 Looks like my watch is fast, so I will adjust my watch. Drew's an Eagle Scout, you gotta cut him some slack. He's on time is late to truth, so. Okay, board members, it looks like everybody is present. All the board members are present. We'll still do a roll call. I'm just letting you know for your information. Thanks, Patty. So it is 428 and so we'll, we can go ahead and call the meeting to order since everybody's present. Patty, can I get a roll call of the board members present, please? Board member Weigel, because of Brown Act, we have to wait until 430. We have to wait until 430. I always forget that. Yeah, so we'll just wait there. My apologies. Okay, now it's 430. I'm ready to go in today, I think. So now that it's 430, I would like to call the March 18th meeting, 2020 meeting of the Design Review Board to order. Courting secretary, may I please have the roll call? Okay, let the record reflect that all board members are present. Fantastic. So since we're in a virtual setting, I'd like to remind everybody about the governor's executive orders and while we're all here today. And we'll read them due to the provisions of the governor's executive orders N25, N-25-20 and N-29-20, which suspend certain requirements of the Brown Act and the order of the health officer of the County of Samoa to shelter in place to minimize the spread of COVID-19. The board members will participate by teleconference into the Design Review Board meeting of today, March 18th. Okay, let's see here. So I'm going to rearrange the agenda today. So we'll do our approval of minutes and then we'll do board business, board room reports, department reports. Oh, well, it's already been rearranged. Never mind. Well, we'll do it in order. My apologies. So we'll move to approval of minutes. Has everybody reviewed the draft minutes from February 18th, 2021? Does anybody have any additions or adjustments to those minutes? Seeing no comments. Let the record reflect that those minutes can now be entered into the record. At this time, we like to open up public comment to items that are germane to this board, but not on items that are on today's agenda. So if there is anybody from the public wishing to speak on topics specific to the Design Review Board or the city at large, you may do so now. But please make sure that it is, that are, they are items not on the agenda today. Okay, we don't see any raised hands at this point. So if anybody would like to do a public comment, if you could raise your hand, then we'll know and we can unmute you. Board member Weigel, it looks like we don't have any raised hands. Okay, so we'll move on to board business. And this is where we read the statement of purpose for the project. So this is the report. Zoning chapter zoning code chapter 20 dash 52.030 f 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 consistent consistency of the design guidelines, architectural criteria for criteria for special areas and other applicable city requirements. PG city policy statements and development plans. And actually I did want to rearrange board. I wanted to flip board member reports and department reports. So with that bill rose interim deputy director bill rose. I'm going to move to you for department reports. Hey, thank you chair Weigel. And first off, I wanted to say congratulations on your appointment. We were just changing the name there to get chair on there. So welcome aboard. You're going to do great. And I look forward to having you in this role. I just had one report. And it's kind of a department report. It's kind of a board report, but I'm really pleased to announce to the board and everybody watching that. Our new chair drew has recently been awarded an award with the from the American Institute of Architects. And he's been awarded the AIA California young architect award. So I just wanted to make a special note of that. Drew, as we all know, has been offering this board so much with his insight and his expertise. And now he gets to do it from the chair's seat. And just really happy for you, Drew. So congratulations on that. And that's it for my report. I don't know if it's appropriate at this point, but as a past chair, I just wanted to say that I'm excited about drew being the chair. And I'm excited about that. And I have to say that the mechanics of being the chair have always been interesting to watch. And seeing drew walk his way through the same bits and pieces and that added responsibility. Makes me recognize the value of the position. And I think drew is going to be fantastic. So I just want to say congratulations and congratulations on the award to drew. I could also. Thank you. Thank you. Thank you for your comment. Drew, it is. I'm impressed with your alertness and your attentiveness. And your ability to, to be cognizant on so many levels. There are a lot of moving targets and a lot of moving pieces to this kind of. I'll use the word calling. And on all fronts, you've been a gentleman. And you've been gracious. But also very vigorous. And they got you. And they did. Not only did you get off the wheels of your enthusiasm. That should drive us all. An enthusiastic city as a lively city. So we'll keep it lively. And thank you for your, your courage here. It's going to pay off well. I'd also like to. Chime in there, Drew, Before you say thank you. And chime in also, and just congratulate you. on the chairmanship and also on the award. I think it goes to show your quality as an architect and also for your commitment to civil service. Thank you for that. It's, you know, what we do ideally is more than just a job and you take it there. So thank you for that. We'll do a survey with you in this new role. Thanks, Adam. And I'll go ahead, Bill. I have one other comment, but please Drew, if you wanted to say something. I just wanted to thank everybody for those kind words, but I also wanted, I forgot, we need to welcome our brand new board member, DRB member, John McHugh. John comes to us from the Cultural Heritage Board and he's so he's new to our board, but John is no stranger to sitting on one of our city's boards. And so we're excited to have John and his insight as a longtime resident of Santa Rosa. So John, do you have anything to say about joining our board? I'm absolutely delighted to be here. It's an honor to serve. And so I'm very grateful for the privilege and looking forward to working with all of you. So thank you. And Chair Wagal, if I may, that's exactly what I was going to mention. And board members, please forgive me for failing to recognize you as our newest member. I think I just, I got used to seeing you in that screen because you've been on the Cultural Heritage Board. So it's nice to see you here. I think you're going to love this board. And also thank you for your service on the Cultural Heritage Board. That's going to be, you've got some big shoes to fill there on that one. So, but welcome aboard. Thank you. So with that, if there are no more, we'll move on to board member reports. I feel like we've kind of done those. Anybody else have any board member reports this evening? I just wanted to indicate that I have been to the site and, you know, just kind of looked it over. So just wanted to share that with the public and you. Oh, thanks. Thanks, board member Ricky. We'll actually do that right at the beginning of when we hit the item and do some ex parte disclosure. But typically with, and Bill, you can correct me if I'm wrong. If it's concept review item that's not required, but we typically do it anyway, just to let the public know kind of what kind of connection we've had either with the applicant or visiting the project site. Is that correct? Yeah, I think that's correct, Chair Weigel. Also, I think we typically don't do public comment as it's not a public hearing, but we do that for concepts as well. If we have members of the public present. Opening night, it's John, no problem. Yeah, it's all good. Learning. Okay, so yeah. So with that, we'll move on to statements of abstention for the schedule items. Do we have any statements of abstention for this evening? Chairman Weigel, yes, Vice Chair Hedgebeth here. I'm associated with the project and will abstain from said project for tonight's proceedings. Sounds good. So we'll see you at the next meeting there, Vice Chair Hedgebeth. Have a good one. So before we move on to the next item here, I just want to make a quick comment of I guess what I'd like to see happen as we move into our concept item this evening. We're gonna, I'd like for our board members to have a pointed and a very deliberate discussions about the design and be as brief as you can in your commentary if we can. So we can assist both the public and the applicants and our lovely city staff in getting home to their families this evening, if they are perhaps at City Hall for whatever reason. So that would be my only comment about moving into our next item. So without further ado, we will move into the scheduled items for tonight. Item 8.1, which is a concept design review for 891 Third Street Multifamily Housing Project. File number DR21-006. And so I think we'll now welcome Kristen A. Tummions, senior planner to give us a staff report on the project. One second, Chair Weigel, while we promote her one second. So Kristen, I'll be promoted here to panelists in just a moment. It looks like we might be having an issue with her sharing her screen. So we'll give that just a second. Apologies for that, Chair Weigel and members of the design review board. This is Kristen A. Tummions, senior planner. And let me get my screen out. Okay, so the project tonight is for a multifamily housing project proposed at 891 Third Street, and this is a concept item. It's a proposed 18-unit, three-story multifamily project. And it's part of a second phase of an adjacent midrise to the north at 888 Fourth Street. And the unit sizes range from 358 square feet to 448 square feet. And the proposed design includes podium level common space, rooftop terrace, rear picnic area, under existing oak trees to the rear. This is where the project is located in the northeast quadrant, so north of Third Street. Here's an aerial view of the site. It's currently vacant with some pavement and not much else. And the project to the north, you can see that grassy area has an approved permit for a mixed-use tower that's six stories and 75 feet tall. Now, this parcel was part of the downtown plan update. And so the general plan and the zoning have changed for this particular parcel on the block through neighborhood mixed use. So originally it was zoned a commercial office which had some restrictions. Normally multi-family would require a major use permit. Now multi-family is a permitted use. There is also an FAR max of three. This project comes, I would live at 1.3. And so the new zoning does require projects to reach a midpoint, a midpoint FAR unless there are specific circumstances that prevent that from doing so. And we can get into those a little bit later. And this shows the downtown station area plan. And so this project is within that area plan. Now, this project was originally always included with the 888 Fourth Street project. And so with that, it's had a long history of several iterations as far as unit count and design. Going back to 2008 and that's with different zonings. So different zoning, different downtown plan. And so I don't wanna go through it in too much detail but it's gone before the design review board, the planning commission, zoning administrator over several years. But most recently in April 11th, 2019 planning commission, they approved a use permit to allow that the 888 Fourth Street apartment projects to exceed the height limit of the downtown commercial zoning district. But then later the applicant came in to reduce the height. And that was approved by the zoning administrator. So March 5th 2020, the applicant had a minor design review application to eliminate one floor and two mezzanines to reduce the occupied roof height to 75 feet. And they did some other design changes. And originally this project was included, this project site was included in the scope. So this is the site plan for the 888 Fourth Street project. You can see on the north portion of the drawing. And this is the most recent approved elevations for 888 Fourth Street. And so this would be what we would see looking straight on from Fourth Street once it's constructed. So the bottom level would have commercial space and the upper levels would be residential. And here's a side view showing a little bit of the parking garage. This is a Google Street View image of the project site. And one thing I wanted to add is at 341, I received a late correspondence from a member of the public and they own property. If you're looking at this image to the right of the project site and they had several concerns with the proposed project. And I would like to summarize those for you right now. The concerns are with the numerous iterations that have been proposed and approved on the project site. They felt like this is Zones CO so it should be office and not residential. In that office would be better in terms of parking. And it was an office they could share parking with 888 Fourth Street and it would reduce the extra burden on Thursday for 24 hour parking. They also had concerns with the stormwater treatment area being too close to their heritage oaks on their property. They were also concerned with building entrances that are next to their bedroom windows. And they're wondering if they could be located on the opposite side. They also had questions with how garbage will be collected. And they had concerns with the overall look of the building and they wondered why the building looks like low income housing. So those were the late comments received from the public. With that, I wanna leave it up to the applicant to present their project. And if you have any questions of staff, I'd be happy to answer them. Thank you, senior planner to me, so I think what we'll do then is we'll now move to the applicant presentation and then we'll do public comment on the concept design and then we'll do questions and comments from the board. Does that sound good everybody? Yes. Okay, so let's go ahead and move to the applicant presentation and have them present their project to us and the public. So am I connected to all of you now? Great. We can hear you. I need to ask, this is the recording secretary. Am I promoting applicant members tonight? If the planner or if Bill can tell me, are we promoting the applicant team for Zoom? Patty, I'm gonna ask you, has this been a practice we've done in the past? It's been a little bit... Hit and miss? Yeah, hit and miss. Yeah, yeah, yeah, we can do that for tonight. Okay. So I think once it looks like Patty's promoted the applicant who is Hugh Futurell. And I guess with that, Hugh, when you're ready, just go ahead and take us through your project. Thanks. Great, am I on a video feed now just for information? Your camera is currently off, so... All right, so let me get this in order here if I may. Although obviously I'm accustomed to using Zoom, but there we are. Okay, I should be on video now, but I don't see it. We can see you, Hugh. We can see you, Hugh. Thanks. Okay, well, good. Thank you. So thank you, members of the board. And I'm here with Paul Gilger, the project architect with H.Peth Associates, and with Christine Talbot, landscape architect with Quadriga, two members of the design team, who will also summarize some of the architectural elements, including the landscape architectural after I make an initial presentation. For the record, I'm Hugh Futrell. My firm owns the property and has owned the property for a number of years, actually, and is the developer and builder of the property. I think the board is aware that we've built a number of buildings in the downtown, most of which we continue to own. I'd like to begin by reviewing the overall plan, the context and objectives, then turn it over to Paul and Christine. This is, in fact, the second phase of the 888 4th Street project, which is a seven-story project, two levels of structured parking, including ground floor, commercial lobby space, and five floors of units above, a total of 108 units. The rooftop terrace, podium level, and other amenities that the project description, that was shown for 891 3rd Street, those particular amenities, which are, in fact, for the benefit as well of the tenants in this new proposal, is actually located in the 888 4th Street project. The tail, as we call it, has gone through a number of reiterations, as has already been described. In some of those other approvals, it was an integral part of the 888 4th Street project by being attached. It was elevated. It was a lot of concrete, a lot of excavation. It had greater height, greater building coverage than what the proposal is that we've made now. When we ultimately came to the final version of the 888 project, we concluded that the proper approach was to deal with this as a detached second phase for the reasons that I'll mention. One reason is it has a more benign impact on our neighbor to the east. And for another reason, it serves some economic programmatic objectives, which I'll talk about. The 891 3rd Street application meets the NMU zoning criteria explicitly. I'll talk briefly about the midpoint issue shortly. It meets the general plan design guidelines plainly in terms of fenestration, openings, relief and other criteria. We are normally very, very careful to maintain that consistency. We are entitled to an FAR under the zoning of as much as 3.0. We look closely at how intensely we wanted to build on this tail, bearing in mind that this is a project which is, although not attached, fundamentally part of the 888 project. And therefore the intensity of use on the 888 project has to be taken into account in our viewpoint. We did not wanna build four stories on this site, partly because it would block Southern access to an elevated landscape podium garden and also some units within the 888 project. We felt keeping that down at a three-story level was the better choice. We also wanted to separate the buildings in order to create a ground level open space garden area which would benefit from the tree canopies from east and west that would overhang that area and could do something that is pretty rare in downtown core area intense development. And that's to create a landscaped ground level space that people can benefit from. The tenants of the 888 project would be able to benefit from it. The tenants in the 891 would of course benefit from it most directly. So we could have proposed six stories on this site and been well within the design guidelines, the station area plan and the zoning criteria but we made the decision not to. I won't go through all the narrative detail. You obviously can assimilate that for yourself. Again, we believe that we've complied with all the appropriate planning and zoning policies. Now programmatically, I would add that the second phase is in tended to create a greater range of affordability for the units in the combined project. One of the difficulties with mid-rise development particularly when you try to incorporate meaningful amenities and make it a strong project is these projects tend to be very expensive to build. It tends to drive the rental pricing to the upper tier of what the market wants. By expanding that housing stock, that's a good thing. But on the other hand, we also have service workers and others who need high quality housing at a lower price point. And as some of you know, one of the things we do is lower income and affordable housing as well as other things. And so this was an opportunity to expand the project to help serve that group, particularly the number of service workers downtown can benefit. So in order to reduce the price point, we went to type five construction, three story, omitting an elevator, made the unit somewhat smaller as you can see. And in general, try to produce something that would be both attractive, cost effective, but would also benefit from all the amenities of the larger project. So the tenants here will get the full benefit of the rooftop terrace, the podium level garden, the rec area, the meeting rooms, the additional parking within the structured parking and all the other elements of the project. We pulled again the building forward almost 50 feet away from the 888 building in order to create this large 50 foot deep, 50 foot wide open space for the benefit of everyone. The vehicular access is via four street. So I'd like to bring in a couple items to your attention in concluding my remarks before we go on to Paul and Christine. One is that there is provision in the NMU zone from a design criteria standpoint that calls out a 12 foot high ground level floor plate. That as you probably are aware is kind of a vestigial carryover from earlier planning policies that were based on mixed use design. There's a contradiction here because the NMU is explicitly either a mixed use project under the code or an all residential project. This is an all residential project and a 12 foot floor plate height on the ground floor really makes very little sense if any for that kind of residential project. So we have disregarded the 12 feet and emphasized the all residential aspects, permissive aspects of the code. On the midpoint item, when we look at this density in combination with the 888 project, clearly this is an intense use of the total site. We're not under developing the property in a way that is detrimental to housing goals. The only way for us to get to the 1.5 is to add another story or to intrude into the common space which is integral to our objectives. We also felt that in terms of neighborhood context, although six stories in the long run will be perfectly appropriate. 20 or 25 years ago, we'll probably discover a number of larger buildings on this street. We thought in current context, the three story building would be wiser. So I'll stop there and turn it over to Paul Gilger to continue. Hi, this is Paul. Let's see, my camera's working here. I'm gonna take just a moment here and promote you. Unfortunately, it pops you out of the meeting and then pops you back in on the other side. Okay. Okay, I think you're back in. Back in? And we can hear you. Paul, you're muted. I'm muted, yeah. There we go. Can you hear me now? Good? Okay, great. If you can advance the presentation forward, go to maybe sheet A1.5. It's probably the best one for me. It'll be the front elevation. A few more pages here. About three more pages. We should be at the front elevation. Sorry, it's doing its best. Gotcha. Now I do have the same presentation on my machine. If I don't know if it's legal if you're able to screen share me, but I look like we're getting there. Should be, yeah, if sheet A1.5 will give us the front elevation. Let me try it this way. Okay. Sure. Sorry about that. No, no problem. Nice to see everybody. It should say south and east elevations, I believe. Where do the two elevations are the most prominent? Sorry, I have an A1.6 and an A1.7. You have a 1.5. Are you allowed to screen share my screen because I can pull it up here? Oh, here. I have it. It wasn't in order. Here we go. Great. Sorry about that. No problem. Okay. Now, so I picked the wrong one. Actually, if you, I can see on the sheets over here. That's the, okay, that's the elevation. If we can go down to the 3D, I see it's gonna be the 10th page. Yeah, let's go with that one. There we go. That's a good one. So the task at hand for me was to try to figure out what sort of architectural elements to help make the building blend or combine or at least be called the setting for the neighborhood. And rode my bike around the neighborhood a lot. And it seemed to be that all the residential buildings in that area, a lot of the California vernacular, Victorian, craftsmen, bungalows, they have sighting. The Stucco buildings in the area tend to be the commercial buildings. Actually, we can go back to the 3D. You just stay right there with that one. So the party company, as you all know, James Hardy has great products that are cost effective and they're cementitious boards so it helps with fire also. So we decided, because the building itself is a relatively simple form, if we were just to do the building in Stucco it would be pretty bland. So we realized that like a lot of other buildings in the area, which are rectilinear in their shape, but really pulls them off as the detailing of their sighting and their trim. And many of the homes in the area have a belt line on them. Sometimes they're the first four windows, sometimes second, third. Sometimes the belt line is at the floor line. What was nice is here, putting a belt line at the windows those of the second floor broke and gave us a nice horizontal line to help write the height of the building, bring it down. And also doing a nice overhang on the building. That's a good solid four foot overhang that you see. Help get some nice shade and shadow to the building. The other thing is we don't have any parapents which allows the roof to drain easily to gutters which is a simple solution for that. The window massing, these are 305 of single hung windows which are typical of that neighborhood. There's also from like a window to a corner there's at least three feet of wall which is pretty typical for massing in that area. The colors are Benjamin Moore historical colors, creams, mushroom colors, off whites. The, as we were laying it out though, it is true that because the building is rectilinear, we needed to find some flare somewhere. And looking at the window patterning and looking what's happening inside the building and how can we express that on the outside? We found that the stair cores and the plumbing cores became nice vertical elements because both the stair and the plumbing cores have the small windows, these little two by two square windows event. There's a plumbing corridor on the front of the building as you look down the side of the building goes from the stair cores. And both plumbing cores and stair cores have a verticality to it. So it seemed to make sense to use party siting and trim to create vertical elements on the building. So we created that and then we realized as we created those vertical elements we could carry those out onto the ease which gives them visual interest with the underside of the ease. And also you can see just small detailing like if you look at the three windows there to the left of the front door with that little man standing you can see we've actually played with the patterning of the vertical vast to create some visual interest. So it is a fully trimmed building, party siting, panels, dark frames on the windows which seem to work very well, historical colors and keeping the building height down. Now the units do have a nine foot ceilings. So those windows do go up to eight feet and the side and glass doors that you see are eight foot high side and glass doors. And that's important because they are small units and that's gonna let a light into the units. If you actually look at the floor plan if you want to back up you can see that the placement of the windows themselves are really quite intentional because of the small units we worked hard on furniture layout to make sure that our fenestration made sense and that we weren't putting a window where there should be a bed wall. And then we'll go with high class detailing like numbers on the buildings, nice wedge shape or lighting those little small details will still pull the building out and make it look attractive. We've also of course you can see on this right side of the building which is toward the neighborhood that has been talking about the building that's the wide side you are there to pull the building away from that side of the property and allows the pedestrian pathway back to the two entrance doors on the side. I believe that's all I have. Oh, and I do want to mention on the railings those are blind balconies that's a metal railing siding glass doors so that when we open up the siding glass doors it gives a feeling the more openness. I think that completes everything I've done. Anybody talking? I can't hear anybody. I think Paul if you're done it sounds like Christine Talbot the landscape architect was gonna go next just to help you guys out here a little bit. So Patty, it looks like she's raised her hand so if you could promote her. Okay, I'll do that right now. I think Kristen, I think the landscape plan is the very last document in the applicants presentation. Yeah, that guy, perfect. Just help everybody move this along. Thank you Drew. This is Christine Talbot from Quadriga Landscape Architecture. So yes, the landscape plan I think just kind of pivoting off of Hugh and Paul's presentations. I think the existing trees that surround the property we're utilizing a lot is kind of like a borrowed landscape. So when you look at this plan and plan view it does look a little sparse in trees and that's really because we're trying to respect as much as possible the adjacent trees and tree roots and so forth. So we are looking for opportunities for additional vertical screening along the fence lines to provide privacy for the residents on both sides and also our residents and we'll be continuing to look for those opportunities. There is the main entry off of the sidewalk but there's also this waggle walk that goes back to the open space that Hugh discussed and that's envisioned really as a passive, picnic space, an open space for people to enjoy and to support that we're proposing a very not residential, more like a high-end residential landscape palette of more evergreen plants with flowers. So we have a lot of seasonal interest but things look green year round and then we're providing seasonal color with the trees either with the flower or the leaf color in the fall. There will be new fencing on the east and the west sides, a six-foot redwood fencing that looks good on both sides. It's not a good neighbor. It's like an awesome neighbor fence. So with the idea that it looks good for everyone, we'll have some temporary bike parking in the back and then some low-level ballard lighting just for evening use to assist people as they're walking back and forth from the garage and the garbage. And yeah, I think it's simple. We're just trying to keep it simple and nice and clean and a really nice project for the neighborhood. Thank you very much. Hugh, do you have any closing comments before we move to a public comment on this? No, no additional comments, but obviously happy to answer questions when the time comes. All right, so with that, we'll move to public comments. So if there's anybody attending the meeting this evening virtually, you can raise your hand in the Zoom meeting there and the recording secretary will assist you with how to come through and you'll have three minutes to speak if you want to make any public comment. And then also there's a phone call in number as well that was posted with the meeting notification. So we'll move to public comment now. Patty. Great, thank you, Chair Weigel. And at this time, we're gonna go ahead and change the applicant team back to attendee roles and change your presentation. Your formal presentation is over. And we are right now looking for some raised hands from the public. We don't see any yet. Oh, here we go. There is one. We have, let's finish Mr. Futrell and Mr. Gilger. We're gonna go ahead and let me just take a moment and move the applicant team back to attendee. One moment. And while Patty's doing that. So just as a reminder for members of the public, please state your name. You're welcome to mention if you, you know, your address, if you live near the project. And then as a reminder, you'll have three minutes to speak and Patty will start the countdown once she starts speaking. And that would be, that's pretty much all the reminders there. And we'll get that going as soon as the applicants are removed from being panelists from the meeting. Thanks. Okay, it looks like we've got everybody set and so we have the first person. We have Tracy Elidge. I will go ahead and set you. You have permissions to unmute at any time, Ms. Elidge. I'm glad you're all staying safe with your staff city virtual meeting. But we, on the other hand, have been in daily stream of unmasked workers who arrive at 6 30 AM, five, sometimes six days a week. Park on our street and work sometimes right next to our fence all day. This mind you is contradicting to the signs on the fence that say this is a mask mandated work site. Voicing our concerns about our health and the health of our tree has led to worker gossip, which my wife and I are now known as the angry and disgruntled ladies. Being a nicer word than they're probably using in that house next door. This gossip has caused mad dog stares every time we look out our windows or spend time in our front yard. All the while constant obnoxiously loud construction sounds are happening to remind us that that ugly building is going up no matter what. This is just to set the stage for my tone, which is angry. Yes, because I am outraged by the lack of forethought and consideration of Hugh Freetrell's corporation and his, this city's paid by my tax dollars policy overseers have shown during this life-threatening pandemic, record setting wildfires, economic crisis and political nightmare. Through these unprecedented changes to our global national statewide and including downtown local community, the city of Santa Rosa has let this developer excavate without a full permit during raging fires and possible evacuation in 2020. The Santa Rosa city design review board and city project planners passed the ridiculous rezoning of 112 foot tall building in 2019 that was apparently unnecessary. Since now it's going to be 75 feet. I'm exhausted by yet again revisiting the changes made to this project site, but feel responsible to take this opportunity to appeal to the policy committee to do the right thing for the Santa Rosa community. I strongly and passionately believe the city body should not allow the rezoning of this building to become a multifamily residents. The address at 891 Third Street has its own address. It is not multi, it is not part of the 88 Fourth Street project, even though the same builder is building and calling it a second phase of his project. For this reason it resides on the street that it is and has been zoned commercial office. It was my misunderstanding. Oh, okay. Yeah, Ms. Eliger, three minutes are up. Thank you very much for your public comment. We appreciate that. Thank you. Is there anyone else from the public wishing to speak on this topic at this time? Don't see any more raised hands. So if anybody would like to speak, if you can raise your hand, we can unmute you. Okay. Ms. Elich has raised her hand again. I think each person gets three minutes. It looks like it went down there. Yeah, I don't see any other raised hands. Okay. Without any more raised hands, we are gonna close public comment on this item. And just to reiterate, I do see Ms. Elich's hand raised again. Unfortunately, I believe, Bill, can you help me out with how the exact rule on that, but it's one person gets three minutes, correct? Yeah, that's correct. This actually isn't a public hearing tonight either. So as I mentioned at the outset, I think that's a, we extend that courtesy, but it is a three minute duration. Okay. So I think at this time, I'd like to go to board member questions of both the applicant and of staff. If there are, so we'll just do questions kind of rapid fire here. And I'm gonna go in reverse alphabetical order, just to keep it fresh and interesting here. So board member Wicks, you're first. Questions, only no comments. Thank you, Chairman Weigel, and congratulations. I'll have a conversation with you offline about it. One of these days, and hopefully we can all have lunch and talk as a board one of these days welcoming our new member and thanking those past members that are leaving. Quick question for, I guess, I'll put it to staff. I was a little unclear about the landscaping area between the project being reviewed tonight and the project on Four Street. Is it a shared landscape area that is integral to both projects? So the proposed landscaping is only on the third street site and while the developer or the manager of the sites could allow sharing of that landscape area. Yeah, because it looks like there's a connection to the Four Street site. And where I'm going with it is I'm just wondering why, I think one of my comments is gonna be pushing the building back. Is there a problem with decreasing the landscaping on the north side of the project that bring the buildings in line with the rest of the street? I was my understanding from the applicant that they were trying to preserve some oak tree or some oak trees in the rear and use that as a amenity opportunity for the residents. Then can I ask the applicant of if we push the building back to align with the neighboring house to the east and to the west, what would impact would that have? Chair Weigel, if I may just quickly, just a little housekeeping. So the applicant, yeah, Paul and you and Christine, you can toggle off and on your mute button. So at this point, if the board has any questions, feel free to just unmute and then you can respond. I think I can respond to that question. That open space between the two buildings actually is an integral part of the totality of the project. Although they are two separate parcels at this moment, one of the conditions for constructing the 888 building is ultimately to merge the two parcels and that merger application is in process with city staff. We brought the building out where it's shown for two reasons. One, the design criteria in the NMU district calls out to come out to the front setback line not to set way back. So we took note of that provision in the code. And the second consideration we had is to move it back would require the potential for some additional tree trimming that is technically possible, but not necessarily desirable. So it was a trade-off between trees and the size of the open space back there and the front setback. Okay, thank you for that question for Paul on sheet, well, sheet eight or either of the 3D renderings, the top line of your roof is setback two feet. It looks like it has a two feet on the west side but has a four feet on the right-hand side. Is that because of setback issues while you clipped it back on that west side? That's correct. And it's only on that west side. The four foot overhang is on the other three sides. Great, thank you. Sure. That's it for me, Drew. Thanks, Henry. So we'll go to board member Sharon now. Questions? Yes. Thank you, Drew. Thank you, applicants for presentation and Christiane, thank you very much for your presentation as well. One question for the applicant team, most likely specifically for Christiane and Quadriga. One of the public comments in the correspondence was regarding the stormwater treatment area and the placement of that. And Ivan, I'm certain I understand your thought process and why it's placed where it is and how it is. For the edification of the public, could you just think through the thought process about that and the placement and any potential thoughts on the trees, the health of the trees there? Yeah, I think the placement is related to we're doing storage and treatment. And so we needed some space. We felt like we were outside, most of the dribble line of the tree, but we can certainly look at nudging it around a little bit. I think the area that is shown is a pretty good amount of space. And so as we move further through design, I think we can take that under consideration and see if we can adjust the shape or the size so that we can get out of the drip line as much as possible. These drip lines that we're showing on here, these are from Ariel, they're not surveyed exactly, so this is not precisely the drip line of that tree. So I think that we would like to take a second look at that for sure. Great, so there will be some thought about those drip lines and it's not necessarily going to direct a linear shape for the stormwater treatment area. There will be some flexibility in determining in the field. That is my understanding. I know there is a pipe in there which requires a linear shape, but whether or not it can move west a bit is part of the question. And if we can reduce the depth of that pipe, I think to Hugh's point, we could have shoved the building back and had a very extensive footing within that space. So we're definitely being cognizant of those trees and doing our best to work around those roots within a small space. I think we should, to your point, I think we should take another look. Yeah, no, that's perfect. I just wanted to hear that you're thinking about that and hopefully that answers some of the question for the public as well. So that's all my questions. Cool, we'll go to board member McHugh. All right, thank you. I've got a general question and the staff report says that your design meets section two design for the downtown area design guidelines. But in your own words, how does the design of this particular building meet the specific guidelines in the downtown station area urban design goals? If you could explain that and I've got another question about, could you for the public tell us what type five construction is? So I think Chris and I either you or Hugh should probably address the questions on the design guidelines and I can answer the type five construction for you. Type five construction is regulated by the California building code and it determines what types of materials you can build a building with. So in many cases in California, that's dimensional lumber is what's type five construction. And so there are limitations on height, square footage and things based on the type of construction. So I think what Hugh was alluding to was probably cost because that generally tends to be the least expensive build. That's why I wanted his explanation of that. So but yeah, I'm an architect. That's what I do all the time. You do answer the design guidelines portion for us. Yes, so this is a concept design review. So staff hasn't really done a lot of an analysis yet on the project. We're presenting the concept to the design review board and we're listening to comments regarding the design and layout. But we haven't made any firm. We don't have any firm analysis yet on this project until it goes to a hearing or a zoning administrator meeting. So I would defer to the applicant team to respond on how they feel their concept meets the design guidelines. Chair Weigel, I'll just comment very briefly on the design guidelines in particular. As Christiane said, staff does not complete a detailed analysis at the concept level. So I think the general references to consistency or that the project supports the guidelines is that it's somewhat general in nature. It's an approved use. The project does from the analysis we have done, which is cursory, as I said, does appear to have high quality, durable materials. And those are the things that we use as kind of the basis of our analysis, but we will have a much more detailed analysis and a much more comprehensive list of the guidelines when the project goes forward for actual action. And certainly I would also recommend that the applicant can respond to. I'm happy to respond if that's appropriate. Yeah, Hugh, please go ahead and respond to John's question there, please. I think you ended up muted again, Hugh, but you're welcome to respond if you unmute there. Yes. So we take the design guidelines pretty seriously. We try to follow the rules with care. We're conscious of the buildings we build, we tend to own for the long term and we know that buildings last for a long time. So we bear all that in mind. Now, in terms of the specific design guidelines, the scale and mass of the building is a consideration, the proportionality of the building from an architectural standpoint, the amount of fenestration and windows, which Paul alluded to in the harmonious treatment of that is critical. The presentation to the street itself is also something the design guidelines call out. So we simply don't turn a blank wall and just windows. Clearly defined entrances are an important goal of the design guidelines. So we've done that as well. Lighting is an important consideration. The lighting here is muted so that it doesn't create lighting issues on surrounding properties. That's a consideration. The quality of materials and the variation of materials is also called out appropriately in the design guidelines. So we have done that as well. The roof overhangs to create relief is also part of the design guidelines. That is also part of the thing that we focus on. This is not just an adorned box. And the fact is there's an awful lot of beautiful buildings that are sometimes called just adorned boxes, but it's also one in which the exterior skin has been carefully thought through consistent with the design guidelines. Obviously I can elaborate more because there's a lot of provisions, but those are the fundamental characteristics. Well, thank you very much. And so in terms of why did you choose type five construction? Well, once we knew we were going to do three stories and did not want to go taller, then type five light frame wood construction is the normal practice. Almost every building that is less than four stories, and indeed in certain circumstances, some buildings that are even taller than two or three stories have elements of type five construction. So it's not in a way a downgrade of material. Okay, well, thank you very much. Board member Birch, you're up. All right, I'm unmuted. The only question that I had was just, I wanted to sort of understand the, and it sounds like there is a lot line adjustment that's going to merge the two parcels. The parking was mentioned by the neighbors. I'm curious, you mentioned shared amenities, including parking. What is the parking situation for 891 third relative to 888 fourth? When I assume the parcels merged and the projects are complete, is there will each unit in the third street project have a parking space in the garage? And just, I would like to know the details of that. So the question is probably to the applicant. I'm happy to respond on that. As you know, under the current rules, there is no parking requirement for multifamily at all in the downtown corny longer. We do have a bit of surplus parking in the 888 fourth street project. That's where people would be able to park in relation to this project. We do also anticipate that as you know, one of the driving concepts here of removing the parking requirement from the downtown core is the belief that some people will not be driving their cars. They'll be walking or using public transit. And that's an assumption for this particular project as well, given the price point we anticipate. So we have given a great deal of thought for that. But to the degree there's additional parking capacity, it's in the 888 fourth street project. And that's another reason where the two uses are connected. You can exit through the garage and you walk 40 feet to the 891 building. Great, thank you. That was my only question. Thanks, Michael. I guess I had two questions. Well, maybe one's a comment, one's a question. And Bill, I think you can help me on this. So from the public comment, I heard some commentary about kind of the construction activities happening at the adjacent project. And I believe the direct action of that would be for that member of the public to contact code enforcement perhaps, or the building division, is that correct? Yeah, that's correct. So if anyone feels that there's a code violation, they can certainly file a code enforcement case. It's an anonymous complaint based action. We have a code enforcement department. Also the applicant, I think, heard the comments tonight, may be able to respond to that if he chooses tonight. So, but the specific action by the neighbor would be a code enforcement complaint, yes. Well, that's what I thought. And then I heard another comment about zoning in particular. And I think Kristin and her presentation had two slides, right? We had the previous zoning and then the new zoning. Could you speak a little bit to how that changes? And typically that's an action by city council, correct? To overled the zoning and our various boards in the city have kind of input to it, but that's ultimately an action by the city council, correct? You wanna take that, Kristin? Yeah, so yes, the city council has the authority for rezoning and amending the general plan and amending specific plans. And so that was done in this case for the downtown. The zoning used to be a CO for this particular parcel and now it's an MU and multi-family is a permitted use and it used to be a major conditional use permit. And I'll just add on to that, that process. Kristin mentioned the rezoning. It's actually the rezoning is a follow-up to the downtown specific plan. So this downtown stationary specific plan was amended and that was a rather lengthy public process. It went through actually a number of different review scenarios public outreach, ultimately the city council took action and then the rezoning is a companion action. The rezoning is what's done to implement that specific plan. Well, thanks so much, Kristin and Bill. I think it's really important to understand how like rezoning happens through that process of updating the general plan. And that alters and changes based on, you guys do a lot of research at a city level in terms of demographics and neighborhoods and things like that. And that's how that plan gets updated in terms of how different parcels are envisioned to be developed in the future. And that's how that zoning changes. So I think that's really important to understand. And just so everybody knows NMU if I'm not mistaken as neighborhood mixed use, is that correct? And so that's a brand new zoning designation within the station area plan updates. Is that correct? And it's got some different rules and regulations and kind of things that go along with it that are specific to kind of high density, transit adjacent oriented development for which then tie into the floor area ratio stuff that we've kind of been talking about since the beginning of the year. So that's all kind of tied together. I think it's important to understand because it may be new for some people. Yeah, NMU is a brand new zoning district. And it's brand new with the recent downtown station area specific plan update. And rather than density, dwelling units per acre, density is achieved through FAR, which is a brand new concept for our zoning code. And your chair, Weigel, it is that specific plan is a comprehensive document. It looks at a lot of things. And in this case, it is looking to concentrate and focus our density in the downtown where amenities and utilities and infrastructure exists. And so that's exactly how that document came to be. So I hope that helps the public understand kind of how that zoning happened. I know I was scratching my head a little bit when I looked at it and I went, wait, wasn't it this? Oh no, it's this now. So now I'd like to do comments from the board and we're gonna go the opposite direction. So we'll do a board member Birch first and then we'll end with Henry if that works for everybody. So Michael, without further ado, your comments on the project. Great. I'm gonna try to take notes here. Sure, you bet. I really think that the applicant has done a great job of separating 888 4th from 891 3rd. And I think that the effort to design a building on the 4th Street side, it is more urban in context. It responds to the urban context of 4th Street and what we hope will continue to become the more urban context of 4th Street. It absorbs its six stories of height in nice vertical gestures and clean sort of contemporary, we'll call it call it movements. I saw the 888 4th Street project in my last tour of duty on the board and the concern about the tail and it feeling like sort of a machine-like entry to a garage and lots of other things was a drawback for me. I think that separating the two building forms but keeping them as one project that complements one another is a great move and I think that this building responds very well to the 3rd Street context. So I think that's a huge plus here. I think it's really interesting that most of the buildings on 3rd Street and really right there in the 3rd and 4th Street, 2nd, 3rd and 4th Street area, you have a mature tree canopy, you have homes that were built at a much, much greater height than homes are typically built now. So we're not talking about sort of nine feet in a roof, we're talking about four or five feet of space up to the porch and the first level and 10 feet in a roof. So I don't know that the building is so jarring as one might think when you sort of look at the whole thing together. I do think that the restraint in the number of stories and the size of the building is good and I think it shows a care and a concern for 3rd Street. I think that the applicant is extremely sensitive to the need here in sort of, we're gonna call it, creating another product that's available at a lower price point for this area to go with the 888 3rd Project. And I think that's really, really to be thought of as something that is very community driven. As far as the building itself goes, I love the material and color banding on the building. I love bringing the mid band up to the bottom of the sills. I think that the variations in the historical colors and materials creates something that feels very much like the street, the forefoot, Eve is great. I love the play of bringing the vertical shafts up and onto the Eve itself. I think that those gestures all create a very attractive building that is going to knit into the neighborhood better than ones looking at elevations and scale figures might think. I do think that this is a really well put together project in terms of architecture. I think that this project speaks to sort of the dignity of design. I'm disturbed by the public comment regarding this looking like public housing. I think that that is indicative of Santa Rosa and Sonoma County in general's attitude toward changes that are absolutely urgent for the city and the county to start to understand what we need to do. And I believe that this building is just, I can't look at this and say that it looks like low income housing and I can't process that comment. So those are my comments on the project. And thank you. Cool, so we'll go to John now. John comments on the project. You're muted again, yeah. Well, I like the attention to the skin of the building and the attention to try to match it with the surrounding buildings. I think that you've done a great job with that. And I like the basic design and how you have put that together. And so congratulations. I think you've done a great job and I appreciate it. Are those your comments? Okay, thank you Board Member McHugh. I'm sorry, I don't have anything more. No, that's great. Adam. Excellent, thank you. And thank you for the previous Board Member comments and I think there's some good analysis there. Thank you both. And Board Member Birch brought up some really good points that I won't belabor in particular, but in terms of the neighborhood context, I agree that it fits in. Well, I think that the design with providing that more affordable compliment to 888, I do appreciate that. I think that there's some very sensitive thinking going on to providing a, not just a monolithic, developing the site that's there, but actually adding to the two separate contexts that are around this site. And so I think that this is a very nice compliment to the larger development over at 888. Let's see. I was glad to see that the fencing on the sides, six-wheat eye with the two-foot lattice going up over the top of that provides some nice separation between this and the neighbors. It's not providing a huge blank wall, but is a textured wood fencing. And to go to some of the comments about entrances next to the buildings, it's a narrow site, but I think that this wooden fence and the 8-feet high total will provide some nice permeable boundaries between the two. Two sites. As far as the design of the building in particular, I do like that it's fitting into this narrow site. And you're providing all of the details specifically that Michael talked about before are spot on the attention to detail. As far as it being a kind of a just larger box-like structure, I enjoyed hearing the design rationale with going for the design you have and for going for some of the vertical nature of the wider mechanical portions to adding in some texture and some variation to the facades. I think that you could take that and even move it a little bit further. I think that this is a really good start, but I would like to see some to, I think that having this be basically a four-sided box structure, I would like to see some more texture and variation to the sides of the building. I could see pushing and pulling a bit. And I think pushing and pulling literally and figuratively, I think that with the overall design, I think you can push the going with the traditional Victorian context that's around the building. You can take that, but then also bring in some of the more modern flavor too. I don't think that you need to be as tied to it as the design is coming across to me right now. I could see bringing in some more of the modern textures and the modern kind of, for lack of a better word, protuberances on the side of the building. And so that's the figurative, pushing and pulling and then literally with those vertical areas pulling them out a little bit, creating some more texture, creating some variation, some shadows, some depth. I think that it'll really vary the flat aspect that you've got in all four sides right now. Also with the blind balconies, they're kind of making them almost more of a, pulling them out a little bit to make them more of a Juliet balcony. I know that one of the things you're trying to do is to keep costs down and to keep them into a manageable ballpark. But that's something to think about is pulling them out a little bit more to creating a little more rhythm on the faces there. And that's really the main criticism that I would have is, I think this is a really great start, but I think that you can take your ideas and go that next step, bring some of the more modern thought into this as well. And potentially with the coloring, I know you're trying to keep it more muted to go with the context around there, but I think you can make them a little more spicy in a way, make the browns a little spicier. And the gray is also a little more rich. So that's all, I think I just would like to see some more contrast coming into this. So I think that you guys are well on your way for a very good design. I think that you're doing some really good thinking with trying to fit under this narrow site. You're trying to compliment the neighborhood. You're trying to compliment 888 as well. And I think they're both going to be assets to the neighborhood when it's all said and done. So thanks very much. Thank you very much for a very good presentation. Thanks Adam and we'll go to Henry. Great, thank you. I think as the NMU zoning starts to maybe take a stronger hold on 3rd street that maybe my comment about pushing the building back would hold us as strongly as it may have come across in my questioning of the project. So I just wanted to state that I think Adam spot on about the balconies. It was actually the first thing I wrote down when I was reviewing the packages that they currently appear to be just a guardrail in front of a slider. And I think a little bit of personal space even at two, three feet deep. They're all in spaces on the building where there wouldn't be a setback issue. There shouldn't be any issue other than the minor amount of cost in making the balconies deeper. And I think that would help add that textural play on the box that if you will, and I think it would improve the overall design. I like the verticality of the shafts. And I thought too about suggesting and maybe they've come out from the building six inches or so or eight inches to create an additional shadow line to it. I think it's a real strong play with the materials that are being presented to us. I kind of like them going up onto the soffit. I got a tweener thing on that. I think it might look cleaner to go ahead and let that soffit line go ahead and wrap all the way around. But at the same time, I could see if it doesn't add too much cost to let those, since that's strongly drawing your eye up to the sky. Why not cut an opening in it and let it go ahead and open up to the sky? Kind of think, I think vertical materials, horizontal material should stay in their plane. Carpet should stay on the ground and siding should stay on the walls and maybe stay away from the soffits. But that's more personal opinion. It's nice the way it looks, but I'd be curious what our chairman had to think of his thoughts on that. I would thicken the horizontal band between the first and second floors. Just looks a little bit thin and weak and it could be just a fatter, more 12-inch thickness to it or could be stepped to total 12 inches. I'll add just a little bit of detail that might park into the rest of the neighborhood. Go through my notes real quick. I think that's it. It's a nice project. I don't know any of the history that Mr. Birch spoke to. But I think it'll be a nice addition. I think it's housing that we all need in the downtown. It's certainly from a walkability. Visited other businesses on Third Street. It's a real easy walk to get to downtown. I think at the right price point, I think it's gonna serve a housing need that we desperately need in the downtown. So thank you to the applicant team for bringing it forward and wish you luck as you progress with the project. Thank you, Henry. I think I had some similar comments. I'm gonna make a pointed suggestion to Paul and I think this may be more helpful. So Paul, I don't know if this is two by six construction or two by four or whatever, probably needs to be two by six to meet energy code these days, right? So I was just wondering, what if you did a two by eight or a two by 10 just in those vertical elements, right? So you frame everything kind of the same on the inside and then you change to a bigger dimensional lumber in that vertical element to get you that shadow relief that I think Adam and Henry were kind of talking about. I think that may be the answer then that way you're not like doing anything fussy. You're just changing what kind of stud size you're using. That's correct. The building is framed out of two by six for insulation but I just speak to Mike Enright because we do have a tight condition and he says as far as the setbacks and the property lines is measured off the stud wall face. So we have the opportunity by using various thicknesses of siding and trim to create dimensional pop out without actually having to pop the actual plane of the wall. So it is quite easy on those vertical elements to give them a little more dimensionality to the epoxy amount with the siding and trim and without creating a jog in the wall which makes the building more expensive. Yeah, there's an old saying about more corners, more cost, right? Right, and also to our advantage and everybody's picked up on this, you can see that the tight side of the building is the west side but we don't have any balconies on the west side. So the balconettes that are on the front, the east side in the south, we're not up against that back there. So they can, depending on what the client wants us to do is for us cost, but those balconies could easily be prefabricated but pop out a little bit more to give some more dimensionality to the box of the building. And also I think with colors too, the color palettes and we're all fine with stronger colors if that's what everybody wants. I happen to have the presentation after on my other screen. I'm just gonna go back to the color board itself which are Benjamin Moore colors there, you can see them. But if it's desired to choose those up a little bit, that's very easy to do. Thanks Paul. I was actually gonna say, I like the colors personally. I think it fits within the context of the neighborhood. I wouldn't go bold here. I think to Chair Burge, or a former Chair Burge, his comments, I think the four street side is very, it's modern, it's bold, right? This is an attempt to respect what's on third street. So I think the colors are fine. I agree with Henry on the belt. I think he could go thicker on that. I did have a question about, so there's a front entry to the front unit but there's not a rear entry to the rear unit, right? And I was just thinking, wouldn't that be kind of cool to have someone have the ability to go out their door in the back to that space back there, which could then you could add a canopy much like the front and you're not dealing with any of the setback stuff. And then the other thing to kind of piggyback on to Adam's comment about the balconies, I was wondering about, in Victorian and craftsman architecture, there's a lot of kind of entry elements where you have two stories of a canopy that's effectively a balcony. And then another canopy for that balcony, which then is a balcony for the next floor up with some columnar expression on the corners. And that may be the answer kind of on the front and on the side. And then if you think about adding that back piece and I think that's relatively inexpensive, I would say that's a consider for me if we were to actually like, condition your project, I'd call that a condition, consider not a shell, because I think it's a, I'm very attuned to this cost problem, right? To hit a price point. And so I'm okay with it the way it is right now. I actually just did a webinar about affordable housing and they talked a lot about affordable housing projects that meet passive house energy goals and other things. And they're very simplistic in their massing and there's a reason for that because when you're simplistic in your massing you're able to get efficiencies in insulation and other things. And so that does not mean the building is any less beautiful, it just means it's simple. And so I would agree with Board Member Burch to that end that you don't need to add ornament or jogs or things like that to add beauty. And I think those are my comments. So staff, do you need a summary of our comments? So a couple of things that I heard over and over for you guys or do you have what you need? You know, I think we probably have it if you have a quick summary if it's just a few bullet points that might be helpful and then just as we typically do maybe get an acknowledgement from the applicant that they understand and giving them an opportunity to ask any questions too. Okay, so the biggest things I heard were dignity of design. We all like the massing and we liked the color scheme for the most part with the exception of Adam. There was fairly strong opinions about the vertical elements and then removing the decorative element in the soffit and then a possibility of doing balconies for all those slider doors on the three sides. And I think those are the, oh, a bigger horizontal band between the first and the second floor. Those were kind of the biggest things I heard. I didn't hear anything on plantings, fence, that kind of stuff that wasn't already addressed. So with that, Kristine, any questions? Okay, applicant team, Hugh and Kristine and Paul, do you guys have any questions for those comments? Oh, Adam, go ahead, let's go to Adam first. Yeah, I have one further comment that occurred to me and it's more of another compliment to the design thinking. I wanted to appreciate Kristine's comment about using the borrowed tree canopy from the surrounding trees because the planting plan can look a little sparse, especially in concept. But I think that in having seen the site, there's mature canopy right next to the fences. And I think that while the plantings do look sparse at this point, there's mature canopy right next to there that's gonna provide good shade and structure. Cool, so Hugh and Paul and Kristine, do you guys have any questions or comments? Does anything seem not doable for any particular reason? I'll comment. I think you've summarized some very reasonable suggestions and we shall take them all into account and result in a even better building. So we appreciate your comments. And I agree with you and thank you so much for the comments and for recognizing that Hugh is really trying to do some affordable housing. Cool, so I think that's it. So that concludes item 8.1, no voting required because it's a concept item. And I don't think there's anything else, Bill, unless you have anything before we adjourn for the evening. No, nothing else. Congratulations on a successful first meeting, Drew. And thank you everyone tonight for your attendance and your participation. It was a great meeting. Yeah, thanks everybody. And with that, it's 6.01 and we are adjourned. Have a great evening. Thank you. Thank you.