Thank [Music] you. Act time organization here press on January 31st on January 23rd, 2025.
That board continues to public and has been available to the public is on file copy on the session to the public
information secretary. Uh I will make statement that we're not uh we moved here tonight because of a problem. My understanding is that there was notice that was posted. There is currently notice posted on the board in a regular meeting and we've confirmed
with regard to that issue and we're going with regard to right. Yes, we are. We've efforted to get notices out the postings. Hopefully anybody that even goes to the other location will walk over here. Yeah, sounds good. Thank you.
Before proceeding with the following tonight, I'd like to say a few words to the applicants are in the audience authority. The board entity has limited authority set.
[Music] [Music] This is the responsibility of the police officer. This board deals with violence and landing spots or denial by an applicant is never entitled to
exception. It must meet specific criteria required and limit by satisfying certain [Music] parts. Word approved is always upon the applicant to show that he or she is
entitled to specifically testing. The applicant is proved that the deviation from the regulations purposes of the ordinance and that the deviation will substantially outweigh any detent or authorized temporary or unique personal situations. Roll call. Mr.
Neznney here. Mrs. D'Angelo here. Mr. Van here. Mr. Forte here. Dr. Lawer here. Mrs. N here. Mr. Canelo here. Mr. Shetti here. Mr. of the flag United States of
America stands nation under God for the first on the agenda tonight is a stop matter. My understanding Sheila is that council or the applicant um advised they were not prepared for students be
and requested that we move them to the June right that's correct and what is the date of that meeting June 5th June okay um did Mr. son offer a stipulation of contract. Yes, he did. Yes, I did.
Excellent. Okay. Um, does anybody carry the self matter to uh all Mrs. D'Angelo? Mr. Brian Aluse Mr. Fora yes Dr. Wer yes Mrs.
Newman yes Mr. Conella yes Mr. later. Yes. Okay. Next is an emergency like to the chair if I could just make some brief well make some
brief statements with regard to this matter. Uh by way of procedural history this this will originally carried from the November 14, 2024 to February 6 of 2025. At that hearing, the board took
jurisdictions and marked exhibits uh A1 through A7. Um I believe revised exhibit A1A also with ZB1 and ZB2A. Uh the engineering reports it was then carried
from the April 3rd, 2025 meeting. No hearing or testimony was taken carried to today's date. Um, in this instance, we have additional exhibits. If I could mark those. We'll start with A8. This is a survey by
Alfred Williams dated July 13, 1988. Does not appear to be under seal under sealed. Uh, A9 are some hand drawings undated. A10 is the certification that I've
received and reviewed uh from Mr. Diseas board member who had not previously sat in on these meetings. He has provided a certification of absent member that he has examined the record indicating that he reviewed the meeting
note that he also had an opportunity to review the uh video recording and that he is prepared if we reach a matter to vote on the matter this evening. Fully apprisel excuse me of those matters
before the board didn't pass. Um as I say we have additional exhibits A8 as a survey that's A10. Um also we're going to mark A1A which are five sheets
of architectural submissions. These are revised to March 26 2025. Five sheets. Uh the first sheet in the first sheet of five uh has the tax map uh area breakdown plot plan and the
200 ft elevation. Second of five has the first floor existing. Three of five second floor existing proposed and second floor existing. Four of five are the u different elevations of the of the site and five of five is floor plan. I
don't have any other exhibits that all of the exhibits that you would have. Why don't you keep your voice? Use your outside version. Excuse I have two resolutions in 1985 and 1989 for everyone if they want to see it copies. Okay, we will mark the
two resolutions to take the first one. They're attached. They're attached. We mark them as one. Are they Are they A5 and A6? They were previously marked. You're right. We have those. Everyone has these. Refer to them.
You can put everything you want previously more if you're going to do that. Yes, I'm And the other exhibit we have is ZB3, the engineering report number three of April 15, uh, 2025 over signature of Mr.
I believe that that is the universe of all activities that we have for this evening. The only other thing I would ask of you is to spare the stand test you raise your right hand so I swear affirm the testimony you give
before the truth or truth. Yeah. Yes, I do. Yes, I do. Yes. Okay. All the witnesses there's one I can get out of now. last time we don't have
um so before we start I just wanted to ask for set the stage for us with regards to variance by the new plans um exactly what is it that we're considering? Sure.
Um, you want me to summarize the existing or the current proposal and then do you want to work back to how it changed from the previous one? So, I think I'd like to start with what's being proposed tonight [Music]
[Music] understand. So the application tonight is simply a second story addition um directly above the existing footprint of the house. So where the roof slopes, they're essentially lifting it up on the
south side. The relief associated with that [Music] um of course is the use variance um the Dvarian for the the two houses on one lot. So that's the expansion of the correct. Yes. Um, rear yard setback 30
ft is required. The house exists about 1 and 1/2 ft from the rear yard setback or rear yard property line. This addition is 25 1/2 ft. Um, so there's more house in between it, but that addition is technically in this the rear yard setback. And then floor area is the
second one. 2200 square feet is required. This proposal is 4,095 square feet. And that's a combination of both of the houses together. Um, and then on page one of my letter, I summarize the the reductions
with the current application. [Music] Um, the following has been elim the following need for relief has been eliminated. Sideyard setback, combined sideyard setback, and lot coverage. And then the following has
been improved but still requires relief. That is the rear yard setback um was previously proposed at three and a half feet. Now it's 25 and a half feet. And the total floor area was previously 4,470 square ft and is now proposed at
4,095 square ft. sheet application helping us keep our family caregiving allowing us to move forward with these plans that will give our family space without any consequences in River. We took the chairman's advice and consider we
consider the board's comments very carefully. We have provided to one group at the southwest corner of the home. The current space is not in the condition. It's a storage area. So the construction work will allow us to make the current space liveable by adding two small
bedrooms. Uh just to repeat what Jordan said, we require this variance for following reasons. We live on performing lots of construction within 25.5 step back versus 30 ft is required and
maxim. Um I just want to address the matter of the non-conforming lot that come up at the last meeting. Um that's why I have these exhibits in the mayor and you have seen them. So in 1985 approved um turning what was a dated
shed and bringing people home um that would no longer be an expert in the community and the court acknowledged that exceptional situation was unique to subjective and to deny result in the first homeowner. In 1989 there were
another edition to make it fun. Both times acknowledged the non-conforming nature of the property but concluded that positive factors outweighed the negative and that there would be no detriment to the neighborhood force. Specifically, the 1989 resolution
granted to no residential use behind our property commercial space and they are not and we are not sending down the perimeter of this house and this still applies to ouration. While our hardship may be different than the 1989, we do agree to further
consideration. Uh Jordan's letter acknowledged our positive aspect of the property and that it's particularly suited for the use and also acknowledge the circumstances that allow the zoning regulations. By building the store, we're avoiding the environment of stress and tearing down home by reducing the
impact of waste and preventing the scroll building. Though we assert that there are no negative impacts. We're in the back not next to anyone. Behind us is a commercial property. It's not stepped up. Our property value will go
up and we you're keeping a unique property fair haven and giving us the opportunity to restore to tear down and develop unnecessarily have here any plans or have any questions. So So before we go, Mr. I'd like to ask you when you were
starting you talked about 3,900 and 4,000 number. Could you go back to that and clarify? My understanding is going to be currently 106 with regard to resolution. So I think we had looked at these struggle to
understand uh their meaning. I think I was left understanding that in 85 which committed was a ship. But are you understanding that 1985 that Yes. We have a
plan and it's adjustment is to remove the fact that it construction the new construction um plans are attached to our house.
1989 they added an extra [Music] at the last hearing everyone had the resolution and I think it was very difficult to read through it and actually understand what it was trying to describe but the plans have since been opra and submitted and presented as
an exhibit tonight. I think that brings a lot of clarity as to what was there previously 1985, what was done in 1985, and then what was done in 1989 to essentially get to the point where we're at today. 89.
So let's break them down separately because I think it's important. So there resolution for purpose of the record. A9 is the hand drawn document that in the lower right hand corner it says
Christine Anderson and Michael Schneider owns 25 church street fair haven estimated cost $5,000 and that that one correlates to 1985 whiches
no my the marking is A9 referring to the A5. Okay. Okay. In the resolution, one of their words that addition is not being
shed but is actually living space question construction. will remove the eyes and increase the value of the subject premises. I I think before that though it says the proposed construction will not extend the existing perimeters of the subject
house. So I I've heard this I understand it to take a shed out and replace it with a new Well, can I ask a question? What is the house? We're living in a house. building in the home that we're asking to have
the door on. It was built from vision. I mean, what I don't I think I'm missing what the issue is that it's not a shed. You live in a home. Well, I I think the issue was clarifying where you started
and what we started with is in 85 the board permitted an expansion of the house through this resolution and I'm trying to understand whether that's true and we can talk about plans as well and then nine something else to talk about
so we can understand where you sit today relative to it doesn't have to be as positive as anything particular but if the assertion is that each resolution put in place anymore. Let's just cut that out so that everybody knows that
that's one more thing. In the 1985 resolution, it says the existing subject structure, which is the shed, is in a dilapidated condition and does not have proper foundation or footings or floor. The proposed construction will conform in all matters manners to the existing building
code. So, it shows top on the left shows existing power, right? SH, right? That's their past that files within the
legal I think we're asking how we how we can interpret the file resolution relative to whatever is done based on yes and you have this it's Okay.
[Music] Okay. So, the resolution didn't have this attached to me as a file from the So, these are this a photo copy of plans that are diverse file. Okay. And you think about these plans
there's some clarity as to whether or not there's a shadow as part of the doctor. So Todd in the 85 it says two residential structures contained on one lot. Front house has a front set back of
front house on the side of the back garage has a sideyard of block. rear house has rear yard of 4.5 ft or 30 ft or the left. It refers to it as a house and it says specifically two residential
structures are contained on one. So everybody should understand that because the property is non-conforming, if the shed need to be removed and needed to be replaced as a shed, it would get done through an approval board.
And if it was a part of the house, I know these resolutions are vague, but if it was living space, I would expect that to be clear. And because the plans say this the existing shed is going to be shed. What I interpret this is that a shed will approve and I don't know
whether that shed is now space or not but I don't have any resolution connects as being a shen Could it have been a capital building and now referring to as
home going back? Well, I'll tell you what. Why don't we be 85 as you interpret it different ways? If I could to the chair and to the apple the 85 resolution that you're referring to is marked as
A5. Okay. So it'll be as opposed to people jumping in on different resolutions. The 85 resolutions marked in our documents as A5 consists of one, two,
three, three pages of a resolution and a roll call vote November 985. Is the applicant with you so far? Have you the draw your attention on 85? I don't want to spend much time with 85
because the applicant needs to put their proofs on. But I draw your attention to the page three of the resolution on A5 of 1985 road. There are no residential uses to
the rear of the subject property. The proposed construction will not extend to the exist will not extend the existing parameters of the subject house. The proposed construction will remove an eyesore and increase the value of the
subject premises as well as the surrounding premises. That's the 85 resolution. That's how it ends. What do you think that means? Excuse me. What do you that means? Is it approved as a shed or space? I I don't know what was
exactly approved. I just know that as of 85, they're saying there are no residential uses to the rear of the subject property. I that's that's the commercial property behind it. Okay. And I and I think that that's what that means with regard to justifying what
they did that there in the second page it says two residential. This is where I think things are getting two residential structures contained on one line. That's number one. Number two front house has front yard setback of
20.6 6 ft where 25 ft are required. Three, front house has sideyard of 4.3 ft where 5t required. Four, garage has sideyard of 1.9 ft where 5t are
required. Five, rear house as rear yard 4.5 ft where 30 feet are required. It does not look as though relief was granted for the residential
structures unless you have a different interpretation. No, no, it does not look I wasn't there. There's a there's a telephone on the back part of the property next to my garage for specifically the back house. So like
that means like the electric company came in telephone. I don't think that's I don't think the question is that wrong. I think the resolution clearly identifies the D5 structures on the property. The question is whether or not the area that the shed had been it was removed and
replaced and whether or not that was approved as an expansion of limited space of the house and I think we can leave it here that it is unclear based on the resolution exactly what was approved and I think I've already explained what I figured out interpretation and I
understand so why don't we talk about the what is that that is marked as A6 in your record and a companion. I I believe what the applicant is representing A6 is the 89 resolution and I believe what the
applicant was representing to the board is that the hand drawing which is marked A9 is what that will contend with. See that that's the thing is it looks to me like
these lands that are attached to these two exhibits have been reversed. Okay, they may have and that's why I'm trying to clear the record as to what the state of the record is right now. Is the applicant saying that the
and again is the applicant saying that this hand drawn I've looked at it a million times. What is the applicant's position that A9 in this record represents? Do these be the
resolutions? Is that 85 or is that 89? I I interpreted as being 85. Okay. I interpreted the A-frame, which is this one, which is the main of the house now, which is a big
great room. And that's exactly 825 square feet. So you think this is the 1989? I do. Yes. That's but that's attached to 1985. That
is from the burrow. Okay. The section where the shed was4. you. Okay. So, so let's try this. So, the drawing that is not sketch, this one right here, which makes reference to
existing shed and new shed. Correct. And the other attachment which is copy of the plan is in relation to the E9 approval. And the 89 approval is for the addition of 825 as
Mr. when you look at this sketch. Yes. Is it clear? Do you want you see resolution on this plan? What I what I'm trying to discern is whether or not that document has been has he has the same
sh. So I can tell you in 85 this was all that was there. 85 they redid this and then we added these this deck here in 89. This is
mass. Okay. So here's what I think you guys. I think that this building exists. I think the shed is here and I think it was approved as a shed and if this is it and they run anything inside because there's no such thing approval for doing
any of these other changes and I think when this happened this was probably evident to the board as to what was when I looked at this I seen four sides of the house there's no shed it appears to be integrated into the house at that time. So in ' 89 when they approved it I
think they might have either acted yes in the fact that or they entirely missed it but I think what's positive is that in ' 89 we know that this is this is representative of Charles today okay if if I can for purposes of the
record I'd like to mark that docu that document as A1 Okay. Brand from 1989. Yeah. Yeah. Mark that as A1 which will
be the which is being represented as a plan from 1989 which by Benjamin Gaudy. Gouty. Spelling of that. Uh G A U D Y. Okay.
That looks like one of two. That's sheet 102. The second sheet be the elevation sheet. Correct. Is the elevation. Okay. Thank you. The 89 revolution got an understanding
of what was happening. They think that it was 35 years ago and so I hope we can all sit on the rules and want
to close. We want we want to qualify this witness. So Mr. was previously sworn and as prior hearing. Okay. for architectural not the plan. Oh, okay.
Um, in the prior plan, we square off the rear of the first floor and we're going to rebuild the first floor. In the current plan, we are going to leave the first tax. Uh we're there as a buyer
there and knock back down to where the recovery was. The the original living space is exactly the buds room, master bedroom, secondary bedroom, kitchen, uh laundry room,
bathroom, and back porch with the uh shower that goes to bathroom. So repairs and [Music] replace and then on the second floor is
a roughly half of the the volume with the kitchen and the area that we aren't going to touch on the rear. Well, we our original proposal was roughly an
addition that would have that that large full second floor edition. What we are now proposing is two doors, an extension of the existing loft which we are 4 and 1/2 ft in beyond the
uh 10 and 1/2t height. So that's our ask is uh the 4 1/2 ft by 24 ft dorm. The dormer would be two roughly 10 by 10 six bedrooms with closets access from the
original existing loft to the kitchen and the living room which was one of the parts of the house that the church was talking about the existing law. Correct. That was above the
825 condition. Correct. Where did that that was in that? That was part of the 89. It's above the 825 additional 825. If you look at the plans or you can
clearly see that there was included in that. Yeah, they may have measured footage different. Yeah. So, in those plans there's a staircase there appears to be off area.
Um and I think you did confirm that the house today is considered correct. So what they consider how they consider the law is
water saying this is what's there can explain to me what we're looking at crosssection of the house where the block is And our golf orientation your plan. Where is the existing walk area? Where does that be?
The existing walk area is here. The cross start from here this way. Okay. Mr. Carl, your plan is on the right post. Correct. So the bedrooms are going to take
place over. Correct. or extending them off to the east to the exterior wall on the brick floor. But you're not proposing to add anyone on the second story. You're proposing to add warmer soil in those
areas. Correct. But that's really a technical measurement and calculation based on the new. The truth is that if you look at it simply the addition of the dormer and the elevation of that ceiling money
doesn't change the floor space one just well but but if without the two and a half you could put a door in change that height there's no change in the calculation square footage and you're
not clear well no actually you are Let's go. Okay. If this were everything [Music] else, we're not proposing that any in the rear area. They're proposing
a low route probably about a tra pitch. We'll be on south side which is our line setback. So we're being at as uh invasive on the neighbors as we can. Here's the east here the south side
view. Um this second floor wall comes out flush with the first floor wall. We've got two um windows because that's what will fit with the windows which is required to have. We are 24 ft wide which gets us
two roughly 10 foot and six bedrooms and two foot. area. Um the plate will be set but starting at its relatively
Yes. And the issue would have been that had we cut back to the window. Um so we would have either gone on both sides or the on this side basic to just go along with it. Um
and we're using a a traditional a slope that can be traditional shingles on the theater. So that is under the at the rear. at the front. I have some photos that we have
some photos last month. So, sorry. If I'm looking at the second house from the street and I try to find the woman, is it on the left hand side of the house? the height.
Yes. And it's 7 ft at the place at the exterior wall. It goes up from there to I don't know the right people here to speak to whenever the university Mr. Cron can ask you a couple questions
just to um kind of further um understand how you arrived at this design. Um, did you consider putting the dormer on the left side versus the right so that it wouldn't be seen as much in the street? And then the second question is, did you consider extending the loft
floor which is already calculated in your square footage so that it wouldn't be a net increase? It would just pretty much be net zero but more usable space. to your second question which was last month. We did not do that
because we would have the wall would have ended up with at the 2 and 1/2t line. We would have had trouble getting a window and short of having more flat roof which is just aesthetically less pleasing. Um and as
far as the north side goes, we've got the open on the north side. We've already got the floor area over the bedroom. So didn't didn't make sense to do that. But I thought I mean aesthetically that's the answer. But logically this would be the answer. And
then doing that I I think you probably would have another setback variance too. Is that right? Again it's resolve from here and still so you you probably wouldn't see it as much but you're creating additional the
need for additional relief. Yeah. We wouldn't need to study and it's the intent to keep people off the space the way it is. You're not proposing to construct [Music] anything to that side. As you do it this
way, you're affecting less of the house. Correct. Yes. the staircase. So here the stairs come up. [Music] Sorry.
[Music] Anyone? Okay. Any questions or comments regarding my application? all the way forward and then we're you swear when you stop. I'll swear you in. You
slely swear. Affirm the testimony you about to give us. Want to be the truth. The whole truth. Talk about the truth. It is. Can you state your name for the record? Spell in your last name. Katie Bryan. Thank you. Thank you. I'm at 15 Church Street. I live next door to the Marthus
for eight years and I fully am on board with what they're asking to do. I think it's very minimal compared to what's going on. Which side? I'm actually where they announced the church.
So you're closer to are you? Yeah. Is that good evening sir this morning to get the board of truth please ask you about live meeting thank
you I do 19 street which is directly to the north of this property. Um I just want to say I have two daughters and I would not enjoy them having to walk in the
same so I am behind this or I [Music] guess 19 Not. Good evening, sir. Welcome. You saw this testimony for the board. Be
the truth. Truth. I do. Could you state your for the record calling your last name? Kyle Roi. R O G. Yes. I am 33 Church Street. So I'm going to be directly south on the side of the
project taking place. Uh I've been neighbors residents for over 5 years now. I say um I appreciate this meeting about character but their family is wonderful. They're two lovely little girls who aren't that little anymore. Uh
and they're wonderful neighbors. I would plan that they have 14. I'm not sure the model 33 church I share the exact entire property. Thank
you. Anyone else? Do you have any questions? That's all. I'm asking questions. Thank you. Um [Music] well a big red last
[Music] time and I think that are not retained. You think that should consume space with the improvement of this plan?
I don't think [Music] I think the difference between I appreciate the scale of that Paul we have a lot of legacy in this mass but
they're sorry I think I I think it's minimal act but I believe that it's already it's an interesting
[Music] country watch take and I appreciate your effort do that also help me understand yeah last I think to that
end space I know that um people who come to this all the time don't necessarily understand why we're the fact that this is an expansion of previous use is why we are doing
And it's just the nature of it. We're not allowed to take into account that you guys are great people and pretty necessarily what I'm saying. I think the board certainly appreciates not only that you listen to thought and
compromise in terms of what you wanted, but that you you made the existing nonformance situation work better. And I think as a result, I know that it's not easy, but I think that we come to that makes sense in compromise and I certainly know I appreciate
[Music] it. Um, and that's all. The only thing I would say is final approved um that I would like to include inside of a resolution that we
test for that. Okay. Because what we have here is a house that was originally non-conforming and then got expanded several times. So if there are plans to expand it further, I
think there it would be hidden entirely from you know on the other side. The reason to put them on the sub is because you want to keep that area that's lofted. And so I want the resolution to make clear that it was in reliance on the
commitment to do that. Um that we found that the accommodation the compromise made sense. Um and I think I want to say that we acknowledge the 85 and the 89 resolutions and that there's some clarity not speaking to what happened at
that time. I think it's clear9 that whatever that's 35 [Music] years. So there is the next who you are
I have [Music] [Music] been but it could be and moment Uh so that was motion. Yeah. And it was based on the accuracy of testimony
[Music] and Mr. Yes, Mrs. D'Angelo. Yes, Mr. Ryan. Yes, Mr. Bora. Yes, Dr. Ber. Yes, Mrs. Newman. Yes.
And Mr. Leer. Yes. All right. Whatever. Okay, that's the only copy. Can I go for [Music] I was thinking the same thing.
So um just to bring everybody up to date um I think everyone knows that it was the third or fourth grind that I put two years ago We adopted new ordinances. Um but of course
we recently committee and the mission of that committee is to review not only how important is working uh but to consider
others which may require some attention. uh Jordan has list of things and we'll move to that. The other committee may not form but is in the process of getting together is a committee that will look at the zoning
business that will be different. Um but the focus of those meetings will be similar in that the the goal is to evaluate how the match current standards and to try to evaluate
where changes might be needed um and to implement those changes through the development of replacement or so in that effort on everybody um that I request that you
come in tonight with an idea of three specific ordinances if you uh these committees take a look at so that you try and see uh the council committee with some ideas um that can be discussed
at the committee level and considered um because Jordan is definitely I think go first um to put together this over time so patient sharing it and has fumbled through some of the stuff we had to deal with because we haven't
yet with that sharing. Thank you. So the first one is related to principal structures and how we measure the setback. I think everyone's familiar with what we typically use
which is about six inches above um that beam a stair or anything like structured. So to that point, um I believe it originated from the accessory
structure section. Yes. So the original section is 30-7.8 um letter H which has since been removed in 2022 and It's pretty long. A porch deck patter similar
structure as part of the principal structure shall be conform to the yard requirements structure set constructed not more than 6 in above grade. It shall adhere to the yard requirements for accessory structures. Um so that's where the
six and even though it's been eliminated we don't really have anything else to refer to. So we stop it and I think all the architects they're used to that too. So we measured the six in I guess it has a
little stairs for the most part. I measured the base stairs and I don't disagree. I think that's that's how I just before we go into what was released to be clear that ordinance did
not revis it was taken out. So where we found something about the it was thrown out the bathroom. So Jordan how how is this typically handled? Where do people
usually where usually establish that to the face of the building to the face of their building. Is there settings? Not always. It's a lot more um outside there's stairs pushing
off the street. Those are disregard. I'm not suggesting that. No. at one time now I know it's facing um I
branch the setback is 25 ft my zone is 25 ft to the front of my house so at some point in every other I'm thinking that the whole measurement so you stand all that is
forward is that okay so The big problem with this is when basements come out, and there's a house that does this on Lake Avenue, and so they use three pass foundation, and they need about seven or eight steps to get up. And what happens
is that the taller that first floor is stairs. And it permits you to sh because the perspective is off because it's closer to me. So at some point in that thing is when
we change that that's more than basically prior because as long as I know that I can call that's setbacks too we can add a Definition
definition of the ordinance. It says definition setback. The distance from the property line about 14 of the structure constructed 6
in and then set back to face there so that we're not discussion is it a 5 in stair is it 6 in stair that we And what they did is I remember it was
they create they step to get another step we know. So sure that's what I was going to suggest is that if we have to fix it I would think it makes sense to be the face of whatever the building is that
first the 6 in and basically people can get a 12 to 8 in leg up by sinking that stair just below 6 in and they usually slightly um and that's something that we don't want to encourage. Um the committee will be
discussing it and then the council will consider a change. But I I think we establish what the problem is. Um does anybody wrongly about team is just having the
first sett? So let me ask you though if you you know change this rule if you have some more houses that are in existing we're not changing the rule keeping the information that we have if you're
defining it somewhat differently saying it's going to trigger a lot that we have to see because it was previously measured to the second the announce the first and now they have aist California. Well,
here let's play it out. So, an existing house has an existing layout, structure, stairs, porches, front side. That's all grandfathered as it sits. You can replace that in time without any variance. The only time that you would
have to come to the board for awareness is if you were going to modify that in a way that was inconsistent, which would mean that you would be changing it from what's currently okay. That process will probably warrant discussion, right? It's
gonna it's changing something interior and you may want to work with somebody something to come in for a step but I I can't as I'm thinking about it as resolutions as a setback and you
may come in and we [Music] look at all the conditions you say something [Music] question pool right question that closely
property is appropriate changes you want to do it just construction so that way those houses don't have yeah it's going to be well tech and stop
that never came to the board was ever in these plans that we receive when they are no place ever comes up where you is here.
So nothing happened. I think I think pre-existing nonconforming Frank's issue about not having to think and I think that's a question whether the saying is
going to pertain to audience. Yeah. be mixed up the same and it seems more final setback. I'm saying the final word setback. Yeah. Final word
setback. It is a setback all setbacks to this partition. If anybody thinks it's just me, the last time they showed me, you guys think the same way, you get super
[Music] You know, that's that's Yeah. What are the setbacks? Yeah. Right. Seven on one side. 16 total. So where you're saying, right, I've got a 7 foot
set. I included a 5 foot wide stairwell to go down into the basement. Now two people, right? And you're asking something that significance inside this house.
It won't come out. You can measure it stairs. at all to me that's it should be that so maybe six in basic stair or subsurface [Music]
structure like you said a setback it seems like it's more because we're like because getting around the rule so it's more so the purpose the setbacks that
happen in a matter of ground. So the purpose of setback is to create a building to create a building. So you're trying to build a box within which you can build your house. The idea of the setback is allowing space to join
property. And so it isn't just a matter of where you have staircase or a porch. It's a matter of observing that vacant space between you and your neighbor. And the closer the houses are together, the more you can appreciate
the important That's existing structure, right? So, it really should be up to disappear stairwell down the outside wall that's foundation.
for everything ask you a mass leading up to those stairways. [Music] are not there
[Music] iss around But you know, so maybe anything I'm asking the most questions so that the
committee can think through those exceptions. On to number two. On to number two. Couple years ago. So, just references to habitable area um AC units and generators in the
accessory structures actually included in the accessory structure section we do as well as women let's go Yeah. So, excuse me. A compressor is an accessory structure and
therefore must abide by the principal building step back. Oh, okay. And what is it? Sorry. No answer when I submitted when I put my sele
um I had to do it in the principal structure. That is also how I supposed to be working. So as I bought the model that I did in the wall which
well good news though is that the accessories are actually easier to achieve right it is but I don't think that's what it is right now. So here's here's the difference. If we use the principal setback in that R5 zone for
seven minimum, you are not supposed to put your AC compressor into that second area. That's very narrow 7 by 7 total two houses. You're supposed to do it through the back. If Jordan's interpretation as an accessory the accessory at that point it would
actually be smaller and you might open up a window put those on but but to put it to put it into perspective if you have a shed or these other things much here and large it can
also be in that same [Music] super far. Listen, I think I think you make it I think you make it full. I think you make it the AC units in I think you need some play around it because it's not
permanent there right usually does it for a certain period of time I'm sorry someone put that right I agree I think the ordinance should require that place that be placed slightly off property just
The accessory of the business is reasonable. You're right. People will put it wherever they want. And you move too. So even if they has to do with your fair access compressor some people put that
five. So accessories. [Music] So then if it's an accessory then it's 15. Right. Right. So there's actually in ordinance with regards to the bud
requirements which I think will require them to raise it. Gordon's suggestion was well Jordan was saying consider it an accessory structure and having said that and I think that it need to be considered whether that's the way it
should be or not but I think that the 15 limitation would necessarily be fixed by the I think that openness kind of lays on top the mandates that is [Music]
certain no that's actually But the ordinance as I it's been a while but the ordinance that I call being adopted is that if you have a 35 foot height requirement on the house and you have to be up 10 ft because of the club
you now go up to 45 they add plus 10 and so with regard to this if you have a shed or accessory shelter 15 I think it would come out all the same [Music] to the chair may I gently suggest that
maybe that the cut off is making a determination between a what an accessory use is and what an accessory structure is. That may give you an opportunity to
to bifrocate the issue that you seem to be stuck on as to whether or not it's playground equipment versus a shed. I I throw that out so that you can one descri buildings and structures and then
max buildings or structural height. So lock them together. But if you really do want to if they're together then not within 5 accessory
building together in any res less than 5T. So then your your AC compressor can be from the fence your private but okay is I just want to ask I know people always take really good notes for
minutes but could you try and take particularly good notes with regard to what we're talking about yeah I'm trying to do my best but I'm a little bit concerned about the acoustics in here and this equipment so I really won't know until I listen to it. I'm even
having a hard time, you know, hearing everybody myself. So, it's challenging. We're gonna have to see how that and Jordan give us as much clarity as we
can take advantage of the discussion. Is is a chess structure? If it's less than 2 ft, it's it doesn't count towards any setback. It's greater than 2 ft.
that is called like that shuts out less from actual [Music] columns and [Music] that was coming up which looks
massive considering side there's a chimney which is which approaches on the 20 and the larger it does that and we say if it's 2T or less
you're okay well Back to number four pools. I don't think pool of women that would be an accessory structure. Um I've been told that accessory
structure setback is a pool pad. Not to the pool. It's not fine that way anyway. But that's a lot of [Music] Yeah. theoretically you could be five or 10 ft of the property boundary and then
you put a deck into the property to the dem. This is the way it works in the vehicle. You put the pool in and then so you can put your pad
down and that doesn't in the right spot and then don't p. But it doesn't all at the same time didn't get picked up on and you're suggesting they tie it together and make clear
right and then uh impervious covers for cool water typically always impervious pool water dodance that has suggest no running if that fills up.
Yeah, I totally get it. I'm just saying what is it? It's nothing and she mean that it's not the pool. Well, I think up. Well, consider the
pool that goes around the pool. So we have a lot definition total coverage include all services access driveway. Sunday or
in the winter time. Yeah. She's I'm not saying she is living room. I would define it as a room that unheated. [Music] window screen.
I think control should be part of the definition whe control should definitely go towards the definition of being countered as yeah so so let's start with let's start
with a preseason room is permitted it was not considered a cable space the time that we use that provide it was open. So if you had screens that would be okay. If you had knee walls but they couldn't go all the way up and you
couldn't have glass. You clearly could not keep or that space that much was clear. And what you got was architects that you would have something within a house. We could just see through it. What they would later add once that was
built is they would get custom glass it would find its way to the heated and cool maybe split or what have you and we'll put baby heat in and don't let anybody see it. So that was before and we knew it was a problem because it's
clearly but now isn't there an additional problem based on the new definition of area didn't complicate it for you no so so I have a knee walls screens open
on one side and was attached to the house or roof is it floor area So the question is how does it differ? I was originally thinking counts, but then how do you account for
that? And is there walls? Yeah, I think it needs to be clarified with you. Obviously, the way we consider it is square, but if it's just screened in a three porch, it's not going to be
living. So that should be really counted as a porch too. repeat saying if it's closed in full size then it's if it's porch it's not an issue right I mean it is the problem has more than you see and
isn't counted so you wind up what could be 400 ft which is not what I'm thinking is that we like let's not have rece we have in one
set area there to be probably the first floor in a screen in porch. It's below the master bedroom and bathroom. Oh, that's one
particular part of that's because you can build an elevated second story, put it up and that bully is going to exist. You can do that. That's not what we're talking about. We're talking about a standalone room
that we traditionally made as three season and I think we're comparing that to porches. We don't consider that porch front as part of area because we're part of the building. My original thought is we
defined it as states that will happen. And then I went further and I said that figure out how we
define that on your roof, right? is going to have to say with and I think the thing that don't have time where it could be simple But we know that we know that
today is I don't like I actually think we should go for a porch and we should use a porch in these areas by four screens I actually but another idea is we want to
consider how much you can have. So how much [Music] cover doesn't exceed the main
the exterior wall. Yeah, that solves per. Yeah. Well, yeah. So as long as the covering of satisfy over there was a discussion of whether or not it's
no and idea is that this is the costly it's not purposeful. It's just what wiring that's already included in the house where it's very extended power. I like your
thoughts and then if it doesn't know I I do like that. I think we're called no six feet wide by 4 feet and no side other than the old structure
structure which is the dash. There's a total porch. I think I think since you're since no matter whether it's porch or preseason room, you have a calculation for
coverage, impervious coverage, building coverage. then fix your formula and say, "Look, if it if it encroaches into a side, rear, or front yard by greater than either a percentage or footage, depending on what you
want, and it I I think you can work off of that definition to make your distinction between porch three and if it exceeds beyond that formula, then it's habitable area." a suggestion. You don't have to
resolve everything this evening. I think definition and then tie that back to the floor area inserted. I think that covers a real speaker. Yes. And we have nations.
Yeah. We have had applications in the past that we did not have. Well, I it seems to me that the definition the definition made it easier to do that
as I also think that that's subject to a challenge and an aggressive lawyer could come in and say this 400 square foot room is a priest room. It's not pable. It's not poor area and it is ever been
considered. I think clean up. [Music] So this is basic sellers and just kind of set the stage for why it's so important on my end is any application that increases area means you first
establish what the existing is add to. So I need to know if it's a basement or I think when the definition were updated years ago they were intended to tell this for new construction only and that's what the finished floor
elevation definition did. Okay. However, you know, I'm immediately going to the basement and sell our definition and all it speaks to is being greater than or less than 30 in. So I think we that was an overstate when we created this and yes it was targeted instruction
that going forward needs to be borrowed instruction because but as we found obviously that brought up a whole lot of new security people and that is not the intention and I think we need to clarify that I don't think it served any purpose
to add especially anything to correct solution for any for any subservice structure built prior year 2022. He shall evaluate his father and identify
what and you remove all and they're handation and it's not new to not 500 you know what I mean it's below do you need a pre
2022 and post 2022 definition or is it just good enough to say definition I guess the problem is if you fast forward many years it's not easy to know what post22 on submission so so currently I have a lot
because they don't provide the topography to establish the finish which then establish so the issue that I was thinking about is million
addition and your old base ends up 48 in and you want your first all of the same. In order to do that, you don't necessarily need a variance or you necessarily need anything underneath. Right. Well, well, that's really the question.
Is it is it all for the or is that necessary going out? So I mean this situation someone wants to maybe put a fixed staircase into their attic and they're really just focused on the attic. When I get it, it's additional area
which is zero counts. But I'm telling them they need to get surveyed of property building that doesn't make sense. Okay, we need to fix that. So it seems to me that that would
only change to the first, right? because we added you should make that negotiations relative to other is where it is what you know what he's saying what they
say I don't think it's hard Listen to every [Music] other denial letter which is the requirement requirement includes a note
to say to verify when it was done Well, listen, we know the tax is the best tax, right? So, we just settle the tax record. We don't have all the answers. I think we have to flag what many are
looking at and flesh it out so that the ideas. So the current [Music] definition there's a whole staircase that is that accurate less. No, there's more to it. the best version. If it's a pull down ladder,
then it's But I have like permanent stairs. Yeah, I just have like it's not too considered because there's so whether you finished space or
not, it's still considered floor area. But there's more to it though. It's staircase. So one right after. Yeah. It's based on the height when you get up there and then the area that it's created in 7 feet in comparison to the floor below it. Yeah. Those are two
steps. You might not actually. So has it always been? Yeah. So So that's important. So in order to prevent people from having a third of their life for decades the entire year, you were prohibited from having fixed staircases
were added period. No one could have no if they have constructed prior to 2022. It's one of two things. Either that's counting square footage or it's one or the other. Now what we've done is
we created the right to put this staircase if it is considered a half and what the definition does is make sure that the size of the attic is constrained so that it doesn't become too large. We're giving people the opportunity to develop and finish and
build new construction with those spaces so they can truly live in that space where they never have Yes. People want that. That was that was that FF. Here's the principle. We recognize that
people require most case of 2025 or 2022 at the time. We were trying to figure out how people could have larger houses on lots that were never going to get any different than the other. That space has always been a target for people to do that. But you need to be able to find
something that works both with the renovation and with new construction. If we were simply saying that you could have a third story, what would happen is some of the spec homes would have huge third stories that would look an awful lot like second story and you would now
have houses that were 33% margin. What we permitted is something that is no greater than onethird of the space below it because the acknowledgement is that everybody needs a roof. Everybody needs an if you'd like to make a playroom for your kids or a master bedroom up there
now you can do that. But only if it is honest, but the floor area is measured through the exterior walls and the question I have is to be clarified that it's intended to include outside exterior. I think the
answer is here. Here we go. Believe me. Okay. So, here's I I fully understand it. I was telling you that a lot of architects and other Africans don't
understand what's actually okay to clarify but I wonder if there was legislative intent the legislative intent is to give someone who was online that would qualify in the next zone to build a house that is fully
compared. So if you can build what has happened is that people have charity. So my mom for example is large enough and so they without setting the constraints that always
[Music] with with the overriding theory of if you can upside we never see you. Exactly. That's the ideusion. I mean, let's face it, the problem we always see is people say, "Oh, I fit in all." Now my question
which is still vague is and I know Todd thinks it's only one but the way it's written or the way it's interpreted is that you can only go up one stone and it's the next and you see
this in the text where people say well I can go up two stones you know you And now you could go in very intent the intent was to create exhaust for
people for people to be able to not and still be regulated and controlled. And the problem is that when you stick two zones, you are now potentially going to something that really should
get that. Yes. Well, doc, that's how you write it. That's how you write it. They put the definition in and they say if you still needed variance you can't use it. Sanders applies to me. So the logic
is fairly simple to me. You think it would be better to tell? No. Okay. I'm just saying that the building area say if if an existing residential lot contains lot area lot in lots with a
zone above the zone in which the law is located on the table above a dwelling may be constructed on the lot under standard of the zone immediately. rather the front yard setback forms
standard. So that says you're moving from Mar and all 75 standards exactly by because you should be pushing your house back 10 ft so that it's not
unlike the others because everybody's got too much rear, right? So you're going to have houses that sit back and now you're going to disturb the quietness of people back because other houses have first should be zone if you
[Music] guys actually can't go from 75 but this almost reads you a lot you can go to the next zone and potentially seek a variance for a one
which we see that people aren't getting using a different column and he was actually giving us a different standard than what actually applied. He was saying that the R15 whatever it was should apply because he felt as though
he satisfied but it didn't all be that they see as applications try to client um there's a requirement about All uh residential parking should be located. The garage only be counted as
off street parking at least 30 ft [Music] long. focus. So I drove from turnout to down third street knowing problem and if you don't know that there are streets
that you can't drive two cars in two directions they park on boat we have a growing parking problem. The idea about this is you require that people find real places to park on. The reason that garages are excluded is because there is
a practical view of whether or not people really park in single carp. Yeah, of course. is this talk of seeing applications come in fully competing driveway just to comply with us for a driveway they don't think they
actually need therefore adding so we have people who tan driveways along so that they comply with us that have been there for a long time question whether think that's stupid or whether you think it's good that they actually
have a Right. It's not that they got to be the front door set. So you got all this front setback that essentially you're not supposed to use because you're supposed to keep it behind beyond front door. So
how can that's the aesthetic part right the aesthetic part but But also as a public safety concern the car, [Music] right? Question as well.
I think is so I would like to have committee look at a couple of site to see how this configuration really works how the ordinances are interpret compliance and
the problem is that we've always appeared as a design waiver and not as parents and so we've never I've never seen anyone ever just come here to that part initiative they always um but then when actually doing anything to fix that
we certainly should safety reason two bars like this bike is where
God was coming down. It's concern. So if you allow them in purpose coverage for safety issues may include something that they need to install
driver to you know take care. [Music] I I think the other issue is 25%. So people really only
have to go you're only able to get a 25% yes conference makes it unless unless the lot is strangely shaped and tapers or widens in one way
or another regardless of how far back. Well, further back, further back you go, you might have like turned around and that's more so
but that's not so my question or another. It says um an entry driveway walkway may cross any yard area but not more than 25% of
the front yard used as a driveway or off street parking. So this front yard area mean anywhere between the house and the front the house the full set not whatever set back
to so if you don't the denominator denominator of the area so the further You're denying that. No, it's 25% further back.
No, it's well like you said [Music] whe is If you came back, then somebody with the house that's set back
farther back would then be able to put their AC compressor in between their house and where the front yard front door is a broader category. the application of articular origins by its
own but I think there is other definition I want to clarify is this specific or section talking about the definition. Yeah. Absolutely. you're putting in much larger area.
Well, any existing exist any new further We [Music] probably discuss a lot of and you can
just let me scenarios where there's defined floor area that is probably never actually standpoint. I think the resolutions get
a little crowded. This is the real area, but you also now include you know these other areas. Is there a way to say that that's not accessible excluded
all your second [Music] So on your second the first top shows an area which circle you're telling us that you're telling us the extent that
that area exceeds 2 and 12 ft that you're measuring about that far and that doesn't make much sense. I understand on the second photo one below that are you suggesting that that is actually the area between the two
virtual red you can have a lot you can't doesn't get accepted not if it was your parent but it is so therefore I don't see the problem you've got attempt to make a roof line that
doesn't let everybody consider the way we deal with the area connecting a twotory wall you tried to establish that if the house is constructed such you could never connect those two that could
And that's kind of what this is here that they need housing too. Todd, it's not possible to occupy that space. It should be excluded because the truth is confident
other than interpret that on I understand and just the areas may just have to be the other problem because that didn't let me ask you remember this is
not a skill is it? because that way nevertheless [Music] [Music] point because they're down hills. The concept was 8 foot 8 foot plus the uh
the the door. Okay. And so the reason it's about 17 is because that's the number. And if it's below that is it underc it can't be a living level, right? It's too low. So you can feel it. You can make it. It doesn't matter. It
never counts above. That's what this should be. It should be excluded. I should count. I'm struggling with you. I'm also not familiar with. So if you had a plan for this twotory
foil, how do you set that? Right. But at what point do you ft But if it's under that, then there is a floor anywhere. I would count it. No, there's
no count. It says put a floor in there. That's the way I thought it's 14. You could argue it's four because you couldn't physically have two it is it is no
exact I think probably the issue I think deeper as you create but there is in facts this is this is the secondary not I'm absolutely okaycept that it's not
going to be cut and that's exactly why you want it to work. And there's the aesthetic though of having that slope between first I don't section. to the upper pictures in the upper two and struggling with that
because that area and that comes and so yes it's part of the devil's compromise of trying to figure it out the more you give them the more they will use
it so everybody remembers we have 4,000 historic houses in that were permitted have parents that measure at 3220. They are all over town. This ordinance goes into stop that happen and good news. It
is so these problems are things you can deal with. Let's not lose sight of all the benefit of changing this and getting back right. Um, I'm wondering if that's the approach. There is an instruction
technique or something inside of instruction that would give us something that may be included in addition to the two and a half so that we can add something to it. I just don't know what that is. I mean I was coming
earlier. It's a tricky way a lot more to the house a lot beefier than it's without from the road. it it presents a much larger and much more complex house
with all these little things though that's not an example of where you can I'm just playing but I'm saying you could create a lot of visual features and it makes the house very sort of visual dimension here very that that is
a 3800T house constructed as 32 you're not certain of the areas that are in violation I feel with everything And that house is considered large. Okay. The visual large on small property. We have to do it by
by his own. Um you drive through this town and the house that looks massive and it's within 20 ft of property on both sides. So it's it's info. There's no barri that's
required and that house from the street. So how do we how do we keep the appearance of large houses you know or larger how do you keep that from
happening in town because that's what [Music] everybody but we need to we need to increase the setbacks larger plan so that they they don't do so the idea is that the building support
so the floor restriction and now floor elevation restriction is intended to create a building which is what as to what your issue house growing up. I'm g you got sheer
walls all the way out on both sides that make it grow 35 ft tall only 20 ft mountain and the solution to that is one that we thought about different set of the second story to actually cut out
those second story and we've done that and other people are here but when it needs to stand out and certainly You're [Music] 202 from the street
death from this degree doesn't look like that. How do we how do we do that? So skip thing for those taking notes is to take a look at the sideard setback to see whether or not it is sufficient and to consider other mechanisms for
softening uh the impact um of secondary school I think really [Music] like that you don't have the ability. So
maybe maybe in some of the minor zones. Yeah. You need to increase. Yeah. I think it's very well
and it permit I mean it's I think situation you got so 32 ft or And they're all like that. That is too. And uh you know when you when you
look at that lot that house that house is is horizontal you know to the it's it's uh parallel to the street rather than utilizing some of that backyard. They chose to keep most of the backyard and make the house bigger on
the side. 89 89 for let's write it down. And now that is oriented to you know [Music] it's oriented toward the front of the
street which I think does people would still build in such a way that on both sides. They put the garage on the other side uh on the side, you know, closer and and they're going to have to
pay the driveway to get into that garage on the side. That garage should have been in the front. You should have coffee and see whether or not something but it's didn't use the
problem, nobody approached similar to this. Okay, those are both that right and now they have. So that tells you that either a you [Music] 20
[Music] years. They're not too big for so I have three comments. The first is that what we don't set up. So number one we have that number two whatever is need to
apply and so we need to anomaly that a little more closely to see if there is a universal change that we not only that but that would create problems elsewhere because somehow and then the last thing is that it took 15
years but when we did 2022 change the size of the was absolutely looking directly on and so the new house going up better. First floor elevation being lower is a massive improvement but but change is hard and
taking a 2,000 foot ranch down and putting up 3200 pounds takes you a lot of adjustment. It really does. And to an extent and so for people that buy the property you want to be able to develop.
So it's got and I will not ridiculous right not present very and I think the shock on a lot of these days especially in the
right hand it's next door older smaller house. It is shocking. And you see that wall, right? Well, it does. It looks
less street, but when you look down, it looks so much nicer. doesn't mean it doesn't [Music] comment specific. Two other thoughts one thing
didn't get to is um back then people were putting [Music] up and joining space and
sh could we have a uh a less now I think we have to take a look at both of those numbers. So we did not look at that in 2020 or 2022 because it requires a lot of analysis. But I also
agree that law coverage and building coverage need be reviewed uh to see whether or not they are reasonable and consistent with community standards today. I would ask you to add that to your list. She would ask you write that down. Um, and I think what we have to do
there is a standard R5, standard 10 blocks, a standard footprint, a little bit of driveway, see what it is, what added porches. You don't want to give too much room, but it should be able to have a pool. Should they be able to be passionate
about? Well, I think one of the problems was that and one of the things that that I think and I think one of the reason we are so uh with it is because we branch single house. Yes. Okay. So when you
have different building okay but actually I do that and you know if you want to do that you can put restriction but let's
say you can pull it back and have an exception to those to go. Yeah. You know, unless Yeah. Exactly. But I think that that's was the genesis of this why why we allow so much and I
think you go to East00 and I have no problem and I have shuh So, you know, that that should not be there's no way that should be able comments
No, I want you to see any more things. Well, I mean um list of various points of mine kind of will that one of them in particular people on the board stand but uh
drivers. So because of coverage they're covered or whatever a lot of not either um panic driveway or because of the limitation of the driveway skirt, it's really just like one car. They have this
little like offshoot car through this. So, what I've kind of noticed is that if you do allow for too far, um, that encourages less off street parking because sometimes it can be such a pain with a tand
street. So, encourage more off street parking. And two, the other thing is everyone puts their garagees on a third. Um, fortunate enough to have a wide drive. So it stand out to me when I see garbages on the
road and we did it also for drive my driving and so like that's another So you're saying that if we were if we enable people to live their then garbage
pick out to be from your driveway versus from a 3x3 tan in the street. That's what I do. And then I noticed when I drive down roads being there still like going
around and letting go. Yeah. So the only solution to that easier solution than have people they need to have access to
neighbors and weird so that's what they want apron so it's still apron even I believe my hand close to my
you know But it's hard and if there's like you know it's tricky. So you need to put it further away for safety reasons like you need at least two feet
clearance. I think the solution then that's then do we want them to put the garbage can because the garbage company right now wants it side. So when we talk about the driveway
park. Could you just note the suggestion made that we should consider expanding uh what the curve cuts are, what the big cut is so as to potentially encourage a double driveway um so as to be able to
realistically park it. We talked about that. So when you're not 50, you're limited to 12 and about 20 is about the minimum so you would be effectively
covering 40% and that gets to be a lot of aspect when you start and I think that is not the design but I think and I think that the park consider what might be able to be done I
think in recent years though we saw that and you run into that is already couple months ago talking about I think it's anyone talk But now I think it should be
addressed. Some of the uh numbers are a lot house numbers. Oh house numbers. Some of them are uh I know you're shaking your head. zero back. I mean, you have signage in the
business. So I think we need to like in the business district and it's it didn't I don't know what our policy is built the house. They
built the floor down the house on the corner of Circle and Vista. They may house be that sitting there [Music]
[Music] sitt we we've done it in the past where we make right when you're facing the main road you have And that deal was decided. So the board has been we have any requiring that the two sides of the
house have effectively a second. Yes. But we have a lot of learning language but I don't think it speaks to why your house so the question we we need to have something to
prevent someone from creating a house that will look perfectly fine in between two other houses and shelving to a street a side of the house that is to be a front. Uh aesthetically, no. But we we
do requires you know [Music] that person [Music] That's what you say.
guys with multiple conversations as well. You want Guys, guys, you still have business in an executive session. Are there any more suggestions? Um, we're ask um we're going
to do those um but to articulate some of these things and help us try and work through that to fix some problems and um your list is great and your attention
to detail and along. Okay, we got a couple minutes Mr. Mr. Dangelo Mr. the law firm. Yes, Mr. Can you just tell me who second?
Second. Thank you. Mr. Jackson, yes. Oh, Dr. Lawren, yes. Mrs. Newman. Yes, sir. Mr. Chennetti. Yeah. Mr. Leer. Yes.
[Music] to approve Mr. Dan Dr. Lra. Yes. Mrs. Newman. Yes. Mr. Tetti. Mr. Le. Yes. Okay. Um because we because we are going
to executive session after this I will open to the public and ask questions. I don't see discussion on the agenda. Is it on the agenda? It is not on the agenda. I will and nor does it need to
be because our annually is listed on those topics that may occur. Uh this is going to be a discussion concerning an application that has come in before the board. It is involving shutters of Fair Haven LLC. Going to explain what the
board what what that application is and take direction from them. How about size and So here's a problem. That was only
constantly the size of the house would probably work, but giving people the right coming to the board to build house and what neighbor is expecting in that particular zone though that should not be able to be done without.
So we do not put all the mass. So one all however if you maximum area kind of has on the
underside the lot it tends to look big but we don't the maximum area for relief if the size you're set off there's no way you
can put a maximum So, so if you had an undersized lot, what's supposed to happen is that the set is going to stay the same. your core area ratio is going to keep a highend path
and you should find that it's harder to dynamics where you could build to the maximum of the cap. If that does happen and you don't wind up varants then theoretically that must effect but
as in particular um I explained to you what the crash panel was and not including it when you worked it up years ago. Do you think that there is a reason to prevent death? [Music] So what I actually
well here's what I said. If you're in if you're on and you're able to respect the set of you build, you know that Yeah. Right. So, so now what what we're really
talking about is whether or not you have to abide by the generally trigger and and the determination that every circumstance maybe that'll be okay but we should allow people to do that opportunity to
make sure that's okay. They're all that's it. [Music] Very quick. Yeah,
tangential council approved the master plan using the planning boards planner. That'll be about a year long process. Uh and then 21 Fairhead Road, the property next to the dock that we bought. Um the site's
going to be stabilized, but process of starting the plan development for that. That would be more of a plan board thing, but it'll be a long input, you know, let us know. Is there an idea there at this point or we just still
uh still thinking about it, but it's intention to be passive. So, nothing vertical, you know, to speak of. Um, and then there's a a business in town at the end of Batmo that had a lot of attention at the council meeting. Uh,
if you're interested to hear about it, um, uh, some neighbors came in and said that the business has been in violation of resolution that was used to create it back in the 60s. And I thought it was interesting stuff about which was in the
discussion. Um they've been doing things that the neighbors think are not following the rules officer and their administrator. So are they proposing any new development? No. Okay. So that issue has been out there for some time. There
was discussion about potential development which caused it to fire up the last time maybe about five years ago. Um, and I know that that original resolution is somewhat there. Um, that was
Oh, absolutely. I was surprised. Is that all right? It is a very difficult situation. It is it is something that needs to be thought through. It's been there a really long time. Um and the use has changed somewhat over the years. Um and I think
a lot of residents really value that as resource and I think that a lot of the neighbors nearby don't like it as much as people. Yeah. Yeah. I did believe in the mission but the way I was missive.
Yes. All right. May I may I propose a motion to go into closed executive session to the exclusion of the public um concerning a matter involving an application we received from Shies with Fair Haven LLC so that I can describe that matter
to you about give you counsel on that and take direction. I anticipate that we should be in closed executive session. I would say probably hopefully no longer than a half hour, but I would ask for a half hour. Yeah, I know. If I numbered things
for you, we could take that one, but I did. I just have the one. I will. I will. But I'd like to make that application. So you said the motion that motion roll
Mr. Mrs. Mr. Ryan yes Mr. Yes. Mrs. Mr. Gonzalez Mr. Yes. Can I make a motion for a comfort?