Time is 10:00. Date is 5 February 27th 26 development review committee meeting. Um announcement of open meeting recordings. Is anyone besides staff recording today's meeting? I see no indication of any. So moving on to new
business conceptual site plan for uh Whitney Street parcels R07-9-14. uh proposed 36 unit tiny home development and private road construction. >> Good morning. Morning McCardi Engineering. Um I'm here on behalf of
Apple Manager who's the applicant uh for this project. Uh what we want to do is kind of get in front of you early on in this project knowing that your zoning just got voted in by the city council not too long ago for tiny homes to at least have some conversation with all the department heads to see if we're all
on the same page moving forward with development of this type. uh obviously being the first tiny home project in the city. Uh the property that we're looking for looking at is property that Mr. Blinger owns at Whitney Street. Um here's Whitney Street here in the end of Love Street where it ties into Whitney
Street. Mr. Blinger owns this long skinny uh piece of property that used to be part of this used to be part of the old time farm property which was the entire piece of property. It was an off what 15 years ago now maybe Al was it something like that. Um, Al has this property here and then the larger piece
of property in the back is what he owns. Um, he's been looking at doing something on this property for a while. I believe we did a variance for single family house, correct? To do that for the frontage variance at the time cuz the frontage requirement used to be 150 ft and he has 140 ft of frontage out here.
uh total land uh land area that we're looking at is uh 21 I'd say 21 and a3 acres plus or minus um depending on what records we look at be the GIS information or the assessor's office information. What we did is we u put together a
concept plan using some of the mass GIS um information that was on file uh using the ANR plan that was recorded that cut off this piece of property. And then back uh years ago when the hunts were looking at developing this property for themselves, they actually had the
wetlands delineated. And so we grabbed some historical information with regards to the wetland delineation on that and showed that as you know as best as we could, tying it into what we had for information also. And so we we compiled the exit conditions plan based off of what we had on on record. Um and then
took into account all your tiny home regulations and then came up with the plan that's in front of you today, which is a 36 unit tiny home project. Um the intent is to build 36 tiny homes, two-bedroom each uh basement with a um bulkhead outside of the buildings to
access the basement. Um there's the possibility of having one car garages for each of the units depending on uh demand and then also spacing of the development and how best we can lay this out. Um but we laid this out just for conceptual matter just to start the conversation. I said we fixed 36 units
we show now on a little more than 1425 linear feet of driveway. We show a sidewalk on one side of uh the roadway for pedestrian access. Uh we will show as we f further get along, we will show the driveways for the units also showing
the one car uh driveway for that if maybe sometimes more depending what the uh the potential homeowner would want. Uh the intent here is to service the units by a common septic system. Right now we we just located this area here as
the let's say the island within the the loop part of the the lollipop part of the road as the location right now. conceptually as a proposed sepic system that would service the entire development. As I said, we're looking at 36 units in two bedrooms. So, we're looking at 72 total bedrooms still being
under the 10,000 gallon threshold about little around around 8,000 gallons, right? Is what we looking at. I know if we do age restrict it with over 55, we can knock that gallonage down to um and so then one of the things that we're looking at too is not doing a pressure dosing system but using the presby
system, >> okay, >> for something like this is what we're conceptually looking at. Um obviously that could change as this further gets developed and we do so testing and get all that stuff in mind, but that was the the initial thought on this regards the the septic system. Uh with regards to the um
water service for the units, we're looking to have multiple wells up here. Uh so that was going to be another conversation that we would have maybe is um our thought was I think four or five wells service they would service multiple units. Um I think what we have
to be under the 25 bedroom threshold, right? So the threshold on wells is going to be 15 or more connections or 25 or more people for 60 days triggers a public drinking water supply. >> Y
>> there's some other caveats in there that we can discuss individually >> and that's what I wanted to have a conversation because that's what I know we would we actually we've been looking at a lot of the public water supplies. We don't want to do a public water supply out here. We don't want to get into accessing the back property to have to put a public water supply. I'd rather just do individual wells as many as we
need to do to service this. >> You're not going to do individual for each. You're going to do five or six wells. I'm thinking >> it I don't know if it would I think it would save us money if we were able to do say one per four units or one per five units, right? >> We'll look into that more. >> But we if if we have to do one per each
unit, we will. >> No, I'm just asking for clarification. >> But we we'd rather not, I think, from a cost standpoint. And then uh there's going to be an association here anyways, right, for the septic system. And so the association can handle the septic systems and popping the septic tanks, the wells, uh, and then the drainage infrastructure. Uh, the intent is for it
to be a private development, not a public way. And I know we talked about that yesterday because that was a question we brought up. We actually met with Melissa yesterday to talk about some of the zoning aspects of this. And then Jason popped in too. And so um, the question came up yesterday about are we looking to do a public way? I mean, we are not looking to do a public way. It's
more of a condo type development. However set up, but it's something along those lines, right? It's a private development with the association. We'll have the the maintenance part of the wells and the septic system. Uh we will do a drainage system. Everything basically from this point here
everything goes to the back of the property toward the wetlands in the back of the property which you can see there's wetlands that extend in here. Um and so we would drain everything toward the rear of the site. Right now we kind of put an earmark proposed storm water area right now. Um once we get a little
further along the design of this get actual on the ground topo uh then we would be able to further define where the drainage would end up being but that was the thought is everything would drain to the rear toward the level like it does now treat it to the standards that the state has but also the city has
um make sure that Rob's comfortable with the design of the the drainage system and then um you know show all that on there too. Um what we tried doing is keeping the development as close as we could uh within the uplands to the front of the site. We didn't want to access through the wetlands and any other uplands that
Mr. Blanger may have in the rear of the site. Um I know the regulation for county homes is if we're you know it's the threshold right 10 acres uh 10 units per acre anything less than that right it's a exped and that's something that Jason and I were talking about and Melissa were talking about yesterday
we'll go through that process for the permit uh we're at 36 and 21 acres right so we're well under that threshold for the the density requirement um but for what we're looking at it made sense to kind of keep it in this manner here where everything's clustered to the
front of the site um not making the driveway any longer uh to the rear of the site. And I know that was I know Chief, you brought that up earlier with the length of the road, right? So, we don't want to get too too far out in the back of the site. And then I'm sure you're going to have more comments, but I know Al and I were talking yesterday. We want to see what your comments are regarding fire protection and see how
how you want to have that handled. Um again, it's very conceptual matter. We want to make sure that we get in front of this early to what you guys are looking for. Um how you guys want to handle getting this approved through the city. Um because we had questions too reading through this new zoning
requirements and how this would get approved through the city. We want to make sure that this is done correctly. I know Al Al wants to take great pride in this project knowing that he's the first tiny home project that you guys are seeing. So we want to do this the right way. So that's why we're in front of you today. So at this point we can I guess
take any of your comments back and uh see where we where we are today at least regards the concept and see if we can move forward developing a preliminary plan to bring in front of the plane board definitive plan to bring in front of the plane board. So, back to you, Jason. Yes. >> Yeah. Uh, do we want to just circle
around? Do they have any initial comments? >> Justin, would you want to start? >> Sure. I I guess. Um, so obviously there's a portion of the development that's going to be within the buffers of the resource areas that are nearby. Um
is so each of these structures um are they all going to be classified as so far as like dwelling kind of is it all single single family or >> Yes they're all class we would classify them all as single family yes even though it's a condo dwelling they'd all be single family you know detached
single family >> okay >> and so we I know we would have to for some of you any of the work we have to file for and then also the actual driveway instruction right >> y So, I guess we do two different ways, right? We could file everything together in one notice of intent. Um, or we can
file them as one not intent for the driveway and then separate notice of intent so that each unit has to get developed out. >> Yeah, >> we've done it both manners and I know the only issue we run into with doing everything in one notice is trying to get them to sign off afterwards, right?
Because releases of the order. And so, that's something that Al and I can talk about is how how he wants to develop that out. Okay. Mostly with tiny homes and this number of units, we don't see it as a long project, right? So doing them in a one notice may not be the worst thing
because we they should be done hopefully relatively at the same time so we can come back for compliance at the same time for all of them. But we can we can look at that. But we are obviously we we know we have to respect the no touch zone, the no structure zone. And that's something that Al and I talked about yesterday after we met with Alyssa and
Jason is this may expand a little more into the buffer zone because of u some of the conversation we had yesterday regards how the unit's going to set up and spacing. So it may get a little the footprint may get a little more intrusive into the buffer zone, but we're still going to respect all the
touch zones. We're not looking for any waiverss from the city's ordinance from regards to ordinance. So >> okay. basketball. >> Um, so first question I have is, um, so you're identifying the inside of the lollipop as the septic system area. Is
there room for the reserve area in that space also? Or have you identified a reserve area space for the septic system? >> We have I don't think I don't know if the I didn't draw the concept plan, but I don't think we've gotten to that location. Just making sure >> I think he had an idea of the square footage he needed. So I think that's what he was looking for. So the
orientation of it might be a little different once we get to the design of it, right? And so he he took a larger rectangular area in there. But I think that's the intent is depending on how it gets set up, it may be in two blocks, right, with regards to the primary and the reserve. But >> yeah, that was just my first initial
thought on the septic system. Um, is the square up above the left side from my facing it that square up at the top of the lollipop. Yeah. Is that the snow? >> This is the storm water management. >> Water management. Uh how's the access from?
>> We would have to so I guess everything's it's all in the same land owner, right? So >> so we wouldn't even need easements necessary. So we would follow a driveway down. >> Okay. So these are >> it looks but they're one foot one foot contours too. So and it's a big scale plant.
>> Gotcha. >> So it's kind of deceiving, right? >> There is slope out here but it's not >> okay. >> It's not as I think uh gross as you would think it is. as dramatic as it looks. >> Yeah, exactly. Right. So, and that's where I think once we get to the on the
ground to we actually get the grades designed, >> we will show that access to that base. We'll make sure that's there. >> And I'm just asking the last question I have for you is um where is going to be your refuge management? Is there going to be multiple points for dumpsters?
>> You think it individual totes? Because I Well, I guess that's the question, right? Is like I know I'm a resident of the city, right? I made an individual to for my single family house. >> Mhm. Right? They're all going to be single family houses. They're all going to be paying taxes. >> So, if this is not subdivided, typically
with the larger home parks, especially on private roads, they have contract private service. It's not part of the city >> plan. You're talking about rubbish. >> Yes. >> My feeling is we're going to get eel Harvey in there. Everybody's going to have their toes. They're going to run to the street and they're going to put them in the truck and that'll be the end.
Yeah. So, so but it would be a private road and would not be accessible by eel Harvey >> for the city municipal contract. It would have to be a private contract between you and Y Harvey. Just just want to make sure we have a plan. >> Agreed. >> Thank you. >> Understood.
>> That's good. You also >> I'm also I'm sorry. >> Um, so first question, I know you're doing it's a condo style development. It's not a subdivision. You're showing parcels. Are they like exclusive use areas? >> Yes. Yes.
>> Um, will this be a typical condo where you have a contractor who comes, does all the lawns or are they going to be maintaining their own? >> Maintaining their own. >> Okay. Not I mean just general question it's not >> but different with regards to the septic tanks.
>> Yeah you'll need an association for >> they will be they'll pump the association will be responsible pumping the subject. So that is one thing they will be doing. >> Yeah. So of course you'll have a lot of infrastructure. You're going to have sewer water well water wells. >> Correct.
>> Which kind of leads me into utilities. Um I'd at least like you to look at bringing water. which is I looked at this morning's about 18,900 feet away. >> Yeah, I think we looked I >> so it's a hall. I I understand. Um but
my biggest concern with that is the units, the spacing and fire protection and and I know Chief's probably going to get into that cuz what's your supply for fire protection? Um so that's kind of out of my area and I'll let the chief touch on it, but just
a suggestion Dana and I were kind of looking at it. Um, sewer probably a little bit more difficult, a lot more expensive because it's a lot further away. >> Well, that's where because I know we even talked about doing like an E1 system to at least pump it and then bring it down because it's everything can dry, right? With the water and sewer ends.
>> Yeah, you're more than half a mile away. >> That's we looked at this. >> I mean, I'd recommend at least looking at it, which you know, >> yeah, >> I don't know what it does. you know, cost is probably way more than doing a common septic system, but um you know, just because it's out there, think about
it. >> Um and then storm water, you know, you find you one recommendation I would make is and I know you're already looking at the length of the the driveway. Um, but using obviously the city standards as
much as possible for either, you know, your catch basins and your drainage system. Uh, cuz that's what I'll be looking to. >> Yeah, that's what we're looking at. Standard. >> Yeah. Yeah. >> We were trying to lay this out even though it's not a subdivision, the driveway width and so forth to make sure it's as close as we can to the subdivision regulation. Right.
>> So that would fire has enough access there too. Right. So, >> and I I think another concern in terms of that is I know we have a 24 foot minimum width now in the road is excuse me I know and and I don't know what the parking requirements are specifically. I
know they've slightly reduced for this kind of development. >> I would be concerned with parking because >> obviously if you only require one parking space but you have two bedrooms, you might have two cars. Um, I think the width of your road is going to be important because I I anticipate on
street parking here. >> I know I think one of the things that we were looking at, we didn't show it, but when we were talking internally, is we do have some flexibility even near parking >> some right some visitor parking or additional parking spaces that >> we could work with.
>> Yeah. >> So, there is some I know the units are tight. There is some other space with regards to that island there. >> Yeah. I mean, that would definitely be one of the things I would be looking for is additional parking because just knowing how these developments go. Um, if you if you're providing fair minimum parking, you're not going to have
enough. Um, and in terms of the width of the roadway, if you have on street parking, it becomes an issue for public safety. Um, you know, even of course it's going to be private plowing, but you know, it's would be a nightmare um like in this last storm. Um, so that's one of the things you might want to
think about. Um other than that I mean you know I forget how the site plan do they come to plan board for site plan approval on this that's trying to figure out how the way the regulations written it's kind of >> so I think we'll probably end up being
in front of them in a >> in some manner it's just >> okay >> yeah I mean either one plane board conservation commission will be looking at storm water I'll be looking at storm water for obviously this will require a permit >> um which I'll be looking Well, that and that's the one thing that
we weren't sure if we needed a plane board permit, but we knew we needed a permit from you. We needed a permit from the cons conservation commission. So, we knew >> somebody from the city would be looking at. >> Yeah. And I will certainly be looking at it and just generally how it's worked whether it's conservation or planning board. I'm it's it's coming through me.
Um so that's fine. Um and that's all and typical development things. >> Yep. >> What actually and maybe Jace will comment on this too. I would be Me personally, yeah, it would be coming to the city with um plans for screening
neighbors, that kind of thing, because >> I mean, obviously you're you're a butter on the right um to the east. Um >> yeah, >> I was going to call the one close one on the right.
>> Yeah, he obviously I would have if that's me, I'm going to have major concerns. So that we have an announced landscape architect. So I know he'll he'll be we'll do a landscape plan as part of this and we'll do a landing plan too as part of this just to make sure that the abs know that um
we're trying to be as nice as we can regard it being not being intrusive even though we're going to development there. Right. So >> yeah that 606 is going to have a lot of units right basically against this property. I think in the beginning when we come
off of Wiki Street they they had the first house set back further. I don't know if it's beyond that house or not. >> Yeah. Just >> No, it's not. >> Yeah. >> All right.
>> But we can landscapes in there. >> All right. And so for site plan review, I did look into it and I know we talked about whether or not this would be considered a detached single family or
two family um dwelling that excludes an out of sight plan review. But I think just given that the ordinance of under 11704, the home ordinance didn't provide new
definitions for what the tiny home like development is that it it's outside of the bounds of what a single family detached exclusion would be. So that site plan review would still be required uh for the development and we'll make
sure that that's more clear in the future in regards to the language used in this and that there's proper the definition is is properly laid out for uh tiny home development. Um assume there have to be something on in front of the plane
board. Yeah. >> Right. So it wasn't like we just want to make sure we were going to the right process. >> No. And I appreciate >> Right. That's what we knew we had to go in front of the other other two parties anyway. So do concurrently and >> um >> we had a chance to make comments.
Absolutely. Um I think in terms of the waiverss or modifications that the planning board can provide that's under the cluster site plan flexibility I agree with Rob in terms of providing shared infrastructure for parking is that's one of the requirements um for
the planning board to be able to provide that it's that 10% um open space um the shared infrastructure is inclusive of utilities, walkways, parking Um, see anything else? Um, and community facilities. Um,
so I I just want to make note of of that as well. So if you want to make adjustments um to include uh communal parking in some way uh both to see you through for the cluster site plan flexibility that the plan board
could provide in terms of um frontage dimensional um I guess the good thing here we have all the rest of the >> the zoning require it's met. So that's a good Right. I guess the beauty of this piece of property. >> Yeah. >> Um so really it's just a matter of
adding the visitor space is to make sure that we're Yep. >> accommodating the residents properly. So >> um >> you don't have an issue with that, right? >> Yeah, that's fine. >> Makes sense. I think be prepared because just given the density of residential in
this area adding 36 units that are housing you know two to three individuals per um so if it's over 58 over 55 what you're looking for >> over 55 what are you looking at just or just none right no restrictions
>> well >> yeah I hadn't planned on over 55 I think there's a demand for over 55 >> they're two bedroom units though, right? >> So, I'm saying even sure what he's looking to do for >> any restrictions. >> I'm just trying to gauge like how many
residents like at its max capacity would be added to the area and whether or not a concern of of performing some sort of traffic study of of what that added um um
>> density volume to the that area would provide. I think that's going to be >> roughly those numbers yesterday and it and it's not close. It's does not need a traffic study. >> Okay. Thank you for doing those. >> Oh yeah, no problem. Um
and I think in similarly to another project that you guys have have have worked on um just making sure that you're engaging with a butters um cuz we want to make sure that this is something that they're aware of and that they're
um you know I think uh cognizant and and just um agreeable to the development uh every At least they're aware of it, right? That's >> to the extent that
>> they'll be aware. They may not be agreeable to it. I know they're not going to be excited about >> um but besides that, I have nothing else. I appreciate you you bringing this up to us yesterday so that we could talk through um just the
requirements for a site plan. >> I don't think Yeah, that's what I said. We >> Yep. It's all new. >> It's all new. >> It's all new. So, there's there's not really a a guideline because there's not many municipalities that have incorporated language like this. So, we're kind of on our own raft here
trying to figure it out. So, I appreciate you both bringing this up to us um to kind of navigate how how best to >> see this through. >> Um so, I did confirm that you would not need a special permit. Of course, this is by right. >> Y
>> and um the site plan, it sounds like you're kind of already doing that and Jason, her opinion is that they need it. >> And I suggest we also ask the city solicitor because in the exact definition, it has uh one and two family dwellings and there's an S. >> Yes.
>> And I don't know what the S means. >> So >> maybe we could Y, >> you know. Um, and as far as the size, so they're suggesting using um the tiny home under the IRC. And if you wanted to
use the the code, you would have to have the uh habitable area um 400 square ft or under. So, if you wanted to put a garage on there and and also for the 600
ft for our act, then I I would suggest a 200T square foot garage attached to that 400 square ft home so you could have that um building code relief. Uh and we can talk more about that if you want.
Does does that mean that the houses have to be 400 or less >> if you want to use the IRC's AQ tiny home building code with one egress, you know, in the smaller uh emergency escape, but we can
talk about that too. Um later go over some options if you if you want to. Um, yeah, it's going to make a whole lot of difference in parking and everything else depending on what we do. If we don't have 600 now, we've got a lot more
space cuz we can now do a 14 wide even longer and move it over and have two parking spots on each lot. But, and one bedroom. So, I think there's a demand for two bedrooms. And I'd like to go down that
road if I can. And that means we have to go to 600 because otherwise it really doesn't fit. >> Correct. >> Okay. >> We can talk about >> So then the garage would have to be an accessory >> not attached. >> Correct. >> Okay.
>> To qualify by right. >> So the garage is part of the 600 is what you're saying. >> Yes. >> Right. Goes back to >> maybe we skip the garage. We're adding cost on. We're trying to keep this thing down to a reasonable amount.
>> So, if I may interject, while we're talking about habitability and square footage, we just make sure that we're cognizant that there has to be at least 150 square foot of habitable space for the first occupant and at least 200 ft of habitable space for the second occupant.
>> So, yeah. So that's that would limit it to if you're getting down to 400 with the garage, that's getting limiting you to two people in the unit to meet the housing code. >> So no garage, we can go six
>> 600, but you would have to follow the regular building code. >> I'm okay following the regular building code. >> Okay. >> And then but if you 600 in a garage attached, you can't do that. >> Correct. cannot
>> because that does not that's not part of the home act because the gross floor area includes all of the interior space. >> So in the home act follow >> it has to be 600 square ft period period >> to be a small to tiny home. >> So 600 eliminate the garage option.
>> I just want to make sure I just try to understand >> just make sure who made those decisions. >> Yes. Imagine where you decision >> 10 ft apart. >> 10 ft apart. >> Yes. >> 10 ft. >> Or else if it's um you're allowed 6 ft
for the act, but if you do 6 ft, you will have to rape one of the walls. >> That's what we >> fire. >> Yes. >> Yeah. >> To allow them. >> Is that what it is? >> Uh it might be two hour. I don't know. It's either one or two. But
>> state building it, we can do that, >> right? >> Easy enough. >> But if you do 10 feet, no rating on any wall. >> I'd like to see as much room in between them as I can. Make it feel like they're
hard. and the open space. Um, I have contacted the AAB to understand if that needs to comply in any way for the 10% of open space if it's developed or any of the sidewalks.
>> So, to be determined. >> Well, we're going to at least on this one, we have 21 acres. So, >> yeah, >> we're I think I think we're around four or five acres out here. So, we're going to have 15 acres of undisturbed area. So, at least on this one, it should be good.
>> Well, under 10. >> Yeah. >> Little above 10. Sorry. >> Yes. On other pieces of property that may come afterwards, it could be more difficult, right? Hopefully not, but it tip for me for now. Okay. Um, so I', as far as the water
supply goes, I'd certainly echo Rob's um, information that, you know, recommend and, you know, considering at least bringing the public water supply out there for, you know, for fire hydrants and fire protection.
Um, as far as a requirement for any other type of water supply, I'd really have to look. I don't believe there's anything in the ordinance, the new ordinance regarding that. >> Um, so I'd have to look in the >> in the fire code. >> Yeah. Mind you, so we know
>> I don't I don't believe there is, but I don't want to, you know, say >> anything near Do you have a dry hydrant anywhere in this area? >> No. No. But the closest hydrant is where the water man ends, which is 1900 or so feet. Yeah.
>> Down at Ken Drive. >> Um, no, it's uh between Adams and >> that intersection. >> Yeah. Yeah. It's beyond Adams. >> Yep. The last house on the service is right there. We have a blow up on that
hydrant. >> It's just after that intersection. >> Yeah. Yeah. You know, there's a point right there that there's a house that sold right across the mountains. There's an easement right there on that property. What's it
for? I have no idea. That's the back way to my property. My property that piece you can certainly explore coming in that way instead of going the road. Much shorter road probably. So what is that?
>> I'm just going to ask a question for future. If like on a road like that, if you were to dig it up to put in the water, I mean, do they just have to trench do the trench? >> In terms of final patch afterwards,
>> I mean out here, if you're in the street, I'm assuming we're just patching it permanent patch >> or the shoulder as much as we could probably. Yeah, the cast doesn't extend all the way down there. >> No, I don't think so. >> No, it's going to cast up there. Okay.
Um, like I said, if it's if it's not public water supply, I'd have to do more research about any other requirements. I I don't believe there are, but I don't want to say that for sure. Um, could you talk a little more about the length of that?
of the road itself including just including the turnaround it's just forformational purposes. >> Yeah. So we are at 1436 ft and I didn't so I know we looked at the subject right
from 9 was the So we are at typically it's something like this right here 600 and 700 ft from here to this point here. >> Okay. >> Right. Is and then that's typically when
we're doing subdivision layup that's how we would determine like the dead end length >> does not include the turn. Okay. >> Well just because at this point you technically have the loop part of it to at least avoid the issue but the dead end length. Right. Right. If something were to happen on >> this side of the road, at least you have the ability to go around the other side.
So, um I I know there is again I'd have to look in the fire code to see what it says. There are links, but >> Right. And then I'm my my best recollection is they don't this is not a length issue under
the fire code. Um the width appears if 24 ft I believe that's satisfies >> I think minimum was 20 ft for fire right is >> 18 or 20 again. >> Yeah we've been told 20 so many that's what we always >> rule of thumb >> and then
>> yeah the turning radius >> we could we can add that to our >> at the end so I brought the that's our largest vehicle the turning radius um which >> I don't know uh you know that's fairly tight at the end there. um whether that meets it or not. I mean it's it's not
>> Yeah, >> it's it's a fairly maneuverable vehicle. It's not >> We can throw it into our CAD system >> and show you the turn movements on the final plants. >> Yep. Yep. Um and that's that's really all I have. Like I said, you know, the just the water and the the
length of the access road issue. I'll have to just confirm stuff. Okay. Now, any questions that you would have? >> No. At this point, we have everybody here. >> I do have one more thing that I was just thinking and this relates to zoning. Um,
in the past for a a condo style development, we've run into an issue and I think Compass Lane was in zoning and and I don't know which section, but it doesn't allow for more than one principal building on a lot.
And I think that was one of the reasons cuz they were looking at calling like an office the primary building and then having and it it beca it was a zoning definition question and I don't know if this new ordinance
>> supersedes that and if if there's an issue that we you know because I'm just thinking about it >> because we did what Kylie's way and Pinewood Pinewood what's one where the DW >> Pinewood and this only came up more recently and I forget whose
interpretation of the particular section of the zoning it was >> because even when we did pressure it wasn't an issue then >> yeah and I don't remember how or why it came up but it just something I think we should probably look at and just confirm
>> um because Compass that subdivision actually well it was it was condos they ended up coming back with a subdivision because of an interpretation of the zone. >> Is that the last one that grass did there? >> West Broadway. >> Yeah.
>> I need a more question internally. >> Okay. >> I wish I knew the sections. I don't recall. >> That's maybe it's part of that we can have to ask them later as part of this process, right? As part of >> that would be a variance. Does it be a
variance? >> See, but something we might have to consider moving forward with these Yeah. Right. This in the styrof home thing, the way the sty home regulations, >> you can do a like it always sets up to do a condom. >> So I don't know if the zoning now
contradicts itself or or >> if something like this, which should be by right, if there's a section that says otherwise. >> Yeah. >> Yeah. I'll take a look at the language. Yeah. >> I'll I'll take a look back myself too, but >> I already reached out for an an interpretation. So
>> Okay. Yeah. Any other comments? >> Thank you. Yes. >> All right. >> I'll uh entertain a motion to adjurnn. So move. Second. All >> in favor say I. I. >> I. Oppos say nay. Motion carries.
Meetings journed. Thank you.