The appellates and we did a revise design initially in front of this hearing that the real problem was with the rather of the of the building and if i can have the overhead on ill show you again what that looked like. One minute. I have a disclosure i have spokens Attorneys Office and they advise me that i do not have a consistent and i can conflict of interest and the only relationship that i share with brendan fox is that we are in the same industry and the letter was written on behalf of hoe would he and he is employed by zephyr employees and we are all independent and we have six of and is he is not in my office. Thank you and one other thing, i believe you have had the opportunity to review the video at the prior hearing. Yes i did. Okay mr. Blag swrai. If i could have the overhead please. Commissioners this is the only design and you can see there was a back stair at the rather of the building and this guideline shows the building to the north and there was a bump out to that bui
See because of the gray, most of the building beis below grade at the back end with three stories in the back and front and im going to show what you the revised elevation looks like and this is the victorian style building and this is the windows to make it taller and give it a more vertical aspect and if i can show you the rather, that will conclude my presentation to you and if you have any questions, ill be pleased to answer them, but let me show you the rather. And this is the rather of the building and the rendering kind off shows more accurately the top bay, no bay at the third level and little pop out which, is similar to the pop out with the neighbor to the north. Thank you commissioners. Thank you. We can here from mr. Schneider next. I do have individual plants plans for you to see and pass out. Josh baker snider that you thank you for having us back to the continue ages and the initial agreeable solution and Vice President phoning was worried about the bright light issue an
Design revision, the neighbors were primarily kept obviously and wanted the building reduced in height and we thought that the concern was with the rather its going to have the overhead again please . You can see what we propose was to basically do a step back in the back to lower it and to kindof give the rather a more attractive appearance. We met with mr. Breecher and he basically said he kindof liked the way that we redesigned the back but the real concern is that wanted to lower the height of the building and wanted the building set back further from the street and the rather was not really the major concern and so based on those discussions, we came one a revised section which basically lowers the building in height of 3 feet again, the l o is with the planning code will allow and in salmon color is what really were at the last presentation, we dropped overall height too 3 feet and the height of the building now is 37 feet in terms of what the Planning Commission allows is 40 fee
A drafting error and its we did a matching pop out and you can see because of the gray, most of the building beis below grade at the back end with three stories in the back and front and im going to show what you the revised elevation looks like and this is the victorian style building and this is the windows to make it taller and give it a more vertical aspect and if i can show you the rather, that will conclude my presentation to you and if you have any questions, ill be pleased to answer them, but let me show you the rather. And this is the rather of the building and the rendering kind off shows more accurately the top bay, no bay at the third level and little pop out which, is similar to the pop out with the neighbor to the north. Thank you commissioners. Thank you. We can here from mr. Schneider next. I do have individual plants plans for you to see and pass out. Josh baker snider that you thank you for having us back to the continue ages and the initial agreeable solution and Vic
Commissioners a little blag jay for the permit holder and is we did have a meetings and we thank you for the opportunity to work further with the appellates and we did a revise design initially in front of this hearing that the real problem was with the rather of the of the building and if i can have the overhead on ill show you again what that looked like. One minute. I have a disclosure i have spokens Attorneys Office and they advise me that i do not have a consistent and i can conflict of interest and the only relationship that i share with brendan fox is that we are in the same industry and the letter was written on behalf of hoe would he and he is employed by zephyr employees and we are all independent and we have six of and is he is not in my office. Thank you and one other thing, i believe you have had the opportunity to review the video at the prior hearing. Yes i did. Okay mr. Blag swrai. If i could have the overhead please. Commissioners this is the only design and you can se