 That's the bridge view, which is the central draw of the location. It's distinguishable from the bridge, not incombinant, but as an eyesore of imitation of serials. This is a disruption of the rhythm and flow of the street, and as I've read up into the Suggestive Guidance from the Introduction to Concerning, Section 2-II, which regards the transition to the million mass and form. While it is similar in height, it is a special interest that this obscures the view. This is also relevant to principle number four of the standards of preservation with regard to the fact that a property may require restored significance in sunlight, and it should be preserved and obtained. This is relevant to the location status as the most Instagrammed location in San Antonio, and while that sounds similar to the other. I understand that accessibility in a population is a problem from 1.5 billion over the past two years to about 3.2 billion overall. And each one of these successes that Finnton used to document their time here on this bridge is a snapshot and an advertisement for a future population investment. Continuing with the environmental introduction, we have Section 3 of our parts, I, I, I, and E, or I, I'll say 1, 2, 5, considering complementary materials, alternative use of traditional materials, and imitation or synthetic materials. As it stands, the current components of this project do not incorporate materials that are in architectural harmony with the surrounding area. Given that this is the only development of this kind of a large mixed-use residential unit on a more or less civilized street, it should be a little bit more cohesible with the surrounding area. For instance, Article B of that same concern for use of historical materials stipulates that new designs can incorporate beams from the area itself. The developer has said in multiple signs that he's heard of concerns in the sixth incorporate, however, several of his citizens have mentioned that the bridge is constructed from the same steel as the Eiffel Tower. We do not see that still reflecting here. Instead, we saw oxidized metals. We saw bricks. These are actually materials that have been named explicitly in Section 5 of Article 3 concerning the new structure, the construction, as simulated stone engineers and contemporary materials that are not traditionally used in the district. They don't have the architectural times of the region, and so it's as imposing that the developers clean the area. Concerning architectural bump number 4, that same section concerning a section 8 of the historical context, the design and building should reflect their time over speculating the historical context. And we fail to see that here. We fail to see the spirit of the now reflected. Affordability of the bridge has been referenced several times, much of the dismay of architecture. However, we have to understand the architecture as you need for its inherent social and intellectual value. The effort before us is not an imaginative effort. It's one of arrogant entitlement. It's an unsupply designed, very solid point, as the property dates of structure. We've heard some support for this design with hopes that it would stifle crime. We share those same concerns. In fact, we're saying that it's personally advocated to our councilmen for it to murder the area. However, it's not click-to-click development that resolves this. On Austrian architect Adolf Ruse argues in his 19-year essay, one image of crime that wasted labor power and hence wasted wealth were one image as one perpetuates the poor conditions of the wages and long hours that foster crime. In this respect, affordability is relevant as a design issue to the interest of crime or used on both sides of this community. Moreover, the pseudo-ruralism of the street layer of the building concerning the brick facades that have external material here is sort of its reminiscent of brutalism. What I'm trying to say is architecture doesn't exist in a vacuum. It's subject to the attitudes surrounding it. For instance, in 2016, it was already a kind of award. She's an Indian architecture. Certainly, for her work as an architect concerning the Marxist building in Rome, these were really ambitious, brutalism-based projects, but they were largely in the interest. They weren't really accessible. We compare that to the 2018, when we have that same award, Altgrinistocchi. It incorporates the communal space, open area, the green space, and the sustainability, the same sorts of things that we feel to see present in this current design. For modernist architects, the Altgrinist creating a world where housing for workers was a model of their fundamental character of society. At the height of their careers, architects like the Corbusier, Walter Crucius, and Bruno Swanson, and Emil Holm-Wolfinger were still designing large-scale housing projects that incorporated affordability as an urgent need because they understood it. It's relative to social economic impacts. They understood that it is so important to engrace yourself into the fabric of the community and not necessarily tiered. The architectural references that we're using here span a couple of decades in styles, but judging from these designs, I don't believe Myers's team is familiar with even one of them. And even if they are, the influence is not present in these materials. What is all the more embarrassing for a case which this much, well, that's all the more embarrassing for a case with this much scrutiny. This is not Myers's first property. In fact, he has drawn wide criticism for the collect that left Aurora apartments infested with bed bugs and subject to fire by the hazards. This is to say, if he has a lot of cut points now on paper, he will make every effort to do so in the future to come. That's right. Next, we have Susama Sigura, followed by Graciela Santana. Hello, my name is Susama Sigura. I'm from District 4. I don't think in the name right here, but that bridge does belong to all of us. It is on the National Register of Historic Places. What I see in these new and improved drawings that came before us is basically Mitch trying to do the same thing he did last time, a residential complex and a void undergrown parking. We keep coming before you and taking on behalf of the bridge and the view shed. It is well within the purview of the Historic Design and Review Commission to take into consideration that the view shed should be protected from this bridge. Never mind that the land is still in litigation. Never mind that the community has worked so hard to preserve and save this bridge and to raise money. Never mind that you need some more. It has the same history of going after a National Register of Historic Places buildings, including the Frederick and the Merchants Heights building, both failed attempts at building development. We just keep coming before you and we keep asking you to please protect the view of the bridge. Everybody wants to see this bridge preserved, but we also want to see the bridge the way it looks now without development on that corner without that height. It goes from four to five and that's just way too high. It just blocks the entire view. There is also a possibility that in the future, the land that you can see more owns that is currently parking lot will come before you as a different apartment complex development building. So please also take that into consideration. I have no doubt that if this does get approved for construction and if Mitch Miners is able to qualify for all of the city and centers that may be available for his construction, including the $25 square foot mixed use and Senate from the Center City Development Office, I have no doubt that Eugene Seymour will try to build something on that one. Thank you. Thank you. Thank you very much. We'll see you in the next one. We'll see you in the next one. We'll see you in the next one. Are you good at Sanchez and it's about Sanchez. What do you all think about that one? I'm just waiting. Yes, my name is Gessia Losanchez. I have a 233 Lotus and District 1 of the Espionage of the West Side Preservation Alliance and also a member of the Midtown and West Side Planning Advisory Committee working to make decisions for the future of San Antonio. I also raise concerns that these meetings because I feel like we're on giving time and energy like you all and I never know where all the time and energy we spend thinking of the future they'll actually honor. I wanna begin by honoring Doug Steppen as many others have. Many people have given them five years, 10 years but this is a letter to the editor dated November 2nd, 1967. He states, as a native of San Antonio I think clean and paint up for hemisphere is a good slogan. However, I can't see how our city officials in our Chamber of Commerce can be satisfied with this slogan when our hasty bridges become a death trap and it's always so full of rubbish and broken bottles and has its railings deteriorated. I think the bridge should be painted and lighted up at night and kept clean especially now that hemisphere will soon be opening. He was 40 years old. As you know, he died a couple of weeks ago at age 91. That's how dedicated he was and he did find that land and he did get it to make it to the city and his son said he was very angry at the end. He went to be angry when he died because he lost that land for the beautiful bridge and it was so important. Next slide, there are several bridges that connect communities together because of our famous railroad tracks that have surrounded San Antonio for over 100 years. This is the view of Commerce Street Bridge. Next, they take these, this railroad systems were instrumental in building this country in San Antonio. They gave jobs, they transport and we continue to transport goods and services and people. In the 20th century and even today, trains can also cost delays when folks have to wait around when they pass through intersections or even stop for long periods of time or even hours as we know in this West Side. So that's why they built the bridges but these are when a beast that commerce and brown holds while the loop is street were built in the fifties and sixties and they're not beautiful. They're not anything exceptional. They are what they are, just using it usable for moving in people. And that's why it's so hard to see, you know, how then the historic history bridge built in 1910 and it brought to the space in 1910, first for photo person buddies and cars and now hikers, bikers and regular folks walking and running or pushing strollers. They are taking graduation and wedding pictures and just scenic photographs of themselves or families and friends. They are photographing the downtown skyline but they are also taking photos of the architectural beauty of the bridge and the small little wood frame homes on the northeast side of the bridge. This is the beautiful and unique San Antonio community that we love and each preserve into which the developers propose to drop an entirely inappropriate abortment complex. The downtown design guidelines that we must, states that we must create a neighborhood identity, a sense of place which gives the neighborhood a unique character enhancing the walking environment and creates pride in the community. These are the words that are in the design, the downtown design. This building will destroy the neighborhood identity. We will no longer be able to see the full view of the community from the bridge because the new building will be 72 feet high and erase the view from the bridge when standing across this new building. Why did the architects or developers give you, give us some view looking towards the building or from the bridge so that we can really appreciate the overwhelming size, the mass scene, the overwhelming mass of the five-story structure and this environment. Additionally, although not part of the downtown design criteria, when this massive building gets built, what happens to the cool day and night breezes that currently move in and out? That's what I always feel when I get up there and I think, I know what that's like because we've been in it when we're downtown and we have massive buildings on either side. On page 13 of the downtown design criteria, it talks about pedestrian friendly. This is not pedestrian friendly because again, we lose the site and the retail, the question about retail is very problematic. We are expecting to get $1.2 million in incentive for the CCHIP already and it says 7,000 square feet of retail. I don't know that there's 7,000 square feet of retail. Are we agreeing to this without knowing what the CCHIP requirements are? Citizens need welcoming well-defined public spaces, places to stimulate face-to-face interaction, et cetera. The land below the bridge is the only space that allows for the public space. The current design for public space is so small that only the residents of the apartments or those who drink or hang out at the Alamo beer will have access to this quite limited public space. Actually, this pocket park is not more like a dog park. It is very small and just like the current Alamo beer company outdoor space makes people feel outsiders unless they live or come to the activity sponsor by the private owner. According to Eugene Seymour at one of his community meetings at the only one happening at the beer company, he says he gets to decide what people get to come in and out of his indoor and outdoor space. And if I was there today and the outdoor park is closed up, you have to go into another area. Building design, I'm sorry, some people have said some of this stuff, so I don't. The developers want us to make money and move this process as quickly as possible. If not, then they would have spent the last three months or another extra three months talking to us and engaging with us. They haven't done that. When he was forced to build his brewery on the south side, he went down. His scale to build the Alamo brewery initially was huge, but now he put back into three separate buildings that are lower than the bridge. So why can't he do and think that way? Thank you very much. Thanks for having me, Astley. Amy has six minutes, both on the head, John Gehry and Diane Sainz, you'll get the time. My name is Amy Castley and again, I thank you for your service. I am a pro bono attorney of the H-Street Breed Restoration Group and I have been since 2010. James McKnight, who's the attorney for the developer here, was not actually an attorney in that case, is not an attorney in the case, the only attorney that was there on behalf of Mr. Seymour is actually Cruz Shaw, who is now the counsel person. So I wanted to tell you that first please, please know that Mr. McKnight's request to you, all the developer wants is to be treated like anybody else, is really a little misleading. That is the developer here, which is the owner, as you know, is actually a three month Jerry at Alamo Sea, which is Mr. Seymour and Mr. Meyer, our investors as well as others. That group assumed this property from the city, knowing full well of this dispute. Moreover, there was a list of patents on file in the land records when they purchased over on both the land from Mr. Seymour's Texas land company, to which the city had transferred the land, was never transferred to Alamo beer. This lawsuit, as you can hear, has been frustrating. The lawsuit really came about because community oriented, volunteers, trusted city government, they were assured, heard from Mr. Steppen's son, they were assured that this land would be held until we had raised money to develop it. So trusting the government is a good thing, particularly by people who want to improve their communities. It's also true and it's no surprise that the statutory law, particularly the statutory law that comes out of Austin, is very much favored, favorable to the wealthy and the influential and the politically influential. We know that. Your role in this legal regime is to bring wisdom and reason to the application of these laws that have been given us that we're kind of stuck with. And it's not true that merely because we're a crowd, we're wrong about the law, we're not. As you know, and as you've heard, and I know Councilwoman Kamal at the last meeting, as well as others, said the concern about the impact on the Hay Street Bridge of this development is very much within our preview. And I know that you've been pressured. Mr. McKnight announced a community about the letter that had been sent by the city attorney and the office of historic preservation to each of you, warning you that you must not consider all these other issues that the crowd is bringing to you. But that's not, that's an inaccurate portrayal of our input. What we're saying is that the Hay Street Bridge has been a historically designated, historically significant structure since 1987. The city has failed to record those things, but the developer was well aware of that when he came and when they came to this property. Moreover, the guidelines that you are asked to apply with reason and wisdom do not uniformly favor the developer. Just because we're the crowd and they're the developer does not mean that they're right. The guidelines that you are charged to apply include as we've talked about the mass of this building. And in particular, if I may read from the downtown guidelines, monolithic slab-like structures that wall off views and overshadow the surrounding neighborhood are not appropriate. That describes this project. It is appropriate for you to say part of this historical district is its proximity to the historical engineering landmark of the Hay Street Bridge. There are structures and there is development that could maintain the community and the neighborhoods access to this culturally and engineeringly and historically significant building. And those could be, as the developer mentioned in the presentation, low buildings that are appropriate to the area, retail buildings that are appropriate to the area, but not a building that locks the iconic bridge of view of the Hay Street Bridge. I wanted to mention also that the rule in, let's see, I'm not gonna put all these provisions to you, but overall under section chapter five, the encouragement of neighborhood activity just as, just as the commission members mentioned in December, the idea that this is a mixed-use project is a farce. And the idea that this will encourage pedestrian and retail action is not true. Thank you very much. Thank you very much. Thank you very much. The audience has four minutes on Montana Tunes for the other time followed by Christelle Pointe. Hello, my name is Natalie Rodriguez and I live at 4,400 Horizon Hill Boulevard. I am going to start off talking about the petitions. We do, there's an online petition that has over 15,000 signatures. A lot of them are local, but a lot of them are also in the United States and out of the United States. And so I'm gonna read a comment from from one of the oncideas regarding signatures that come from out of San Antonio because this is a very important issue to people here, but it is a people issue and national issue to protect the historic bridge. Several people did not give us their stories, but have taken a stance against gentrification by signing the petition to fight for public access to the bridge. This is not just a local issue. People from all over the world have added their names in solidarity with our mission to protect the historic bridge. These people are from Greece, Spain, Italy, British Columbia, South Africa, Germany, Switzerland, Sweden, the United Kingdom, Brazil, France, Venezuela, Quebec, Nova Scotia, Ireland and more countries, other others throughout the US. I've also added their names. This is not just a local issue, it's a national issue. So many around the world seem to understand this. Why can't San Antonio's own city officials? I'm gonna continue reading comments, other comments from the community members who could not make it. This is from an anonymous person because of the unique history and structure of the bridge. I believe it should remain open to the public in the past. It was the main artery leaking the east side to downtown safely getting residents over the railroad tracks. It can still bring citizens together today as they enjoy various public activities there with the beautiful view of the city. It's unique architectural structure reflects the unique history of our city and to remain open to the public and not to be degraded to be the nearly part of one company's property for all of their own heritage and income. For Margaret in Texas, we don't have many destination points that bring out the true cultural and historical beauty of the east side that East Street Bridge is one. Nora from Texas, Nora P. from Texas. I value the saving of historic places after the works restored, the bridge should remain accessible to all that should not be incompatible with commercial interests. I'm John Kaye. This is an historic bridge structure that was saved and rehabilitated by with federal, state, and city funds of the public monument of our past and then a history lesson to this generation about how we live and how this unique type bridge was part of our transportation infrastructure that needs to be shared with future generations. Susie from Texas. I live in a neighborhood I vote and this is an encouragement of developers against the load of people who live in the neighborhood. The developers do not care about our neighborhood as they are not our neighbors. I'm an anonymous person because of the unique history and structure of the bridge I believe it should remain open to the public in the past, though. Thanks. That's not unfamiliar to me. As they did, the history bridge is a link between downtown and the adjacent east side neighborhoods. It also has historical importance making an industrial age the more agro-garry and founding of our city. The view and sense of being connected to other parts of San Antonio and many aspects should be afforded to all citizens much as a small percentage of the newcomers to our city. And Naomi in Texas is a historic symbol not only bridging the city's neighborhoods but also the symbol of bridging the racial divide from Vanessa in Texas. This is absurd that public property seemed for a recreational park should be sold at the gain of an interest of the city realtors and alimony brewery. This all has already happened in South Town. All the people have been pushed up their homes and apartments whose facade may have paradise but are of shoddy construction have gone up. The price gargling on these apartments and condos is also significant. That's it. Thank you. Next we have Christelle Fuente. She has six minutes. Eliza Perez and obviously I'm... Yes, sorry, I really wasn't... I'll book you over there. Okay, sorry. My name is Christelle A. I work with Fuente. I live in 431 Burr. My great-grandmother lives on pine. My grandparents live from Burr. Thank you all for being here today. My name is Issue. I'm walking in the most beautiful view of our city and the Hays Street Bridge. The scale of this building is raised approximately 20 feet. This building is out of scale and I'm consistent with the historic neighborhood movement. According to the Downtown Design Guide, Design Experiences Foundation is successful in healthy communities. This is the view that we will lose and it's on these papers right here so you can really take a good look at it. So as we're talking about the design and stuff, the Z-shaped narrowing by the good to make it a downtown or historic pattern, it adds no value for urban walking, especially shared spaces with walkers and bikers. Cities downtown design standards do not meet all bounds and the suggestion and the design illustrates that developers do not understand good urban design. What is needed is larger sidewalks. This affects walkability and the setback, it should have a further setback and sidewalk should be 10 feet. I also see no coverings for air condition or outside trash bins or recycle bins addressed. Sorry. The audience should wrap around the building even until Lamar. Lamar looks like an afterthought. A larger 10 foot sidewalk is needed on Cherry and Lamar to accommodate more comfortability and loving and walking for via buses, car share, moving vans and walkability. I did notice there were open terraces that looked like they were for residents to view the bridge. Are these open to the public or are they indeed private? The EC shaped parking lot is not acceptable for a view to have from the bridge. 360 degree views from the bridge should be considered. The scale that they'll need is problematic considering that it cuts off the view of the bridge from historic homes and the neighborhood itself to the bridge. And there should be a minimum of 141 parking spaces. I only counted 76. If you target millennials living in a studio, they will need to have two spaces even though they both want to walk, want to buy. They still need a car in Texas because we do not find easy public transportation. Obviously, one or two better tenants will need a space. Retail establishment will need a space. Local residents and visitors should originally need a space to park. How will this work? Will tenants be forced to walk far away and park underneath the expressway? Maybe tenants who want urban living will want to take a bike to work or take public transit. Very well then. The nearest bus stops are unknown. There are sub-park via services for Ella Austin and we have events there driving in parking that overflows into the name that is an issue. The city and via need to come up with a plan for cherry more route that leaves this area with the rest of downtown. Loopy limited should be forced to commit in writing to fund transportation options before any thought of approval for this design. Especially if they are selling the lack of parking to each DRC under the guise that millennials will mostly want to take public transit. A brewery then coupled with a new restaurant are not proposed in a high density housing zone where they are already at least two other bars and a close proximity of each other. Big urban cities do not approve liquor licenses or high density downtown housing without a proposal for public transportation. Why congestion and DUIs? This area with expected new business and especially several service alcohol is a danger to residents and patrons and will face consequences of DUI offenders. Will this be an area police will increase patrols to prevent those drinking and driving? Will tenants who can't find parking late at night have to park under an expressway, walk over train tracks, walk past of our parking lot, down streets with four lining and 50 sidewalks with fear of dodging impaired drivers on their walk home. There should be a serious look at the lack of parking and the need for bus loading zones, a seating shelter and trash cans, side of a passing and walking space. The problem with the nationwide success of the pro is that now every developer wants to ride the coattail without success. And instead of pushing for creative design, the design is studying the needs of developer neighborhoods they are content to the copy and paste formula. The pro will consider it a success in business model. Design wise, with scale, a mistake was made. The new buildings bore the original current pro design which stood out as you can see the northwest view from P Street Bridge or opposite from the river. As per design of this building, this is not a good option for a historic neighborhood. The corner of La Barre and Sherry could be another cut and paste from pro, so all the slops are even the first design presented. The two small p-tailed spaces is not going to be proud of success like the pros have. Perhaps the issues with the guidelines themselves, which in the strategic framework plan that was working in SA 2020 for 2012, the city has grown and is pushing the boundaries of downtown. The needs of neighborhoods have changed. Although the downtown design guide is a new innovative design, and he would states it and encourages it, I ask, is HDRC and the city really promoting this to developers where it counts for that? Which for developers like Seymour and Myers indicate is monetarily? The answer is in similarity designs we are seeing getting approved with HDRC. And it's time to take another look at the downtown design guide and how we incentivize developers and what are we incentivizing them for. This leads me to offering a solution. I don't want to be considered an instructionist, as a lot of us often are. Through my research, I found a container park in Las Vegas. When I hooked up the container park, I realized that maybe instead of developers trying to create another pearl with every design presented to HDRC, maybe they should be looking to other successful models for downtown development and other tourist revenues sitting implemented. I do have one last comment I'd like to make. On a final note, as an artist, the side cards are a sad attempted arc. Again, the ignorance of the developer telling the people, well, this is the arc you get, it's vintage. Instead of what it might be, more appropriate risk to be, the cards are not key side, or much of the architecture of the bridge. Yes, maybe long time residents would really love this little reminder of the displacement of the name of the 1938 that's in place to floss away from this place. Please wrap up your remarks here. This design was passed today. The side card edition took development. We'll go along nicely with the new 76-foot reminder of the lost promise of Dawson Park that was stolen. We have Rose Hill, followed by a few commissioners. Let me take all my time. I think a lot has been said today. I'm the president of Government Hill, the Neighbor Association. We are neighbors to Dignity Hill. When I look at the Hays Creek Bridge, I was born and raised on Brooks and Olive. There was one other bridge that we never mentioned, the Brooks and Olive Bridge. It was there as I grew up. My mother's died 97 years old. She played with the Rose Buds. I wish I could have brought that picture today, where they, all the girls, and they grabbed it with Emerson. She's 97, gonna be 98. Played and took a picture on that bridge. When I hear today, I'm not against development. Luckily in Government Hill, we've had developers that have come to the table, that have sat down, made their propositions and worked with us. We've been agreed to disagree, and somehow have come together. Today I don't see that happening here. That's very sad. Because regardless whatever the developers decide to build, they have to stop. They have to look and they have to listen to the hearts of the people that live in that community. The history of British is going to take away a lot of you, but I think that today, what I've heard of Mammoth Bowser can be a compromise. Why not reduce those two stories? Let that view still be available. There's gotta be some year of tape, but you can't give it all away and not give back a little bit. So I think that if I was a developer, which I'm not and I know they're gonna lose money, go back to the drawing table. Talk to these people. Sit down, stop, look and listen. Be a good neighbor. And maybe something good can come out of this, but I think that they need to go back to the drawing table. We did it many times before. We might not agree of always what they're gonna do, but if you can compromise to some extent and listen to what these young kids, because those are our future today, I've heard some fabulous comments on the young millennials here today. I'm 61 and I'm just, I'm over-impressed, but you gotta stop looking and listen. And the developers, I hope that you will listen and stop looking and listen today. That's maybe something good might come out of this. Thank you. Lastly, something I've heard is on your news. Mr. Diaz has one minute. Diana, who gave us your video. Thank you all for staying here and listening to everybody. I know you're more about historical design or all that. I'm speaking more on the human aspect of gentrification. There's been such a move to house people from the East Side. I still have family. I lived in the East Side for a long time. I think right now, my daughter is on her next problems. Gradually. So I see this as an interest. As prices continue to go up, neighborhoods get dismantled. Residents get displaced. That's gentrification to me. And I have not spoken on the East side, street rich issue, because I saw it all as gentrification. That's bringing in more development, higher taxes, higher real estate costs, which means higher taxation even though our city says we all raise taxes. But when you assess the property higher, your taxes go up. That is what's going on. And we'll continue to go up. So at this point to me, a green space in part would have the best of that impact than a five story apartment complex with again, outreaching two retailers to displace more houses in those neighborhoods because you would need that space for retailers for parking and so forth. So all I see is displacement. All I see is gentrification and higher property assessment, higher costs and loss of those people that have lived there, you're listening to people who have lived there since the turn of the 20th century. And they're still there, the families are still there. They can have a foreign high cost. That is a low income housing. Speaking about affordable housing, you've seen public housing go down. There's no more public housing in here. What you have is mixed income housing down. Not affordable housing. The affordable houses are those wooden frame walls in those neighborhoods that will be torn down because of such development. I'm here to speak on behalf of my grandchildren, daughter. Now the residents might go to that area that cannot afford to be moved out to other neighborhoods that have just been developed or those houses are astronomical costs. 150, 200, $300,000 per hour. That is our wages in San Antonio for the general working person cannot afford them. And more than likely cannot afford this development of the apartment that is being proposed at this point either. So I am in favor of the integrity of the existing networks surrounding the A3 bridge. So I am opposed as a developer on the support of Green Space and the part that will actually stay as Mr. Steadman fought for to develop it for the community for a park. I'm Antonio Diaz, an activist in San Antonio. And I can't see, I mean, I know that you all are doing the best you can. Hopefully you will side with the people's interests. And to be more strengthen with the developer is that I'll try for retail businesses to move in that space that you're talking about. It's imaginary, it's imaginary. Will that become real? Which means displacement, which means houses torn down. The integrity of the neighborhood, gone away with. So please hold this developer to a higher standard. Very much. I wanna make an observation and then I have a question for either the staff or the sentencing legal person here. I begin everyone of these meetings by reading Chairman Steadman and the last sentence in the first paragraph of something like this. The people of the decision by the administrative official can be filed in accordance with the city's unified development code. That means no matter which way this goes, as I understand it, either the applicant or the city can file a appeal to reconsider the decision we make. What I wanna remind everyone in the audience about is that this is an advisory body. So our votes are actually considered to correct conditions. Ultimately they're certified of food chain. So I'm happy to report that we're very rarely on return but sometimes we have them. In the case of one very substantial historic property we were asked to be listed on the basis of economic hardship, we be fined to do that and the order was successful in getting it to be listed later. What is the method of the appeal that one wanted to make it? Where does that go? Appeals of administrative decisions go to the board of adjustment. All right, so that's just for your introduction. Commissioner, I'm sure we're gonna have some discussion. I'm sorry, can you pass? It's actually our turn now, but we may ask you a question. You asked a leak of questions and I don't think that's your turn, you can ask that. You can ask that if you have any questions. Mr. Chairman, there is an opportunity for the applicant to re-bundle the period and the rules of procedure if they wish to. All right, I don't know if that was the applicant. Do you want to make it in your vote for the particular one? Thank you very much. I'll make it quick, there's a few things that I really want to put up to try to clarify tomorrow with a view. One is the view shed. It keeps referring to view before too as the view shed. There is no view shed, there is views of the bridge from the specific spot, and there are views from the bridge from many spots. One of the views of the bridge is by importance along Highway 37, I mean this isn't the only place where you can view the bridge, so I'm not the idea of referring to this view shed. Also, it's important to remember that there is a view shed process going on right now to create an ordinance, but we have filed our permits, prior to that ordinance being submitted, so we're actually not subject to any limits that we can pass upon that. Parking there was in the downtown zoning area, there is no parking requirement, so it's referred to from several people that we work on your park, it's not true. There may be less spaces than they believe, there are certainly not less spaces in the area required. The open land concession, yeah, it isn't a large concession because the land that was there prior was not part of our development at all. I do need to say what's referred to as not being a concession, but it was a completely different person who wanted to develop that property and we convinced them to put it as part of ours. It was a comment that the commission wanted to know what's happening on that land. We were not trying to take advantage of that land in some way, it was just there and the questions came up about it, it was clear that it was an important site. So to resolve that, we went back and talked about it. Also about the authority, what the purview of each person that I was talking about many, many times, but I think it's important to note that the downtown zoning guide is its own document. The U.D.C. fully states that you go to DG, downtown zoning guide to talk about purview and how that works, but it's separate from how historical views and procedures go for that. As far as public outreach, this architect was hired officially at the beginning of January and at the end of the beginning of January. On January 9th, I sent an email to the DG and the president of the park to say, look, we're going through a new process of getting hired at a new architecture firm. We'd like to talk to you about that. On January 12th, we were told this is too big of an issue for us to talk to you about this ourselves. We'd like a public forum for that, which resulted in a town hall running through the city councilman's office for February 5th. So we reached out, like I said, we reached out on January 9th to engage the public in that process. We had a town hall meeting. It didn't happen the way we wanted to and we'd go to the town hall meeting and we came to the public at that level as well. There are, I think you've heard so many folks don't want anything. And one of the ways I can say that is because of one story building, we have a diagram that shows it. Certainly, the two-story building blocks the view. The view is, I mean, if you bring it all the way down, the difference between a four-story and a five-story, that that view from the March area is exactly the same. It blocks the view that a 16-foot building blocks that view. So two-story, four-story, five-story, it is the same result. And so the only way to preserve that view is to have that view. So I want to tell you all at the beginning of this that there would be no such demonstrations interrupting speakers, your own, or anybody else. You all have had three and a quarter hours for us to hear what you have to say and we need to hear what the other folks have to say because we can't hear them through that. If I could also point out some clarifications to you, some of the misinformation was shared earlier. Although I think that we're all moved by the great interest and passion that we see by all of the folks here today, it wasn't all accurate. For instance, we do have, I hope you already heard the five-parking space, it's not so far. If you look at the exhibit, the package that we show underground parking was a great expense to mention. We're also increasing the ability for four or five stories in the sole interest to move massing away to shuffle units that were previously closer to the bridge and four stories away. So the area that's closest to the bridge and the actual prep and little sections is only one story with the magnet on top of it. That was a big move, a great hit, which wasn't sure that was right in the new, it comes at great cost to him. We're on point four next to the building, we're expensive and fall under some different higher codes and things, but it was the right thing to do if you didn't have a respectable bridge. That's the only reason we're noting these five stories that it wasn't just to poke anyone in the eye or anything like that, just to make the answer sound much worse for four to five minutes of deliberate strategy and developing that massing with respect to a lot of the UEC sections that were cited and that those were historic districts or historic property. Now, here we've gone through great lengths, and I think now there's a design, a great design here. Is it a Christopher Wings, ah-ha-dee, you know, what's the purpose of it? Probably, you know, Adolf Luz, I haven't heard someone say Adolf Luz, he would love this movie, which is a black ornamentation and such. That being said, we're very familiar with it. And it marks the reference, the long, low building context. What we looked around, you know, certainly there aren't any five story buildings within the block, because if you look further over, this seven building has a six and seven story building, very low historical heights. That's not a very impressive point here. Every other building has a proportion. It's a long bar. So we took our mass, as you've seen, and broke it down into a series of stacked, low bars, and technically, predominantly to cross the chariot. And at the point, you know, pushing the point of our mass, had attempts and practicons to really isolate these different elements into that same sort of proportion, to explain how the design went from what you're waiting to buy. As I said just a minute ago, the building was four stories, and it was a C, when we first looked at the old design. And so what we did was I didn't have just a four story building that even at its closest point to the bridge, which is presently over the, it's the rest of Ontario. That was four stories tall, when we felt that it was imposing too much of its mass, approximately to the bridge. And then, of course, we looked at lots of different precedents including the buildings we need to adjacent to the bridge now. Even like at the standard hotel in New York City, by the skyline, by the project there. Highline parking. And so we then massaged, we pulled the mass back to one story in that area substantially. And that, we took those units and put them on top of the building at the rest of the area. So that was the best one for four stories, five in those areas. Plus, it's to the bridges one. I think our team needed to actually get back to the guy. What we did, the idea was to incorporate all those components and to very increase all that sort of what we incorporated. In essence, we've taken the scale of the buildings across the street and translated them into a power brick base on the basis of the monitoring as well. I think you've heard from my earlier comments, saying that 16 feet we call for here, we can call it floor-wise. We'll call it as a minimum we can get. So I think those historic homes are very least well. And we are required to, I was hiding down at the first floor, be at least 14 feet from the floor to the ceiling. So we'll kind of fix into that. High buildings are at several feet. So at 16 feet, we'll probably have to screen them, but for example, if the building property does drop off, it's going away from the bridge. So the intersection of the lawn chairing is a little bit taller on the three feet. And as you work your way down the lawn to the west, it's a little bit taller there as well. We were able to explain that to part of here, to work in the apartment that we have. Well, we have a live 3D model. Can you talk about the microphone? Sorry. Yeah, I'm looking at the 3D model right now. Mr. Chairman, can I interrupt just briefly? We might want to take just a couple of minutes break and see if we can get this figured out so that the public can see what you guys are doing. Okay. I think that's fine. All I have to do is announce that we'll take a lot of time to break in a little bit.