Historic District Commission - Regular Meeting

As the newly minted chair, I'm gonna call this meeting to order. Thank you very much. And I think we have a quorum, but let's let's take the role. Please answer. When I call your name, Josh? Here. Nancy? Here. Laura? Here.

Here. Ryan?

Here.

And, Glenn is not here this evening. So that does give us a quorum. Okay? And the secretary needs to read procedures into the record, please.

I'll now read the following into the record. The commission operates under NC general statutes one sixty d dash nine forty, which gives local governments historic preservation authority, and the Chapel Hill Land Use Management Ordinance, including Article three, which established the local historic districts and set forth regulations governing them, and the Chapel Hill Historic District's principle design principles and standards, which sets forth standards for changes in the historic districts and the rules of procedure adopted by the Chapel Hill Historic District Commission, as well as the significance reports from all three historic districts and photographs. I also call to your attention each of the applications and associated materials in your agenda packet. All of these items are hereby entered into the record. Thank you.

Alright. Thank you very much. And then I need to read the public charge. The advisory, body pledges its respect to the public. The body asked the public to conduct themselves in a respectful, courteous manner, both with the body and with fellow members of the public.

Should any member of the body or any member of the public fail to observe this charge at any time, the chair will ask the offending person to leave the meeting until the individual regains personal control. Should decorum fail to be restored, the chair will recess the meeting until a genuine commitment to this public charge is observed. Sad to me. Okay. So next, we need approval of the agenda. And as I understand it, there may be one amendment to the agenda.

Yes. We need to, remove the new business item for 304 North Boundary Street. So you can ask for a motion to just strike that from the agenda.

So can we get a motion to approve the agenda with the amendment of deleting 304 North Boundary Street?

I move that we approve the agenda with the removal of 304 North Boundary.

Second. Thank you. Seconded by Josh. Okay. Are there any

We need to vote.

Do we need to vote on that? Okay. Well, let's take a vote. All in favor, say aye.

Aye.

All opposed? There you go. Motion passes. Okay. Announcements. Do we have any?

Staff does not have any announcements.

Staff does not have any. Anyone any of the members? Okay. And then petitions, I understand we don't have any. Correct?

No petitions.

Okay. Then we'll move on to the approval of the minutes.

Move approval as submitted.

Second.

All in favor, say aye.

Aye.

Aye. All

opposed? There are no. Okay. So that takes us to the consent agenda. Is there any discussion from the members on the consent agenda before we ask for a motion?

Nope.

I move approval of the consent agenda.

A second.

All in favor say aye. Aye. All opposed? Okay. So the consent agenda moves on. Now it gets us right into new business. Okay. So we're going to look at 132 South Columbia Street. And you're gonna set up the electronics for

us? Mhmm.

And when you guys whoever is coming forward, I'm gonna have to read a an affirmation to you. You need to answer respond by saying I affirm and then state your name. I need to find the affirmation. There it is.

Are there you can all do it at the same time?

It'd make it quicker and easier.

Excuse me? Are there any conflicts, or has anybody viewed the property?

Each of you will also

She's asking if there's any conflicts with anyone, any member? No.

No.

Okay. Thank you. Good job. You know, you don't look like Kevin, but you sound like me. Okay. Well, that explains

piece of paper that we have.

I've got you. Very good. Okay. So I'm gonna read this. If you guys can each say I affirm and then individually state your names. Okay? I affirm that the evidence I shall give to the historic district commission and the reference to application shall be the truth and nothing but the truth I so affirm.

I affirm Affirm.

Excel. Affirm Calth Adam.

Was that all three names?

Yes.

Okay. Very good. And I assume someone will tell us if if they weren't close enough to the mic because we need to make sure it's part of the record. Okay. Alright. Let's hear your presentation.

Good evening, everyone. My name is Giselle Houle, and I'm presenting this proposal on behalf of DTW Architects. And we are working alongside Barnhill to design an addition to the Delta Kappa Epsilon fraternity house located at 132 South Columbia Street and in the Cameron McCauley Historic District. This house is located on the corner of Columbia Street and Cameron Avenue, and the front of the house faces Columbia Street. It's a three story colonial revival house originally constructed in 1925, and it was later rebuilt in 1970 due to an unfortunate house fire.

The original three story building was added upon with an addition of a two story cafeteria bedroom wing on the back of the building connected by a two story hyphen. The house later had a full interior renovation during which a covered single story entrance was added to the stairs down to the basement. This entrance sits between the main building and the addition to the adjacent and addition and adjacent to the hyphen connector. The two story addition has a cafeteria which is situated on the lower level and bedrooms on the 2nd Floor. As fraternity has grown over the years, the cafeteria can no longer serve their larger student population and can only accommodate about half of them at any given time.

Because of this, DKE has asked us to design an addition which would create more space in the cafeteria. In the same project, they also asked us to convert two bedrooms on the 2nd Floor into a single study lounge area. They would also like to create a second story balcony above the cafeteria addition with access from the new study lounge. The fraternity would also like to build an additional second story additional second story bedrooms above the stairwell connector. And due to the cafeteria extension, we will also need to reconfigure the ADA parking on the site.

So as you can see here, the site on the site plan, the addition is located on the side of the building towards the rear of the property and is highlighted here in gray. We can zoom in a little to see what needs to be done in the site in order for this addition to happen. The biggest thing here is we will need to relocate the existing ADA parking space. Here we can see the addition as well as that relocated ADA parking space and accessible sidewalk as means of egress from the building. Zooming back out, you can see the addition, and I've highlighted here the visible area of the site when standing on the stairs from the sidewalk to Columbia Street.

This is that view here, and you can clearly see the addition won't be visible from this front angle. So this is the existing building and area of work for the addition. And here is our proposed design. You can see the cafeteria extension on the left and the addition of the two bedrooms above the basement stairwell connector right there in the middle. I'll go a little bit more in-depth with proposed items, and I would like to and I'd like to show you how we're aiming to fit in the historic character of the building and the surrounding neighborhood.

We'll start with the cafeteria addition, which extends out 14 feet from the existing building. The house is constructed with brick veneer, and we are aiming to have as little impact on the existing brickwork as possible. All new bricks will be compatible with the existing conditions. For the addition, we are aiming to complement the existing brick, but also introduce wood siding to differentiate the addition from the existing building. We will also locate all doorways and existing window openings.

The new materials used in this addition will borrow features from the existing house and surrounding properties. Masonry will be compatible with the existing brick. Door and window details will be consistent with existing details, and new molding and trim will also match the existing building. The balustrades on the balcony will be constructed to match existing designs. And we are also introducing wood siding to serve as stylistic relief in the building.

However, it will reflect the surrounding properties. In terms of site work, the cafeteria addition will be built out at a similar offset from the building as the existing balcony. We will also not touch any of the stone walls during construction and only alter the site for ADA compliance. The fraternity has asked us to convert two second story bedrooms into a single study lounge area. This is located above the existing cafeteria.

We're adding a doorway which allows which will allow access to the new balcony above the cafeteria extension, and this doorway will occupy the existing window opening on the left bedroom, which you can see right there. We have designed a balcony patio above the cafeteria addition and that will be accessible from that new study lounge. The new balcony will have balustrades to match the existing conditions around the building. However, we will also need to replace the existing balustrades on the balcony pictured right here. They're deteriorating.

The fraternity also says they need to be replaced. The materials will be replaced to match the existing balcony details and conditions. We're also adding a second story or additional second story bedrooms in the space you can see pictured right there. These will offset the loss of the two bedrooms, which we converted into that study lounge area. In this addition, we will need to alter the roof form a little bit, and our solution to that is what you can see pictured up on the screen.

The new roof is designed to be incorporated into the existing roof, We'll match the existing details such as the molding and trim on the previous two story addition. We've designed the low pitch roof we we have designed a low pitch roof which minimizes damage and impact to the original building. However, due to the low pitch, we need to change the roofing material of this additional roof from the original slate to a standing seam metal roof. However, this is consistent with the other properties in our historic district such as the Carolina Inn. In the bedroom edition, we will install new doors and windows which aim to match the existing conditions of the stairwell connector.

Doors and windows will be constructed with hollow metal frames and painted to match the existing white color. And finally, we'll need to reconfigure the ADA parking on-site. The cafeteria will occupy the existing space, and so it will need to be relocated. There are no historically significant exterior lighting fixtures within the proposed area of work. However, due to lighting requirements, we may need to add light fixtures to the new balcony patio, but they will be selected to match existing fixtures on the building. In terms of accessibility on the site, we're relocating the ADA parking to a similar location on-site, And the slope sidewalk from the parking space will be located in a similar place as well, and this will be on the side of the building.

So

to conclude, this is our area of work on the side of the building. We're very minimally impacting the original three story building. We're really mostly building off of the two story addition and the hyphen connector. There is no work really being done to the front of the building as well. And so this is our proposed design.

We believe that it complements the original building and its features. However, the details of our addition help differentiate itself from the house and make it a clear addition. This is consistent with other fraternity houses in the area. So we will aim to match existing conditions in our design, and we'll look to build upon the growing history of fraternity house. We believe this is a thoughtful addition which looks to add historic character of the district. So at this time, I'd like to invite my coworker, Cal Fadham, up here to help answer any questions that you may have.

Ready for questions. What's that? Ready for questions.

Well, think he's still going to jump in with Do have

anything else to add?

Yeah.

He's just here to help answer the question.

Oh, Okay. Well, are there any questions?

So the view that you currently have on screen is the view from Cameron, correct?

Yes. So this

is the view from the front of the Carolina Inn?

Yes. Yes.

Roughly. This is probably from the sidewalk on adjacent to the

And on the left of the screen is the new addition.

Yes.

How far out from the existing building does that new addition

Can you speak into the mic?

Yes. That's 14 feet out, and that's basically where our setback is. And if you look on the right hand side, the balcony extends to that extent. So we're basically matching that.

Do you have a view from the front of the house that actually shows what that looks like from the front of the house once it's built?

No. Not in this presentation, no.

And how much further out from the building does that new addition sit than the balcony that's on the historic building?

How much further out does the

How much further out is that extension than the balcony

that sits It's the same, 14 feet.

But that's a balcony not a structure, correct? Correct. So I I I would like to see what that looks like from the front of the house. Do you have that?

No. We don't. You won't be able to see it from the front of the house. We have a view of the house if you're standing in front of it. However, you're not gonna be able to see the addition. It'll be very

I I think part of the challenge with your project is that your backyard is actually the front yard of one of the most important structures in town on Cameron Avenue. It basically faces the Carolina Inn Yep. Which is town's front yard for all intents and purposes.

Can you go to the site plan real quick? You just zipped past it there. We can get up to There you go. I think that illustrates how far that comes compared to the structure on the right back in the right.

And then what's the setback from the sidewalk? So the new structure is how far from the sidewalk on Cameron?

I I think it's 25 feet.

And does that adhere to the Lumo for the sound?

Yes. Yes. Does. Okay. So

you're not asking anything special?

No. Nothing special.

From a setback standpoint. Okay.

Can you confirm something for me? The three-dimensional view that you showed before shows the cafeteria extension to be offset from the wall of the building. Yes. The plan drawing you're showing now shows it to be contiguous.

Uh-huh. Yes.

So the question I have is which do you which are you proposing?

Yes, sir. That is a that's a good catch. This is a site plan from our civil that was produced before we read your standard that stipulates that new additions should be made to to be distinct from the original structure. So the most up to date version would be where it is set in from the exterior wall.

And that's the one you want us to consider?

Yes, sir.

I had a question about the roof. Are you proposing the standing seam just for the rear or for the entire building?

Just for the section above that stairway connector where we're infilling it with two rooms. And it's just because to tie it into the existing roof requires a low slope and under one and a half and 12, something like that. And so the slate wouldn't wouldn't work in that case. So it would be just above that two bedroom connector.

Okay. Thank you.

Could you go to, I guess, the photo elevation of the Cameron Street side? Yeah. There you go. Go back one to the yeah. There you go.

Let's talk about that for a second. My question, because I actually brought a copy of one of your slides, 4.3, because that was the only issue that I had in previewing your application, is this section right here where you're going to add a floor on top of that one story piece. What gives that building its scale and proportion, which is a big deal in design standards, which I'm sure you know, is the fact that the two masses to the right and to the left are clearly separated and always have been even before that little addition was slid in there. But it it still maintained the general massing and volume. And with what you're proposing with taking a brick plane that lines up with the other planes all the way across, it kinda kinda wipes out those proportions and totally changes the look of them.

Did you consider anything where you were setting the the wall back a little bit?

Yes, sir. We did. We we actually first considered a material change in that in that area. And the client was not receptive to that. So we came away from that wanting to match the brick as close as possible. Again, this is from the client. In terms of adding a relief or something to that, we did consider that. We wanted to present this to just see if we were in the ballpark first before we went down that path. But certainly, it could be stood off from that to, like you said, play up the existing forms.

Yeah. Well, we'll close the public discussion a minute, and then we'll discuss among the board you'll hear. But I'll go ahead and say one of my comments is when you're considering all the design standards, I think when it comes to materiality and things like that, you're spot on. I can't say anything bad about what you presented. But when it comes to this kind of abolishing of the existing proportions of what faces, as Brian says, the front yard of Chapel Hill.

I have a real problem with that. And in our discussion, I can point out the article four point three point one two. There's quite a few articles that I feel like your presentation if you go down one more slide to your render thank you. I think that drastically changes the look and the feel and the presentation of the community to the point that it deserves a little discussion, maybe a little further thought. But what do you think, Josh?

I strongly agree. I think that the same point I made about the offsetting in the others for the cafeteria would apply here. Although here, I didn't see any difference between the plan and the cafeteria. So I was saving that comment for later. But I'm glad you bring it up, Zoe.

I think this is a very critical elevation. And handling the proportionality of the original building on the right and the addition on the left, creating this infill actually ties them together instead of maintaining the separateness which gives the current building its sense of scale. So I think that you you I really appreciate the fact that you did raise this issue with your client. And I'm gonna encourage you to be more forceful with your client because we're gonna need to see from what I'm hearing, we're gonna need to see something here that goes in that direction. Whether offsetting the wall, whether it's changing materials, whether it's dealing with the roof form, those are three areas in terms of design in which you could start dealing with that differentiation that we like to achieve.

So did I hear you say you talk to the client about a different material there between the two? Because I know in the original one story piece, the little gable portion is quite horizontal siding. You can always consider that to change material, and that would also set it back a couple of inches. Right. But but I that's my only strong comment is about that connector piece, not as much about the actual dining hall extension itself.

Yes. Actually, that that was the direction we first explored before deciding to carry on with masonry. But I do think that even if we are to tie it together with masonry all the way across, we would like to look at setting it back or creating some sort of reveal to separate those forms.

Is there a view going south on Columbia of how much you can see the cafeteria extension? Like, if you're at the light looking towards the building, how much of the new part do you see?

Going north on Columbia?

South.

North. Yes.

Yeah. If you're heading north on Columbia.

No. If I had

Heading towards Carrboro.

Oh, south.

Campus. We're

heading On on Cameron?

Well, never mind. I'm going toward the Carolina Inn.

Yeah. Okay.

I'm gonna turn right.

Oh, I see what you're saying.

How what

you're saying.

If I'm coming that way, how much of the new extension do I see either going north or south?

Yeah. I think the the closest thing we have to show you is is the the diagram with the the field of view from the front. Yeah. Can you bring that back up?

There's also a lot of hedges on the property. That's that's true.

Help shield that. I feel like maybe the the renderings are not giving a good a good example of how much hedge cover there is on that side. But

This this brings up the brine issue from previous meeting. Vegetation.

Vegetation dies.

Which is we're we're not wanting to hide this. But that's I just wanted to

I was gonna I was gonna say, Nancy, you really couldn't see hardly anything what we're looking at as it exists today if those hedges stay there because as you're walking down, there's a little raised up area and then there's the bushes and so it's a little above five foot six which is the average eye level. But we've had a lot of vegetation conversations on this board. Understandable.

Yeah. No. We we do not have that's a that's a good point. No. We do not have that view for you.

Can you go to the site plan that shows the extension and the rearranged parking, handicapped parking?

There you go.

So in this, it shows the sorry. The parking the cars will be pulled sort of a third of the way across the elevation of the building. Is that right? That hatched areas where they're parked?

That hatched area is the striped for the ADA spot. The ADA spot itself is at the bottom.

At the bottom. Okay. So the car will pull in and block about a third of the building. Almost a half.

I suppose you yeah. You could look at it that way. Not right up against the building, but if if you're looking at it straight on from the Carolina Inn.

And that's already how they have it set up. Yeah. It's kinda figured there.

Yeah. Okay. Thank you.

There is a aerial view. There's actually sort of four views an aerial view proposed South elevation proposed dining room balcony and two different views on page 26 of the applicant materials. There you go. So it looks like this building is sort of pulled towards Cameron Avenue. But there is the historic building actually kind of extends towards Fratt Court on the other side. Was there any consideration given for some of this massing on the other side of the building to balance it out versus pulling it out towards Cameron Avenue and flattening the building?

No. There really wasn't. This this seemed to be the way to do it. And if we if we looked at the the floor plan of the house, it might might make more sense. But this seemed to be the most logical place to build onto that side of it.

So there is some concern about the massing that you've created as you filled in that hyphen between the two buildings that we're going to have to talk about how to resolve. And so if I'm in your shoes, I would think about what your alternatives are. And in looking at that top down view, it appears as though the massing is on the side of the street that faces the public versus facing the back of another fraternity house where it's not visible from the public. Right? Yes.

That's correct.

There you go. Next will be public comment. Is there any? Okay. So do you want to close? I guess we're closing the evidentiary portion of it. There you go. Use my lawyer word like I'm supposed to. And now let's have a board discussion, please.

I'll jump in and continue the discussion about this south elevation. And I think it, before I could approve this, the south elevation needs more work. I think it needs more articulation of the different elements that are being added and infilled. I think the roof can also have some work done to it so that there is a more apparent roof rather than this very low slope roof would almost what appears in the elevation like a flat roof Mhmm. Which I I can see here is not a flat roof.

Mhmm. But I think that that elevation needs more work before I can approve it because we do have standards about about making additions read differently Yep. Architecturally than the buildings they're attaching to. So that's my comment.

So in addition to the massing issue that Josh just mentioned, I'm concerned about a 14 foot extension moving out towards a public right of way on Cameron Street and its visibility from Columbia Street, which is the most prominent corner in town. And so I'm concerned about the view of that structure from the front of this historic building. And I would not approve something if I can't see what the rendering looks like to understand what that's going to look like from that very prominent part of town.

Just jump in the discussion here to address both issues here. First was what Brian's saying. I don't have a problem with the massing coming forward as it is because you aren't asking for anything special from a code perspective. And it actually adds a little more three dimensionality and it does it's more contemporary compatible to use a National Park Service term, a funny term. So I don't have a problem with that as much, but I have a big problem with blowing up the proportions of the existing structures and not telling the story in such a way that you see the original 1925 plus the addition plus what you're gonna do.

What you're you have every right to do something just like they did in the past, but yours needs to to complement and not completely turn its back on and change the look of the other two. So that's kind of where we're going with it. That's sorry. I said we. That's where I'm going with it.

I agree with everything my fellow commissioners have said. I'm still a little unclear as to how the appearance of that elevation is going to be with the extension and the parking and any plant material that may or may not be there now and may or may not be put back. I'm not clear on that. And, for example, are there any trees being removed? But, anyway, I don't think I have enough information on those incidentals that I think will make that elevation blend into the streetscape and be attractive from Carolinian and and for the rest of us in Chapel Hill.

Let me jump into Kevin and Brian. Brian's my my help this evening. He's my muscle. So do I just ask for a motion right now? Or what are some options for where we're heading with this?

So that was a little loud. So I think there are really kind of two options at this point. Either a motion could be made to approve the COA that sounds like there's probably not a sufficient vote to approve the COA. Another option would be and I suggest that you all discuss this with the applicant first. But another option would be to continue the evidentiary hearing on this application to perhaps your regular meeting next month.

The applicant would then have some time to bring back new or additional information that might address some of the questions or the concerns that you all have raised this evening. And then assuming that you all are satisfied after that evidentiary hearing, you could make a motion and take a vote to approve the COA itself.

Okay. So just from a a time perspective for the client, it makes the most sense for to move to to put it off until the next meeting, basically.

I think we should be as specific as possible in what we want them to bring Mhmm. Next month because there have been a lot of points raised.

Do you wanna try to craft a motion?

So what I would suggest is that we continue this item to the next meeting. Because if we took a vote tonight, I would vote no. And I think others would also. And I don't think that's what you want. I think you want to be able to build something. And so I think what we're suggesting is we're going to give you what we're concerned about and give you an opportunity to address those things with your client and continue this item to the next meeting.

And I think before we decide on a time frame, does the next meeting the December, is that sufficient time? Or do you think you might need

to Yes, And

Sharnika, that is fine with Lumo's timeline in terms of when the application was submitted? I I think I think

Yeah. I think it's fine in terms of the the time limit. Lumo says we would need materials before that December. So probably the end of this month.

I I don't think there'll be a hold up on our

end. Okay.

Yeah. I've never known many architects that are outpaced by a a board. As an architect myself, I say that. So it sounds like we want a continuance of the evidentiary hearing. Do we need a motion for that? And along with that motion could include specifics. Think what it sounds like me. Should be one motion that says continue and what we're looking for.

Yeah, think that's fine.

Okay, great. So I'll make a motion that we continue this item to a future meeting based on your timeline with your client. I think I'll ask other commissioners to weigh in on the things that we're concerned about. I think the massing of this proposed structure and the articulation between the historic structure and the new structure feels like it got lost in translation. And it feels like it's one large mass of brick, which is inconsistent with our standards. And I feel like, Don, you actually have a couple of things called out that we may just want to draw their attention to in the standards.

Yeah. It's Article 4.3, roof form materials and details. Design new roofs to be compatible in form, slope, and orientation with historic buildings in the immediate surroundings when the form, slope, and orientation are important in defining the overall historic character of the district. There are others, but that one is spot on. And I think that's what keeps this from being congruent with the design guidelines, quite frankly. Nancy, do you have something specific?

No. This is up to the architects.

Well, I would I would add I would further amplify what Bryant said and which is on the south elevation to study the articulation of what you're proposing relative to the 1925 building and the later addition which flanks what you're proposing.

And then one last thing. It's more of a presentation thing than a finished product thing. You mentioned, and so we all assume, say in your presentation that you're going to copy all the existing trim work and details and corners work and all that stuff. From a presentation standpoint, if you could show that in your renderings a little more so they aren't quite so plain block simple lines, I think that would help people with the scale of the building and scale of whatever you're gonna come back and propose. You just put a little more detail in the corner's work. Also,

if you could show the setback of the cafeteria part that you mentioned that wasn't in the drawings so that we could really see that?

You mean the How existing the

was you said that it was you look at the guidelines, and it's supposed to be set back a little, but you didn't have that in your drawing. If I maybe I misunderstood that.

Oh, I I believe I I said that we were building out to the allowable setback.

Yeah. I I think what you're showing there is that the the addition is set back from the corner, which makes it a clear addition,

which is offset.

Understand. Whereas in your civil rendering that our eagle eye here picked up on, it was in the same plane. So this render is what we want. We want the new pieces to be a little bit distinct from the old pieces. Compatible, but distinct.

And the view from this corner looks like your cafeteria extension actually is more prominent than the patio or the covering on the original structure that you're echoing. It looks like it actually extends further out from the building. So I would like to see standing in the front yard of the structure once this is built, what do you actually see from that corner? And there's a lot of discussion in the guidelines about backyards and visibility. You actually have two front yards. So the front of the house does face Columbia, but the side of the house faces Cameron. It's an extremely prominent part of town that faces a historic building. And so I think you have to think about this not as a backyard, but as actually an extension of your front yard. And think about how it's going to read to the rest of town, You're which is a

looking for a render from the corner of Columbia And Cameron.

That's right. And then I agree with the questions around so if we could get a little bit more detail around what this is actually going to look like. Is the gray area parking? Is there going to be a car parked right on the street? What does it actually help me with I think you had some other important I

feel like the appearance of the streetscape is very important. And I can't tell from this plans exactly where that parking space is.

Okay.

What sort of landscape was there that you're gonna replace if any. Okay.

Well, sounds like we want to I'm gonna kinda recap the motion. Here we go. Wanna continue the

Excuse me. Kevin, do they need to specify the date? Do

we need to what?

In the motion, if you could specify the date that you're going to continue the hearing to, which is I think December 9. Let me double check.

I think Brian's motion was to continue the hearing to the next available date at which the applicant could be back. I think that's fine. But in order to avoid the need to, like for instance, mail new notices of the hearing, which will take some work off of our staff's plate. If we specify the continued date in the motion, then they don't have to send new notices.

Do have a problem with that?

So I'll amend the motion that we continue this item to the December ninth historic district commission meeting and which gives the applicant and your team an opportunity to address the feedback that the commission just gave.

And the feedback included massing roofing and something else about south elevation. I can't read my own writing.

But there's Consideration for the view that's currently on screen is actually at the front yard of the house. You actually have two front yards, not a front yard and a backyard because of how prominent it is. And we're concerned about what that's going to look like on Cameron Avenue.

Okay. So that wasn't really a motion. That continued to be a discussion. Sorry. So

Brian, you can correct me if I'm wrong, but I think we have a motion to continue to the December 9 meeting on the floor. I think there's been plenty of discussion amongst the board about what specifically should be addressed and brought back at that time. So just to kind of cut through and cut to the chase here, I think there's a motion on the floor to continue the evidentiary hearing to December 9. Is that right?

So I made a motion and Josh made a second.

And Josh did second it. Okay. So all in favor of the motion, say aye. Aye. All opposed? Okay. We're gonna continue till next meeting. Thank you. And thank you for bringing up points in the design guidelines as part of your presentation. That's a good move.

Okay.

So I don't think there's anything else on the agenda for this evening. Is there Shanika? No, there's none. So do we need a motion to close? So move. Do we have a second?

Second.

All in favor?

Aye.

Aye. Okay. Meeting adjourned.