September 3, 2024 — Meeting Transcript

Welcome to the Planned Commission ARB for September 3rd. If you have any electronic gadgets, please silence them at this point. We'll get started. Obie?

Steve Lichtenfeld? Here. Bob Denlow?

Steve Lichtenfeld? Here. Bob Denlo?

Here.

Bridget McAndrew?

Here.

Helen DiFate?

Ellen DeFayette?

Here.

Kami Waldman?

Here.

Jim Arsenault? Here. David Gipson? Here.

Jim Arsenault? Here. David Gibson? Here.

We have minutes from the prior meeting on August 19th. Are there any changes? Seeing none, do we have a motion?

I move to approve the minutes before us today. Second.

All in favor? Aye. Okay. We'll move on to new business and it'll be item two. Item one, if you've seen the agenda has been pulled. Item two is 312 Edgewood Drive. And I believe the applicants are here. We'll start with the staff report.

The property is on the west side of Edgewood adjacent to the street's intersection with Carswell. The site is zoned R2 and is developed with a two-story single family home. The project proposes a two-story addition at the rear of the home. The addition would be replacing an existing rear enclosure and patio. The home's main entrance would be relocated from the south side to the front. Widown Forest is more compact than other R2 neighborhoods. Homes vary in style and materials and often range from one and a half to two stories. Additions are less common, but can be found on rear facades. Primary entrances are commonly on the front facade, and homes more often have front stoops, but examples of front porches can be found throughout the neighborhood. The addition would show a two-foot, eight-inch concrete foundation. The main level would be clad with cement board lap siding, and the second level would be cled with cement board shingles. The roof and windows would match the existing structure. A wood composite deck is proposed at the rear of the addition. New HVAC units are proposed between the existing home and the patio steps. The new front door would be located between the existing chimney and the north side of the home. The new front porch would comprise of concrete with brick cladding and a metal railing. Although the north and east facades do not comply with the architectural review guidelines, staff are of the opinion that material composition will not contradict the neighborhood character due to the variety of materials nearby and the limited visibility of those facades from the street. I should clarify that there was a typo in the staff report. It is the north and east façades that do not comply with architectural review requirements. Staff recommend approval as submitted.

Okay, thank you. The applicant or the architect or both?

Hello. Welcome

back, Alva.

Nice to see you again. Do I introduce myself? Please. I'm Alva Levine, Levine Associates Architects. We're the architects for the project. As described in the site, the staff report, this is a tight site. There's an existing rear addition that dates from 1937, so it matches the style of the house. We're wrapping around to fill in the back quadrant that doesn't have the addition, continuing the roof line and continuing the lines of the elevations. Right now, the elevations have a belt course. And so we're using that to continue a change in style of the siding. There is some shingles on the house already. So we're doing shingles up above the belt course and horizontal siding down below. I can answer some questions. owner is here as well, so that you could talk with them with other questions. We noticed that there is an error on the site plan that says existing ask, right? It's already an exposed aggregate concrete driveway will be remaining in place. And then there's an extension of the driveway that's brick and that will remain in place as well.

Okay. before questions, if the homeowners would like to say anything, just give us your name and address. Anything to add?

My name is Diana Rollins, and my address is 316 Edgewood. And what I guess what I'd only would like to add is that moving the front door from the side of the house to the front of the house will add an additional parking space and parking. There's no parking on that side of the street on Edgewood. So we think that adding a parking space is rather important for the whole neighborhood.

Do you own both houses? Correct. Okay. I was unaware of that. Okay. From the staff report, some of the material doesn't really fit into our requirements. However... Alva, I think the way you explained it following the brick course in there with the two different types of siding actually works very well. Also, you'll have to be on the property to see this. It really isn't visible from the street. But I do like the difference in the siding. And I think it'll be a good addition to the not only the property, but to the neighborhood also. So But let's go around and see if there's any other comments. Bob?

Alva, always good to see you. The house has basically turned sideways.

Correct. It has a side door currently.

And the width of that, I saw like you have the living room is going to be 11 feet wide. The dining room is going to 11 foot wide and you're going to attach a front door to that narrow width. Are you concerned about that at all?

No, it actually works out better than what is there. It's a very, very modest house to begin with. And so the existing living room will remain in place. The existing dining room, which is only 11 by 11, becomes a front hall. And so we're not even changing the opening. We're just saw cutting the original window and putting a door in that opening with the new porch roof. And so the living room stays in place. What we're adding is a kitchen and family room in the rear.

Okay, all right. Other than that, I think it'll be a wonderful addition to your home.

The existing kitchen was only seven feet wide and it included a flower sifter and other fun gadgets from the 30s.

Okay, thank you. Go

ahead. I think it'll be I think it looks great. I bike or walk by your house all the time. So I definitely look forward to seeing the transformation.

Ellen?

I think it looks good. And I like how you've handled the existing front door, keeping the overhang. Had you thought about putting like a little Juliet balcony

actually talked about that

good no i think it would just be fun and if you you'd have to have a patio door i mean this is all adding to your cost but just to be able to put you know a flower pot or something out there it would i don't know be fun so no it looks good

cami

Yeah, I think it looks really great. I like the front door on the front facade now. I think that is a large benefit to you, clearly, and also the neighborhood. I think it looks good.

Jim? I think the front door being moved and kind of creating that entry does kind of definitely create some nice flow. I see that you have your LP smart side there. I was just curious, coloring-wise, what we're anticipating? I think...

we're um thinking of trying to go with the red that gives kind of the brick color um for the LP siding

okay I was just curious about that because there there is some wooden trim that's kind of pretty close to it that color on the house already so um yeah I just was curious about that but overall I don't I don't see any issues

David I

don't have any comments or questions

Okay. We have a staff recommendation to approve as submitted.

I move that we approve the staff recommendation as submitted.

Second.

All in favor? Aye. Opposed? Thank you.

Thank you.

Thank One other item on tonight's agenda, and that is old business at 139 North Merrimack. And this will be architectural review. And the applicant is here. So we will start with the staff report.

To clarify, 139 North Bemiston. I'm sorry? You said 139 North Merramack. To clarify,139 North Bemiston?

North Bemiston. Sorry.

Steve? I will recuse myself for this.

Okay, thank

you. The project was previously presented at the July 1st and August 5th PCARB meetings. The ARB voted to continue the architecture review application to allow for revisions at both prior meetings. An application for a minor subdivision plot was recommended for approval to the Board of Aldermen on July 1st and approved by the Board of Alderman on July 23rd. Additionally, an application for site plan review was approved at the August 5th meeting. The subject property is on the west side of North Bemiston between Maryland and Pershing. The site is zoned R3 and is developed with a single family home. The project consists of the demolition of the existing structures, subdivision of the lot into two lots, and construction of duplexes on each of the new lots. Since the previous presentation, the application has made the following revisions. Both proposed structures would reach two and a half stories with the front facade presenting as two stories. The height of the proposed structures would reach 34 feet, 10 and three-fourths inches. The duplexes would reside higher than adjacent properties, largely impacted by their place at the top of the hill. The roof lines have been revised to a traditional hip roof with dormers. The hip roof along the front facade results in the appearance of two stories and reduces the overall structure height. Much of the structures massing is set back from the side yards more than the minimum requirement. This additional setback is a strategy outlined in urban design districts in the city and helps to reduce the towering effect of new structures. The design retains the horizontal brick accents on the front facades and removes the diagonal angle at the front entry of the northern duplex. The stairwells have been revised to better blend with the slope of the roof. The design meets the height setback and coverage requirements for the R3 district. The proposal has been revised to better blend the height of the duplexes with the surrounding structures. The design introduces modern styling while incorporating architectural elements found nearby. The proposal incorporates high quality primary and secondary and accessory materials throughout the design and meets the requirements of the architectural review guidelines. While the replacement of the existing structure will have some visual impact, staff are of the opinion that the revisions respectfully integrate the new duplexes with surrounding area. Staff recommend approval is submitted.

Hey, thank you. The applicant. Welcome back, Tyler.

Thank you, Steve. Good to see everybody tonight. How is everybody? Good.

Doing fine.

Good holiday weekend. Everybody's well rested. It's good. I was waiting for my presentation to be loaded up. I can go ahead and tell you who I am. I'm Tyler Stevens, Corten Architecture, 4501 Lendl Boulevard, St. Louis, Missouri.

Yeah.

All right, so we're back here tonight. I'm excited to be in front of you again tonight. Always a pleasure to present to the city of Clayton. And I started my presentation multiple times ago with telling you about some experience and some longstanding projects that I've been a part of in Clayton. I am aware of the fact that there are people in the city that have appreciated my projects in the past and have liked the architecture that I've provided to the city of Clayton. And then I have been made aware that in this particular project, potentially I'm putting my reputation on the line and ending my career. And so I would like to Make sure that that doesn't happen because I like working in the city of Clayton. So what you're going to see tonight should be more of the old playbook and not less something new and cutting edge, a little bit more of the old. The package that you have in front of you represents the changes that we have made in terms of geometry and various design elements. However, there are a few details you'll see in the renderings tonight that I've added just recently to further enhance the traditional nature of Clayton architecture. So they're a little bit different than that rendering you see on the cover. You'll see a new rendering with some revisions. That being said, we've talked a lot about the context of the street, not the neighborhood, but the specific street. And so before we go into the actual building, I would like to take a little tour down the street and talk about the buildings that are there so that we're all on the same page when we talk about context. And I have put together a series of images that represent every building along Beamiston on the, I will say on the west side of the street because we are honing into the exact specific location of this lot and what is appropriate there. So starting at the south end, this is 115 Beamiston. You'll see a lot of repeated themes in these buildings. They are what I would call kind of classical blocks maybe. I don't know, they vary in style, but they all have a similar kind of massing, a lot of symmetricality, a lot of classical details, and certainly a lot of brick, all in the sort of red-brown family. So 115 Beamiston there is a pretty typical example. Next door to that. Now, this is an anomaly on the street because the brick has been painted. That is not the case of most of these. So it's kind of this yellow color. But you will see a large window element facing the street as well. A lot of glass there and not a symmetrical facade in this particular instance. Two-story, although this one reads as a one-story because of the way the proportions are. It's just a kind of a tall one-story building. Next to that, 123 Beamiston. This one reads as three stories. So jumping up to three and it's a very flat front facade. Not a whole lot going on, pretty simple in terms of a pattern of windows. Again, classical details with the arch and the cornice up there at the top. Next to that is 127. Again, another block. This one has a hip roof on it. So I point that out because we're going to talk about hip roofs versus gable roofs in this particular presentation. This one also has the... The addition of this underground garage facing the street. This is what I had talked about before, something that we were trying to avoid, which is why our site plan was set up the way it is. And I think we talked about site plan enough last time so I'll leave that alone. But this is an example of what that looks like. This is the house right next door at 131. This being the only original example on the west side of the street. It is a little bit smaller in scale. It's still a two-story, but because that roof comes all the way down, it has a one-story element porch on the side. But I want to point out kind of a pattern. I'll talk about this later, but this shows up in a couple. which is an A-B pattern and how we would explain that in architectural language. This is element A and this is element B. A is vertical and B is very horizontal. So A is like what we would reference as our tower element. And then B is a horizontal porch element. So that's a pattern that you see there. This skips over our lot and going now one building north of that 141. Again, back to a simple grid of windows, front facing garage, three parts, hip roof again. Next to that at 145, this one now has a gable that's rather tall. This one is a little bit different on the street because it sits up on top of a, the site is, it's not a hill, but it's really kind of built up from the street. You look up at the house. The yard has a lot of slope to it. And you don't see the garage because of this, because it goes down. But gables facing the street. Again, two large window elements, bay windows with a lot of glass they're facing and they're vertical in nature. This house reads, in my opinion, as the tallest house on the block. And I'll show you in comparison when we get to our proposed structure later. Next to that, back to another gable symmetrical garage. Now instead of having single doors, we have a big double door garage and a very wide driveway coming across. This one, although I think it works a little bit more successfully because the entrance is located on the front. It's obvious where the entrance is as opposed to those others which are kind of hidden areas. And the roof of the garage is turned into a porch this way. So I kind of like how that works at least. Notice the windows, how large pieces of glass gang together, creating large openings. And next to that, another gable and garage. This one presents as four stories because you see all three of those windows plus the garage. So four stories facing the street. I know that ours has been referenced as being a four-story presentation, but that's to the side, not facing the street, which is already there. 159, I don't know if this is the most recent one built. Those of you who live in the neighborhood could probably tell me that. It looks more It looks, I don't mean modern in style because this is obviously a Frank Lloyd Wright prairie style imitation with garages, but it, I just assumed that this was a more newer build. I don't know Steve you might know that. But what I'll point out on this is going back to that AB presentation again, and where you have the A tower element and the B horizontal porch. This time, the porch being up on the second floor. So that's a pattern that is definitely there on the block. And we reference, again, this has a lot more going on though. However, it has multiple gables and this little entrance piece. And so it's quite a lot going on in this structure. But the other thing I'll point out on this one are the windows. The windows here, even though it's a large window element, let's take this one up here for instance, that's a large window but it's broken into three with some pretty prominent mullions that are part of a decorative grid system to add some detail to the facade. So that's a way to do a larger window and break it down in scale, something that I think it works pretty well and you can see that even in the door, a little bit below that just patterning. And then you get to the end of the block. This one is quite different from everything else. This is 171 which is a larger lot in a very horizontal presentation. That's, again, quite different. but that gives you an idea of the context of the street so that we're all on the same page when we talk about context and what is there and what we're actually trying to blend with. So this drawing here represents the proposal that we're bringing to you. It's the same design that is in your packet, just with some details added to it. And I'm gonna walk you through the changes that we've made because I think that they're important to understand The very, the main changes with the roof is the biggest, biggest changed element. The roof before was a gable facing the street, and it was pushed back so that the tower was out in front of that gable if you remember. The tower was much more prominent because of that. It kind of looks sort of like a nose on your face that's sticking out. So we've done a couple different things. By changing the gable back to a hip, you can see here these lines just give you an idea of how gables present. And this line and how we've kind of placed the heights and everything, I'm going to keep referencing down the street. This is that one that I said reads as kind of the tallest tower. If you look in line, a gable would be similar in size to that because they're all based on the same zoning code. So it would be very similar to that. However, because we've gone to the hip roof, you can see the difference here. It pushes that line way back visually so that from the street, it doesn't read nearly as tall when it's a hip. So that's one thing. The other thing that we have done is pull the roof out. We kind of stretched it forward so that it encapsulates more of the tower. The tower is not kind of sticking out in front then. It's kind of connected with that gutter line. It presents a nice deep porch up on the second floor, which is a really nice design element that's going to be good for the plans. And it's a nice space to be, again, similar to that That other one that we showed down the block that has that porch on the upstairs. So all of that gives you an eve line now that is in line with the block. Point out there's the eve line of this gabled one, the house next door which has a hip roof but it's very low pitch so you hardly even see it. It reads as sort of as a front square. all in line with where our roof is. Now, that is definitely higher than the house next door because, again, I said that down at this one story line. But when you take in consideration this kind of front-facing gable that presents as the tower element of this house, it's not all that different. And the peak of it matches that same line. So definitely in scale. The other thing about that roof, once we pull it out, is we started making this porch a more prominent element. Before, we were using the gable. If you remember, we had two materials mainly. We had brick and we had wood. And the wood was the gable that was up on the top, kind of in the back, adding some warmth, and then it echoed down around the entry. Since we don't have a gable anymore, we didn't really want to lose that wood aspect because we think that that's in character. So what we've done is the porch... railing it's now moved out in front of the brick just a little bit it's enough to create a shadow line there and that would be the wood element that and then the surround around the windows up here so this whole little balcony on the second floor would be the wood the brick would then be first floor and then up the stair tower itself and around the other the other facades the porches and all those other elements but that um That's the main geometric change. The tower, again, has been brought down in height. We're down now around the mean of the roof and we made it flat instead of sloped so that it didn't stick out so differently. This shows you what I was talking about with those AB elements in terms of that vertical tall piece a horizontal porch and the same thing vertical tall piece horizontal porch so similar themes that are going on with the architecture around the neighborhood. So if we take that, then that's one comment that you all had in terms of scale and blending. So that's my response to that geometric blending and scale, bringing it down. The second is with regard to since we have two buildings there. I know that there's been a lot of concern about it reading as one large project, and certainly nobody wants to see multifamily over here on this block. We're not proposing this as multifamily. These are townhouses duplexes, which are allowable in zoning code. We've already talked about that. The fact that there are two of them next door to each other does not mean this is a four-unit condo. This is two duplexes. But how do you make them a little bit different? Yet, I don't want them to be totally different. They shouldn't be foreign to each other. They should relate to each other. So you can see geometrically they're symmetrical. So they do have a mirrored kind of presence. They share that driveway. It makes sense. Functionally, they're symmetrical. I looked at doing, this is what you'd call a book match in wood terms where you take a piece of wood and you fold it. I looked at doing a slip match where you take it and just slide it over and repeat it in the same. And the floor plan gets very messed up when you do that in terms of that stair tower because you can't flip the garages. Obviously they have to stay the way they are. So architecturally, I'm telling you that this is the way they need to be symmetrical. That's not an option to change. So what could we do? And it was mentioned in the last meeting, a thought about brick colors. Now this is where I'll show you my samples here up front. We've got two different brick colors. Before, we had a very modern light-colored brick in an effort to go more traditional, more blending into the neighborhood. You saw all the brick colors that are there on the street. Certainly, Clayton is about dark reds and browns. Coming into City Hall tonight, I walked across the little entrance plaza and all the standard brick of the Clayton streets, the sidewalks. You have a two-color scheme, which is a kind of dark color A red and a chocolatey brown. That's Clayton standards. So we're giving you Clayton standards, you see the two bricks in front of me. One red one brown. And so the idea here as we get to playing with us we we one thing that I like to do in all my buildings is create a lot of brick patterning. I love to play with bricks and pull corbelling and bricks coming in and out and different patterns. So you see some of that in the tower element there by the window. It almost reads like a giant shutter around those windows. So it got to looking at it. And what I think is the right solution is to do two brick colors where one is the field, the other is the accent. And then on the other building, you flip those. The so on one, let's just say the one on the left is the red is the field. The brown is the accent that appears through it. And then on the other building, the brown would be the field. The red is the accent. They both go together. They're in the same family. But that way, the two buildings look different. Now, what would that mean? look like, I give you a little color block study here. When you start imposing those on the block and these other brick colors that you see here are kind of averages of their, they have a lot of modeling, but sort of averages in color and how they read. So you can see what we're going for here is two different colors that go together. And then that way they're differentiated as different structures, even though they're geometrically the same. I do a little walk around the block here, looking at it. Now you look at it straight on this where you can see all the way through. You see, these are not connected. There's no, there's no, it's not one big building, it's two buildings. And so I think you really start to appreciate that. You can see in how keeping in scale with the rest of the neighborhood, the yards, um, the buildings, this line that's going down the street in terms of roof, there it is reappearing down here in the next building. And then also notice that as you get I mean how we really see the street is where we're approaching down a street driving or walking down the sidewalk. And you see these in deep perspective, they all blend at that point they all sort of read together. I mean, these two buildings next door have almost the same brick and the two are very close. And it's interesting because it's kind of a wild brick that's got a lot of modeling, but yet they're both almost the same. So I don't know if they were done by the same developer or not, or they just liked the brick and copied it. But in doing that, when you get close, I mean, they start to the massing just all reads together down the block. And this is where you can also see where our porch elements start playing in as these porch rails pull forward, it really is emphasizing a horizontal line down lower to draw your eye down and make the building, you know, read even shorter in the neighborhood, even though the roof lines match a big deep cut on the porch up above gives you that that relief. So now what does it look like when you start to render it out? I changed the rendering a little bit in this one because before we were always looking at the marketing rendering, which is a nice pretty picture up close that has trees and different things in it, which is good for selling units but not necessarily good for you all because you can't see the neighboring buildings due to the trees. So we strip all the trees off and step back a little bit. And you can see the materials kind of in concert with the rest of the block and massing as it goes down. Here you can pick up on the two different bricks and the patterning that I'm talking about, where you have red with a brown brick pattern in the one, the other is brown with a red brick. You can't see it in the rendering very well there, but it's the red brick pattern. And then the last thing I'll draw you to, which is another major change, is Windows. So before we were presenting always a very modern window that's just expansive glass. That's because that is what people want in the marketplace. That is what buyers love. Everybody loves these new modern big glass windows with very minimal frame. That being said, I recognize that that's a departure from Clayton tradition in the neighborhood and certainly this street. So drawing back on the themes of the other buildings that are on the street where they have big pieces of glass that are broken up with these strong mullions. We're showing here a mullion pattern in the window that starts to break it down, starts to divide it into smaller pieces, add transoms and other details that you would expect in traditional Clayton architecture. And in the end, so as a reminder, this is where we started. So we were there. We reduced it down in scale to there. But again, a very similar design, just a smaller scale. And now we are here. And so In all of that, I present this image to you as something that I feel blends very well with not only Clayton but the street, introducing even small details like stone caps on the brick planters and rails and around the windows and various things like that. So this is what we... would love to be able to build on Bemisden in the city of Clayton for your viewing pleasure. Thank you.

Well, Tyler, This is really a radical change from what we've seen before, as well as what was submitted to us. I wish we had been able to see it before the past 20 minutes. I think that... may provoke a totally different type of discussion. But I appreciate you taking the risk for your own profession. I think you're going in the right direction with some of the materials, some of the changes like the roof change, cutting the tower down. However, it really is all on the facade. my concern still stands that the two buildings really look as if they are one development. And, um, even with the changes to the materials, which, uh, really do relate to the context of the neighborhood a little better, the buildings still seem to be out of scale, uh, too high, um, sitting very far forward and giving the impression of a multifamily development. I think I may have to look at it much longer to see the details, try to walk down that street again and look at it with this because it's quite different. And I am still concerned with the context and the compatibility. And as you have referenced before in our 2040 tomorrow plan, there's the idea of the context sensitivity in there. And I think we still have to work on that because even with looking at all the houses on the west side of North Bemiston, I think there's still some discussion that needs to be made. I think the glass stairwell is one of them. It still reads to me, even though the glass has been broken down into smaller pieces that are decidedly more residential, it still has a very bold, high commercial look to it. I certainly understand your idea of the architectural idea of type A and type B. I see that working now. I think it's more successful than in the previous schemes, but I still am concerned about meeting the compatibility and the context. But let's go around and we'll have more discussion. Bob?

Yeah. Tyler, I can only imagine how frustrating it is for you and Doug trying to figure out where is the bullseye to make this work. From my point of view, the scenario you brought last time was beautiful, compatible, and it worked. And I thought I made That was my feeling, but I was certainly a minority last time. This time, as I see it, it's kind of like the sexiness has been pulled out of the buildings. You're a great architect. I don't want you to think you can never come back here, you know, but it has more of an office feel, actually. It's so boxy, the front, the rectangle, rectangular. You know, and... Another thing I want to say is the fact that the two buildings look like one apartment complex, I think, is chasing up a wrong tree. I could take two or three of these relatively new brick single-family homes, and they almost look like it was made by the same architect in Washington. you know, and big driveways in the middle. And it does nothing for me. And it looks like it's pretty similar. So the fact that you have two buildings side by side that, that look the same is not much different than having two single family homes on that side of the street that pretty much look the same as well. Um, so I, I'm not moved by that, but I would say that, um, um for the first time this look gives me uh makes me sit back just a little um that's all i have to say richard yeah

i mean i honestly when we like came here i I think I would have said something similar to what Bob said in the sense that, you know, the pizzazz was kind of gone. But it is hard for me to all of a sudden because this looks a lot different to me than what I have stared at in my packet for the last four days.

The only thing I just want to address that the only thing that's different from your packet are the windows

and the power element, which is a pretty strong statement.

What's the difference?

Well, according to again and I'm, I think you know Tyler I am here because I'm an alderman so I look at these pictures, and I think that's what a lot of the public looks at and when I look at these The tower element, I'm just saying the tower element is very different here than what I've been looking at.

I'm not following that. The window is what's different. The mullions added to it, the one in your packet just shows large pieces of glass.

Right.

The rest of the tower is the same. I don't get what you mean is different.

It's got an angled roof on the front packet. Also, it's a box. Oh, that's neat.

Again, we lowered it down to make it flat and shorter because you keep telling me it's too tall. So I'm making it shorter.

But that looks, I mean, this element looks very different. It does, like you said, you've tried to make things. So would you

like it if we put it, we can put up a angled roof on this. We can just have a

discussion. I'm just trying, like. I just don't know what

to do anymore.

I'm just making decisions like this are important to me. It's important to all of us. So I have walked up and down the street, like I think many of us have in the last few days, you know, trying to think about the plans that were before us. So I'm just having a little trouble kind of digesting. I am, I think as Steve mentioned, honestly when you look at it from this angle, the massing to me doesn't look as bad despite the fact that there is still kind of bigger towers in the middle. The massing to me looks much bigger from the front. I do like the windows a lot more. I think the windows fit a lot more in the neighborhood, like you've already mentioned, the more modern look. But I am still, again, concerned about the massing element. But I do, it's hard for me to, I guess, make a decision when I'm presented with something that looks a lot different to me than what I've looked at the last few days. So.

Kami?

I really appreciate all the things that you've done to alter this building from all the feedback that we gave you. I think a lot of your decisions were very smart. I do... have trouble with that stair tower. I do think it's a very prominent feature of this. And, you know, when you kind of went through like all the existing homes on that street, even like, you know, with your AB pattern, this is just, it really stands out as a very unique feature. And I think it's a prominent feature. So that's something I'm struggling with. As far as the windows, I think the mullions were a great feature to add. I think they're very heavy in this. It's kind of like if we could get like a balance between you know, the previous rendering and this, I think would help with that balance. But I think, you know, when you are trying to design with a modern idea, and then you're adding all these non-modern features, it kind of gets jumbled a little bit. And so I hear everything that you're saying is just like the final product, just with that stair tower, you know, like the gable roof and everything. It just kind of, it looks off in my opinion.

Tim?

Overall, I'm still kind of processing some of the design changes versus, once again, the packet that I've been staring at the last four days. I will say, at least in my own personal opinion, I believe that the hipped roof on both buildings, to me, that makes it read much more as two separate buildings. I believe I had previously said the asymmetric gable structure. Kind of on each side, kind of coming to the middle, I thought that's part of what made it read as a larger complex. To me, with the two-hipped roofs, I think that definitely helps make it look like two independent structures, even if they are mirrored. And I do understand on some level what you're saying with the garages and why that's mirrored. I guess just maybe to get ahead of some questions that probably will come up later, between this property and 141 to the north, is there a fence that exists there right now?

I don't believe so. I don't know. Neighbors would know better than I do.

Okay. And that fence will remain, correct?

Yes, it is. Okay. Yeah.

Okay, yeah. And beyond that, it's... Like I said, yes. You know, I think I echo some of the thoughts of everyone else that, you know, we received this packet in the mail and, you know, this is the picture that we kind of look at and make...

Do you like that picture better? Because I can just... We can just say that's it. I mean, I'll take anything.

If... If I'm being honest, I do. I do like this picture more than... I was told by... I understand

your frustration. I completely... I'm getting a lot of different feedback from a lot of different sources. It's hard to make everybody happy.

And I can understand that. And I think part of that is you have a body here of seven very different people who are coming at it from seven different angles. We don't get together and discuss and kind of have a cohesive statement that goes forward. And sometimes... I'm sure in a situation like this, it can make it very difficult. So I understand your frustration there.

David? It seems like the stair tower element is what a lot of people are struggling with here. Can you explain the necessity of that? From a functional standpoint, is there any way to put the stairs somewhere else in the building? There are

two units, one on top of the other. The person on the top needs to be able to get to their unit. so they need a stair um it'd be nice to be able to get to their unit from the front door so the stair needs to be connected to the front door

just trying to figure out yeah location wise because that seems to be it seems to be the element that throws it a little bit i mean when you look at this i think it's a lot closer to what you see on the street until you get to the until you get to

So stair towers are not allowed on Bemiston? That's

not what I'm saying. The building looks like it's cut in half where that stair tower is at, but just the block feature next to that hip roof, when I look at it, it just really, really splits the building. It looks like it's just kind of tacked onto the front of it. Right, exactly. So I'm just... It's listening to other feedback and it sounds like the stair towers is one of the elements everybody's struggling with so that that's the question about this doesn't have to be in that particular location is the location of those stairs what's driving that

functionally in the front stairs don't work any other place okay. I could wrap

the... My question is over that. I could take all the windows

out of it and make it look like a big blank wall so you wouldn't know it's a stair tower, but I don't think that would be good either.

The fact that it's this large rectangle, it's a very modern element, I think, and then you look at the rest of the building and it's not as modern at this point, so it just...

Yeah, I didn't know that modernism wasn't allowed.

I didn't say that. I've not implied that at any point. I'm just asking about the stair tower.

Tyler, let's go back to the two buildings on North Central, just south of Taylor Park, that you have said has been your inspiration in walking the three streets over the weekend. I found that those two buildings were far more horizontal in appearance than these two buildings. Granted, they still look like and most people think of it as one development, as a multifamily, although like this one, it is separated into two duplexes. But here we have your architectural element A and architectural element B very strongly stated But in your inspiration, those buildings really did not have a major A and a B. It was far more horizontal. It seemed to fit into the neighborhood, which on North Central has quite a bit of multifamily, but those tend to be predominantly more horizontal. We do get some big gable ends on a few of them. But as you're hearing, it does seem to come down to the stair element and the boldness of it standing out there. And I can see at night, it'll be lit up like a beacon on the street or two beacons if they're both lit up. Or a porch light. I'm talking about interior light. Yeah. So I think it's that, but let me go back to it because you've made many radical changes in the material and the execution and in the massing of various elements. But to me, it still goes back to dealing just with the facadism. That's all that we're really looking at that has made a difference. And I'll still say that the massing, the similarity, even though I understand the two brick colors are going to be Dave Kuntz, out of place in the neighborhood and potentially setting a precedent for more buildings that will. Dave Kuntz , Look as if they are multifamily now that could even mean that a developer in the future would come and want to rezone. a particular part of the neighborhood to R4, which would allow low density multifamily. I may have that terminology incorrect, but multifamily. So I think we're at a watershed moment right now of how this building, no matter what the facade looks like, fits into the neighborhoods. One other thing, when we look at the stairs and we were looking at the photographs of the homes on the west side of North Bemiston, there was one with the very large window that was really two stories in height. That is an occupied space where I think we would see probably shades at times and different lighting effects that may be on the first floor and the second floor. We're here. If this is lit up, this is one big column of light. So I really think you need to think how that will affect the rest of the neighborhood. If there are any further comments from the ARB, we can take them now. But we have several people in the audience that I see heads shaking. They would like to make comments. Okay. Tyler, we'll get some comments and then we'll be back to...

My only request is that we don't go for three hours before you tell me we're going to continue it. So if that's the predetermined notion, let's say that now before we go through three hours of bashing.

I appreciate that. I hope it's not bashing and I hope it's realistic. And I will ask anyone that wants to speak, come up, identify yourself by name, address, and limit your comments to three minutes. Please come on up. Your three minutes is starting.

Cheryl Anderson Miller, 130B North Central. I live directly behind this property. Tyler, thank you for the changes you're making. You're really... trying hard to get into what the neighborhood feel is from your first rendering to this it's significant and i think we in the neighborhood appreciate the fact that you're working to work with us and i know it's frustrating to you but thank you um my concerns are i live behind it And I'm concerned about the massing in the back as well. There's the big patios in the back that are going to look right directly into my bedroom. and into my property, and I'm concerned about that. I'm concerned about the noise from the air conditioners, and I know there was some comments made over the weekend. We'll just put them by the garages at the back of the property. Well, then that affects our noise. So to me, it would make sense to put the air conditioners down in where the cars drive in. um i'm also concerned about i think that the garden plans are beautiful um the tiered gardens but i'm concerned about the drainage there and the integrity of our garages with those being built that our garages not be affected in terms of all the digging that's going to go on to tear that um So if we can just make sure that there's adequate drainage for that, because I think it's a beautiful plan. We need to make sure that it's drained properly. We are losing a lot of trees on the property that give us privacy. I don't know if you are planning on... I know Baxter Garden is doing the... landscaping and I don't know if you're planning on taking all the trees down, especially those at the garage area, but those if those could be left, you know at the wall area that would still provide some privacy. So I believe those are my comments and thank you for listening in your time,

thank you. Next Suzanne.

Hi, you all. Some of you know me, some of you don't, but I live at 159 North Central and I am standing here alone. But in 1976, my husband, our builder, Hank Altpeter, And I were here to try and get a permit to build what has become really the Renaissance of the area that I live in. The two streets that are my neighbors and my neighborhood are North Beamiston and North Central. And they have approximately 50 houses, eight duplexes. And we are very diversified, which was prior to when we came before this group. And they had special permits and that's no longer. Anyway, I won't get to that. I have a lot to say, so I want to say it quickly. So when we bought the lot and came, it was our builders. that saw the piece of property on North Central. At that time, North Central had a grocery store where the library is. Big buses, trucks, and everything were coming down Pershing and traveling south on North Central. And that, of course, Hugh Scott and some other people, mayors, all, but the point is that this lot had a seven-foot elevation. What kind of a house could we put on a seven foot elevation? And at that time, there had been no construction in this particular area that I'm speaking of, this small little area that I live in, that's in this big massive part of Clayton. Nothing had been built in 27 years. Our builder suggested that what we might call a townhouse that had never been built. That wasn't on your record. You all didn't have any little things to look at. And the people that worked for Clayton said, we have to come around. There was a Mr. Gravitz. I wish I could remember some of the names, Steve, of the other people that took part. I think Mayor Stith, I think was the mayor. But the point is at that time they thought, hey, we don't have any really plans and I'm just cutting this down. And our builder said, well, maybe we could work together and great. So they came up with the idea of having a garage underneath and the house go up. Okay, and what was said to us is we need to have something that that is in balance, something that the city of Clayton has tried to put forth to all the people that live here, build here. We need balance. That's a really hard thing for you all to do because it comes in all sizes and all colors. But I want to say that Mr. Gravitz and a lot of the people that were in Clayton, as a matter of fact, the very morning that we were to start, nobody could decide on where the building line was because there was a streetcar that ran down the street. It was 50 degrees on one side and 60 on the other. So they came with a guy that had one of those things, and Mr. Gravitz and all the mayors and everybody else were there. The guy is waiting to dig, and they decided, this is where you're going to build it. The guy put a stake in, and they started work. And from that day forward... we and Clayton, the people that assigned to make up the rules and regulations of what a so-called townhouse would be. And I would say they were there every single solitary day of our, but we, our builder, excuse me, our builder And they wanted us to have something balanced for the neighborhood, suggested the brick in our house and the house next door, which was built the year after we built ours, was built out of old brick that was taken from the buildings that were in the expansion that went from Grand on down. I'm sorry, I can't think of the name of it, but I'm trying to rush through my two minutes.

We'll have to wrap it up. And I thank you. Can I

just say one

word? Sure.

What I'm here tonight to is present to you that I would like to see that you go forward with balance. And the number one thing that I'd like to say, if you want a perfect example of it, is look at Graybar Electric, Ceylon, the Shanley House, and Beamiston Place. If they can do it, I believe that Mr. Douglas could do it if he wants to be in the neighborhood to fit in. Thank you.

Thank you.

Mark Wohler, 141 North Bemiston. Probably lose a friend that was up here earlier, but my issue isn't real sexy either. But we spoke last time and we were kind of dismissed very quickly about the location of the air conditioning units between our two homes. They're going to be roughly five feet or so from our front door and our living space. Going to be in a tunnel area. noise is going to reverberate it's going to be very noisy we think the solution or an easy solution is put them the units in the backyard on the property line they're up against the garages for the north central condos the condos probably have 30 plus feet from those there's landscaping, the garages. It's basically a brick wall in the back there that would buffer the noise. But five feet out our door, I assume most of you wouldn't want air conditioners five feet out to your front door. We did talk to a good friend who's a PhD audiologist and she was that these were being placed in this tunnel area. Because again, the noise will reverberate and needs to dissipate so it's not so noisy. We also talked to an HVAC pretty well-known contractor in town. He said the top units roughly create 65 decimals of noise. So there's four of these units and you can do the multiplication it's probably not four times 65 is probably 200 plus normal. speech back and forth to 60 decimals. Police sirens 90. and 85 you start have hearing possible issues if the noise is out loud so we think at a location ours are in the backyard away from the buildings we think these can go in the backyard very easily and not create any problems for anybody so the other the other issue is it was mentioned earlier there's huge trees on this property that are going to be removed Is there insurance certificates that the contractor and the subcontractors have to file? One of these trees is actually probably six inches from our fence. Another one's probably three feet over our roof. They're huge. And those aren't the biggest ones. And I'm just concerned about damage potentially. And I just want to know, do they have to file insurance certificates or to make sure that if some damage does happen, we're covered?

Well, on your first item on the air conditioning units, we'll be talking about that in detail as we go further. There are certainly ample locations that those could be relocated on the site. On your second one about insurance certificates for the trees, actually, I would have to ask

you, Ryan. Trees are a real concern because they're so big.

Speaking to the items discussed, the first I'll mention is that the placement of HVAC units as well as the landscape was approved as part of site plan review last time. But I will additionally say that as far as tree protection, whenever they do go for their building permits, they will have to provide tree protection plans. Even if a tree is technically offsite but could be impacted by the construction or the disturbance area, they would have to provide tree-protection fencing for that.

Some of these trees are probably older than home. So,

well I think Ryan I think most of the trees are coming down like according to the plan so but there, I mean there's insurance that I mean if there's damage to the house. The owner of the property would have to cover any damage or the city won't

necessarily get involved but it would be a private matter between the owners. Okay.

Thank you.

Hi, I'm Sandy Gralnick at 132 North Beamiston across the street from that. And Ed Ellerman built our house. He built a lot of houses in the area. I think he did a good job. I don't feel that this has the charm that the neighborhood has. And I think it needs to be softened. But my biggest concern, our street is very narrow. And when you get a truck down the street, you have to wait for the truck to leave. You can't even pass the garbage trucks half the time because the street is narrow. We've had two, one was a redo next door to me and the other was a house that was built two doors down. And these trucks blocked our driveways. We couldn't get out. And that can't be. And I propose that they close the east side of Bemiston for residents only and let the construction park on the west side because it's impossible to get down the street when you have these trucks Trucks, deliveries. We've just been through it for two years. That's my biggest concern.

Thank you. Some of our narrow streets have parking only on one side. And in my neighborhood, they switch every six months. So that's something I would suggest you bring up with the city administration. Oh, wow. Okay. That's not in our purview here.

There will be like construction is difficult. I mean, in any stretch. I know.

Listen, I've lived in Clayton my entire life. I've gone from Y down to Old Town.

So I'm aware of I think, you know, I think, too, there was construction in other areas of the city where, you know, the park. I mean, the construction traffic was terrible. People were illegally parking. So, I mean, that is where we can certainly I know parking patrols can go out more frequently to make sure driveways aren't blocked and but, you know, again. I know city staff will do their best to kind of, you know, ameliorate any construction difficulties. Yeah, well, when you

have an appointment and you're driving.

And it is a very narrow street. I agree with you.

Very narrow. Very, yeah.

Thank you.

Okay, and I'm going to find out who I contact. Okay.

Come on. If we could keep the comments short and pertaining to the application.

Okay. My name is Joel Miller. I live at 130, the first one that spoke, and I live together as husband and wife, so we're on the same page. I have three comments. One, perhaps for the architect, the top part of each of the towers above the glass line, is that a functional area or just continuing up in space? Okay, so it's not stairwell above the glass in our usable space. Okay, but if it's, I know it's an issue of discussion among all of you, but that upper third of the two towers sounds like it's Second issue I have, and I'm sorry I have to do this. Is the green light on? Yes. Can you hear me? Can you hear me now?

We can hear you. We can't hear any of the responses to your questions that you've been

asking. Okay. The other issue is about the HVAC units and where you suggest, and I think they're planned now, they would abut the wall at the back of my unit. And I think they have to be set back from the wall three feet by code, a little vague on that. But it's not solid garages, so we would have to contend with that noise. And I wish there were a better place to put it. Well, I think they're going to clear that out, which gets me to my last issue, which is to make this thing work, he's got to clear out a lot of trees. But I hate to see that 100-year-old oak go. It's healthy. It's large. It's aesthetically beautiful. And I hope there's a way to save it. That's all I have. Thank you very much. Thank you. Come on up.

Hi, everybody. I'm Steve Burrows. My wife is on the Zoom aspect and we live at 142 North Beamiston, right across the street from the proposed structure. We oppose the design as currently submitted. And while we can see the recent revisions that have been made in an attempt to soften the overly contemporary look of the two structures, In our opinion, the problem is that the proposed project remains incompatible with the surrounding area. And it's incompatible because the two structures which has been mentioned by a couple people are basically mirror images of each other and even Tyler mentioned that they're symmetrical. And they present themselves more as what I'll call a condo complex and not two different structures. And to us, that's clearly not consistent with the surrounding area of North Bemiston. Actually, this look would be pretty appropriate if it was placed in an area of like Topton or Brighton Way, or even on North Central between Kingsbury and Delmar where there's a lot of these more condominium complex type structures. So as such, we would ask that the ARB not approve this project as presented and defer any further reviews until the applicant brings a design which provides a very clear differentiation between the two structures to eliminate that condo complex or office building like appearance. and to meet the ARB goals of maintaining the context, the character, the compatibility, and the integrity of the neighborhood. Failing to do so will set a precedent for more similar and incompatible developments which will undermine the character and charm of the Old Town-Platon neighborhood. Thank you for considering our point of view. Thank you.

Any others?

Sorry. Patty Kiesel Sutherland, 143 North Beamiston. First of all, Tyler, I feel like you're the giving tree tonight. Because you really have made so many changes. And I go back and I walk my dogs around the neighborhood two, three, many of you will attest, too many times a day. But one thing I just wanted to point out is that when you use the property as central on the park, the Lou Sowers property, what everyone needs to remember is that when you look at that property, there are not any facades on either side. To the north is Taylor Park. And to the south, it is the house that faces Pershing. And it is just the green space of the side yard to that house. So it's not presented with facades on either side. And that's the exact same way with the two condos at 7747 and 7749 Maryland across from the post office, which are also in that same kind of vein. of design, that does not have facades on either side as well because the house that's next to it faces Linden and there is no house on the corner. So I think going back to the original premise that you're inspired by a very, I mean, I like the architecture of Central on the Park. And I believe Steve made the comment at one of the earlier meetings that it was a great design for a different lot. And I think that's exactly what you find is because that property sits by itself and stands out in its design stands out because it is not between two other kind of bookends that may or may not match. So and also 151 is getting painted, so it's not going to be brick. 151 is turning gray, and that's another Doug Cohen project. So as far as color, it doesn't have to be.

Thank you. Nancy?

Hello, I'm Nancy Georgian. My husband Mike and I live at 224 North Bemiston Avenue. And my comments are essentially along the size of the massing. They have made great efforts on having this fit in better to the neighborhood. But the R3 zoning was adopted to stop the development of the condominium complexes. The purpose was to retain the residential nature of Old Town, and it was specifically adopted for single-family and two-family houses. This property is being marketed as a complex It's on the website as a condominium of a complex of two elegant buildings. I do think that both this design and the one that was submitted that we all looked at are a great improvement, but the mass and the design is clearly a complex, and I feel that once we do this, it's that proverbial take the finger out of the dam or whatever, you open the door, and we're going to have This is the precedent that you can now develop these buildings and buy two or three lots and have a condominium complex. So I do think we have to give great consideration to that when we're looking at what makes these buildings different. I do think that the architecture, having the different brick in some of this would go a long way to fitting it in the neighborhood. I just don't think this is it. Thank you. Thanks.

Good evening. I'm Patty Chapin at 148 North Central. I'm still opposed to the rooftop terrace, which will overlook the residents on North Central. Thanks. Thank you.

Any other comments? Do we have any one online? No hands. Okay. Any other comments from the Planning Commission, ARB? Tyler, any further comments? Or Doug?

So I guess my main comment is I think what's really going on here is nobody wants to see anything built on this lot, I think is what it really comes down to. And so it doesn't really matter what I present, you're not going to like it. So I feel like before we come back with more changes, if it's possible for us to get in a room and for me to give you all some tracing paper and pencils and tell them, you know, design something. Um, because I don't, I don't think, I don't know. I don't think that anything I bring forward is going to be something that you like, um, unless we just build two single family houses here, but even that, I don't I really am surprised. I mean, you talked about setting precedent for the future. That's a lot of weight to put on any project to say that the look of it might influence someone to want to change the zoning. I can't control what people are going to want to change. And that's all in your purview. If you don't want to change the So I don't think that's a very fair thing to put on us. With regard to a large window, I mean, yes, that stair is a large window. I showed you other buildings on the street that have large windows, and I don't think, even if there were no other buildings that had large windows, I don't think a large window is necessarily incompatible with anything else. You can go... look at all the various architecture down Lindell Boulevard on the north side of the park and see a variety of old houses, some of which have slightly, have all different styles of elements, Tudor and Victorian. And there's some Germanic in there. There's even some modern. They have all kinds of, and some have large windows, some have small windows. I don't see why the size of the window has to do with compatibility with as long as the scale resides. So I think there's just a disconnect in what you all would like to see, and I can't read your minds. So I'd like to be able to meet with you outside of this meeting. I think the guy who suggested we don't come back until we have something that is compatible, I think he's right. We should all sit down together in a room and have conversations everybody put pen to paper and see what comes out.

And I, my name is Doug Cohen. I'd like to add to that because you know, we build in all different municipalities and we're, I've never been one that we've gone down this far down this path. And I know that maybe Steve, you're not in, haven't met with us before we go formal, but in this case, it's just, there's gotta be an exception to every rule. The interest expense and the delays are just exorbitant here. And you know, I mean, I, I think that we would cancel the vote. We're not going to vote tonight. And, and I would like to dismiss everybody, and then have as many of this group, spend a half hour with us right now to go over some fundamental items that we can change. And so that when we come back the next time, we can have a head start instead of just throwing darts at a wall and just praying because there's too many personalities. We have one person that wants to go back to the contemporary. We have one that is trying, I mean, I just, you can't, I can't please everybody. And Tyler's getting really too frustrated and we don't want that. That's my main concern is we don't want to get Tyler frustrated and throw up a design that no one's going to want because that's just going to cause me a heartache in financial failure. So I'm going to ask you very passionately, that we can dismiss everybody. I'd like to, I think we could take a half hour, go over some fundamental changes that we can get together, that I can live with, that Tyler's proud of, and that you can accept so that when we come to next time, we can have a head start. I don't think that's asking too much. And we really, I think that's important.

Well, I think the idea of you meeting with the citizens would be very good. I don't of time or location, though.

I'm not talking about a town hall

meeting.

That would be an absolute disaster because then we'd have an amalgam of things. I'm talking about you all, the decision makers.

Well, in response to that, we are not the design group. I'm not sure if you will hear or see anything different if we sit down outside of this meeting

I beg to differ. I think that we can, I mean, every little bit of feedback when everyone, whether I can get a majority of the people to say, I like that, gives us direction. But when we're getting it piecemeal, we're all just wasting our

time. Well, I can't speak for the other people on here, but I will say that my comments from the very first meeting are the same comments I had tonight. They were not predominantly about architecture. They were about the character in the neighborhood. And part of the challenge that the ARB is supposed to uphold is the sensitivity, the compatibility, the contextualism of any developments in the residential areas. One

thing I want to talk about is the compatibility in kind of private because it may be the solution maybe just to have one two-family and then one single-family and that would... eliminate the look of the condo complex you know so i think that we just have to have a chat about these things so we don't keep coming back here and wasting everybody's time and and uh and trying to get something if we can just talk privately we could get some direction on where we're going to go on the next meeting

well doug i think that that would probably i mean i again can't speak for others but that it only makes me uncomfortable in the sense that if you start hearing that Bob and I like a design after we sit down with you, I think there would be an expectation from you that I would vote for the project, which I don't think anybody wants to

see. I'm willing to take that risk.

I know that, but I think that that makes me uncomfortable. You've formally submitted an application. If you were going to withdraw the application and start from scratch, that would be one thing, but you have a formal application, and I certainly have a policy of not meeting with people privately once there's been a formal application submitted. But I think there has been a lot of feedback. I mean, what you just said just now, I'm not suggesting that you have a single family home and a duplex, but I think you've heard over and over and over again that the mirror images present as a condo complex and that looks nothing like anything else on the entire street. So I just, I think you have heard a lot of feedback and Tyler, I adamantly disagree with you. I think there's not a single person in this room that doesn't want something built here. Nobody wants to see... The house is coming down. The construction fence is up. But we have to find something that will live in this neighborhood for the next 100 years. And if that has to take a few meetings, I'm sorry, but that's kind of where we're at.

We understand it'll take a few. But the... We just don't want to get into a few dozen. Yeah, so...

We are in the third meeting of a structure that will live on this street that these people will stare at for the rest of their lives. So this is important, and I understand your frustrations, but we're all doing our best up here to work with you guys and to work with the neighborhood. I

promise you. I agree with you in terms of longevity of buildings. I totally understand that, and I very much agree. So that's not what I'm talking about. I think there's just a It's hard when I'm an architect who's trained to know how to make things look good and be compatible. And when I do that, there are a lot of other opinions. I don't know of any other occupation where people get to go into your work and criticize your work before you put it out there.

That's why I couldn't be an artist. I couldn't do what you do. But I think also there has to be an expectation that people will differ on what you think is compatible. And again, we are just doing our best to work with all the parties

here. We'll do it. We will come back with something that you will love. I guarantee it.

Doug, you made a comment that there should be no vote tonight. I think we're at that point. There should not be any vote tonight. And I would propose that we table it to a date uncertain when you are ready to come back.

I move we continue the architectural review here.

Second.

All in favor?

I'm posed. Okay. Thank you. Okay, thank you to everybody in the audience and to those online. We will see how we proceed in the next time. Thank you.

Motion to adjourn.

Second. All right, all right.