought up last week if we could address them each individually that would be great and i'm happy to read them they're listed on your minutes the first one is that he would like that um would like certified local government added to future agenda discussion if the board um it's bored i get if i if the board currently uh as currently composed quantities i've got this so tiny qualifies i'm sorry yeah and mine was tiny so um that that can be added if uh board member debaker has a second to that however this is the one if i were in your shoes i would that's a that's a pricey endeavor and i would um talk to my council member as well and we may not meet again i don't know what's on the next agendas so we may not meet again before their budget setting sessions on march 12th and 13th so again i would just encourage that uh so you know cost would be one of the things that would be a discussion item if this were to come back to us right we're talking about putting this on the agenda to hear what what it would entail and how feasible it is or or budgeting is going to have to be looked at to make it a worthwhile agenda item and and that's yeah that scope of review or what what the board is asking for is going to have to come from the board um so just the simple discussion to get it on to the agenda is today's today to two board members to say let's get it on to the next agenda to talk about it and at the next agenda meeting um i know this is it's very it's kind of confusing i apologize um at the next agenda uh or at the next meeting um it's discussed by the entire board whether or not to add it to the next agenda and then at the third agenda then you can identify or we can identify the scope of work not a we it's you i'll just take notes this is reminds me the iowa caucus there's the state delegate equivalents and then they turn into national delegates it's also like a transformer in that way or a pokemon sure yes board member debaker i would like to see the first three items appear on the agenda uh at next meeting looking for a second i'll second yeah okay um the the recording secretary needs to know what first three items means i have number one ch member liaison responsibilities number two certified local government let me see if i can jump in and ask for your help board member debaker uh the first one the first item uh and board member grant ago you could weigh in if this sounds okay to you uh would be uh to uh have a discussion about the uh board member pairing up with different historic districts in the city and uh you know what that entails and what uh responsibilities board members would have to uh you know find information and deliver reports to the board into the public at future meetings and that one will be added um to the next agenda looking for a second to it um unlike the other three from board debaker that were brought up at the last meeting and now he's requesting he's he's actually at that first agenda i know it's very confusing it's three meetings just remember that so you're gonna be a second for mr granica's request okay okay and uh board member debaker you we've got your uh matters that you raised last time written down here but if you want to uh elaborate uh for any kind of scoping and uh let us know uh yeah go ahead please thank you just clean up the language on the first one a little bit um we'd like to have a discussion of certified local government and particularly whether the composition of the current board qualifies second item was simply as stated adaptive discussion of adaptive reuse award project and the third one was discussion of local annual preservation award local something preservation local local annual preservation award okay any support for that okay board member granica gets the honors even though there was other interest okay how we doing we got what we need and the next the march um fourth meeting was canceled there were no items submitted so unless you yeah we the we'll add it to the next active agenda we'll meet yeah it'll be triggered by a project okay i think board member debaker yes please sorry chair one final comment first i'm going to be having my knee replaced um on march the ninth and i will be unavailable uh probably until early april early mid april traditional meetings so i have my uh council person now so thank you all right well at least we we would miss you at the march meetings and so we're gonna we're gonna get by by the skin of our teeth without you and uh hope you uh have a speedy recovery all right uh miss murray thank you very much patty thank you uh i think that'll do it for today okay and we are adjourned until our april meeting or possibly second uh meeting in march okay until at least the second regularly scheduled meeting in march