Stucco was that because the original brick that the location of the original brick was a question. And it was not to be found and so, the next best historic representation would be through stucco, i guess that is the question. Or, does this new information about the possibility location of the original brick would this make me difference in your original consideration about the use of the historic material . At that hearing we were told that the original brick was not available and we felt that the stucco was a better choice than the brick which seemed kind of not an appropriate material in terms that it was just a thick brick and that it was and there seemed to be evidence of those and since i had originally been stucco and so that was our recommendation and so so the brick situation is a new information that we didnt have at that time. If the brick is available or not. Commissioner pearlman . Yeah, i mean, part of the department had worked with the project sponsor about putting venee
Public comment. Back to the commission, commissioner johnck . Yes, thank you. I am interested in getting a little further understanding about the original brick and wondered if the members of the Architecture Review Committee would it be andrew . Yeah, that, and maybe karl, and you previously looked at this, and your recommendation on the stucco was that because the original brick that the location of the original brick was a question. And it was not to be found and so, the next best historic representation would be through stucco, i guess that is the question. Or, does this new information about the possibility location of the original brick would this make me difference in your original consideration about the use of the historic material . At that hearing we were told that the original brick was not available and we felt that the stucco was a better choice than the brick which seemed kind of not an appropriate material in terms that it was just a thick brick and that it was and ther
Was a question. And it was not to be found and so, the next best historic representation would be through stucco, i guess that is the question. Or, does this new information about the possibility location of the original brick would this make me difference in your original consideration about the use of the historic material . At that hearing we were told that the original brick was not available and we felt that the stucco was a better choice than the brick which seemed kind of not an appropriate material in terms that it was just a thick brick and that it was and there seemed to be evidence of those and since i had originally been stucco and so that was our recommendation and so so the brick situation is a new information that we didnt have at that time. If the brick is available or not. Commissioner pearlman . Yeah, i mean, part of the department had worked with the project sponsor about putting veneer on it and there is the sense that it looks very fake, you know, even a good one l
Only two residential buildings, and we are obviously attracted to the historic square and we support the developer coming on board and taking this project on and seeing the completion of this building. I guess that renovation is a strong woerd, but evolution and seeing the bliet lifted. What we are concerned with is we are blue sky starved already and we are at the base of the financial district and also the cer csf that went up right in the sun arc and blocked a lot of our sunlight during more than half of the year. And we are very supportive of the developer, and working through this project. What we do want to ask is that light blue sky, privacy issues are taken into consideration, for the other home owners, and we are building of eight condos, and two parcels, south of this project. And the penthouses that are already two penthouses on the roof. So i am not sure that if this is a third pept house being discussed but i would like to see some consideration of minimizing additional st
We are blue sky starved already and we are at the base of the financial district and also the cer csf that went up right in the sun arc and blocked a lot of our sunlight during more than half of the year. And we are very supportive of the developer, and working through this project. What we do want to ask is that light blue sky, privacy issues are taken into consideration, for the other home owners, and we are building of eight condos, and two parcels, south of this project. And the penthouses that are already two penthouses on the roof. So i am not sure that if this is a third pept house being discussed but i would like to see some consideration of minimizing additional structures on the roof and the impact of a further height will have on the blue sky effect which is extremely minimal already. And just wanted to do a few months a year really. That said, again, we are encouraging the project, we just want the roof height and impact on blue sky to be considered. Any other member of the