December 14, 2022 — Design Advisory Board Regular Meeting

Transcript

Captions from City of Boulder YouTube recording.

[0:00] board members and staff so Todd, Brian DAB, Rory Brendan, you're muted Brendan Ashdad Matthew checks on our de Okay. Mark Mark Mcintyre Planning Board, Liaison. Okay and and Staff People I'm. Jenna Noler at the City of Alder Planning deposit. Okay, Great I'm. Calling from the DAB Board liaison with the planning department, and Charles Farrow will be joining us around. Okay. I'm Amanda custom with planning and development services also. and I am Devin Saunders with planning and Development Services and the Board specialist for the Design Advisory Board. Okay, great. And we'll introduce the applicant in a

[1:02] in a a a second or 2, but we want to start off with kind of the rules of decorum before we get into The approval of the minutes, and then and I get into the public participation. I'll kind of walk people through the agenda. So if Devon could start us off with it. the the of of of decorum are in engagement. All right. Yeah, Absolutely. Thank you, Mr. Chair. I will be sharing my screen here and going over a few slides with you all to go ahead and talk about the rules of decorum for tonight's public meeting. Maybe if I can pull it up here. there we go. Alright, yeah. again. My name is Devin Saunders board specialist here for the Design Advisory Board. there is one item for public discussion tonight. and so i'll be going over the rules of decorum for this public meeting. the city has engaged with the community members to co-create a vision for productive, meaningful, and inclusive civic conversations.

[2:15] This vision supports physical and emotional safety for community members, staff and board and commission members, as well as the democracy for people of all ages, identities, lived experiences and political perspectives. The following are examples of rules of the quorum found in the Boulder, Revised code and other guidelines that support this vision. These will be upheld. During this meeting all remarks and testimony shall be limited to matters related to city business. No participant shall make threats, or use other forms of intimidation against any person. Obsceneity, racial epithets, and other speech and behavior that disrupts or otherwise impedes the ability to conduct the meeting are prohibited. participants are required to identify themselves, using the name they are commonly known by, and individuals must display their whole name before of being allowed to speak online currently. Only audio testimony is permitted online

[3:08] there when it comes to public comment. There are a couple of ways in which you can do this there was no pre-signed-up form. So when it comes to that time we'll go ahead and do use the raise hand function on zoom You can go ahead and hover your mouse over where it says, Raise hand, and that will raise your hand and let me know that you have something to say. Otherwise there are a few shortcuts listed right here. if you're calling in on your phone, I did see that we have one in person coming in from the phone. so during public comment, if you like to speak, you can click Star 9, and that will promptly raise your hand. Also there is the option. Why. for a Mac or Alt Why for PC. These will. All these options will raise your hand for public comment. Additionally, there is another way where you can go hover over the reactions. If you're on the the actual online form and on under reactions, you can raise your hand that way. and with that I will turn that back over to you, Mr. Chair.

[4:02] Okay, thanks. So we have The I think the first thing we want to do is to is to approve the minutes of our last meeting. which was on September the fourteenth and so could I have a motion to approve those minutes from a DAB member motion to approve. Okay. any changes in the minutes that were sent out to us with our with our packet of information for today's meeting. There were a couple set of edits that were submitted, and they are reflected in the packet for today. Okay. all right. So So can we go ahead and approve the minutes. Then you have a motion to approve. Okay. are we?

[5:00] We have approved the minutes, then from from our September fourteenth meeting. So the next item on the agenda is public participation that's unrelated to the project that's being reviewed. So we have about. It looks like we have 20 for more attendees. i'm! Assuming that all of the attendees who our members of the public would probably like to comment on the project. So there will be a place in the discussion of the project for those public comments. So does does anyone want to comment on anything that's not part of this application. Please hold up your hand or raise your hand. No one devin I am seeing no hands raised, Mr. Chair.

[6:01] so we will come back to the the second up. Oh. public participation part in the discussion of the project. So, we now have a project before us. That's there renovation of the 1345 20 eighth street it's a relatively large project. we're gonna try to answer a few questions that the city councils ask the Design Advisory Board to address. We're going to try to focus mostly on those questions. but we will have time. after those questions are answered, to come back to some other design elements that that design Advisory Board members may be interested in. So what i'd like to do to sort of kick off the project. A description is to ask Shannon molar if she'll. She's

[7:01] can give us kind of an overview great. I am ready with a quick presentation. I'll just see my screen settings. There we go perfect. Okay, You can see that. so good afternoon board. I'm. Shannon Muller, the case manager for this project as part of the Development Review, planning staff and the city of So i'm just going to give a really brief overview of the project before handing it off to the applicant. So today the Board will be reviewing and providing recommendations on the design of a proposed redevelopment project. 1345, 20, Eighth Street. This is the current Millennium Harvest House Hotel. and it's located just last of 20, eighth south of Arapaho, and very close to the

[8:01] University of Colorado. Main campus across Wilson Boulder Creek runs through the southern portion of the site. It's about 15 acres, and it's located within the Boulder Valley Regional center. So here you can see the existing and proposed images of the site. It contains the entire property that's outlined in red. So it spans the north and south areas of the creek. As mentioned, it currently contains the hotel which has been approved through demolition. There are multiple tennis courts that are proposed to be removed as part of the reworking of the open space around the creek. There's an existing Fish Observatory, just north of the creek that's proposed to remain. There are 3 cottages used for non-residential purposes south of the creek of which 2 are proposed to remain. this proposal is being reviewed through the site and use review process. the proposed new structures would include 3 4 story buildings

[9:04] that are about 54 feet in height, and they would have 303 apartments. These are geared towards the City's University student population. This site is eligible to request the proposed height through the site review process, where the city's community benefit standards require an increase in inclusionary housing requirements. If it is approved through the site review process. The site plan also includes a new public right of way of the north end of the site, which is to be known as olsen drive. and it will also include various updates to multi-use paths through the site and to the open space around the creek in terms of the review process we're in. The proposal previously was discussed by the Planning Board in 2,021 through the concept Plan process. And when the concept plan went to City Council for call up consideration. The Council referred the proposal to the Design Advisory Board as part of the site review process that we're in now.

[10:06] to provide some general feedback on the design. So that is a process that the board's commenting under, and the relevant guidelines are those in the Site Review criteria. as well as the Bbrc design guidelines that are specific to projects in this area. Lastly, in terms of this review, it's important to note that the overall proposal is significantly impacted by flood, plane, high hazard and conveyance zones from Boulder Creek. So these are constraints on the placement of buildings and changes to parking and they required the buildings to be outside of the height, hazard, zone, and for the lowest floor to be elevated to the flood protection, elevation. I'm. Just going to touch really briefly on the key issues staff identified for the board's feedback.

[11:00] First we like feedback on the relationship of the buildings to streets and public access ways and recommendations in particular, regarding the north elevations of the buildings facing Olson Drive Next we'd like to forward to comment and provide recommendations on circulation patterns and way, finding in particular, as it plays into that accessible circulation routes and location of building entries. Third, we'd like the Board to review options to address softening the exposed podium, recognizing that the building elevations need to be elevated to allow the lowest floor to be at or about the flood protection, elevation. And lastly, we like the board to review the buffer space around the ground floor units that based on to parking areas at either end of the site and provide any recommendations that could improve privacy and livability at the ground floor. so that was just a really quick overview, and we'll touch on those again as the

[12:02] discussion goes on. I just wanted to briefly pass it over to colony before the applicant does their presentation for just touch on the the review being done by Job tonight. Hi! So as the board may recall a couple of months ago we had talked a little bit about how to streamline some of the meetings, and as you'll notice from the packet. we had identified what we like. The top 3 to 4 items that the Board can address related to site, review, criteria, or any other guidelines that may apply to a project. So that's the structure of the memo that you saw in the packet where the kind of high priority items from staff to need site, review. or the Vrc. Guidelines that said, there's other. If there are other items that the Board sees. that they would like to address that during the meeting. Please do so. But we did want to identify the top 3. So that's what we have for you tonight.

[13:02] Yeah, and that that concludes the quick staff overview, and I think that the applicant has a detailed presentation as well. Okay, let me ask a more of a procedural question here just for practicality. Does it make more sense to have the applicant's presentation, and then the public participation after they've heard that that presentation? Okay, let's let's do that. Then Okay. so go ahead whenever you guys are ready. Great. Thank you, Mr. Chair. I'll introduce myself. and the team members that are going to be speaking tonight. So i'm Kevin Ronamus I'm. A principal of Si R. Projects and Denver we have a long history of working in Boulder, and are happy to be working on this site again. It's a great site and a really excellent client, and we're pleased to be talking to you about it today.

[14:01] Amy Mccann from our office will also be presenting from the Our. and then Caitlin, with the link associates as our landscape architect in the project, and she'll be. and thank you for the Prep. And comments. I think we'll touch on the 4 main area concerns sort of throughout the presentation rather than as a it was a concerted effort. so familiar with the site. thank you. I think we can go past a fair deal of the context. you know the uses on site. We have had quite lengthy discussions with Rmtc. About the viability of the tennis courts. What can we be worked out through the site. the underlying thing between them and a lot of what we're going to talk about today has to the foot plane. So we have a 16 acre site. and there's I forget the number 4 acres of it on which we can actually build something. and that adds a lot of constraints. So there's geometric constraints to

[15:05] the realities of parking building dimensions fitting the program that's desired keeping adequate space between buildings for fire, separation, distance. and also just making these comfortable spaces between the long. so that that little blue area is a is the is what we've got to work with, and that's a primary driver in the mass, as you'll see in some of the diagrams that we've got coming up. it just explains how we approach the site. Why, it is the way it is. Why this? You know why the plant configuration is drive this as it's shown. and really it's the externalities. You know. It's it's lifting this building up out of the flow plane. it's connectivity from the yeah transportation master plan. and you know, if we look on the top left diagram, that might be an original concept that would need the clients program in a kind of a traditional way. maybe a little bit

[16:05] wider courtyards, deeper. and you know, circular in nature. what this site affords us. Of course, with this great connection to the creek path and everything through there. is a real desire to open that. and as we open up the mass instead of these, you know series of very insular donuts, if you will. that gives us the opportunity to engage with the creek, and that's really what's driving the form of this and then that arc is in response to both the creek and the high hazard zone. and diagram, for there, on the top right? You can understand how we're beginning to recognize. These are large buildings. And we want to be sensitive to that. So all of our massing skills down to creek. It's really you know we have 3 four-sided buildings to design in this scenario maybe we're choosing favorites a little bit with self elevation. But we feel like that's a program in terms of scale.

[17:05] And then, recognizing that they are quite large buildings just where it would break those up how to incorporate the circulation through the site. so that it's both engaging to the public for use to the shopping area to the north, and for the students that are living here for connectivity to the path to the south. and then, looking at that from a courtyard point of view and landscaping I don't think we touched on this, but one of the reasons we have not come to the sooner. Is there a lot of discussion with city forestry and with Chris. the status of the trees on the site. What could be salvaged? What What would be impacted by this change in elevation. and the net results is there are a lot of trees that will be removed, but there's much greater number that will be replaced. I think we'd go to the next one. Another characteristic in the site. Anybody who's written that path will now is that it's sloping from west to east right? So there's about 67 feet of rain change across the site.

[18:05] which does give us a lot of challenges from the topography, creating accessibility, point of view, and that's one of the comments that we'll talk about. From the stuff comes this is an earlier massing model. It's sitting over there in our office. We wish we could be there in person for you to look at it. It's it's still quite relevant in terms of illustrating the scheme in that we we do have these like wings of the building that are coming out. the mass is broken up as it approaches the creek, and that's also scaled down stories. And so to touch on the circulation of the project. this diagram kind of clearly shows in the pink dotted line sort of the primary circulation. So what the project does is peel the Boulder Creek path away from the edge of Boulder Creek to create a better experience for trail users and a safer experience.

[19:00] the other sort of primary route of circulation through the site is this North South multi-use path connection between buildings, one and 2, which gets trail users up through the fight and connect Bye. And so one of the benefits of pulling the creek path away from the edge is actually to create more park space and to create this publicly accessible open lands area similar to the civic center and the the parkspace that has been created along Boulder Creek there as a destiny. Boulder Creek. it's part of the project priority to preserve an enhanced Holder Creek for ecological reasons for habitat and existing trees existing mature tree preservation. Bye. While both sides of the creek are being developed for the project the proposed structures are occurring on the north side of the creek. So for graphic and conversations

[20:08] contact. It is north of the creek. Some of what you're seeing here are the courtyards and spaces between the buildings, which kind of lay out nicely to create these private courtyards that are going to be secured from the South End and part of what these spaces do is mitigate the grade. Change that at least 5 feet between finished floor and the flood plane elevation. so they give us the room in the space more south to make up that grade. we acknowledged that we have sort of the same grade challenges on both sides of the site. So east and west. facing of the parking lot. where we have a little less space to make a that they change so we acknowledged that that's a pretty tight condition. We're sort of limited in our lateral constraint as far as providing the adequate parking requirements and circulation

[21:01] requirements as well. So we just kind of want to touch and note that we have improved it some comfort plan where, initially, we showed the sidewalk the edge of the building, and have now provided it's like buffer and room for thanks, Caitlin. So the project consists of these 3 buildings that that range in size, the easternmost building building. One is the smallest, it's at 125,000 square feet. The middle building building 2 is the largest at 165,000 square feet across. All 3 buildings. There is 303 units. They are They are a mix of unit types between studio, 1, 2, and 3 bedroom, and then the majority of them are 4 bed units. The amenities spaces are concentrated into building one, and there's some other miscellaneous study spaces scattered throughout

[22:01] the other buildings as well. Looking at the materiality of the project, we have a this east-west bar on the north side of the site that is clad in metal panel that is contrasted to the north-south bars the fingers, if you will that are more warm tones, the south ends of each of the fingers we have clad in brick and the brick we're looking at, using a 3 toned umbre effect. So you'd have the darker brick off to the east, transitioning to a lighter brick As you move west and closer to campus. The fingers will also have a continuous insulation system in the courtyards. We're looking at, using a a lighter tone, continuous installation system to help diffuse the daylight within those courtyards and the main building entries will be clad in wood, so that wood material will help communicate the the entry points.

[23:04] The unique condition is at the main entry. It's the only opportunity where we have the a North South Bar kind of sliding past that east, west metal backbone, and so that the special unique condition is at the the main entry. So, taking a look at some of the building elevations. the south elevation in the middle. Here you can start to read the cadence of the solid, void, solid, void language along the the south elevation and the north elevation. Here, you can see is that metal clad backbone with the the wood entry. Well go through some of the elevations the next year elevations for each of the buildings. And do you want to note that for these architectural elevations? We're not showing the the landscape material, so we'll see those more in the renderings, and then we have a

[24:03] fly through at the end, where we can see those. You can see the metal panel backbone along Olson Drive, where we'll still have some partially recessed balconies to have some planar relief in that facade, and then that contrasted with the warm, warm tones of those North South fingers. And as we talked about being in the flood plane, the finish floor elevation is above grade for each of the building. And so we've been intentional and deliberate to make sure that the exterior cladding material is actually pulled down to grade to help conceal that foundation. Looking at some of the renderings for the site. you're able to see more of the relationship of the building as it meets grade and more of the landscaped area. We you can start to see the umbrella effect of the brick

[25:02] as it transitions along each of the building fingers. We had a request from city staff to add a couple more renderings for discussion, so we can come back to these as needed. The views on the north show the relationship of the building to Olsen drive 150, and the views on the south, or are more of the buffer on the east and west of the building. The entry points as we talked about are clad in wood, so it's a common language throughout the project. We also have a pretty consistent window festration pattern. and the the windows at those entry slots are more vertical stacks the courtyard spaces. They are mostly 42 feet wide, with the multi-use path, and then the primary courtyard at building one a little wider at 46 feet wide.

[26:02] You can see the continuous insulation finish system that we have in the courtyard, and then you can also see the that metal panel backbone at the north end. So now I can jump to the fly through. We can look through that together. So approaching the building on the east side, off 20 eighth kind of turning the corner to the main entry here. so you can see how the main entry is elevated above grades. So we have some landscape features to help soften that edge. Yeah. And this is towards the main entry, and how the building relates to the multi-use path. So now we're going south, down the multi-use, path

[27:03] so more of the amenities spaces on the right, and then a typical apartment entry on the right. So amenity on the left. typical apartments on the right we have the club room and an outdoor perch on the left Here. kind of turn left, and take a peek at the building one amenity courtyard to see that relationship with the pool now making our way west. and more of the landscaped area. You can see the Fish Observatory off to the left. and the relationship to the creek can see the relationship of the mass void mass void

[28:03] cadence. Hmm. The intentional scaling down of the building on the south elevation as the the grading steps down towards the creek. This will be a nice lawn for the public. some wood slot features on the fully projecting balconies along the south side. so you can really see from some of those early diagrams how the form and mass of the building is responding to that kidney shape of the the flood plane which is in direct response to the the creek, and

[29:00] using that as an amenity for the site it we trying, of course, to be respectful of the time when I requested. So if there's anything else, we're just a little over 10 min with the videos, so we could talk about this a lot more quickly. So many details, and it's such a large project. but we are. Look forward to the conversation and feedback and and about less. If there's anything specifically you'd like us to address that we didn't cover in that presentation. Please let us know. I think we'll get to that in in some of the questions. So. yeah, this was. This is very informative. So thank you very much for doing that. So we so we want to move into the public participation phase right now. And here from the public. and Devin, do you want to kind of

[30:01] take that over and kind of describe that process and walk people through it absolutely happy to. so this part of the meeting is going to be the public comment section. If there are any people on this any attendees on this call who would like to participate in the public? Go ahead and raise your hand with the raise hand function. that will let me know that you are wanting to speak Each. Each participant will be given 3 min to speak their their mind on this project, and with that I will go ahead and open the floor. Please raise your hand if you would like to speak. seeing none. But i'll give it just a quick second. and Mr. Chair looks like there are no public participation at this time, so i'll turn that back to you. Okay. I will officially close the public participation.

[31:03] segment then, and then we'll move into So I guess that kind of a 2 part discussion with the with the DAB board. and the first is to just ask specific questions. Are there specific questions that you have about the presentation that you would like a little more clarity on before we get into the specific issues. Everyone. Okay, Matthew. I i'm just curious what phase of the architectural design are you in along with the civil and landscape design. Yeah, we're in the second Router Site Review comments were just submitted recently, so it was as I mentioned it was intended that we visit I'm. Closer to that first review, but the issues with Forestry and the Fish Observatory

[32:01] cause this to continue a little bit. No further along. Okay, thanks for clarify that probably was mentioned. I could remember which round of site review it was. Thank you. Okay. Other questions Brendan or Rory or Mark. I I don't at this time. I think we'll get. I have questions, but I think we'll get to them as we get into the review. Okay. Rory. Anything specific? Nope: okay, Mark: Yes. You The the current Creek path and its proximity to the creek itself. is the critic path? A. I I know it's plowed by the transportation apartment. But is it actually managed

[33:02] by parks and wreck. or Osmp? Or who who actually is responsible for, you know, center line of the creek or the creek and the Current Creek path. My question mark I don't know the answer right off the top of my head. But if you give me a minute i'll figure it out. Okay, all right. And this one for the applicant. Was it your strictly your design to pull the path away from the creek? Or was it input, from all smp parks and rack. and anyone else within the city. That that, help you reach that conclusion. That was specifically our proposed design to really create a better space and a better experience for trail users. but

[34:06] all of city staff has been pretty supportive of that decision, both from a a circulation standpoint of sale users, and from an open space standpoint. So it stems with us. But the the city seems to be on board with that. Okay, that was that was great. I I just wanted to make. Just wanted to know if it was your kind of a a pure design motivation or a a nudged design motivation. So that answers my question there. Thank you. Yeah. Okay. Any other questions before we kind of move into the discussion. Okay, then, what I would like to do. this is kind of a tradition with DAB the Design Advisory Board. We we try to start off with with some positive

[35:01] feedback about sort of first impressions, and what we. what we liked about the project, or what we like about the project, and then we'll get into some more of the critique of it as we go along. But we generally start there, so do any of you. They have. Members want to start that off. Sure, i'll start if no one else prefers to. Yeah, I if if I can. you know, in terms of just attributes that I think overall organization of the building materials. I you tend to like that. There's a concept and a logic, for where certain materials are applied. I think that's

[36:00] a nice guiding force compared to the alternative where it's just sort of painting different materials at different areas. So i'm sure we'll have more to talk about materials or distribution of them. But I think the organization of it is really platform. Okay, thanks. Matthew Brendan and Rory. Oh, okay, so when you, when we first received this packet. I think the first thing that I was concerned about was how the heck are they going to address that massive flood plane? And I, because it it is taking up so much of that site in that area. And while I think tennis players of Boulder will be sad to see those courts go, but I think that it's a nice use of

[37:01] creating some open public space and area for just more interaction with the creek and the multi-use path. And you know, it it takes it away from the just being sort of a narrow narrow corridor pathway to get basically further east or West. I think it creates a nice moment and a good pause after a long underpass of 20 Eighth Street. So I I do like I do like how the flood plan has been addressed. in terms of landscaping. Okay, thanks. Rory. Yup. I a second like I am saying, Here I write this section of the path often and well. Parallel in the creek is always a wonderful experience. As you head west, you you get that for about 4 miles. So like this kind of reminds me a bit of

[38:06] will. The East, where kind of the bike pass system takes an opportunity to dive into a student student housing development. I think in that case it's actually. but it just adds interest to the path. Experience creates a nice node after kind of a major transit, as she mentioned under highway 28 and her and across the bridge I also really appreciate that just porosity through these buildings that you know, not only using the flood plane as a forum driver and plan locator. but as far as trying to maximize density that's still preserving access to air and light and green space, the kind of finger approach, as well as kind of the stepping down massing, and then ultimately breaking. project down into kind of 3 separate buildings, that each take on kind of

[39:01] a bit of uniqueness as far as massing and overall dimension. So it's not just the same module kind of stamped out across the site. So I appreciate those things. Okay, thanks, Rory. I think I think what I would say. The the kind of my first impression was for the massive scale of the project. at least in the images that we've looked at so far. it. It does feel like it, like there is a human scale there, and I think that's a combination of things that we can talk about. but it felt it felt kind of that. There was this scale. that made me feel comfortable there, even though the it is, it's it comes in as sort of an institutional scale itself. And so the challenges, really, and making in sort of scaling that down as much as possible. So

[40:00] I think, that you guys have done a good job that some of the things we want to talk about. So if there are no other comments there, I think what we have, these 4 issues that we want to talk about. And I don't know if we want to just take them in the as they're listed here. I think I would prefer to start with the north elevation running Olson. and if we could. if that's okay with you guys that we could sort of zoom in on that with the walk through that we were just doing. maybe we can get through that one pretty pretty easily. So the North. the Olson Street kind of corridor there.

[41:00] and I think, what we kind of want to see is from more of this. where it where it intersects with the street. Yeah, that's I think that's Is that all north facing Yeah, this is the north elevation. So this is so the question here, I that that came up with staff and correct me. if I kind of string into other areas. But it sounds like there's a because of the relationship between Olson Street and this these, this set of buildings, and what's what will eventually be happening across Olson Street on the North that this feels more like a an alleyway treatment. And I don't know if other DAB members perceive it that way. I think that's what we want to talk about, and and so the recommendation would be to sort of how to make this

[42:03] more of a I guess more of a human scale. That has a better has a more attractive interface between the buildings the road, and then what's across the street from it? What's north of it. So jab members, do you want to weigh in here at this point? Yeah. So what is North? Just the memory isn't serving me. What what scale of of development do we have? Oh, you yeah, it's all that. And then that one kind of multi-use trail connection, that kind of splits. Yeah, it's kind of like the back alley. Are there any and forgive me, i'm just not that familiar yet with the access to the building. It looks like there's a lot of access to the buildings from the courtyards.

[43:08] But what are the primary access points on the north of these buildings? You go into the interstitial space to an entrance. Correct? Yeah. basically the 42 to 46 foot gaps between the buildings. or all pedestrian access and then as you head south, you know, roughly 2 to 2 unit modules. Then you're presented with. Is there a detail of that North detached sidewalk and landscaping, and the the for, like a better word, like the the throat into those entry ways. Is there a closer scaled Look at that landscape plan, and how the paving and pedestrian circulation is marked

[44:05] Caitlin, if you have where i'm along with this is. I think, it might be important to keep in context, not just to facade. But but you know which which there's going to be some areas of facade for 30 or 40 feet, that aren't primary view. But it's the treatment to me of that. Know it around where you enter into that entryway like, how are those treated? And are they landscaped, you know, in a way that that's the kind of visual focal point. and and not so much the buildings. the lower end of the facade there. It may be helpful if you do. You guys have the ability to walk around in that and skate through whatever that model is, because it's pretty well into

[45:02] we do. Yeah, we can. or even just looking at the east elevation of building 3 or an elevation view. So here's and remember these architectural elevations. Don't, have the landscape shown. but they are representative of great incorrect, as far as I. Yes. and that was that was actually going to be one of my questions. Is the great line seems to be different between section elevation 3D i'm just wondering if that if if that's still being developed, or for example, the grade between between the buildings and then the grade within the you know, between the fingers.

[46:06] I I think what's happening, and I mean, correct me if i'm wrong here. But basically it appears that the north Facade has kind of this flat line grave that we're seeing on the screen. And then, once you're in between the buildings, whether you're in a courtyard or just one of the interstitial spaces, there's a lot of landscape development that helps to mitigate great. So that's where rise and follow up. Great is occurring with a lot of kind of site, features, planters and benches and stairs and things of that nature. There's I think the architectural sections are more representative of the great difference between buildings. But Don't necessarily represent the exact landscape pathways and walls and things. so the plans and the model are a little bit closer to that.

[47:01] but I would say that as soon as you get beyond the north edge of the buildings. we have to drop back down to the foot plane elevation. So on sort of the approach south from the north side. to the buildings. You're you down lower, and generally raising up higher to get up to the building elevations. And it was thoughtful that between buildings one and 2, the the multi-use path connection, is sort of a a wider, broader emphasis, so that it's a little bit clear that that's the way that people should move through the site. and then the coroner between buildings, 2 and 3, was intentionally designed to be a little bit more vegetated, narrower scale. So it's encouraged for people to get off their bikes, walk them through the space, move through the space a little bit slower. it is publicly accessible, but it's trying to feel a little more

[48:02] semi-private in that zone. so trying to really designate the the clear public routes through the spaces. So each corridor is kind of treated as its own unique space. So that kind of a actually just creates a a little more of a question when i'm looking at this section through the whole site. I can it. The the courtyards, and the multi-use paths, and the pedestrian paths between the buildings look a lot like basins, and so it's hard to understand the relationship of grade at It's going back to what Matthew was talking about. The relationship of the grade with the entries to the buildings, and then also, just how that grade hits the South out the you know the the knuckle of the fingers. Is it that low all the way.

[49:01] Norse. And this is the multi-use path. you know. climbing enough, I know there's so much like warped topography on the site. So it is. It's pretty confusing, I'm trained. I know we have an extra elevation that helps show that a courtyard elevation. This is the 3D model. It looks so developed, and i'll be able to just walk into a couple of these score youards real quick and see some of them. We recently developed the the north side for these rendering. So I think the the landscaped vegetation that we're showing in the model is more of a recent effort. Yeah. we're sort of showing like a a turf under story rather than something that'll be planned a bit more sensitive and native. Yeah, there's a little bit of difference in the model of vegetation just because of modeling programs what you can select for that. So there'll be definitely more development that'll be refining that vegetation. but as far as like general placement and concept of where landscape versus hardscape is accurate and the model.

[50:17] I think Well, you're pulling that up to kind of cut to the chase here on this, because we we got a lot to talk about tonight. Guys is that basically the read of the guidelines would suggest that you know Bolson Drive, which doesn't exist today. will one day be a beautiful street. I'll be a short segment of street if the intent would be to set a precedent that this becomes, You know, a street facing facade that's beautiful. and the challenges that one today it doesn't exist. So to go out there just visiting and Google our street view. I'd encourage that members to drop themselves there. And and you're looking at basically the asset. And that was strip Mall with

[51:00] visible trash and grease collection systems and back a house, and probably a lot of cigarette butts, and it's not a pleasant experience. And the kind of alley comment is very well taken from staff, because I think largely in its current form. It behaves as an ally. I think, what the intent here is that you guys are now the pioneer species on the on the redevelopment of this kind of area in Boulder, and if we set the right precedent here on Olson Drive. The intent would be that someone responding from the Northern property. would would respond and like, and then maybe we end up with a beautiful street segment. The challenge I realized beyond just kind of the visual impact of its existing condition is then, of course. this floodpline elevation. And if you're below, which becomes very expensive and very complicated. I think you know there's conveyance zones here. You've got debris management like any glass that comes below has to be rated 4 foot tall impact zones. I mean, it's a nightmare.

[52:07] But I think what we'd like to try to discuss with you guys is what opportunities do we have to one celebrate that this will be a street one day so kind of putting a little bit more energy and kind of visual interest and attention on it. and 2, some of the creative grading and landscaping techniques that you guys are using so wonderfully kind of within the fingers. And as we kind of descend on the southern end to the creek. are there opportunities to kind of warp and mound and create more visual interest on the north side, so that if the building feels like it meets the grade in a more kind of integrated way. I think that's a good. a good summary of the of what we're trying to do. So I I have a kind of a a similar question. But when Amy, when you were walking us around the north side, and you said, or the east side, and then you came around to the north. The entrance is right. There.

[53:06] Is that correct? The entrance is on the north side of building one, and we have my colleague Masood, who has the the model open. So if it if it makes sense. I'll stop sharing and let me Sue steal the screen so we can jump into Lumi on. Okay, that that that would be helpful. So can I verify on the model. It's the model. The topography is accurate, but the landscape and the landscaping is not quite developed on the north. elevation is that for the Lumi on model that we're pulling up. Yes. yeah, I would say that the topography is mostly accurate. There's gonna be some minor differences, but our They're a little bit time consuming to model so specifically for this north End. so it it looks like you you're in, because your entrance is on the north side. That is a that is a street-facing facade.

[54:03] The question is just whether the rest of that facade, including the sort of the service access points, and things like that. The the tend to be in the back of a building are now would now then be on the street-facing side. So that's sort of the challenge I think that we're looking at is that. How do you make this? The back of your building look like a street facade. Yeah, that that That's the way you phrase it tied is similar to what I was originally getting at is that Recognizing that the entrance of the buildings isn't through the building facade itself. It's actually the space in between them. I think. There's given that is the fact, you know, appropriately guiding visually and circulation-wise

[55:00] design-wise an effort at these openings in the buildings are somewhat more important than the you know. The other 30 of the building that touches the ground which functionally is back of house or transformers or garbage cans. You know. I don't think you can. I don't think there's an expectation that you can dress those areas up efficiently enough to make them worthy of the front of a building. Right so I do. I just want to. We acknowledge, as we go through. There are some just functional limitations of the fact that some of those areas you can't be enhanced. They maybe can be screened. Or so for the sake of of keeping keeping the momentum going. Are there specific recommendations that DAB would make regarding the North Facade?

[56:02] And when I say specific. I mean. we can make a recommendation sort of in principle that this is something that that needs to be considered where we can go step further and make specific recommendations. So are there specific recommendations that I can actually write down? that we can. What what is that? What is that material? That's so I I know. Obviously board form on below, on grade level, and then above is that the metal panel that you we have like 2 profiles. So we have like a narrow profile. It's just the bearage metal panel. So a narrow profile and a wider profile. Matt, I think your point is well taken, but I guess. Here, here, let me just brain down real quick in the effort of like recommendations I mean right now this is not feel like it's engaging the street, and I, and I think the reason is because the there's no entry or sort of kind of retail commercial

[57:07] public program on the street facing level of 2 of these 3 buildings. The eastern building is is a gimme. It sits further back, so it's able to be landscape with more layers, and it's entirely programmed as public amenity, space or resident many space. So I think that you know it's kind of out of the equation, so that as we look at buildings 2 and 3, which are arguably, you know, 65, 70 of the length of this facade and street frontage. We're greeted by units which you know, it's important as far as meeting unit density and kind of pro forma goals. We've got all of the waste collection happening as kind of the punctuative programmatic element at the end of the 2 or 3 units and then we've got in the middle Building. We've got a portion of corridor that exposes itself. But on the building 3 we do do not necessarily have the opportunity.

[58:02] and in this effort the entries, as you've identified Matt, have been pushed through these fingers and then into the sides of the building. So I think you know. 2 basic approaches from my perspective is one. Can the Rubik's queue be twisted a few times, and can you actually create an entry off of the North elevation that doesn't disrupt? You know your 3 or 4 story plan here. and and you know, trash being kind of maybe an obvious contender of movement. or 2 does. And I think, Matt, this is what you are getting at. Can these landscape entries be kind of further designed with, You know, you know, overhead element signage element, monumental elements that actually acknowledge kind of an architectural entry. Even if you are not entering a thermal envelope. they will provide potentially the front door experience or quality of design abstracted. that that staff may be looking for

[59:10] that. That's pretty much what I was There's a you know. However, you said it sounded amazing. The south side of the site and the ability to weave the public path in compared to this. And I know I and I understand this. We're looking at, you know, in progress kind of options here. But here we're looking at 2 parallel detached sidewalks basically with a not a lot of engaging circulation. And I think you know part of what we're seeing these 2 parallel paths don't help the you know. Don't help the the effort to, you know, create more visual interest and engagement on the south, and I know that probably where I've just had that process in the design.

[60:06] But, like this spot right here, could have a different landscape treatment that heightens its character, and in that really you have a landscape entrance to 2 buildings. I think that's kind of a cool idea. and you may not. We may not have to rely on like a lot of architectural, you know, movement on the facade itself. But as a result, anyway. Mark, can I. Yeah, let me let me keep the discussion going with the people of raise their hand. So Mark and then, Kevin. thanks. I I just wanted to build on what Rory and Matthew were saying, and urge the applicant to go visit 30 Fourth Street, south of Belmont, which was going to be a Twitter building. but that street is one of the most innovative and creative streets, I think, in Boulder.

[61:04] and I understand that maybe form base code and stuff allowed them to do some different street design than what the city would normally allow. But it's an active street that almost doesn't feel like a street is so pedestrian. but yet you have access. You have truck access. but it it it's just such a creative design. It's a narrow street. It's a little dark. But you you get on there, and the car feels like the visitor, the pedestrian, and feels like the person that really belongs there. but it's mixed with infrastructure access. So I really encourage that because I think that this awesome way could be an example just like Rory said, hey, you're You're the You're the leader here in this area, and you have an opportunity with kind of a to clean up. Have a clean slate from

[62:01] what is now back of house sort of thing. So, anyway, I would encourage a a review of 34 Street, south of Belmar. Thanks, Mark Kevin. Thank you, Mr. Chair. thank you for the comments, Mark. We'll absolutely take a look at that. So a couple of things to be aware of on the north elevation. Of Of course we have to tie back down to grade. So that's one of the things that makes You know. That's why this is an area where the crowd floor is so much higher over, so to the north of our project is also a conveyance zone. It's not just to the south, where the creek goes. So you know they fled it that we anticipate that this. you know, this is an area of advance as well. So this one factor to consider in terms of our ability to navigate the grade. and the other is I I can assure you we've had extensive conversations with our friends and transportation about the character of of the street section parking through there. and it probably just worth noting for folks that one of the things that the applicant is committed to is that secondary sidewalk is almost strictly a result of

[63:06] I'm. Trying to take trash as much to the building 3, the Far West building for collection, so that you don't have these activities going on through the courtyards between buildings, one and 2 and 2 and 3, So it's and the the feedback that we got from transportation was the transporting that trash where there's by hand, track or carter, you know, rolling Yeah. a lot of public right away was not acceptable. So that's what drove the second path there. We admit it's a little funny from a landscape point of view, and it's not exactly how we would design this in a different situation. But so it's. It's too. Fact about 3 factors. There's the gradient. There's what? there's a trash collection. but there's also just that, you know, sort of a project logistics of trying to localize that pick up point from just one building, because that's what we kind of mentioned in the Intro to this is, we have 3 buildings that

[64:00] don't have a backside but to somebody else's point. Thank you for recognizing that. Yeah, there's trash. There's transformers there's generated. There's like all these other components that do reflect the reality. I I think. Oh, go ahead. No! And and I think in terms of articulation, You know there, there, aren't like one of the obvious ways that you might consider doing. This is a ground level student entry to these units. from a building safety security point of view that's not a condition. We have you down the the courtyards. so it's. It's not preferable to do that, but I do think we could look at articulation with the base of the building, you know right now we've made a deliberate choice to bring the exterior material down and not articulate a different base. but that may be a queue along with the vertical. You know these in and out recesses in the balconies and the base of that coming out. That may be something from design point of view that we can play up a little. so I can't help but go back to You know. We we reviewed a student housing project just across the street from this project.

[65:06] and I can't help but go back to some of the that we had there, and that there just needed to be sort of a in my mind when you're approaching this project front on 20 Eighth Street from the Whether you're coming from the north or the south. there seems to be it seems to be missing some kind of a way, finding or highlighting element, you know, coming into this project as a whole, and then when you're just looking at the north elevation, i'm concerned that it's while we like rhythm. and I, you know the punched openings are nice, and there's like a good amount of glazing, and I like the treatment of the the the would in the balcony recess, and it gives that you know the concrete and and metal a little bit of warmth. but i'm just really concerned that there's there's no variation in

[66:01] you know, East to west or base to to parapet top. There's no variation in this materiality or color for a large portion of this facade until you get to like the transformer elevations where it's just. You know where there are no windows, and it's a very stark warehousey facade, and I it just it. It it's concerning. you know there's there's portions of this that have. you know we have, like the ribbon window, and then we have no windows, and then we have the rhythm of punched openings. i'm just concerned about. you know. There's a nice variety and and break up the materials and the face of the building on the other elevations. But the north elevation sort of breaks from that design, and that rhythm, and giving some variety and variation in

[67:02] materials and perspective and depth and and breaking up of that rhythm. Yeah, I so a couple of thoughts a lot in response to a few people's comments here, I think. as far as the waste collection component. I guess building one has its waste collection halfway down its courtyard, so as far as kind of the north being the logical location for pick up it's not consistent, so i'm not sure that we can rely on that as a design driver. Why waste it's been located on, I think. What staff is trying to communicate is the front facing street facade? And then as far as the grading component, I mean, I I I agree with what Brendan's saying is that we've got 4 story tall

[68:01] masses that are cloud, you know. Wall, wall ground to parapet with the same materials. Do we want to? I mean, we don't want. I don't want to necessarily tell you how to how to design your building, but you know, just bringing in some more urbanism of creating kind of the pedestrian scale ground floor plan? Is it 3 over? One? Is it one over 3. If there is there some kind of penthouse expression or something to help kind of break these masses down again? I don't. Wanna I know you've probably been very thoughtful as far as the elemental and form driven Cloud architecture here. But just to further that, I think, Kevin, you kind of touched on a little bit about kind of treating the base as potentially exploring materiality, or some delineation of this is the base which may help obscure some of this plan that we're talking about. and then I think, just to further that again. If those elements could jump off the building and somehow populate like a an architectural language that defines portals into these courtyards, that you may be able to sell that

[69:03] successfully as entries shown on the north Facade, and not just void that you have a sidewalk to get in right there's some sort of celebrated front door. I'll be at a gate or a portal driven with landscape technique, I do think, and that you guys can can tell me. And maybe alright. is it the landscape. You know th this North seems candidate for some of these, like Asian inspired, you know, mounded architectural components where you can kind of quickly achieve grade, and layering in a way that can greet the building and conceal this kind of obnoxious blood plane protection layer that I know you're kind of been dealt the hand here but would create some sort of you know, Significant interest with landscape solution allows you to get back to street grade rather quickly. But then make a very good case that you are kind of screening and layering and grading up to the building. It's just odd to me that

[70:07] along the entire north we have a black line that looks like it was drawn with a main line. Yeah, that's a good point, I think. Ideally, we would be able to slope up to the building on the north side kind of south of that called second sidewalk. that we're talking about using for trash and circulation. kind of back to what Kevin was saying this this area is like highly dictated by the flood plane. So any change that we make in this area ever so slight, has a ripple effect across the site, because this flood plane is so complicated. and so it's very sensitive to any sort of grade, change or adjustment. so we can certainly look at if that's a possibility in the model. But we have to work with our civil engineer and our flood plane engineer to determine if that's even feasible, without causing a rise or some other ripple effect due to the split flows that Kevin mentioned earlier. So

[71:04] I agree that it's desirable if it's not feasible. I think we're going to try and use landscape material. Plant material to our benefit. for screening purposes, which I would say is probably what you're not seeing here right like You're just seeing a ground plane massing and not seeing that vertical element which we will have. so I think if we were to add that element to it, it would definitely help soften. And on the north side there we do have a a decent amount of distance for Buffer to actually put in some plate material that'll get a bit taller there and help screen kind of that that ground piece that comes from the finish floor across the podium down to the ground plane. So I think we can definitely look at if there's any possibility to manipulate grade in here. some of which you're not seeing as well in there. kind of behind the sidewalk along where we have that wider planting area down the middle has a slight depression as sort of a swale along the entire length of that. So that's one of the subtleties to the landscape that

[72:14] didn't quite make it into this model, but there'll be a like a a slate manipulation of greed there, so I think there's other features we can utilize to try and accomplish some of these. it concerns it. if we're not able to utilize grade in the manner that we are talking about, so we can definitely look into materials and vegetation. And I think way finding is is a key one that the consume team has mentioned. So I think there's definitely some possibilities to looking to. So I really I really do like that landscape buffer, because as Rory said, if you go down that alley. It's. It's loading docs, and it is not it's service entry for sure, and it's it's really these kind of windowless back of

[73:04] building facade on the other side of the street. So I really do like that landscape buffer. I think, on your site. Planets that it was like 35 feet or something. I mean it's it's very generous. but I do kind of again going back to this This articulation and architectural detailing on that of of the materials themselves. I think on on another review for the diagonal to me when you when I see this much and I love this I mean. I use this barrier like M. Deck as fencing and citing all the time and projects, and I and I do think it can be used effectively. And but I just I wonder if there's just not quite enough articulation in it, and variety in it to create it. It has a feeling of like a

[74:02] containership. a shipping container. and I just think it it just needs more variation and and articulation detailing great thanks. So I feel like we need to move on to the next issue that we need to talk about is that everybody comfortable with that? Yeah, they get into it, Doesn't it. Pardon me. Yeah, it plays into it. I mean it's talking about the entries kind of taken 2 to the floor here. Well, which what's the next one that we need to go to, then? That's sort of tied in this is that the item B is saying, the design of the entries at the northern area of the buildings, coupled with the grade, change negatively, impact the accessible entry locations causing brightest routes that bypass non-accessible entry points. Please review and provide

[75:01] recommendations to help improve circulation patterns and way finding for different user types. So they kind of in the Bay of the discussion. It's very well organized. Can we? Can we walk down which you know one of those and trees, I think. Let's if we walk down the the interstitial space between building 2 and 3. And I think what's happening is we are basically building 2 does not have an accessible entry from the interstitial space, and i'm looking at a diagram from Staff that would suggest you'd have to walk entirely through this finger around to the bike path, back into the courtyard. Otherwise from the from the western parking lot. Right This would be from, you know, the northern sidewalk. So depending on if you parked in the east or the west, or on street, or got dropped off by an Uber or whatever. Yeah, that I think we can point out a clarification about that. There is accessible entrance there. I think it was incorrectly identified in the staff report. So when we get over to there, between buildings 2 and 3 towards the north the entrance through that like room that's one of the areas where grade comes up

[76:15] to be. That so? it was a great point, thank you. but the this, this grade. Yeah, thanks. For where we come in through here you can see this raising now through here, so that entrance into building 2 to the east is accessible. It's it. That's one of the instances where we reached up for greed got it, and that entry is through a bike room, though correct. Correct? Yeah. for for both, you know, fully able people and otherwise it is folks bringing a bike in or going to park there the same same as anybody else, whether it's a trip or a assistant cycle or something. So i'm i'm a little confused about whether

[77:01] what we're looking at here. So we're looking if it's helpful. We're looking south in between the opening building 3 is on our right, and building 2 is on the left. so there's an an opening underneath this wooden projecting mass that goes into the bike room at building 2, and that is an accessible entry. You can see steps to the right up here, leading to the entry at building 3, and there's a ramp further south. It is accessible just a little more secure to us, because, comment be. Maybe it's already been. No, I think I think we're addressing it so that that isn't the point at this point. I don't know, Caroline, if you want to shake your head. And also you yeah, as far as that's an accessible entry. So I think the last one in contention would be the actual west elevation. So somebody were to be parking in the identified accessible parking spaces at the northwest corner

[78:02] The diagram i'm, looking at from Staff, would suggest there's a non-accessible entry directly in front of it on the west facade, and that you'd actually have to either go all the way into a finger courtyard or around. Yeah. And is that labels? Because some of the labels were. and the line work on the circulation diagram. Yeah, that's that would be correct. So that would be if we were looking at the other side of the building, I think, is what the question is about, but that is inaccessible. mostly because of the great change that we have right along the edge of the building there, and the requirement for a walkway and very little room laterally to fit in a ramp on that side. And so we studied that, and it just wasn't feasible from an accessibility standpoint. I think if we were able to we would make that an accessible entry.

[79:02] but from a grading standpoint it just wasn't possible. So we sort of talked as a team. Do. We locate the accessible parking on the northwest corner, and kind of have someone directed around the north side of the building or on the south west corner and go around the south side of the building, sort of following the Boulder Creek path. and we, as a team, decided that it felt safer and shorter distance to go the north route rather than the south way, and kind of jump onto the Boulder Creek path. so we can look at the west facade. I think he's getting there right now and then, basically from that parking lot. Looking back. So the there we have the trash on the lower left guys right garage. Roll up, and then those stairs right there. adjacent to the stripe Ada spaces. This is the area we're talking about is that essentially, if you are driving your car to a handicap spacing park here, and you either have to go left around that building until you get to the courtyard and then go down the courtyard into the entry, or you have to go right down that

[80:09] What looks really long in this perspective onto the bike path to, then get back up and button hook into the finger courtyard to get to an accessible entry. So I think there's clearly 2 ways to manage. This one is just moving, you know, like you, said Ada, parking spaces somewhere. That's more convincing that the route is kind of convenient or it's about figuring out. And I you know, when when you say that it's in feasible, I mean, we have to remember that you know a lot of times we we create the and visabilities right because we were designing these projects. you know a ramp you guys are have done a great job with rams elsewhere on the project. I realize this one. This particular side looks awfully tight to parking, and it's providing kind of a minimum 5 foot sidewalk. So I realize there's kind of unit counts, and you know, courtyard with and separations, and I know there's a lot of thought that goes into this stuff.

[81:09] so I I guess that's me digesting the problem out loud. I'm not sure that I just have a solution to ride off the top of my head here, but I don't know if someone else from Dad wants to jump in. And guys i'm looking at DAB members. I've got, you know, kind of the main level floor plan pulled up, but i'm also looking at staffs you know, comment B and C, where they've got this diagram of accessible. There's no accessible entries as a reference. Can you? Can you describe why the maybe back up to what we were looking at in terms of that handicap parking can describe the grade the elevation problem that exists there

[82:00] that that doesn't allow you to have an access point there. Yeah. So what you're seeing? I believe there's 4 here we can stalls on this side and those would have a curve ramp up onto the sidewalk. and the the distance between the required width of the sidewalk. if you want to zoom back into where you just where the distance between the back of the sidewalk and the door entrance doesn't give us adequate width for providing a ramp there that meets code requirements for width and and slope, and so it's within the slope of the of the ring of a wheelchair ramp that doesn't work it doesn't fit. Yeah. But like, if you recess that entry, it'd be billing on your bike, or I mean, there's an infinite solutions here, but the maintenance shop appears to be on grade.

[83:03] Is that accurate, and it's just a few spots further south in the parking lot. So I think you know there's a horse trade to be had here this building appropriately somewhere. and you know again, I don't know off the top, my head all the Ada like, if it needs to be within. You know, 100 foot raise a parking spot if it needs to be, you know, from public right away. So someone's coming on the sidewalk. It needs to be. But I think your finger entries are handling sidewalk pretty nicely as far as proximity. for Ada. this particular parking lot may benefit from more southerly location and access point for parking. I think the other concern would be, you know, once in the building, the vertical conveyance system. proximity to the accessible entrance. That seems to be a challenge really just on building 3. I think so. So are we saying as

[84:00] yes, DAB, that there should be a handicap access point there. Yeah, I was gonna suggest that. you know. Right now the entrance is is recessed. But what if the entrance was was pulled out to the sidewalk, you know, in in playing with the face of those balconies, and you now and then, and put it grade. And now the ramp can be internalized. I think you might lose a couple of bike parking spots. But there is opportunity for ramps inside, not just outside. I know it's what is. Do you know what the grade is here? I was trying to that. Is it 3 feet or something that we're? I don't know that that's right about. So. I mean that's a that's a massive ramp? but I do think that there could be a happy medium of

[85:00] some ramping outside, some ramping inside. But I do think that that ideally that that spot would be accessible, or that that entry. I think, needs to be accessible kind of water entry, electric, and where the waste is coming in, I mean you were able to fit switch back stare in that location. Is this an opportunity to address 2 comments to kind of ramp from the North with a combination of any grade that you may be able to manipulate. I realize there's kind of 2 conveyance zones, but you're always draining away from the buildings and grading towards your building should be a major issue. and then you could create a more celebrated entry on this north facade and and start ticking some staff boxes here.

[86:05] so i'm on the north side. If or whoever the pilot is here, if you kind of just go right around the corner and we see the the switch back stair. That's kind of going into a utility entry. I would assume. There's enough room to potentially stretch a switch back ramp that may address some of the other comments as well. I mean I I I I I guess. Is it fair to say I i'm looking at Staff here that we want a more proximate part accessible parking to accessible entry. And ideally it would then be to the accessible vertical conveyance system. But I think that's gonna be on this discussion. and so there's a number of ways you can move. You know the accessible spaces further down the line to where the building better meets grade and kind of horse trade of the bike and maintenance facility. I think this north Facade is an opportunity to study which may address. Comment a but I I don't think you're back into a corner on this comment.

[87:03] No, I I think that you summarize that. Well, Rory, that there's some options here, maybe some program movement in different areas, you know. But I think you could solve probably 3 of our guidelines that the that review criteria and the Bdrc guidelines by taking a look at some of these screed areas, improving the accessibility. And and while it might meet Ada in the letter of the law right? There is this intention that if you have your you're asking people to park here. but they can't use that stair there. That's not really the kind of spirit of that. and it's typically not best practice, especially in this. So on a whole, I don't think we were. we're not talking about kind of large adjustments to the whole building design.

[88:01] But there's some critical areas regarding these that we'd like you to solve to me that review criteria and the Bvrc. It's. It sounds like it's on your radar, anyway. from what you've said. so I think I don't think we need to make any more specific recommendation about that about this particular issue we can move on. The only other comment I would like to make. And again, i'm not well studied on your plans, but the the corner looks like, you know, between bike accessible entry waste and this maintenance shop It looks like there, could you know there's available ruby skiing to potentially put an accessible entry. It can be over indulged because it's also the bike storage and move waste in a way that's still fully accessible off of the drive aisle, and treat this corner, which will largely be kind of the entry to your project from anybody coming from Folsom in the future, which I know. There's plans to connect

[89:10] whatever. This new drive is across the street to some redevelopment down the road north of the the Field House as a true entry meeting. Yeah, I agree wholeheartedly with that. You said Roy. You said, treated as a true entry. But yeah, I could entry be like, you know, a glassy corner that's got bike storage or ramp entry. It addresses like 5 comments of staff. I don't think it. I think it relatively simply could be Rubik's down this west facade in a way that preserves all of the other necessary parameters that I know you guys are solving for of stacking those units which I understand the efficiency in that. But I agree that this

[90:04] you there is access off of fulsome, although people don't use it very often now, because it feels like such an alley. But I but I agree that this is this is the corner. This is one of the the corners that that people are going to see first, and and it's very back of house service. you already, and it and it could be like you said we're just programmatically shifted. which ripples to all 4 floors, I realized. But to create more of a of an entry moment or some kind of a at a feature. Yeah, it's really just that trash shoot which you guys have some pretty nifty widgets in their layouts here. So i'm sure you've got a version where you can trash you somewhere else. This is good guys. We I mean, yeah.

[91:01] So are we ready to move on? if we're ready? I want to ask if you if anybody needs to take a break If you want to take a break right now that's power through power, through. Yeah, take a break on your own if you need to everybody. Okay, with that we lose Brendan. She's she's going to turn into a pumpkin soon, so we gotta make sure we've got enough time. Yeah, i'm. I'm hard. Stop it. 7, 20. We're making good progress. I feel like I don't know. Maybe that's just my optimism. But yeah, I think I think we are. So let's so let's move on to the third issue. which is the I believe that's our This is the yeah, the flood constraints require elevating the first floor of the building. It's creating an exposed podium around the perimeter of each building, measuring in areas

[92:05] up to approximately 6 feet. The podium lacks human scale elements acknowledging the buildings first floor elevation will likely not change. Review strategies and options to help address softening the exposed podium. The exterior court cards or their finger court, are designed with more human scale elements around the podium. where the exterior perimeter is not addressed to the same level of detail. Staff would like an additional touch and paid to the buffer space around the ground for residential units alone. the parking lots of building one and 3, and along the walk race between buildings. So this is tidy, right? All these commons are tying into each other. Is there a is there a particularly I guess? Egregious example of this? This goes back to the question at the very beginning of of this and that. you know. I'm looking at the elevation of

[93:04] building building one the west courtyard elevation. and it's showing that that is essentially eliminated by the time it gets to the south facade and i'm just. But in in other areas it looks like the point is still there in for the whole length of that courtyard. I'm. Just. I just need clarification if if the that massive base continues all the way into the knuckles of the fingers. or if the grade comes up and meets the ground floor. Yeah. the great varies. Maybe i'll take a stab, Amy, and then you can. The great varies depending on the location. So some court yards are higher at building finish for some courtyards kind of gradually slope from finish floor down to existing foot plane elevation along the sides of the building like the edge that we're looking at right now.

[94:06] we're going from finished 4 to existing grade. And so that's about 5 feet and we don't have the ability to slope between that because we have to get parking down to a certain elevation. It's more exaggerated on the the 2 end sides of the buildings, the east and the west of building one and 3, but the interior courtyards they all vary so they kind of transition between. So finish for and then a a more gradual sloping elevation down south. These court yards are gorgeous. Spread the love to the perimeter of the building totally like this. this treatment on. or am I getting ahead of myself. I think the final question. the buffer. Never mind. We can talk about that later. No, Brendan. The questions when we for the issues when we put them together.

[95:07] They're very closely tied. So if they blend together, we can kind of summarize these all. I think I mean this is this is epic. This looks lively and thoughtful, and fun to hang out, and addresses kind of access and accent in a wonderful way. Clearly, the skill set is available on this team. I was just gonna say I think we can apply some of these concepts, especially to like the North End that we looked at and materiality, I think. or where we're really constrained, is the east and west sides of the project where we don't really have any flexibility to Resolve that grade in the landscape. we do have a little bit of room for landscape buffer.

[96:00] but we're sort of meeting the minimum requirements laterally on the site for parking circulation. North South multi-use path connections depending on the so it's a little bit challenging on that edges. But I think the the North definitely allows us more room. The nice thing about the courtyard is, we have the the length of the building, and these fingers to make up that grade. So that's what allows us to either sort of do like a really elegant ramp or smooth walkway, whereas it's. you know, i'm i'm less and sort of the flood impact of kind of site improvements. But are we unable to provide like retaining, you know. bench height, retaining, and then 2 to one, you know, really dramatic kind of sloping planting material stuff that just

[97:02] is going to make the perimeter feel really designed like a raised planting bed or something. Yeah, like having, you know, planters. They create some sort of rhythm. Is there? Can they be at different heights? Can the slope of the grade not, you know, be steep, or a bubble, or something that you know again, is creating variety and interest, you know, particularly in the north east facade here. you know, I guess. Do we need to maintain grade at sidewalk, or can we go vertical immediately Once you get the width of the clear sidewalk required, and start to you know, create ground playing rhythm. Yeah, that's a good question. I think we can work with our fun plane engineer to understand our ability to manipulate the grade in those areas. Just tell me about weeks in the walls. Let it all through. I think that this east elevation is in my mind the most important elevation. It's the gateway to Boulder. It's, you know, on the other side of the street we have.

[98:05] We reviewed a project student housing that is like we, you know it was all about the articulation and the you know, being this like beacon, and you know the gateway to Boulder, and this is the first building that we're really seeing as we come down that hill off of 20 eighth. And while I mean anything is an improvement, I think, from the Harvest House. I I just wonder if. And I and I understand that like giving this building a articulating some type of a basins building is not the designed intent. It it's not the direction that this building is going in. but I get the sense that the that the landscape is the landscaping. The planting is trying to like trying to fill that role, and it's just not quite

[99:02] It's not quite tying this flat facade into the grounding and the base of this, and giving it sort of this, this true and entrance and excitement that I think that this facade needs, and if you go around the corner and you get the sales office in that fairly interesting at element that's on the the amenity program. I mean, I want to see something like that. you know, as we're coming into the corner of this building from the north and the south, I would like to see some type of interest. I I mean, I think that that is interesting, and I think but it's it's tucked back far enough that you're not. You know we talk a lot about the pedestrian experience of these buildings. But I think that this building is primarily going to be experienced. in a vehicle that most people are going to be seeing this

[100:03] project, you know, driving by it on 20 Eighth Street. and I just. I I would like to see some something happening on that east facade, and I I agree that that sort of flat landscape coming from the sidewalk coming straight into the building. and then it going straight up is It's well, it's. It just needs something. So, Brendan, we are. We getting into the the fourth issue. you know. we we really like. I I'd like the experience of being in those in the knuckles and the fingers. I think that they've been the architecture has been articulated really well and detailed. And the human scale is is there, and the landscape and the plantings and the variation of programming within the landscaping is there? I just

[101:06] like, Rory said. I just would love to see it pulled on to the outside right, so I guess one i'm wondering is, are we? Is this still? Are we still in the discussion about the softening, the the exposed podium, or have we? Yeah, I think there's kind of while softening the podium is your opportunity to buffer the ground floor, and it's a. D. And E. Are happening simultaneously here. Right that that plan was the plant has been successfully buffered, in my opinion, on the South, you know. If you're looking at the building from the south, it's it's it's been more successful. I think so. But for that pl it would be nice to see some of that same language brought out I mean, I couldn't agree more that this is. I mean, you guys have a heavy responsibility here. This is the gateway to Boulder, and there is a lot of shit precedent

[102:07] along 20, eighth right now, so well, it's easy to shine and a pile of shit. It'd be awesome if it was a jam. and I think to further the discussion. I I guess a few comments. One I there, you know, other than the size of the festration where we've got kind of a more of a storefront, larger expanse of glazing that is indicating public program. There's that's it. The line stops there. It's just, you know. Here's a wall, and here's some units because they've got small operables. And then here is a public program because it's got a larger store from Assembly. There's got to be a way to kind of draw more architectural intent and articulation, whether it's material change mass, you know, undercut whatever you know. I don't want to screw you through structural logic. But

[103:03] to further identify these, you know, I'd say in this view the most successful component is the standard, and it's probably because there's a big sign there, right? That makes it obvious to realize that that's an important thing. But you get the rest of this rambling corner with storefront that then just becomes a different window punch in the same wall it would be to me the building would become more legible if you know, material or mass kind of address, the public program. and then kind of a larger guiding principle. What I think you guys have done incredibly well here is taking a very large project. and applied kind of a massing and materiality scheme that is project wide. So when you go zoom out, you know, 200 miles and you look at this from a Google earth sort of diagrammatic perspective. The way that you talked about kind of the umbrella effect across the building, the stepping down to the the public path and creek side. The articulation of kind of the metal bar, you know, on the north versus kind of these you know more residentially sized units that are broken by kind of the entry points of wood, and then different bricks. That is all incredibly sound logic.

[104:15] I guess I would be interested, and I don't know what the budget is on this building. But then, applying that same core set of diagrammatic breakdown principles to then the buildings themselves. Right now. I feel like they've You've broken down like the carcass. but we haven't started cutting fillets out of it yet. If that makes sense. Okay.

[105:00] Are there other sense where we've started them transitioned into this fourth issue. Are there other things we want to talk about in terms of the issue Number 4 that the deal both with the West Side and the East Side. and trying to create more of a landscape buffer to buffer the the the units that are there. So there's so. What I see here is this kind of a thin line of of ability to plant things in there on both the east and west sides. So there's not a whole lot of buffer there. I mean. I agree that there's not a lot of width, but I in in. There are presentation in the beginning there was. There was some talk about creating these landscape tiers at the north Facade at the entry.

[106:05] it! It it seems like it. It's something that can be done. I understand that the width of between you know the sidewalk and the facade of the building is is narrower, but the same landscape, interest and treatment, and the tiers that are happening on that north. I I think, is successful. I and wondering if something like that could be brought around the corner or extended around the corner. Specifically, what are you referring to on the north? Those the tiers where you see, between the cars sidewalk, and then you have some landscape tears happening right if that could be brought around, and that goes back to Rory's suggestion for creating some type of

[107:00] planter. raise plan for bed planter platforms. You know some type of articulation of these planters that could be pulled around that corner right? I think we can definitely work with the footprint engineer to understand if we can create some more height in that space. I think we're kind of constraint set on that with, and you can kind of see I mean in the front. We have you know 25 feet, and then already side we have 5 feet. So it's pretty significant difference there. But I think the other thing to with sort of subdividing that and creating tears is, you may get a little more height of landscape, but you get sort of less with. So some of the the bigger plants that usually get bigger or sorry, wider and taller. you kind of end up with a couple of smaller stagger versions not to say that we couldn't explore it as an option. Okay. like, Are you going ahead?

[108:00] Are you guys constrained by on the floodplain by storage capacity? Is that the issue of you that you're displacing storage capacity of the flood plane itself, that everything affects everything in this one. I mean the the poor guys in ace, you know where we'll say we want to lift this up 6 inches in the the hydro dynamics of this side are so incredibly complex. so it's. Yes. And then we we I was wondering on this East Side like if we had a series of planters to help articulate that base. Maybe we go back to the plan, diagram, keel, and I can't remember if we're right up against that. Or if we do have some flexibility in that landscape area, what we what we can't do? To answer the primary question is like, we can't push the parking lot any closer to 28 because that's pretty disastrous from the flood modeling disastrous. It's bad 4 choice of words. I apologize. yeah. So we we it goes through the 28. Then we get into all sorts of retaining.

[109:05] That's furthering a not great condition. It's like. Yeah, Kevin. I'd add to that from a layout standpoint the parking lot. We have a set dimension from the property line. We have a set dimension of the parking lot with itself, and then we have a set dimension of the the walkway along the building. So when you put all those together, we're kind of left with the space in between. Unfortunately, so we don't have any lateral with Eastern West on the site to be able to push and pull that parking. and our our best ability to add to that area would really be to remove parking spaces, and there's already a substantial parking reduction. Right? Be contemplated. and we we actually have, I mean, through working through transportation, engineering utilities. just a lot of the site drainage, you know there's there's a lot more green in the parking lot than initially proposed. and that's been part of kind of the negotiated response through the first round of site. Review.

[110:04] Okay, I I would add. I I think we have more opportunity on the east side. Here there's 5 foot planting area next to the building, as currently shown, and it's in the shadow of the flood plane. And so I think we might have some some more opportunity with raising different blints or benches, or retaining walls in that area where, I think. on the west side it's only 2 feet wide. and that's the higher end of the site. And so I think. adding. adding height to that planting area on the west side is will be more challenging. Okay. yeah. On the west side is as much drier and hotter as well. That's a You also hit grade more quickly on the west side, right? So there's this is a little bit less of a concern. You're you're on shack, right?

[111:00] Yeah, that's a function of the salt. You know the sight fall as it goes, but at 6 or 8 feet as you go from Westing East. Well, I look at this Cis. and it doesn't that I mean like the fact, like, there you're starting to articulate like penthouse versus 3 story building, starting our tick, you know, like I think that is some of the kind of material interest without turning this thing into like a fashion statement, because I appreciate kind of the rigor and the massing and kind of delineation of function. But. you know. Is there any way of? I think I don't want to tell you guys what to do. But has there been any studies that would suggest? You know the upper 3 levels for windows with panels or something just to start to, you know. Not Just look like. you know, a plate diagram from a a you know, a hotel over a parking. a parking layout right? Almost. I almost added this when we were talking more about the materiality of the middle panel, but we do have a 3 over one for building 3 and a building 2. It's the opposite a one over, or I guess this this facade we're looking at is one over 3 where you we're having the more narrow

[112:14] metal panel up at the top. and then the wider metal panel. So there is a a slight play. I I hear that feedback of it being to monotonous. but I did want to point that out. Yeah, there's some. There's some horizontality and some a break up in the horizontality and the verticality with just color, change and material change. I mean the this. I understand, on the south side that there is some stepping of the building, but we're just not seeing any of that for 100 feet or whatever all the way around the building. It's the parapet is the exact same height. and you know the the finished materials the exact same height. it just need I? But I do think that this helps visually break

[113:03] that up, and then i'm not. And then i'm not paying even as much attention to the plums, or or the concrete the podium like there's a big board form concrete podium beneath that balcony, but it doesn't my eyes not drawn to it, because there is more variety and materiality and colors. I I don't know if if I can interject just because everyone has a different opinion, i'll offer a different one like I love the fact that I love the fact that the building has a very consistent color. It's a block. It has a it contributes to the language in the form of the overall development. I would if I were designing, I would be hesitant to just start patching different colors into this section because it takes away the legibility of you know. There, this is a different side of a 16 acre site.

[114:05] And so I think you know. tempering that with Yes, it is a big structure, and it could be monotonous interior of material I would just, you know, offer maybe, subtle variation which is, which is happening at the top floor. But you have a lot of the thinner gauge metal panel or the thinner corrugated metal panel, as the let's say, 90% material. It might be creative or fun to start mixing that, taking some of that other scale, and maybe introduce, you know. other bands or sections. and and maybe not going on a completely different color, but changing the texture. I think that could be really vibrant, too, with shadows, and as the day changes so like, I said, just because everyone is a slightly different opinion, I wouldn't go so far as to start you catching in a whole new language or palette a material.

[115:02] Yeah, that's a great point back to you. I think this particular board composition on Deb is not fond of trying to turn big buildings into small cute buildings. No little. It's a small world, after all. So make sure that's temporary tempering this entire discussion. Yeah, it's subtle. Yeah, it's a very important comment. let me get. Let me get Mark's comment. and what the the topic has moved away from my comment. So i'm sorry. That's okay. No, no, I I When earlier, when we were talking about planters and the kind of landscaping effect and the the need for the landscaping and on certain elevations as as we've been moving around the model. I just keep seeing very small narrow strips and islands of turf of sod. And my question is, is that best practice

[116:01] in the West these days to have these high water use high maintenance strips that no one really visits in any meaningful way, and I understand they provide a a visual buffer. But in terms of. or is the model just not really developed Yet, in terms of Okay. We put grass in there for now, but later it will be tall grasses, bushes, etc. So that that's kind of more of a question. Is it best practice? I think I think they address that early on if it was quick. So I don't know if you caught it. But that was something they definitely caution as they pulled this model up is that the under story of planting is sorely under represented here. Okay, great. Thank you. Sorry about that which we understand. We we we play with models a bunch, so we get it. the what about the corners or these opportunities? I mean. Again, I don't know the pro form of a student kind of dormitory housing, but

[117:07] if this were an apartment building, these corners would drive kind of premium unit pricing. and would be suggested and would suggest it to the public with, You know, big corner glass, and you know, articulating the fact that you have the opportunity to have rooms with light on 2 sides. but they're kind of not. They're just taking the chorus or kind of the rhythm section is just punching around the corner here. but before we go there Have we sort of covered the 4 issues for questions that staff is raised, and I have we now move kind of moved on to other DAB topics. and if not, can we Can we wrap up the 4 issues before we kind of move on. How are you doing?

[118:01] Yes, you have address the issues that we put forth on the key issues. We would like to get the summarized for the minutes, though so as a sort of effort for the board to go through right now. summarize those, and then, if you don't mind, then we can start to talk about maybe more more of the materiality or the lay up or kind of the general patternated organization of those other items. I was hoping we could do that all at once the summarization. But if if you feel like you guys will remember these further down the discussion. yes, we could do it towards the end. But if it's fresh right now, and it's easy to summarize right now, that might also be I have a. I have a lot of notes that I think I can that we can go back through and kind of remind people what we were talking about.

[119:04] so I I would prefer to to keep going. But it's. I want to remind people that it's it's 6 now. so I don't know if we need a a full hour. or if we're almost finished. You've been to a dad meeting before right now. Yeah. we we have gotten through. we've gotten through this fairly quickly. I think, compared to some past meetings, but I know that there's the that there's probably more to talk about that doesn't directly affect the 4 issues. and I want to make sure we have time to do that. But I don't I'd still like kind of like to do that fairly quickly, because we have a We schedule a meeting from 4 to 6 and

[120:01] one of these days. I I think it would be nice to to try to stick to it. Maybe this is not the right project, because it is probably the largest project we've had in a in a while. Todd. Mr. Chairman, I I wonder if I could make a comment. This is Chris Shears. I've been listening. If If that's all right. Can I just make a general comment? As a former member of what was did to have years and years ago, and and for many, many years. I want to say that I then I think i'll speak for our entire team. That the review over these last 2 h, and, as it continues. is very effective. The way that you run the meeting the way that she began the meeting, and a positive note the the the comments that are spot on, as far as I think this team is concerned. it, it's just impressive. We do a lot of design review. We we sit on both sides of that.

[121:05] and we we have a lot of respect for the process. We know it's difficult. And I just. I just want to say that. I'm impressed. I think our whole team is impressed. And after all. the whole point of this is the projects improve through a couple of hours of discussion as we're having. This is a very high level to design discussion that you don't often see with design review boards. And so I just want to thank the Board and you as chairman, managing this this meeting for that. I've got to actually drive to boulder where I live, and I've lived for 40 years. So so. But I I just wanted to to say that I also want to tell Mark that he really needs to turn the lights on. I'm. I'm not sure why you're in the dark, but

[122:02] what you deserve. He's in the woods. You deserve to have the lights on so. But but thank you all of you, and for Kalani for her review, which was spot on as well. This project is better for this. So thank you. Great. Thank you, Chris. I'd be curious if anybody on Dad Brendan and Matthew, you guys are just starting to feel the I mean a little bit outside of the staff task focus items as far as just general massing and character administration. What I what i'd like to do as we move forward is to just to focus as much as we can on recommendations. And I know that we that there has to be some discussion leading up to that. But i'd like to sort of get that

[123:04] on people's radar that. That's what we're trying to to sort of. Get out of this, so It may be helpful to make a recommendation, and then explain why why you think that's a a good recommendation. I think that, and I don't I mean, we could move around the entire, you know. complex as much as we need to. I always get a ton out of listening to the discussion, but I am also feeling the the pressure to make sure that I get something that we get some specific recommendations for City Council. and for the applicant. So that's a great view. I think one of the recommendations would be in, and it's mostly just a summary is as a special articulation or treatment of these corner, these major corners of this building, maybe not necessarily

[124:03] building 2, but you know, for sure buildings, one and 3 with this this North corners that need need to have some type of distinction or or just just clarification. Maybe maybe it is a potential for higher interest units, or or whatever it is. But I I I think it needs it some. It it just needs to be treated differently, and celebrated a little bit. and then another item that wasn't on colonies list, where where the the balconies. So the balcony rails.

[125:00] are, you know there's there's quite a few of them as you go around the building. and I am concerned about students occupying these units. And having these be visually porous, and being able to see onto these balconies, they are going to be total junk collectors, you know. I mean it's somebody from California that's moved is they're going to be storing their skis, and bikes and bean bags, and everything is going on to these balconies as an overflow space. And so I I just want some special attention paid to the materiality of those balcony rails because it's not high end peloton renters it's it's students

[126:09] 10 of guidelines. It's a a very tightly managed community. They have these all around the country. so if if Robert Andrew can have a presenter role. they can speak to that quickly. It's it's a great point, because we you know what that looks like. As I. I have a quick question. That sort of tags onto this. Are there specific storage units that the go with the units that are on a different on below grade, or it doesn't sound like there are. But there's there's not dedicated storage rooms throughout the building. Then there there's no below grades on the project to the flip plane. So there's storage base scattered throughout the plan. There's a a couple of units that have

[127:02] like left over space off of the corridor that will be rented storage. So it's not dedicated for each unit. But there are opportunities for it throughout the corridors. Brendan is talking about. and when the building was built there were. There are storage units that were built in the basement. and the tenants are supposed to put their stuff there. and a few of them do, but most of them put it on the porch. And it is it? It is potentially a a big problem, and this is a affordable housing. So it's managed by boulder housing partners, and they have their rules, and they you have to remind them all the time that that those are the rules, and so then they have to enforce them, and then the stuff disappears for a while, and then it comes back so. and it's kind of seasonal. But there's a lot of stuff that's a good, really good point.

[128:03] hey? This is Andrew Costa from landmark properties. the app. Can you guys hear me? So so yeah, as Kevin was saying, we manage that through our lease documents, so in addition to a code of conduct, we have requirements that the tenants follow certain guidelines. and we manage that through our leases. So essentially, if if they don't comply their risk of losing their lease. and so we are well versed in this. It's a it's something that a lot of communities we work in are worried about, and it's it's in our best interest to be a good neighbor. I I don't know if anybody on DAB has seen the good neighbor agreement that we submitted alongside our site reviews the middle but we are committing to a number of things in that agreement to make sure that we're operating this community in a way that is going to be accepted in the community.

[129:02] So storage of of miscellaneous stuff on the on the balcony is not allow. Okay, thank you. And then and then you guys have regular enforcement of this, or how does that get? So if they walk around and they see it happening. the property manager will contact the Resident and ask him to. you know, Remove it. Okay. Brendan, and anything else you want to add to your recommendation. Recommendations? not not really. I mean, I think that. I think that there seems to be that the balcony treatment is the same in most cases, except for I was looking at that on the south elevation that looked like there's

[130:04] maybe some decorative vertical metal elements that make it a little bit different. It it. It might be nice to be able to see some of that same design or detailing articulation on this east facade or on the north. I just feel like the South is just hogging all of these great design moments. That's a good point, too. Okay, Thank you. So, Rory and Brendan, we can come back to you. I want to come back before you leave and see if you have anything to add. But let me see what Rory and

[131:00] you guys go, you guys, go I I I just wanted to get something in before we conclude it. But, you guys, go go ahead. Matthew, go for it. We lose that here. You may have lost him. Hmm. He's joining him. You see, if he's still on the list you just showed up back to you guys. I just promoted into panelists. It'll take a second. It looks like he's trying to I I mean as far as documenting my feedback. I just think, globally, the reader with which the entire project site has been treated from a massing and articulation of building scale

[132:00] on the site that has been very rigorous and well received. I think, taking that same rigor to individual building development would be the next logical step of design development here. Can you say more about that? Yeah, I think you know, treatment for further architectural expression of programmatic, of of programmatically varying spaces and a review kind of project, wide of the rhythm and the articulation of frustration to break it down at least one step further.

[133:00] the logical places being corners. but also evaluating is kind of vertical versus horizontal subtlety can be incorporated. Okay. I think I got that. Matt: you with us. Yeah, Sorry about that technical difficulty. So, Matthew, we were trying to get specific recommendations so overall and and as specific as you want to get outside of the outside of the 4 issues that we've kind of addressed.

[134:01] yeah, I think my 2 big things, and i'll be brief, because they probably fall into what we've addressed. One is creating entrances, Landscape entrances on the north between the 2 main alleys. of the building. and I think some textural variation on the east West bar. you know, facing the north, the side or of the north facade. those are my 2 big things. The third I just concur with some. the need to, I think the northeast corner. because of the program, the program lending itself to this is there is. you know well articulated in the program gives that opportunity.

[135:01] I think if you're going to have accessible parking on the northwest, something has to be done on the northwest corner of the building. adapt to that just reality that you know we're trying to. I think one. A lot of people are going to access the site from that entrance. I think that corner of the building is a bit of a billboard right now, and it it just needs something at the ground level. to address people circulating from the from the west. No, I think that's something. We've all agreed on so that the north west corner should be treated more as an arrival begin. and if it if it means moving transformers to the east along that facade or something, I mean easier, said the done, i'm sure. But if it means making some accommodations to create something more interesting in that corner, which is the first thing

[136:06] everyone parking in this parking lot is going to see I think you know, coming to a back of house garage, or if that could be mitigated, it probably be more attractive. Right? So, yeah. or at a minimum, you know, that same articulation could could start as level 2 and give it some and just have left give visually less emphasis on that service door and the transformers. Okay. And then I I I have kind of registered. you know, as an overall comment for this for this project.

[137:02] And maybe we could go back to that view that we were just looking at from the South East. Yes. I think you know. The reason why this project was put before us is because there's there was a height variance request. and When I was looking at the diagram that was showing the harvest. How this project overlaid in, you know, in 3 dimensions with the Harvest House. I I understand that this. The 55 feet is starting from the low point in site, which is, which is very low. So the you know top of parapet of this building is actually not very high, and it's as we saw in the diagram. It's not any higher than than the primary structure of the Harvest House.

[138:00] However, I do think that what was successful in the Harvest house is that that only a portion of that met the 55 feet. And then there were. There was a lot of stepping and a lot of variation in height. I think. For example, building one the entire building, is it as it at the Max height. I just I don't know if and then, as you go into 2 and 3, you have a some step, some step back and some setbacks, and it just creates more interest, and I just would like to see that building one not be maxed out on every floor, at every facade to that Max. Height elevation. you know, if if that's what we're, if that's what we're going for.

[139:00] Okay. I think the other thing I would add, is in a lot of ways. It's a discussion about the East aside is a direct reaction to it, essentially being a street facing facade, even though it is separated by the parking lot. So I would, I guess, like to document that not only should the North Facade be treated with kind of a design lines that one day it will be a Front Street facade. but acknowledging that this is in a lot of ways a second and corner like property with the 20 eighth. Is there a recommendation that you have to go along with that? I I think, just providing kind of the design, nuance and subtlety to

[140:02] dignify a street facing. Okay. Great thanks. So Mark, I think you had a you were holding a comment. Yeah, I I just have one going back to my original question. Slash comment in regard to the multi-use path on the south side of the building and the way it's currently designed, I think, is kind of reminiscent of the lawn between the library and the city building and I I find that to be successful, because moving the multi-use path away from the creek has many advantages, some of them ecological for the creek

[141:02] etc. But I I want to make sure the applicant understands that because of the way Boulder has structured a lot of East West traffic commuters use that path at high frequency high volume, and maybe inappropriately high speed. and I do not underestimate the the the use of that multi-use path by commuters and so the the radius, and moving it away from the creek can't seem gratuitously out out of the way it's got. It's got to be just enough that you get the effect you want. but it can't seem like I'm really being diverted here just for a a landscape. Architects sort of whim it's got to feel it's got a feel right that it's got to acknowledge the volume of users.

[142:02] The other thing, I would say is the edge of the creek. in conjunction with whatever city department really manages that needs to be programmed. so that as people use the creek edge similar to again the the city lawn. there are real structured and programmed places. These are the people. Go to those places, and they don't damage the rest of the creek, because if you just have it, be a free for all. Then the whole thing kind of gets damaged and falls apart. So people want to go to the creek. You have to make sure that they have a place to go to go to the creek, and then that is not particularly great for them to go other places, so that that's my comment on the path, the multi-use path, the Lead Creek Bank. I think that's a really good point, and I and I can. My concern is that you know you do have this wider multi-use path, and then you have it a a shortcut, and I wonder if people are going to start just cutting through that on onto the pedestrian path

[143:12] on their e bikes, which are, I mean, the We live really close to a bike path, and it is the speed it which those e bikes are moving on. Those bike pass is is frightening in terms of. you know, Residents trying to get down to that spot spot can be like crossing 4 lanes of traffic on a highway. It it can be in it like you said. Markets can be very busy, and I do think you need to be careful about creating shortcuts for people to to avoid having to do that circuitous Luke to the north. Yeah, I think there's a balance there between getting it away from the creek and just making it feel like, Why am I going over here when I really want to go this other way. So yeah, agreed

[144:05] I. That's a I think that's a really good point, too. I have a question about the bridge. Is that bridge. Is that crossing the of Boulder Creek? Is that there? And right now it sucks you. Come in high speed, and then it's a hard left. So I think. Okay, the radius is actually I I mean, I agree with what Mark saying. Like. You know, this shouldn't be a sightseeing to her. I think I ride that but path to get to the office. So i'm cruising but it looks much more pleasant as far as taking that turn without a 90 degree and usually people collect there. So it's kind of a pretty dodgy moment on the trail right now. So having that park is more of a natural sort of and for sure. Yeah. So at least I mean

[145:03] Mark's points well taken. i'm just thinking that bridge, if it comes across perpendicular to the creek. It sort of suggests this bigger park rather than the sharp turn. Exactly, but not not overly done. That's definitely the reasoning we looked at doing that? I think as soon as you come off the bridge, if you're there in today's condition, it's really dangerous. It's almost gotten hit a number of times being a pedestrian with cyclists just flying by. So we were doing it more out of safety for pedestrians and for cyclists. I don't know if it's going to get people to slow down anymore, but I think it at least creates more sight lines and more opportunity for pedestrians to interface with cyclists, and see that so, we felt like we designed it to a level. That was

[146:01] It's going to be beneficial for pedestrians and cyclists kind of moving through on that. I think that's a good point about making sure that creek pass edge that's along the creek doesn't feel like a shortcut. So I think we can definitely re-examine that I think the the angles about the past kind of put back into the boulder creek trail. it kind of jog back in, I think hopefully, that will serve as a deterrent. But we can that to make sure that we feel like it's serving purpose. Okay, great. Thank you. So are there any other DAB comments, or that we need to consider here for recommendations? I'm just the only one while we're on the path. Mark: I'm curious if you guys on planning board chatted at all about like

[147:00] encampment opportunity Here this is. It's like prime encampment, real estate right now we so I did not do the concept review or site review of this in 21. I was not on planning board yet. So we have I I have nothing to. So, anyway. I don't know. Maybe Kwani remembers. But no, I I don't remember we are just seeing I mean, this whole path is littered with vagrants and things. I would. I guess the in a community I, on approach should probably be something is considered, and it seems like you have in a lot of ways the fact that it's more. An open lawn can go either way, and we see Central park kind of becoming heavily populated at times. but we also see kind of the sticks and the brush as kind of long term residences for some folks

[148:07] just something to be aware of. If you're continuing discussions about articulating these beautiful green open. Okay. Very good point. Have any other any other recommendations overall no hearing none. I think Amy's got her hand up, though. Who does? Oh, Amy, i'm sorry you're very busy in the background. I didn't see your hand there. Oh, okay, yeah, Thank you. Rory. Yeah. I just wanted to follow up on Brendan's comment about the height at building one. I know part of our. When we were looking at massing strategies, we have the setbacks at buildings 2 and 3,

[149:04] where we don't have the amenity space, and having the amenity space up building. One is where we have more of the activated level, one with larger storefront openings. and so having that variation for building, one having a full height at building one in contrast to the setbacks at Buildings 2 and 3 was something that we had looked at doing intentionally. And so i'm just wondering if your comment of having a level height across that whole building, if maybe adding some variation in parapet heights would help address your concern. Well, you we actually did talk about that on the project across the street, you know. Is it something? Is it a variation in parapet Height? I in this case I don't think that that's remotely a strong enough move. I mean I I appreciate the amenity space that you have, and I and I like the storefront treatment, and I like the ground level engagement from the interior space to the exterior space.

[150:12] We just don't see any of it from this east elevation. And to me this is like this shot. This is your money shot. This is. This is what's gonna get a student to sign up to lease a department over here as opposed to the options that they have across the street. when they're coming into boulder, and I I just wonder if if some reduction in just it's just a it's just a very big mass, and I and I understand the move that was made for the amenity space on the ground level and appreciate that. I just. you know. like would love to see that program mirrored and flipped, and ha! And and Not only would the amenity space be engaging the property, but would also be engaging

[151:02] the public. I just it's it's it's it's very private on the interior of that project. and I'll i'll add that we have the multi-use path that we're activating as well. So, just going back to the 3 60 buildings that we're working around in addition to 20 Eighth Street frontage. We also have the multi-use path for pedestrian and bike activity for the general public. And so we do have amenities on on that elevation. I think if we had the opportunity to move, you know the entire mass closer to 20 eighth, it would be a stronger. these components. you know. In fact, we've got this 120 feet of parking. We can't do anything else. We this is part of a drove that we said, let's choose what is more apt to be the active

[152:00] use kind of following the intent of the code rather than just saying, Well, there's the street with store front there. that that's that is how that this is where the parents start thinking about whether they wrote the right check. Yes. okay. Good. Very good points. There. Anything else. If not, I think we can close this a portion of the meeting and let our applicants take off. did you? before you do that? Did you summarize the staff? But key issues the recommendations from the staff key issues. then come back to the with the board. They might want to hear those just if if the applicant wants to stay for the summarization. They will be part of the minutes.

[153:05] so you'll have that there. Well, we're we're flexible, You I I do want to echo Chris's thanks for the The great discussion is feedback Understanding of this is really spot on, and we appreciate the dialogue. So it's. It's your choice, Mr. Chair. Thank you. Okay, we can get this we can get you the the recommendations fairly quickly before we put them in the minutes, I think. But I don't want. I I have quite a few notes on on some of the stuff that we talked about, and so I want to make sure that i'm capturing what what people are truly recommending. versus something that they may be just articulating. So I would prefer to just let you guys go, and then and then have the go back through these notes with the with it. the DAB members.

[154:02] if that works Yeah. And if if there's any, I mean, we're happy to excuse most of our team. it might make sense for one of us to hang on just in case there's any questions that come up clarification. We don't everybody here that that'd be okay with us. Oh, sure, yeah, you can do that. We can kind of go off video. So you guys have more privacy. I guess that's helpful. and so we can eat our pizza, you know. I want pizza that Remember, you guys used to bring. There was a day before 2,020 way back in ancient history. That might be reasonable, and a lot of active chips. I I think Cindy had a snack ball, too. And has has anybody besides me been been taking notes?

[155:01] Still travel over here? Yeah, okay. Well. We talked about a lot of stuff I I would like to go back and kind of revisit the notes that I took on each one of these and see if they're still on the radar, or if they've somehow been incorporated into something else. So I don't want to mit ctl and summarize stuff that maybe isn't necessary. So so on the first issue, which was the basically the north-facing facade, 150. The big question there is. How do you how do we sort of make that more inviting to as a street facing facade. and that and the the points that came up was

[156:01] Can you? Can we create an entry in that basically a landscape entry, which I think is the way Matthew put it, which I thought was was pretty well stated. Can there be more of an architectural, and through entry on the north can there be more of a landscape entry on the North Mark suggested visiting the 30 Fourth Street, south of Belmont, as an example of something i'm not. I'm not familiar with it. But that's something that that my transit. He sign my changes. Village. Okay, Transit Village. All right. So that's one issue that's like that. One issue is the recommendation is, is we need to make more of of an entrance on the north facade either either either, and a landscape entrance, and creating more architectural interest on that side

[157:00] that begins to sort of articulate and and an entrance from the north. Yeah, I think what we were saying to the the The guidelines are very clear that if you know you need entry from the street facing the side. and I think the discussion was such that if there is not opportunity to have direct building entries from the North Street facade. Then let's further celebrate and articulate the landscape entries. Okay, so that is a clear recommendation. Now, the other recommendation that sort of fits into this. I think, is that is that Kevin was talking more about articulation of the base of the buildings. and there's something there around that. and this may be changing if this came up, and I think in some other discussion around

[158:02] making the the North Facade more interesting architecturally through texture, through design and that it's it's just this sort of flat face at this point. and it seems like there's opportunities to do that in a number of different ways. Yeah, I think part of the discussion was right now that we have a whole series of programmatic elements that need to be on on the back of a building. you know, trash and service, and whatever that might be, it also needs to be at grade and accessible from street level. So I understand programmatically why they need to put those elements, the transformers, the trash collection, all that has to be on that side of the building. But if there's programmatically in the elevation, there's no distinction between this sort of service base elements.

[159:02] and then the residential units of it that I think. an opportunity to to visually and through materiality separate those 2 yeah elements on that north facade right now. It's just. you know. Yeah. it's up to you one material. right? Okay. So in terms of materiality, I think, Rory said. Increase the variation east to west. and I assume top to bottom, break up the rhythm a bit on that whole north facade. This is this is separate from creating the entrance, but it's it's the goal there is to make the the North side more. That might have been more my opinion, and then seem to have a different differing opinion. and which. you know, is one great thing about as we don't

[160:00] have to agree on these things correct. I I what I do think, Matt and Brendan, i'd be curious. You're in in, because reaching consensus is always more helpful for the applicant. But I I personally, you know, Matt, you're actually in kind of a long scanning okay perspective on that DAB perspective that you know we're not. Subtlety is is key. So we you know we don't wanna start, you know, linking windows of different colors, and you know, changing material direction for just the hell of it, just to create visual noise. so achieving everything that Brennan is speaking to as far as creating kind of interest. But doing it suddenly. Yeah, right. I concur that. And we're trying. We were trying to do an application the city of eerie. And it was like

[161:04] every 25 feet. You have to have 3 elements change in the of the 1 billion. It just, you know. We're not looking for busy. We're just looking for it's not all variation and interest, and you with oh, sorry, not good. No, I I was just. I feel like the context that are are varying perspectives on that. From my point of view it has to do more structurally with what's happening at that point of the building. I think that corner of the building needs the most help. but we haven't. We're not talking about the northwest corner yet. Okay, are you? Yeah, so hold on to that thought so. Yes, because I did want to come back to let's see. Yes, that that did. That did come up. But we'll get to that. Rory mentioned. what you I think what you call this sort of Asian inspired sort of grade changes

[162:10] to create. Yeah, I I would. Yeah, exactly. I think I think Well, so again we're. We're under key issue a right now. And the response that hopefully we're crafting for staff is in is in response to the comment that the relationship to the new street. It's going to be a new stream right now. It's a shitty alley, but it's gonna be a new street it says, provide recommendations to help mitigate the visual impact of the service areas. So I think Max Northwest Corner is relevant, because yes, the garage door for the garbage, the transformers, etc. and improved human scale elements like entries which I think both Brian and Matthew are touching on between the landscape entries and then breaking down.

[163:02] You know some of the monotony of this at the facade treatment. So that's really what to to put it. Whatever summary to that. That's those are the elements here that we should focus on. So. And I think the because this is not the how do you? Yeah, we're not. Yeah, we're not. So. So then the next issue is which we sort of Trent we're transitioning into was dealing with the accessibility, and that's when we started talking about that northwest facade in that northwest corner. So one of the recommendations on the access is that is, that they This accessible parking and entry need to coincide what I wrote down, however, they do that, whether they move it, or whether they try to accommodate it there. I I yes, I think that 100% that that's it. 100%.

[164:05] That's okay. Put a period behind it, I think. Then what was born out of that discussion was that back to Point a. So this is where they bleed a little bit the northwest corner. It seems like a perfect opportunity to address, accommodate by adding more interest and and front Street facade development and address the accessible marketing and access with some minor program reconfiguration. I mean, if if you've driven, if you're driving on Folsom that that hill really starts to climb on on Fulsome going up to to see you so that corner in reality is pretty sunken.

[165:00] So I in I don't know I mean i'd like to see sort of a shot from Folsom. How much of that corner you'd actually even be able to see. So that that corner is a little less important. although I do agree with the comment about the maybe opportunity for more administration or just different administration on that corner. But you it is You come off Folsom Street and you go down sort of this ramp of of a road to get to that backside. And so it is pretty sunken it is, i'm looking at right now. It's not quite the steep section of the hill, but it's just elevated above that park. I think the I think that it it will be an entry, because eventually once this becomes Olson, drive fast forward. 10 years they redevelop Joanne fabrics, and it's now has a street. So now the North property is going to front this street, and maybe have storefronts and things. And then

[166:06] west of Fulsome. There's discussion that that the University is going to take what is currently, you know, north of the Field House. It's like these old school. It's called Newton Court. Like these old school, like bush, hammer, concrete, aggregate, Expose how zoom development. but that that will be redeveloped. So basically Olson, drive this new road. Quote unquote. That is kind of being created here will essentially link 20 Eighth Street through Folsom to another potentially residential or mix these development west of Folsom. So I guess the idea would be that if you how many people would be taking fullsome and turning on to this new Olson Street. And this northwest corner is You're arrived like this. This is your rival beacon, right like i'm going to pick up my friend. I'm going to do whatever

[167:02] and feeling like You're actually arriving at a front of a building, I guess, is what I was. Well, that's it. Yeah, I don't. Yeah. And maybe we don't know that at this point. But but the point that we we're trying to make sort of 2 points. One is that, and we'll get to that. I'm jumping around a little bit. But this east facade is really important as a as of frontage as a street-facing facade as is that northwest corner. So the northwest corner. Yeah. What else? What what I also have here? Is it treated Northwest Corner as a a an entry beacon. that it really has to be celebrated. and that and that maybe there needs to be some programmatic changes in order to make that happen. But I think the chair of importance would be. you know.

[168:00] southeast, northeast, and then northwest in terms of celebrating corners. celebrated corners. Okay. or or northeast, southeast, northwest. I don't know what, but these seems to be. I mean, I do think eventually that that will become a a node. But you know we were tasked of making with 3 buildings between Pearl Street and Walnut Street, of making an ally into a lowry lane, and it's It's like lipstick on a pig. It's still an alley, you know. It's just been a very hard task. and maybe in 30 years it'll look less like an ally. But I I sort of my concern is the same Road is is really just an ally service access in the near future. I I don't disagree. I think, Kyle, on your kind of visceral response in our pre meeting of like this is like because you're on the city planning, you know, kind of leg of it.

[169:09] This is how it happens. So it does a nice job. And then the people that redevelop the property across street are like Holy Shit. Look at this context that we are working with that's that's obviously the goal. Yeah. and it's planned in the connections plan, too. So the long range plans for the Bdrc. And other connections. So this is kind of locked out as a local street and not a alley. And so you're right. It does. That's how it happens. And it happens with the catalyst project like this. and maybe 5 years, maybe 10 years. But we do plan forward looking for these improvement. I guess so. Right. It's really awkward in the in between phase and hopefully. There is a way to to that. But we do want to try to make those improvements. I mean, right now, you that road. It looks like you're just you. You're not allowed to turn it off. It says, do not enter. You're not supposed to come down right. It looks like i'm not parking lot, so I think. What? Now for our making it a road.

[170:18] Yeah, people probably will use it more. I might use it all the time, the even though it's the the I I guess so. I'm i'm in. I think we're reaching consensus here. I guess I would just caution putting the need to put kind of a hierarchy on these corners. I would just I agree. I I don't I don't agree with that ranking. Necessarily. I I don't find the south east corner particularly offensive. It's somewhat hidden from 20 Eighth Street. It's facing the creek. you know. So I I I would It's okay with everyone. I wouldn't record

[171:02] a priority. Necessarily. I think the general thought, yeah, I I wasn't picking. I'm going to prior it, but I So the northwest corner is a is really more. It is designed now as a the back of it service. And that's addressing Comment a. Is that how can the north Facade not be a service driven facade right, and the corner needs to in that northwest corner needs to be celebrated. Celebrate, it might be strong to it needs to have some don't know some design intent there rather than just a utility corner. It is. It is the first corner 100 people are going to see when they go drive in there.

[172:03] So I think it is fairly important it should be articulated as a street facing a. I don't think you can see your street facing arrival. Yeah, it needs to be appropriately detailed. It's not that the alley or back of house is helpful. Thank you. Would it be helpful to do? You need me to point out. Do you want to see the particular criteria that talks about this? Yeah, or you at the building to the street? This is straight out of Evrc criterion. orientation, and entrances. The building should address the street and not quote, turn it back to the public Orient, the main facade to the street and provide an entrance or entrances on the street side.

[173:01] If the parking is located behind the building. An entrance may also be needed on that side of the building. Also consider providing an entrance facing any activity area transit stop, or major off-stream pedestrian path located near the building. If the building is long or large. More than one entrance may be needed on the front aside, where entrances may be needed on a number of building sites in general for walkability. building or store entrances to occur at least approximately every 150 feet. and these are happening every 156 feet. These courtyard entries that we've been talking about. So we're we're there. That's that's how that's the criteria with which this is being reviewed. Yeah, and I think given that description of criteria. That is an area I mean, they have for accessible parking spots there for one. That's that's one reason that's good enough. I I think the other component is 5, 3, a service areas. Kailoni, where it says, rotate service areas to minimize visibility, locate trash, storage, loading and truck parking to minimize visibility from the street or sideline.

[174:14] and the building entrances this can be difficult to achieve while what goes on. But I think this is all kind of in support of this north facade. It does turn a corner. So you'd argue it's no longer the you know north facade, but right now it's trash, transformer. and utility entry. So it's it's it's completely out of sync with the spirit and the letter of criteria. And and I would say for the the 4 key issues that staff put together. If you have a consolidated recommendation for, say, a and B, we are okay with that. If it makes sense to group those together, because those 4 really play off of each other right? The elevation design that kind of

[175:01] pedestrian portion, the entries, the way finding, and that kind of podium and human scale buffering. They're all of the same kind of spirit that that's yeah. So basically a is the north Facade with this to that criteria B is the accessible entries which I think, Todd, you sum that up very nicely. and then see is a diagram which kind of threw us off a little bit. I don't know it's not an actual task. I think it jumps to d we get to the flood constraints. That's the podium common right? So you want to move there the on those entries, so that may have been embedded with your other entry on that north corner. Some of the recommendations you have there. So we have a recommendation regarding accessibility. But in terms of way finding is that

[176:00] is, that a separate issue? Or is that only an issue if the accessibility is around the building. there was 2 accessible issues when they clarified one. So now we're back to the northwest corner, and that's why it's bleeding into the north facade, because if you got rid of the service component, that's against the spirit. then you could potentially put an entry there that they had the stare, if you recall, so maybe they could get a ramp. Or maybe, you know, I don't know one other comment that I would like to make on that north facade is the is the transformers. We have the, you know, a series of transformers as you're working on that road, and the elevation behind it becomes stark and somewhat windowless. And maybe there's opportunity for screening of the transformers. whether that's landscape screening, screening, or some type of a

[177:04] decorative, you know, built fence element. but I do think that that as part of that service component driving the design at North elevation. The transformers are are problematic. And I need to be addressed. Okay. Alright, Kevin Kevin wants to. Kevin has a comment. Is that okay? Yes, with you guys. Yeah, thanks. Thanks so much, everyone. I appreciate that this is difficult to to word Smith. And and one of the things that's that's difficult about this is. we kind of see them all as primary elevations. When we're looking at that northwest corner of building 3, both of those are equally important. and we chose to put that around in the north, both because of the flood plane constrictions. but more the parking dimensions on that side. So I mean, if you think about it as if we're concerned about vehicle traffic headed east as it comes in on this new hills and drive

[178:02] it's on one face or the other through there. we did it. Doesn't need to circle Bill Link. So you know, locating those things down to the South isn't an option in terms of service ability, and it's not something you want on the south side. You're you're you're struggling with the very thing we did, which is, they're all primary facades. so I I just put in a request to be cautious about how we we understand the attempt that we need to approve that northwest corner. But if we get into recommending relocating transformers I think the flood engineer is probably gonna jump off of a convenient bridge. I I mean. And I said that in the beginning that I whole part of we understand why the service elements have been placed where they are based on grade and program and city services and all of that. And I understand that we need transformers. I just think we just need to be there just needs to be a distinction between those service elements and then the residential

[179:03] component. And maybe there's a way to dress up. Yeah, and I, I. We agree with the intent of that. I'm. Just trying to encourage the language to not be constricted as to what we do. Allow us to study that It's it's a great. It's absolutely. It's an area that's set up further further study. Yeah, no problem. I guess. Would it be fair? Guys? Just say that you know transformer locations and adequate screening should be evaluated with the re-evaluation of the north facade. Sure. yes. totally. Okay. Thank you, Kevin. Thank you. I appreciate it. So should we move on to the exposed podium Which sort of bleeds into the the the the fourth point 2, I guess. So.

[180:04] yeah, I think you can combine. Yeah. So what I picked up on here was was: I was a little bit confused about what we were really talking about here. So softening While softening the party, the the podium exposed podium, we have an opportunity to create new interest and effect all around. basically but we and then we talked mostly about the east facade. in my, I I think that what happened is, you know, in the same way that they are. They addressed the accessibility entrance for building to, I think part of that. That that platform problem was address was addressed and resolved in the knuckles, you know, in the courtyards and in the fingers. I think that they

[181:04] successfully addressed some of that that with grade, change, and landscaping and elevation, and it doesn't feel like it's sitting on this giant podium when you're looking at it from the south. So I wonder if if some of that was addressed in design between middle and today's meeting. Well, I guess, to link these 2 comments. basically we're we're being asked to review the amount of podium that is exposed, and that's particularly on the north. and that amount of podium can be mitigated with, You know, creative landscaping and grading, and potentially. Planters. You know, landscape design that e is talking about the landscape buffer zone for the units.

[182:01] It's primarily on the East and West. So I think basically we were talking about strategies on the North where, you know, could they work in some, you know, unique kind of grading bubbles, or, you know, steep grading elements and and couple of that with collectors that create rhythm and change, height or something to create, to help further the north interest and the podium comment. and then that naturally became the discussion as we went to the east of the building as well. So I think the in other words, Todd, the way to address hiding the podium is with landscape screening, which is also what comment for, or e is asking. Yes, and I, I get that when i'm when i'm kind of observing, though, is that there's they're really constrained on the east and west side, and what they can do in terms of landscaping.

[183:02] But I I what you know, and I and I said this earlier in the meeting that I did. They have come up with some great solutions on the South. on those interior courtyards of how how to, you know. articulate those elevations and bring interest, and there's there's great details in there, and there's a change in like, for example, just the the balcony rails, and you know they have applied materials on the facade. I'm not really sure what they are, but they're They're just decorative, and they're interesting, and I I just. They have some solutions within the project that can just be like, you know, extracted it doesn't all have to be through landscape. But I think that that plant can be

[184:01] also resolved with some with some of the good architectural moves that were made in other parts of the building. The podium, though. Right? I'm talking about the yeah. Well. the podium that's still problematic in my mind is the North and the East. the north and east. Okay, all right. So. But the recommendation, if I could draw one out of what you said is to apply treatments that are being used in the courtyard to the exterior part of the building. Yes, the yes. the perimeter of the building should be treated more similarly to the anterior courtyards, so that a landscape and buffer from a landscape design and suffering components. Okay, now. so when you get when you say the architectural design.

[185:01] Are you still talking about the podiums? Are we moving up now into the facade? Seems to me to be a separate issue? yes and no, I mean, I think, that there's there's some moves with storefront windows, and you know of different glazing treatments. I I I think that there are. I think that I I just don't want the architecture to be forgotten. I don't think that this podium problem is only yes, correct. That's the that's the distinction right there. The podium component can be solved with both landscape and architectural treatments. the comment e or for whatever we're going in the buffering that they'd like to see more of a landscape buffer to the parking lots. That is strictly

[186:00] landscape compounds to to to be specific to recommendations staff. But then our general discussion afterwards then picked up the desire to see more architectural isn't Necessarily it the grade plan of the buffer, while they they are limited in depth that they we can play with some variation potentially in height of the planter beds or the landscaping itself. Okay. Okay, so apply it treatments being used in the courtyards to the exterior in both architectural and landscape. solutions all right. And then

[187:02] we, if we're talking about that specifically. So then, okay, there's 2. There's in terms of just the buffer the last point, the last issue dealing with the buffer on the east and West side. There are certain things that they can do through trying to soften the podium. but there's limitations on how much room they have to plant in terms of removing parking spaces. or creating more of a more more of a planting bed between the building and the sidewalk. They don't have a lot to work with, and they can't go. They can't push it towards more. Towards 20 Eighth Street, because they're going to run into flooding constraints. So they're very limited, it seems like, and what they can do in terms of buffer on the east side. I'm not sure about the west side, so it seems to be constrained as well. It's be more constrained East Side as a 5 foot planting buffer between, and the building and the west side as a 2 foot landing buffer.

[188:11] I think what Staff is basically saying very clearly, says Staff would like to see more landscape covered. Now, I think what we're debating here is. do we think those dimensions are enough? I mean, you know what the applicant was saying is that, hey? By the time we get a minimal parking lot off the 28 and in a way that's designed with grades that it's not a a disastrous, you know, during a flood event we resulted in 5 feet. and then same thing from the West. But I guess again these constraints are self inflicted. I don't, I mean. could you steal 6 inches out of every courtyard and in between the buildings and increase it. Sure, do we really? Is it worth the brain damage? And I guess that is probably ultimately what we're debating here is that

[189:01] one, I guess what I thought was what I thought I was saying on the east facade is that I think 5 foot. and that if they get more creative with planters and I sloping grades and things, that and the plant material which they kept saying, Obviously, it's hard to articulate in the model. I get that that that would be adequate. I guess the question I have for you guys is a 2 fun planting Strip staff is saying, if we would like to see more landscaping buffer to me, that's a quantifiable request, not a quantitative, not better landscaping buffer. They want to see more. But there is there's quite a there's quite a buffer between 28 Street and the parking lot I mean that 5 feet all right. Sorry from the building. So they're saying from the parking lot for residential units, they're saying from the inside of ground floor residential units along the parking lot walkways, this is a very specific moment. So if you're in your unit ground floor and you're either east or west facing to the parking lot.

[190:08] they would like to see more landscape buffer. I mean when you're at 2 feet. It's not a landscape buffer. Let's just be honest, correct. There's no landscape that's growing in 2 feet to the foundation and the sidewalk. So you know. Okay. just to look at it from a different perspective like, is that a crime like there's a lot of urban development. That's right up to the lot line. It's right at the sidewalk. They manage to have recess balconies, and it all works it doesn't great, it's not It's not a chateau in the landscape. It's it's a it's a ground floor unit next to the parking. and that is a very common, if if not unfortunate, urban reality.

[191:01] So my recommendation would be. instead of trying to call it a two-foot landscape buffer, design it as something that's not a landscape buffer. you know. Design it as a wall or a seeding wall, or something. that treats it for the space it is, and not try to. you know. Say that it's a landscape because it's not so that to me would be a more realistic approach than plus telling them to move the building 5 feet east. which you know is, I think, above and beyond what we'd be willing to ask you. Ask anyone, Matthew, are you suggesting that if I could put this into words, evaluate evaluate other buffer solutions for the West Side. Yeah, and I and I have to actually leave here, and just just a minute. my final say on that on the east landscape buffer the 5 foot one.

[192:05] I think, ties more importantly into the podium conversation that when you get to the south side of that elevation it's there's quite a I mean. I don't know exactly what it is, but it's several feet of of podium before you get to the First Level. And so I think that Yes, I've some treatment needs to happen in that area to cover the podium. But I also I agree with you all that it doesn't necessarily have to just be plants. I think it can be you know this is where we talk about like a landscape architecture that they did if i'm looking at the site at the entry to the so to the You know the sales center. They they did a really. They did some very nice planting walls and great elevation changes in the planting itself, and I think that

[193:06] while there's it's Mini, it'll be significantly smaller. There's some opportunity for landscape architecture to happen in that. Okay, Brendan, I know you have to go. Do you want to say any more about the East facade? No, I think I mean I just. I think it needs to be celebrated more, and I and I can. I can leave it to that. Okay. All right. I think that that works okay. So that should bring us up to these sort of final recommendations that you all made

[194:07] One other thing that the that Matthew mentioned on dealing with the West Side talking about subtle variation in the scale materials. Texture. you were. You didn't want to see big sweeping differences. You wanted to see more subtle differences in texture and things like that not big. My recommendation is just based on a preference that you know I don't. I don't think big bulky buildings are improved by patching on different colors without a change in relief of the facade. I think that actually is pretty bad looking. So this is a context, and that's my personal feeling. Practically. I think you summed it up. Well, Todd, I think what I would recommend if I were

[195:00] articulating. It is. you look for some chances to provide variation in materials not necessarily the color. you know, by playing with the scale of the material and the panel system. and I think it. I think it can be further summed up by just saying. Yeah, introduce more. You know more more variety and interest. Yup. Okay. So then, moving on to. but your more general recommendations. these are some. There's some the little bit of repetitiveness here. But Brendan talked about articulation of the major corners. one and 3 for sure. She mentioned the balconies

[196:04] and the the potential problem of having and be places that collect junk which which I think what she was getting at is that if you could somehow hide that through the design of the of the balcony structure that that might be helpful. But that's I was less concerned with that. I mean I. You know I have a condo, and i'm on the h of a board, and we do quarterly walks, and people get fined if they don't and Andrew mentioned the landmark being the property manager, and the having a code of conduct, and all of that. So that's I think that's about as good as we can do there. I think, as it under the general kind of DAB discussion recommendations. I think of appro approaching the project with a

[197:01] a finer scale of development, and it like that. It goes off of what I was saying about like. The entire project, I think, is very well conceptualized. I just don't think it took it to they haven't gone for far enough with the scale. So now these building blocks are being identified. It still looks very diagramatic to me like Again, the entire north facade is one material. I mean it's 2 scales of that one material that it's one material for 500 feet. So yeah, so take so taking some of the architectural expressions from the interior on the south side and applying some of that to the exterior. As I think you said so, the South is hogging the design moments.

[198:02] Yeah, I yeah, I think the I think just further articulation of the mass and character of the buildings. Okay? And then Matthew talked about The landscape entrance on the north. I think you were sort of summarizing texture variation on east and west, facing in north facades, and finally the northwest corner. So you really articulated that? And let's see if there's anything else The program more furthering the programmatic distinction. the programmatic distinction

[199:00] right now. The only the only signal that there is a public program is just a bigger store front window system. There's no sort of base plants materiality. There's no massing move. There's no like canopies, or you know things that would further articulate the programmatic extensions. Okay. beyond just larger. beyond larger windows. Okay. you agree with that maximum. Get to my mute. But yeah. yeah, I can I? I I think The I think that area still looks like a revision model or sketchup model, You know, I think there's a whole

[200:03] level of detailing there that that we're not seeing that potentially could make it look great. But in general, yeah, I agree. There's a couple window systems. I just didn't understand. One was the big store front, and then somewhere adjacent. There's a like a ribbon system. I think there's a language to the storefronts that because there's several it make it attracts from all of them. I would almost feel like, you know. pick one of those languages. The language of the whole development is the punched opening. So I feel like. and you know, no blue shade to the designers. I feel like storefronts are very difficult to design, and they tend to come in later in the design. And this looks like the first okay pop in a storefront system to make that a comment. I would.

[201:02] you know, just concur with you. I think it needs to be developed. Okay of editorial for, like a very little comment. Yeah, and then and then Mark mentioned, and I think everybody agreed that the he was talking about the path. not creating a as it comes across the bridge. not creating an opportunity for people to to to shortcut. because they don't want to make the big arc. They Yes, that was a two-part comment like, prevent the shortcut Yeah, and further evaluate the depth with which the arc enters the property because this is. you know, it's an efficient transit

[202:02] corridor. And so you know. Well, we don't. Well, it's nice to kind of have variety and bring the path up like the idea is like, Find the balance between the more interesting and bridge turn. But right. not so much that you're creating kind of undo travel. Yeah. Can I just say as an aside. I like the move, a branch of traffic into the site. I think it makes that public brain more effective. Then, if the path went along the Creek, and you just had the public room and then the buildings. so I I wouldn't want to word the final comment in a way that discourages them from maintaining that kind of mixing of the yeah. I agree, too. I I do think that experiencing that on a bicycle it's easier to to

[203:01] navigate that bigger arc than it is if you're on foot. because if you get to that point you crossing the bridge and you're looking, you can see where you need to go, and you don't want to walk all the way up to the building and then back down You're just going to make that turn. Yeah. So on foot. I think it's potentially a problem. But is that a problem? I mean, people are going to go occupy the green. or do you think they're going to turn it into a trail. But it I guess it depends on what they're doing. If they're commuting their they they may not be walk walking. If you're walking and just enjoying you're you're outing. You might not cut the corner. Yeah. okay. And I think that's all I have. so we got the corners that those were caught in a broad comment.

[204:01] I think just the for like the the general comment of further articulate the building, I don't think we're suggesting They link windows vertically over is only that we're just saying generally, just reevaluate how to at another level of articulation. So I think we've covered it all. It's just a lot of building. Okay. that it is. Okay. So Now I think we can end that this part of the the discussion. So I want to really thank. Let's see how many people we still have on your. We have 10 people who are still participating, and 5 of them. Well, 4 of us, because Brendan had to go. But

[205:02] If there's there's still several people on here. I really thank everybody for hanging in there. I really thank the applicant for taking the time to sort of walk us through this and and get into down into the weeds on as many things as we were able to. and I think, going back to our first comments, I think that what one of the things that I would take away from this is that this really is a very challenging project, and you guys have done a great job. so feel good about that, and we will get you these These comments as soon as we can. I think you probably have articulated them, and probably written them down better than I have. Certainly. So I think you know what what sort of the what we're recommending, and but we will get them in writing as well. So thanks again for

[206:01] your time and your energy. I'm on back, Kevin, if you want to. are, are we good? Well, the the bunkers on this will appreciate that. I'm finishing the I'm finishing the call while biking across downtown. So yes, thank you. I thought you were coming back, so that's fine. I just something that matters real quick if we can. Yeah. what we got on board matters. So for some scheduling things. But i'd like to talk a little bit about, cause it's better for us to to talk about the review and make improvements during the in little bits. and so moving forward, I would strongly recommend that so these summarizations are done at the end of each topic area. because it does cause a little bit of kind of circular revisiting of the items.

[207:03] and that in itself took an hour and 15 min. So that's a a significant portion of time re summarizing things that we're already summarized My only comment, Kylani would be that particularly on this project, where all of the comments. the the task priorities kind of let into each other that we do, we're discovering solutions for the first priority item while discussing the fourth one. Well, and that's if we want to do that, summarizing them in a bundle, but we then moved into very detailed ones that we also summarized again just now. So what I want to see in what would be helpful is if we're efficient in the summarization of where where you're at, if you want to bundle all the ones that staff has in one section totally fine, and then go through, and we can.

[208:03] because the ones we did that were very specific to each one of you are are much easier to record through the minutes without even having to summarize like. If Matthew has individual recommendations like you guys did this time. we can do those kind of quickly without having to go back through and re-sumerize those on top of it. So I would suggest doing that, and then I would also suggest is maybe it's helpful to break the note, taking up between all of you like everybody gets a chance to kind of summarize one portion, because I think it'll get one taught a break, and you guys tend to help each other summarize anyways. And so maybe if there's 3 or 4 questions each, one of you takes one and does the summarization that might be helpful? I don't know, Todd, what do you think about that? I'm fine. With that I I think the

[209:00] the challenge that I have. That just kind of came to me at this very moment. Was that if what we're trying to do is get recommendations. so that I guess that raises the question for me. Why do we need to get to summarize it? If the goal is to get the recommendation. I guess if those are different. if those, if a summarization and recommendations are different, which it sounds like they are. I don't need what what we take is action minutes. And so the action minutes. What we used to have is very complicated kind of a record of every single input each board member, and it led to a lot of competing things that applicants had a hard time resolving. or that planning board had a hard time understanding what's the ultimate kind of

[210:00] recommendation. And so for the Consolidated recommendations. It was part of an ask from planning board on that we summarize what what Dad was trying to say and those ones those recommendations are usually kind of what the Consolidated Group feels about something. Now, there's always going to be things like if there's a an outline kind of disagreement on something, we should note that, too. That's that's but the recommendations are really what are those big moves that we need to bring forward the planning board and to the applicant. So they have on there, and they're not trying to resolve competing recommendations. Okay, so I guess when i'm thinking is that I feel like I could I could. What I was trying to do is to really capture the details of the recommendations that were being made, and not this sort of overarching summary

[211:02] the overarching summary. I think I could probably do Lauren did it really? Well, I think I could do it, but it would be very general. I think that's okay, though, because I think what we're not. I mean, without us designing the building ourselves. We're never going to be able to say, like, you know, use a 8 by 4 break pattern and space. The windows accordingly. You know it's basically the stuff that's in, like, I always imagine, because I you know, reading our minutes. Obviously, I had quite a few edits on the last call, because the I was putting myself in the shoes of Mark. who's not a trained design professional, and who has to basically say, okay. Our architects came back to us, and they changed these 10 things that they were very specifically telling us they changed. What did, how does this relate to what DAB wanted to see Not that Matthew is personally interested in subtlety, right like that. It's it's just that

[212:07] I like. And if i'm essay, I want to be able to go and say, okay, hey? Planning Board. Here were the 5 issues that staff outlined for us. We went to DAB, and on issue one, they said, create more variety and interest, and reevaluate the location of the utilities on the north Facade. Please see these revised facades. We've moved transformers 3 foot off of all corners. We've had screening elements, we we swam the garage with the maintenance barn. We added a fucking entry there, etc., and then they can go cool and then they go to point 2. So we're we're basically just trying to create a cliff Notes Road, and it's not detail, right? Yes, yes, it's not detailed. you know. Part of our inclination is to in our discussion is very detail-oriented. The summary does have to be conceptually oriented because they're never going to come back with the specific details that we recommended. It's just not going to happen, because

[213:05] the project is so complex. There are things we don't know. So I think the guiding philosophy for the summary, whether we do it and current to discussion or after everyone leaves a meeting. really has to distill it a a content that is. you know, intentional. but also interpretable. Yes, by lay people. Yeah. yeah, and and we do it's really helpful to learning off of the last time we did this in the applicant left. After you guys summarize there was a lot of questions, so it's good to have at least one or 2 people from their team. But just like planning board. This is your deliberation time. And so you don't want a lot of interruptions right? You want to be able to talk and go through the words. How do you want those words to be characterized?

[214:00] So I What Kevin had said was helpful, but I mean. In general. it's good to have them. They're taught in the background just so they can hear the discussion, and it's not like a surprise after the whole other just when you were really working with them and going through the design on the so the positive thing is obviously being well received. the fact that we don't want to say something nice. I think we also need, because Kevin's response at the end he was very fearful of the specific language that we were about to submit to planning board. But we're not. I mean we're not quasi judicial, and I think we should remind all applicants after that positive piece before we that, like as the the hinge to the criticism to just remind them that, like you know, we are an advisory board by nature.

[215:00] Nothing we say it is quasi judicial. and we will be providing general recommendations for planning board to evaluate with your recent metal. Yeah. and it I found the one time one or 2 times you guys had mentioned. We're going to give you a lot of recommendations and some of these things. You're going to find out through your revisions that they may or may not work. and that it. But we want you to take these in the intent, and that you know that part that they really grab the intent of what you're talking about. because I've had that was on the on the project that was at liquor mark. They came back and said it was really helpful for Dad to say that to give us some ideas, but also give us a little bit of flexibility on how to approach that, because we had the problem. So building code issues, or you know, material issues. So that was for them to. I feel like we crush this one. Guys. How about you? I thought it was one of your better reviews, like one of the best reviews you've had in a long time.

[216:05] And I think once we can nail the the summary for the this to it will, or the recommendation kind of consolidation. That'll you guys. This was good, especially for the scale of the project. Yeah, i'm still i'm, I guess i'm still confused. But i'm not sure what i'm confused about Tim to me the I knew that. based on all the notes that I took. what I see, what I see happening is that there's that there are some early sort of things that come up, and that come up early in the discussion, and then those, then trigger people of people's responses. And then there's a long discussion. And then, at the end of that discussion. everything before that may or may not be relevant, because people have like. Oh, I didn't really think of it this way.

[217:03] So at the end of the discussion there may be more of a more of a consensus or common ground around what people have decided or what people are thinking. So I I agree here. Here's but to respond to that. Here's what I think we should do is in those free meetings the Tuesday pre- meeting, where you and I are meeting with Kailoni and the you know a lot of times. That's my personal introduction to the project. So I think I was kind of pulling those meetings. It's just like another commitment in my schedule, but I have never been as prepared to review one of our projects as I was today. Like. I understood this building because we spent an hour yesterday talking about this building, and actually like. And I know there's some weird like you know. attorney things where we're not allowed to like. Do the review outside of the review, but and I've always been a little nervous. How many questions I can ask you

[218:05] outside of this Forum? But we talked a lot to really understand. What are you guys concerned about here instead of us like digesting your comment, your tasks During the meeting it was all pre digested, and I was able. I was trying to, anyway. Step in and shortcut some shit, and just be like, look like. This is what we need to discuss on the North side. because i'm very familiar with this comment. and that that was the intention of those meetings to really help kind of frame the criteria. What staff is those priorities. during that meeting, and kind of get those to where you're very familiar, and you can help to so to take it. One step further, Todd, and I think I hope this will alleviate. You know some of the confusion component, I think what what we should make the goal out of those pre meetings is one not only making sure we go through each of the task items

[219:06] that Staff has presented and feel like we've asked enough questions to actually understand what their concern is. Not that we need to opine on it necessarily, but that we actually understand it. But then, if there's opportunities to group some that we think would be relevant, and in this case I would argue. All 4 of them would have made it into one group that might create logical milestones for Utah to say, hey. we identified a and C as Austria interdependent. so why don't we start with a, and then we're going to go to C, and then we're going to summarize those 2, and then we'll go to B and D, and whatever. And if at the end we want to say, hey, does anybody want to adjust to summary based on where we've Resolved. we could debate that. But I think the time management is something that obviously we want that that we're working on here. Yeah.

[220:00] yeah, definitely, we're going to progress, and it's getting better. And I think that that's a really good idea. And a great way to spend our agenda meeting is. if you guys think 2 things go together and you want to bundle those we can get that either organized on our Powerpoint in a way that kind of bundles them, and I I think it will help the structure of the discussion. But I also think how on on Staff's perspective to further kind of the process is. I guess if if it's obvious that comments are not related to each other, and i'm not saying that it always will be. but that they somehow just arrived. As a single item. I debated that I felt it felt like a lot of images and a lot of stuff under one bullet to try and go in there. Related to that that kind of North elevation site design way, finding circulation. I feel like you guys were easy on them compared to the one we reviewed last time. Like I don't know, this is because of the size of the building or whatever. But

[221:12] I I would have thought you guys would have had other than the north Facade. I would have thought you guys would have a lot of comments about, or at least a couple of comments about just the sheer massiveness of these buildings and the lack of kind of articulation. we have gone back and forth on those articulation on the massing where they have on some of them. They've dropped some of those that was early on in the discussion, but right now. because the the priority. when we talked about kind of focusing Dabs discussion on high priority items. this this this set of items were the hottest priority. They were the most kind of difficult to really move the discussion forward and the design forward on.

[222:03] But those are still. We'll still go through every single site review criteria, so Shannon will go through each one of those, and she will talk. It was at planning board and speak to how they need those. And they're They're in their second round of Site Review and I. They've been resolving a lot of issues like they had mentioned. They've been on trying to resolve the tree issue for months, so I I feel like they've got some time still on their design that they're working on things. It's not like it's going to planning board next month. Got it. you know, when i'm. I I think when I was probably most worried about was. I felt like the applicant knows what we're saying. They're get they're getting it. But I really felt like that that the minutes have to reflect what

[223:01] what they get, what they're picking up from this discussion that have to be somehow reflected in the minutes. And at this point I don't know who's taking the minutes. Who is going to take the minutes. so get all that done with them. Well, it's kind of what I thought, but I didn't want to put them on the spot by like devin. Did you take the minutes? Yep, that'll that'll definitely be me? I I've got him a draft down here, but i'll definitely have to do a little review for sure we're I don't want to say, keeping up with the discussion. But do you think you were getting that sort of the the crux of what we were talking about? in a bit? you know I don't really have much of an architectural background, but I was able to kind of like you. You folks did really break it down a little bit to where I was able to put it in a I think, as as Rory mentioned like in a more layman's terms as reflected in the notes. So yeah, I definitely think it was. It was communicated. Well, in that in that aspect.

[224:05] Okay, because I was trying. That's what I was. So when we went the first. The first conversation around the first issue, I think, was the most to me was the most complicated the other one seemed to be relatively more easy, but that first issue was seem more complicated, and there were a lot of points that people made, but I felt like we have to. I had a lot of a lot of paper, and I actually didn't want to go back and revisit all of these and try to summarize them in front of the applicant because I thought redundant. It's redundant. Yeah, we're sort of just keeping them here. We can. We can sort of take all this stuff and sort of kind of get it down to the nugget of what we're trying to say through a conversation like like. What does this point still relevant? Yes or No.

[225:01] What would a recommendation look like based on this point, and try to get you get it closer to recommendations. But I didn't want to put them through that. So I yeah. in some ways was sort of necessary. And I think, Matt. you know, buzzer beater with the east or the West Facade. basically acknowledging that it's not a landscape buffer. So don't bother treating it like one. I mean, that's we didn't really cover that into the applicant. So the fact that that's emerging as our as we're kind of boiling through that would be helpful for them to understand that, like we're not asking them to plant grade or

[226:03] increase the size of that buffer. They may just need to look at some architectural screening or architectural. I mean, maybe they maybe they're fine going through that. but trying to trying to take all of those points that people made, and try to find what what are the real nuggets and all those points which then brings up more discussion. Yeah, I I think it's like any Board meeting, you know. This is their project. They're the applicant. They're gonna want to hear the summary at least, like they were saying. It's nice to give them the opportunity, though, to let their consultants go. Let the folks that they, you know, that are being billed hourly. and it maybe it's just a project manager and your architect, or you know they're critical people, but it makes sense. Yeah, it's helpful to have them there, so they can hear things like don't treat that like a landscape because it wasn't discussed during the time they were there, and now it's surprise them. They might look at that and go.

[227:05] Wait. I didn't hear them talk about that. So yeah. I like. I think we need to leave them the option to stay, you know, and I would generally I would actually want at least one person from their team be there. Yeah, that makes sense. I I agree with you totally. A bunch of architecture, Babel and his fucking nuts. I'm gonna come through that shit because it was. It's hey, Devin? I think there's some good AI resources online to help you. That is a really good point. Actually visual interest, just right? A visual interest. Just right, a visual interest

[228:06] that What was that? I'm sorry. Did you know what a exposed podium was? No good idea. It sounds worse than it is. And then Rory explained it to me at our agenda meeting, and then i'm like. Oh, well, that makes sense, and I look at them like what's wrong with them? They look fine to me. Yes, yes. But I thought was going to look like a retaining wall or something. No, yeah, fair enough, I think. and there I think the issue is that they've got these. I mean like an entire corner of this building is one material, and it's a huge block floor to ceiling. and then the base windows, which are some random storefront. are sitting 4 or 5 feet above the ground, and it's just looks like it looks like somebody was, you know, Jacqueline. It looks like a fucking Jack a letter in some in some of those locations.

[229:00] Don't worry about that in the minutes 7 forbade. So we Haven't adjourned, have we? I have one more. I have one more board matter before we move to calendar check. and this may come up in the calendar check. But But I don't know when we're going to meet like the next time. and sorry go ahead. We might January, maybe a small project that's required to go to the dow because it's in downtown renovation, and it hits the dollar mark. It would be the second Wednesday of the month, which would be the eleventh. the eleventh January. So maybe, if they if they move forward, it's kind of a little questionable right now.

[230:00] So Rory is scheduled to go off the board. and I really don't want him to do that. I would have thought you guys. Sometimes you guys give me such a hard time. I figured you're ready for a little more space. You're you're in your stride with this. I feel like, I'm starting to hit stride a little bit. Yeah, it's been 5 years. Has it been that long? Yeah. Well, it will be. Are you going to reapply. Since we don't meet every month you have this stamp. One want to do well. Last year the deadline was February. The 20 first. Yeah. the applications are not online yet, though. Right. Devin those.

[231:00] Yes, yeah. yeah. I I figure why not. These are good. I mean, they're fun now. They're not having to go in and sit there. being at the house, and you know, cracking. You know You've got all your snacks available to you, and no, I I dig it. I just like being aware of what's coming to town. Yeah, I think that's what I would miss the most. It's just. Lauren told me that that was fun, because you, because you went out drinking afterwards, which I think we did once or twice, and then Covid hit. Yes. no, no, it's just during. Oh, so yeah, i'll reapply definitely do that. Yeah, yeah, yes, of course. What else do I have to do on when the second one save every month. So okay. i'm trying to think there was a word you use today that you use several times

[232:02] that you haven't used in the past that I know of. and I don't think I wrote it down. It must have been good. Yeah, I have no idea. Podium. It was a great word. I think we did well today, but I also think we were guided appropriately by staff. I also think this is such a big building, dude. So we it's working for you guys, if you, if if just identifying the the most important issues, is actually working. Obviously, we don't want to keep you from commenting on the other things like you talked about some of the materials, the window patterns. but if this is a good format we will continue to do it. You like matter? Are you going to stick around on the that's locked in for? He just renewed

[233:01] I think i'm on the five-year plan. Yeah, he had a short. He had a short. It it's all running together. I'm, I'm gonna go for a a decade if they let me but here would be my one request. Kylie and I would like to still have my end of term dinner, and give my first hopefully many historic frame to paintings. I have to see if we're still doing that. I don't for Rory. You could do it. Oh, Rory, Well, let me work something out on the payment, and I've loved it, maybe like a which options are available, and then. you know, she would just she would pick them. You know we never. I never saw this. She would always go very quietly to the Historical Society.

[234:05] I pick from our, you know, historic Preservation group grab, have one printed and do all of it. So. It was always a cool surprise. Deeply appreciate that. And then is it cool from like? I I mean it's the end of a 5 year term, so I feel like a dinner. Celebration is Warrington. I think so, too. So it's Rory. You're the is you're the only one I haven't looked at the timing. I think you might be the only member of timing out this. Yes, he is 23 i'm 24 Matthew, I think, on a two-year term, and then he came back in for 5, so he's in. Oh, no, Matthew, what it says here is matthew's term is 21 to 26 todd is to 24 under 23, and bread is to 25, and we're hoping to have some folks your I know your friend or I had wanted to apply.

[235:06] but there. Unfortunately, he lives outside the city limits. and not a but If anybody knows of anyone or you're at a AI chapter meeting or Asla chapter meetings. You want to spread the word. Please do planners to. If you know any planners that I would love to get an active practicing landscape architect on. because that cat you know, he's just he's like a detail, a detailed landscape designer, right? So like as far as having suggestions for landscape design elements. They would be less. you know, planter and and more like specific, which I think would be pretty cool, because they they dig through images and precedence on the landscape side that you know we've never really seen or cracked over.

[236:05] I do like you guys, as explanation of the landscape recommendation. some architectural lands and Asian inspired both. Maybe some architectural landscape walls. Yeah, that's great. So yeah, that would be nice, especially on sites like this. We're right, the the the site design, and last, it really plays heavily into the whole building design, too. So it's always nice to have someone that's got that specialty. So if you know of anyone, we do have another open seat that we're also trying to recruit from. But, Rory, as we get closer, and they post the application online. I'll email you with the link and tell you, hey? I've been. That's a good time to reapply. And in the meantime I will see about these historic photo, frame photos and dinner

[237:01] that it sounds amazing if you excuse. Yeah. And and it'd be excuse for us to get together. I don't think we've all been in the same room or space 3 years, so I would attend I would attend. Yes, i'm down from whatever mountain he's at at the Rio, I think, for that was like a a week before we went to the lockdown right? It was questionable at the real cause. I was sitting there thinking, do I need that? I forget I, my favorite, was. We went to Italian joint. Yeah, I think you get to pick don't you, Rory? Yeah. same guys, Are we? Good? Can we can be? Yes, we we don't we've done the calendar check. So I think we're just to

[238:06] adjourn. So have a happy holiday. Thanks, guys. I.