So, I'll turn it on. Okay. Call the meeting to order the ESRP Monday, September the 9th, getting echo at 430 p.m. Can I have a roll call please? Members, Del Gavio, President, Tom Ra, President and Chair Lindsey. President. Members, Middleton and Tophter noted outside. Cute. Do we have any changes to the agenda tonight? There are no changes. Well, sorry. The item number one, the project for the designer view at Cognata corners 30, 30, 30, 36 to 36, 2, woodside road will need to be continued to a date certain of that being September 16th next Monday at 4.30 p.m. in this room. The reason for that is tonight we only have three members. One member has to recuse himself due to only property within 500 feet so we've lost a quorum for that item. Although we will have a quorum for the remaining items. So that item is continued to a date certain next week, September 16th. And then there are some desk items for each of the remaining items and the planners will address those but their presentations. And I do just want to make a quick announcement that we are very excited to announce Julie Patemean has accepted our, the job for the new planning clerk position. So she is now our newest part of the planning team. And Julie has actually worked for the town of Woodside for at least a year. So she was on the administration side and records management. So thankfully we're very excited and happy that she has joined us on the planning side. So just wanted to know that. Welcome. So again, just to reiterate, so we will not be discussing item one tonight, which is the parking that is correct and and for members of the public that maybe listen online or are here in person. All the desk items that have been received have been provided to the ASRB for that item, as well as we will be providing just an updated package for next week, which will be available tomorrow. Just a reminder for everyone in the room, if you have not yet, please remember to sign this sign-in sheet. So we have a record of who has attended tonight. If there's anyone in the public, either in the room or online who wishes to make a comment on a topic not currently on the agenda tonight, you are welcome to do so at this time. I see no one in the room standing up. Anyone online the hand up online there are no hands raised. Okay. I'll move on to the consent agenda. Are there any consent items for some? There's nothing on the consent agenda. So we just go into item number two. Okay. Right. Move straight into item number two. And this is up. Hardwick 110 hardwick is that correct? We'll make a point after every item to remind you. Okay we have a presentation from staff. Yes. Hello and thank you. Melanie Olson, associate planner at the town of Woodside. I'll be introducing the project at 110 Hardwick Road for an addition and remodeled to an existing single family residence with exterior design modifications and other site improvements for formal design review with ASRB. The applicant initially submitted the proposed plans as a building permit, but upon official initial review by town staff. It was recommended to be reviewed by the ASRB due to its design considerations that may contradict the residential design guidelines and municipal code regarding community character and building design specifically. There's one desk item added to today's meeting, which includes an email from the property owner, providing a report from the Woodside Hills homeowners association that states their approval for the project and signatures from adjacent properties shown they do not object to the proposed design. The properties approximately 1.12 acres and is in the SR zoning district as well as a part of the Woodside Hills homeowners association. the property has an existing main residence with an attached to car garage and accessory exterior garage will house and a swimming pool. The proposed addition and remodel mostly affects the front of the existing main residence that faces hardwick road and the side facing woodside drive which is shown in yellow and orange on the site plan provided. It also includes a new courtyard highlighted in blue that would include stone veneer wall that is about four feet tall, enclosing a seating area with the fireplace at the front and side of the main residence. The existing main residence is a ranch style that is understated with the hip roof and rectangular windows and doors. It has beige stucco walls and a cream colored trim. The proposed project shown on the bottom elevation is considered a bit divergent in its architectural style from the existing main residence. That includes a kitchen addition that would be tiered and may be considered bulky and would add an additional two feet in height that would increase the maximum ridge height from about four and a half feet to 16 and a half feet. It would include standing seam metal roof that would be adjacent to the existing asphalt shingle roofing, a new gable frame for the attached garage, as well as arched entryways, windows and doors. It also includes as previously stated and closed courtyard with round columns that wrap from the front of the main residence to the side, which are shown on the left side of the bottom elevation, where my cursor is circling. The rear of the main resonance is not changing much aside from the addition of glazing, which is shown on the bottom elevation on the left side. The west side facing the adjacent property on Hardwick Road does not have many changes aside from the new profile of the gable roof of the attached garage. Its materials would include matching the existing stucco exterior walls and a cream colored trim with the addition of gray, stone, veneer walls and entryways along the front of the property or main residents. The residential design guidelines and municipal code regarding evaluation criteria of building design and community character speaks to understated and cohesive building forms as well as rural characteristics. The residential design guidelines speak specifically to the use of simple massing to minimize bulk, being consistent with the architectural style and striving for simplicity. And here is a roof plan of the existing shown on the left and the proposed on the right, kind of more so showing the addition in the yellow with the tiered roof and metal roofing adjacent to the existing shingles. While the material of the materials of the project are mostly rural and matches the existing main residence in some areas, staff recommends the ASRB reviews the proposed addition and remodel and potentially provide recommendations that may better suit the existing building. For example, propose more of a dormer style kitchen addition instead of the ornate proposed addition and rectangular fenestration indoors that better matches the existing main residence and instead of round columns on the courtyard using square columns. The property owner is here in person and available for questions that concludes my presentation. Thank you. Is anyone on the board have questions for staff. There's one confirmation that cars within that. Correct. No questions. The new height of the addition. I think you mentioned 16 and a half feet. Yeah, approximately. That's still well below the. Yes, it is well below the maximum allowed. And none of the new footprint risks impeding on any of the setbacks. Correct. OK. I have no more questions. So we will move on to presentation from the applicant. Okay. It looks like that. Or the architect. The architect is not present today due to traveling and it seems the property owner. Would you like to go up and say anything? Our architect is on a plane. If you wanna step up to the microphone, thank you. So people on Zoom can hear. Our architect is on a plane for a long plan vacation. And he just, he said he would say that even though the massing is larger than it was the overall scale and scope of the project is still significantly less than what is allowed. And that the staff comment at the bottom of page four says that the project would be mostly compatible with the existing site and neighborhood setting. And we've been working on this for like three years and we just really love to get started. And we're trying to make it more attractive in addition to getting just a little bit bigger kitchen. Would you mind if we if anyone on the board has questions for you? Not on the of the architectural. If they're not tips and call you. You're okay. I'm curious the change in the architectural style. What might have, what was the influence for that? I, well, we, I should say, were just looking for something a little more attractive and interesting. It's, it's a like a French country feel and he came up with this and I'm blanking on the name of the style of the roof right now but he said it's very classical architecture that's been around for hundreds of years and you could find it anywhere in the United States or internationally. I mean, it's a pretty substantial shift in aesthetic, but you're preserving a lot of the same materials. Yes, nothing's changing with paint color materials. I mean, I think it looks a lot better. Don't you? I can't offer anything about that. I would say it's very comparable to the completely new houses that are going up in the neighborhood of which there are several. And you really can't see it other than from the very front. Nobody's going to see the sides or the back we have landscaping that hides most of the property. So and I don't think anybody would be offended by it. And our neighbors thought it was a lovely design. On the rear side, which I think is the west, west elevator east elevators. Yeah, no, that one there north elevation. I mean, you're adding a little bit of decimal glazing nuts. Okay. Yeah, there already is existing. Two sliding doors. And we're going to change it to like a nano wall because we're flip-flopping the rims. So, previous owners had done some internal remodeling and the house has what I would consider a bit of an awkward layout floor plan. And so if you're looking at the left side where there's a little person standing, that's the dining room now, which is far away from where the kitchen is. And on the right side is the, where the right windows are, is the family room. So we want to flip them so that you can go from your kitchen to the dining room. And then the the bifold doors will be for the family room area. Always a good opportunity to improve the flow. Okay, I have no other questions from the board. I don't know if there's any members of the public in the room they'll like to speak if so you can step up to the microphone. Yep. All right. Thank you. With that I'll close the public hearing and turn it over for board discussion to any of my fellow board members comments. I guess just being respectful of the sage and Melanie's comments about the round columns and roundedness of the windows arch over of the windows. How much does the applicant really love it? Does matter that much? So I can't I feel it's acceptable and it enables them to be personalizing their own home and I wouldn't object to that. I would agree and I think it's great that you reach out to your neighbors just to get them home and I think you know the screening that you have around and property is amazing. So even if there's a little more glazing on the windows, I don't think that anyone in the back couldn't see anything. So I think it's bringing it up to a little bit more of a modern feel than that. I think it's great. I mean, I might have gone with this square column instead of a ran one, but that's personal preference and not my house. Yeah. Yeah, from my perspective, I mean, it's a relatively small remodel and expansion of the house. I don't think it's as significant impact. I am a little hard pressed to identify the style. I think it's taking inspiration from multiple sources. At first glance, I would have called it more italianate than French, but that would be a limit in my knowledge. I don't have a strong opinion on column profiles, square versus round. As it pertains to windows and window arching, I think the direction they're going, as windows and window arching, I think the direction they're going, as long as they're consistent, I think that's what's important here. Nothing worse than shifting style and only implementing half of it. So it's good that it's throughout the entire home. But beyond that, I have no concerns about the project whatsoever. And I certainly respect the opinion of the Woodside Hills Homeowners Association Architectural So I would summarize it as I mean, in generally, we're receptive and we don't see any egregious departures from the design guidelines. Materials are consistent with the existing home. Very simple summary. No, I appreciate that. And so this is something that was just brought forward for design consideration and given that there are no concerns or recommendations for changes to the board, you could just make a motion to recommend approval of the project and think about it. And we do appreciate the story polls were installed. That's always so helpful. Do we have a motion? Take a motion, but at this point, we're not going to a formal review. It's correct. This is essentially a formal review. It didn't automatically trigger ASRB. It was just a unique design in which staff felt as appropriate to look at a recommendation from the ASRB. I'd like to make a motion that we approve this project and sit on the set. Second. Okay, we'll call member Delgabio. I agree. Member Arrest. Chair Lindsey. Yes. And members middlemen in top note. Open now. Great. The motion the motion passes and we'll sum out a letter detail in this action in the next day. So. Thank you so much. Hey. Before we move on to the next item, Sage, would you like to remind the room? Yeah, just for those that may have missed the very beginning of the meeting, item number one, the project at the Cogotic Corners Commercial Center, that item was continued due to a lack of quorum for that item. And it's continued to a date certain that being next Monday at September 16th at 4.30 p.m. And so we just want to remind folks if they miss that, they were only here for that item that that item will not be heard today. Item number one, the cognotic corner, it's the cognotic corner's commercial shopping center. It's 3036 to 3062 woodside road. And our reason for continuing that tonight is as we don't have or that's correct. Well, one of our members that is here tonight has to recuse given ownership proximity to the property. Okay, moving on to item three. This is 637 West Glenway. Hi, everyone. I hope you're having a wonderful start to your week. This evening I'm going to be introducing a project for you all at 637 West Glenway for conceptual design review. The scope of this project includes construction of a new single family main residence with an attached garage and partially delighted basement, new driveway and associated site improvements on a vacant lot located at 637 Pileskin, Glenway. In addition to the desk items that you were sent in advance of the meeting, the architect and applicant team has provided you an additional desk item, looks like this, just directly before the meeting, and they have indicated that this desk item is largely in response to community concerns expressed in the other desk items. So give you all a moment to thumb through that as we're going. But otherwise, there are two additional community centric desk items that were provided to you, both in the forms of letters from neighboring properties. One who asked the ASRB incorporate analysis of main residence placement, landscape placement, future funds and placement and future solar placement into their analysis of the project to help preserve view corridors and maintain wildlife passages within the neighborhood. And an additional letter expressing concerns with the alignment of this project to neighborhood context, the location of the driveway and potential light impacts associated with this project, just to highlight the solar and the lighting, infencing or not necessarily included with conceptual design review submittal, but pertinent to bring it up now just because there were community concerns. And then during review of a future application for formal design review, the town will determine if this project is subject to the California Environmental Quality Act. Here's the property that we're addressing today. The subject property is approximately 0.671 acres and with the southern and eastern property lines, and the site is currently undeveloped containing small clusters of trees along the northern and western property lines. The subject law was created via a lot merger in 2019, which combined lots 42 and 43 in block two of the Emeralds Hill, the Estates Emerald Hill Lake subdivision into a single lot. And the provider preliminary title report and topographic surveys have not identified any easements on the property at this time. The subject site ranges in elevation from approximately 754 feet at the northernmost property line to approximately 760 at the southernmost property line. The provided topographic survey does identify slopes in access to 35% north, southeast and south of the proposed main residence, the footprint of the proposed drive by and parking overlaps slopes in excess of 35%. The applicant has submitted a letter from Liam Braze Engineering, indicating that the proposed developments encompass man-made slopes, 35% are greater in existing paved street, and that the average pre-development slope adjacent to the existing street was approximately 31.9%. Should exhibits be available to affirm that, then that development would be permissible. Just as a little bit more of a project overview, the applicant is proposing construction of a new single family main residence side towards the northern rear property setback just as kind of additional information because we do have two frontages along West Glenway. This leftmost property line was deemed the front in order to maximize the space in the building on the loke. And the proposed main residence would be a two story home with a partially delighted basement and ake. And the proposed main residence would be a two-story home with a partially delighted basement and attached garage. The proposed main residence just dying includes both outdoor patios and decks directly adjacent to the structure, utilizing both covered and uncovered designs. The main covered entry porch is proposed on the southeast side of the main residence facing the proposed driveway. And the residents would be accessed from a proposed drive by entrance located adjacent to the intersection of West Glenway and Southdaleway. Although flooring calculations will be confirmed at the formal design review stage, the applicant has provided a preliminary flooring calculation for the main residents and have calculated a main residence size equal to approximately 4,168 square feet. Therefore, this would require the maximum main residence size exception during formal design review. Most of the main residence has been measured at approximately 28.91 feet in height at its most extreme difference between existing grade and the structures ridge, and is therefore compliant with 30 foot height and maximum main residence and the SR zoning designation. The proposed main residence does include a mixed materials palette consisting of standing seam metal roofs, horse lentiles, aluminum cloud windows, and horizontal timber tech siding. The provided digital materials board, which is shown right now, includes a color palette that has a variety of earth tone colors, primarily in shades of warm wood tones, charcoal grays, and off whites. The proposed project design currently does not require removal of any existing trees on the property. However, should trees be required for removal to accommodate the project's design, the applicant shall let us know during formal design review. Thought it'd be pertinent to throw in some preliminary landscape plans that the applicant did provide, although these are not required at conceptual design review. They did provide a preliminary for us to look at and, well, we're all chatting about this project. And members of the project team for 637 Westcum way are present at the meeting. Should there be any additional questions pertaining to the design and the project team will provide a brief presentation shortly. And staff is happy to answer any additional questions you have at this time. Thank you, Gilin. Are there any questions for staff? Um, um, is it solar and channel getting involved? evaluating the project at any point, right now, or what the other Yorker tech wants to solar? Yeah, so typically this wouldn't really be looked at until building permit phase, so it's wouldn't really be looked at until building permit phase. So it's not really anything we would analyze at conceptual designer view. Although I think that concern was brought up due to some preliminary conversations that the owners had had with neighboring properties, but it's not really something that we would look into deeply at this time. More so at the building permit phase. And I'll just add that there is, I don't know the exact requirements, the building code requirement, but there is a requirement for new residences to have some certain amount of solar on the building. So they will have to work that out with the building department, make sure they're compliant with those codes. Solar on the building? It's on the site, I know, to serve the residents. But again, it's more of a building code with regards to solar cities are limited. We cannot look at any design considerations related to solar. Due to the Solar Rights Act, it's strictly if they meet the health and safety requirements, it shall be approved. So that's why these details will typically be worked out with the building department. Could you tell me the additional documentation is there a change to this from what we looked at prior? Yeah, so in speaking briefly to the architect in advance, he indicated that these were exhibit documents, not changes to the provided plan set. And he did draw these up primarily to create a better distinction and increase visibility on where stuff such as the septic fields would be, where the driveway corridor is, and potential view corridors. So I think that's what he was trying to highlight here, although more detailed questions regarding his marked up exhibits. I'm sure he'd be happy to help address, but nothing should be changed in terms of what you've received. We're saying that they are asking for a maximum size exception. What are we talking about? I've only seen it. Yeah, so in terms of the maximum main resident size exception, that's a codified formula. So essentially we'll look at the combination of formula and the lot size and just ensure that their lot size is conducive to that increase. We had an ordinance passed and I believe 2017 by the planning commission that entitled those size exceptions. So as long as their law area combined with that formula and, you know, site details such as slope and natural state, things like that are compliant and typically that's not too much of an issue. It's more so property size. I guess the materials question. When looking at two by four is that they should tile on most of the building in these areas that have so much movement is. I didn't look at the look at the specs on a too far to see how thick that material was. Is that going to be cracking over time in that be consideration? Um, essentially, I'm not sure that's likely more building question in terms of the grading of the material and ensuring that it's fire compliant and all those other. The applicant might be the best answer. Can I have a question? Could you just restate the point you made with regard to what is defined as the front of the property? Yeah, absolutely. And the setback that's applied there. Mm-hmm. Absolutely. So here's the project site here. As we can see, this is a bit of a little twisted road here. We have Westclin way that actually runs along to property frontages. So in the case that there is a corner law, which this is the planning director makes determinations as to the property frontage. When analyzing this, we found that a 50 foot setback on this side of the property would significantly reduce the buildable land space on this property. So this was elected as the front in order to make sure it was fairly applied to other programs. And then you're back somewhere, and I just don't say it. It should be. Yeah. Oh, thank you. So what Jillian saying is correct is that when you have a lot that is as narrow on one side and longer on the other, usually the narrower side is best to be the frontage. Otherwise, you would see it create a very awkward billing envelope with this not being a rectangle. It almost create kind of this bow tie building envelope with a real pinch in the middle. Whereas any type of development on that property would be subject to some type of variance. So in this, it's more appropriate to scale the property and the development with the setbacks I've shown. So I understand the front is on the west side. Correct. And designating that part of the property as front has no bearing on where the driveway needs to be here. That's correct. It's strictly a development envelope. So you could have your address or door or driveway on different side zones. Question of that. The fence is that where is the fancy in regards to the completemate's ramps property? What's yeah, so there's existing Fencing along this property line. I can't tell if you can see my cursor, but that Fencing is actually regulated to adjacent property. So it's not affiliated with this property. And at this time, the applicant hasn't proposed Fencing for the project. They've only proposed a vehicle gate. Earlier iterations of this project did include fencing, which is potentially where Uber concern has emerged from. But at this time, there's only a vehicle gate associated with this project. And if there is a proposal for fencing, that'll be addressed at a later stage of review. Should they want to add that back into the project scope? And onit four, where it's calling out not counted in a couple of different places, is that due to the fact that it's under the above surface? Sorry, which exhibit exhibit four is one of the pages in our plan. And it says portion of the patio under the overhang and beyond the eight foot from face of the structure not counted and then below it says driving and parking not counted. Of those. Oh, for the paved areas a bit. So in that regard, we don't double count anything towards the TFA, the total flurry of a property. We don't double count it against paved area. So in the code covered patios that extend beyond eight feet from a structure are counted towards floor area, rather than paved area. So we don't double penalize that. So that's why that's been rubed. And then parking that is 50 feet beyond a structure, such as a main residence or garage is excluded as well to account for potentially long driveways and things like that. Of course. There's a fairly substantial amount of grading necessary to hold this project off. Is there a grading exception that's required for this? I believe that it was kept just below the thresholds for site grading exception. I can pull up the actual plan set right here. Where do? However, they are going to have to have a conversation with the engineering department as referenced in the staff report for this project due to proximity of grading to reliance. There are some components and they already have submitted some preliminary documentation for us like a line of site analysis and things like that. But that'll be reviewed in greater detail by the engineering department when that phase of the project comes up. But, Steve, one, thank you. How they would get it off the property is kind of unclear for us at this point because there's no road. Road first. Yeah, so in terms of site grading on this project, it would be 895 cubic yards and then just based on a preliminary look that doesn't look like it would need the cubic yardage grading exception. In addition, they have kept their cuts below 8 feet in depth. So this phase, a lot of the actual grading is affiliated with the building footprint in the basement, which doesn't necessarily more at greeting exception. The proposed finished grade of the driveway closest to the house. Oh, what that roughly what that is above the street grade. Yeah, I can up for you real quick. Believe it was about 713 was my recollection. Oh yes, 713. Right. The street is that at approximately 702703. 10 feet. All right. Good. I have no more questions. But he. Yeah. Okay. So with that, we'll move on to the applicant's presentation. Welcome. My name is Walter Chapman. I'm the designer for the project and the property owners are here as well to answer any questions. The exhibit that I like the bow tie description, I originally thought of it more of our glass, but it's definitely bow tie. But that was part of the challenge of designing a house on this site. So there's multiple challenges that I just want to bring up and that's what this exhibit was for. So whenever I start designing a house, the first thing we do is you'll see there's a purple line. That is the required building setback based on front, rear and sides. The other interesting about this property is this used to be two lots in an R1. So the houses built to join to this, their setbacks are half the size of what we're proposing because when it was an R1 you were allowed to build closer. So this lot being combined really doesn't mean it was at the S, when he said the S, S, R. So we're required to use the setbacks of an SR on a property that was really originally R1. So that was a challenge. So the first thing we did is we applied the setbacks and then the next question was, well, how do we get a driveway onto the property? What is hard to see here, the blue diagram helps. I'm sorry, the audience doesn't have benefit to this. We put the entrance to the driveway as close to the intersection because that was the highest grade of the road. So we didn't have to climb as high to get on the property by starting it at the highest level of the street. Then we also had to meet a fire truck grade requirement. In order to get a fire truck, we had to have a turning radius and a grade not over a certain slope. So the first things we did is the setbacks. The second thing we had to address was a driveway and a fire truck. Then after that, we had to address four parking places. So we figured out where to get those to work with a little bit of a hammerhead, why at the end of the driveway. So now we were getting somewhere as far as how to get on the property and where the building still would be was the challenge. You'll see there's an orange area towards what is the front of the property. That is the lower end of the property and we have to put in a septic field. You don't have sewer out here So you need to put the septic field at the lower end of the property so it can gravity feed and drain properly So once we put in the septic field placement that forced the house to quote the rear side of the property So that the septic field would work. We also have drainage requirements for runoff from the building, so we had to create the yellow area which is our drainage system. And you also need setbacks from your drainage system to your septic and your septic from the property lines. By the time we were done, we had a hole, like a peg, to put a house in. So that is why the house is placed where it is. However, that's actually a really good location for the house for a lot of reasons. The house is as low down towards the driveway as we could put it, because we didn't, we didn't want to go any further away with the driveway on the property. And that also places the house completely forward of the joining neighbors house relative to the street. So the second page that you see, I didn't have a chance to do it as formally because I was trying to address that today as I was preparing. There's a dual lines, blue lines. That is the view corridor that the immediate neighbor is concerned about. And that actually is missed. The house is set forward enough to West Glen Way, so that you have that view corridor. But the interesting thing is the orange line represents the rest of their view. The ridge of our proposed design is only at the back is only a 14 foot high building. All the height of the building is on the downhill side. So from the neighbors, what they see is a single story house, not a two story house. I was just up at the property today, standing relatively close to the property boundary. And I can see completely over the top of the proposed house. You can see the whole view of the Santa Cruz mountain range. There is no obstruction of view in that direction. And so the placement of the house, trying to work out access, septic drainage plans, we've managed to be able, ironically, to put it in pretty much the best location to minimize impact on neighbors. You will see the house, certainly, as you drive up West Glen, because we're closer to the street rather than further up the hill. The landscape plan that you saw, we were proposing landscaping around the house, not at the property lines. You'll see that we put the majority of the proposed landscaping to be around the house so that softens the home, but also there is kind of no point in planting further away from the building because native vegetation is going to be a challenge out there already. And as you know, the deer will keep the grass down on the septic field. So the placement of the house, we felt was the best corner in a sense of the property to tuck it in and leave as much visibility. But again, it was driven by fire truck, septic, drainage, all the things that we have to meet in order to get our approved building site. The civil engineers here is well today to answer any questions about the grading, those type of particular comments. We respect the neighbor's concerns about solar. However, there's two locations that we're looking at. We haven't worked with our solar engineer study yet. Over the drainage system, which is shown in yellow on my diagram, we can put in a solar array section down there, but we need to find out the capacity of that. The orientation of the house and the property itself doesn't lend itself to good solar orientation. It's just not face, we don't have enough surface area to accommodate it. Whether we need to expand that solar array, the area we have limited space to do so, so we have to work, sit down with someone and do a study on that. And we're certainly willing to try to work with the neighbors in how to soften any impact. One of the things with was brought up is that you're required to have solar on new houses. Both being all electric structure. Both my clients have health issues that need have the need of an elevator having the solar panels to run battery walls so they're not dependent on power outages. So that is a concern that we worked into the design. What you don't see in the design as well in an emergency is I made sure that from the back of the house, there's always a way to get out and meander all the way around the building to get to the ground level. Should there really be an emergency where they need to get out of the home that would accommodate their needs? So I think I'm running out of time. I don't quite speak as fast as Julian. That was, that was, anyways. I'm here for questions, so are the property owners. So thank you. Thank you. There may be questions. So that's a very good question. Mike, that's a slide. Does anyone on the board have questions or? Actually, I think that was great. All of that. But I'm getting that. The orientation of the building. Yeah, the orientation of the building is such that the majority of the surfaces, the hill slopes a certain way. And we're cutting the house and stepping it in shelves up the hill. So the orientation of the majority of the roof planes are pointing in a direction where they don't generate solar electricity. They haven't solved that one yet. The very few roof planes we have that do have the proper orientation. Won't generate enough panels to run the power walls and all the needs of the home. So that's why we're looking at the area further down the hill first, where the drainage system is going to be. You can build solar array structures over a drainage system. You can't build it over a septic field. Septic fields need to breathe and if you start building structures over them, they don't, they need sun as well. So I hope that answers it. It's all about Quantitive surface area to generate enough electricity and the orientation of the house just If if I were building on a different site we'd orient the house differently But we're kind of driven by the what we have to work with One question why are there on a seven which is your cuts? She your cross-section sheet. Yeah When looking at the steps that go down to the building, how will those steps be surfaced or what? What will they be like? You're referring to ones in the front yard. Because we have different steps that come from the entry down to the driveway, then we have other steps internally in the structure itself for the homeowners. It is section C dash C. Could you? Yeah, put that one up for me and I. Thanks. So we're not guessing. So on 7-1 shows the steps better because the steps turn 90 degrees and are now coming towards you on the paper. So you can see the driveway level is that lowest flat surface. Then we have the steps come up 90 degrees off the driveway, turn another 90 degrees to get up to that landing, turn another 90 degrees to get up to the front porch. So we did that in shorter lengths of steps so that there's natural places to stop instead of trying to climb a full straight staircase. I will be at this area near behind. Yes, near 200. We'll be like, can we see? Oh, no step there. Thank you. So those are the steps. I thought you were referring to like stairs steps you walk on. So each of these are terrorist areas. The coming out of the master bedroom wing, the primary bedroom wing, we wanted to be able that we didn't want to be looking at an eight foot retaining wall. So what we're looking at here is you have a little patio when you first come out of the building and there's going to be a little bit more than a seat height wall where there can be some landscaping. The next level up would be some bushes or short trees. So when you're looking out the back you're looking up at a landscape terrorist hill. So all of those are landscape terraces. And what's going to be planted in each of them we're still we have to find out depending on how we can protect the area. It's either going to have to be something indigenous that the deer won't eat, but the idea is in one of those levels, we would like to plant something tall enough to block visibility from the uphill neighbors from looking right into the house. So that was an interesting way of not embedding the house into a concrete wall, but to let also sunlight and air get into the back of the house. And so I thought it was a pretty, I thought it was a clever idea. They will be retaining walls. What material will be on them? But see they vary. The lowest one is down, and then you've got a slightly taller one. And we try to then terrace them and even lifts. And so what that is, it's basically a sunken garden behind the house. So outside of the sunken garden will just be natural grade and terrain. So the idea is to contain the landscaping in a hole. I have a couple of questions. Sorry. That's okay. This is good for my needs. You have nothing done. Is there a junior ADU incorporated in this slide? That is not planned. The way the house is designed, I mean, for the needs of the family, we do have the bedroom level is kind of split in half. You have the parents' wing and the daughter's wing. Then upstairs you have a guest bedroom. That is the way the house is laid out so that there's kind of zones within the house so that the family can take care of each other. But if someone ever wanted to make it a junior ADU in the future that, you know, that's an unknown. You always encourage them. Yeah, doing a lot of that. We did receive a desk item from a concern neighbor regarding headlights from vehicles traveling up the driveway and on the driveway. And so I that was the question. Reason I asked the question earlier about what elevation the driveway was at. I'm sorry, Don. Yes. As you're driving up the driveway to where the parking area is you are pointing directly out. So I don't I'm sure in the in the larger aerial map. That there is Kind of weather. I don't know what the screening is about as I recall being out there. There's a lot of trees all along 622 west Glen way. I'm thinking more of a scenario where the cars are approaching. They're up the driveway. They're approaching the house. If there's some form of either an Altarimeter wall around the driveway or or landscape screening. Landscapes cleaning certainly can be planted along the edge of the road. The interesting thing though is the if you think about when you're driving a car as you're coming up, the headlights are pointing towards 799 Glenn Craig. So they're kind of pointing out in space and then when you back out of the garage and drive downhill, it's not so you get the end of their driveway and you're pulling out that the headlights would point into anyone's property, but that's kind of normal. I mean normal traffic traffic of a vehicle, you are going to have some headlights. I don't think there's going to be that much traffic on the driveway. Okay. Can you speak to a little bit about material choices, sort of what your approach was there? Well, we wanted to put in some wood around the upper floor, because we wanted it to give a sense, essentially from the back of the house, the rear view, I think we had another rendering showing in the back. So we can start with that, you had a back view on the first thing you put up on the screen. Julie, there was a... So we've tiered the house. The upper floor, you can see on the back, has wood siding that wraps around. And then it comes around the front. So we have wood siding on. It's not, it's not true wood siding anymore. We've found that because of fire, we're using. TREX, actually, which is a deck material that's used in fire zones, wooey zones. So we're actually using the trex material on those upper walls. And we're using two colors of it. So it looks more like a natural wood instead of one solid color. The tiles themselves, when we thought about whether we started looking at stone as part of it, it was just too heavy, there was too much stone. So this will give you the effect of like a cut stone block that the house is sitting on top of. So the idea was to tear it so the lower floor is it looks like stone block, the wooden house on top. And then we did this standing metal same roof again for fire, but also it has kind of the agricultural look to it that you would see in rural communities. So that's how we took that approach. The idea of using the large tiles, I thought was actually rather creative, that was, came up with that one. So the, because of the large joints and the seams in it, if there were any movement or cracking it would basically happen at the seams. And it's certainly, one thing they didn't want to look at is trying to maintain stucco and have a big mass of stucco. We thought this was a, a software approach created some texture and wasn't as massive stucco. We thought this was a softer approach, created some texture and wasn't as busy as natural stone. So I'm waiting to see it in reality because I like the idea and I may use it again in the future. Can you just, this rendering, it's unclear exactly what two front columns that the front entrance are clad with? Those are gonna be clad with probably a black marble. We wanted something to distinguish the entry porch when you come up the driveway. And you can see the steps have the turns in it. You go up steps, turn, go up again, turn, and just keep working your way up there. So that there's soft series of lifts basically getting up the front walkway. But we wanted something also that tied in with the metal banding because we have the bronze anodized metal on the windows and we're doing the bronze anodized on the railings and so we did since again fire concern is we're doing a metal cladding on the edges of the balcony and the facial boards. So there is no exposed wood to maintain, especially when you've got to be up and down on that face. So it's all clad with metal cladding like the windows are. And once we had that much bronze anodized, it seemed to make sense to have the columns also pull that color. So they contrasted from the building, but they tied in with the bronze anodized coloring. So until we find that exact piece of stone, we're going to be trying to do something with a matted, kind of a matted black finish that kind. Whoops, blends in with the rest of things. So it's materials are always a challenge because until you actually see them in real-day light, you know, the light does funny thing to materials and there's going to be a lot. That's why we try to capture the shadows in the renderings because as the sun comes around the building looks different at different times of the day. Good. Thank you. Is there any other questions? Go ahead. Okay, so that'll close the public hearing. Anyone in the room from the public or online? I wish to make a comment on this project. Yes. See one hand in the room. Yes, I my name is Vijay Masi. I am the owner of 799 Glencragway. I am the house exactly below this house. So first of all, come to the neighborhood, but right now, the polls that they put, they can totally see our house. So he mentioned something that they are kind of designing the house of having privacy, but the way they're designing it, they are taking away my privacy. We spent a lot of time in our backyard. I have a Jacuzzi. I'm using the Jacuzzi every night. So right now, practically with this house, they can totally see, especially, I'm not sure if those balconies are looking at the house or somehow the way it is being situated, that practically they can absolutely have 100% of my privacy to be taken. You said you said something to? 799. So right now. Yes. I told you understand the challenges that everybody is kind of dealing with, but we all I mean, I opinion this neighborhood for a few years. I came to this neighborhood because of the privacy. I have much much bigger luck just because I wanted to have that privacy. But that house being built over there, you guys are taking everything away from me. Based on this illustration? The illustration and then I'm looking at the house. There is polls. They put those polls over there. The polls I can totally see the polls. If I can see it, they can see me. Yes. Depending on what windows are on which side of the house, yes. Yeah, that's a good question. The front of the house is a different direction. All the drawings and everything. I have nothing. I only have two pictures that someone dropped off at my house that, yeah, this is going to be the house. So I know there are, I saw it and I walk over there every day. I know there are two balconies over there, but I just can see from the poles that, you know. So we just look at this. We would have east elevation. That's what's primarily. It's a solid wall. We have no windows on that end of the house at all. Nothing. No windows on that wall. The balcony. That's the end of the balcony because the primary balcony doesn't they don't want to look towards your house. They want to look at the view the other way. That's right. But I very wide why see all the because when I'm looking when you're looking you don't see the orientation, but that's the wall that faces your home. That solid wall. And then what's that that thing? And those and those windows. Those are off those are off to an angle looking sideways, but they're at an angle. So what about the door? They're two windows up there and that down one. The only thing I just want from the town, that's what I want. I want the guarantee that they cannot look at my backyard, not look at my my jacuzzi. So I'm going to ask a question just real quick. And could you put up the aerial map again? So do you have privacy issues from this home? No, I don't. They have one window. The neighbor is over here. They have one window and the window is always 100% closed. I think they cannot see anything in my house. Right. Yeah, so that is, yeah, that's the one. Yeah. So the wall you're looking at that solid is that whole wall facing towards your property is a solid wall. So what is the unhung that that corner? You know that's all solid. There's no windows on that wall facing your property. The balcony looks the other direction. There's a little opening on the end of the balcony, but that balcony is geared to view looking across to the view. And on the other windows that you see, they're looking into a hole in the ground. So those aren't looking towards your house at all. Okay. So I'm not, I don't know how to read it. Yeah. I expect you guys, this is your job for you to give me the assurance that they cannot look at my backyard. That's what I need and I do appreciate it. Thank you. Thank you. Any other members of the public in the room are online? You have a member of the public online. Kim Hanson, you may speak. Hi, thank you. I'm unmuted now. My question. Well, originally, I zoomed in in for a different item, but this was for two of us that this item is being talked about this evening. My question is regarding the scenic corridor for 280 and neighbors like myself who are on the other side, actually, 280. We can see the neighbor's house from my house, and I'm wondering if this was taken into consideration with the design, because the proposed drawings that you've shown seem to be very light-colored and massive, especially the light-colored retaining walls and steps and things. That's one of my sets of questions. The second question about where the solar array would be placed, I do know this lot and it seems to have very good sun exposure. So I kind of hope that if solar could be placed on the roof of the dwelling, maybe that would have reduced the visual effect. And since there have been other projects that this ASRB and Planning Commission have approved that have had serious drainage issues as well as impact on the scenic 280 corridor. I'm hopeful that you'll take these things into consideration with this and on any other projects. Thank you for taking my raised hand. Does this site fall within the 280 scenic quarter? So the scenic quarter is two ideas of one of the designated scenic quarters and 10 years or more ago, the scenic quarter was a defined area of 1,000 feet from the scenic corridor was a defined area of 1,000 feet from the scenic corridor, and that was changed just to look at what could be visible from a scenic corridor. So there's no different requirements in a scenic corridor. It's just something that, because it's more visible from some of these areas, the only difference in the code is that it has a lower threshold for triggering ASRB review. So a thousand square feet of an addition or a new house, it triggers ASRB review, whereas another part of the town, 2000 square feet trigger ASRB review. So for that reason, there's a little bit more attention paid to these areas. And as some of us who commute on the 280, well note there are some prominent areas where some houses are very visible. And so that's just something to be taken under consideration. Good. Thanks. We'd be one. Yeah, I haven't been out to look at it from that angle, but it's quite possible. It could be visible. In when you're on the property, you can't see 280 from the property is one thing. But also the top of this roof is lower than the finished floor of the house next door. So this house is completely lower than the house next to it. If you see anything, you're seeing the house above. This one's completely lower than that house. So, I mean, its impact on the corridor is kind of moot because the impact already exists from there. This is just filling in a gap. So. Could you tell me the railing that's on the end that we were looking at in that left corner? The last plan was up. What is the material? That's going to be a cable rail. So it's got the black Anodized frame, aluminum metal frame with the cables in it. It's not like we could do something that would have potentially the wood where the wood rotates and those all way up together. The full coverage there. The reality is that the amount of time if people are out on that balcony, the view that you're looking at is completely different direction. You'd have to make an effort to go there. But I mean, if a blind was put up, because they're sensitive to the sunlight up there. That's why we did that wall solid. Never occurred to us. And we're thinking, well, gee, it's a good thing we put a solid wall there because that protects another neighbor's privacy. But if the sun gets too intense, a blind may find its way there regularly anyways, just because that exposure is pretty brutal. That's the house next door, as the neighbor mentioned, always has a woodrow of pass. And I said, it's all blinds, external blinds, because they ran into that same issue of the sunlight. So I'm not expecting that to be a high use area. I can't say for a fact that there will never be people out on that balcony. But when they are, they're real view, they're looking at his south to the mountains. So. If any other public comment online. Hope we have another one. Thank you. I have a question about the size of the home. I think you started to ask about this in Jillian. You cited the formula. I'm actually concerned about the actual numbers. We did speak and you went through the home with me and you did great job describing the challenges of a lot. So my first question was just, are there any exemptions that are going to be needed for the home as planned? And the answer was no. But now it sounds like actually the home is bigger than the wouldn't an exemption. That's not the right word. So I'm curious, again, if you could say how big the home is and how much over the maximum size that is. Happy to clarify apologies if I am used in a meeting. This doesn't currently have any variances or planning commission entitlements. For the plans that they provided this time, it does however have what's called the maximum mean residence size exception. This is largely ministerial versus discretionary and it is based again on a formula pursuant to a lot size. So this is just a codified formula. It never really has to go to planning commission or anything like that. And we don't have finalized for area calcs until for a normal design review. So there might be adjustments to the current floor area. However, as it's presenting right now with their preliminary calcs, it would need to utilize that maximum main residence size exception, which is. Right. So in order to know that, you must know what the what that maximum was to know that you must know what the maximum was to know that you're over. So what is the lot? You quoted a number 4,000 something. So what is the number below that? I have it here. In the staff report, it notes. So in the SR district, residents are allowed to be up to 4,000 square feet, not including 440 square feet of a garage. And with the exception for this lot, what Jillian was explaining is the council called an exception, although basically just you plug in your lot area and whatever your lot area is, yield you possibly more square footage over the 4,000 square feet. So in this case, the formula allows this lot to be 4,223 square feet. And their approximate calculations at this time are about 4,170 square feet. So they're about 170 square feet over the 4,000, but still under what's allowed by the exception. And again, the reason it's called an exception, it used to require planning commission review and there was specific criteria that had to be met and about five years ago or so, the council wanted to allow larger house sizes for folks. And in doing so, what they did is they stripped away a lot of that criteria that had to be met. They've removed all the discretionary items that take into account various things and just made it a formula and basically said, if you meet this formula, you shall get the extra square footage. And they kept it as an exception because there are other parts of the code that tie a maximum standard to a house size without the exception. They didn't want to change all of those other parts of the code. So those other parts of the code are still tied to the 4,000 square feet. For example, basement grading is tied to that. And so what they did is they wanted to allow additional square footage for folks to plug in your lot size, the sliding scale up to a certain square footage in this area, the maximum could be 5500. It'll larger lot except on this lot because of its smaller size, the maximum with the exception is a little over 4200 square feet. Is the is the grade or the slope also factored in? It is not regarding the lot size. Yeah, it was when they had the exception process. There was different details for that. But for this, it's just it's based on your lot size. So it's a number based on another number. Okay. Did that answer your question? Yes. I'm going to ask. I'm going to ask. Hi, ma'am. We're at six four three. West Glen way. Could I ask for the site plan. Are you of you to be put up the. Yes, please. That would be perfect. Julian, would you mind just putting the mouse over the six four three property just for reference? So that's our house. First of all, I want to say, I think that a great job has been done relative to the placement of the house. I'm very appreciative of the fact that the house, as the designer said, does not encroach on the primary view set of the fact that the House, as the designer said, does not encroach on the primary view set of the House. And of course, the only way to not encroach on anything is to not have a house there. But with the House there, it does a very good job relative to the placement. So thank you for that. I would like to say, though, that the assertion relative, I'd like to talk about solar for a second. I know that that isn't the primary purpose of this forum, but to the extent that it is not addressed now, the ability to address it later will be severely limited if we wait all the way until building permit. And so I'd like to address that now. The caller online, I think was quite correct, because I just relative to fact checking, if you note the access of 637 of the house is south to southwest, which is an exceptional access in order to place so, there's plenty of light on that property, the assertion that there's not enough light. I'd say is by the by the designer is bold but flimsy if you notice the axis of 643 house, down the kind of south to southwest axis, the intent is we understood it to place the robust solar field is right around the vista that our house is designed to look at. So was to essentially make the electrical infrastructure of 637, the primary view shed of 643. And so we would greatly appreciate it if that could be considered in this because we don't understand why that utility infrastructure needs to be our view. And again, I'm just going to state it, There's a lot of light on that property and the access to that roof line is awesome for collecting life for solar. Thank you. Hello, I'm Kristen Crosland and I'm also at 643 West Glenway and I would also really like to compliment the Lee family because they have made a sincere effort to inform us about what they're doing, to share their intentions, and we are looking forward to having you in the neighborhood. It's going to be great to have you. The letter that my husband and I sent, which I imagine you have seen, he mentioned the issue of solar. It is a big deal to us. We want them to have solar power. We understand how they want 100% independence. We're very supportive. We understand you're constrained and some of the things that you can and can't do. But to the extent that that could be factored into the design, it actually matters immensely. It goes from a green space corridor to an infrastructure utility. That's a huge difference. The other thing is that fencing, even though that's typically not relevant at this stage, we would actually like to have that factored in because we know the Lee family has a dog. We have dogs too, and having safe places for the dog is important. And we want their dog to be safe. But we also want to be mindful of, I submitted several photos. We are a wildlife highway. We have deer in our yard and on their shared property every single day. We have coyotes multiple times a week. We have every number of birds, et cetera. And so we just want to make sure that the fencing, we did our fencing as tiny as possible to give our dogs a space to be, but to allow the wildlife to freely move. And they use these corridors to not have to be on the road, and I don't want myself or my teenager or my neighbors to hit a deer. So we really would ask that that be thoughtfully considered, so that the animals do have the ability to move. And from what the architect was saying about, you know, having around the house, that's great. And the way that they're looking to do the landscape envelope, that's great. And we would just ask for that broader piece to be left open. A, it's a viewshed, which we would also enjoy. But B, it genuinely is, I mean, coming tonight, there's at least eight deer out there. So those are the things I would like to have considered. Thank you. Very short, Bob. Just to... Yes. I was gonna ask you to come back and... Yes. So... State your solar, your... Well, we do need to have a solar person look at it. The majority of the roof exposure is to the southeast and the northwest, which are not the ideal direction of face panels. But we will work with the solar engineer to figure out what solutions there are. Because the owners, the leaves aren't trying to create a problem. But they only have so much space to work with. and the orientation of the house has been the challenge as far as putting it on the roof. If there are areas of the roof that make sense to use, then these are all things we work with the solar consultant with. And the landscaping, again, we're trying to contain it close to the residents, because they're not going to be going out into a lot of the yard. So I don't think it is a matter of where, how much yard the dog needs and how close we can keep the fencing because they are concerned about coyotes. Not concerned as much about the deers, the coyotes, because losing a dog to a coyote is not something anyone wants to experience. But anyways, fence locations were going to be studied and neighbors can work together on what's a viable solution for fencing and landscaping for screening and privacy and also sun because we deal with that regularly. So I think if the propriowners work together, a solution can be arrived at without putting the city staff through the process of trying to dictate what should be done. I think hopefully the neighbors could work together and find a good solution. Thank you. Having removed a dead deer for my property last week, thanks to a coyote, I typically need for friends. Any other public comments in the room are online. There's none, there's no hands raised online. Hey, that will wrap that up and shift board discussion. Who'd like to pick us up? Couple of thoughts. So I think you know two things, two challenges with this property. One, you know, developing what has been an undeveloped property is always a challenge. You're going to run into a lot of instructive feedback. I'll put it that way. You're gonna run into criticism and people who've been lived with a vacant lot for a long time are initially going to be resistant. So being open and honest, I think has helped you in this situation. I think that's a good thing. I think your neighbors are appreciative of that. For those who are concerned about privacy, I mean anything that you can provide in terms of renderings from their perspective, landscaping plans would be helpful to alleviate those concerns. My biggest concern is the development of a steep slope could risk creating a beacon on the hill with lighting. So anything you can incorporate in your plan with regards to mitigating the lighting that you're projecting out into the neighborhood. We heard that from one from person online with regards to their view from across the freeway. From a materials perspective, I think the only thing in a diagnostic question around wrapping the entry columns with marble. I think all the other materials we're familiar with, we see throughout woodside, stucco wood stone marble on the exterior is used much less frequently. So I think considering other alternatives there would be worthwhile exercise. Aside from that, I think again my primary concerns are light pollution that you're going to project out into the neighborhood and that one material chose and helping all the surrounding neighbors better understand anything you can do to help them best understand the impact of the property on their privacy not necessarily yours but that would be how I'd summarize the project. I agree with everything that Donna said. And I think if we can make them feel comfortable in advance, because I know when you walk away from these meetings, if it's not sign seals and delivered, you wonder if it's going to happen. So how can we admit or guarantee to the neighbors that we are going to be sensitive once somebody says yes, we approve. My comment said they have to do with the materials and it's not because you are not on Senate corridor. I didn't actually do what they were. But sort of our guidelines are more organic materials and I think the stone and the cement walls coming out are just a little too bright and harsh. I would probably go with a more organic color. I mean we're just talking shades that may match the evil of that. I don't want to say gold and that's not the yellow, that's the right word, but I know that in the cement were you planning on doing the colors? I mean so instead of just the plain cement walls where you're going to add some colors that cement as you went up to the... That's a good thing, but consider it. That's the one thing I would consider, it's just actually the marble columns that probably was thinking that it was probably granted. But yeah, I would like to see a different shape on a stone and on a cement. The other thing I would like to see is I would like to see a solar engineering work to see if it is doable to put those solar panels on wood. It does seem like some exposure to the air. So just to have that verified whether or not that I don't trust your comments on that, but that would be worthy deep than two. And the other thing, I think Don mentioned as the driver, the one I was mentioning lights, you know, with the driver, if there's something you could do to some screenings, some trees, I know another neighbor didn't want trees to fall. So, you know, yeah, stay within 10, 12 feet, something like that. I think I would just like to see a more detailed landscape, maybe adding something along the driveway next street, and also with the fancy to kind of see where that fancy, I agree, you're not going to go all the way up to the Davis property anyway, but just to see what that fancy is going to look like, the out where it's going to be. So I think just a little more detailed on the landscape. The night. I'll just add to that. So I just I do want to commend you for having put up the story polls. They're not a requirement at conceptual stage, but I think it's been immensely helpful for all of us to better understand the impact of your of this development on views. I'm surrounding neighbors, so thank you for that. is that the ASRB commends the applicant for doing some neighborhood outreach, providing a site location that fits it within the constraints. The ASRB recommended that the applicant work further with the neighbors to alleviate any privacy concerns. So whereas there may not be any significant privacy issues, that should be better clarified to neighbors to help alleviate those concerns ahead of time. To look at the project and potential lighting mission from the project and how that lighting mission could be mitigated from different portions where there's more glazing. And then looking at the materials, I heard a few different comments and with regards to materials that the applicant should consider an alternative material to the marble columns that's more in keeping with the residential design guidelines, as well as looking at exterior materials for the building and the retaining walls that could be darker in color that had helped better blend in with the surrounding area. The ASRB also recommends, whereas the town does not provide a certainly design review for solar panels, but to look and study the solar access for the property and to try to provide as much solar panels access on the roofs as opposed to on the ground based on the solar engineer's recommendations. And then two more items that's to look at screening to help minimize any headlights that might be visible from driving in and out of the driveway driveway and to provide a more detailed fencing plan that keeps fencing more closely related to the surrounding of the immediate area of the house while still allowing for some wildlife passage on the property. And with StoryPoles being installed, well, first off, is there anything else that should be considered? That capture everything. Great. And so with StoryPoles being installed, the SRB has a couple of options. They could, you could forward the formal designer view to staff. And staff would work with the applicant designer view to staff. And staff would work with the applicant to address these recommendations, or you have the formal designer view come back to the ASRB for consideration. I'm gonna pull my fellow board members to feel how strongly their sense is. You have, we could be at a landscape. That is the neighbor's. We have a staff that they don't get notified of. So in that instance, I think it would be nice. Or a landscape. It's a lot less. Sure. it would be nice for a landscape to come back to us. Sure. It's like a live item. Yes, it's possible. So we've done some things like this in the past in which these different items were outlined the materials, lighting mission, privacy. Those items could be something that the applicant continues to work towards with their formal design review application. Well, they could continue this conceptual design review and just have the landscape plan with the fencing comeback for review. And so we've done something like that in the past. I mean, of that the coordinated with the formal review, or it could be. It's up to the applicant. You know, they could knock out these details and come back right away. They could be ready to submit for their formal design or view application, and which time we could show everything, or but it'd be a focused review of the landscape and the fencing. Yes, we could also look at the color board as part of that. So I'll put forward a motion that your summary as stated with the addition of the color board is part of the motion, but that the items on there that I think we've felt most strongly about are continued to come back at a later day. And so those items specifically would be related to the materials and color board, the landscaping and the fencing for the project, whereas those other items will still be detailed with their formal design or view application. And for the members of the public, we would encourage you, there is a sign-in sheet in the back, and if you would like to be informed of this project as it progresses through the next stages, please fill out your contact information on that sign-in sheet. And what that means is, even though a hearing may not be required for formal design or view if it just goes to staff, staff will still notify those who are interested in the project and they still have the opportunity to provide comments and for staff to consider those comments as part of the formal design review. So that is a way to still stay informed with the project as well as for to make sure that if there's any other concerns that they can be considered at the next stage. Is that a sufficiently well-formed motion? Yes, yes. So we have that. We're clear on what we're bringing back. So we're continuing the conceptual designer view specifically for the landscaping, the fencing, the color materials board, whereas the other items will. It's up to you. They're going solar. There's limited ability, but we've heard the concerns of the neighbors. And also, it seems like the applicant is interested in working with the neighbors. So we'd be happy to help facilitate anything we can along those lines. And yeah, to get any kind of report and understanding of where solar can fit on the building. And that would be the priority. Okay. We have a second. Okay. We'll call vote. Member Delgavio. Member Omra. Chair Lindsey. Yes. Members, middleman and taft are noted house. Great. So for the benefit of the public view board to address these concerns. And then after that, we'll be then going to a formal one still. Yeah, so this is the conceptual designer views. So what they're looking for. Before you have to get it so far deep into the formal designer view plans, you can look at just these focused issues to bring back to finalize the conceptual design review process. Then yes, you submit your formal design of your application with all of the details required with that application. I think it's completed so. I believe Julian. If we run 12, the other items, just a reminder, we are not talking about item one tonight. That's correct until next week. Yes. So, Mark. We will just for all those that may have come late, that item number one, the Kinyotic Corners Commercial Center, parking lot expansion project has been continued without discussion tonight. It's been continued to next Monday night at 4.30 p.m. September 16th. Thank you commissioners. It was very good meeting all of you. Thank you. Thank you. We're under our fourth item. This is 729 Southdale Way. Thanks. thank you. I will be introducing the project at 729 Southdaleway or ASRP review. For this conceptual design review project, the applicant is proposing to demolish an existing residence and would storage sheds and decks and construct a new single family main residence with an attached garage in basement, one detached ADU and associated site improvements. So there is one desk item from a nearby neighbor who provided an inviting for you tonight with various considerations and comments regarding the proposed projects, namely the need of a variance permit for the front setback of the main residents being within the basic 50 feet front setback as well as site work such as driveways and parking areas on 35% in greater sloping land. The neighbors suggesting that the project site should support a more modest design and not one that would be highly visible or tall from the street or from the neighbors. And as noted with formal design review staff will ensure that all proposed structures and site improvements in relation to setbacks, height, paved area, square footage, and other calculations are reviewed closely and meet the requirements and standards listed in the municipal code and to ensure that the applicant submits all applicable and required exceptions, entitlements and or variants during formal design review. So this is the property description. The property size is approximately 0.75 acres, approximately 32,500 square feet, and is in the suburb in the residential SR zoning district. The overall site slopes upward from the elevation, approximately 160 feet from the roadway, up to 180 to 190 feet on the central part of the property. And so the site has an. I took these photographs. As you can see here, which storage sheds and the decks, as well as the main residents are in various stages of decay. And the existing main residence is on top of the relatively high sloping land. so it's situated on the top side. And as you can see here that the site is in various stages of decay and has graffiti on the walls currently. So, this is the telegraphic survey. And this is the overall site plan, which shows the details and extent of the conceptual design project. And so, the proposed main residence and accessory structures, or the ADU, or located on the central and rear side of the property, and the submitted renderings, which I will show later, for the main residence, show that the facade and color is a bit bright. And both the main residence and ADU is proposed to have the feature materials, including stone veneers, stucco and concrete tile roofings. So this is the enlarged site plan. And this is the post-lower floor plan of the residents. This is the post-upper floor plan of the residents. This is the floor plan of the post-ADU. These next few slides are the elevations for the both main residents. This is for the front elevation. This is for the both residents elevations for the sides. This is for the both residents elevations for the rear. And these are the proposed ADU elevations. And so the applicant has provided a couple of renderings before you, and it's also on the physical post-subord. So the top left is for the main residence. The bottom right is the rendering for the ADU. And the applicant has submitted digital samples of the materials, windows, lights, the doorways, as well as the post garage door, patio door, and the materials for the wall including the stone baneer. And that concludes my presentation. Staff has happened to answer any questions and the applicant is an attendance tonight. Thank you. Thank you. Does anyone have questions for staff? One question, when I have a fair to face. So at the end of season, you walk all the way up to the driveway and at the end there's another house. Is that a neighbor's house, it's sort of a light green or is that part of this property? It's just all the way up the driveway, and past where the house is gonna be, where all those oak trees are. There's another structure that, I don't know why, I thought the contract that it was. Thanks to neighbors, Tom. That is the neighbors house. Oh, okay, yeah, okay. I was another driveway wrapped around. It's that light green one that's just right at the edge of your property. Okay. Thank you. I have a question. Could you bring up the site map and point out the setbacks? So first identify what is declared as front of this property and then sure. So the frontage feed property and then sure so the frontage feed is and where the exception. So the front setback is along the frontage of this south day away and so the applicant has incorrectly labeled the setback lines for the property, which should be in said 50 feet. However, the applicant is posing a variance to be able to encode part of that main residence into that basic setback at formal design review. So in this rendering, it looks like that. Orner of the garage is at at the setback or. The corner of the garage is at 30 feet. It does not meet the setback. So what you'll the another 20 feet back. So kind of on the other side of where the garage is, is what would be the required setback. And we've only seen a handful of variances. So at what stage would that variance need to be granted to allow this to change? So at the conceptual design review, these are things that are called out by the applicants, they understand that they're going to need to go through that process, but any type of entitlement other than its conceptual design review, that all comes with the formal designer view application. Okay, so the variants needed to develop those slopes next is 35% as well as for the setbacks, I would be considered with the formal designer view application, which means the final decision on the project would be made by the planning commission. Thank you. Elevation of some of the sort of main structures of the main house. I was a little too small to see the text on these and then the printout. So would you just call out some of those that the types of the roofs, just so I understand, I get a sense of what heights we're dealing with. Sure, so let's see. So the applicant has stated that 202 feet elevation will be the bridge in the raid. Existing floor would be 173 feet. So that's to do the math. 29 feet. Okay. That's for the main, main residents. Yep. And the for a two-story home that limit is 30 feet. Is that correct? For main residents is a limit is 30 feet. Thank you. Any other questions? Is there a consideration of reducing the size versus extending the setback? Yeah, I mean, it's the applicant's proposal. It would it would be a to impose the setbacks all around the entire property, it could create a tight constraint there. You'll have an opportunity, they'll just finish asking questions, they don't have opportunity. Any other questions? From the ward? No. All right, let's wrap that up. Thank you. Let's invite the applicant up to make a presentation. This is Minji. I go by Raymond. I'm the owner of the property. We are family acquired the property two years ago, approximately. There's a system house there, but it's been in bad shape. Be hoping to get remodel and rebuild. But there's quite some challenges on the site. For example, I will comment first on the setback issue. The driveway is narrow. So the only way to widen the driveway is by moving, as you can see, widen it toward the south-deal way. So we designed the garage to the end of the driveway, but there's a limit of 150 yards because of the fire restriction. So the driveway was, I mean, the garage was placed there for that reason. And actually, the house design, it's pretty much the same location as the original house, but just because the driveway got moved more downhill. So we put a basement and then a garage on the bottom portion of it and then it's initially just like a half half of the home is like with the basement and garage and then one story on the other side, so that that kind of answer that. And as you can see on that tube, we're doing with the sub-tech issue too. So the sub-tech pretty much take up a lot of the space on the side. So, um, yep, that's kind of the concern that we're doing with. So I'm here, I don't know if you need me to introduce more, but I'm happy to answer any questions. Yeah, so I mean, this is an opportunity for you to explain as much about the project as you wish. Otherwise, we can move to questions if you prefer it's your choice. Yeah, and then the design of the home we are in love of the French country style, we had the old war counter style and tried to match that with their rural characteristics in woodside. But the French country is kind of like the style that we're going with. We also try to simplify it, not making it too complicated. And the material is pretty typical of tile roof and stucco. There's some of the design thoughts and other than that, let's see what else I guess that's all my would like to say. Okay. Maybe describe your fence a little bit. We'll see there's wire. It said to be another one was plan. Oh, the fence. Right now we try to build fence around, but kind of open with the wood six feet tall with the wire. So kind of see through, but also the design is not completely enclosed. So they're allowed animals to go through. The railing is pretty much it's theirs because we have kind of like the on the driveway, we need to step up to the main house, so that's kind of like some railing there and also try to have protection so that we don't fall off to the side of the hill. So that's the design to have like Island, Island, four feet tall, Island fans. That's the, there's no gate design on the driveway. It's up at the top. Yeah, up at the top is you can see the next to the stairs. I know this is one you were trying to go up that driveway. We didn't go up that, but that it was very steep and dangerous like base of the driveway we actually kind of were with our truck for wheeling there and if fall off you'd have to do some work to make sure that was safe right. Great and I'm glad you asked that that's one of the reason why we designed to widen the driveway to make the make a better curve so that it's safe and also that when we widen the driver, the driver will be a little bit lower because we go more toward downhill so it won't be as steep. Also, one thing I do want to say is because the house currently is tax unsafe to occupy. So we've been doing with a lot of wind or some people try to break in there and do something. So yeah, we would like to speed up the process to get it, you know, rebuilding would be great. Okay. Any other questions? It is a challenging site. I understand your rationale for positioning. The main has largely where the existing structure stands. And then the decision to place the garage where it is. I think the result of that is created a fairly substantial amount of mass at the sort of the boundary of the property. Looking at the story poles, it makes for a rather imposing structure when looking up from the road. Did you, was there any exploration around rethinking where to put that where else you could put that mass away from the garage or set back from the garage? We can certainly take it into consideration. I think you're concerned about because the garage on top of the garage is the house. So in order to keep the house size currently is only about over 3,000 square feet with two bedrooms with an office. So if we shrink the portion of the design, then we will have to go the other way. But the other way also during the setback issue, because as you can see, we on the other side, we are maxed to the 30 feet setback from the side. So there are multiple issues we are doing with EIGC on the curve there. Yeah. So we do we cut into it and then we cannot go, go high and we cannot go through the left. Hi, I'm Stanley Problem. It's just what I'm responding to is when I look at the elevations of the both, there we go, left, rear. The next one I'm going to do is when I look at the elevations of the. There we go left rear. It's an imposing structure 30 feet almost 30 feet tall sitting on top of that very steep hill. If the story polls are accurate, I mean, it makes for a challenging wall to look up at. I'm just, I'm interested if there's opportunities that just sort of break up some of that facade just to try and relieve some of that imposing aspect of that wall. It's just quite commanding. Okay. Don't think I have any additional questions related to this. Who else? Masses, right? Massive. Masses, massive. And it is, I understand the limitations of the site. We've done it. Right. Yeah. Yeah. I mean it is. But yeah. I the only thing I would say I do love the tier of fancy in the stone wall. I would just be because it's up on the go, go to the doctor. Shame, that's more in the line with what would usually does. Oh, you mean the doctor pain? Yeah. Yeah. Yeah. It wouldn't be so obvious if it was more in the brown shade or that though. That definitely, that's certainly can be done. Yeah. Yeah. It's actually yellow, but it's more like an earth tone, but right now just the rendering may not show exactly but. Doctor. Definitely. If there are other questions from the board, so there's any public comment. These wishes are anyone of the public, which is the maker comment, either in the room or online. Good evening. My name is Steve Patrick. I live at 732 West Glenway. I've actually lived on this little hill for quite a few years, I'll be honest, 67 years. And I actually, I guess they put the story poles up on Sunday. And so it kind of went over there and took a look. And then this morning, I got a very brief opportunity, and I got a chance to look at the plans, but didn't look at them in depth because we really don't get to do that I mean we just have to sit at the counter and take a look at it But I think the first thing that became real clear to me is It's represented as if it's in a setback. Well, it's actually the 50 foot setback is the front yard setback And then keep in mind anything over 17 feet at the 50 foot setback has to be setback two more feet for every foot it goes up. So we aren't even looking at a build again for a look anywhere close to what is being presented here. So I think it's really unfair. I mean to the board to actually consider these things without kind of the knowledge is the sage says I mean it's a huge variance and then looking at other issues the septic system it's they found little tiny sl you can't, you have to be 50 feet from a 50% cut. So or a hilt or a bank, they call that a steep slope. And so I don't think that this proposal fits anywhere within the kind of current guidelines. I mean, I agree. It's a very constrained site. I mean, as an architect, I looked at it and I recommended to people that this site is extraordinarily constrained. I believe there's a two-bedroom house on there. I believe a modest home could be there. 32-hundred square feet on top of that hill. That's a huge project in that area. And I actually think it's kind of interesting that what's there currently kind of demonstrates what could happen there that driveway could come up. You could park where they want to put the ADU. I mean that is where the garage is. I think they should be you know should consider things like that where the house is should be maybe where the house is and it should be modest, rather than trying to push this thing to a three-bedroom house with septic and you know they're going to expand the septic field by you know enough for a third bedroom since this is two-bedroom house currently. And I think there's enough documentation so there shouldn't be any fear that if they went and took down all that garbage up there that anybody would view this any differently at a certain point. So it's like sure it's There shouldn't be any fear that if they went and took down all that garbage up there, that anybody would view this any differently at a certain point. So it's safe, sure, it's dilapidated, but it shouldn't prevent them from making the site look better. Prior one other point, if you look at the story polls, I mean, there's one story poll that's 32 feet tall on the existing cut that's 30 feet off the property line. I mean, it's not a valid proposal for this particular thing. And then I agree. The yellow or a tone, it doesn't blend at all. Actually, the color of the old shack up there is much more compatible with the surroundings. I mean, from my house, you can look straight at this thing. And it's 30 feet tall. I mean, and then you drive around Southdale and it's actually, if you think of that 30 feet and the 30 feet, it's probably about 60 feet tall from there. And I believe you said that the contour at the base of the property, which actually should be at the intersection of mid-Gland and Southdale there. I mean, it's, I don't know, it's got to be 50 or 60 feet to the base of where the property, the driveway. And the driveway, it's like it's going to need a variance on the downhill side and on the uphill side and it's all on 35% slopes. I don't think any of that was taken into consideration when they decided to put a massive garage and turn around in front of the house. It's up to you to move it forward. But I think a formal design or the planning commissioner should get its teeth into this. A variance is going to be granted for some of these kind of, you know, just because you have a property yarn entitled to 4,000 feet on it. I mean, you got to look at the constraints and it's not something that they were born in. I mean, this was purchased, I believe, within the last two years. So those constraints existed before they got this property. It's not of a previous making. I mean, this is of their own making. So, well, thanks for your consideration. Thank you. Do we have anyone else in the room for public comments or anyone online? Online. There's Sue with the way it's tanned. Sue, you can speak if you like. So unmute yourself. There you go. Actually, I'm sorry. That was me on the prior property. That's going to be built pretty much across the street from us. So I was too late and raising my hand. So I don't have any comments on this property. I was concerned about solar. Sorry about that. Yeah. Please. You can contact Jillian, Negly, the planner and she can help answer any questions for you after the meeting. Thank you. There's no one else with their hand raised online. I see no one in the room approaching the mic. So let's close the comment and turn the board discussion. Who would like to. Why find it interesting? I didn't realize that. I knew, but I didn't realize about every foot. She'd be stepping down and she'll only be 17 feet and we've got 30 there. I mean, should we eat my paraphrasing incorrectly? No, that's correct. What Mr. Patrick stated is correct. So for every one foot, the building is over 17 feet tall. You push it back into their two feet from the property lines like a daylight plane or building them below. So this project is requesting a variance to that requirement. So one, they'll need it for the lower level. They won't meet the 50 feet. And the upper level will not meet that increase setback, which is a 70 feet or something like that, depending on the height of the building. So it's what the applicant is requesting as part of their proposal. Whereas the ASRB does not, part on the findings for a variance per se, it's still part of the design review and the mass and the bulk and the sighting and the building design. All of those things still come into play. And as variances are needed, those types of things, obviously, will be looked at a little bit closer. Since we feel that it's pretty grand as if there's anything that can be considered to keep it down so that lower heights it would be beneficial we don't grant the mayor. Almost should see if they were going to grant any that they will have. It's the chicken of the egg. You have to grant a variance for a specific project. So what is the specific thing that we're looking at? What is the height? What is the setback? And all of that plays into the design. So whereas the design maybe doesn't have to focus as much on these very technical items, the exact foot or square foot or distance from a property line, where those impacts should be addressed and then looking at what entitlements may be required after those impacts are addressed, it'd be at which time the Planning Commission could look deeper into those issues. Checking in, Nick. Do you have any other questions or comments? Okay, so if I try to summarize. I think this is a, it's a challenging site. There's a lot of hurdles to, to, to, to, to get this current proposal through you need a setback variance. You need a step back variance. It's still a set setback, so it's wrapped into the setback, so there would be a need for a variance to setbacks. And so, you know, variance to setbacks can range, right? In terms of two feet from a property line, or 30 feet. So that will be the increase setback will be noted that there is an exception going to that, as well as the lower floor setback. But it also needs a setback for development slopes and access to 35%. I guess what I'm speaking to specifically a second from. Yes, the other. It will be need a larger setback variant. So to speak, it's one variance, but there is a larger setback required for that upper floor. So I think those are big hurdles to overcome. ADU, I have no concerns about at all. I think it's, it's the proposal. What's being proposed is more than satisfactory. But I do have these reservations of whether you will be successful in obtaining these Fed facts based purely on projects we've reviewed previously. The ask is a lot. So my general feeling is that I think it would for you to go back and reconsider some of the placement of the masses and the variances that you would hope to get and come back to us with another concept that minimizes the expectations around you successfully get it back. While also addressing a lot of the other concerns around septic placement and sizing, shoring up the driveway size. The list is long. I think this in general, I would just summarize. I think this needs to be revisited in terms of the concept. I think it's asking a lot. That's how I summarize it. It's not, I mean, there are a handful of specific things, but it's at a high level. Conceptually, I think it's not in the right direction. Or so, so what I've heard is that primarily, there's a significant concern with the massing of the project, specifically as it relates to the setbacks as viewed from the roadway that's downhill. And the applicant should look at ways to reduce the massing, which could include different things, such as building location placement, changing the building location or placement of the footprint, stepping back the upper floor in particular the areas that are closest to the roadway. Looking at also the impacts and heights of the retaining walls necessary for the driveway, and to see if any impacts visually can be mitigated, whether the retaining walls could be lower, reduced grading, stepped retaining walls or other alternatives, any landscaping that can sometimes happen between stepped retaining walls is another way to help address some of those impacts for the walls. I'm also to look at a color that's more earth toned and less yellow in color, something that blends in better with the area. And so that is what we have this word given these comments. It looks like it would probably be a request for continuance at the conceptual design review level. So before the applicant spends further money on details on this particular design, they can get a better read for kind of a redesigned building on that as more in conformance with the residential design guidelines, specifically by reducing the mass and bulk of the structure. Is there anything else? And? Have a friend ask me to go redesign this whole project without an idea whether they'll even be granted. So the setback is there a way they're going to stop with someone first? See, maybe what would be the least amount that they might have granted? It seems like you're asking them to go to a lot of work, which they may make him not can say, oh, no, you're not going to use that. We need to do that. Yeah, we can't guarantee approval of a variance at any stage. And the, but what we would do with the staff level is look at something, especially based on comments that we've received tonight and work with the applicant to provide something that maybe look at is is something that staff would support from a variance standpoint. The site is extremely constrained. It's unlikely you could build on this site without some type of variance, whether it's a setback or slopes in excess 35%. With regard to septic, it's a new house. The county is going to require a full new septic system. Whether we build a one or two bedroom house, county is still going to require a minimum three bedroom septic system. It's a current requirement. So they're going to have to build a three bedroom septic system, whether they have three bedrooms or not. And well as the county requires not just a septic system, but requires a 100% expansion area, meaning another place where you can fit another septic system should this one fail. So these are requirements that do need to be met. The county allows you to go into slopes next is 35%, but not 50%. And so they'll have to kind of thread that needle and make sure, you know, there are going to be limited areas and where you can put septic on the property, which will be a driving constraint. So with regard to the question, you know, anytime you're asking, you know, on a constraint site and asking for some type of exception, there's going to be some risk involved. And what we can do with the staff level based on the comments that we've heard tonight is try to work with the applicant, try to minimize that risk. We have a motion support of that summary. And a continuance. It's a continuance, yeah. Good. Yeah, and this way, you know, the applicant come back to the ASRB to look at these changes. Sometimes there might be further changes needed. Maybe they really nail it and fit everything in nicely on the property. And so by continuing the conceptual level, allows the applicant to get more feedback from the ASRB without, you know, say going through a whole new grading plan. Sometimes it's necessary as your redesign are really positioning things, but, you know, there is a need for a full landscape plan. There are ways that it will help reduce the cost overall, suppose you're investing all that money in front, which may have less of a chance getting a proof. Last that note. You have a second. I'm not yet something. Sure. I actually, the engineers here, Lee and Bragg, they can comment on this topic and expect to be a perfect, a been done successfully on the side. So they can tell some detail about some of the concerns of the cycle for the subject and also they may be being more true. Is it feasible? Is it? Hi, Jim Toby, Liam Brazenjury. We actually have design to sing out. It is very constrained. There's no doubt about it. But this thing has been part tested, has been designed, and we have had the geotech out to look at everything. I know one thing that Steve brought up, which is always a concern is that when you're next to a steep slope, you know, technically it's not going to be a stability issue or anything like that. So they've already done that. That portion is done, that portion, the septic system as you show on the plans. It's kind of the only place to put septic system. There really isn't much of a place and that does definitely lead into the placement of the building. So while I can't speak so much from the massings I'm not the architect, but definitely the when it comes to where the house is located and how the septic system is located right there, that is kind of the constraint lot and where we build around it is where we have to kind of be. So even the driveway, we obviously make a driveway that is the minimum requirements for the driveway being able to put the minimum requirements for parking up there and being able just to simply take a car and turn around. So that's something we've looked at very carefully and that's kind of what dictated it. None of the retaining walls right now. I know we haven't submitted a very detailed breeding drainage plan that's going to come in the formal review, but we have definitely done some preliminary analysis of everything and all the site retaining walls are no more than six feet tall. So we have staggered them, especially on the uphill side you'll notice we have staggered some of those walls to make sure that they're going to be kind of more less massing than at least on the site walls themselves. So yeah, in terms of the septic, it is something that's kind of set in stone a little bit now because there's really no other place in the property to put it and it has passed all the rules, protests and geotech to get to this point. Where's the existing septic field on that property? I'm not 100% sure. We're not sure anybody's really know. The records, there really aren't much of a record on this property. It's so old that the records don't tell you. Is it okay? Somewhere, but that house falling apart, everything's so kind of fallen all over the place. We haven't exactly found it. Is there an outhouse on the property? There what? And the outhouse on the problem. I'm sure somebody's using it. Who knows? I mean, it's definitely the idea when we looked at this site was the very first thing I went up there the first day saw how delupiated it was. I don't know where they are So we're a field is low. It might be an old redwood tank. It's my guess is what it is Knowing how old this house is I would venture to say you probably have one 20 foot line of leech line Where nowadays you need four or 70 as an absolute minimum. So they did get any per... it got any perc? So yeah. I don't think nothing in the motion involves breaks. So yeah so we had a motion. How do we have a second? Second. Here we'll call vote. Member Dahlgaviot. No, I passed that. It's H.C. Member Kamra. Well, it allows you to call it. And Sherlyn V. Yes. Members, middlemen, and tap note it up. Thank you. Students, I have four. So wrapping up. Director's report, nothing nothing that you know our big announcement was running right with the an answer, be meeting with a lot of items. I'll note that, you know, on Sarah's departure, there still are some number of minutes that we need to complete. So Julie will help out with that and we'll be bringing those minutes back to the answer, be for a view when they complete. We asked a big favor when you send out the plan sets, would you let us know in our personally nails as well or is that taboo? I'm sorry to your personally nails well. Yeah, yeah, we can. The notification didn't have documentation. Yep. That's fine. Thank you a million. I mean, the additional ask is the packages this week did not include the staff reports. If you did make it. They were just kind of big. I didn't find it. Yeah, nothing. In the physical package. Yeah, they were. Yeah. Yeah, I didn't see them. Okay. I retract that. All right. I'm going to adjourn this meeting at 645. Thank you. And I pile a paper. You just want to. Thank you. And I pile a paper. You just want to be.