[0:05] Good afternoon. I'd like to call to order the design review board meeting of Tuesday, September 8th. We have roll call, please. Chair branch before we have a roll call. I wanted to introduce our new clerk here, Raylene Gonzalez. And some of you may, she might, you may have seen her before because she was our receptionist at the front desk. So she's now joining the city clerk's team.

[0:34] There you go.

[0:35] Well, I feel it's so much better.

[0:38] Welcome.

[0:42] Member Vannewerder.

[0:44] Here.

[0:45] Member Dragassi.

[0:47] Yes.

[0:47] Here.

[0:48] Member Brown.

[0:49] President.

[0:50] Member Aiman.

[0:52] Is absent.

[0:54] Member Schumacher.

[0:55] Here.

[0:56] Vice Chair Wheeling.

[0:57] Here.

[0:58] And Chair Brandt.

[0:59] Here.

[1:00] And now we're rise for Pledge of Allegiance.

[1:02] I

[1:05] pledge allegiance to the flag of the United States of America

[1:09] to the republic or which it stands, one nation under God, indivisible, with liberty and justice for all.

[1:25] At this time the public shall have an opportunity to comment on any non-agenda item relevant to the jurisdiction of the city.

[1:33] Do we have any speaker slips and or hands raised?

[1:36] I do not have any speaker slips and for any attendees on the Zoom webinar who wish to speak on the item,

[1:43] Please use the raise hand icon and I will call upon you.

[1:50] I'm not seeing any hands.

[1:51] Board.

[1:53] OK, this will take us to our administrative agenda review

[1:57] of agenda.

[1:58] Chair Brandt, a question to staff.

[2:01] Please, we have no minutes this meeting.

[2:04] We do not.

[2:05] So we'll catch up next round.

[2:07] Thank you.

[2:07] And no changes on the agenda today.

[2:09] OK, well, let's get into it.

[2:11] Item B1.

[2:12] That's

[2:16] partners of Galita's gift smokes sign, 585, Hollister Avenue, APN 071-053-024, case numbers 26-0014-DRB, comma 26-0021-ZC.

[2:35] Very good. Declarations, everybody visited the site, Tamecia?

[2:47] I have visited the site a few times in Nox Parter, Martha.

[2:53] Previous site visit Nox Parter.

[2:55] Jim.

[2:56] Site visit Nox Parter.

[2:57] In Cecilia.

[2:58] Virtual site visit Nox Parter.

[3:00] Okay.

[3:01] Very good.

[3:02] Luis at the floor is yours.

[3:04] Good afternoon, Chair Branch and members of the board.

[3:07] Today, we have the redesign for gift smoke sign, and this is located in Old Town.

[3:16] They were last at the DIRB meeting July 14.

[3:23] They took the comments that the board had at that meeting and submitted a redesign.

[3:31] And today, they're here to present that.

[3:33] We have the applicant that will be joining us virtually today.

[3:36] virtually. Okay, great.

[3:43] Is the applicant there?

[3:47] Yeah, hi, I'm here. Okay, great. You want

[3:50] to walk us through what your changes were? So the changes that I submitted were in regards to the

[3:58] demonstration of the mockup that shows the ventilation and update of placement.

[4:15] Say that again.

[4:17] I updated the placement and the mockup design.

[4:25] Okay. Very good.

[4:28] It looks like you incorporated the vent into the

[4:33] Yes into it. Okay

[4:35] All right

[4:37] questions for the applicants Cecilia

[4:40] No questions

[4:41] Jim

[4:42] So the dash is removed correct

[4:45] Yes, that is correct. Yeah, thank you. That's it. Martha. No questions. Dennis. No questions

[4:51] Tamisha. No questions. I have no questions. Do we have any public comment?

[5:01] No public comment. If anyone on the Zoom webinar who wishes to speak on the Senate, please use the raise hand icon and I will call upon you.

[5:21] I may not see any hands. Okay, we'll move to comments, Tommisha. No comments. Dennis?

[5:29] I appreciate the applicant's patience with the board to get to this point. I find this sign perfectly acceptable now.

[5:42] I think it's fine as proposed and their proportion looks good now.

[5:47] Jim?

[5:49] I would echo Vice Chair Wailan's comment of the applicants, patients with the board.

[5:54] I know we've probably put them through their paces just for a dash and event.

[5:58] So I think it looks fine as proposed.

[6:01] Okay.

[6:02] Cecilia?

[6:03] Thank you for the changes you made.

[6:05] Looks good to me.

[6:06] Okay.

[6:07] Someone want to make a motion?

[6:08] I'll make a motion to approve the project as proposed.

[6:11] Are there any other guidelines that I need to introduce?

[6:19] Subject to findings and the CEQA.

[6:23] There it is.

[6:25] The DRB adopt the design review and CEQA findings and categorical exemption and approve the

[6:38] a project as currently proposed.

[6:41] Very good.

[6:42] Oh, second.

[6:44] Second, any discussion?

[6:46] Are we approving for final and set before

[6:48] conceptual preliminary and final?

[6:52] Yes, the motion should include conceptual, preliminary,

[6:56] and final approval.

[6:58] Very good.

[6:59] We'll vote with Roca.

[7:03] Member Van Order?

[7:04] Yes.

[7:05] Member Dick Assi?

[7:07] Yes.

[7:08] Member Brown?

[7:09] Yes.

[7:10] Mr. Schenglacher?

[7:11] Yes.

[7:12] Vice Chair Wheeling?

[7:13] Yes.

[7:14] Chair Brown.

[7:15] Yes.

[7:16] Motion passes.

[7:18] Very good.

[7:19] This will take us to item B2.

[7:28] Second story, residential accessory structure.

[7:32] 7289 to remain dry.

[7:35] APN 077-093-003.

[7:40] Case number is 26-0013-DRB.

[7:43] Coming in 26, 0, 0, 0, 8, dash LUP.

[7:50] And declarations on this, Temecia?

[7:55] Virtual type visit no exparte.

[7:57] Dennis?

[7:58] I have visited the site both virtually and in person and no exparte.

[8:03] At a virtual site visit no exparte.

[8:06] Martha?

[8:09] Previous virtual no exparte.

[8:11] Jim?

[8:13] Site visit and no exparte.

[8:15] Okay.

[8:17] Cecilia.

[8:19] Previous virtual site visit in the next project.

[8:22] Okay.

[8:22] Luisa, welcome back.

[8:24] Laura Scherz.

[8:25] Thank you, Chair Branch.

[8:27] So today, for the 728912 Me Dry project,

[8:33] we have Andy Triton present to speak on behalf of this project.

[8:40] So this project was reviewed at the design or design

[8:44] review board meeting on May 26th. The applicant submitted a new design that we believe addresses

[8:52] the feedback received during that meeting and today we're here to discuss the changes.

[8:59] All right, thank you.

[9:02] Turn your mic on and introduce yourself for the record and proceed.

[9:07] Hello, I'm Andrew Trangout, the owner of the Sub-2A9 Pulling Jack.

[9:11] Okay, great.

[9:14] Go ahead and walk us through.

[9:16] So there were two comments at the last hearing, one being the mass, the scale, the compatibility

[9:24] and the compatibility with the existing structure.

[9:29] What we've done is, we originally proposed what was already there, which we all agreed

[9:33] was pretty ugly.

[9:36] You know, so some good comments from you guys last time.

[9:39] So what we are proposing now is basically centering it on the, on the structure, so it's a little more

[9:50] with the neighborhood, there's a few neighbors that also have a very similar design, one right across the street, one moving down the street.

[10:00] And so we went to a gable roof, keeping the footage the same, scooting it away from the neighbors

[10:08] set back. It's not protruding any further out. There's actually a prior addition that was done

[10:15] before I purchased the house, this plot portion here, which was approved 20 years ago or so.

[10:23] So it's actually under the footprint of the original, not the additional template that it extends.

[10:36] And yeah, that's where we're at right now.

[10:43] Okay, is that it?

[10:46] Yeah, I believe so.

[10:49] Do we have any public comment?

[10:52] Yes, thank you, Chair.

[10:53] I have one public comment and for any attendings on the Zoom webinar,

[10:58] who wish to speak on a item, please use the raise hand icon and I will call on you.

[11:03] The first speaker is Monica Trent.

[11:10] I live next door to 7289, 12-Amy Drive.

[11:16] The last time in the previous hearing, he had indicated that he would be working with me

[11:22] on the redesign and the only input he has asked for me is whether I want horizontal or vertical

[11:28] paneling on the addition. The fact that he's sintering it at this time is new to me. I have some

[11:37] examples here of two neighbors who do have second story additions, one across the street and one

[11:45] on the street adjacent.

[11:53] Either one of those properties and pinch upon the neighbors on either side.

[11:58] If Andy is proposing to redesign this, so it is in the center of his property to where it doesn't loom over my backyard.

[12:06] Right now, he has added a staircase to the existing property bill, I should say.

[12:16] And if somebody stands on there, I can see that staircase from my bedroom, which is on the other side of the street,

[12:24] other side of the house near the street. The second thing that I would like to

[12:29] indicate is that again this does not meet the size and comportment of the

[12:36] neighborhood. I went around and I took pictures of the skyline or the roof line

[12:41] of the neighbors and on our side of the street there are no additions.

[12:53] Second

[13:00] Here's some photos that I gave you previously showing what

[13:07] sliding glass door in my backyard.

[13:11] Now one of the things I did do is I went and I took pictures of where the existing

[13:18] addition is in relation to my property line.

[13:23] I took a ruler and it's about the overhang is about six to seven feet away from my fence line, which is on the property.

[13:32] So one of the things I'd like you to do is irregardless of the fact that he is built on top, I'd like you to review this thinking that what would be best for the neighborhood in addition to what is best for my backyard.

[13:54] I do have grandchildren, I do entertain over there, my son entertains over there, and right now the way the existing edition is just untenable for me.

[14:09] I have no privacy, all somebody has to do is climb up that staircase and my whole house is in full view through the sliding glass door.

[14:18] I have a large double sliding glass door.

[14:22] The last thing I wanted to hand you is what pictures I took looking at his edition from

[14:28] the front of the house, from walking down the street, showing that it looms large in

[14:36] the neighborhood.

[14:37] All right, thank you for your comments.

[14:41] There are some other neighbors who have been trying to get in on this hearing, and they haven't

[14:47] been able to connect with the Zoom.

[14:48] So, I'm not the only neighbor that has concerns about the addition right now, if Randi is willing to relocate it.

[15:00] So, essentially, in the middle of his house, that would go a long way in elaying some of the fears that I have. But, at the way it is structured right now, it's impossible. Thank you. Thank you very much. What? These are yours. You can keep them. They go back to you. Oh, okay.

[15:29] Okay. Questions for the applicant, to me? Mr. Chair, I do have one.

[15:34] public comment over zoom. I'm sorry. Go ahead. We have Yvonne Peterson. Please

[15:40] unmute yourself. You have three minutes.

[15:46] Can you hear me? Yes, we can hear you.

[15:49] Okay. Hi. My first question to you is I did write up just a one-page list of

[15:56] concern. Have you had access to that? And have you been able to read it? I believe

[16:02] those were submitted with our with our packing. Okay, so I'm not sure if I'm if I'm repeating myself

[16:10] based on what you've already read or if you have not read it. My house is actually on San

[16:15] Milano Drive. My the back of my house my back view is elevated and is exactly Kitty corner

[16:23] to I say Monica's house right there in the corner. My parents bought the house in 1966.

[16:31] It's been our family home since then and one of the reasons we bought that lot was because of the elevated and with the with the views it kind of was this over over the top kind of view, even of the Bell tower UCSB.

[16:48] It has been shipped away through the years through all the foliage and building on this was a very big surprise to me that this was all a sudden built and I had not heard anything about it.

[16:59] So my first concern is to how on earth this happened in the first place without even being told or informed about this that all of a sudden built that seemed like it was kind of an underhanded situation.

[17:15] Now that it is built, I agree it's very unsightly. It does not fit. I agree very much with what Monica was talking about. It does not fit into the mode of the neighborhood.

[17:27] good, it feels very industrial, not industrial, I should say, more commercial. And I also have

[17:35] concerns about the reason for it. And why we're building on top of precedent that it's going to be

[17:44] setting, right? Now we're going to build storage units on top of our houses. And is that really where we

[17:52] want to go. So some questions there on that. I addressed a few things on my note and I know

[17:59] I've got a limited amount of time.

[18:06] All right. Thank you very much. One other comment I have

[18:10] is that if as I understand it you're going to be maybe possibly moving at ease at least from

[18:17] the plan that I see and by doing that and I know that helps Monica by moving it shifting it away

[18:23] from her a little bit, but for me, that completely interferes with what little

[18:27] sliver of a view I've got left.

[18:35] All right thank you very much.

[18:40] Now we'll go to

[18:41] questions for the applicant, Tamisha.

[18:47] Yes, does the staircase still overlook your

[18:49] neighbor's yard? Was that relocated at all the access to the new? We haven't been

[18:54] building since the citation. The citation stated the staircase. It's nothing new

[18:59] that was added. Oh, I think we did it with we painted. Excuse me. Excuse me. I mean, you can see

[19:08] the from the complaint from the guy that's the. Code, Code Compliance Officer. Sean McLaughlin.

[19:17] Sean stated on his document the staircase in there. The only thing we've done is paint it because it was starting to rust.

[19:25] that's about what we did with the staircase right now.

[19:28] So it's still in the same location.

[19:31] Our offer to Monica to try to solve the problem

[19:34] of seeing into her yard was to put a,

[19:38] you know, some kind of something that was,

[19:41] you know, six feet higher or whatever the height we need

[19:43] to be able to not see in her yard as you make the turn in.

[19:49] It's not also anything that someone would be standing there

[19:52] looking or y'all they got to make a turn to go inside. We also to try to use her with that put no

[20:00] No windows in that side. There's nothing looking in once anyone's in there.

[20:06] That's, I mean, we've done our best to try to accommodate, make her happy. I've also, it wasn't just vertical or horizontal setting. I probably went through about 30 different pictures with her trying to ask her if she liked any of this. If it helped, you know, do you want me to put vines here? Do you like the wood this way? Do you like light wood dark wood? Do you want stucco? You know, more than the cosmetic. I'm more than willing to

[20:29] that do what's needed, it wasn't just a quick vertical horizontal slots in our conversations.

[20:36] And I've had considerable amounts with her, so at this point, I just asked for your guys' guidance

[20:42] where you think the right way to accommodate everyone.

[20:46] Okay. Any other questions?

[20:48] Not only question.

[20:49] Okay. Dennis, questions?

[20:51] Thank you, Chair Branch.

[20:53] First of all, Mr. Chair, how much that is number of feet

[20:58] has this plan shifted from the previous one.

[21:04] You mean as far as how far over has it gone?

[21:06] Right.

[21:10] I would say at least so the staircase canolavers

[21:15] three feet out from the existing building.

[21:18] So it's three and probably a good 15 to 20 feet over.

[21:23] It's 15 to 20 feet.

[21:24] Roughly, yeah.

[21:25] Thank you.

[21:25] If you need, I can get you the exact numbers.

[21:28] Now, it's sort of to my advantage or disadvantage

[21:31] that I'm familiar with drawing conventions, and I had a lot of trouble reading these plans.

[21:38] So bear with me as I try to straighten out some questions I had.

[21:43] Now on sheet A2.0, that's titled as the floor plan.

[21:49] But that's really the second floor plan, is it not?

[22:01] Yeah, that's the sheet.

[22:02] So,

[22:07] that's the second floor plan, not the ground floor plan, right?

[22:13] I would say yeah.

[22:14] Okay, and what does the dashed line indicate is that the wall line or the eve line of the floor plan?

[22:31] This is, I think, the existing 3-2 canally.

[22:36] I'm referring to the dashed line.

[22:39] Is that the wall line when I look at the next sheet, A2.1, it appears that the dashed line on that sheet is indicating the wall line.

[22:53] I just wasn't clear on that so-called second floor plan.

[23:01] I believe it's the wall.

[23:03] All right, that's helpful.

[23:06] Let's

[23:11] see on

[23:19] sheet A3.0 it

[23:28] shows the stair landing extending out in its previous form or shall we say as built.

[23:36] Does that change at all?

[23:39] So that the 3-p cantilever that goes from the current addition out, that's the landing of the staircase.

[23:48] So that's what was there in order to have the proper 3-p cantilever landing and the proper pitch on the staircase.

[23:56] So that's not changing and we're proposing it not changing?

[24:01] Okay, because it was an as-built condition as you say may be unpermitted deck addition previously, all right.

[24:09] So the feedback can only be that it's actually more than 7p, it's almost 10p to her.

[24:13] All right, so looking at the railing on that detail number two, sheet A3, it seems to indicate vertical stair supports,

[24:28] But when I look at the next sheet, A4.1, it appears to be a different kind of railing.

[24:37] What I'm looking for is what kinds of railing balusters and handrails is proposed.

[24:45] It doesn't seem to be very clearly thought out.

[24:49] Is the staircase a prefabricated metal stair, like out of a catalog?

[24:55] No, it's it was custom made I mean it's

[25:10] It would be helpful if this information were on the drawings and just a point of clarification.

[25:26] We're not here to give you guidance on what's preferable.

[25:30] You would propose and we would respond to that.

[25:33] I applaud that.

[25:34] All right.

[25:34] The guy is in the drawings.

[25:37] So, let's see.

[25:39] And then continuing on sheet A4.2, there are some details.

[25:46] I'm confused where these details are applied.

[25:49] there's no cross information as to which sheet numbers one and two the floor

[25:57] assembly and the pipe penetration. They look perfectly adequate details. I'm

[26:06] just sort of blindfolded as to where do they apply if that deck is already

[26:14] existing. I'm just trying to understand what you're proposing here. Those are the

[26:21] Joyce. It can't deliver for the basically underneath the floor is I want to

[26:29] believe that four by twelve Joyce would run. So this is the landing can to

[26:41] I can just jump in for one second.

[26:43] These are fire separation details.

[26:49] They're not tested assemblies.

[26:52] Yeah, these are all about fire separation.

[26:55] What's the fire separation that you need?

[27:00] Maybe for the chimney, I'm not too sure.

[27:03] Or if you're removing part of the existing roof

[27:06] and building over the first floor, perhaps that is.

[27:10] You can see our confusion here.

[27:11] Yeah, I apologize.

[27:12] The drawings are telling us some details just enough

[27:15] to make us curious as to what is being proposed.

[27:20] I was a little blindsided to my guy.

[27:21] I didn't go along with that.

[27:25] I find no materials or colors or are in the proposal.

[27:31] So, those are all of my questions, Chair Branch.

[27:39] I think she A5.0 has some specifications and materials.

[27:46] It does. It's too much to grace.

[27:47] That's all existing to the house right now.

[27:50] So, it's roof shingles or a dark gray and the siding.

[27:56] Is that a blackish bluish color?

[27:59] Blaster to match the rest of the house.

[28:02] Right. Okay. Yeah. Thank you. And then just let it go.

[28:05] There's a wait for them.

[28:08] Okay. Martha, do you have questions?

[28:13] None that I can actually articulate, so let it pass by me.

[28:21] Okay. Jim, any questions? Yeah.

[28:24] Yes. I do have a couple of questions.

[28:27] I'm looking at sheet A 1.0, the cyclone.

[28:31] And I would also hold a finger on sheet A, excuse me, A2.1 at the same time, sort of

[28:44] flip them back and forth. On the site plan A1.0, you note the stairs. Now the

[28:52] stairs are, I thought you mentioned they were previously permitted. Did I hear that

[28:59] in correctly. On the addition that there. So I have an addition that was a bathroom. Yes,

[29:05] it was permitted and a. The backup valve was permitted before I purchased the house.

[29:10] But the stairs are not. That's part of this while you're here. Okay. And then on the which

[29:18] would be the northwest side of the addition, which faces your neighbor to the west, you're

[29:26] We're showing a roof deck which I'm surmising would be the flat roof deck that would remain

[29:34] were you to relocate this building more towards the gable of the existing house.

[29:43] And on sheet 2.1 you note as that as an existing roof deck.

[29:51] It's, yeah, so it's the flat roof of the bathroom currently.

[29:56] Right.

[29:57] And I'm trying to determine, well, you're...

[30:00] When I see existing in these plans, I'm, I'm tend to think that it's existing permitted. So I'm just trying to get clarification. Is that, that would be, that would be part of what you're seeking to permit. Is that roof deck? Correct. Yeah. Okay. And I think the reason mainly for the roof deck was that's when you walk up the stairs. That's the way to get in. So you need a way to make the turn. Yes. I understand. Okay.

[30:31] and turning to A3.0 drawing for north elevation. I'm looking at keynote seven, which is talks about the new staircase with railing.

[30:45] And if I heard correctly, previously your previous response is that projects from either the building below or the fascia of the roof by three feet.

[30:58] Yes. Okay. The staircase. Yes. Okay. And that edge of stair now going back to a 1.0 is basically

[31:08] would be right on the 12 foot setback from the property line. If you look at your site

[31:14] plan and I'm yes. From the back fence or the top of the stair landing, more or less the

[31:22] lines right with your setback line to the to her yard if well no your setback

[31:29] line your side yard setback correct yeah okay it is within the setback right

[31:36] okay yeah all right and then the roof last question the edge of the roof deck

[31:41] would be vertically it wouldn't extend beyond the roof line itself correct no no

[31:51] So, okay, thank you.

[31:53] That's it.

[31:54] Cecilia, any questions?

[31:56] No, I don't have any questions.

[31:57] It's just a very confusing project for me.

[31:59] Yeah.

[32:00] That's my only comment.

[32:01] Thank you.

[32:01] All right.

[32:02] Then let's move to comments.

[32:05] Tamisha.

[32:08] Yeah.

[32:10] I appreciate that you move the storage over a bit there.

[32:14] I still have a problem with the stairs and the access.

[32:18] To that area.

[32:20] And I also feel like since there's a roof deck there now,

[32:22] That's even more of you into your neighbor's yard.

[32:27] I also am a little confused as to why you can't just treat this like a home addition and why is it just storage.

[32:35] You know, it needs to be treated as if like other neighbors have added, you know, maybe a second floor to their home.

[32:43] It's more congruous with the roof line.

[32:47] There were a couple of windows on there.

[32:50] treated as an actual at least from the outside make it look like just a room and

[32:55] then you can store it sort things or do whatever you like on the inside. I

[32:59] think that would probably be more acceptable to your neighbors but right now to

[33:06] me it just looks like you move the same box right over your front door so I'm still

[33:14] not quite there yet. That's it.

[33:17] Dennis?

[33:18] Thank you, Chair Branch.

[33:21] My support to Misha's comments, I appreciate fully that the building has been moved

[33:30] 15 feet or so to reduce the impact on the neighborhood.

[33:34] I can't really see that the addition is compatible with the neighborhood.

[33:42] it, I think it would be to your advantage to have some views of the project from the

[33:49] street as it affects and in the final assessment. It just looks plopped on to the bill like

[34:02] it landed there and could be better integrated. I think you're going to have some real difficult

[34:09] and roofing problems, as proposed, if it were an extension of the gable on the south,

[34:18] just more integrated into the design. I'm not sure how that would result. Those are my comments.

[34:30] Martha, comments?

[34:33] I would echo the Schumacher's comments. It's it's almost like an enormous

[34:40] cupola or something. It's again just it's not working. It's like you need to

[34:48] create an actual addition to your home instead of just dropping this box onto it.

[34:54] So I don't think it's working at all and I'm sorry.

[35:00] I can't be more hopeful, but it's

[35:05] not well thought out in any way. Jim, any comments?

[35:13] Yes. Again, I appreciate the nudge towards moving it away from the property line and integrating

[35:23] a roof line that's a little more consistent with the residents, three and 12 pitch. I would

[35:29] I do have to agree with the other board members' comments.

[35:33] I don't see a problem if you were to add some fenestration,

[35:36] even if it's something rather than a storage.

[35:42] I think maybe suggestion of not naming it storage might be an idea.

[35:49] I also think that its proportion is a little odd.

[35:55] And I know I get the sense you're working

[35:57] with what you've got right now, and trying to slide it over to the east, but it just

[36:06] is proportions feel odd.

[36:09] And especially, I think that's especially prevalent in your, both your south and your north

[36:18] elevation.

[36:19] and just kind of is this almost like a tall tower.

[36:27] And then I was asking earlier about the roof deck

[36:30] if that was existing because I thought I heard,

[36:33] but obviously I misheard that it's not an existing permitted.

[36:37] I do think and I understand,

[36:39] I think I understand that you want to,

[36:41] that's the existing, you know, where the addition is now,

[36:44] preserve that as a flat area.

[36:46] I think in addition to reworking some of the proportions of this second floor

[36:55] edition, to pull back that roof deck. From looking at your plan, your deck is

[37:03] about 12 feet from property line and that's and it's large enough that it looks

[37:10] like it would be seeding there and that is a view into your neighbors and I I

[37:15] I understand some of their concerns.

[37:17] So I think that roof deck area needs to be looked at again.

[37:22] Potentially, I would encourage to minimize that a little bit,

[37:26] and then look at some screening, some planting screening

[37:33] between your property and the adjacent.

[37:36] I didn't see that in the package.

[37:38] We do have existing, like, a whole row of feces

[37:41] that are probably 12-foot tall, I'd say, between our yard.

[37:46] Okay, well, it would be good if that were depicted in what you're submitting.

[37:50] It helps the board understand what we're looking at.

[37:55] Question for you is because I heard a few of you guys said, are you saying that making

[37:59] it a room would be a better alternative or making it a second story edition?

[38:04] What would you as rather like to see?

[38:07] Well, let us finish our comments and then you can kind of interpret how you want to proceed

[38:12] after that.

[38:13] Yeah, and I apologize if some of my comments sounded a bit leading, that's not the intent.

[38:19] It's just, I'm just responding to some of the comments that I've heard.

[38:25] But yeah, I just, I think that proportionally, especially in elevation, it just feels awkward

[38:31] because you're your first floor, much wider, the roof, you know, it's more than just matching

[38:37] the roof line.

[38:38] There are other proportions that I would encourage you to look at.

[38:42] That's it. Thank you. Cecilia, any comments?

[38:46] You know, I've been trying to digest what you're trying to do here. And if I can just

[38:53] say this to me, okay, I'm not an architect. I'm a neighborhood person. It just seems

[38:58] like there's a hodgepodge of elements that you're trying to, I don't know. It's very confusing

[39:05] to me. And I understand the neighbor's concern. And I would support your trying to eliminate

[39:15] any overlooks into her yard. I appreciate that it's difficult when you try to do a second

[39:21] story and you try to get out there. But I just, I just, I just, I just, I just feel like

[39:25] you're there, there, yet. That's all. Sorry. That's the best I can do.

[39:32] Okay. I'll try and see your pointer please and let's flip it back to the roof

[39:39] plan. Well that's good. I

[39:47] appreciate that you because when we saw it last it was

[39:51] all over here right you moved it over here so that's great and I think

[40:00] It would be who you to move the stair over and make your entrance into this, on this side of the chimney. And I think you would, you would then be it going in and out in a way that, um, that your neighbor doesn't feel impacted by. And I think this roof deck, you could turn this into pitched roof to match the rest of the house and, and play with your proportions of this and integrate it into the roof plan.

[40:29] and of this to make it look like an actual addition.

[40:35] And even if you, I'm not completely against it,

[40:40] not because you're proposing to use it as a storage,

[40:43] I understand that.

[40:45] But I think if you popped in a couple of windows,

[40:50] even if they're small and high, it helps

[40:52] it have a residential feel, which is more friendly,

[40:55] even though it's just storage.

[40:57] But I think those types of things would help integrate that into feeling more like the

[41:05] residents that it is.

[41:07] It appears that the components you have here kind of fight how that structure feels.

[41:14] Does that make sense?

[41:15] And I think at this point, and I probably speak for the board, that we're grateful that you're

[41:26] you're willing to move this over and do what it takes to do this.

[41:30] You're clearly listening to the comments.

[41:33] But I do think, you know, if you could,

[41:37] if you could, with your designer kind of integrate this into the existing roof plan,

[41:42] so that it makes a little more sense and get your stair over that you're coming in and out

[41:48] on the east side of this existing chimney there,

[41:52] I think that could go a long way to feeling, you know, for the neighbors not feeling like their privacy is imprinched upon, especially with this flat deck then becoming sloped roof, it's not going to be a place to sit or whatever.

[42:11] So yeah, I don't know why you called a roof deck.

[42:14] I mean, this wasn't really, I don't have any desire to have a deck right here.

[42:19] Well, but it's but it's but it's a flat area and and, you know, maybe you leave that house

[42:26] and somebody else comes in and decides they want to put table and chairs up there.

[42:29] So anybody else have any other comments?

[42:32] Yes, thank you, Chair Branch.

[42:34] It occurs to me with your comments that the storage room might, you might consider

[42:41] rotating it 90 degrees, which would significantly reduce the visual impact of the neighbor.

[42:48] As long as you're going to tear off the roof of that gable, might help solve a couple of

[42:54] problems.

[42:55] You might even incorporate the chimney into the storage room rather than trying to avoid

[43:02] And whether there is an operable fireplace, I know that a chimney has to be two feet higher than anything within 10 feet.

[43:15] So as proposed, I'm not sure it really does that, but I'm getting too much into plan check here.

[43:23] But the move I suggest about rotating it, it really does evolve around reducing the impact of the neighbor.

[43:37] So at the top of the stair landing, when just sees a door, the windows are a fine suggestion.

[43:44] They don't even have to be real.

[43:46] They could be blacked in just something that ties the building more together.

[43:51] I can, I can, but when does this no problem?

[43:55] Anybody else, any other comments?

[43:56] Yeah, Chair Wrench, back to your comments about,

[44:00] and I echo Vice Chair Wailin's comment about rotating it.

[44:05] You do have the long ridge of the main resonance,

[44:09] running opposite to where you're showing this down.

[44:12] I'm specifically looking at the South elevation on A3.0.

[44:16] I think that was a good suggestion.

[44:18] And on that same south elevation, as you mentioned, Chair Branch, the pitch of the roof which on that elevation is shown dashed as though it would be removed if that pitch were continued, it would minimize or mitigate the perceived height of the addition.

[44:36] No question.

[44:37] Yeah, that's what it is.

[44:38] Yeah, so I'm just echoing, I heard that loud and clear and I think that's something, yeah, I encourage exploring that as well.

[44:50] Okay, I think it's clear that you kind of need to take another stab at this with your designers so I'm similar on them.

[45:00] Make a motion to continue this? I'll try to make a motion that the item be continued to the next meeting or indefinitely with staff suggestion. And the project continued to reduce the impact on the immediate neighbor and provide us with site photos of the landscape that you speak of and the existing conditions.

[45:29] and perhaps even a photo rendering of the impact from the street.

[45:42] That would be almost story poles, but it's already up,

[45:47] so they don't really need story poles.

[45:49] I'll remove that last part.

[45:51] I'll be willing to add, well, let's get a second

[45:54] and then you can change it.

[45:56] Okay.

[45:57] Go ahead and choose.

[45:58] Second adding relocating the stair and and putting sloped roof over the existing roof deck. I would suggest relocating the stair. I realize that it's already existing or study relocation of the stair and what was it?

[46:21] the penning pitch roof over this flat roof deck.

[46:24] Adding a pitch roof over the flat deck,

[46:27] and then I'm going to continue on,

[46:30] a solid railing around that deck

[46:33] to further limit the visual impact.

[46:39] Perfect.

[46:40] So the seconder agrees with those changes?

[46:44] I agree.

[46:46] OK.

[46:48] We will, anything else to add by staff,

[46:50] Do you need a date or just continue in DEFINITELY?

[46:54] I think we continue it and when the owner is ready to come back.

[46:58] Okay, and DEFINITELY.

[47:00] Yes, thank you. No date, certain.

[47:02] All right, then with that, we'll take about with the roll call.

[47:06] Thank you, Barbara.

[47:07] Member Van Order?

[47:09] Yes.

[47:10] Member Degassi?

[47:11] Degassi?

[47:12] Member Brown?

[47:13] Yes.

[47:14] Member Schenglacher?

[47:15] Yes.

[47:16] Vice Chair Willing?

[47:17] Yes.

[47:17] And Chair Branch?

[47:18] Yes.

[47:19] Yes.

[47:19] Thank you very much.

[47:20] Thank you.

[47:21] Thank you.

[47:23] That will take us to item B3.

[47:30] R&G 1st and 2nd floor.

[47:32] Residential addition.

[47:34] 5864 BF-Yori.

[47:38] APN069-660-009.

[47:42] Case numbers 26-0012-LUP.

[47:47] Alma 26-0017-DRB.

[47:52] Thank you.

[47:54] Declarations, everybody?

[47:55] Tamisha?

[47:57] Virtual site visit, no expartee.

[48:00] Yes, the same with me, a virtual site visit and no expartee.

[48:04] Yep, virtual site visit, no expartee.

[48:06] I had a virtual site visit and no expartee.

[48:09] Jim, site visit, no expartee.

[48:11] Cecilia?

[48:12] Virtual site visit, no expartee.

[48:14] Okay.

[48:15] Very good.

[48:16] Louisa.

[48:18] floor is yours.

[48:19] Thank you, Chair rent.

[48:20] This is a new project and has not been reviewed by the Board.

[48:25] This is a request for a new residential addition of 367 square feet to an existing two story residents.

[48:33] The new addition will add 157 square feet on the first floor and 210 square feet on the second floor.

[48:40] The total living area will increase to 2776 square feet.

[48:45] Since the succeeds, the maximum floor area allowed for this parcel as per Title 17 and has a second story component, the project requires approval from the design review board.

[49:00] Thank you.

[49:01] Okay, very good.

[49:05] Make sure your mic is on and introduce yourself and proceed.

[49:09] This is on there. Yeah, Chris Cotrell Architect. This is I guess you've all been up there.

[49:17] Look at 180. Oh, thank you. Yeah, you get to present upside down.

[49:24] That's perfect. That's great. Everything life is up there. Okay.

[49:27] This is between Cathedral Oaks and Fairview. It was a development. It was all two story homes.

[49:35] We are proposing, first of all, the owners are out of town, they apologize for not being here, they wanted to be here.

[49:42] She's retired judge in a sports enthusiast, so she wants to build a study.

[49:47] He wants her to build a study to house her memorabilia.

[49:51] So that's what this is and to do some work.

[49:55] So go ahead and say, okay, there you go, you got it.

[50:00] The addition is proposed in the rear of the house. If you've been there, if your is here, the addition is back here. It is actually shielded by the house. It is a two-story addition. We're adding about 150 square feet on the first floor and 200 square feet on the second floor. All materials to match existing. Let's see if I can show you where this is. Yeah, okay. So this little notch is this pen. Okay.

[50:27] It doesn't matter.

[50:29] Okay, yeah.

[50:30] This little notch is kind of what we're infilling right here.

[50:34] It's kind of a dead spot anyway.

[50:39] So we'll be taking out that little blank on this word.

[50:46] Thank you, Bay Window right there.

[50:49] Yeah, and then it'll be a straight stack to story.

[50:52] These plans printed really lightly.

[50:55] So I apologize if they're, oh, you can kind of see them.

[50:58] You can kind of see them.

[50:59] Okay.

[50:59] This is existing.

[51:00] So you can just ignore that.

[51:02] And then this is proposed.

[51:04] So you can see that the two addition is just stacked right on top of each other.

[51:09] And then, electrical, we don't need to get into yet.

[51:14] So these are set up where on this side it's existing, on this side it's proposed.

[51:20] So obviously from the front of the house you're not going to see this at all.

[51:24] in the back it's going to the windows will match existing. We'll have slightly

[51:28] lower slope roof and back there to keep it tucked away. But the eaves all match

[51:34] up. And the same on this last page. It's just the same match all existing

[51:40] materials. On our screens that was a red line it was easier to see. Yeah. I didn't

[51:46] realize we didn't have digital presentations. Next time I come I'll bring you

[51:50] color brands.

[51:54] Well, next project.

[51:59] Okay, I think it's pretty straightforward so I'll just leave

[52:01] it there and ask any questions. Okay. All right, do we have any public comment on this one?

[52:10] Thank you, Chair. I have no public speaking subs. And if any attendees on the Zoom webinar who

[52:17] wish to speak on the site, please use the raise your hand icon and I will call on you.

[52:20] I'm

[52:29] seeing no hands, Chair.

[52:30] Okay, very good.

[52:31] And we'll proceed with questions.

[52:32] Tamiya, questions for the applicant?

[52:35] Yes.

[52:37] I'm sorry.

[52:38] I'm not a professional.

[52:39] So sometimes I have trouble understanding blueprints and floor plans.

[52:44] So I'm just trying to understand the bottom floor is where the primary bedroom is.

[52:48] And there's an adjacent bath and closet there.

[52:53] What would be there?

[52:55] Will that remain once you add that or is that going to be expanded also?

[52:59] Yes, the existing lower floor stops right here and this was just a family room.

[53:03] So they're basically just expanding the family room downstairs.

[53:07] So it's not a change in use down there and then upstairs this was void.

[53:11] So this becomes that new office.

[53:13] Okay, I see. So that is actually downstairs is what I was looking at downstairs.

[53:18] Just a bigger family room.

[53:19] Okay, and so then again upstairs, I guess the trophy room would be adjacent to the primary.

[53:26] Correct, yep, upstairs.

[53:30] Okay, that's it for me, thanks.

[53:33] Okay, Dennis, questions?

[53:35] Well, I share, remember, Schumacher's,

[53:37] puzzlement with reading the plans.

[53:41] As a gesture, it seems very simple and straightforward.

[53:44] But when I look at your site photos,

[53:49] and it would help if we could zoom in on that.

[53:51] I don't think we can.

[53:53] I'm looking at the west side of the residence

[53:55] and the southwest.

[53:57] It looks as if at the second floor

[54:00] there's about a one foot bump out.

[54:04] That goes away.

[54:06] Correct.

[54:07] Yep.

[54:08] And then likewise, that the second floor above the garage,

[54:14] It extends out over, okay, it's a lot more complex than one would first.

[54:21] I think those are my only questions.

[54:24] Thank you.

[54:24] Okay.

[54:25] Martha, do you have any questions?

[54:27] No questions.

[54:29] Jim?

[54:31] I'm fine with the proposed plans.

[54:34] First and second floor.

[54:35] I understand kind of what Chris is trying to do.

[54:39] My question is about the floor area.

[54:42] Yeah. You are proposing to increase the floor area above the allowed maximum. Am I right?

[54:51] It's just that triggers design review. It's not a maximum for zoning. It's just it's triggering

[54:57] design review.

[54:57] Right.

[54:58] Yeah.

[55:00] That was my other question. Thank you. Cecilia, any questions? All right, let's move to comments. Do you have any comments? I wanted to pick up a question of member Van orders to staff. So am I correct in understanding that it is currently above its allowable maximum floor area? It is per the parcel size of 7,405 square feet. The maximum allowed for this parcel size.

[55:30] per Title 17 is 2,281 square feet. With the addition on the first and second floor, that would increase

[55:40] the floor area to 2,776 square feet, therefore exceeding the maximum allowable by 495 square feet.

[55:51] So are garages included in that calculation?

[55:54] In the floor area, I know accessory structures are, yes, garages are included in the floor area calculation.

[56:01] So in my ballparking, it sounds like this would result in a 30% exceeding the maximum.

[56:09] Approximately.

[56:11] Yes, but I will say because there's a second story component, it's not necessarily expanding the building footprint, it's more adding to the building volume.

[56:22] both the 1st and 2nd 4th and 2nd yeah is this characteristic or uncharacteristic of this

[56:29] neighborhood?

[56:32] Is that a fair question or is that more planning?

[56:41] I think the characteristic

[56:42] of the existing dwelling, you can't see it from the streetscape per se. As far as our charge

[56:50] is concerned I was just wondering if all the other neighborhood houses are existing,

[56:58] exceeding the maximum floor area.

[57:00] That I don't know.

[57:02] I'm just making a curious assumption.

[57:04] All right, that's my question.

[57:06] Thank you.

[57:07] Okay.

[57:08] Comments, Tamecia?

[57:10] No comments, thank you.

[57:12] Okay, Dennis?

[57:13] Well, I'm wondering about the impact on the neighbor.

[57:16] And when they did a virtual inspection, it doesn't look like it would impact the neighbor that much.

[57:24] although I would like the additions to reflect more of the existing Indian

[57:30] outie of the building rather than just walling in that corner. Maybe it could be

[57:37] offset a little here and there just so that original character wasn't

[57:43] completely subsumed. Thank you. Martha? I would say I find it completely

[57:53] acceptable and in a way improves the house which is pretty complicated to start with so I think it

[58:02] looks just fine. Jim? Thank you.

[58:12] I would agree with Member DeGase's comment. I think it

[58:17] regulates I think the any outy is a little odd. I don't see a major impact to the backyard neighbor.

[58:25] I drove that street as well as the front of the view of Huron, so I think it's acceptable.

[58:35] Thank you.

[58:36] Cecilia, any comments?

[58:38] I like what Mr. Hand order had to say about it, but it's kind of my feeling so it's okay.

[58:43] Okay.

[58:46] Yeah, I guess I can concur with them.

[58:50] I think the fact that this is tucked behind it, it makes perfect sense.

[58:54] And the way you had the low slope roof, when it's all said and done, nobody'll know.

[58:59] And there's, you know, with the tree to the west, you know, it further hides seeing that bump out.

[59:10] So I don't have a problem with it, I think it's well designed.

[59:16] Any other comments?

[59:18] There was someone like to take a shot at a motion.

[59:22] I could take a stab at it.

[59:24] Okay.

[59:25] I propose that the board adopt the project as proposed, including the California Environmental

[59:35] Quality Act findings as per attachment name and the categorical exemption as per attachment

[59:47] and that the board, well, I guess I would pose take a straw poll, this is for conceptual

[59:52] preliminary and final. So I would propose approval for final, conceptual

[1:00:00] Assembly, and final. Okay. We have a second. I second. Any discussion? Okay, we'll vote with roll call, please. Thank you. Member Van Order? Yes. Member DeGasis? Yes. Member Brown? Yes. Member Schumacher? Yes.

[1:00:19] Yes.

[1:00:20] Vice Chair Wheeling?

[1:00:21] No.

[1:00:23] Chair Branch.

[1:00:24] Yes.

[1:00:25] All right.

[1:00:26] Thank you very much.

[1:00:27] Thank you so much.

[1:00:38] All right.

[1:00:38] That's will take us to our conceptual preliminary calendar.

[1:00:42] I think I want to take just a quick two minute break because we're going to have some biggies

[1:00:47] after this.

[1:00:48] So we'll be back in two minutes.

[1:01:04] Okay.

[1:01:04] I'd like to call the meeting back to order.

[1:01:07] And we left off at item C1.

[1:01:11] Thank you.

[1:01:11] So, that's 7513 Carlisle Way, APN 079-454-004, residential addition and setback modification,

[1:01:24] case number 26-0021-DRB, 26-002-MOD, 26-0013-LUP.

[1:01:38] Thank you.

[1:01:38] Very good.

[1:01:39] And declarations from everybody for site visits, Tamecia?

[1:01:43] Virtual site visit, no exparte.

[1:01:46] Dennis?

[1:01:46] Virtual site visit, no exparte.

[1:01:49] I had virtual site visit, no exparte, Martha?

[1:01:52] Virtual site visit, no exparte.

[1:01:54] Jim?

[1:01:55] Site visit, no exparte, and for full disclosure, the applicant is a former employer of mine.

[1:02:01] Okay.

[1:02:02] And Cecilia?

[1:02:04] Virtual site visit, no exparte.

[1:02:06] Okay.

[1:02:06] Very good.

[1:02:08] Kelly, the floor is yours.

[1:02:10] Thank you, Chair Branch.

[1:02:12] Hello, everyone, members of the board.

[1:02:14] The proposed project before you today is for a residential addition,

[1:02:19] totaling 800 and two square feet.

[1:02:22] And accessory structures consisting of two patios and one trellis,

[1:02:27] totaling 626 square feet.

[1:02:30] The applicant is seeking DRB conceptual and preliminary approval

[1:02:35] for a modification to reduce the rear setback from 25 feet to 16 feet to allow a small portion

[1:02:43] 42.7 square feet of the addition to encroach into the rear setback.

[1:02:50] The addition complies with all applicable residential district development standards,

[1:02:55] including floor area ratio, height, front and interior side setbacks, except for the rear setback

[1:03:02] within the RS zoning district, the two patios and trellis meet the development standards

[1:03:08] for accessory structures, including the front interior side and rear setbacks, and that

[1:03:15] concludes staff's presentation on the project back to you, Chair Brandt.

[1:03:18] Thank you.

[1:03:18] Okay.

[1:03:19] Very good.

[1:03:20] Welcome.

[1:03:20] Make sure your mic's on and state your name and proceed.

[1:03:24] Press the, where's the, there you go.

[1:03:27] Okay.

[1:03:27] I'm Dennis Thompson, I'm the architect for Holly Adams, John North and their two kids.

[1:03:35] Holly grew up in this house, went to Dos Pueblos High and has raised her family in New York.

[1:03:40] She just inherited the house and she and John want to move back next year hopefully and make

[1:03:47] the house over for their family.

[1:03:50] It's a 65-year-old house, and I think it's pretty much reached the end of its useful life.

[1:03:58] So we'll be taking it down to the studs, adding insulation, new windows, all new finishes.

[1:04:06] The house itself right now is a three-bedroom, 1,400-square-foot-one-story house, and to make

[1:04:13] make it into a four-bedroom house, we're adding about 800 square feet on the back.

[1:04:19] And we're stepping in from the existing house to follow the current setback.

[1:04:26] The adjacent house is quite closer to the street than our addition.

[1:04:31] This is a one-story addition to one-story house, very minor changes to the front of the house.

[1:04:36] So the reason we're here is because of this encroachment and this slight encroachment.

[1:04:41] The house doesn't have any dedicated outdoor space in the back right now, so this is patio and trellis.

[1:04:52] Here's the floor plan, 1960s, track house, three small bedrooms, two baths, kind of a wall separating.

[1:05:00] These rooms here, garage here at the street. This is the street side.

[1:05:06] So a minor addition at the kitchen that will follow this roof line. A small addition here for some outdoor storage outside of the garage. And then the main addition is 800 750 square feet here with a patio for this bedroom and a patio for the living space. Some reconfiguration of the rooms here.

[1:05:30] This is the best I can do for a street picture.

[1:05:33] There's some giant junipers, which the owners want to remove a bunch of cars from the father that they will remove, and the back of the house here.

[1:05:43] So a very simple house, and as I said, we'll be taking out all the windows, that's what's shown with dashes here.

[1:05:53] And here's a street facade, similar front doors, actually the exact same front doors for sentimental value.

[1:06:02] this arch, sentimental value, once again they want to keep a couple of new windows on

[1:06:08] the front, new roof, all new plaster, siding. This is not a perfect rendition of

[1:06:14] colors but basically it's kind of a tan with white windows, these are fiberglass

[1:06:23] windows, a single roof and one color for the front doors. The

[1:06:33] trellis, and that's

[1:06:35] That's it.

[1:06:37] All right.

[1:06:39] Very good.

[1:06:40] Do we have any public comment?

[1:06:44] Thank you, Chair.

[1:06:45] I've always received any speaker slips.

[1:06:47] And for any attendees on the webinar

[1:06:49] who wish to speak on the item, please use the raised hand

[1:06:51] icon, and I will call upon you.

[1:07:00] I've not seen any hands, Chair.

[1:07:02] OK.

[1:07:03] Then let's begin with questions for the applicant, Tamisha.

[1:07:07] Yes.

[1:07:08] Yes.

[1:07:09] Could you play out exactly where the encroachment is?

[1:07:14] On a site plan, it's this triangle, and this triangle of the trellis.

[1:07:23] Yeah, the portion of the trellis said.

[1:07:28] Yeah, this is the setback line that's right here.

[1:07:31] Yeah, this is a pie-shaped lot, very difficult.

[1:07:34] A big back-yard setback on a triangular lot makes it tough to add anything.

[1:07:39] without blocking the the sun to the house. Well, you can't add anything on this line without the little encroachment.

[1:07:48] I'm also trying to understand. Thank you for that, by the way.

[1:07:51] I try to understand where I guess how the seat is the

[1:07:56] The street is set up. Is this in a cul-de-sac? Is that why it's triangular?

[1:08:01] You know, it's a it's a curve. It's not a cul-de-sac exactly, but they have a very narrow

[1:08:06] So street frontage and then expands back into a pie.

[1:08:14] That's it, thank you.

[1:08:15] Dennis, any questions?

[1:08:16] Yeah, just two small questions.

[1:08:18] Am I correct in understanding that the tralysis free standing

[1:08:21] doesn't touch the existing one.

[1:08:23] That's right.

[1:08:24] And then on sheet A3.1, I think you're there.

[1:08:28] There are different indications for wall finish.

[1:08:32] Is that new plaster versus existing or all new plaster?

[1:08:37] all new roof shingles. Well, am I missing? There's a texture here but not here. I see.

[1:08:46] We mean to show the new addition with a different texture. So that texture on each of

[1:08:54] the elevations is new. There's the kitchen bump out and the bedrooms. Thank you. I understand.

[1:09:01] Yeah, yeah. Martha, any questions?

[1:09:04] I have no questions.

[1:09:06] Jim, any questions?

[1:09:07] No questions.

[1:09:09] Cecilia.

[1:09:10] Okay, great.

[1:09:12] I don't have any questions, so let's move to comments.

[1:09:15] Tamecia.

[1:09:17] It looks like a really lovely renovation and really nice that she's trying to keep some elements

[1:09:26] of the home she grew up in, the door and an arch.

[1:09:29] which it would have been helpful to see how that will fit in with the rest of the homes.

[1:09:34] But other than that, I think it's a lovely idea.

[1:09:39] Okay. Dennis, do you have comments for Dennis?

[1:09:41] Yeah, but she's not keeping the trucks.

[1:09:45] I appreciate how the windows give of otherwise bland house a lot more character.

[1:09:51] It's perfectly fine and reasonable.

[1:09:53] and I think that they got the right architect for the job.

[1:10:00] Martha, comments? I think it looks very nice. And the encroachment, the setback is completely reasonable. That's a really deep yard. And I think it's a good use of the space and the outdoor spaces.

[1:10:16] Very elegant. So thank you. Jim, any comments? I would echo member DeGasis comments. It's nice. I think having driven by and looked at it. I think the neighbors will be very happy.

[1:10:32] It needs a bit of love, we'll put it that way, so thank you.

[1:10:38] Cecilia, any comments?

[1:11:02] I echo everybody else's comments.

[1:11:04] I think the addition is perfectly handsome and works with the house and I can easily support the encroachment in the set back.

[1:11:14] And I'm actually kind of glad that the junipers are getting,

[1:11:21] while it makes kind of an interesting arch,

[1:11:24] it's a little like, you know, going to Narnia to get to that house.

[1:11:30] So I think you've executed it well.

[1:11:35] So this is for conceptual preliminary.

[1:11:41] So now you're going to get your mod.

[1:11:43] So all right, somebody want to make a motion here?

[1:11:46] I'd be willing to make a motion, but a question to staff due to the agreement of the board members, can we make this final or does it have to have this set back mod?

[1:11:57] It needs to have the mod.

[1:11:58] So today, the action would be conceptual preliminary recommendation to the zoning administrator.

[1:12:04] All right, I will make that recommendation to the zoning administrator for preliminary approval and recommendation the adoption of the DRC and SQL findings and the SQL categorical exemption for the modification to the lot lines.

[1:12:27] and that we conduct conceptual and preliminary review and provide these comments to that aforementioned zoning administrator made that needlessly complicated.

[1:12:43] I'll second.

[1:12:45] We have a second. Any discussion?

[1:12:47] All right, we'll vote with roll call.

[1:12:52] Member Van Order.

[1:12:53] Yes.

[1:12:54] Member Tickases?

[1:12:55] Yes.

[1:12:56] Member Brown?

[1:12:57] Yes.

[1:12:58] Member Schemacher?

[1:12:59] Yes.

[1:13:00] Vice Chair Wheeling?

[1:13:01] Yes.

[1:13:02] And Chair Branch?

[1:13:04] Yes.

[1:13:05] Thank you very much.

[1:13:06] Okay.

[1:13:06] Thanks.

[1:13:07] A question to staff.

[1:13:08] So this item will be coming back on the agenda for final.

[1:13:12] That's correct.

[1:13:13] Right.

[1:13:13] There's.

[1:13:14] I just wanted to save them another trip back.

[1:13:17] But if that has to happen, so be it.

[1:13:20] Thank you.

[1:13:21] Thank you.

[1:13:22] All right, that'll take us to item C2.

[1:13:26] Thank you, Chair.

[1:13:28] Five, nine, five, five, Kyle, Real, Health and Development Project, case number 25-004-SUB,

[1:13:37] Investing, Tenant of Track Map, case number 25-0010-DP, Developmental Plan, case number 25-0044-DRB,

[1:13:49] Design Review Board, case number 26-0014-LUP, land use permit, case number 26-0015-LUP, land use permit, case number 25-004-PHA, preliminary housing application.

[1:14:09] Can you repeat those please?

[1:14:14] I'm sorry.

[1:14:16] Okay.

[1:14:18] Decorations from the board, Tameja?

[1:14:20] Site visit, no exparte.

[1:14:22] Site visit, no exparte.

[1:14:25] No additional site visit, no exparte.

[1:14:28] Site visit, no exparte.

[1:14:30] Site visit, no exparte.

[1:14:31] Is this here?

[1:14:36] Okay.

[1:14:36] Hi, Christine Ease, just in the nick of time, the floor is yours.

[1:14:43] Good afternoon Chair Branch and members of the board.

[1:14:46] I was watching from my desk, so I knew my item was on deck.

[1:14:53] The project before you is located at 59.55 Kaya Real.

[1:14:58] It's located next to...

[1:15:00] Mr. Bolero, Bowling, Alley, and Entertainment Center, just for reference to help you orient yourself. This project has a lot of different components to it. This project is a Housing Accountability Act project, known as SB 330. The project is using state density bonus law. All of those things have specific timelines and requirements. Staff has reviewed the project.

[1:15:29] for consistency with the city's applicable objective standards and today the DRB's rule is to provide a recommendation to the planning commission regarding the design findings and other design related comments and recommendation for consideration by the applicant and planning commission.

[1:15:51] Today's request is for a recommendation regarding conceptual and preliminary review.

[1:15:56] You may recall that this project was seen before your board on the July 14 meeting.

[1:16:02] At that time, the board had provided several comments on the design of the project.

[1:16:08] Some of the concerns raised at that meeting include the streetscape elevation, not having

[1:16:13] a unique identity.

[1:16:14] The amount of open space was not enough for the future residents, additional comments

[1:16:20] focused on the farmhouse design, which was thought to not fit in well with the surroundings.

[1:16:25] The board suggested a more varied and articulated architecture and color variation to be incorporated

[1:16:31] into the project.

[1:16:32] The board identified some of the landscape trees that may be incompatible with the local

[1:16:37] climate.

[1:16:38] The board suggested that the live work unit should have more identity.

[1:16:42] The board thought the aesthetics were too top-heavy while the bottom feels very dark aesthetically

[1:16:47] and had concerns with the colors and materials, just refreshing your memory on the July 14th

[1:16:54] The applicant since then has redesigned the projects with those comments in mind.

[1:16:59] They have submitted a specific page addressing those comments, which I'm sure the applicant

[1:17:04] and their team will be talking more about that was provided in the packet, so that's available

[1:17:09] available to the public as well as the board.

[1:17:12] Now on to the specific project.

[1:17:16] Projects total floor area would be 68,612 square feet.

[1:17:20] Comprising of 44, 3-bedroom, 3-bedroom, 3-bedroom, 3-bedroom units with attached to car garage,

[1:17:27] 2-3-bedroom, 3-bedroom live work units with also attached to car garages, a dog park,

[1:17:34] shaded picnic and grilling area.

[1:17:37] The project doesn't meet the city's requirements for mixed use development, open space standards, setbacks in landscaping.

[1:17:44] The entitlements required for this project are a tentative track map, design review, development plan and

[1:17:51] two land use permits for the live work units, and as mentioned the planning commission will be acting as the review authority on the project.

[1:17:58] They have asked for one concession and three waivers.

[1:18:04] Those are listed in the staff report.

[1:18:08] And the DRB can provide comment and

[1:18:11] input regarding design related matters on the project that do not reduce its density or

[1:18:17] differ from the objective standards.

[1:18:19] Those would be setbacks height, density, established by the city or

[1:18:24] Authorized by state law, such as density bonus.

[1:18:29] Sorry, I'm trying to summarize as well as I can.

[1:18:32] The environmental review for this project, the applicant has invoked Assembly Bill 130, AB 130.

[1:18:40] AB 130 establishes a statutory exemption for

[1:18:44] qualifying housing development projects that meet specific infill density and site eligibility criteria.

[1:18:50] This project, as staff has found to meet that criteria, so there are, so no further

[1:19:02] sequa analysis would be required of this project, sort of with a asterisks there.

[1:19:09] There are a couple of things that will be required on the conditions of approval for

[1:19:14] the project.

[1:19:15] the next steps for this would be planning commission hearing for review for all components of the project and with that I'll turn it back over to the board.

[1:19:25] I will be here to answer any questions on the project. Thank you.

[1:19:29] Okay. Welcome back. State your name for the record and proceed.

[1:19:33] Thank you. It's going to be back. My name is Nick Patterson with City Ventures. I do want to appreciate you guys taking the time to review this again.

[1:19:40] I know that's last time there's a lot of, you know, constructive criticism and we do take that to heart and we do appreciate you guys going through the project in such detail.

[1:19:49] And we feel that we've done that as we've gone back through the plans and really tried to, you know, meet all of your suggestions, recommendations, and hopefully...

[1:20:00] Resolve any concerns that there have been. To begin with, I'll just kind of go over high level site plan. Changes that we've been made. We also have our architects, Anthony Corbin from KTGY on the Zoom call. He's going to be speaking more about the technical elevation changes and differences that we have made from the previous farmhouse style to what we have today. So kind of going into just the site plan initially.

[1:20:28] I know a lot of the concern was regarding the live work units, which are along Kyrielle.

[1:20:37] So what we did here, they are still in buildings four and five in units 24 and 25.

[1:20:43] What we did here is actually shift the rest of the buildings a little bit farther south, six and seven.

[1:20:50] We were able to get a parking space in here to help with those commercial spaces to have a little bit close over walk for

[1:20:57] or anyone that is visiting those live work units.

[1:21:03] And I also just want to know these will be more so low intensity

[1:21:07] appointment only kind of commercial areas, like law offices or

[1:21:12] accountants and so there will be a little bit more planning that is done around it.

[1:21:16] But we did want to just make sure that we did get a parking space that was closer.

[1:21:20] And so we have been able to accommodate that between buildings five and six.

[1:21:24] A little bit more on those live work units.

[1:21:27] We have increased the patios just slightly to kind of create a little bit of a buffer

[1:21:33] for the rest of the residential units behind.

[1:21:35] And as well as give more of an outdoor fuel and outdoor use to those commercial spaces so

[1:21:41] they can have seating out there if they would like.

[1:21:44] And then we have in the landscape plan created much more of a buffer and kind of a landscape

[1:21:53] screening along these buildings, which really helps to block any public use that's not coming into the commercial spaces and not part of the residential project as well.

[1:22:05] So we've made those plan changes, just looking through.

[1:22:10] We have adjusted the building roofs as well to add more pitch and it did help lower the units just slightly.

[1:22:21] They are still about the 35-foot height limit, but they do have more slope into them and

[1:22:27] a little bit darker of a color here to kind of help break up that contrast, as well as just

[1:22:34] create a little bit nicer of a streetscape here. At this time, I'll turn it over to Anthony Corbin

[1:22:39] from KTGUI to kind of talk through a little bit more of the architectural changes, materials

[1:22:44] and elevations. Hi, good afternoon, everyone. Can everyone hear me okay?

[1:22:49] Yep, we can hear you.

[1:22:51] Awesome.

[1:22:52] Nick, do you mind flipping a sheet three, please?

[1:22:55] So that we can take a look at the design elements.

[1:23:01] So again, I'm Anthony Corbin with KTGY.

[1:23:03] I'm part of the architectural team for the project.

[1:23:05] It's nice to see everyone again.

[1:23:07] As Nick mentioned, the biggest change was the overall architectural direction.

[1:23:10] We heard the concern that the previous design felt too farmhouse driven

[1:23:14] and did not relate strongly enough to Kaya Real.

[1:23:18] So we were provided a recently approved retail project

[1:23:20] that helped guide us to a more contemporary, more progressive architecture the city was hoping for.

[1:23:25] So we use that as a design cue to move toward a cleaner and more contemporary residential

[1:23:29] expression that still felt appropriate for town homes while still relating more strongly to the

[1:23:34] commercial corridor. We refine the buildings with simpler compositions, stronger massing,

[1:23:40] warmer materials, and more deliberate articulation. We incorporated recess balconies,

[1:23:47] projecting wall planes, roof transitions, and material changes to help break down the longer

[1:23:52] elevations and create more depth and rhythm. The material palette was also refined to feel more

[1:23:57] cohesive. A dark brick base helps to ground the buildings while standing scene metal roof elements

[1:24:02] add variation and a more contemporary expression at the roof line. At the ground floor, wood toned patio

[1:24:09] walls introduced warmth and a more natural character while tying back to the horizontal fiber cement

[1:24:14] exciting. So the overall confidence is still felt coordinated rather than piecemeal.

[1:24:20] We also focused heavily on the live work frontage along Kairial. The ground floor,

[1:24:25] live work spaces are part of the residential units, but we gave them a more intentional street

[1:24:29] presence with storefront style glazing, integrated signage, metal awnings, trails and elements,

[1:24:36] and strong ground floor articulation. The goal was to create a more active and commercially

[1:24:42] compatible edge along Kairial while keeping the overall project

[1:24:45] bigger than the residential. Overall the revised design is intended to feel

[1:24:50] more contemporary, more cohesive, and more responsive to the character of Kairial.

[1:24:55] We appreciate the board's previous feedback and look forward to your comments on the revised.

[1:25:01] Thank you.

[1:25:04] Thank you very much. Anything else you'd like to go over?

[1:25:10] Okay. Do we have any public comment? Thank you, Chair. I have not received any speaker slips. For attendees on the zoo webinar who wish to speak on the item, please use the raise hand icon, and I will call on you.

[1:25:31] There, I see no hands. Okay, so we'll get into questions. Tamisha, any questions for the applicant?

[1:25:37] Thank you.

[1:25:38] No, thank you.

[1:25:40] Dennis?

[1:25:42] A question for staff.

[1:25:45] Under the state bonus density law,

[1:25:48] I assume that there is a maximum number of public meetings.

[1:25:53] If so, which meeting is this, Ms. McGuire?

[1:25:58] Thank you, Vice Chair Whalen.

[1:25:59] That is through the SB 330 that the applicant has on file with us.

[1:26:03] There's a maximum of five public hearings.

[1:26:06] This is hearing number one.

[1:26:08] Since last time that you have reviewed the project, the project has attained completeness.

[1:26:15] And so now once the project is complete, there's a five, a hard and fast five public hearing.

[1:26:22] And that does include any potential appeals.

[1:26:26] Thank you.

[1:26:30] Martha, any questions?

[1:26:30] I do have a question, and it's also for staff, and it's regarding the shading calculation.

[1:26:41] I don't recall exactly last meeting if driveways were included in the requirement for shading.

[1:26:50] Can you answer that?

[1:26:52] Thank you, member DeGasis.

[1:26:53] I do recall that from the last meeting and Miss Prassie and I were looking through our code to find out if that was included and the driveways are included as part of that.

[1:27:09] So a question to Mr. Patterson, then you're shading calculation sheet, the number of which

[1:27:17] I don't recall, does not account for the driveway having shading, which I'll reserve

[1:27:27] what I think should be done for comments, but I think it's a separate sheet you have there

[1:27:34] that indicates shading on the parking spaces only I think and I do have another question

[1:27:47] that site plan related if you could flip over to any of the site plans and it's there's

[1:27:56] a nice maybe the landscape plan if you don't mind that

[1:28:10] will work along with the wall

[1:28:13] plants there's the common space area is here and then there's also an area that

[1:28:22] appears to be walled off the wall diagram indicated that the CMU block wall

[1:28:31] was has a little terminus here and here is that space designated to be

[1:28:38] Anything in particular?

[1:28:41] Yes, so on the end, these lighter green areas are the patios, the outdoor patios there.

[1:28:49] So these walls are about 36 or 40 inches for patio walls there.

[1:28:56] And this is just open space.

[1:28:58] There are air conditioning units that are down there and it's kind of the end of the drive.

[1:29:04] So it's not going to be used as part of any private space for these two units there.

[1:29:09] Okay, and on your wall-infencing plan, it did look like it was the concrete block wall.

[1:29:16] That would be along the property line here to just help give some division and some privacy

[1:29:22] and security against the car washlets.

[1:29:24] Okay, and if you turned to your wall plan, maybe I was just reading that wrong.

[1:29:29] It looked like it was the heavy red line that

[1:29:33] indicated the perimeter wall,

[1:29:39] yeah, these two little wing bits here, and there as well.

[1:29:44] Yeah, those should be blue, and I believe this one down here as well.

[1:29:49] Okay, so that's just a little drafting thing.

[1:29:52] And then also on, if you could flip back to the landscape site plan.

[1:30:01] So these little planters that are at the dividing line between the garages, those look like they're about four feet wide and deep, something like that. Maybe a little more.

[1:30:21] Yeah, these little, they're these, they're these little planters at each unit. Garage units.

[1:30:30] But I'm just going to go back to the street scape here there, that street scape because

[1:30:40] you have this overhang, you just have shrubs there as I understand it so.

[1:30:49] Correct.

[1:30:49] It was just to help with an initial drive in, I believe, a comment in the previous hearing

[1:30:56] was that there was just a lot of massing and a lot of it kind of felt like a

[1:31:02] canyon that you're driving through I think and so we just wanted to include

[1:31:06] plantings through here to help kind of break that up and soften the drive.

[1:31:10] And it appears that the shrubbery that's proposed there is something that might be

[1:31:16] three feet tall or so. Yeah it would be like a potted plant or a potted shrub

[1:31:22] that does not reach to the, to the overhang there.

[1:31:27] Yeah, and the overhang would completely cover

[1:31:29] that planning area or partially cover that planning area.

[1:31:35] The projection of that story above the garage level

[1:31:38] is to the curb.

[1:31:41] Correct.

[1:31:42] Yep.

[1:31:42] OK.

[1:31:44] I think those are what I have.

[1:31:48] OK.

[1:31:48] Jim, any questions?

[1:31:49] questions. Yes, thank you. At the last hearing, I seem to remember the request coming up

[1:31:58] for a view of the project as it faces Kyrie Al. Do we have that?

[1:32:04] We do not. No, it's not part of the, they're underings there.

[1:32:08] There's a reason why.

[1:32:11] I do not believe so.

[1:32:15] Okay, so yeah, I just didn't get done.

[1:32:19] Can you turn to the cover sheet with the image?

[1:32:26] Would it be fair to say that the part of the two structures there on the right of the

[1:32:35] image adjacent to the road would be indicative of the elevation on Chyria?

[1:32:43] you're referring to these. Yes, this would be Kyriell here as you're and this would be a project

[1:32:49] entrance driving in. So while we don't have a straight-on elevation we do have a perspective

[1:32:54] view of the view of Kyriell. Correct.

[1:33:03] See, I'm telling off of another question that was asked by

[1:33:08] Remember the gazes you you responded that part of an open area public open area was for air conditioning units.

[1:33:16] Are there any roof mounted or are they all going to be sight mounted?

[1:33:21] They're all sight mounted and so they're shown kind of on the sides of the buildings.

[1:33:26] This was done so we could have more pitched roofs here before we had mechanical wells.

[1:33:32] And so this we're able to bring the building heights down a little bit as well as

[1:33:37] add more kind of undulation to those roofs and then all of those air conditioning units will be

[1:33:42] screened with landscaping for many public right away and something that we've done before we've

[1:33:47] with other landscaping or kind of other materials that we can there. So they're dispersed we're

[1:33:53] not looking at farms of correct to use. I think the max is four that it will be together

[1:33:58] at that point you just run into different issues with running air conditioning lines across multiple

[1:34:03] different homes. Right. Yeah. Yeah. It becomes infeasible.

[1:34:11] Okay. That's it. Thank you. I'll reserve

[1:34:13] the rest for comment. Cecilia, any questions? Thank you. On the eastern side of the project, there's

[1:34:25] I thought I saw a fence someplace in the.

[1:34:28] You're referring to the back.

[1:34:30] Was there.

[1:34:32] On this.

[1:34:33] Oh, the side.

[1:34:35] Sorry.

[1:34:35] The background.

[1:34:36] Can I make sure you're speaking in the secret.

[1:34:38] But it's

[1:34:44] not working.

[1:34:45] There's no fear to be.

[1:34:53] So is it a fence?

[1:34:55] What is the?

[1:34:56] Oh, sorry.

[1:34:57] I didn't understand the question.

[1:34:58] Yeah, it is.

[1:34:59] Zah!

[1:35:00] It's a block wall. Oh, I, because I saw a fence someplace in the, in the drawings, I thought. Yeah, what is, is that? So this block wall here is what runs along the Eastern property line, Eastern Western, Southern. And how, how high is that block wall? That is a six feet tall. So how far is that block wall from the residents? I don't know the exact measurement, but at least

[1:35:30] five feet, sorry, are you asking from the edge of their patio walls or from their front doors?

[1:35:37] I don't know, what is the difference?

[1:35:38] Well, there's about six feet of depth for each of the patios.

[1:35:42] So I would say from their patio walls, it's probably, you know, it's five to eight feet and

[1:35:48] then plus another additional six feet from their front doors.

[1:35:51] Can I ask you why using a block wall on that side?

[1:35:53] Yeah, given that it is a commercial area, with all this parking that's here for the commercial use here, you're not going to want to put a slatted fence like this, that's leaking in lights and

[1:36:07] fuels front doors, just adds a little bit more privacy as well.

[1:36:11] No, it's too.

[1:36:12] Yeah, going through.

[1:36:15] Okay.

[1:36:15] I'd like to ask you a question about the landscaping at the front.

[1:36:19] One of the diagrams that I saw shows that there are, I guess they're trees, I can't really

[1:36:24] tell, I don't have this looking.

[1:36:27] And the question is, it looks like because these projects are what, ten feet from the sidewalk,

[1:36:34] I guess, on Kairial, right, they're ten feet, or is it ten feet from the curb?

[1:36:38] 10 feet from the curb.

[1:36:39] Okay.

[1:36:40] So from the sidewalk.

[1:36:41] From the sidewalk.

[1:36:43] From the sidewalk.

[1:36:44] You know what?

[1:36:45] I can't see where you're pointing.

[1:36:46] Sorry.

[1:36:47] Can you move that?

[1:36:47] I can use that.

[1:36:48] Oh, it's off screen.

[1:36:49] Yeah.

[1:36:49] You need to move that.

[1:36:50] There.

[1:36:51] Okay.

[1:36:51] So here you have.

[1:36:53] And these are, I presume, trees that are that you've got planted here.

[1:36:56] Correct.

[1:36:57] These are trees.

[1:36:58] Okay.

[1:36:59] So these trees.

[1:37:00] Is this shrubbery going to be covering Kyriel at maturity?

[1:37:05] What's happening here?

[1:37:06] Are you saying if there's going to be overhanging as it's kind of shown in this?

[1:37:11] I would imagine so, I mean, we don't have that calculation, but what we do is we plant

[1:37:15] mature trees along this.

[1:37:17] So we'll eventually, when they do grow, there could be overhanging along Kyriault.

[1:37:22] That can be part of an of maintenance agreement.

[1:37:24] I'm just going to make a comment, because I walk this area a lot, I'm a walker.

[1:37:28] So it's a problem when there is vegetation in the sidewalk area, because then you're walking

[1:37:35] around it and it shouldn't it shouldn't be that way and that's going to be my

[1:37:38] comment here so I don't know what you're going to do what your what your plans are

[1:37:41] for that particular area but that's it's going to be my comment because that's a

[1:37:44] big thing because I'm always dodgy landscape when I walk around yeah completely

[1:37:48] understanding okay and the other question so not a no fence and the other than the

[1:37:58] so ten feet from the sidewalk you have these trees and what else is in that

[1:38:04] in that area, right at the front.

[1:38:06] Yeah, so showing along here is actually kind of a hedge

[1:38:11] that's all, that's going to be all landscape,

[1:38:14] all plantings here.

[1:38:15] That kind of just helps give this yard here

[1:38:18] a little bit more of a private feel that people can use.

[1:38:21] Oh, wait a minute.

[1:38:21] I thought these were the two commercial units at the front, right?

[1:38:24] Correct.

[1:38:25] They're the live work units.

[1:38:26] So there's going to be a hedge that sort of separates them

[1:38:28] from the sidewalk.

[1:38:30] I guess I'm having.

[1:38:30] Yeah, so to access them from the outside, you can walk down the sidewalk here, but it just gives a little bit more privacy

[1:38:37] For people if they are using these they are still the can be used as homes

[1:38:42] So just want to have

[1:38:43] Kind of the best of both roads there

[1:38:47] So is there is there going to be any gate in the block walls to allow people some people who live in this sort of

[1:38:55] I don't know the southern part of this project

[1:38:57] So they won't have to walk to the front if they want to go to the bowling alley.

[1:39:02] They could go through a gate to the-

[1:39:04] There is not currently a gate proposed in the block.

[1:39:08] So on the other side is going to be also a block wall, the entire length of the project?

[1:39:13] Correct.

[1:39:14] Yes.

[1:39:15] Partially due to this easement that's going to be remaining that's used for egress,

[1:39:21] for the car wash and gas station there.

[1:39:23] I just want to provide safety for residents as they're walking around.

[1:39:31] Those are the only questions I have for Nell, thank you.

[1:39:34] Okay, let's move to comments, Tamisha.

[1:39:39] Hi, I did have one question.

[1:39:42] The horizontal sort of accent area that you have in front of all of the units.

[1:39:48] What is that going to be made of?

[1:39:50] Is it building material question on the elevations, do you mean?

[1:39:54] Yes, yes.

[1:40:05] Are you talking about this material up here? No, down on the kind of front. Oh, this? The fence or the? Yes, not the green. The brown horizontal separation kind of. Yes, so that's going to be a wood fence. There. The height of that I believe would be 36.

[1:40:31] Okay. And the wall surrounding the property is going to be made of, what, cinder block, or?

[1:40:42] Not cinder block, it's a split-face rock and it comes in many different colors and kind of styles.

[1:40:52] Okay, so something a little decorative, not correct.

[1:40:54] Yeah, it's not in a way.

[1:40:56] All right, so my comments are that this definitely to me,

[1:41:01] at least looks a lot more interesting

[1:41:03] than your prior design.

[1:41:05] I do appreciate the kind of visual interest

[1:41:10] with the balconies and looks like little pop outs

[1:41:13] of things and there's balconies.

[1:41:16] And my only concern is those, you know,

[1:41:20] everyone right now loves these horizontal fences.

[1:41:23] I'm just curious, you know, what that's going to be made of because over time I've seen

[1:41:28] them warp and look kind of, you know, five or ten years down the line, it doesn't look

[1:41:33] as nice and trendy.

[1:41:36] But I'm also a little disappointed that it's still so dense, but I understand that's how

[1:41:44] you make money.

[1:41:45] It would be nice to see a little bit more green space and more of our neighborhood feel

[1:41:54] versus just kind of, you know, rows and rows of buildings basically.

[1:42:03] But I do like also the changes you've made to the unit in the front, the live work unit.

[1:42:14] A little concern that it's so close to the sidewalk on Caliareal, but if it's supposed

[1:42:20] to be perceived as a business, maybe that's not so bad either.

[1:42:25] And that's about it.

[1:42:28] Okay.

[1:42:29] Dennis Cummins?

[1:42:30] Yes.

[1:42:31] A question for staff.

[1:42:33] Ms. McGuire, you mentioned concessions and waivers.

[1:42:36] Could you specify what those are, please?

[1:42:42] Thank you, Vice Chair Wail.

[1:42:43] And sure, I'd be happy to go over those.

[1:42:45] There is one, this project is eligible for one concession based on the affordability level

[1:42:50] that they have proposed.

[1:42:52] They are choosing to use their one concession to increase the inclusionary housing ordinance

[1:42:58] quantity of very low units, from 2.5% to 5% and lower the quantity of low income units from

[1:43:05] 5% to 2.5%.

[1:43:08] That's just math and money.

[1:43:12] So that's one concession, they have asked for three waivers.

[1:43:18] The three waivers are exceeding the height limit by four feet to a maximum of 39 feet.

[1:43:25] Actually, I apologize, I think the maximum is now 38 feet.

[1:43:31] 38 feet, I'll have to make a note to update this.

[1:43:35] I did not note that with the revised changes.

[1:43:39] So normally the height is 35 feet in this zone, and the maximum height they're proposing is now 37 and a half feet or 38, 37 and a half feet.

[1:43:50] So two and a half foot height increase, reducing the common bicycle charging outlets from five to zero, that still remains.

[1:43:59] Reducing the parking lot, heat island standards, previously they did add a little more to that.

[1:44:07] They went from 40% to 56.9% and those are the waivers.

[1:44:16] Again, those things are not, they deviate from the city standards but

[1:44:21] they can't be considered for year purposes or the planning commissions purposes.

[1:44:28] as they can't be deemed to be incompatible with the general plan or the zoning ordinance

[1:44:34] because it is a state waiver.

[1:44:36] Very good, it's very helpful, thank you.

[1:44:43] I can't support this project as proposed as none of the major issues that we addressed

[1:44:49] were really, I think, substantially addressed such and the biggest one is the open space.

[1:44:57] There's really...

[1:45:00] None.

[1:45:02] And that didn't change and wasn't addressed. I mean, there's a token strip on the

[1:45:09] side next to the car wash. I just don't think that that's an appropriate open space for

[1:45:16] such a dense housing. The streetscape at the Kaya Rail, yes, you did address that, but

[1:45:29] But it has a wall in front of it and it was only the ground floor for my impression or my interpretation of the comment was that the entire three story facade should have a distinct and unique identity.

[1:45:45] I

[1:45:49] don't think the architecture has been articulated and changed that much.

[1:45:56] As Member Schumacher said, it's an awfully dense proposal.

[1:46:03] I don't see how that the design is compatible with its neighborhood or even Galita.

[1:46:12] you moved away from Galita Farmhouse to more something you characterized as modern farmhouse.

[1:46:24] I'm just not sure what that is.

[1:46:28] I just don't agree with the aesthetics and the density which I think is, which is not part

[1:46:37] of our purview, but those are my comments.

[1:46:43] Yeah, I appreciate the change in materials and the color, the change in the color ways.

[1:46:50] I think that's a big improvement, the siding, board and bat siding and so on.

[1:46:56] I think where last time that pediment or lower floor dark material seemed a little offensive,

[1:47:07] I think now it seems to support the materials better

[1:47:11] and reflects the roof color in a nice way.

[1:47:15] I like the storefront windows on Kairial and the 10-foot

[1:47:21] planning area, of course I always wish they were more.

[1:47:25] I think one thing that was a little disingenuous on both the cover sheet

[1:47:28] and this view is that we're looking at the project

[1:47:32] as if we're seeing it from the backyards

[1:47:36] where I would like to see the imagery reflect what we're going to see from looking down

[1:47:49] that driveway area from Kyrie, and again, it's going to look really severe, I think, and

[1:47:58] And if we go to the landscape plans maybe, and I'm going to continue to harp about

[1:48:04] this shading requirement for the driveways, which is not met in any way, you've been

[1:48:13] very careful about doing your shading calc on the parking lot and so on, which you're met,

[1:48:19] of course.

[1:48:20] but I think this is going to have a very severe effect with all the garage doors opening

[1:48:28] out onto that central drive and no treescape at all. And my comment would be if there's

[1:48:36] any way to get your shading requirement met by trees along there, I think it would go

[1:48:50] I think the plant pallets find, I think the building materials in the wall materials are

[1:48:57] fine.

[1:48:58] I think the fact that you have eliminated the uplating is great just using pedestrian scale

[1:49:05] ballers is an ice idea.

[1:49:10] It looks like the dog area maybe you shrank in order to get that extra parking in before

[1:49:21] before I don't need to go into that again.

[1:49:26] People currently, I believe, are parking along the edge.

[1:49:32] Right there, yeah.

[1:49:34] And that's going to be eliminated.

[1:49:36] I think it's maybe good to point that out.

[1:49:41] Yeah, it's too dense.

[1:49:43] I don't know what we can do about that.

[1:49:44] Their hands are kind of tied with that,

[1:49:46] but I think you can do a lot by

[1:49:51] softening that effect from Kaira, when you come back, I think we're all gonna want to see what that's like.

[1:49:58] You did a fly-over before.

[1:50:00] Or I think, did you? Or was that your other, did you do the little fly by or was that your other project?

[1:50:08] Yeah, so yeah, we're going to want to see what that's like. Looking down that driveway. That's all. Jim. Thank you. One of the comments that I specifically was interested from our last view or our last

[1:50:29] meaning was would it look like from Kyrie Al and that's why I asked about it when we were in the

[1:50:36] question period.

[1:50:40] While the rendering on the front side is appreciated it's also very telling.

[1:50:48] Before I get into that I will say I do appreciate the looking at the materials,

[1:50:53] making some adjustments but if I could if you could turn to that front side

[1:50:59] to make a comment? Yeah, the cover sheet.

[1:51:05] I appreciate the attempt, and I do mean that

[1:51:10] very strongly attempt. I don't think it was very successful to sort of push and pull

[1:51:14] the elevations specifically as it presents itself to the public side, which is Kaya Rial,

[1:51:20] but I don't think it's enough. I don't think it's proper. You've got these gable ends, which

[1:51:26] which feels very residential that don't face Cairo Real and then you've got this flat

[1:51:31] facade which doesn't evoke residential that faces really the public side of it.

[1:51:41] What's being presented to Cairo Real is to me a very urban look, not Galita and there's

[1:51:49] nothing about Galita that is urban.

[1:51:51] And I would appreciate a little lower pop-outs on the second floor here and there.

[1:52:03] But it's just a very weak gesture, we'll put it that way.

[1:52:13] I think it's not really, I don't really like the term modern farmhouse.

[1:52:20] to me, every farmhouse when it was built was modern.

[1:52:23] At the time, it was built.

[1:52:26] So I really hope I don't hear that term again

[1:52:29] relates to this project because it has nothing

[1:52:31] to do with farmhouse.

[1:52:34] I think I would agree with Member DeGasis

[1:52:36] comment about the shading along the driveway.

[1:52:38] I think that it's definitely needed.

[1:52:42] It's going to help this.

[1:52:44] Now, as far as materials, I appreciate,

[1:52:46] which I mentioned before, I appreciate

[1:52:48] the move towards materials and looking at some other projects in the area where the

[1:52:54] materials were reviewed by the board. But on the third level here, why is there

[1:53:02] plywood between the two tall windows? To me, that's exactly what that looks like

[1:53:07] and that is not a good look. I think I do think there's a missed opportunity. Again,

[1:53:14] And with these, you're turning a flat facade to the public where you have these nice

[1:53:20] cushion poles of gables on the facade that is facing the parking lot.

[1:53:26] I think, you know, I'm not here to design it for you, but I don't know why you can't

[1:53:32] treat that side of the building in a similar fashion.

[1:53:36] It just, these buildings look like a run-on sentence when it comes to facing Kyrielle.

[1:53:42] And again, I'll repeat, you're presenting a very urban edge

[1:53:47] in an area that is not urban.

[1:53:50] So for those reasons, I don't support this project at this point.

[1:53:56] Thank you.

[1:53:57] Cecilia, comments?

[1:53:59] This

[1:54:03] project a lot.

[1:54:05] And my first thought is, it's just totally not compatible here

[1:54:12] because it's all commercial.

[1:54:13] And here we add an element of residential units, which there's kind of like no connection

[1:54:21] with anything there.

[1:54:26] So I don't know how you go with that, but it's just, I mean, you know, and landscaping,

[1:54:33] the landscaping, I'm thinking along, Cairo, you know, what's going to happen to that over

[1:54:37] time?

[1:54:38] Nothing.

[1:54:38] It's not going to grow.

[1:54:40] It's not going to.

[1:54:40] You can see it.

[1:54:41] There's no buildings landscaping along the frontage along Kaya Rio.

[1:54:47] Well, I don't think the banks do, but they've got a big setback at the front.

[1:54:53] I do think it's better this particular site plan than your first proposed.

[1:55:00] But I just, I just, it doesn't work for me in Galita. It's just, maybe we're different here. I don't know. I think when people see this, they're going to freak out. What, what is this? And there's been some comments by members of the board regarding that.

[1:55:18] I don't know. I, I would hope that it would be something that would be more integrated with the area and I realize the area is just all commercial buildings made of block and concrete. I don't know. There's, there's not much character.

[1:55:32] And this certainly is going to be a lot of character.

[1:55:39] I'm kind of lost for words, describe how I think about this.

[1:55:43] And I think people are, I think the board has done a really good job of that.

[1:55:51] Chairman, just one last, previous meeting I made the comment, while we cannot comment specifically

[1:55:59] on those elements which fall under the state density bonus, I remain, my comment remains

[1:56:08] from prior is that while the number of units and all of that that's fine but the

[1:56:16] citing of the buildings I commented on that the last time it is too close to

[1:56:21] Cairo. It's much too close I was there yesterday I took a picture of the

[1:56:26] story poles it's frighteningly close and those are just two poles with some

[1:56:31] with some flags in between I I shuddered to think what that's gonna look like when

[1:56:36] that's built, if it's built the way it's presented right now.

[1:56:39] So, I would encourage to step it back if you can,

[1:56:43] maybe the upper floor, or somehow address the side.

[1:56:47] Sorry, I just wanted to mention

[1:56:47] that my previous comment about building location.

[1:56:51] Thank you.

[1:56:52] Yeah, use, use, please.

[1:56:54] Yes, thank you.

[1:56:55] So, considering my colleague's comment

[1:57:00] about how close it is to Cairo, you can step that thing back.

[1:57:06] The dog park to me next to a freeway, I'm a dog owner, you know, I wouldn't take my dogs

[1:57:12] out of there.

[1:57:12] It's kind of a funky place and it just, it seems to me that you could, you could push

[1:57:18] those buildings down and give some relief to and provide a little bit more there at the

[1:57:22] frontage because ten feet is nothing and you're going to have trees that are anyway.

[1:57:29] So I would request that you look at the landscaping that you're going to have along the frontage

[1:57:34] year so that it doesn't intrude with people walking on the side, walking people are going

[1:57:38] to be walking there and it looks like you've got some big shrubs or I'm not sure what they

[1:57:42] are.

[1:57:46] All right, I'm going to chime in and probably be a little contradictory to what some people

[1:57:56] have said, but I don't know what architectural style I would categorize this as, but somehow

[1:58:05] Now it's interesting to me, although it looks like it's more, I have to see it at a ski

[1:58:11] lodge or something, but it's cool, I don't dislike the vernacular, you're doing.

[1:58:18] That said, this and this against this kai reo is not effective and needs to be looked at

[1:58:30] for sure.

[1:58:33] But I still have the same problem that I had before and I can't, there's nothing

[1:58:40] that I can do about it, and that's the sighting of it and the canyon that is going to be

[1:58:48] down looking down there, and I think there's probably a reason that we don't have a perspective

[1:58:53] looking down that, because there's no way to make that look great. And I know we need housing,

[1:59:03] But I'm going to go back to a positive, this, what you did here is kind of matched materials

[1:59:10] in quasi-style of the, all the improvements they're doing to the Kaya Real Center.

[1:59:17] And I can see that and I appreciate that.

[1:59:22] But the site feels overbuilt and not, I don't feel the site plan is friendly for living

[1:59:36] there.

[1:59:37] So, I'm having a problem with, I guess, neighborhood compatibility, because I can't say anything

[1:59:43] about densing density or any of that stuff, so it's the overall compatibility and while

[1:59:50] I know we need housing, this feels like too much in a small space and I can kind of...

[2:00:00] I can't support it. So, so those are my comments. Anybody else?

[2:00:10] All right, so this has comments

[2:00:14] and now goes on to planning commission. You only have a couple of meetings left, right?

[2:00:20] Yeah, thank you, Chair Branch and members of the board. At this time, it seems like we have

[2:00:28] a little bit of a mix from the board, but given the SB 330 project with five meeting

[2:00:34] limits, the next hearing will have to be the planning commission. So you all can choose

[2:00:40] to recommend approval, recommend with your comments at the planning commission and see what

[2:00:48] happens at the next level of review.

[2:00:51] But we can't like recommend to planning commission that they reduce density, that's off the table.

[2:00:56] Correct. That's off the table, but some of these other comments that I've been taking notes on, we could incorporate as part of your recommendation or, I guess, as part of your referral to the planning commission.

[2:01:14] And I mean, do I understand correctly that, you know, whatever, whatever the motion is, whatever we, whether we approve it or approve with comments,

[2:01:25] or not approve it, it's still moving on.

[2:01:30] Right.

[2:01:31] That's correct.

[2:01:32] Regardless of what we say.

[2:01:34] Yeah, it's not a great feeling to articulate that or to think about that, but yes, that's correct.

[2:01:40] The next step on this project will need to be the planning commission.

[2:01:44] And so in your motion today, you can pass on whatever you would like to the planning commission.

[2:01:50] and Christina you can correct me if I'm wrong but I do believe you need to

[2:01:54] recommend approval with conditions or suggestions or denial not not just

[2:02:02] pass along your comments and you know the planning commission they're the

[2:02:06] decision-makers for design as well you're the recommending body so they can

[2:02:12] weigh what you say in their overall decision of the project so your options are

[2:02:18] approval, as is approval with your comments for some changes and or denial.

[2:02:27] Okay. Those are the recommendation. And then after the process goes through the planning commission, it does come back to DRB for final.

[2:02:36] Acknowledged, okay.

[2:02:39] And at that point, when it returns from planning commission, should there be no appeals on the project, we would still have three more meetings.

[2:02:49] available to the project.

[2:02:51] Okay.

[2:02:52] Miss Chang, if we were to recommend denial,

[2:02:55] would it include comments such as that we've made?

[2:03:00] Yes, you're reasoning for denial.

[2:03:02] And even better yet, if you can tie it to the findings,

[2:03:06] neighborhood compatibility, architectural design,

[2:03:10] you know, that would be the way to,

[2:03:13] if you do move forward with the recommendation for denial.

[2:03:22] You want to someone want to take a stab at a motion maybe a bad choice of words. I didn't mean that I

[2:03:36] Will take a stab

[2:03:39] Probably a dull knife, but I'll try it anyway. I

[2:03:44] Would recommend that the board

[2:03:49] Excuse me just getting my bearings there

[2:03:51] I recommend forwarding to the planning commission with the following comments that the applicant

[2:04:03] study the street frontage of the buildings along Kyrielle.

[2:04:09] Look at the shading aspects on the drive.

[2:04:15] consider the Board's comments regarding material specifically the wood, the use of wood

[2:04:26] siding, which I think I commented looks like plywood, to look at that, to study potential

[2:04:36] softening of the building facade as on the sides of the building is going down the

[2:04:44] drive aisle up there isn't. There's to study options to soften those elevations and

[2:04:53] to and I urge the applicant with this one strongly consider.

[2:05:00] Marching forward are not strongly considered. The siding of those buildings in relation to the sidewalk of Kyrie, I'll be the separation.

[2:05:13] Along with, and based upon the, the, the findings that the project currently does not is not compatible with the neighborhood in its size and bulk use of material.

[2:05:32] materials, site layout, orientation of structures,

[2:05:38] choice of materials with the surrounding neighborhood

[2:05:45] is incompatible.

[2:05:48] So we want to second that.

[2:05:50] I'll second.

[2:05:54] Any discussion?

[2:05:55] Yes, I have some comments.

[2:05:57] I didn't hear whether this was recommend approval

[2:06:01] or denial, Mr. O'Connor.

[2:06:03] I did recommend the Nile.

[2:06:06] Recommend the Nile, thank you.

[2:06:08] I would also include mention of, in terms of neighborhood compatibility,

[2:06:14] a lack of open space.

[2:06:17] Thank you, yes.

[2:06:19] Agreed.

[2:06:20] Still second.

[2:06:21] Still second.

[2:06:22] All right, then that will vote with roll call.

[2:06:27] Thank you, Chair.

[2:06:28] May we have an order?

[2:06:29] Yes.

[2:06:30] Yes.

[2:06:30] Remember to gaseous?

[2:06:31] Yes.

[2:06:32] Remember run?

[2:06:33] Yes.

[2:06:33] Remember Schumacher?

[2:06:34] Yes.

[2:06:35] Vice Chair Wheeling?

[2:06:36] Yes.

[2:06:37] And Chair Branch.

[2:06:38] Yes.

[2:06:40] Okay.

[2:06:41] Sorry, man.

[2:06:52] Now that takes us to, I think, our last item.

[2:06:55] Item D1.

[2:07:06] Thank you.

[2:07:09] That's 77780, Hollister Avenue, APN 079-210-056.

[2:07:17] Golly to the self-stores, case number is 24-002-DP-24-001-CUP-24-0011-DRB.

[2:07:34] Okay, declarations by everybody, Tommisha.

[2:07:38] Oh, you have to recuse, she's in the penalty box, she has to recuse.

[2:07:44] Okay, Dennis.

[2:07:46] I am familiar with the site and have visited and had no expertized discussions.

[2:07:53] I've visited the site previously, no expertay, Martha.

[2:07:57] Previous and no expertay.

[2:07:59] Jim?

[2:08:00] Site visit, no expertay.

[2:08:02] Cecilia?

[2:08:02] No additional site visit, no expertay.

[2:08:05] Very good.

[2:08:07] Travis, the floor is yours.

[2:08:11] Thank you, Chair Branch Marshal of the Board.

[2:08:12] The proposed project is the Golida Self Storage Facility at 7780 Hollister.

[2:08:18] You've seen this project a few times now at the most recent DRB hearing on August 11th of this year.

[2:08:25] The board had concerns regarding building a second-story massing in height in relation to loss armus.

[2:08:33] And they also suggested removing the most Western building, building F.

[2:08:37] the applicant has heard your comments and has come back with a slightly modified design

[2:08:44] where they've removed approximately 950 square feet from the second floor of building A

[2:08:49] reduced its western end cap by 8 feet, it's eastern end cap by 2 feet.

[2:08:55] Additionally the western and eastern end cap heights of building B and C were reduced by 2 feet and 8 inches.

[2:09:03] The applicant is requesting preliminary design or approval recommendation to the planning

[2:09:09] commission.

[2:09:11] So if that happens, they will go to the planning commission and they will return for final

[2:09:16] after that hearing.

[2:09:19] I conclude staff's presentation and staff and the applicant team are available for any questions.

[2:09:23] Thank you.

[2:09:23] All right.

[2:09:24] Thanks.

[2:09:26] Troy proceed.

[2:09:27] Well good afternoon and good evening. My name is Troy White. We're GW Land Planning Development

[2:09:33] representing the owner and applicants. We really appreciate the DRB's comments over these past

[2:09:38] several hearings. We think we have a much better project as a result. We're excited to share the

[2:09:44] revisions that we've made to the project. Travis highlighted the changes to building A and also to

[2:09:52] I believe C. We'll also speak to Bill Enough,

[2:09:54] relative to Mr. Osis comments.

[2:09:58] We have our designer.

[2:10:00] Thank you, Phil Stephens here, who will show further the changes, and we're excited to share them with you. Thank you. Great. Good turn your mic on and introduce yourself and proceed. Great. To the DRB, my name is Phil Stephens, and I'm here to, like our planner said, and Troy said to talk about the modifications we've made. Thank you for your comments on building F and A and B and C. We've made modifications to some of those, and we're going to go over those now.

[2:10:26] So, what you have on the screen before you is building A, and we took a thoughtful approach to your comments to study the Western facade of that building.

[2:10:34] Like it was mentioned, we've reduced that Western facing gable.

[2:10:39] The peak element of the building down by 8 feet, and have taken another look at how the roof forms of the second floor relate, and we've additionally pulled those back as well, another 10 feet.

[2:10:52] So the building presents itself as a two-level building, a lot more than one large element.

[2:10:58] And so that feels a lot more pedestrian scale.

[2:11:02] And we feel like they're more compatible and attractive based on your comments with the surrounding

[2:11:09] neighborhood, and give a better presentation of pedestrian scale.

[2:11:13] I'll flip to this page here, talk about building F.

[2:11:20] We did look at building F a few different ways and we've prepared the exhibit before you which highlights kind of the main element being that the windows inciting and existing eucalyptus trees in addition with the layered landscape result in a really increased perception of depth.

[2:11:41] I'm amazed whenever we do designs with landscape,

[2:11:45] how another row with another mass with another edge and another plant start to really increase your perception of depth.

[2:11:52] And so the Euclip Districts with the additions that Aaron have made really increase that perception along with the understated design of the building and the layered landscape.

[2:12:04] We have the, we did study different ways of looking at that edge.

[2:12:11] We, you know, the elimination of building F, if it was reduced or removed,

[2:12:17] would be replaced with a wall similar in size and character to the proposed single story building,

[2:12:22] and wouldn't really have a significant visual impact or benefit to the project in that regard.

[2:12:28] And the second story views from the height away across the project

[2:12:33] still are largely screened by the existing Eucalyptus trees, which is a real benefit that are being preserved along the edge.

[2:12:41] So we're looking at the revised, we're looking at that element along this edge here as a pedestrian scale view of the building.

[2:12:49] And then just kind of little peaks at the top end are the buildings B and C, which we've also made the modifications that were listed.

[2:12:57] We have reduced those heights by two feet, bringing them down a little bit more, just trying to reduce

[2:13:03] wherever we can to make those elements feel rural and as incompatible with the views offsite.

[2:13:27] In this illustration here, we underscore kind of the differences between the second story element

[2:13:33] that is in the top view that was our previous submission. And then thanks to your comments,

[2:13:39] the result that we have before you at the bottom of the page is what we're presenting today.

[2:13:44] You can see it in all the views that we presented, but this one felt like it gave you the best

[2:13:49] expression of how those materials and building heights step back in a more residential way and how the windows and the material changes

[2:13:58] really underscore the bottom level and second level and that change in elevation.

[2:14:06] We'll go ahead and hand it back to Troy.

[2:14:16] One of the comments that we had had was related to, I think, what does it look like from the second story balcony versus the first?

[2:14:26] And so we do have some exhibits related to that.

[2:14:36] You want to look at building A?

[2:14:37] So there should be a, yeah, there's six

[2:14:48] roles.

[2:14:51] Okay.

[2:14:52] So we provided a revised cross section here.

[2:14:57] And same cross sections you saw before.

[2:15:00] So we have our northern cross section, if you want to point to the key legend in the bottom corner there. Northern cross section is located more or less with the center of building a. And then the southern cross section is the center line more or less a building f. So we want to demonstrate the separation of the high, this is loss armist, by the way. So the separation of the height of ways located to the west.

[2:15:29] and our buildings to the east.

[2:15:33] And so you can see there, we have a separation of about 90 feet plus minus depending on the section.

[2:15:40] So a very significant distance between our buildings.

[2:15:44] The importance of this exhibit is also, we wanted to be able to demonstrate that we've worked really hard to lower the stature of these buildings.

[2:15:54] As you may recall, we'd started off way back when with three story buildings.

[2:15:59] Reduce those to two story buildings and we've been further chipping away at that high.

[2:16:04] You can see in both sections, relative to the buildings,

[2:16:08] fronting Las Armas, building A, our building high is lower in stature than the one that exceeds the pieces of the portion of the building.

[2:16:20] I mean most closest false armors are below the heights

[2:16:23] of the two-story residential across the street,

[2:16:26] 90 feet plus, and then also relative to building up.

[2:16:30] You can see we've got a single story project

[2:16:34] which will be screened by the existing mature

[2:16:37] eucalyptus coupled with the additional landscaping

[2:16:40] that Aaron Carroll has provided.

[2:16:44] So anyway, just wanted to build it in straight.

[2:16:46] We've really tried to be thoughtful

[2:16:49] in terms of the separation of the properties

[2:16:54] and also relative to the heights.

[2:16:56] Let's also take a look now at the first and second story.

[2:17:04] Bill, yeah.

[2:17:09] Can I just, do you have any images

[2:17:12] without all the greenery?

[2:17:15] We have elevations, coupled in the balance, plans.

[2:17:20] So these are exhibits that we wanted to be able

[2:17:24] So in this particular image here, we were asking what does it look like from the pedestrian

[2:17:31] level, what does your project look like from second story balcony.

[2:17:37] And so you can see here that image on the top is what it looks like from across the street

[2:17:42] at the pedestrian level.

[2:17:44] So the building is sort of sunken from the street level and it presents fairly low and

[2:17:53] character about 21 feet or so plus minus at the, and that's set back further from the

[2:18:01] street.

[2:18:03] The second image on the bottom, so that's taking a look at from our neighbor's balcony,

[2:18:10] so what might they see, you know, at a slightly higher distance, and so you can see there,

[2:18:16] not a huge difference between the two, but ultimately what we tried to emphasize here is the

[2:18:22] The elimination of the initial boxiness, that was the concern of the DRB, the utilization

[2:18:30] of varied materials, the simplification of the architecture, the introduction of pitch

[2:18:37] group elements, and then ultimately, the reduction in the elimination of the second story

[2:18:42] elements, in addition, long ago, the third story elements, and really trying to present something

[2:18:48] that's much more human in scale.

[2:18:50] So that's building a, let's take a look at building F if we may.

[2:18:55] So this is building F, so this is center line of building F. Once again we have the pedestrian

[2:19:01] view on the top and then the second story view from at the bottom.

[2:19:09] So you can see here we've got, by the way, we're not trying to create any type of screening

[2:19:18] I mean, that's achieved by the, we have trees on the opposite side of the street as well.

[2:19:22] So, typically we'd sort of, you know, put some imagery there.

[2:19:25] But anyway, you're looking through the trees on your side of the sidewalk and then looking

[2:19:30] across the street, then you're looking through the existing mature eucalyptus that will remain,

[2:19:36] and then also coupled with the filling of the landscaping, you know, that, our landscape

[2:19:42] architecture and Carol's proposed.

[2:19:43] So as you can see here, building F as Phil alluded to, it's not terribly visible and that's

[2:19:51] by designing, by intent, trying to address his comments.

[2:19:55] We also took further to your comments.

[2:20:00] We took a look at, what does this look like at the second story level, you know, the balcony level, in terms of now you're elevated a little bit, you know, so what do I look? One of my looking at as I'm looking down into that, once again, you're looking through your own vegetation, then you're looking across 90 feet, then you're looking through mature eucalyptus, and then all the landscaping that would supplementing that. So you're seeing maybe a little bit more of the second story roof lines in building

[2:20:29] buildings, BNC, beyond building F, but it's not terribly visible.

[2:20:36] You'd also asked, Mr. Gassos, about last year, did you give any consideration to the

[2:20:43] second story of views, and I indicated at that point, well, it was primarily landscaping,

[2:20:48] but I want to revise my comment to add, you know, we spent quite a bit of time in addressing

[2:20:55] We've seen that second story architecture, you know, we had, if you recall, I can certainly

[2:21:00] bring out the images.

[2:21:01] We had steel rectilinear, three story buildings, those two buildings, and so we've made pitch

[2:21:08] roofs.

[2:21:09] Most recently, although it wasn't even a comp from the DOB, in studying the design, hey, we

[2:21:13] can even lower the roof line further by two feet and eight inches, so we've lowered the

[2:21:20] roof.

[2:21:21] We have pitch roofs.

[2:21:22] We've got windows.

[2:21:22] We've got inter-stream materials, so once you look beyond your own trees, on your side of the property of the street, and then you look through our trees, in our vegetation, and you're looking over a single story structure.

[2:21:35] You're looking at what I would argue is a tastefully designed building, so we've tried to be thoughtful in addressing the deer abuse comments.

[2:21:44] So I guess in summary, I'd like to just remind the DRB that we've through your comments,

[2:21:55] we've eliminated all three story elements.

[2:21:57] We've reduced the size of the product by approximately 37,000 square feet at this point.

[2:22:03] We've simplified the architecture.

[2:22:05] We've eliminated the initial boxiness of the buildings through addition of peak rail elements,

[2:22:10] windows, and barn door features.

[2:22:13] We preserved the existing mature trees along Las Armas and have integrated them into the landscape plan.

[2:22:19] We've also, more importantly, further reduced the building heights and massing along the Las Armas

[2:22:25] fronts says that we believe the product is compatible with the residential buildings across the street.

[2:22:30] These changes were made as a result of the DRB process

[2:22:34] and the project that you have before you now through our collaborative efforts through your comments

[2:22:39] is something I think we can all be proud of.

[2:22:42] Respectfully, therefore, we ask that the DRB

[2:22:45] recommend to the Planning Commission

[2:22:46] to adopt the findings of section 17.58.080

[2:22:50] of the Cleveland Municipal Code,

[2:22:52] included with the attachment A of your staff report

[2:22:56] and provide recommendations for preliminary design

[2:22:58] and review approval.

[2:22:59] This concludes our presentation.

[2:23:02] We really appreciate your comments today.

[2:23:04] We think we have a great project

[2:23:06] out of the results of this process,

[2:23:07] and we'd welcome any questions. Thank you.

[2:23:11] Do we have any public comment?

[2:23:16] Yes, thank you, Chair. I have one speaker slip, Robert Miller.

[2:23:21] And if anyone on the Zoom,

[2:23:23] a webinar would like to speak on the side,

[2:23:25] please use the raise hand icon and I will call on you.

[2:23:28] Okay.

[2:23:33] Good afternoon, members of the Design Review Board.

[2:23:37] My name is Robert Miller. I believe this was the third time

[2:23:40] I have paired before you on this matter.

[2:23:43] there. Thank you for listening. I submitted a letter a few days ago, I hope we've had

[2:23:48] a chance to consider it. I will not repeat everything I said in the letter. I simply

[2:23:53] can't believe the city would approve this project. And I don't think the city will. It remains

[2:24:01] an industrial style project in the middle of residential neighborhoods, a school, a nature

[2:24:09] to preserve senior citizens home and a golf course.

[2:24:15] Findings, as I understand it, you are required to find the project satisfies 11 separate

[2:24:24] findings in order to recommend approval to the planning commission.

[2:24:28] I submit that at least three findings cannot be made.

[2:24:32] Findings number one and three cannot be satisfied because the project remains not compatible with the neighborhood and its size, bulk and scale are not appropriate to the site and the neighborhood.

[2:24:47] As I explained in my letter, three large two story buildings averaging about 45,000 square feet each.

[2:24:55] In three large, one-story buildings, averaging about 7th.

[2:25:00] 2,000 square feet each are simply not compatible. In addition, approximately, 250 large garage doors, if I counted it correctly, represent a monotonous repetition and reflect the industrial style of this project. Finding number 10 cannot be satisfied because the project lacks sufficient consideration of the neighbors' private views. If this project

[2:25:29] is billed, it will fundamentally and permanently change the character of our neighborhoods.

[2:25:36] For these reasons, I strongly urge you to recommend denial to the planning commission.

[2:25:43] Thank you for listening to my concerns.

[2:25:46] Thank you very much.

[2:25:49] All right, questions for the applicant, Dennis.

[2:25:51] Yes,

[2:25:54] my question is kind of late to the game here, but did you investigate moving building

[2:26:02] F and appropriately building BC and E probably D2 to the East to alleviate that visual impact

[2:26:14] on Los Armas?

[2:26:16] We

[2:26:20] considered it so Vice Chair Whalen as you can see so

[2:26:35] if you look at the bottom image

[2:26:38] on this graphic here we have a separation of almost 96 feet between our buildings which

[2:26:46] is substantial not depicted here is our property line but if you look at where the location

[2:26:53] of our sidewalk is in relation to building up versus the sidewalk on the western side

[2:26:59] of Los Arras and the two-story building located there. You'll see that there's a very

[2:27:05] smaller setback of a two-story building right off of the sidewalk whereas we have a substantial

[2:27:12] setback. I want to say it's something on the order of almost

[2:27:20] 40 feet setback. So we've pushed

[2:27:25] the building back indeed, quite a bit from the property line, the setbacks recall in

[2:27:32] the general commercial zone district, which is the zone district where we're located,

[2:27:37] setbacks are 10 feet from property line. So we're nearly four times of the required setback

[2:27:43] and in a nod to the neighbor, rather than having a two story building for building F,

[2:27:50] We chose to have a single story building, something much more modest in height, and coupled with the other comments from our neighbors as well as from the board relative to, can you make some efforts to preserve some of the existing Eucalyptus trees along Los Armas and indeed we did so.

[2:28:09] So we did consider that.

[2:28:13] Thank you.

[2:28:19] I do for Mr. Lee, maybe. So it's a zoning is CG.

[2:28:28] Yes, that's correct. A general commercial.

[2:28:31] And then the Westmont project adjacent to it is also CG. Is that correct?

[2:28:40] I believe that's the assisted living. Let me just confirm that really quickly.

[2:28:43] It

[2:28:45] was just kind of an aside, other than that, I don't think I really have any questions

[2:28:53] exactly.

[2:28:55] Thanks.

[2:28:57] Jim, any questions?

[2:29:00] Yeah, just one.

[2:29:02] I was not in visit at the site yesterday, and everything better to do on our Labor Day,

[2:29:09] But I was struck, to be honest with you, I was struck at the top of law firm is looking

[2:29:17] down towards Hollister and I've got a photograph I'm looking at.

[2:29:19] I was struck as to which I'd never quite noticed the same, the power poles along there.

[2:29:29] And I read through the staff report, there's some additional planting that's going to be done

[2:29:34] in the right of way and as well as offsite,

[2:29:37] is there any proposal electrical undergrounding?

[2:29:41] So that was a question that was brought up

[2:29:44] at our last hearing and you may recall

[2:29:47] that if this was a matter of simple low voltage,

[2:29:54] but given that, it's feeding a major piece of land.

[2:29:59] So the long.

[2:30:00] That's sort of sort of financially it's in pieces. Yeah, understood. Okay. Thank you. That's all. Cecilia, any questions?

[2:30:09] All right. Do you have any comments?

[2:30:17] It's bored, long time, and all these big storage facilities are problems.

[2:30:24] I understand how the neighbor feels. I don't I don't live near any storage facilities, but I understand people how they feel about them.

[2:30:34] You know, for me, it's an allowed use. And I think the applicant has tried to

[2:30:39] to take into consideration the neighbor's concerns

[2:30:43] and in terms of the changes that they've made here.

[2:30:46] So I'm gonna support the project.

[2:30:49] Jim?

[2:30:50] Oh, we're going back on comments, okay, yes.

[2:30:53] Thank you.

[2:30:55] Yeah, I think echoing off of what Amber Brown noted,

[2:31:02] the applicant's been back, this is now third time.

[2:31:05] and each time they've listened to the board's comments, worked with our suggestions,

[2:31:13] and I did a quick calculation.

[2:31:16] I think I saw a reduction of almost 19% of what the square footage they came in with,

[2:31:24] close to 20%.

[2:31:26] You would basically lost 37,130 square feet as of my calculation.

[2:31:32] That's a significant reduction.

[2:31:35] I understand the neighbors' comments and their concerns.

[2:31:40] Again, it is it allowed use.

[2:31:44] I think that the applicants have really listened to what we've asked for, and they've really

[2:31:50] made some significant reductions and improved the project, not only in size book scale, but

[2:31:57] also in the materiality, and the screening I want to complement Aaron on his landscape

[2:32:03] plan, and especially because, as I mentioned, I was on Los Armas yesterday, and I would

[2:32:14] I took a picture from both sides of Los Armas.

[2:32:18] Number one you can barely see the power, the story pulse, as you are looking from the height

[2:32:25] the way side of Los Armas. Number two, as I mentioned, which is why I asked the question

[2:32:30] about the parapoles. That is more unsightly in my mind than the buildings themselves.

[2:32:36] That is awful. I wish there was a way to underground them. And then I was struck by my, as I

[2:32:45] turned my back to the project and looked at the height away, I was struck very strongly

[2:32:51] by the number of trees that are in the right of way, the Parkway, adjacent to the Hyde

[2:33:00] Way, which blocks views, which I think you mentioned in your presentation, you alluded

[2:33:05] to in your presentation. It's very true, really true. There's I think five buildings

[2:33:10] there. I think there's only three or four windows that actually are not blocked by views

[2:33:16] on the Parkway of Los Armas.

[2:33:20] And I go back to complementing Aaron Furs Landscape

[2:33:23] and in hiding this.

[2:33:26] I do find it to be compatible with the neighborhood.

[2:33:30] Size, bulk, and scale.

[2:33:31] We can talk about the number of doors.

[2:33:33] I heard the concern.

[2:33:34] But it is much, it's not as tall as the buildings

[2:33:38] at the highway.

[2:33:39] I think that the setback is really addressing that issue.

[2:33:43] It's stepped into the site.

[2:33:44] And so I complement the team for working with us on this and I can definitely support this project as it's presented.

[2:33:52] Thank you.

[2:33:53] Martha?

[2:33:55] I too am very appreciative of this sacrifice if you want to say that of lowering a building a and a bit of lowering a building.

[2:34:08] of, again, I think we all recognize the landscape superb and worked hard on that. I think the,

[2:34:22] I don't know if you'd call it outrage or anger from the neighbors is the fact that this

[2:34:32] This is zone commercial, and too

[2:34:38] bad that all the rezoning that went on with all this

[2:34:43] housing allocation didn't look at this property before this went forward, but that's

[2:34:54] the problem.

[2:34:55] and even the Westmont is also a zone commercial, I don't know.

[2:35:00] Anyway, I think that's what the the upset is about is that we've got a different zoning here on this parcel.

[2:35:12] That's all I can say about the comments, but thank you for all the changes you made. I know it cost you a bit. Dennis? Well, just to pick up on Mr. Gases, if we weren't such a big consumerist society that had

[2:35:29] all kinds of stuff to store, we wouldn't be in this discussion.

[2:35:35] I do think the project team has been very responsive to our comments,

[2:35:39] and it's a project that I can support.

[2:35:45] I agree with my colleagues.

[2:35:46] I can absolutely support this.

[2:35:50] If I lived next to this, a storage unit is a pretty low impact thing to live next to.

[2:36:00] So, and I think you guys have done an exemplary job of screening and reducing it and meeting

[2:36:08] the boards.

[2:36:09] Which is why the audience is going through it.

[2:36:15] Who's that?

[2:36:16] So, East Berlin.

[2:36:19] Anyway, I can support this easily.

[2:36:23] Someone want to make a motion.

[2:36:25] For a minute, too.

[2:36:27] It's for going to planning commission, right?

[2:36:30] Yeah.

[2:36:30] I'm

[2:36:41] getting the glare there, so I'm going to recommend to the Planning Commission adoption of the design findings and

[2:36:50] Recommend preliminary

[2:36:53] Approval to that said commission

[2:36:58] Can we get a second?

[2:37:01] I'll second

[2:37:03] Can you discussion?

[2:37:05] All right, let's vote with local

[2:37:07] Thank you, Chair. Member van Order. Yes, Member de Gastis. No

[2:37:13] Member Brown?

[2:37:15] Yes.

[2:37:15] Vice Chair Wheeling?

[2:37:17] Yes.

[2:37:17] And Chair Branch?

[2:37:18] Yes.

[2:37:19] Thank you.

[2:37:21] Thanks, guys.

[2:37:21] Thank you.

[2:37:22] Thank you for your work.

[2:37:24] It's a struggle, all right?

[2:37:28] Announcements by members and staff.

[2:37:30] Do you have anything?

[2:37:31] Chair Branch just want to mention to the board that we are canceling September 25th meeting.

[2:37:38] Okay.

[2:37:40] All right.

[2:37:40] Okay, all right. Thank you with that we are adjourned

DESIGN REVIEW BOARD

Transcript