Okay, we'll get started. Uh, this is a regular meeting of the Fair Haven Planning Board of Adjustment. Adequate notice of this meeting has been given pursuant to the provisions of the open public meetings act. At the time of the board reorganization in January of this year, the board adopted its regular
meeting schedule for the year. Notice of the schedule was sent to and published in the Asbury Park Press on January 30th, 2026 and the Two River Times on February 26, 2026. That notice was also posted on the bulletin board in Burough
Hall and has remained continuously posted there as required by the statute. A copy of the notice is and has been available to the public and is on file in the office of the burough clerk. A copy of the notice has also been sent to members of the public as have requested such information in accordance with the
statute. Adequate notice having been given the board secretary is directed to include this statement in the minutes of the meeting. Uh there's a new procedure for publication of legal notices. On June 30th, 2025, Governor Phil Murphy signed PL 2025, chapter 72 into law, which
amends the legal notice requirements under the open public meetings act. Beginning March 1st, 2026, public entities must publish their legal notices on their website rather than in newspapers. Uh you can view the Fair Haven's legal notices using uh
www.fairhaven neww jersey.org. All right. Um we have a roll call shield. Thank you. >> Uh Mrs. Bush, Mr. Olsen, Mrs. Fiv here,
>> Mr. R >> here. >> Mr. Rivera >> here. >> Mr. Anderson >> here. >> Mr. Joiner >> here. >> Mr. Brandonetti >> here. >> Mrs. Rolo is on Zoom >> and
here. >> Great. Great. Uh let's have pledge of allegiance. Pledge allegiance to the flag of the United States of America and to the republic for which it stands. One nation under God, indivisible, with liberty and
justice for all. Okay. So, um we have a pretty full agenda tonight. Um so, we'll start with um a We'll start with the some might as well start with the with the application. Sure. >> And get them done and through and then
we'll >> go through the the admin items. Um so why don't we start with 777 River Road LLC block 49 lot to zone P1. This confirm that we have station.
>> Yes sir. >> Okay. Why don't we have all of the people come forward? Welcome. >> Yes. >> You look very dapper, but I'm sure you don't want that. >> Tough meeting last time. >> Well, okay.
Raise your right hand. You swear the testimony you give before the Lord will be the truth, the whole truth, nothing but the truth. >> Yes. Yes. >> Yes. >> Which? Yes. >> Yes. >> Yes. >> Better. Yes. Um, my general direction to you is before you start testifying,
state your name for the record, spell your last name because recording. That way we identify you in case of need for transfer with the chair's permission and mark some exhibits for Mr. Broski. >> Absolutely. >> Okay, Mr. Ross with your permission I'm
going to have marked as A1 the develop the application and the checklist has one exhibit A1's survey of the property dated July 10 2025 consisting one J one sheet day two architectural plans
um looks like they are last divides January 18 2026 existing three sheets mark that as A3 A4 four highway photos of the subject property. I think we have three sheets to 12 images.
Um A5 is the uh historic preservation committee's memorandum of agreement uh with conditions set forth. We mark that as a five. A6 would be the copy of the own officer's denial letter dated
December 29, 2025. We also have marked as planning board one the planners uh letter from CCH over 6 miller that's going to be P TV1 TV2 is going to be our engineers report
from Hill May 18th 2026 that is all of the exhibits that I have. If you have any other exhibits we can mark those. Your next exhibit will be day seven. >> Okay. I may or may not have one, Mr.
Kovac, but okay. We can get started. >> And unless there's anything else material, floor is yours. >> Great. Thank you. Good evening, Mr. Chair, members of the board. Rick Brodsky on behalf of the applicant, 777 River Road LLC. The application before
you this evening uh pertains to the property that's located at 777 River Road um which is uh I know it best as uh um the old law office um which uh I've
been been in I was in many times over the years uh um and I actually went by it earlier and it was interesting to see it vacant uh this evening. In any event, um the uh it
the the the property and the building is in is in the B in the B1 zone. And what we're seeking this evening is minor site plan approval to um uh to actually permit uh the renovation of the existing
building. um uh together with the construction of a of a 480 square ft addition in the rear the second floor not which will not um which will not have any effect on the
foundation no increase uh to the to the to the existing footprint. Um this uh the structure was built early 1900s. We've seen something about 1908 or
thereabouts. Um historic uh uh the uh Fair Haven Historic District has approved the proposed plan um which was uh taken care of before we came to you this evening. Um you will see and here
as we go through the testimony um uh that there was an old shed in the back which has uh has been removed. That's why you you notice a reduction in the building coverage and the lot coverage. Um the you will see
landscaping that's proposed along the perimeter of the property. Um this is um it's an irregularly shaped lot. to the to the extent that it's narrow. It's only about it's only 44 feet and change
wide. Um and it's only about 5512 square ft in lot area. Um there's no parking on the site. Uh and you know the the beauty I think of this application
is that uh the principles of 777 Ben and Russ Smith who here who are here and were were um sworn earlier um are wedded to renovating the existing structure and in in accordance with its its style
going back to the 1900s which will be unaffected by the the the modest edition in the back. Um their their intention is to use the uh building as a uh as a sort
of a personal office building uh for their for their um business. Uh so that there will be no no members of the public uh that would be invited onto the site. Um it'll it'll
only be the local owners of the business which are four people. Um one of whom is a resident one of two of whom grew have grew up in here in Fair Haven. One of whom it is actually still lives in Fair Haven. The
other three live nearby in Rumson. Um so it's very local thing. It's a very um understated uh sort of uh limited intense use. Um and again um
the right buyer I think at the right time for this site they they they have purchased the property. Um the architect uh who you'll hear from this evening has been retained to and and his plan is to
renovate the existing building. um and is confident that it can be done um had the building sat for much much longer I'm advised then um we might have been having a different discussion because there's a lot of structural integrity
issues and deferred maintenance on the building. It's basically dilapidate falling apart uh literally. And so they're going to breathe some new life into it, keep it historic, keep it
uh uh consistent with the adjacent uh properties along River Road which have been con uh sort of adapted in into commercial use. Um and uh so they're really excited
about it and they're they're excited to get they're excited to get going. What brings us here this evening in terms of variance relief is well we there are the existing conditions that I spoke of which are the lot width uh and the lot
frontage at 44.22 22 feet where 50 is required um here in the B1 zone and also the existing front setback uh for the existing structure which is 12.3 to the
porch about 18 ft to the building itself and um no proposed change to to to that. Um and in under your ordinance 35 ft is required. Again that the addition that they're proposing the 480 square ft is
in the rear second floor that will have no effect on that front setback. Um there are a couple of design waivers couple of waivers that are being sought as part of the application. Um one is for the submission of a of a
separate landscape plan by landscape architect. We have the landscaping that were proposed that has that is shown on the plan. We were we were hoping that that's enough and that would satisfy uh uh what the board is looking for in
terms of uh landscaping. Um street trees. Um I'm going to have the architects speak a little about the number of street trees that are required versus what's there uh and what can be
put there. Uh and the last component uh last waiver that we need is for parking. So there is no parking now and there won't be at the end of the day. Um and
that's kind of the way it's been for a long time. A long time. >> Yeah. Sure. Okay. >> If I could, Mr. Gardella, there are a number of checklists for you. Is that correct? >> Yes. Would I be correct in stating that
there's they're asking for one of the check waiverss was not to have well they do not have at this point in time a letter uh from mama county planning a board and since it's on mama county 10 you're recommending it letter
>> I'm recommending that comment was in my completeness review letter and also >> so there were checklist Most items that were outlined in the completeness letter which dated back to March were reversed to review the application for completeness.
And forunately my computer's locking up on that one that had to do with >> really what I was hoping to do is have you go through any outstanding waivers. >> Yes. >> And if you recommend those waiverss, >> we could identify that and perhaps take
care of that in a serial action so we can disuse the application. And if there's anything that you want to have, one of these would recommend as a condition of approval that the applicant agrees, we can get into them, but I will characterize it so hard on them. There were seven checklist item waiverss and
then one um waiver having to do with which we can address was as you were aware any commercial property requires review by the TDRC technical design review committee. Given the nature of this application and
minimal site improvements that are proposed, I had recommended that meeting um being not necessary and that was in my March um my March letter. So fast forward to getting them on the
agenda looking at the additional waiverss that I outlined as well. to your point, yes. Mama County Planning Board, it's on River Road standard practices to submit to them to the uh
to that to that group for for review or you could simply ask for exemption. >> Any problem if that's your condition? >> No. >> Okay. >> The other one was freehold soil. Obviously, it's minimal disturbance. it doesn't meet the threshold, but the
building department is still going to require it once building for me filed and the land use office, we typically double check that as well. So, you could simply do a an exempt development >> letter of no interest. Okay.
>> Um the next one was and these are all checklist items based on our application. Mammoth County Health Department. Understanding that this application doesn't really fall into that category, I had recommended a waiver be granted.
The next one is the what we call will serve letters from the utility companies. This isn't new development. You're not looking to bring in electric, gas, water, sanitary. I'm assuming everything at the site is all functional or will be functional or existing. So
will serve letters would not be required. So recommending waiver on that one. Next one. Freshwater wetlands letter of interpretation known as an LOI. Um we're not aware of anything in that >> no >> developed site.
>> So recommending the waiver. Uh the next one is storm water management. I had um requested this waiver not be granted. Although you're not adding additional footprint, you are adding um
you know you are doing some type of improvement to the site and currently there's nothing on site to do any type of storm water management. The governing body recently adopted a definition for minor development and that's kind of that's this is a way to capture some of that.
So when we get to the testimony, you'll see in my technical review letter, I just said at a minimum, let's let's take care of some of that roof run off. >> So we'll address that and that >> and then they can speak to that point. >> And then um another requirement is a
parking plan and given the nature of this application and the existing site, there is no um there's no on-site there's no off streetet parking. So it would make sense to grant a wa that wise as well. So that those are the housekeeping
events. >> So So except when the issue items identified as conditions, you're recommending the waiverss uh to those items identified. Yes. >> We can propose a motion to accept the recommendations for the waiverss. We can then proceed and ask for that motion to accept the waiverss identified. Just
>> to be fair, he's leaving almost everything on the checklist except for the strong word. Well, no. There's there's he still wants a a letter back from M County Planning Board. He would like a letter exempt development letter back from free old soils. You would like uh he's going to discuss later on the
storm water management plan report. We get into what that is. That's still outstanding. But the waiverss here being requested are and recommended that is application of the Monet County Health Department will serve letters from utility companies provide freshwater
letter of interpretation the LOI where it's located and not have to provide a parking plan at this point in time. >> I'll make a motion to uh so parking though. So the you're adding 480 square feet and so I get there's no parking
obviously there's no parking really for any of those buildings on the front but so so the parking department goes to nine spaces for what would be a regular >> the off street parking requirement for
due to the additional square footage that they're proposing bumps up the required spaces to nine where the current building requires eight. >> Even though there's no parking lot, >> even though there's no law, correct? >> There's still So, >> there's still an increase in parking
based on the >> the waiver doesn't go to the granting of the variance. They're still going to have to demonstrate >> their entitlement for the variance. If they don't if if you don't they don't get it, they don't get it. But in terms of a pardon plan,
>> since they weren't with them to do that, they didn't buy the plan. It didn't make sense to make them do a plan for something that would assem. >> Yep. >> So there's a motion to grant those waivers subst. >> Yes. >> Mr.
Mr. >> Yes. >> Yes. and Mr. >> Yes. Okay. Wait, Mr. Ter. >> Great. Thank you, Mr. Kovac. What I'd like to do now, unless the board has any questions, is I would have ask my architect to come up, but before I do,
um uh what I'd like to do is just real briefly have um Mr. Smith step up um to just address the board real quick in terms of uh just just to sort of verify
everything that I've said and just give uh give the board a little bit a little insight into sort of the uh intent uh and plan uh behind what's proposed for the building. >> Sure. Yes. So, I'm Ben Smith. Uh so, I
own the business with my three brothers. It's actually four of us. We're all brothers. We all grew up in Fair Haven. Uh my parents just moved out a few years ago and I've lived in town for eight years now with my family. Uh we own a manufacturing business in New Jersey and
Texas and travel a lot um with our kids growing up. Uh I was actually at Booster New one day walking by the building and thought, "Oh, it would be nice to just put our offices there." So I called Derek Debris, who I did the fire academy with back when I was a kid, and we
bought the building two weeks later. Uh that was back in August and little did we know it was going to be quite a production. I thought we should have been in there by now. Uh but we've learned uh but anyway, what we're what we're doing is we're restoring that building uh to make it our offices for
my brothers and I. It's gonna be four of us working out of there. We're never even typically in the area at the same time. So while it's four of us, I highly doubt it will be four of us there just about ever. Uh the reason we're looking for the 480 ft, um this project's
costing us way more than the building's worth. and for us to put the money into it. Well, obviously it was our decision and we're not begging you for a variance because of that. All we're doing by adding those 480 ft is taking what were 1908 tiny rooms upstairs and expanding
it so it's a functional space. We want it to be a nice sustainable building that we want to keep forever. uh if we just simply renovate it, which we could have gone and done months ago, we weren't comfortable with that because we'd be creating a product that is not
really usable for modern standards. Uh what we envisioned using it for is being able to work close to town, close to our homes. I coach a lot of sports. I'm constantly around town. It'd be nice to be able to pop in and out instead of going out to our factory far from here when I'm home. Uh so it's a very low
volume use. Um like I said, we grew up in town. We're not going anywhere. I live in Fair Haven. My three brothers are in Romson. Uh and we thought it would be very nice use for us uh to be able to continue uh working, you know, even get more involved in the community. >> And there were no other employees proposed to work in the building?
>> No, we're not. No, it's going to be four offices upstairs, conference room downstairs. >> Okay. >> Any intent to rent out hanging space, tenants or anything like that? >> Not now. And it's not really it's not going to really lend itself to that of what we plan to do, but now we're just going to use it and lock it up and go
home. So yeah, basically quick explanation of what we're doing and why we're asking for the space and uh the rationale behind it. Overall, it's a net reduction in ground coverage. You know, we already got rid of the shed. That's, you know, I could have pushed it over when I was there. So when we did the demo, we
haven't get rid of it. Uh the building did just flood a couple weeks ago. Uh so the back is jeopardized right now and the longer we waited is going to continue to fall in more disrepair. So you said the the second floor. So
you're adding a floor or you're you're you're renovate like how are you creating if there's four rooms in there now you're knocking down like >> No. So there's a flat roof off the back. So there was an addition at some point. It's a singlestory flat roof off the back. We're simply fixing up cleaning up the roof lines adding off back of that
to make it look like a cohesive upstairs which our architect will talk in professional detail about. But okay, >> then we're taking it and expanding the room sizes to make them function. >> And and and in fact, um you know, when the law firm was
there, I don't know if you've been in there, but I was, there were there were a number of people in there. There were probably a lot more >> desks in every room aside from the conference room or man upstairs. So that's what we're talking about in terms of the left and pent view even though
we're we're adding on a little bit to to the very top. >> Okay. >> Who's going to speak to the conditions that were set for the historic preservation commission? Elizabeth is still our architect will speak today.
Thanks. Oh yeah, Michael James Monroe, 788 Shrewsbury Avenue, Tinton Falls. >> Okay. Um, Mike, you've been sworn in, but just for the record, if you give the board the benefit of your background and experience as an architect and I here in New Jersey.
>> Yeah, I've been at Carnegie Melon University. They've been licensed for about 35 years past president Jersey Shore AIA and I probably testified at 100 different municipalities throughout the state. I don't know how many total now the last 35 but for a lot of them. So, but I've done them for the board
many times. >> Thank you. Um All right. So, let's let's Mike I see you've got you've got an exhibit up there already up on the on the easel. Is that um just
The exhibit is actually a set of drawings. I have all the sheets here. >> I also have a um extra sets of small sheets and extra sets of photographs if anyone in the audience wants it. >> Yeah, that's fine. But anybody would like to see any of those? I'll take >> Yeah, I think you have them all data.
>> Yeah. >> So, you know, so is what's up there, Mike? Is that an exact copy of what's been submitted or were the photos added? >> That's an exact copy. >> Yes. and the same one we use for the historic. So maybe there's a >> Okay. So Mr. Kovac, no need to remark
that. We'll just >> keep it as A3. >> The architecturals are A3 A3. Yeah, if you want to on your build mark that A3 markings for all three sheet, you don't have to understand
what's on this sheet. There's there's three photographs on top, but the top right one is the picture that hangs upstairs in the hallway. uh when it was originally done. The flag holder actually is still there. We'll probably put the flag back. The next two are uh more current condition plans of of how
the building is today. Um I gave you some closeup of the signage as we keep the same signage. Note if it changed any that all stays as it was. Um and I gave you some close-ups of the shutters and the forts. The shutters are actually fine. We we're actually going to just
keep those and keep as much as we can. But there's uh there's recent built-in gutters. I have not been up on the roof. I don't know what they look like, but uh it's the old fashioned way of doing gutters. Uh but even in the old picture, it's pretty funny. They had a we turned on the front porch. So, I don't know how
we're going to handle that, but um all it's all overrown in front. It's causing some rotting in the porch. That taxis, that dense U there has been growing for 84 years. No one's ever trimmed it. And so, that all gets redone. I did a landscaping plan. I worked with a
consultant for um someone that works uh with the Rumson uh >> Aubirds Arbor whatever their garden garden club to pick out all native species, nonative noninvasive local species. We also did the building next
door that's only I got about half of what I wanted there, but um they're still growing in. This will be a continuation of that. So all then it gets ripped out and slow and all the sizes around here. >> We actually have two trees that uh it is a street tree really. It's a six feet
off the property line. It's a 16inch maple. It's it's in desperate need of uh some trimming and maintenance. Never been done. There's and there's a multi- stem Japanese maple. So some of these pictures you can see the bright the fall leaves here when we started in the fall.
Um, and then under the tree, right by the street, we just did some real nice ground cover like uh to give some color to that tree offseason. I I think we uh we don't have to go over all of it, but it's basically a a ground ground cover, a Christmas burn. So, it was all picked
up picked out very purposely to reflect the historic that would be here at the time. Um, so I don't think we need need another street. We had no room to put it. Um, and we're going to clean up the steps. The brick walkway is almost exactly the same. get rid of any tripping hazards and stuff. So, and and this front door has never been open.
Probably never will be. Um, you know, make So, there's also some cool pictures I found for the inside. I just did that for the the historic people, but uh I found an inside window. The historic mustard color is very cool. I couldn't sell my clients or anyone else on it, but it was typical that it was dark
green and mustard was was the colors. Kind of cool. Has all brick inside the walls. That's the way they used to with their insulation and their strength. So, it was kind of cool. I just did that for fun. Um, but basically what we have is um, we took a building and we had a building out back which is not really
just a shed. It was almost the size of a garage. We got rid of that. I originally counted that as space. It was filled with files. It was used. It had value. I could have renovated and used it as space. Brooks bought Archie that um, his stuff was still in there. Um, I thought
we originally I was going to try just to change the roof in the back. Um, because but I started looking at the uh the bathrooms, the stairs. The front stair is very steep and narrow. The back stair is is crazy. That's it's and there's a little bump on the back of the building. I gave you pictures on the handout
mostly of the back because you you've already seen the front and has a bunch of entrances which is kind of weird. I mean, not weird, just different people coming and going. We're taking all that away. Um, but there's s if anybody wants a poppy, I have poppies. But getting rid of all the extra entrances and things
like that and cleaning it up. It was never put on very purposely. It's it's all falling down and might we may even have to build the rebuild the foundation that area. It's got so much damage. It's got old brick foundation. It's it's just flooded again. So I wouldn't be surprised if we had to rebuild right
from the foundation up, which is fairly expensive, but it's it was never really built to last. The front part is actually surprisingly pretty decent. date. Um, but once the back half goes down, we're going to have a bigger problem. So, what I thought of doing too is if we're going to redo the roof in the back, what why not make it match the
front? You know, we usually the historic doesn't care. It's a street view and they're done. But you see this building coming down from the side. You see it on the next side street looking back. So, I think, you know, it's important to really make it look like it was like that the whole So, we're going to spend the extra money to add all the trim and all the details that we have on the front uh all the way around the whole
building. So, it looks like it's been there the whole way and it's in good shape and it's going to last for another hundred years. Um, and then, yeah, there was, like I said, the bathrooms were, you know, this small. So, I have we have three bathrooms. We have one downstairs, one up, and one for the conference room, but they're 6 by8. The bathroom was 3x4,
you know. So, uh, we're going to rebuild the fronts there, but I'm going to do it historically sensitive. It's just I can't save it, I don't think, and it doesn't have any great historic value. We'll look at, but it looks like it's it's just too dangerous. Um, and it's going to be our one main stair that can service the building with one stair. So,
really what what was represented is fairly true. The number of people actually working here to bring it up to a common office space, a common standard. It's what you'd expect in in a in a building today. what we'd be asked to provide. Um, and I think everything that was said um by the owner is um
absolutely true. I think it's going to be a great improvement. Um I I originally counted the shed space. It was one parking space, but one or two doesn't really matter. I mean, that's fine. Um and uh overall, I think it's going to be a great project. Um I think
>> uh um the uh the addition addition is over all second floors. We're not touching any grass. when he talked about maybe Rich and I had talked about it uh in the fall, late fall, and he said, "Would you be open to doing, you know, some storm water?" And I said, "Yes, we
could talk about I don't mind picking up uh you know, the roof leaders and things like that, and we'll go through the audience and I prefer not to do a whole storm water plan." Um but if we can agree on keeping it reasonable, I have no problem doing whatever. So, I want to put that plan into effect. There's no
reason um not to do it. one of the front leaders comes down right in the gardens. But I have no problem doing that if that's okay with you. Um and the same with the landscaping plan. If uh if you're not happy with it, we can have someone else, you know, recopy it and and redo it. But I mean, I think it's
going to be a it's a great street. It's a great building. Um I mean the we did the building next door and struggled with the parking thing too that uh I think it's going to come up basically. Why can't UA park? We have you have different owners here I think and we
have a lot of places in town where we have access across cross access easements and it does work fairly well. keeps traffic off the street, gets the employees off the street, it saves it for parking. And I think sometime in the future, but um we tried to make a minor modification next door when we did we
were trying to put an apartment above and we got an 18piece letter back from CME about, you know, it was it was astonishing the things that we had to do because it's not going to be a nice stone driveway like our parking area. It's going to be paved and storm water retention and lighting and striping and
it's going full-blown commercial. So, um, I think that will happen in the future. I think the way this project sits by itself, I think it's a low use intense usity, low intense use. I think it's appropriate. It gets this building restored back in the way we'll have it as a treasure for the town going
forward. And I think at some point in the future, the owners will come together and probably work out the parking thing. I said it's probably a one and a half year process. You're tying in, right? You're tying in county roads access. You're probably going to involve three or four properties. It's going to be a nightmare.
>> You mean the owners on the street? >> Owners of the street. >> The adjacent. >> Yeah. And I I'm sure they aren't the less reasonable, but we're reasonable. It's just nothing that's going to happen very quickly. And as part of the whole master plan, as you know, you try to do
things like that. I think it's good. But for this, this is the lowest intensity use um that I can imagine for this site. There's really no public coming to it. So, um I think overall it's a good project. >> And Mike, you heard the chair's question basically with a little bit uh with
regard to you know the concept of adding 480 square ft but yet not increasing the intensity of the use. I think you I think you addressed it adequately but basically it's just to we're still going to have four offices right at the end of
the day. they're just going to be of a more usable uh size, >> but there's offices there. Now, this this is what I'm just trying to visualize it, right? There's you're not adding like a floor. The floor is already there. There's offices there. So, you're just w opening up.
>> We're building we're building over the flat section. So, in the back of the >> So, there's no there's no it's >> it's not a there's not a room there. So it ends here all cut. So what they're doing, they're taking this roof line,
cleaning it up for the if you're approaching it from east or west on the road, you're not seeing one of these mismatching roof lines, right? This is now going to be a clean roof line. These rooms are being patted back here. >> Gotcha. On top of what exists. >> Yeah. I mean, this picture in the second
sheet up his head, that's a complete mess. It's got the bump out for the stair, which is just stuck on. The whole thing's leaking. Everything has a different height. It's uh it's crazy. So, I didn't want to build it back as a flat commercial roof. That would be a sin. >> And I would at the very least I would do
a gable roof. So, >> um that's how this kind of morphed out. But, I think if you take away >> the extra circulation space by code, the stairs, the extra bathroom space by code. I really don't think there's that much extra office space. I think it's just it's just done the right way.
>> It's increasing the functionality of the space and it's restoring a building that's falling apart. Could fall apart. >> Yes. Exactly. Do do we know um when Brooks got awkward there how many and maybe you know Rick from the the
sheet originally how many employees he had and how many people he saw this seems like less intensive use as you say I'm curious if we know those numbers >> like did he have did he have five there to employ a >> parallegals he had
>> he had number parallegals he had >> he was you know his clients were coming and >> do business there regularly, right? >> Park on the street, >> right? >> And then would have >> real estate closings which would >> the other attorney would come and and
seller or buyer. >> Yeah. You always walk the back door. He went in. He was the women in there and then he would come in, you go to the conference room and stuff. >> And then we would even have a pee, you know, as you know, he'd peer here a number of times and we would do meetings there sometimes with his clients, right? Sure.
>> His professionals. So yeah, definitely more than four. >> Yeah, >> that's all I have. >> Well, just one more one more couple of questions like I mean I think you hit on it, but I mean there's no question, right, that this that that what we're
proposing fits in so to speak with the other buildings along uh matching. So it was in the conditions of the then we we would do it anyway but we're going to restore everything to what what it was originally. >> And from your perspective you don't see
any negative impact on on the neighbors. In fact it's probably it's an improvement from your perspective. Okay. >> Um >> why is the lot with what is if we're building up what does
this have to do with the law >> break? So did >> Oh, okay. It's pre-existing. >> I was going to say like what why there's nothing getting wider. >> Okay. So, we just have to reprove that. Okay. Got it.
>> Yeah. Basically, we just pointed it out because it's an existing non-conformity that and there's nothing we can do about it >> kind of sits tiny corner to the street. It's kind of kinkedked a little bit which makes it even crazier. But, um that's just the way it is. But but
nothing that we're doing is has been there any setback or anything. We're over an existing building. It's not like I'm increasing a non-conformity. These are all non-conformities that go with the sites that are really kind of grandfathered in technically, but um we have to ask for them. If we're asking for one, they ask for all. So,
>> and just in summary, the the historic this historic commission is is good with the plan. I saw letter. They're very happy. >> And then I noticed that this from 1970. >> Yeah. >> Submitted by Brooks Fun Arts. Um, is
this a a driveway easement back then? I'm not sure. >> I don't know. I I know originally next door he was allowed to park next door on the previous owners. They might have given him an ement to actually use that lot. I know he parked there. >> Yeah, this this seems to be at 769 Road.
So, I'm just curious what the what the relevance of this. >> I don't know. >> Yeah, I know. >> We request that any effect will probably be provided. Do you know if he's still >> I never I never even saw that. I don't know.
>> Is it our document or their document? >> What's their package? >> Probably probably because in your research I guess researching any easements that were there. Um >> it must be a but looking at this I don't see I don't even see
>> an adjacent property. Yeah. >> Not an adjacent property. didn't do nothing. Well, what are the two? >> What are the two retail properties on either side? Is it one the uh the coachure fashion?
>> So on the right is the blue doctor. >> Okay. >> On the left we have that's now >> Oh, okay. Okay. But you'll have you'll have no retail on it. The applicant will agree that the
condition set by duration commissions reports like it's like four on September 2nd 2025 conditions. Yeah. No problem with all
there's also a sign. There's also any discussion concerning the sign. >> They want us to keep it. We want to keep it. So there wasn't a big fight. >> Um well to that point when one of these documents lists even though the existing
signposts is going to be is going to stay, it looks like they're recommending 28 by 28 side panels printed on both sides. >> Um we were we were matching uh we think we agreed to match the ones that were double printed. the original one uh in
this picture not too long ago had it's a cross arm thing with two hanging sides and they're they're painted on both sides. I think there's only one there now. Uh but we agreed to keep that style in it from the last. >> All right. >> Sometimes we have to replace the postings but I haven't got into that
bush yet. I see. But it will be I think it's it has to be replaced. It will be exactly the same. The historic preservation was clear to say no illustration other signage. >> No illumination. >> No no illustration. >> No illustration or description of the
final placement sign has been presented. There's been no determination made on the >> right. Absolutely. >> They're going to have to go back before they're going to have to go back before historic whatever. They didn't give me We didn't get a signed logo for the building here for us, but it's going to be they're going to have to go back before historic just to get the graphics
approved. The signs approved uh the way it's there, the size of it, we agreed to that size. So once once these guys decide on a graphic, they're going to have to go before the historic and say this is our graphic and they're going to say that's great. Uh, I'm sure it's >> is the sign size location informative to
the orders? >> I know. >> I have no idea. >> The way we've been handling these and talked about this at some of our land committee meetings. We we work with the applicant to try to
get them into the building and then any signage we handle afterwards. So if HBC approval is required, at least they've got occupancy, they can move in. They got their CO from the construction
department. They can start using the space. In some cases, they might just put a small canvas something up just so they have some identity. And then we get we work with them through the land use office to ensure compliance with it
location and size and then assist them through the HBC process. >> But the location is going to remain in its current location, right? The proposed remain proposing not to change the existing condition because it goes with the historic nature of the building. So it's part and parcel with
it. So, um I don't think it's going to move backwards or forwards, but if someone decides that it should, I guess, um >> well, that's what I'm trying to do. I don't want that. You have to take it off the seat. They have to come back for so long to the sign.
>> We like permission to leave the sign the way it's been for the last hundred years and we're just going to change the graphics and that'll be a separate approval like it always is. >> It's it's just a hanging. It's a hanging thing. Two chains. So, you're going to take your piece of wood, you're going to paint it, you got to come in, they're going to show them probably not something crazy, probably close to the
black and white like everything else. And then, uh, they say great. Uh, they might comment on the lettering size. You have to graphics can't be too small, can't be too big where, you know, that's usually what they look for and they say great or they make some suggestions or sometimes people will bring two. You know, we went through the building next
door. I think one lady bought two. So I guess >> depending on the flavor of the board, I'm just trying to suggest to move it on because I don't want us to be sitting here all night unsigned because if if there's a condition of approval
that you will present what your final signage is going to be to the office of the engineer for their review for performance and provided that's done, no further relief is needed, they're all done. >> Yeah. My concern is what if and I mean I
know it's pre-existing non-conforming. Do you want a fixed location now? So as long as it's fixed location and generally the size not talking about graphics or limitation but generally size you'd like relief for that. >> We've already represented it and they
want it to be what it was. They represented the historic it's going to stay where it was and exactly like what it was. Can they they I think that was their >> I think we word it. Can we word it? And and we were to the extent there's any relief necessitated by keeping the sign in its
current location, we'd be applying for that as well. >> Trying to make this one stop. >> I hear you. >> I'm with you. >> Fine. I can I can figure that out. >> As long as the bull >> just because I'm saying >> so slow. >> If you think what I'm saying is stupid,
you can say so. Disagree. We'll do something else. >> Yeah. name described. >> Same location, same kind of sign. >> Yeah. Subject to the historic commission's kind of approval. What what the graphics don't >> What is Mr. Smith? What's the name of
the business? I'm just curious what sign should be on the street there. >> So, we wouldn't even have signed up to us. >> Oh, really? >> We're not. >> Oh, okay. >> I say 777. >> Oh, great. >> Okay.
Thank you. >> Appreciate that. Any other questions for um Mr. Monroe? >> Thank you. >> Thank you. >> Um I have no further witnesses. Uh Mr. chair. Um,
so going through my technical review letter, items one, two, and three we handled. Item four was a majority was in regards to the management of trash and recycling.
>> Yeah, sorry I missed that. >> You know what they proposal is, Mike, for trash and recycle. I don't I don't remember what Brooks did. He probably just used a [ __ ]
>> It is. So, there's currently two trash cans and one recycling there. They're in the front yard. I've been like putting them all. It's really a pain, but I've been doing it, but I think I'll probably end up talking to like Dr. Slers super on board with a lot of things together
with us. I'll probably ask her if I can just roll them out the side and out her driveway, put it on the left or whatever that road is instead of dropping it down the retaining wall and then the box of sidewalk. Uh that's what was currently
done. I'm assuming based on where they left. Uh but I would think it's better off the side street the road. >> Any concerns about No. >> Next item we touched upon was storm water management. I think it makes sense for the architect
and myself to work through the definition of minor development. As we mentioned earlier, one of the downspouts will discharge into that landscape area. Those are the type of improvements we're looking for like um something really just to soak up that
rain and and catch it before it ends up out into Riverwood. So maybe something small in the back. We could take a look at the site. Um, it's pretty much all lawn. >> Yeah, it's all remaining. So, you don't have parking lot areas that you need to
deal with. It's just clean roof runoff. So, >> so design in coordination with your office will record. >> That would be a Yeah, I think that would be a a good condition to Yeah. to work towards. >> Could that be anything from like a rain garden up to and including like a a
recharge pit or something like that at your discretion? more green type of low impact design, not so much putting in a there is, you know, big uh recharge dry well system, but >> they were on the same page with that.
>> Yeah. >> The last two items, uh, one had to do with Mammoth County um, planning board. We had talked about that and that last item was fruit soil exemption. >> That's fine as a condition of approval of And that's it on my end.
>> Anyone have any questions of the engineer item? >> Hi. >> Hi guys. Uh Donna Miller King. Um, so I I know they had said that there is a street tree, but technically it's on
their property, so not officially a street tree, but to their point, uh, it's a narrow sidewalk area. Um, there's really insufficient room to do it and still have sidewalk. So, you know, we're we're totally supportive if the board wants to
grant the the exception on that. And it sounds like you were already kind of in agreement about the non landscape architect designed landscaping plan which again we don't waver that doesn't have to feed our plan. You have any
concerns about the being proposed at this time? >> Well again as we pointed out we couldn't really discern what was proposed based on the plan. There's no plant schedule. There's no details no notes that we would normally see. Um, but they're all,
you know, all the plants are within their property. It's basically their front yard landscaping. You know, we don't want to trim too heavily on they're just want to beautify the property, >> right? They're not cutting anything down. They're not >> right. They're going to trim and
>> and clean up what's overrown. um the burrows um >> certified by tree >> certified tree expert um to make sure that you know whatever plants they do decide to select that they're they're
going to be um more native not invasive non-native >> programs what if anything we want I don't think I I can stipulate that as a condition of approval. I'll modify the
plan. I'll put the quantities in the schedule so at least you have something to >> Sure. I'm sure we can work out. >> We can work with you. >> We'll work on everyone's happy with it. But u I'm sure it'll be very close to this and and you'll submit that to the planner for their review and recommendation. >> It's fine.
>> Anything else to >> Yeah. Can I can I ask a point? I do see a good amount of green space in the back and this is me putting my shade tree commission back on on on my head. I wanted to know if u could we fit any trees in the backyard? Is there any open
space like maybe where a shed once was to just require one additional tree? I know we always try to add to our tree resource here in town. So maybe this is an opportunity to get one back >> instead of doing a street tree. That's a fair trade. Well, the street the street
tree that well the tree that is there now we don't have a room for a street tree. Right. So we're not getting rid of the Japanese maple. Right. >> Right. But that's not a street tree because it's not in the right way. >> But there's no room for a street tree either way. >> Right. But in instead of saying let's
grant the exception, say give us a tree in the backyard. >> So we can we can stipulate that. We'll work with the planner's office. We'll pick a some sort of tree except shade tree and maybe not put it right in the middle. Maybe put it back. >> Yeah, not right in the middle. No, don't know where it's in. But just just plus
>> Okay, plus one. >> We have no problem. That's fine. >> But you're not cutting anything down, right? >> No, we're not we're not touching the ground. So, there are two big trees in the backyard that are dead that will eventually I think we'll end up doing
furnace to take down because I had Frontier already look at it and said these are dead and need to come down. >> But that you guys always say that I think tree removal is going to have to be done in accordance. >> Yeah. So, >> we're not granting any approval with
that. >> Yeah. I'm not talking about that part of it. I'm going to say I'm not going to sit here and say we're not ever taking trees down because those are dead >> and one I guess is ready to come. But that would be handled however needs to be done. >> Well then that can be separate with the
towns but then we'll have for this landscape plan. Okay. >> We'll probably do just a couple along. It's great. Thank you. Uh board any questions? Any further
questions for >> any any questions? >> I don't have any further questions. to the extent that the approvals that we grant once we grant these approvals there's going to be four offices even though there was area was carved up they're really going to create four
office stairs with no onsite any concerns to this because now in the future to the extent that and again I have every reason to believe that what they're telling us is absolutely true but from a planner's perspective knowing that you're going to have four offices
upstairs are you concerned as to what other parkings in the area or what are the parkings available? >> I could be um >> there's four questions. >> They've testified that they're going to use uh building not at the same time.
So, it's never four people at the same time on the premises. Uh are you guys all driving? Anybody walk, bike? >> I mean, I will, but I'm not gonna testimony say I'm walking to work every day. But what what is the nature of are you
concerned about the nature of their business on a long site? These will come in long. From an good urban planning perspective, I have no um objection to or concern about
um the need for off- streetet parking for the use, >> but it's a pre-existing. So, it's a the the building as it exists today, if they were going to do nothing to it, it's it requires eight spots,
right? Isn't that And there's no there's >> there's not eight spots, right? >> Never. >> So, you're only adding the requirement. >> It doesn't add it doesn't require eight spots because it's existing non-conforming. They can occupy it as it
is and not need to come get a parking variance. It's an existing non-conform is allowed to continue unchanged >> because they're increasing the floor area of the building. That's the thing that triggers the parking requirement, >> but only a plus one of what it would have normally been. So, it's one spot in
a place where there's no spots anyway. So, it's >> so I'm not concerned as a planner by the increase in the technical mathematical demand of one Austrian parking space. >> Exact. We're not building We're not building a
We're not building a new structure. >> Yeah. >> That has four offices and no parking, >> right? >> We're we're renovating and adaptively adaptively reusing an existing structure that has >> no parking.
>> That's never had parking. will continue to >> and there's no real way to have parking without >> easements and all sorts of things with adjacent property owners. >> And the testimony of the applicant has been that again the intensity of the use
by the nature of the office, not being, you know, a busy lawyer's office doing real estate closings and having people coming and going at different times of the day, multiple days of the week. um even as their own use. They're not all four people on the presses at the same
time. So, it's kind of a deescalation of that intensity. So, again, I I don't see the negative. But if they let let's to your question though it's if they sold the building and then somebody else bought it and was
going to change the use that would then come before somebody to talk about >> they would have a change application if they didn't do any expansion but still they'll have to come forward and change the use and you have to be satisfied. No, they'd have to come forward if it is a change in use. If it was not office
space to office space, if it was a change, a legitimate change in use, they would come back for you. >> If that use, then >> but that's a separate application. You would have to see if if it were a permitted use, a change
from the existing use to a different use. Does that use now fit there with regard to how many employees on site? And you would look at opportunities to park outside. What type of trash and recycling did they generate? Are they going to receive deliveries? How often
they going to have deliveries? If they're going to have deliveries, where is that going to be standing? You have an opportunity, >> but it's a separate it's a separate process. Exactly. >> Exactly. Solidarity. >> That's that's their positive category.
in the negative category. They haven't discussed with you >> easements that inhibit getting in on anyone's site. if you want to address those things or your inability to create park space other than >> well the the the architect did reference
the fact that they're you know the intention is to try and have negotiate uh discussions with adjacent property owners to achieve some sort of uh easement cross easement situation to yeah >> in order to some parking
>> but don't want it to be anybody trying to speak to whether or not those easements continue to exist for the benefit of this property bargaining elsewhere. >> We're I'm talking about something future. >> Has anybody explored whether or not
those instruments that are granted are insufficient are insufficient for the prior the the prior eent that was referenced does not achieve what would be necessary to have parking on this property. um what what is being what is
contemplated is some sort of future shared parking amongst a number of property owners but that's something that you know it takes >> three likeminded people and I I think we have two of those so it's going to happen eventually >> and it'll make all the properties more
valuable and it'll help the town and then because you're going to have parking and that'll open it up and then maybe it can be a different kind of store at that point. I think that's the next thing you'll see, >> right? But too many but too many variables, you know, to to to be a condition of approval,
>> not right approval. That's why I was asking if it would it would end up in a separate process if the building was sold and they wanted to change the use. So, can I just I want to ask a question about that. >> Um, >> would a retail storefront be a change of lease from what currently is what these
owners are planning? Yes. Yeah. Okay. That's all I >> Okay. >> Because what has been described to you is a is really interesting office space for a limited purpose, limited number of folks there. No real business
transaction there by way of on-site individuals. Retail business would have customers coming in be concerned about. >> But if it were another but if it were another office use with the same parking requirement, >> we would have to go through that. We would take the recommendation of the zoning officers.
Yeah, there's just to clarify, there's a definition in our ordinance. It's called exempt development. The exemptive element has several items outlined. It's a means for an applicant to get administrative approval without the need
to go to the board, typically a business. And in this particular case, because the addition was being proposed, the off- streetet parking requirement went up, which intensified that they were added to that parking
requirement. That was really the reason they came before you. It wasn't the use, right? >> We really didn't even know. We didn't even really talk about the use. Yeah. Because it was really just a building. >> Otherwise, it would have been an exempt. >> It would it would have it would have fallen under the definition. >> We kind of tried. Yeah,
>> we kind of tried. >> Yeah, we tried. And to your question before, if if they decided to vacate the building and then want to maybe lease it to someone else, well, that's when they submit a zoning permit. We take a look at it in the land use office. We
determine number one, is it a permitted use? If it is, then we look at the definition of exempt development and our zoning officer goes through that. Typically, we meet with the business owner. we go through all the different items that are outlined there and
try to, you know, encourage them to try to get this approved administratively rather than coming back to a a planning and zoning board. So, and most of the time the parking requirement I would say is a I think
it's a fair thing to say that that's typically what drives a lot of these minor site plans before you saw. >> I have anything further any questions? Nope.
Uh any any uh anyone from the public wish to speak on this application? All right. Uh so we'll move you discussion board. I mean I can frame a resolution.
>> Yeah. Why don't you >> let me frame a resolution for you? I frame it always in the positive. It doesn't mean you're advised to to vote in favor of the applicancy. various variance relief from the large property located in the B1 business district lot
49 lot 2 application design exceptions you've heard the design and waivers exceptions those have already been approved the interior of the building will be renovated with full arition made on the second floor and in the rear of the building within the existing
footprint there are no changes to the site with the exception of landscaping and removing the small shed in the rear applicant We received approval from the historic preservation commission. There were conditions that the applicant has agreed to to abide by. Other conditions
of approval with regard to this particular application are the completeness letter with regard to storm water management which the applicant is advised. We will work with the engineer to have an appropriate plan. The engineer at minimum was looking to have site drainage going into and then to be
sight drainage from then going into onsite not impacting the joint properties. Applicants also believe that it will get an exemption or review by the county planning board for the development and that there will be an exempt development
with regard to frequentation district. Um I think that covers all the conditions of again there's been Mr. applicants agree that it's going to take
place. Um additional information for the planning for improvement with regard to the types of tons within the landscape will also identify the type of tree and the location of tree into the yard as they
as they um the conditions with regard to signage are that the applicant is agreed that it's not going to relocate the signocate in its present period but that the signage once agreed upon will be
reviewed by the bureau of engineer regard to compliance and comply with any recommendations we have. There is no there has been no testimony concerning any additional exterior lighting or on-site any lighting of a sign or illumination sign. If those things are
going to occur, they have to be addressed with the department first before those replace. Think that covers everything unless there's something else. That would be the resolution. I would ask for a first and a second on that.
Then discussion board members as whether or not specific to the parking and the existing pre-existing conditions should be printed motion motion. >> I think it's a fine plan. I think it's an upgrade to the existing property. We
have lower intensity use. I think we're protected by the sort of preservation from the commission in terms of like the sign aesthetics of the building. Um I think we're also protected by the change of use rules in case there's any sort of change of ownership or or you know tenant type of retail situation that's planned. Uh the town gets a storm water
management plan in place and we get a tree. >> I see all an upgrade to just building this and to you know historical contact from a local owner certainly weren't attention to the public that was in what
they're constructing as many do so right that roof land. I mean it it is a it'll be a really nice aesthetic for it right that district Mr. Olsen
>> yes >> yes >> Mr. B >> yes >> Mr. V >> yes >> Mr. >> Yes >> Mr. Anderson >> yes >> Mr. Barner >> yes >> Mr. Grandi >> yes >> and Mr. Yes.
>> Thank you, Mr. Chair, members of the board. Thank you. Thanks, guys. Thank you, guys. Thank you. >> All right. So, let's move uh to the administrative items. Um so, let's start with the approval of the
resolution last week. And I know that there was said two titles in there. >> There are two titles. Please forgive me. The only person who's responsible for this committee in on page five at the
very bottom where it says now therefore we have resolved the zoning board of adjustment. You are not the zoning board of adjustment planning board. And I apologize for I haven't read it about but I still read it in and the
same uh on page seven with the four votings of true thought resolution planning amend those with those the planning board the fair planning board. >> Well I'll um make a motion to approve
with the condition that those titles be famous forward again second. >> Yes. Mr. >> Yes. >> Mr. >> Yes. >> Mr. >> Yes. >> Anybody that did not vote in favor of
the application do not vote on this application. >> Oh, just the new register. >> Okay. So I don't So I >> you wouldn't vote. >> I vote. Okay. Sorry about that. >> That's >> just abstain. >> Um Mr.
>> Yes. >> So I think Mr. you >> too. So, presuming you voted no also. >> Mr. Anderson, >> yes. >> And Mr. Dorner, >> yes. >> Mr. Brandon,
>> yes. >> I did. >> Okay, let's move on to the minutes which were distributed uh beforehand and Um, I'm presuming everybody's had a chance to comments
minutes. What was the one that >> I think I made that? >> Thank you. >> I uh I'll make a uh motion a second. >> Mr. Olson? >> Yes. >> Mrs. Hoey? >> Yes. Mr. Fer?
>> Yes. >> Mr. Bell? >> Uh, yes. >> Mr. Sarah. >> Yes. >> Mr. Anderson. >> Yes. >> Mr. Bar. >> Yes. >> Mr. Grand. >> Yes. >> And Mr. >> Yes.
>> Um, so the next is So there's a an an ordinance that is uh being submitted to council um on May 26th. Uh and so I'm going to ask Doug to give
a review of that. We're going to have to provide uh commentary. uh back to the to the council on that. Um >> we have we have a very limited role with regard to this. Let me just explain any rolling
planning for a while please continue to be boring. Um, basically with regard to any land use or development application, uh, any ordinance that comes before mayor and council, there's a first reading and then within 35 days that is
submitted to the planning board for which is reviewed. Planning board is reviewed, which is very relative in certain respect. They're not approving the ordinance. They're not recommending the ordinance. What we're doing is telling mayor and council
whether or not this particular ordinance is at odds with the master plan or the zoning ordinances and any other conditions that you generally think should be brought to marion relative to this particular ordinance.
Even if you were thought that this ordinance was not something you were in favor of, that's not your role. Mayor and council just wants to hear from really in a sense, think of it as you're their legislative committee. You're their chief expert
with regard to planning and zoning in this municipality. They'd like to hear what your thoughts are about it. But if it's consistent with the master plan, consistent with the development regulations, you tell them that. But if you have any additional concerns, you can also do that. If for some reason you
were to say to Mar and council, this is not consistent with the master plan or the development regulations. All that does is heighten the vote requirement for mayor and council. Okay. instead of a simple majority 10
and generally speaking if they do approve mayor and council to speak to those issues generally they but in in this instance and I will ask the planner has planner had an opportunity to review the ordinance >> nope >> no okay this ordinance >> I'm curious though to see
>> no that's fine that's fine I I think it's it's pretty straightforward it's an ordinance that you that you're familiar with this is the ordinance with regard to and it's in our zoning ordinance at this point in time. It is it is in this instance it strikes the
language from the zone Olympics that says doesn't change anything by way of the time or your start or your end times but in terms of the language I see I see it >> yeah just
go ahead >> basically it says it strikes the last or second language it says that it can be changed in accordance with the site plan approved by the municipal agency So that the ordinance will still read, "No business, office or commercial
activity which invites or permits customary or public use, visitation, or occupancy shall operate between the hours of 11:00 p.m. and 6:00 a.m. except and it says those striking to te
those businesses such as establishes establishments licensed to serve alcohol and beverage which have their hours regulated by government law, regulation or ordinance. It then strikes the second section which says in accordance with the specific site plan approved approved
approved by these blades. So the long and short of is the hours don't change and still the only exceptions and this is my this is my language to explain it to you in a nutshell highly regulated industries. Okay. Where there's already
a highly regulated industries like the alcoholic beverage commission already sets the hours with regard to the establishments municipality generally generally take second seat. If it were something like a highly regulated industry in that instance say like trash
pickup or those types of things. Not that you're going to be dividing customers for transit, but those hours and there's case law to say that's something that's going to need to be regulated on a on a more global basis outside of just municipality. >> So it takes it takes hours of operation
out of site plan variances is effectively what this does. >> It can I at the end of the day it doesn't it doesn't list that often. Someone can still request a variance, but I think in the in that instance, it depends on how it comes up. If site plan
approval is not needed, then it would probably not come before this board. It would just come before regular variance, then in that instance before a zoning rule adjustment. But one application that you had once before was for an amendment to a minor site plan. So it
was still dealing with site plan, which gave this board jurisdiction. in this instance that's not an option under this. >> So that was my question. So the last month's meeting the issue that we took up that would >> that was a minor site plan movement that came before us >> right but that would no moving forward that would no longer come to us. It may
not. I have to I'm going to have to see how the zoning officer handles that particular application. >> Understand what the like. >> So the site plan you would still need to give this is how I understand it. that somehow your I think it >> your site plan site plan approvals would
still come to us but we would not be able to grant variances in terms of hours of operation in a site plan approval >> because if that's the interpretation then the entire application might go before the zoning board of adjustment. There are certain times where if it's in
variance of the zoning board of adjustment controls, then the entire approval process goes before that board. I don't know how the zoning officer is going to operate on this and I don't have enough information at this point in time to tell you or to guide you that. I
just know that with regard to that language, it's not there at this point. >> Would this overturn in some sense or no? No. But moving forward, we couldn't do it.
>> We couldn't we couldn't grant, >> right? Like last month, >> we couldn't grant that early start, >> right? So the next one that comes through >> the other whatever for 5:00, we can't do it basically. >> It wouldn't have come.
>> It probably would have come before you. >> But so who makes that? So what it sounds like is that the we don't like how who's going to make
the determination of where it goes off >> decisions are made sense at a different grade level than us. >> The you'll probably see Joe will probably look at it. No, Joe will look at it. The engineer will look at it and say the type of because it's really going to depend on what the other motif
is. recycle then but there were Dvarian relief it would never come to you >> well so so ride for example the other exercise should be out they want to open up class at 5 a.m. there's no changes to the site plan that would no that would
not come back >> should not come forward >> right where because remember they they they characterized it as a minor site plan amended to a minor site plan for which they then wanted to wave all the minor site plan requirements
I I think when when couched in those terms your zoning officer looked looked at this order said okay well then it says something about site plan we'll go before the planning board probably wouldn't at this point in time Again, that that's that's my observation based
upon what's happened. And to clarify, technically, and this is per municipal revenues law, an applicant does not need to seek a denial from the zoning loans. They could they could apply to the board
secretary directly with an application. It'll it'll then be reviewed for completeness by the board professional which would then which would then talk you know discuss jurisdiction
>> but before it gets to that board professional we would need to look at it as well because we have different board we have two different >> I mean you would have to those professionals we're not we're not neither board is involved in that level of discussion.
So Doug, what what do we need to do with regards to this? We need >> Is it at odds with anything in the master plan? >> Do you see anything that's at odds? >> No, I don't I I I think it's consistent with the master plan. It certainly is within the authority of the of mayor and
council in terms of the hours of operation within there. You certainly have language like that in your master plan. It is not it is consistent because it with with the zoning ordinance except for a modification because you presently have it. So I I eat tired of it. So what I would look for unless there's unless
there are additional issues that you want to raise mayor and council attention is we would authorize me to prepare a writing which we which we do that says this is consistent with these master plan and zoning ordinances. Planning board either has further
recommendations or no further recommendations. You get it off your council. Two paragraphs. I would I would just suggest looking at their hours of operation or it's very loosely
written in broad and has some contradictory. >> What do you think is contradictory? >> So I can clearly tell >> Yeah. Yeah. Well, doesn't allow um hours of operation between 11:00 p.m. and 6:00 a.m. for uh
businesses that allow consumers to entry, right? So, what about officers in town? >> So, what about >> Well, they can come at 4:00 a.m. and 3:00 a.m., right? So I think they should look to
fill the ordinance more broadly if if hours of operation are a hot topic per day. But this this ordinance doesn't talk about like this is a a I like a procedural ordinance or procedural
guidance like commentary about this specific ordinance say you need to look at your >> No, my my view my my position is just that this was brought up specifically due to hours of operation. It appears
right. So while they're looking at that and considering that why don't they see if there's a better mechanism that can put sort of >> rather than modifying the the way they feel modify it but just look at it
holistically and see if there are better mechanisms to guard against what mayor and council is concerned about you know I think it's prudent to do that especially as you're looking at a master plan I the the way that I read this is
that the timing is obviously it's a response to our you know our monthly meeting last month think um seems to be taking away our ability to kind of hear applications and >> I I I would I would I would >> reading that
>> not agree to that I would agree and I think one of the things that the applicant said was during the call and you're going to see it in your resolution approval I know you all read it because it's exciting reading um the resolution of approval, but one of the things that the applicant said to
you was a b was a basis was well, you know, mayor council haven't had a looked at this ordinance for over 20 years. Maybe if they had an opportunity to take a look at it now, they they would change those things. Well, now they have. You don't have to change the house.
>> So, I would say the next applicant that comes down the pipe for you, you have that language there. They're not going to be able to say, "Well, mayor and council might have looked at it differently now because they haven't looked at it recently." And your answer is going to be no. In fact, they looked at it last month and they're changing
it. And they're changing it to restrict even further who will review these if possible. And they certainly didn't touch the hours. >> Yeah. The plain English is >> Yeah. >> I mean, it's not it just it just it just
limits it. Yeah, plain English is the concern was on slippery slope that we would have more and more people coming and asking for 5 a.m. hours and the dynamic of the town changes. >> Now you have a clear direction whether
you agree or disagree. That was the that's the choice. >> We're obliged to follow that and now you have I think you have a clear statement from mayor council. No, we're not interested in changing those hours. I not no that that was exactly the point
you said it hadn't been looked at in 22 years. This clearly states that my my my point to cancel is just if you're going to look at it, look at it. Right. Right. But the ordinance is is pretty pretty loose. You know, if the intent is not to
have hours of preparation ahead of that and if employees 20 people, every one of them could go at 4 a.m. and have doors open and closed and have headlights and have traffic and have all those things, right? So, you know, there there's just a holistic way to look at it is my point
that and if they're looking at it right and there is a clear indication that they wanted to look at it, >> I would just say maybe maybe council should look at it. >> Okay. And if they don't see that that's, you know, the fit for them to do or they have no desire to do it, then they don't
do it. I think the point is just perhaps it could be now's the time, right? Great. >> Okay. I I believe in the checks and balances of government, but this something about this doesn't feel right
>> from a master plan perspective or to make a comment. >> It wouldn't be master plan. be more is consistent with this. This is a change in the hours of operations
ordinance or we're codified in the ordinance, right? So it so it's not a change in the hours of operation. >> No, but it's a change process. >> Yeah, it's a change in process.
The timing is the question I take. I mean it's >> but it's just not in our perview. What's in our purview is does it align with the master plan? And the answer is yes. That's a very different question from what you're posing right now. >> But are we not to look at this? Is it at odds with the master plan or zoning
ordinances or because this seems this is a change to zoning ordinances, right? Or just the language surrounding zoning ordinances. But if you think it is inconsistent as a Florida and you need to tell me what that inconsistency is, what I'm hearing from from Mr. Anderson
is maybe this is an opportunity to take a look at it holistically. Maybe not just from 11 to 6, but look at other operations and don't want to look at what happens in town. This is a general comment, but you I I would generally suggest to you that I don't see that
this is inconsistent with your own or your master plan, but if you want to make additional comments, that's fine. >> I disagree with the point you're struggling. >> What's that? >> I don't disagree with the struggle and I think your better. It's just not inside of our purview. But um I think maybe
within our comment is like maybe a more granular look at the type of business uh is is warranted or are they just saying blanket statement 11 to six um unless it's you know government uh different regulatory um authority. I I think we
>> I will tell you that that language is in there because of case law in New Jersey in which a garbage company basically said where the language was broader but it certainly limited the time and the garbage company said look I got this I'm
a highly regulated industry I have to do certain things certain times this is different than your commercial purview and on the general health safety and welfare if I have to have a different schedule from each municipalities to do my trucks going through it particularly
because I'm already highly regulated. those regulations at the state level should supersede the individual municipality and that's what that language is generally intended to go through just like alcohol beverage once you get your approvals from the ABC
highly regulated and you should be able to rely upon those not have to have a variety of different issues in which you want to smell >> yeah but what's fresh in my head is not that you know it's it's it's a local business with I think a need that was demonstrated And I would I would hate to
kind of neuter our ability to to weigh in on it. >> Tell me what you want to say. I'll put it in there. But I but I think what I'm hearing is you tell me if I'm wrong with regard to our first task. It's not at odds with the municip with the master
plan. But here are our comments and concerns about other matters. If you want it in the comments and concerns about other matters, tell me what you want to write. I have something from Mr. Anderson. Then I'm going to ask you if so say you all so say you all fine we're done. If
there's anything else do the same thing we did for me. >> I'm just a lowly scribe. >> How would I articulate this? Maybe you can help me. I think that >> well I think that I think that we had an applicant come to
us twice in six months um and and jump over hurdles to to while seeking approval um to to fill a need that their customers were asking for. Um,
it I think benefit fits the town in in in the health sets. >> I know I don't want to reitigate. I really don't. I think that we did. I think that we uh resolution that's approved. >> There's there's no Yeah, there's no need to to
like talk about why it was voted yes. No, be more procedural because >> the proced the the the procedure that's being proposed is not at odds with the law with with anything really. And so,
you know, while we may not like it, we don't have the authority to change it. We have the authority to say we don't like it. We have the authority to say that, you know, we think
other things should be considered. Um, but I I I mean what if it's not at odds with the master plan and it's not at odds with the zoning ordinances. >> Can I offer something? I know you guys are struggling and I >> don't really I don't really know.
>> I don't really know, you know, too much of the backstory. I don't want to know. Um, but I will suggest that hours of operation is not defined in the zoning ordinance. Yes, it is. No, it's not.
>> Uh, take a look at 30-7 30. It's clearly in your zoning orders. >> Seven. >> 730. >> Question. What is the new master plan going to say about this that was sent out that we're working on? Does that change anything? >> In other words, you're talking about a
master plan 10 years ago and it's not in your it's not in your design. Well, we can >> I've seen let's and then let's hold that. Well, we >> we can address that. >> No, that's that's this section. But
hours of operation as a term is not defined. It's not >> that may be a legitimate comment back to me. you know, if you're trying to force out >> I mean, it also doesn't say meantime, but you know,
>> but but I think and I don't know if I'm reading too much into this, but like if I want to go to my office and get in a little earlier and it's within these restricted hours, but I'm not actually conducting my business.
>> If you're inviting customers or public use, you have to read the entire >> That's the business, not the activity. No business or office or commercial activity shall invite or permit customers for public use cues, visitation, or occupancy shall uplate. I think you have
to read all those words together. Right now, they're saying from 11 p.m. >> and 6 a.m. except and it gives you those those exceptions. >> Okay. So if you're telling me, so I'm suggesting to you if you're inviting customers on premise,
>> but not the that's not the activity I'm talking about. Again, occupancy is a catchall here. I'm an employee. I don't operate the business. Business may invite customers on site.
The thing I'm doing is not inviting customers on site. Thing I'm doing is something in a back room. that isn't the issue. But but >> I get it. But so if it needed to be parsed out further, that might be a an avenue is to
refine the definition, an actual definition, not just this is a rule. This is a rule. No business shall operate. That's what it's telling you. And it's clarifying business activity, occupancy, these things. Actually it doesn't business
says no business office or commercial activity which invites or permits customers for public use visitation or occupants >> shall operate between the hours of the letter >> have all the other language in between >> right >> and then we're creating this exclusion
for the ones that are already regulated by assets which >> I will generally suggest no be concerned if you go into your office and tell a needed it. It wouldn't consider that an inviting if a person >> if that's not the problem. Well, >> that's exactly my point.
>> But I mean I think that's that's your point. But in terms of how it's interpreted at this point in time, right? >> Yeah. I I guess keep coming with a different it's a it's a different >> you have to divorce the the the you
divorce the case from the procedure, which is I I mean I know it's hard I know it's hard to do that. No, I think it's I just think that we if we are no longer going to be doing adhering applications in that regard. That's unfortunate because I thought we
did really in that specific example did some really good work I think finding a solution and so but if that's not what this is that's not what we're here to do tonight regarding this >> I don't know that you can say that but that might be legitimate
>> we yeah so we we need to like I said divorce the case from from this now there's there's I know Tracy wants to say something so just give me one second >> I know William asked I'd like us to complete what we're doing here. This is function exclusively of the planning
board, not when inviting comments. It's exclusively the planning board as to what we want to say back to mayor and council. We're certainly going to open to public. >> Right. >> Right. But Bill, so so your point was, you know, so I think it's completely valid. It's like when we do the master
plan, when we we when we undertake all that language, we obviously need to put something in about hours of operation and guide the the council on perhaps um reviewing reviewing the ordinances in
more detail. >> Correct. We absolutely have to do that. That's part of the master plan. >> That's where I'm going. Yes. Because the master plan you're talking about around now is 10 years old versus how things have changed. >> Exactly. >> 10 years. >> Exactly.
>> So maybe it could be postponed until >> master plan is completed. >> I mean is that >> put that letter in the file that is >> give it to a committee. >> I'm sorry. Said put that letter into a file. Give it to a committee.
>> Right. I like that. No, but the thing is you're changing an ordinance based on something that's 10 years old, but yet you have you're getting data now that might say, "Oh, it's still good." Or it should be changed. So then you're changing again
next year to conform with the three months. >> No, no, they'll vote on it. Yeah. So the and I I I struggle very deeply with exactly what you struggle
with as it relates to this not really what's on the table. the master plan is really guiding sort of the guiding principle of our talent ordinances, right? And so within that, I'm sure as everyone's going to read from that
survey is going to be that people won't keep the small town character and they sleep in beach town and all these other things that may council given this I would assume believes that opening before 6 a.m. materially changes
that characteristic. Right? So I don't know that in the master plan there's a place that's going to directly >> articulate business >> hours of operations. >> We the master plan could urge that the town consider being a little more
specific about hours regulation depending on business type. Right. I think that I think that point was made about us being a commuter town and so what businesses might benefit from being open a little bit earlier for commuters. Um, you know, you could you could take it a couple different ways, but I think
that um I I think that maybe the master plan would be a big venue to pose the question to the mayor and council divide that maybe we do need to look at this 11 to six blanket closely kind of like >> well and you could share that with mayor
and council appreciate what they're doing at this point in time. The board does intend to take a look at the types of demographic evidence that we have the changing character and whether or not would be appropriate and there are recommendations to make recommend
recommended changes to ordinances like this. That's fine. But I mean I wouldn't look to an application. I wouldn't look any any further past this particular ordinance and our limited jurisdiction at this time. to the extent that people are are are weighing into other things,
that's not what this is about. I think I think there's a legitimate concern what Mr. Anderson just said. I think we can address it by way of saying we intend to take a look at it with mastering plan. I also think it's a legitimate concern to say that that there should be some
guidance as to how these applications will come up and what board will have jurisdiction. Again, I will gently suggest to you that it will have that jurisdiction will fall along the same lines as it always has depending on the
nature of the relief that's being sought. Okay. >> Yeah, I think you're you're articulating a lot better than I am. But >> that's all right. I'm not I'm listening to you. >> Okay. I cover all of those bases so far,
but from what I also hear is we're agreed that it's not of the nationalities on the ordinances, but that there are some additional concerns that they're current testing plan >> current test. That's the only thing I can go >> right. I'm good, but I don't see
otherwise I otherwise after the last horse race, I wouldn't be here. Okay. So, anything else? So say you all that >> yes is there Tracy did you have anything >> when you open it ask if it's still relevant.
>> Okay. >> Um so one >> I will take your direction prepare writing command council in in a timely fashion to bring your comments and our conclusions to master plans. Okay. Now I make sure that that gets over to Sheila
so she can get that out to you in your next All right. So thank you. Thank you. Um we wanted to have a discussion regarding the planning board appeal process. So just whatever you um planning board.
>> Yeah. So if if the council was an appeal I'm not going to focus on what council may or may not too. I'm just going to talk about gently. Um >> exactly >> anybody can can appeal a decision of the planning board and also appeal a decision of of the planning board.
Basically what happens is um you and you've seen it in the past. You know, you you've had objectors that make make claims uh that they're not happy with the result. They decide that they're going to take an appeal. It's done by way of what is known as a prerogative writ. The applica the person
who's deciding to appeal the decision uh files an action in le of prerogative rits. They request copies of the transcript. In a sense, does this appeal happen in court or here? >> No, we have no appellet jurisdiction. No, I'm saying where would somebody
>> superior court in court? I'm sorry. That's it. Goes to superior court as an action in lie of prerogative rates. >> Okay. It's it's a very shortcircuited procedure, right? In other words, what's happened is the court takes a look at
the record below. It generally generally except in extraordinary and limited circumstances if there's something wrong with the record generally looks at the record below and says to the to to the petitioner who's
referred to as a petitioner respondent private written what do you think the board did wrong why do you think that there the standard is that the decision was arbitrary for the wrong reason each one of those words means something different in the standard but it's a fairly high standard
And even if the court were to take a look at the record below, unless it were interpretation of law, they take a look at the record below. Even if the court would have said, you know what, I might not have I might not have voted in favor of this or I might
not have denied the delay relief. It cannot substitute its judgment for that of the board. It should sustain the judgment unless it finds it's arbitrary, rational, and reasonable. If it is a question of interpretation of law,
the court will not give as great a difference to municipal any school and it's the planning or zoning board of adjustment below will not give great as difference and you can figure it out. Courts look at law all the time. They give deference to the planning board and
the zoning board of adjustment because you had an opportunity to see live testimony. You had an opportunity to make credibility witnesses. You had an opportunity to hear your planner, their planner, their engineering, world engineer, all the witnesses from the public. And there's great difference
given to the to the land use board either planning or zoning board below because you're familiar with the local conditions much more so than you would do. The court generally does that and it's almost like an order to show cause. You
have the you have the facts. is usually not a factual dispute by way of had the hearing was approved. Here's what was done. Here's the transcript. And then you make your arguments on the law as to why it should stayain sustained or why it shouldn't be overturned. The judge
generally hears it. Generally requires filing of briefs by everybody. As I say, there's no factual testimony. There's no taking of additional testimony except in extraordinary circumstances. And the judge then says, "Come on in.
I've read your briefs. I have a couple of questions or I don't have a couple of questions. Now that you've had an opportunity to read the other side's brief, is there anything else that you want to to address? I'll either give you an opportunity to make a robot brief. Rarely do they do that or I'll just hear
you on an oral argument the just determination. You have 45 days to take an appeal of the lower court of the lower of the lower planning board or zoning board adjustment. 45 days from the date of publication of the decision.
Right now any let's say we approved an application this evening that's going to go out to the applicants council. They'll do a publishing whatever that date of publication is. It's 45 days from that date. If you miss that date
again unless there's extraordinary circumstances too bad for you. You don't get a taken. Okay. Any other questions? More than you ever need to know. Now you know it. Sorry to put that on the dashboard.
>> When you said filing the briefs, they file the brief and the planning board attorney files a brief. >> Yes. Sometimes the judge sometimes the judge asks well and well usually you're having three briefs. >> Petitioner, >> right? >> Board
and right. If let's say you have, let's put it this way. Let's say you have an objector. You're going to have objective file the brief. They're going to be the petition. You're going to have the applicant who was successful and you're going to have the board read a brief too. >> So let's say for example the last one
that was approved and somebody that did want it approved can also file appeal. >> They could. Yeah. Anybody anybody can file that appeal. >> So it doesn't necessarily have to be that person that went before their claim board. >> But in that instance there Yeah. Correct. Let's say we had denied the
relief and and the applicant said, "I don't think that's right. It' probably just be two briefs. The applicant's brief and my >> But let's say we the applicant got it." Yeah. >> But somebody that lived right down the street says, "I don't think they should." >> They get to they get to if they >> So within the 45 days of the
publication, they can file an appeal. >> Yeah. >> Even though they're not part of it, they're whatever. >> Yeah. The the standing to file an appeal is extremely >> easy. Very okay. So there's no limit on who can do it. Basically
>> there there are some but some but you don't need to know that >> right >> not not at this. >> If we get to one of those close cases I'll bore you. >> Anything else? >> Anyone have anything?
>> Hi. Hi Mr. Chairman. Hi everybody. Um, >> I don't I'd be happy to share with you anything that might be helpful if there were questions about why this came up. Um, I don't represent the entire council, but I think there is a sort of
understanding about what we introduced. Um, >> I think you should make it clear that you're not speaking councils, >> correct? Uh, traical one, two, three grand. I didn't do that. Um I I I just
wanted to address um I think it's clear what happened tonight and I appreciate the added discussion about process and appeals. It's all good stuff to know. Um the one thing I feel like as a resident I want to say both as your leaison and
as a resident it isn't just well let me back up and say um Mr. Anderson is correct. Like we know that this town cares deeply about its small town character and may perhaps
be the single most important um aspect of community life and how we identify as a community. And it isn't just one law that may or may not impact that character, but changing hours of
operation, um, heights of buildings, width of roadways, there are many things that can contribute to the slow erosion of that small town character. I think there's almost a strong
protectionist posture within our community around that small town. So with that in mind, what I want to convey to you today, whether you're hearing an individual application from a property owner and
they operate a business or a homeowner, and I've served on planning boards before, I have a planning background and some of you know that, but you guys are at all times representing not the property owner and the property owner's rights or that business. You
represent community's rights which are expressed in law. So that's what I want you to keep your eye on and this is me as a resident but also as one of the legislators who helps to adopt laws that hopefully continue to
advance the kind of community we all care about is that those laws have meaning and they help to make manifest the kind of community that we all want to live in. So representing or
caring about and being mindful that you represent the rights of the community, not necessarily the rights of the property owner. I'm sure that business or other businesses might want to open longer, but the community has rights too
and we look to you to guard that. >> Yeah. Anyone else? Hi. Hi. I'm Carolyn Ferguson, semicolonial court. Uh, I own a commercial property in town. My husband owns a business in town. I'm a member
I'm an officer of the Fair Business Association. We have 69 active member businesses. Uh, one of the things we do is work together to help each other understand the ordinances and the procedures. So, uh, two of I have two
questions uh, just related to that. So, first on the uh hours of operation, um I agree with what Donna said. U as a business owner, we read the ordinances to understand what we can and can't do. And when I looked at that ordinance, it
said the hours of operation, but to me, it was unclear. What does that mean? And I'll just put it simply, I realized that I can't sell the bagels before 6:00 a.m., but can I make the bagels? That to me was unclear. I I
think that's the language if I can offer if you're not if you have if you aren't inviting somebody into the building, you can bake. >> That's that's the whole point. That's that's the entire in the code that like if if the real concern is opening at 5:00 a.m. changes the character of a
small community, then allowing 15 bakers that come in to bake their goods at 3:00 a.m. changes the character of the neighborhood just the same way. And so there are inherent conflicts in that code and and so I think that's why there's the feeling that there is up
here amongst the border. Right. So there there are ways to holistically look at these codes to make it very simple for you to understand. Right. >> Right. We're seeking clarity. We're just regular people. We're not lawyers, but we want to be able to read the rules and understand them and operate our businesses. So and like I said, that's
just an example that to me that I would have a lot of other questions. Can I come in and do my taxes? But I'm just looking for clarity on that, you know, and I think that would be an improvement to that ordinance. Then um I mentioned that part of what we do is try to help
each other navigate the processes and the ordinances. So I would just like to kind of clarify what we saw today to make sure I understand it properly. Um I understand that uh what is governed here is a use on a piece of property, but not
who is doing that use. So that I think what we saw today, and you can stop me if I'm wrong, is that the piece of property as it was described to us today is approved to be used as a business office. And one of my
questions is like the use that means the list of permitted uses in the ordinances of which business office is one. So like they're allowed to operate a business office at that property. They
did not get a use variance and based upon view that in that zone the office is in permitted use. >> Okay. >> That type of office. >> Okay. And then really what I was wondering >> they were seeking site plan they weren't seeking the use
>> right since they were not seeking the use >> the use there >> the use is already there because use is in office. I mean although being vacant it's always been used in that manner. They did not seem to use the only way I could ask. >> So the outcome is that business
>> they're asking for here to be permitted that we appear. >> Okay. And the thing I'm looking for clarity on is when somebody comes back. So we said like this is Bill's business office when he sells it to Jim.
How would he come back? Like >> well if he's going to change the use they're going to change the use. They would have to come back or do they? >> No, they would. They >> assume it is assume it is a permitted use. Try to try I'm going to try to keep my engineer out of trouble.
>> Go ahead. Because assume it is a permitted use, but it is a different permitted use. >> What if it's the same use? If it's a land use, it will go before an initial foby zoning officer who will make a
determination as to whether or not he agrees with your characteration that it's the same. >> Okay. >> If he does if he or she does not agree then you then again assuming it's a permitted use
that's the development. Do you remember the exempt form that you and I discussed >> way back? That's the exact development where where Bridge would look at it and Joe would look at it and say, you know, this business operating and it has eight employees and the hours of operation are from 9 to5 and it has this and then they
would lay it next to the proposed business that says it's this use and they have four employees and these are their operations and then they would determine in the zoning office if that is in fact an exempt use that doesn't need to then come in front of the board
for plan approval to be granted based upon a new use. I have a concern that some of our ordinances may not have kept up with some of this. So like in our ordinances, the definition of change in use says there's no change in use when tenency, occupancy, or ownership
changes, but the use remains the same. >> So Bill's business office becomes Jim's business office. This says there's no change in use. >> Don't know what Bill and Jim do, >> right?
Think of it this way. It's a bed and breakfast. I sell my bed and breakfast to Mr. Anderson. He doesn't do anything except change the name on the deed. >> I'm no longer collecting money. He's now
collecting money. >> That should not be a change in use, but >> I think would not come before. >> It should not. It should not. Right. Still goes to the zoning officer. >> How would it do that? What is the
process? Just so we can understand. >> But I I think I think in that instance, we're getting to an area of providing legal counsel and that wouldn't be something that we should do for you and I'm not picking on you. >> Yeah. No, I understand
>> because you know sometimes you should seek your counsel in regards to those things. That doesn't mean that you don't come in and ask richly. Look, I'd like to know if specifically on these facts here and specifically on these facts here,
do I need any approvals from you guys? I think that's a different case. But in order to make a general statement about all ordinances without specific facts, it's hard to provide a comprehensive response on a hypothetical. >> Okay. And the business association has
submitted a list to the bureau with some areas that we feel are unclear. um like especially how does this process work >> and in fact we're not the body that inter right so I was just trying to understand because when we were discussing this it
was like oh you guys are okay you don't need parking but >> the next guy will come before us but >> it's it's always operating >> I don't think everybody said okay rec recognized practical realities of the site >> yeah yeah exactly well perhaps maybe the
burough planner should weigh in on some of this as We have rural planner. >> Mhm. Absolutely. >> Okay. >> Not the board planner or planner. >> And who's that? I mean, still >> I mean just you know >> different role but
>> so yeah like said we're just trying to like I saw this play out today but in my head I was like given what I know I can't figure out how that new owner would actually come before you guys. Um, but we'll continue to work with the
borrow to >> clarity on that. >> Our zoning officer would tell us if the zoning officer comes to a decision that it doesn't have to go before a board, we don't know about, >> right? And my question is how does the matter even get to the zoning officer?
Like there's not a process I'm aware of that would cause that business to >> the realtors call us, attorneys call us, the prospected business owner calls us, the people that live in town call. >> But legally, what's the requirement for somebody? >> They're doing their due diligence before
they buy a business or buy a building or >> we don't have a change. >> It's not a perfect system. We we'll give you that. Yeah. Yeah. >> Like we don't have a commercial tenency change rule ordinance, which some towns do, and that to me would explain how
somebody would >> Well, there's a CO required. >> These these are things to council. >> Okay, great. Okay. >> Once they change that ordinance, >> we'll get a chance to review. >> Yes. And Brian is our business liaison,
and you know that we've been seeking answers on this for a long time. So, thank you. Anybody on the on the in the ether? >> No. >> No. >> I'll make a motion and close.
>> Second.