October 19, 2026 — Meeting Transcript

Steve Lichtenfeld. Helen DiFate.

Steve Lichtenfeld. Helen DeFate.

Here.

Jim Arsenault. Here. Chris Brennan.

Here.

Claire Queskin.

Here.

Jeff Marcy. Here. Susan Buse.

Here.

Thank you. The changes.

I just have one change in all business that the last line arsenals is just misspelled. Arsenal seconded a motion for 48 around all

yeah,

it's just 2 letters transposed.

And

do we have any motion.

I move to approve as submitted with the correction.

Second. All in favor? Aye. Opposed? This is the time for the open forum. If you have signed up outside and up to the planning commission that is not on tonight's agenda, please come forth. We will move on to our old business first. The first item is we'll get started with the report.

This application was presented and continued at meetings on August 17, and October 5. So given that I'll just quickly note the changes and recommendation. Revised plans were provided with the following changes. The new parapet was revised to meet the roof slope. Bird safe glass film is noted and additional technical details have been added. Staff recommend approval as submitted.

Come on out. Okay, great. Welcome back.

Thank you. Great to see you all again. Thank you for the time to be here. Appreciate the conversation feedback last time and wanted to discuss some of that feedback, what it was, and hopefully can meet, I think, all the questions that you had last time as well. In our last conversation coming out of that, we had talked to Susan for a little bit about bird safe glass. We talked about this need to see the actual materials themselves as well as questions about the specific roofing material on the addition and then how that roofing material meets with the existing structure as well. So we've come back with that information and we've also brought our architect and contractor to be able to speak in additional detail to any questions you may have. So in terms of the bird safe glass, we selected the bird divert glass material. That was actually funny enough. My wife, kind of focused in on that one, picked it out. And then I think Ryan forwarded the email from you from a friend of yours, maybe Deb, I think on Thursday, and it was the same kind of recommendation, same material. So excited to be aligned on that front. In terms of the materials, we have some of those here for you to see in the standing seam steel siding, as well as the roofing material on the rubber on the addition is EPDM. So that's ethylene propylene diene. Monomer, I believe, but it's a 60 mil is the is the kind of recommended standard for flat or slightly sloped roof in residential homes and actually walking around the neighborhood found several houses that have a similar sloped. roof traditional roof that goes into a flat addition both at two and five wide down terrace you can see that there too so it's very similar in that regard but it is again that's epdm ethylene propylene diene monomer 60 mil is that material that we are recommending And I think that's everything that I was hoping to bring back today, but happy to answer any questions myself or lean on our architect or contractor for additional detail.

Well, thank you for listening and participating in the discussion. If we could hear about how the Parapet is meeting the existing house. I think that's one thing we were looking at before and really did not clarify.

And when you say the parapet, are you referring to the actual wall itself or the rubber material? Okay. The wall. The wall. Yep. So it will come off the addition and I believe it should, it will go into the actual slope of the existing structure up into the point where it meets the slope of the roof on the existing structure. And then so the water will be able to, yeah, if you go back. Yep. And you can see the trusses. So the truss is actually a webbed truss on the addition. And so it is much thicker than a truss on the traditional roof, which is why it's actually a little bit higher to be able to support that. And it comes into the slope of the roof there just above the existing gutter line. Yeah, the gutter.

So you will have to redo the existing roof slightly

we will have to attach on to the top of it and then the rubber as it connects actually uh will go up the existing roof about two to three feet underneath the existing shingles yeah and part of the reason for that given our it's really high heat in the summer and then also in the winter are really cold winters that we have in particular with when we get a heavy snow something we have to look out for is the freeze thawing that occurs during the day where it can melt that snow and it starts to run down and it freezes and hardens so we want to make sure it doesn't actually you know go up above that rubber and back up the roof so it actually will run about two to three feet up on the existing structure.

You answered my main question, so I appreciate that. Helen?

I think my questions were those and also about the standing seam aligning with the window opening. And if you go through the wonderful samples, examples that you gave to us, and you look at them closely, you can see that they align. And I think as I pointed out the last time, computers and computers The subtleties, you can't get them unless you spend an inordinate amount of time trying to do that. And that's not time or money spent wisely. But I would still look at that as you're going through the process and you have the full size construction documents. The other thing... I would consider, I know on the bump out you have for the fireplace, you have a shingle roof on that. I think about a standing seam metal roof kind of, so it wraps...

I know exactly what you mean.

Yeah.

I think actually in one of the pictures provided in one of the previous slides, there was an example of a standing seam structure that had the roof lines match up with the sidelines. I am aligned with that as well. That would be my preference.

So those are details that really you can, as long as you're aware of them, working them out on paper at this point is...

Sure.

You need to focus on the bigger details. Yes. So I think it looks great.

Thank you. Jim? Hey, Jim. I think the majority of my questions were answered by the additional plans that were provided, so thank you for that. Do you want to take your materials and put them up here and kind of walk through them? This

is the black stainless steel.

If you prep it up on those stands, then we can see it.

That's what this is for?

This is...

This is the black standing seam steel. It comes in a 24 gauge is what's recommended thickness for residential buildings, but also for this climate and should be able to withstand the expansion in the summer and then the contraction during the winter. And these actually lock in together side by side. And that's the standing seam you'll see there. This is, again, the EPDM rubber. And as you can see... This is the thickness of it, but it is impermeable, so it doesn't allow water to go through. And then so this will wrap up the walls of the parapet wall and through the corners, and so it will carry it, again, all the way up the roof of the existing structure. So this will prevent water from leaking through, but also snow, ice, that sort of thing. It's good at allowing it to run off. And then that is wood for the inset siding around the windows and doors. So we're looking at doing a wood siding and cladding there to match the kind of modern aesthetic of...

It'll be vertical.

Yes, vertical. Yeah, we think that matches the vertical seams you'll see on the black standing seal as well as just the modern aesthetic.

Great, thanks. I don't think I have any more questions.

Thanks, Jim.

Chris?

You're going to become an expert at this by the time you're all

through, right? I love it. Not like an expert about this now.

Thank you. A couple of questions for you. One, if EPDM was a Scrabble word, do you know what the point value of it would be? Oh,

no, not at all. The whole thing. Gosh, yeah. It's the whole board. I win,

right? Specifically for this one, I'm curious about the drainage and whether we were going with that interior sort of drainage. And I guess it's more for the architect just whether there's any sort of concern about that. And my only thinking, and it's a no way to dissuade you from doing this. You know, I love this. Love the direction you've gone. You've been great partners with this. I'm thinking about what happens when leaf kind of builds up on top of that flat roof and then clogs those gutters. I know I have a mansard roof on our house, but we have very large gutters that accommodate kind of that. So just wondering from the architect's standpoint what what kind of thought has been given towards that

so that's a detail that we actually haven't worked out yet but in my mind um my thought is we would have an overload drain so if it's clogged it's apparent on the exterior of the building so that it can be unclogged immediately and then yeah i just i like the idea of not having the gutters on the exterior of We had thought about it, but Brian was more up for having them internal and hidden. So that's, that's the plan at this point. The details haven't been worked out yet, but we do plan to have an X, an extra year opening for overflow. Okay, so you'd

be able to notice it if it's okay. Yeah. Okay,

that's

great.

Hi, I'm Lisa Sheerholz. I'm the contractor. It's a very common way, the internal gutters to do it on commercial buildings and the systems are very complete with how you build them in. They work, in my opinion, better than standard gutters. And because they're internal and the way that they're installed, clogging is very unusual. I mean, it can happen and we'll have something that'll be in place in case it does, but they're better. So I think that you could feel good about them working.

That's great. That's what I was looking for as well. And thank you to you all for being your willingness to work through this too. I mean, we're excited about how this has turned out. I think it's a cool project.

Blair?

I don't have any further questions to add. Thank you.

Jeff? Hi. Sorry, I missed two weeks ago, but I'm catching up. And I really appreciate the direction you're heading here. I want to make sure I understood the last conversation. Is it internal downspouts also? Okay. Okay. So, yeah, that's a little tricky to get done correct and that you never have a problem with that going forward.

I'm so sorry. it is a standing seam you know exterior so if there was a problem that's that is a beauty of standing seam because you can take off a section and fix it right so that works way to hit their favor if there would ever be but the way that it's done um like i said it's hidden behind it's usually done in a very hard pvc um you can't crush it you can't hurt it So it would have to, and it has a grate on the top. So it would really have to, in the way that their roof slopes, you're not gonna have standing water up there. We do it on flat, where this really became essential is on very flat roofs and commercial where there is no slope. You're just sloping the rubber roof and that's it. But in this circumstance, we don't have that.

And that's a insulated downspout, I assume?

Yes, I mean, yeah, it does.

Because I'm less worried about debris than I am about snow and ice. Right. Just because that's – I'm with you. I've also got a low-sloped garage. it's amazing the amount of snow that builds up up there to just make sure you're handling that and not freezing eventually and having all kinds of other issues um another question that i if i would have been here two weeks ago i would have asked um the new trusses for the addition or wood trusses i assume is that correct okay um yeah i wish And that kind of, to me, explains the height of the addition, because I know you'd take that much depth to do that sort of a span. It's a little... I wish the addition could be a little shorter, but I understand with that sort of construction, it probably can't be. Cause it's sort of when you look at your elevations compared to the rendering that's in here and the rendering reads lower like the addition kind of lands into the gutter line of the original house, but it doesn't, it sort of overtakes it. But I don't think that's a deal breaker. And I understand use of wood trusses, Otherwise, I think it's really attractive. I don't have anything else.

It's going to be a really cool job.

Susan?

First of all, my impression is you are an expert already. Thanks. And I appreciate the responsible and responsive way that you all have approached this. I think that you've infected everybody with excitement and the vision of this project. And the bird safe glass, I'm very appreciative of your work on that. I'm just curious, did you get by WashU or the zoo and look at where they put any of the products?

There's one product I think in the new building right there on Skinker from WashU. You can see the bird safe glass. They've just installed it I think in the last month or so. But yeah, that's the one I've seen. I have not been further on campus to see others if there are.

Yeah, it's interesting because as we were getting bird counts the last few years and things like that, I think, and realizing how many cities already have ordinances in place and things like that. it's becoming more and more awareness. And so, again, I appreciate you all doing this. And it's also interesting that you decided to do the film versus by the glass with the install that's already prepared. So learning from what your experience is on that as well. So I appreciate it very much.

Of course. Thank you. Well, and I must admit, I've learned from you as well because I did not realize –

community

yes exactly i didn't realize the like mass migration patterns either so i've looked those up and like learned since our last meeting um and then sure enough like last week i saw probably more geese than i've ever seen flying in a v ever before there was probably 50 of them i was like wow sure enough here they are they're going south right over our house

And that can ruin a family card game.

Yeah, for

sure. Yeah, so thank you. It looks great.

Thank you. And I think the biggest issue there, by the way, with bird deterrent. Birds have trouble with glass if they believe there are trees beyond it or trees reflected in it. So that kind of the reflectivity of the glass makes a difference because if there's nothing beyond the glass that they want to go to, they often don't hit it. Now, when they see trees, they do. So hopefully the glass doesn't have much reflectivity to it. That would help because I don't know. in the back of your yard, I don't know how treed that is. That would be the issue of them saying, oh, that's where I need to head. One other thing I forgot to ask, I'm sorry. You have a concrete step outside the back. Is there any sort of deck slash et cetera planned there? The stage was

straight to grass, yeah.

I'm sorry, what? At

this stage, straight to grass.

Okay.

Yeah, we're looking to maximize the yard for, we have three young kids.

Okay, okay. Actually, I kind of like that flat plant class. Thank you. Great, thanks.

Any other comments? No. Any comments from the audience? No. Well, we do have a recommendation to approve. Do we have a motion?

I move to approve as submitted.

Second. All in favor? Aye. Opposed? Okay. When will it start?

As soon as possible. I'm sure we can get plans submitted and approved. Yeah, right.

Assistant.

Thank you all so much. Appreciate your time and partnership on this. We're really excited.

Good luck with it.

Yeah, thank you.

Okay. Our first item in new business is 7471 Cromwell. believe everyone is here again we'll start with the

staff report the subject property is located on the northeast corner of the intersection of cromwell and glenridge is zoned r2 and is developed with the two-story single-family house the primary front yard and driveway access are located along cromwell the secondary front yard is along glenridge The applicant is seeking approval for the construction of a covered patio, carport, and new driveway. The covered patio would be constructed on the west side of the rear facade adjacent to the secondary front yard. The carport would be located in the northeast corner of the property. The driveway would largely be located in the same location with some modification to support the proposed carport. The site has an existing metal fence which would be retained and modified to accommodate the improvements. The improvements proposed the use of hardy stucco board and trim, which would result in the facades not meeting the material ratio guidelines. Similar styles can be found on the existing house and in the surrounding area, and staff are of the opinion that the proposal would have a minimal visual impact. Staff recommend approval as submitted.

Okay, thank you. The applicant or applicants? the materials can go on the table, on the easels.

Hi, I'm Edward Stevens, the architect. And this is the homeowner, DJ Gellner. And then this is the contractor, Sean Scalise. And we have two phases on this, but phase one is more interiors and renovation. And what we're here tonight, though, is for phase two, which is the exterior work. And the exterior work consists of, like we were already told, is a 24-foot by 16-foot outdoor room with a 4-foot 8-by-8-foot outdoor kitchen grilling area connected to that. this this is a deck not a patio that we're doing under the covered outdoor room um and uh anyway the outdoor room will have a outdoor fireplace with a stone front and uh and uh we'll also have stone piers you know, with the wood columns and the columns will be a composite wrap. And the ceiling's gonna be a stained vaulted wood tongue and groove ceiling. And we're gonna use the fiber cement hardy panels and add the trim over it to give that, you know, stucco finish that we've got on the rest of the house. And let's see. And anyway, the new outdoor room is going to go behind the existing dining room and office. And then in addition, we're going to add a 24 foot by 24 foot detached carport with some storage above. And once again, we're going have the same stone piers with the wood columns and the same ceiling material, but it'll be a flat tongue and groove stained wood ceiling. And then we're also going to replace the driveway, make it a little bit wider, and then go up to the new carport with a turnaround space.

Questions? Well, first let's start with comments. Okay. I think it looks great. I really think it fits into both the design of the house and in the neighborhood itself. And of course, it's on a tight corner lot with essentially two front yards. And when I was over there, I see phase one is really ongoing. Looks like the current garage is going to become a family room or something. That's correct. So it is moving on. You mentioned the driveway. I thought the driveway was very narrow. Are you widening it toward the house?

Yeah, widening it toward the house, and it would be about 2 foot 8 inches over from where it is now. Right now it's roughly a 10-foot wide driveway, and we're changing it to 12 foot 8. Let me just confirm. I've only done three site plans on this, so let me make sure I'm quoting the right number. Yes, 12 foot 8. Okay.

Well, of course, I didn't measure anything, but as long as it's on the owner's property, that works out. Okay. really had no major questions I thought the materials look good the detailing is certainly in line with everything in the neighborhood and it'll make a big change in a much more private backyard

that's what we're trying to accomplish

we'll go around Ellen

Okay, I assume that the overhang on the carport is so that you can navigate in and out. The roof...

Oh, the cantilever? Yes.

Yeah, the cantilevers. Yes. That, looking at it just as a cold line drawing, it looks a little bit...

Did you?

Oh,

you got the color right there too.

Yeah. But I see exactly why you're doing it. And I know I have a tight driveway and a curve and my garage is almost behind the house. So yes, you can navigate. You can get in there in one swing. Getting out, it's a couple of motions. But I think it looks great. The only thing that concerns me on the outdoor deck, the outdoor room, is that you bring the stone down to the ground in some places but not in others.

Okay. Okay.

If you look at sheet five on the rear elevation where you have the grill on the left, that is on posts. You know, short. But having a heavy material, visually heavy.

That's a good point. Yeah.

It looks cheap.

Yeah, we could change that. This,

I know, is not a cheap attempt. Right. That, if you would bring the stone down to the ground, wherever you have stone, do it on the piers.

Yeah, no, I agree with you. That's a good comment.

And then on that same sheet, the interior elevation, the outdoor room, You bring the finished material to the deck. But if you go on the right side elevation, which would be, let's see, hold on a minute. The partial left side elevation.

Okay.

Which would be Glenridge.

Yeah.

That same finished material doesn't go to grade. And again, you see the posts.

Yeah.

Again, looks cheap.

Okay.

You know, I realize putting something that hits grade, it's subject to wicking moisture and everything else. Right. But if you could bring it down to like within two inches, like we do with fencing material. Sure. So that it has the appearance. of a full foundation wall and more of a true house wall. OK. I realize you can plant, but I always look at things as though the plants all died.

Sure.

OK. So those are my only concerns about it. Otherwise, I think it looks great. Not too jealous. You know, I think those things will add a lot to it.

Okay. Yeah.

Other than that, I have no questions.

Jim? I think the carport's great. I have absolutely no issues with that. My only kind of issue is on this left side elevation. All the stucco elements, for the most part, or the stucco accents, first of all, acts very much as an accent on the main building. And most of those accents exist up on the second floor. So I worry about such a large stucco expanse. It makes it kind of look almost like it's just stuck on the building. I feel like, at least personally, if that kind of horizontal element before the roof goes up. If below that was brick that matched the house where it was just stucco up above that on, on just that left side elevation. I think that would be, I personally think that'd be a big improvement also being that that faces Glenridge. So it's kind of a major thoroughfare through there. It's not like it's going to be hidden between two houses or anything like that.

Yeah. We did look at that. Actually, Sean did and they weren't able to really find a brick to match. I've

exhausted. I've checked everywhere locally with all the restoration brickyards as well as some out of state. So I've numerous, at least 10 different brick companies trying to find some restored brick and this exact brick, I forget exactly what it's called. I apologize. But we can get something close. It just won't match. There's just going to be a color variance. So if that's something that guys would be okay with with the arv being okay with something that's close you know you just match exactly

yeah as the owner you know we wanted to do brick on all of this as much as we could and that was our intention when we when we started it's just Sean wasn't able to find the brick and we found the stone. And then this, I guess, sort of compromise with the Tudor is the next best option instead of going with mismatched brick there.

What if we did stone up to that elevation line that complimented the brick? Or I'm just worried that mismatched brick is going to look more out of place than, and I'm willing to do whatever, but I just, I couldn't find it. I promise.

Are you pulling any brick off the current house?

Not enough, not really to do anything of that magnitude.

Yeah, I don't know also if that would give you the ability to kind of like mix it in with a new product where it would hide it a little bit more. I just, I, yeah, and I would have to, you know, I'd have to see it rendered out in stone there. I just know, I feel like it kind of stands out with With the stucco being such an accent piece and where it sits kind of on the house, I just feel like that's a lot of stucco to be on a prominent side of the house there that's on a major thoroughfare. And that's just my concern with it.

um but i'm i don't see us removing too much of the or if any of the existing brick

i was just trying to create a possible another solution or think through it so i'm not saying tear down part of the house to be able to brick in this uh

well i haven't done that before but yeah i do have some pictures on my phone of the existing brick it's just a very coarse It's almost like a broom finish type brick, you know, historic brick that it's trying to match that. We can get a flat brick that's the same color but more of a flat face. But trying to get that, I'm just worried that that might be different. The texture is extremely different. And ideas, I just have one that just thinks it's going

to be. I don't have any further questions, but thank you. Chris?

My concern is comparable. I'm not as concerned about how that looks with the Tudor kind of styling on there or the material. I am concerned with what you're choosing to use for the roof. Because according to the rendering here, I believe the existing roof is clay tile. That's correct. The renderings here seem to show it with a beautiful clay tile roofing on the carport and this, but we've got samples here.

It's going to be an architectural shingle.

Yeah, and I think that's where I have the real issue with this because you have a steep roof on this carport. So you have a lot of that roof and the architectural shingle, that architectural shingle bears no resemblance to a clay tile roof or the existing clay tile roof. So I don't have any issue with the Tudor detailing on the side. I do have a serious issue with... how it's actually going to look with the new roofing material compared to the existing roofing material. And I would have liked to see that in a sort of rendering because as it stands right here, I would agree with Helen. I think it's beautiful. And I like the way that you're taking all of these details into consideration. I think it is an excellent use of the property and what you're doing has significant value. when we start straying too much in terms of uh i don't like the idea of trying to match the brick you know unless you can get it exact um but the same thing goes when it comes to this roof then too like if it's going to be kind of the same on the side and kind of the same one the roof then suddenly we have something that looks very different than existing so um that that's holding me up The other concern I have then is related, and that's the proposal of possibly putting up solar panels. I saw that as mentioned and have no issue with adding solar panels. But again, how does that affect the overall look of this? And where would those be? And in terms of, I guess this is a question for you, Anna, or for staff, What's our guidelines in terms of like solar panels? Is that something that we look at architectural review-wise or afterwards?

No, we actually modified our regulations to make it no longer a requirement for ARB to approve solar panels. So they could do that through the permitting process without coming here.

Okay. So it's potential that on this addition, that could be solar panels all along the side there. Yes.

West side.

On the...

Just the cardboard, not on the main.

Okay. Okay, so just on the west side of the carport and I do see them now in the rendering there. It looks like you've got them kind of detailed there. Okay, I don't have a concern over that necessarily then. I had assumed that there might be solar panels going on the addition. So my only concern would be really the use of the shingles for the roof material.

Later.

Yes, thank you. I actually echoed both Jim and Chris's concerns with the stucco. I also wanted to see the continuation of brick across to feel less like an addition and more like an original part of the home. I do see the visual relationship there. between the addition and, or the change in the main. But I, in hearing what you're saying about the brick, I do not think a close match is an acceptable match. So I would also go the direction to choose this alternative. And I liked the idea of maybe adding some additional stone sort of to mimic the columns there. I think that that could be a nice detail as well to pull that in. The roof also really concerns me. I do think it's important, especially those being so close that they do match, that they are the same, excuse me. Nothing further.

Jeff?

Yeah, a lot's been said that I was going to say. I think the, yeah, the I know it's expensive, I don't know if you've looked into actually trying to match the roof roofing material on on both the addition and on the carport but yeah to to get the look that you're showing in the rendering. you really need to do that. So I don't know if you could consider that and maybe come back to us and let us know what you've decided, but a shingle roof is gonna look tremendously different. And then I think Helen and Jim's comments are sort of the same comment of the screen. I guess I'll call it a tutored style screen that's built on the end of the addition. I get that you're holding it up off of the ground because The problem's going to be it's going to catch dirt and whatever. It's not going to wear well down that close to the ground. I

was just going down to the bottom of the floor choice, but that's doable.

Could it be a stone base that sort of matches the stone base of the rest of things, which would be something that could hold up to dirt splashing up on that side of the addition or whatever? Think about that. I wouldn't try to match the brick. I don't think you'll ever match the brick. But that i wish this is a little tougher i wish the screen i'll call that the screen the end wall i wish it wasn't quite so in line with the existing wall of the house i wish it was pulled back just slightly because it's literally you're going to go brick and then you're going to have have this tutoring right to it it looks like somewhere there's got to be a downspout in there i guess. And even if a little recess is created that kind of stops one material and starts the other, I think that'd be helpful. It's an important detail there. It's kind of, I think that's what we're into. Just the small things in this are going to make it work well. If they're not done well, you'll have issues. And then my last question is maybe just for the staff or for the rest of the panel too. I mean, I drove around the neighborhood a bit, and maybe I wasn't looking hard enough, but I couldn't find many carports. I assume we don't have anything in our ordinances that stops someone from building a carport. Is that correct? That's

correct. We don't have any prohibitions of carports.

Okay. I mean, you've certainly done a lot to detail it. I have the same comment to start with that Helen had about the the eccentricity of the columns and I get why you're doing it because you don't have enough back out space to be able to move your car around there. That's fine. Originally we

did start with a garage but the homeowners wanted a more open

oh they did okay yeah i thought it was mostly just for space but go ahead

or more open space the the backing out thing was definitely a concern we also have a hundred year old magnolia tree in our backyard um and preserving that as a strong uh concern for us uh this was really the only way to put it in a footprint that will work for us to back be able to back out um and have everything work because it would have been our preference to have a garage um it's just it wouldn't work out as as constructed to be able to back out and whatnot so

where's where's the uh tree in the i don't see it on the survey but maybe it's there someplace uh it's

like right

back okay so you're just saying the the to try to yeah serve that space okay

The tree's like right here. Oh, okay. Yeah. Okay. So that's why we end up.

Just for the, if you can speak into the microphone over here, the mouse, the mouse that you guys have up there works. So it, the, the, this keeps freezing, but when you have those conversations and Blair's not going to know what you're talking about. So if you can just use the mouse, yeah. To show on the site plan on the screen where the tree is. Thank you.

Yeah. Yeah, his plan that he was showing me looks a little different than the plan that's submitted in the plans.

Sorry, can you just say, is the mouse currently where the tree is?

Yes. Thank you. Yes, sorry. I have a picture of the tree on my phone if that would help.

If the board has a question about it.

And my question really was, again, about the use of carports in this neighborhood, which is sort of a somewhat new thing or different thing at least than many other houses in the area.

Well, we do have carports throughout the city in many of our neighborhoods.

Okay. Okay. good that's all i had thanks

all

right thank you

at the advantage of coming uh at the end because that was very very helpful what you just said um and the comments about the roof and the almost but not quite matching brick uh but my concern was i'm hoping that you all figured out the um the minimum green spaces is that 50 are we

yeah and it is on the site plan um but i did notice right before the meeting i had it the number inverted. So

we're all okay with that minimum,

right? I believe so, and I can pass around the site plan. Yeah, I think it was at 50.8 is what we figured.

And then your comments on the openness I thought was great because having driven by again and living right by you, we do live close together, and having that openness, I think that that's good for the neighbors, the community, and everything else, and I don't know if you've had any comments from neighbors on this project or?

Well, they're here. Okay.

Okay. Hopefully all positive. Okay. We'll give them that. And then the tree, that's the other thing that I was wondering as we post-tornado, maybe we're more sensitive to it, but we're keeping our canopies and keeping our older trees as such. It is so critical to the temperatures in our neighborhoods and everything else. And so to hear you say all that, and that was part of your consideration, I think is really very responsible and encouraging. So thank you.

Thank you.

I had one final comment about the west side, the Tudor one. I tried envisioning it in brick. whether the brick matched or not. And I thought brick would be much too heavy on that street facade. So I did feel that the Tudor design worked pretty well. It was much lighter looking. But then, Jeff, what you were saying about, I think several people did, about a base that could tie in with the stone that you would see around the north side. It could also go all the way down to grade. um and you don't have to have much of it but it could be see on the left side i don't think you need to go as high as the uh the wood horizontal but it could be very low yeah

okay yeah we're not opposed to that at all absolutely can do

that all that i had any further questions up here Any comments from the audience? Sure. Come up. Yes. And speak into the microphone.

Erin Hales Mecham. We're neighbors, lucky us to have JJ and Kate next door. I appreciate your question about the carport in the neighborhood because it just kind of doesn't fit with the rest of the moorlands so just wanted to put that out there i didn't see any i drove around so

well we appreciate the comment Any other comments?

A comment on that, just with the carport there. I know that the carport kind of analogies me as well. It's something that we seem to be moving away from or have been moving away from carports. And so I kind of find it refreshing that you go back to this carport. I am wondering what your neighbor's concern is in a way with the carport, if there's any specific sort of concern that you're seeing with the carport. Is it just... having things that are in display or having things overflow?

Get directly through our backyard. So cars as opposed to a wall, I guess.

Okay. Thank you.

What is the setback? I don't remember.

The setback?

Five

foot?

It might be.

Yeah. I mean, uh,

Ryan, you guys have a half story though. I'm sorry. Um, the reduced setback that's being considered by the city council is when it's shorter than what you have proposed because you have a space above the garage currently. So that would remain

the five feet. We stay back five feet trying to stick with us, accessory building. Okay. And

for the reason for the height of that, um,

We were trying to, you know, match some aesthetics of the house. And also the homeowner's going to use for some extra storage space because they don't have a garage anymore with phase one. And then we also, the overhang is counted in that case being at the five feet back. So it's not the piers, you know.

And Chris, maybe I'll comment a bit on your question and my comment about carports. Beautifully built carports, and this looks like it will be, with simply two cars sitting underneath it is one thing. A car or two cars with other stuff underneath it, which I do end up seeing on carports in other areas, that to me is a very different story. I mean, I... I'm glad I have a garage with walls and a door because I wouldn't want folks to see everything I have in there. And it kind of, I guess the cleanliness of what's underneath it can be the issue. Not that you wouldn't keep it as clean as possible, but I just know things need to be stored. I

think that's the impetus for the storage space also. To be able to hide any sort of clutter or whatnot and keep it up there.

A lawnmower, you know, for instance, and things like that would be...

Yeah, the other thing is we're converting the interior garage, which does not fit cars, of course, because our house is 100 years old and was built for much smaller cars. um it's going to be converted to like more of a mudroom laundry room type area so anything like the kids bikes and that sort of thing will be housed in that area instead of under the carport and yeah we definitely don't want any clutter under the carport or anything like that i mean hence the storage space and you know redoing the the garage area i think in a responsible manner as well so

okay thanks

in the storage room too we're using attic trusses which will be open in the middle you know instead of the webs coming through so

i would assume there could always be planting or screening if it were to become an issue as well

yeah we could do that with the five foot setback

yeah i'm just thinking ahead i know there's a there's a beautiful carport off of uh price road between uh ledoux and clayton that is a great exemplar of like what can be done because two cars sit under there it's separate from the house it looks very nice but that was my concern as as well that if you start getting other things that are building you know accumulating in there becomes an issue

so are you open is that what's to putting screening as part of this as well with some plantings or

Yeah, screening or planting, we would be open to that for sure. That

would address some of the concern. That'd be great.

Yeah. Any further comments? Chris.

I believe Blair has her hand up.

Thanks, Chris. Yeah, actually, my concern in initially even looking at these plans, and I'm not sure if I missed a meeting, missed something, but in removing the garage and doing the carport, that was initially confusing and not something that I like or would have recommended. My concern, I sort of agree with that cluttering and Interestingly, you're saying you're going to put the bikes in the mudroom or things like that in the mudroom. So they're going to be coming indoors. Is that sort of what I'm hearing? But yeah, sort of same concern. I think that the greenery will offer a nice sort of blockage from neighbors and screen from anybody, anything that might end up being in there.

Yeah, so I think, yeah, the kids' bikes are probably the only things that would need to go indoors that would be, I don't know, some might consider weird. We don't consider it weird, I don't think. And the other issue is, as I said, the garage as of now is not usable. You know, our cars don't fit. There's a pole in the middle and a pole in the garage. So our cars are parked on the pad behind the house right now. In the wintertime, it's a huge pain, obviously, with the snowfalls we've had in recent years and whatnot. Anytime there's a hailstorm or anything along those lines, we literally cannot move the cars into the garage, so we have car covers we put on and whatnot, and we're just looking for a space to park our cars that will be covered relatively safe from the elements and afford us the ability to not have to worry every time a hailstorm pops up and that sort of thing.

Any final questions? No? Well, we do. We have a recommendation to approve. Are

we adding to that with the?

Yeah, we have several things.

About the roof material?

I think I personally and I can see how other people feel about this. At minimum, I think I'd like to see not renderings but pictures of the current roof material and the new roof material next to each other to see how they relate. I think also, I mean...

I do have some photos there and I thought I had it on the back sheet of your sets of drawings. Maybe sheet 11 where it says photo or reference photos.

I just think also there's been, I mean they certainly haven't been major changes but some minor tweaks that have been suggested that I think if we could see all that kind of in a more complete state perhaps everyone would feel a little bit more comfortable going forward with it.

You're suggesting they make revisions. It would be my

preference for it to be continued. That would

be my preference too. I think we've talked about enough things that I'd like to see the roof. I'd like to the different detailing on the end wall of the outdoor room, et cetera, that we've talked about and then approve that as opposed to this one that we're seeing right now, which is my opinion.

We can certainly go that direction in lieu of approving it tonight. Is everyone in agreement? Yes.

i mean the

roof

yeah i mean i i think to us the the roof is uh we color matched it you know extensively here and i don't think it will detract from the the area at all we're happy to make any changes with the stone or whatnot on the bottom of the outdoor room um i'm confident that this will look nice i think when it's all done um But I mean, if there's any way we could, you know, obviously I'm not an expert on your guys' procedures and whatnot, but if we're working through details or whatnot, you know, I don't know if there's some way to do some sort of an addendum yet conditionally approve or something like that upon whatever laying your concerns are here.

Will those who would like to see more of it, do you want them to come back?

I think that if it comes up for vote tonight, it will not pass based on the concerns that we have. I don't think we would approve it tonight. So I think there is enough stated belief that we need to see some revisions. I don't believe that the roof is color matched. I believe it's close, but we would want to see how it looks next to the existing roof, pictures of how it would look, because that is a large expanse of roofing that is right next to existing roofing.

I think, too, in some of these details, like we've kind of discussed this stucco wall and stuff like that. And, you know, certainly doesn't sound like it's going to be brick all the way across. But it sounds like there's, you know, whether it's stone, whether it's some changes on that, there's multiple different directions you could go. If it was if it was very easy of like just switch this to this, that would be the type of thing that I think we could conditionally approve pretty easily when there's. couple different options that are up in the air. I think that's usually where people feel a little more comfortable continuing it on. I, you know, I definitely don't think this is trying to push it off to get a no in the future. I think it's, I think it's hopefully just see a little bit of revision to have a very confident yes in the future. If you, If you saw the one before, that was their third time here. Just more with making little tweaks and being able to present that. So I think that's at least that's what I'm asking for. And I think that's more of the general consensus.

And just if this would even be possible. if, and I think you might have answered it, but like getting a framing package approved tonight? Because again, the roofing and all that and the cosmetics would be something that would come in after to at least get the structure erected prior to the elements. And we come back, I guess, in two weeks with some of the additional features. And is that even an option or?

I would think... I would

just, the only comment that was, I'm not sure what state that would leave for our building examiner to actually approve a building permit if we're not really sure what the roof is or some of the other details. Because this approval is just purely for the aesthetics, but the actual construction permit has to be issued and reviewed for the building code. So I'm not sure why. how you would draw something up that has all of those

questions. And just so I'm crystal clear, the existing roof on the house is a tile roof. Is that correct? Okay. Very different weight than the shingle roof that you're talking about here. So, so I would, yeah, I think that's gotta be because my preference again, it's your money I'm spending, unfortunately would be trying to find a tile that actually matches this roof. You know, something that, again, for Chris's comment, there's a lot of roof here. And I don't think you're ever going to find a shingle roof that will look the same as the existing house roof. And I think it's got to be built into the structure to be done well. And you would know that.

Have you evaluated the existing roof? Is it in good condition?

It's

not something that you... finish the addition with the new tile roof on the addition, and then you look at the existing and realize that it's in bad shape. Where if you change the existing, then you could do everything to match.

That's an interesting idea.

Helen, I cannot believe you brought that up. Helen, do not convince them to take away an existing clay tile roof and replace it with a shingle roof. Please do not do that. I'm not

convincing you to do it, but that is the reality. I had a slate roof, and roofs do have lifetimes. You know, that's something you should look at and evaluate and then come back if it is in poor shape. It looks in good shape from the pictures. But if that is an issue, then come back and present your case. You know, here is why we're doing it. No, don't ever tear off a roof that is in good shape. usable condition, you can create a wealth of problems that you didn't expect. So no, I'm not encouraging. And I would

add to that that there is a large quantity of used roofing tile because increasingly older clay tile roofs are being removed and replaced with shingles because it is cost prohibitive quite often. So I think that you have a very... high likelihood of finding used clay roofing tile that would work in this case. This is a simple kind of ludowisi pattern that you'd be able to find if you contact the used roof companies that are out there, Old World, Renaissance Roofing, those ones, you'll be able to find it and it probably will be surprisingly cheaper than you think it would be. I would not try finding new clay tile necessarily for this.

Following the discussion Answers or direction from tonight? Okay. Comments?

Okay. I move to table this to our next meeting in two weeks.

Second. All in favor? Aye. Okay. Thank you. Thank you. Okay, we've come to our discussion session.

So there's not really much to present on because it's just all in a packet. So if there are any questions, about it or comments, I'll do a general run through for anybody that might be online if anybody stayed. But essentially what we have here is the neighborhood guidelines, which would enhance and replace our existing architectural guidelines that we have that have been adopted over time and in our various different forms. So this would replace that with a general document that identifies guidelines that would be applicable to all residentially zoned properties and then also introduces neighborhood typologies, which are for specific neighborhoods across the city that have more specific guidelines related to the exterior design of structures. So our general guidelines cover what you have seen a lot of reference to over the years, driveway paving materials, retaining walls, screening. materials, we added in some references to lighting and sustainability that have been kind of common themes of discussion points for some of the projects that we've reviewed recently that are not currently reflected anywhere. So those are more general statements about sustainability. Added in just a brief glossary for some terms to make sure that we're all using them in the same manner. And then it dumps into the neighborhood typologies. So we identify which neighborhoods are classified within the typology for type A and B, C, and D. We have an ideal floor area ratio that we've identified. And we went over this a little while back with the residential zoning districts and decided not to introduce a floor area ratio maximum within the zoning code, but rather to have a guideline here, and that's based on the range of floor air ratios that we have across neighborhoods. So we kind of looked within the different typologies at a pattern that seemed to apply most reasonably to neighborhoods. So for the case of The type A neighborhood, that ideal flurry ratio cap is a 0.3, but there were two neighborhoods, Ellenwood and Skinker Heights, that have a pattern that establishes a little bit of a higher, so there's slightly smaller lots with slightly larger homes, so that ratio has bumped up to a 0.4 cap for those two. Then within the neighborhood typology, as we go into specific recommendations where we tried to outline generally what the prevailing character or pattern of massing and proportions and roof heights and dormers are across these typologies and introduced photographs from homes throughout the different neighborhoods that kind of reflect that pattern. So this is where we've kind of called out. Generally, we decided not to at this point identify which specific neighborhoods have it because Again, this is supposed to be a little bit more of helping people design to a general standard that then you all will have more specific conversations. But we didn't want to get into the business of saying you're building a house on this specific block of the Ellenwood neighborhood. And so here's the houses you have to compare with. So we tried to get a representation across the various neighborhoods. Similarly, with architectural details, materials and windows. Garages, we have some reference to accessory site features. And then that's kind of the pattern that it follows for each of our neighborhoods. So that's the general overview. And then I'll just turn it over to you guys for any questions or comments.

Okay. I had a few. I think they give us a simple, direct guideline where to go without mandating something or

not.

But I did have a couple questions back on page three. It shows up everywhere. The prohibition What about Trex material or similar?

Yeah, you mean the materials, the composites that we allow now? Yeah. So we allow some that have some mixture of recycled plastics within their composite, but it's not the primary mix. It's how we've been handling it right now. But that's up to you guys if you want to change that.

We

could still

allow that.

We can. And that's something that we've been talking internally. I mean, we'll see probably at a different date, there'll be more of a conversation about that because more and more of these various products have more and more plastic in them, but they're composites. So, but that was, we did not focus on changing that within this proposal at this point. Yeah.

Then on the FAR, where certain neighborhoods, let's see which one. Type B has three recommended FAR numbers. I really didn't follow the rationale on that.

Yeah, so we presented on that previously, and we can show you that again. But basically, we looked at the patterns across the whole typology, and then we compared that to the patterns of individual neighborhoods. And so in this instance, the overall... type B pattern, we recommended a 0.5, but then when you look at applying that to Davis Place and Hillcrest, it created more of a skew. So I don't have that slide. I don't think, I don't really want to go finding it, but I can present it to you previously that showed where it had that average in the range of every neighborhood and where we had set the proposed floor area ratio compared to all the neighborhoods. Yeah.

and then only one back on page two. The order of the photos doesn't correspond with the order of the written copy above it, if I followed correctly.

Oh, yeah. We just put... the photos just in the yes or no category together

right but um uh in the retaining walls masonry and then modular block and then concrete is that the order of the three that we're looking at

You want us to put the photos from left to right to be how you write it from top to bottom. Is that what you're saying?

I think a contractor or a citizen would understand it better.

Okay, I might just add labels too because we can easily change that.

Yeah, labels would do it. Okay. the first thing that confused me was on the introduction, the colors. Some of the blues were very close together, but as I read through the whole thing, then they became more distinct.

Okay. Yeah. I used a color blind friendly color generator to do this. And when you do color blind friend, I don't, this generator didn't give more of a range in the blues, but I can try and run it again and get it. get another generation.

That's

outlined and that is the There's a slightly different.

Right.

If I didn't know the subtleties, I would find that confusing.

Yes, I will look at it. I think there's various different versions of Bemison based on the subdivision plat. This was really just highlighting the reference... So the actual parcels that are colored are the ones that are then in the typology, not necessarily what the overall boundary is.

Well, Helen, I think my... Just if... I'm going to ask a question that might clarify it. Are you just saying on page 10, instead of just saying Bemiston, and then on 14, it also says Bemiston, just call the one on page 10, something slightly different to highlight the fact that it's

East Bemiston. It's not

necessarily like identifying a different boundary, but identifying that it's a different type of that, a different subset of that neighborhood by just calling it a slightly different name or with a direction or...

Yes, and that's where I was saying everything else is called out based on the subdivision, the actual subdivision name. Bemiston has multiple Bemistons that when I called those out separately became kind of tough to read the lines. So I'll look and see, but I guess I don't want to just for one area make up a name that isn't going to match, but I'll go back and compare it against the subdivision areas.

it was confusing and I could see someone arguing that, you know, this is part of Beamiston and therefore I'm in a type B neighborhood and I can do this if it benefits what they want to do.

Um, and I'll put a caveat because then the day it comes down to what, where your parcel is highlighted.

Yeah. Other than that, I thought it was excellent. Um, really like the photographs and um just the way the information is organized it's really i think user friendly um there was okay on page 17 where you have Yes, and no. And it has to do with garages.

Mm hmm.

And where consistently, where you've shown front entry garage, it says no. But in this area, in C, type C...

Oh, you mean there's a typo because it says yes and yes and it should say yes and no. That's just a typo.

Okay. That's what I thought. But we do have in... In a neighborhood C, we do have a lot of front-entry garages. Here is my garage, and oh, by the way, a house is attached. Okay, I didn't know, so that should be a no. I think this is wonderful, so thank you. Thank

you. I'm jealous because I feel like I went over this granular detail and really wasn't able to locate any mistakes or anything. And what I really found is I thought it was extremely informative and kind of a joy to read. And I think it's also worth pointing out again that these are not... This isn't the code. This is just guidelines. And I think they're really helpful guidelines. And I thing kind of to point out how maybe when you give someone good guidelines, the direction it can go, if you look at type A page eight on that top row there, the second The second to last one that kind of whitewashed brick, that is a new house in Claverac Park that I helped work on when I was a trustee of Claverac Park. And I think if you go down Ridgemore and pass that house, I don't think you notice that it's a new house. And the homeowner was thrilled with it. The neighborhood's thrilled with it. And I think when you look at it kind of in line with all these other old houses, you see how this process, how people can get their tall ceilings and everything with a form that really feels like it sits well in a neighborhood. And I think that's the point of all this. And I hope that through all this hard work that the staff has put in, that this yields a hopefully consistently better result. Chris?

I really like it. I think you guys have done a stellar job with this. I love the graphics and the pictures. A couple things, minor things. If you go to page two on the slide there, I hadn't seen it originally. I loved all of these ones. I'm wondering if it would be helpful from a visual standpoint if you had yes and no of the driveways and pavings right underneath there, and then yes and no of retaining walls over underneath that one. So just yes on the top, no on the bottom. Kind of divide it out. Might make it a little bit easier. I don't see it as a deal breaker sort of thing. I didn't see... I saw an explanation of the FAR I'm wondering if it should even be more explicit rather than referring to it as a 0.6, 0.4 and all of this. If we were to say that or overstate maybe that like a 0.4 indicates that no more than 40% of the area could be built upon or just something so it makes it a little bit more user-friendly if it's designed for a guide for like the average person. And I don't know how consistent we'd have to do that, for it's just explaining the FAR even clearer at the start. But in my head, even knowing what the floor to area ratio is, I'm constantly thinking, okay, 0.6 or 0.4, like which one is better to have, you know, trying to equate in my head. I just wonder if there's a way of doing that easier. But overall, I just found it so easy to read and the way that you've laid it out, it just is visually done by someone with strong design sense. So good job team.

Is Blair still on?

I'm here. Oh,

okay.

Thank you. Yes, great job. You guys did a really good job. The photos are extremely helpful. I really like the breakdown and it being concise with the bullets, very user-friendly. I had a similar or the same comment actually. I think that was just Jim that said it but on page two in breaking out the driveways and the retaining walls. Um, also the picture on the far right of the chain link of the concrete. I mean, that's just, you know, do you just put like a bold? No. Um, you know, it's showing multiple things. So I think that that was a really good example, you know, to put in there and showing, uh, So both of those on the right are good. That was actually it for me. I really liked the breakdown of the graphics and the photos throughout this. So thank you.

Jeff. Thanks. Anne, I probably didn't read carefully enough. How are these... How are these guidelines made available to the public?

They will be posted on the website once they're adopted. So currently on the website, we have links to our zoning code as well as a description about what architectural guidelines there are and where they're applicable. And Ryan's created some one-pagers that have been really helpful to provide people, especially related to retaining walls. So if somebody comes in to do a contractor's building or retaining wall, what are the guidelines? So all of that is available on our website.

Okay, so they're not ordinances. They're not things you must do. They're things that we'd like you to do. Is that right?

Yes. In the code that establishes the Architecture Review Board and what your charge is, it talks a lot about... these same guidelines, but it doesn't specifically outline those in the code of ordinances. So as the architecture review board and carrying out those duties that are assigned to you, you're adopting these guidelines to provide a path forward, but it provides you also more flexibility because they are not codified. But so they're really just a tool to try and help you all and help the designers and the residents understand.

Well, could they be, could they or will they be eventually referenced in any of our codes that said the architectural review board will use the guidelines published to assist in reviewing your project? Or, you know, something to that effect, just so that people know that, know they have to read this when they're developing a project.

Right. I mean, part of that is that they're online and staff's job is to make people aware of them when they apply.

Okay. Okay. And how did the neighborhood designations... I kind of wish there would have been an overlay of them and where the R2 and R1 zoning is so that I don't know, do we have neighborhoods that are two different neighborhoods that are within the same zoning ordinance. And I'm trying to try to imagine if I'm somebody building a house, how I'm going about looking at the ordinances and looking at this at the same time and making sure I'm quote unquote following the rules or following the guidelines or both. Do you know what I'm saying?

Not quite. So when, like are you saying somebody might be confused that this replaces

their zoning district? Yeah, or that it doesn't because it doesn't really have teeth to it. It's not codified. What I really need to do is follow the zoning ordinance and I can talk my way through the rest of it because I think it's clear that there are guidelines. They're not codes. They're not ordinances, right? So...

I think an example maybe would be... Like, I think an example that you're talking about, Jeff, is like Clavarack Park and Brentmore are both type A, yet Brentmore is R1 zoning, Clavarack is R2 zoning. So on one level, they're stylistically being handled the same, but on another level, zoning-wise, they're handled different. I will say, though, at least with part of this, and... Ana, you can tell me. I do think it's rare that a project just probably gets dumped in the lap of staff and it's the first time they've seen or heard about it. I know people reach out a lot of times in advance. So I don't think a lot of this stuff they're just encountering completely cold. And I do know just from experience and even talking to people that we have a very responsive staff. And people reach out to ask questions on this type of stuff a lot. So, yeah, I'm not quite as worried at a lot of this being confused as if it was the fact that this is all you had to go on and then you had to go present and be like, well, you actually missed all these things where – You know, lots of people come up here and reference speaking to Ryan multiple times throughout the process, so on and so forth.

Yeah, I'm just kind of wishing that some of this could be referred to or maybe not incorporated in, but referred to in the actual codes that... we will be looking at all these things in this neighborhood type. You know, maybe I'm worried too much about syntax here, but...

Yeah, I mean, I think probably, well, we can take a look, but the difference is that the code of ordinance is adopted by the city council. These guidelines are adopted by the architecture review board. So in... When, as outlined here within the code where the city council established the architecture review board and what you do. It says that you look at all exterior modifications and then it identifies exceptions to that that are eligible for an administrative review process. And so that's where we've established pretty clearly within our process for approving permits. administrative review, as it says here, has to then meet these guidelines that you all have established. If they are proposing something that is eligible for administrative review but it doesn't meet the guidelines, then they have to come to you to ask for that waiver. So those procedures are already established and used on a daily basis. So I'm not too worried because I do think we have teeth in both manners. Nobody is going to be able to unless you approve it just decide to not listen to the architecture review board guidelines but it would have to come to this body in order to do that and in staff review whether it's hobie or ryan that's part of what they do when they look at their zoning review. Is it a building permit that's eligible for administrative approval? Okay, first thing we do is check and make sure that it meets the guidelines. Otherwise, at that point, we would tell them they need to apply for ARB. Or if somebody comes to ARB, one of the first things we do in the zoning review is look and see, does this comply? Or at that point, you're not placed on an agenda, you need to address... you know, this aspect.

Do we establish FAR limits in the codes? I should know, but I

don't know. We do not for residential, and it came up during this discussion, and I found where the slide is. I can share that. It has come up based on a couple of new houses that have come before the board previously. The idea of using floor-air ratio, we do use that in our mixed-use zoning district, and so that discussion came up. We decided not to establish it within the zoning regulations because of – the variation, so I'll show you the slides.

Because I've seen how the words you've used here said an ideal floor area ratio. And I actually think, given some of the development of homes that we're seeing in town, I think something like that is a very good idea. We're seeing overbuilt lots in many cases. Now, this sort of just gives a recommendation of what the number ideally ought to be. Should we actually put a limit on it and say in this neighborhood you can't build any more than... X. I wouldn't mind that, personally.

Yeah, and part of the reason we did not do that, so these were some of the slides, and we can go back over this in more detail again the next time, but floor area ratio is just one of the tools that's going to help you with the massing of a home, and just using the cap based on the different analysis that we ran over the various zoning districts and the different neighborhoods was not going... would probably not solve that problem. So when we looked at all of the data for the zoning district regulations that have been proposed currently, as well as the neighborhood character guidelines, we ran a bunch of analysis. So you can see here that we started looking at floor air ratio based on neighborhood typology and looked at floor air ratio, based on the year that it was built and floor air ratio compared to zoning districts. And some areas there were really clear established patterns and other areas there weren't. And it really even varied across zoning districts. So here, and I have a very similar table that I ran based on zoning districts. This groups all the neighborhoods based on their neighborhood typology. But you can see where in the neighborhood typologies. So for example, with the Neighborhood B, so that's one that you asked about, Seem. So we set the solid line is the ideal cap that we have recommended. But you can see how various neighborhoods that fit in that typology have a really big range that differs from that. And some of the neighborhoods that we called out, such as Davis Place, when we look at that range, if we move the cap up and just use the recommended cap, that could be a significant jump for a lot of properties within Davis Place. So this analysis shows on the map on the right-hand side, the darker gray parcels, those are the parcels where the existing flora ratio of the house that's there today would exceed the proposed cap. So you can look at that pattern.

These

are,

but we're talking about, well, maybe I'm wrong. We're talking about new construction though, mostly with the guidelines, correct? That if you are to build a new house. The guidelines

actually apply

to any exterior modification to you on the property. Or in addition to if you have an existing house that's a certain size and you want to add an addition. I mean, right now, I guess you sort of control it by permeable, impermeable a little bit, right? Right. But, yes, some way, whether it's floor air ratio or some other thing to keep folks from overdeveloping lots, I think is really important because I think that's been a problem over the recent past and how we somehow control that. I think would be useful. So I don't know. I'm, I'm, I don't know if it's Florida ratio. I don't know what's permeable in formula, what it is, but to keep you from building too much house on a lot. would be good to have in our guidelines.

Yeah, we can go over that. I'll do another slide, another presentation about that at the next one because the example where it really came up was the new house that's constructed in Polo. And if we did a floor area ratio maximum based on the average of that neighborhood, that house would still be allowed. So that's where just adding in an arbitrary floor ratio is not going to solve a lot of what these perceived issues are. And I also... We have made changes to when we went to green space, we tightened it up. So the way that we measure green space now is is harder compared to the lot coverage previously. And we are hearing about that from residents. So I would hesitate for us to go so hard and saying, we're going to establish these really, we've never done it before, but we're going to throw in these really aggressive floor ratio caps. And we've already limited you in your, uh, in the amount of coverage that you have on lots. And we're also introducing, uh, uh, finished floor height, now that you have to measure against your neighbor. I mean, these are a lot of things that would really tighten develop and our goal is not to just completely cease all construction across the city. So I think maybe a presentation specifically recapping the various different things we've done so far and the ones that we're considering still would be helpful. I think too,

if you think about this, Before, I think a lot of us sat here for a look at a lot of houses and said, it just feels really big. It feels too big, where I feel like a lot of these guidelines, floor area ratio, all this stuff, it gives us multiple things that we can point to where we can just, instead of saying, I don't like this, or this doesn't feel right, the staff has given us vocabulary to say, this is why I don't feel like it's right. On the other hand, every now and then we get something that is completely out of left field, such as this contemporary edition, which all of us really like.

I was going to bring that

up. That's my only concern. And it's like... I mean, what a difficult task. But to give us the tools that we can basically push back against the ones that we don't feel fit but still allow enough leeway when someone comes with an out-of-the-box solution that we say, hey, you know, we want to be able to reward this. So, yeah, it's difficult. It's very difficult. But I think the way this is set up, I think it – It requires a little more work. It puts the onus on us, fortunately or unfortunately, to be the bad guy in those situations and say, like, I don't think we should go forward with this for these reasons. But it leaves enough leeway for someone to come in with a novel solution or something different that would still work and move things in a positive direction. And

little things that can help us have that conversation. I mean, I don't know if anybody here lives in Old Town, but just... the way Old Town has changed over the course of the last 30 years, let's say, has been bad to me, to be honest, the way it's been developed.

Certainly. If you look at this chart that's right in front of us and go up to Clavarack Park, which is one, two, three, four down or something like that, you can look at that 0.8, how far that is. That's my neighbor. And that is a house that people still to this day complain about as I don't think that that house would be approved today. And I think the language that is in this type of guideline is what would prevent that house from being built because it gives us something to compare it against and numbers and not just feelings. So yeah, I'm very grateful for that.

And then I'll go down back to a whole different level of detail. John Potter, This is just jeff's personal opinion I don't think we should allow stamped concrete on driveways I think i've never seen a good stamped concrete drive 10 years five years or 10 years later that still looks good and it's not stone it's concrete and this by putting. lines in it, I don't think it looks like stone. So that's just my opinion. I don't know if anybody else feels. On the other hand, and this is I know has been controversial, as long as it's not used as a permeability tool, I like Hollywood driveways, which I call them Hollywood driveways, ribbon driveways. I think they actually And Chris, you made the comment about, hey, these carboards harken back to the way people used to build carboards. Well, I think those driveways harken back to how people used to build driveways. And I think they're actually really attractive. I don't want anybody to build more house on the site by building a ribbon driveway. But I think that's easily enough said. You can do a ribbon driveway, but it can't be counted in your permeability calculations. So anyway, just a couple of details.

One thing I want to comment on that. I think the ribbon driveway – I don't find ribbon driveways, Hollywood driveways – I don't find them bad either. I think the distinction is really that if that center of the ribbon driveways is rock or something that is permeable, like we saw with a recent one a couple weeks ago, I think that's totally fine. It's when they try to grow grass in the middle and then grass does not last and then it turns into... That, I think, is where it's difficult.

My daughter lived in Los Angeles for quite a while, and I can send you 50 pictures of beautiful ribbon driveways that do have grass in them. It's just a very nice, comfortable, residential feeling. But I don't, again, want somebody to be allowed to build more house on the site because they happen to put a strip of something permeable in the middle of it. Yeah. And I guess I do appreciate all your work, I should say that, in putting this together. It was me, I wish it could be edited even a little more down to some clearer, simpler bullet points. Less words might be better. Because as I went through the different types, there's a lot of repetition from type to type. I kind of wish this was calling out the differences, it was highlighting the differences in those neighborhoods, you know, that you can do this here if you can't do it there. Maybe there's general guidelines for in all our neighborhoods, you can do this, but then in type A, these are the differences. In type B, these are the difference. And to to make it a little simpler to understand that way nice jeff

are you looking for

a matrix no i'm just looking for less words to be honest yeah i mean it's hard it's it's hard to to do that but to kind of get it down to again if somebody if we handing we're handing this to somebody who's doing a new house let them get the picture very quickly of what they can and can't do in that neighborhood. And maybe this is it. And I think the pictures do help, but I think the words that are written next to the pictures could be a little, could be shorter. It would be simpler.

Yeah, I went back and forth on that. I guess my question to you all would be do you think that we – my thought was if a person calls and says I'm designing a new house, what are the regulations, which happens a lot. We get that via email. We send them here's the zoning district regulations and here are the applicable architectural guidelines. So in this case with the typologies, we would say you're – Property is zoned R2. Here's the link to the R2 dimensional standards that you'll need to use, and you're in a type B neighborhood. Read the type B section. So my thought was, well, I needed to kind of repeat it because they're going to flip directly to their typology and only read those pages. But if you think that we could get them to read a general introduction to all typologies and then also read their typology, then I would agree with you. We could definitely get the wording down. Yeah, you

have an upfront section that says, in all our neighborhoods, you should consider these things. Now, in these particular neighborhoods, just this, this, and this changes. That would make it simpler for me to read.

I definitely think... Obviously, this affects us on a every other week basis. So we're going to read the whole thing cover to cover. I think if we were building a house, we're going to go to the chapter that affects us instead of just reading, you know. I would read through the whole thing just because I'm interested in this type of stuff. But I think most people are like, okay, well, what affects me? And they're going to go to that section of it. And

also you can say at the start of type B, you could go refer also to general neighborhood guidelines, page two, whatever, back at the start of it. But I see your point and I see your struggle with how to do it. Yeah.

I would argue that if we get too specific, Jeff, and too bulleted, too restrictive, that we do start to get, I mean, yes, we get residents that are frustrated. But more than that, I think that we start to sort of narrow ourselves into, you know, we have five different style homes and you know, this is what you can do versus, you know, putting a little bit more creativity into your design. And I think that that is what's so special about our neighborhoods is that every home is different. So I hesitate to make it even more concise.

Got it. Thanks.

I wonder if the language for the flat concrete asphalt and ribbon drives are prohibited, if that would be worth considering, you know, flat concrete asphalt and parentheses for the sake of adding buildable LAN are prohibited because we have had a couple of exceptions approved for ribbon drives. So that gets a bit to your point that maybe from a design standpoint, if someone comes up with a really cool ribbon drive that works with that, we would allow it as long as it wasn't. But again, are we getting too sticky with these little things?

Can I ask a clarifying question also? I think Anna's in them. When a driveway comes up, let's say someone just... presents a driveway to the city. Obviously that's not coming here before us, but it's like, I guess, what are you guys seeing and stuff like that? Because like, I'll be a hundred percent honest. Someone just poured a flat concrete drive in Claverac park and it's, it's very flat and it's very white. And I pass it every single day. And I was like, well, God, it's like, did they just like pour a drive in the middle of the night or, you know, or is there some, you know, is there some way that this type of thing can get mixed up?

Yeah, we do get a lot of driveways where people just pour them. So technically this is where the hard part comes in because a lot of contractors are used to it doesn't require a building permit. But we have the code section that requires all exterior improvements to your property require architecture review board approval. And driveways are one that can be an exception. So we created a years ago, we created a administrative permit that covers all of the construction projects that impact the exterior of your property, but do not trigger a building permit. So they're supposed to get an AR permit. Now this is because of the nature of pouring a driveway. It's one of the hardest ones for us to catch happening without a permit because it, Unless our inspector happens to drive past that driveway when they're pouring it, it happens in one day and then it's done. So technically that should have gotten an AAR permit where we would have said no to the flat concrete.

And we just approved a grandiose house. that the ordinance says should have a high-quality driveway in it that's being built with an asphalt drive. So it's sort of, I didn't make too much fuss about that, but I sort of wish I would have because it just seems strange. Anyway.

Yeah, I was going to bring that up. There are a lot of asphalt driveways now. So this is really going forward.

Well, this is, yeah, basically what this says is asphalt is not the material that we recommend. So therefore it could not be administratively approved. So that's what it just adds that extra burden where most cases in neighborhoods that have like Brentmore park, the majority of the driveways in that neighborhood are actually asphalt. And so they can't, that's part of coming here. and seeing that that actually fits, and then the ARB can approve it, but staff wouldn't administratively approve the asphalt driveway.

And I also was wondering about the ribbon driveways because I don't know if we want to. I guess this discourages them or prohibits them, but it's something to think about. I don't know that that's necessarily – I don't think it should count as green space or permeable surfaces just because there's so many problems with them, but – I would wonder about too um the other thing in here that just what's currently there and I know this is for changes and things but we have in our area a lot of uh we don't have the trash enclosures a lot of tuck-in spots and that's something that I don't know how we feel about that the reality is that a lot of people don't have their trash behind a wall with a door that opens um Thanks very much for the roof color choices, the dark sky compliance, the native plants. I think all that helps with the heat and water and everything that certainly is not going away. The only thing else I wonder about is the front entry garages. Do we want any more criteria on when those are approved or not approved? i'm asking that i don't know i don't know a lot about them sometimes they look fine sometimes you don't notice them sometimes they stick out as is much of the house

yes i think we and i apologize i'll have to pull it up we did include um so there are some overlaps there are some hard regulations for front entry garages that ryan's included in the residential um code that's going up for adoption with the city council. So I'll verify that, but I believe we were going to include language that's found in our urban design districts, which establishes a, you need to have your block have more than 50% of the homes that have front entry garages in order for you to place one in there. That's in, um, in Clayton gardens currently. So I'll, I will double check, um, and see if that was, was included in

our, I can't remember. Yeah. And even sometimes when It sounds like when you put these together, you didn't just take an average of what's already there. You took surely what was a character of the neighborhood to capture it versus saying... If I add up all the floor area ratios that come up with this, so this is where we want to be.

It's a little bit of everything. For the floor area ratios, that was more of a calculation and then trial and error of, okay, here's what the numbers are saying. How, if I use an example, take a neighborhood and plop a house down that met the regulations, how would it fit? But then the other regulations, just the more general language about massing and other things, That was more of just professionally looking at the neighborhood inventory data that we had and walking the neighborhoods. Excellent. And

something else, maybe I should know, I don't. Do we allow any front yard fences?

We do. Yes. So right now, that's part of Ryan has cleaned that up in the residential zoning district regulations that you saw. We do allow front yard fences, but they're limited here. to requiring ARB approval and four feet in height. But there are streets, the busier roads and other areas where there is a pattern of more solid fencing. So that's why we introduced the definitions that identify your primary front yard versus your secondary front yard and then addresses the fencing differently for those.

Because I do wonder if we want to add, depending on where you live, a prohibition on front yard fences. I think that So break apart a neighborhood and change.

Any other comments?

What if we changed the word back on this prohibited thing to something like strongly discouraged and generally not approved rather than prohibitive? And it wouldn't have to be prohibited for every time that's used. But so, you know, again, flat concrete, asphalt and ribbon driveways are strongly discouraged and generally non-approved gives a little wiggle room. It's setting the expectation that most likely it's not going to happen and we don't want them. But if they really have a design reason for it, that's a suggestion. Is there any recourse if they do like what in Klaverak? You know, they pour this driveway in the middle of the night. And is there any recourse that we have in that case once it's done?

Well, we can go through the process of our code enforcement to cite them.

Do we do that often?

Yes. So we do have our inspectors are all trained in code enforcement and we do have one inspector who does a lot of the code enforcement burden. So we will cite them. We usually just with the staffing that we have, we don't have a We do not have just a code enforcement department. So the way we prioritize that is the relations to what permits would require, what are the impacts to public health, safety, welfare or adjacent properties or other things. So in the scheme of this flat white concrete driveway. that otherwise meets the requirements is not the one that we send our inspector out immediately to go get. But we have with driveways where we have become more strict at finding that and enforcing it after the fact are the driveways that are larger. So if they installed a parking pad in a front yard or a turnaround without proper approval, then that we would actually we would definitely flag earlier or if they're going over coverage or creating some sort of uh storm water flow redirection that's causing their neighbor to be flooded those types of things are what our inspectors would take into account

i can say too if you guys see something the report a problem button on uh the clayton website uh Not in this case, but in other cases, I have forwarded code enforcement and I've seen changes like a lot of times within the week. on those properties.

Yeah, we do try because right now we cannot afford really to do proactive code enforcement in a lot of cases, but we do try very hard to have an inspector go out and visit any sort of complaint or issue that's been reported to us within 24 to 48 hours, depending on staffing levels. So we really do try to address the issues that are reported to us.

So then there is a judgment process that they can use.

Our code enforcement officers? Yes, that's part of what they're trained to do. But if an issue is reported to us and there is a code violation that they can verify, then it's not at their discretion to choose whether or not to... cite that code enforcement case. But in these cases, the harder part with driveways is if the driveway goes in it's the work has already been done. So we have to then go back and document when that work might've happened, whether or not there was an approval that was granted to them at that time, et cetera. So that staff time to do all that research to then go through the code enforcement process. Hopefully they decide to respond, but if they don't respond to the first violations proceeding through the code, the court municipal court process, you know, that, That's a lot. When we get reports of people who are doing work that was done without permits, that impacts, again, the health, safety, welfare. So they're doing it in addition without a permit. We're going to do immediate stop work orders and that sort of thing.

And by the way, the Cromwell project that we looked at tonight, I went by the site. I think you did also. I don't know if anybody else did. Sure looks to me like they're under construction already.

They are, because they have a building permit for all of the

interior. Well, this is beyond interior. They're doing exterior work in the backyard right now. I can see it. Yeah,

well, they do have an active permit. So, I mean, we can have our inspector check it the next time they go, but their permit right now does include... changes to the exterior wall in terms of doors and windows. Taking bay windows out? Right, yes. So their permit right now does include exterior work into the envelope of the existing footprint, but it does not include the addition of the covered porch or the carport. But it does include everything else that they've talked about that would reorganize the interior of the house. It's a pretty extensive project that they have going on inside of the home. Okay.

Because I know we disappointed them because I'm sure they want to keep going tomorrow if they can help it. But, yeah, I just kind of thought they were jumping the gun a little bit maybe.

Any other comments? Anna, do you have enough information?

Yes. So we are going to present these guidelines to the city council for some comments at the end of this month, their council meeting. Because like we said, you all as the architecture review board actually adopt these. So we want to make sure that the council has a chance to review at another public meeting and bring any recommendations or comments that they have back to you all. So I have taken some notes, so we'll come back to you after that city council meeting with any sort of updates, modifications, and some additional points to address the comments that have been made tonight.

Well, to wrap it up, I think it is really a great direction we're going compared to where we have been. More graphics really help.

Yeah. It was fun to take the photos too, because I will like some of the neighborhoods that we went through. I think it's, yeah. I mean, just looking at type C and all of the very different types of architecture, but yet they all kind of fit together when you're in those neighborhoods. But then when you put them side by side, you realize some of it. So it was, it was an interesting exercise to take all those photos. Yeah.

Well, I'm sure you either tried to get each one of our houses or none of our houses.

I don't appreciate you including that picture of my asphalt driveway chain link bent fence. Okay,

well, thank you for the great work of all the staff. We really appreciate it. Jeff, any other comments? No, nothing. Thanks. Blair, if you're still with us.

I'm still here. No further comments for me. Thank you, guys.

Chris?

I do, and I hate to keep us. I'm just going to bring this up. possibly for another discussion. It was interesting. I got in conversation with the family that lives in Clayton Gardens this week, and she was expressing her frustration at seeing all of the new homes that are going up in Clayton Gardens that seem to be taking up every inch, as we know, of the space. And she lives in an older house, and is kind of looking for an area. She wanted to be able to sit outside in the backyard with her family. She says, I'd like to have a little patio out there or have a deck or something. I'd like to their home is already over the green space calculation of 55%. So she says, it seems like we can't do anything without changing the way that our front walk goes up to the house. You know, it's kind of curves and she's like, we could get a little bit of square foot if we went straight our driveway, we could chip away a little bit here, chip away a little but here there's a parking or an old pad in the back that had a shed on it. She said, we can take that down. And she, has reached out to you and got some fantastic, reach out through the mayor, I believe, and got some fantastic advice from you basically being, hey, this is what you can do. This is, you know, you can get 2% variance if you do this. But it brought me to this kind of overall question and What can an owner of like a lawfully nonconforming property, like what can they really legally do or lawfully do that doesn't require a variance? And I don't think – I'm not looking for a specific answer. But I'm wondering if we should consider some sort of a limited provision down the road for – existing homes or these 100-year-old homes that are in areas, it doesn't have to be Clayton Gardens, where the homeowner really wants to expand in some way. They realize that their home is lawfully nonconforming. But there's a way that we can have them do this work to maintain the integrity kind of of the family. I mean, she's not looking to increase space. They kind of just want a space that they can enjoy time outside as a family. And she says, how can we do this when I'm seeing all of these homes go by, go up all around in the neighborhood, taking up every space. And all I want to do is add this little dinky deck. She didn't use the word dinky, but I want to add this little deck onto the back of my house. And I can't seem to make that happen because of this green space consideration. So yeah, I guess it's a two-pronged question of one, if there's some direction I could point her towards that says these are the things that you definitely can do without getting a variance. And then is there something that we need to consider down the road in terms of preserving the older homes and their use of space? That's all I have.

Thank you, Chris. I'm usually the one extending the meeting. Only three meetings left for 2026. That's all I have. I

think that opens up a whole new discussion that we've probably skirted around in the past. And maybe we need to zero in on it as we go forward.

I think it'd be awesome just to... I don't... I imagine it'll be an issue that comes up more often as residents that have been in Clayton for a long time see all of the new kind of modifications that are being done and want those or want something similar, but find that their property is potentially already non-conforming. How do we respect that?

Did she realize, I assume the new construction does follow the requirements. But she's looking at it and thinking, well, it must not because it looks like too much has been built there.

Yeah, and I think they're very aware of how they can form. I think there's a bit of a disconnect of saying, well, this home is just massive. How in the world is it possible that this massive home is meeting requirements when my 100-year-old home is... is not because I want to add this little patio.

Well, and the home that she's looking at might also be lawfully nonconforming because we changed over the green space ratio to specifically deal with this type of thing. We were saying like, well, we have these absolutely massive homes going up. We have to dial this back some. So, you know, we've moved more in that direction. So, you Know, although in this case, her home might be lawfully non-conforming, the one she's looking at my also be lawfully, non-conforming. Right.

Yeah. I don't think it's an easy answer. at all. But I feel for the resident. And if it's helpful, I mean, if it's all right with you, Ana, I mean, I'll reach out to you and Ryan and Hobie with a specific question. Like, is there anything that

Yeah, I mean, I think so. Their architect spoke with Brian and he provided them options. And then the mayor spoke with me and I provided the options again. So they're really the options. There isn't anything other secret out there. The biggest piece that I think people often... Our struggle to compare, you know, we're comparing apples to oranges because the majority of the new construction have more square footage of interior space because they don't have a lot of driveway. So that's where we get it. They did this trade off, whereas our older homes, the location and driveway designation takes up a ton of their green space. which is the, that's the case here. So their house feels really small, but they actually have a lot more coverage than the new construction did usually does.

Yeah, that makes sense.

Yeah, so that's where we're at. And we can get into that. Kevin and I can get into it. I don't want to dive too much into it right now because it's really a matter – we do have a process where people who can prove a hardship, so there's some reason why their property is different, that's the variance process. So we can – I think it's a good topic for us to kind of discuss, especially now that with the changes, as we kind of alluded to earlier, with all the compounding changes we're making to zoning – There's going to be some cases that come up that people are going to be a little confused about. So that might be a good topic, generally speaking, to have. This is how the different changes we've made might impact people. Here are the procedures that are available to them, but here's also really what it means to have. the zoning code in place that tells you what you can or cannot do, why we have non-conforming provisions within our code and how that protects people and what that affords them, and then also why we have a variance process and why that's established differently.

Not to beat a dead horse, but I think it's important to remember that the purpose of of nonconformity's regulation is to eventually over time abate the nonconformity. It is intended to drive that nonconforming circumstance out of the market. so that conformity is achieved. And the regulation is intended to serve, especially the green space, the broad public policy of reducing surface water runoff and the physical problems and the flooding problems that that can present to the community. So yeah, these are going to pinch at various places, but there are broad purposes served by that approach. No one wants to hear when it's their property.

Anything else, Chris?

Good to see you all.

Jim? Nothing further. Ellen?

Nothing to add.

Toby?

Nothing for me.

Anna? No, I'll be at an ESRI conference for the first November meeting, so Ryan and Hobie will run that.

Thank you, Counselor. Pleasure to be here. Always invited. Thank you. Okay, we will meet again November 2nd, I believe.

Thanks, everybody.

Thank you.