Applicant Grinshtein presents R7D alternative in response to community board

So as you know, we attended community board meetings and hearings and had a lot of very interesting feedback on our proposal.

And I think that the conclusion was that the community board recommended an R6A in the context of the planning that you're proposing to do now.

And while we have no interest in withdrawing our application for R7X, we heard the remarks of the community and the feedback that we received and

have spent the last couple of months working on something that might bridge the gap between what they're proposing and what we proposed.

So we have some.

ideas about how that might look and what that might look like in an effort to allow the project to move forward without having to go to

an appeals board or refile under the new regime starting in January.

We have looked at

very closely what an R7D designation, how that would affect the site.

Next slide.

So next slide.

An R7D, here you have the very small details of what R7X looks like, but really it's the summary of the height and the FAR.

Next slide.

And so if you take the R7X that we showed here earlier, and then you add the R7D to the right, you'll see that it brings the total height

of the building down to 125 and the FAR to 5.6, most importantly.

And so that would be a small but meaningful, from our side, reduction in the proposed building.

But I think more importantly, we took the moment or we took the opportunity to redesign the building with some different materiality and different arrangement of heights and setbacks.

Next slide.

Next slide.

That was R7D there, which you can look at at greater length in the recorded material.

Here is the proposed redesign.

We've taken a, and maybe it's better to turn this over to Yuri to talk about the new materiality and the massing.