##VIDEO ID:SXgIZlisbe8## okay all right good evening the meeting of the B the board of adjustment for the buau of Somerville for August 21st will please come to order adequate notice of this meeting as required by the open public meeting act has been that on January 18 2024 a copy of a notice specifying the date time and location was posted on the buling board outside of burough Hall given to the clerk administrator mailed fact or email to the curer news and posted on the burough website if anybody believes that this meeting is being held in violation of the open public meeting act please State your views at this time hearing none next item roll call chairman Adair here Mr allet here miss carpinet here Mr McLaughlin here Mr O'Neal here Mr Vimy Mr Flores here Mr Alvarez Mr Daniels would some one yeah would someone please um make a motion to excuse the absences of Eric and Brian second move second all in favor I okay next item to flag United States of America stand Nation God indivisible withy and justice for all okay okay I guess that's all we can do right now because everything else requires a Voice vote U take take take five six minutes you have anything I had a couple things but uh Brian and Stewart are not here yeah no they're not coming Brian doing um Eric aren't coming um I want to talk about something real estate that's in these zoning or that's in our our ordinance that I'd like us to take a look at and the mayor and counsil and the planning board uh we allow form animals okay I have chickens running around my neighborhood one of my one of the gentlemen on the planning board his neighbor has a pig and somebody else has ducks and geese like to take a look at that and kind of ban them I know I know that's that's just the thing good point my wife was uh cooking on the grill and she looked down and there was a chicken looking at her and she said she said got next that what was going to happen I was just one of the things uh uh de rinsky has resigned from the U planning board after many years she's moving out of town yeah and uh just like to thank her for her many years of service she was in one of those that she sat on the planning board and her husband was on on this board years ago and um right she did with the DSA yeah she's um she was a big proponent of little houses and I'm just hope just hoping somebody from the planning board picks up on that she's gonna be missed uh Monday the burough Council introduced ordinance uh basically memorializing what we did on the property on six West Cliff Street the um house on the hill uh where they're going to move the the driveway it's going to cause us to lose two parking spaces there but they're going to introduce the ordinance at the next council meeting so first was the first no was it the first reading or it was that they were talking about introducing me was and the uh planning board is meeting next week they they had put out requests for uh proposals for planning and uh services for General planning for um the affordable house or the affordable housing element and the his the master plan master plan so they be meeting on that next week maybe that's just update from a board member no we only have six we do have a d variance so the advoc gonna have to take that into consideration yeah we should well we have a transcript so if anything anybody okay okay next item on the agenda resolutions I'm sorry minutes for last month's meeting soone like to move move any discussion roll call please chairman Adair yes Miss carpinet Mr O'Neal Mr Flores yes okay next item resolutions someone the move resolutions move any discussion roll call please chairman Adair yes M carpinet yes Mr O'Neal yes Mr Flores yes I having a really bad time take over want do that first or last I mean we'll do it down last I recommend 60 Mercers so just can enjoy the rest of the evening all right next on the agenda under miscellaneous 60 Mercer Street it's 202208 Z don't go anywhere if I can fill the board in and the applicant can chime in if I don't get all the story straight but what happened is came here this is the brand new house that go next to the explosion the board approved it the variances in the sidey setback uh house look beautiful it's almost built uh we got a found two we need to make a motion to amend our original resolution that's correct right yeah so I don't know the applicants proper theil control it's basically 're ready for move in finish the project so this is one of the final steps so I'm sure they're anxious to get through this process so that's the survey will be F all right right you're anxious to get moving on yeah right put the utilities in they've done the sanary sewer vial videotaping it they've done all the conditions of the approval um and it's just the uh the foundation survey doesn't reflect the as it's no nothing theer only did so how does our motion have to read or sound I didn't hear you what what kind of motion do we need to make make is it to accept the the we I would make a motion to accept the as built as depicting the actual conditions on the property uh and uh essentially amending the uh essentially amending the existing resolution I don't have that in front of me but uh that resolution in front of me but uh that's that's how it would be done no because the as belt will control anyway we Rec we have the we we and as built in our records correct correct okay that's as it should be but I just want to make sure that should be sufficient there's no reason to go through a new hearing and a new resolution and everything just the board they've been through enough the minous issue I'll second that cff said any discussion roll call please chairman Adair yes Mr alet yes M carpinet Mr mclin yes Mr O'Neal Mr Flores yes okay you're all set you're all set congratulations thank you very next item on the agenda is the dismissal of last November and it's been continued on this board's agenda at least three times over the last six months and uh they did not provide the notice to Jenna for this hearing and then the attorney came in the applicant at the same time that Cliff was mulling over dismissing recommendation dismiss and the applicant actually want doesn't want to pursue that is that correct Jenna so we have the applicant attorney recommending that the board dismisses and the board and the board's attorney attorne dismiss without prejudice in other words if they want to bring it let me finish if they want to bring it again some other day they can do it this doesn't close the door on them but essentially it's dismissed uh they may never come back they may come back but they're not foreclosed from coming back which is legally how it should be handled someone want to make a motion I'll make a motion dismissed without prejudice for failure to proceed mov second and any discussion roll call please chairman Adair yes Mr Alec yes M carpinet Mr mclin yes Mr O'Neal yes Mr Flores yes next on the agenda of the hearing uh 202 24-9 z25 West High Street ask move that to the end yeah good evening counselor could you enter your appearance please yes good evening Michael salvaji from labor salvaji A M Cohen on behalf of the applicant 25 West High Somerville LLC um this is for the property no surprise 25 West High um it's uh block 113 lot one um for those who are familiar with the property there's an existing building there it's been used for uh commercial Enterprise for a number of years 25 West High uh is a Associated company of if you recall 87 West High that was before you about 18 months ago it's an organization that provides uh housing for those with developmentally uh with developmental disabilities um unlike the prior application which sought to take that existing building and make it into two families this is going to be a single family dwelling with no more than five occupant um it's permitted under your Zone which is the p-r Zone uh it's also a recognized permitted use under section 66.1 of the municipal land use law um we're here in front of you uh because the application uh and the conversion of the building does trigger a D4 F variance um we're not proposing to do any changes to the building we're not enlarging it uh or expanding it in any way however it's just merely a function of the space that's there when this was built in relation to uh the property itself so we will need that variance there's also some additional bulk variances again again we're not doing anything to to trigger that it's just because of the way the property has been laid out in fact one of the variances we need which is for impervious coverage uh we've actually substantially reduced it from over 70% uh down to like 63% however that still exceeds uh what's allowed u in this zone so this evening we'll have the applicant a representative for the applicant address um uh you know the operations uh we will then uh have our engineer go through uh the engineering aspects uh address Mr Cole's report Mr Cole had issue report on August uh 13 our architect will testify and then we'll conclude with our professional planner who will address both the f as well as the bulk variances um so with without further Ado um I'd like to call our first witness again for those who were here Wendy was before you uh 18 months ago uh for that prior application so when did you stand good evening ma'am welcome back uh would you please raise your right hand you saw we swear the testimony you're about to give in this matter will be the truth so help you God please state your name and spell your last name for the record me to SP sorry oh no please spell your last name m a n d l a u m all right welcome back thank you thank you um Wendy uh we'll get right into it what's your position with uh 25 West High Somerville LLC so I'm the exe executive director for Hudson Hill which um we do um could you speak into the microphone please sorry this is so different from the other place so a little nerve-wracking um um so I'm the executive director for Hudson Hill and we provide services at 87 West End Avenue um we I don't know what else well what what what are the types of services what's the population that you uh serve so we um provide supports for um people with intellectual and developmental disabilities um we are 247 you know we're there 247 um um we are let's see I don't know how I'm nervous I'm sorry um what else well I mean what's your experience uh with providing these types of servic I us right so I used to um run group homes in Maplewood New Jersey and um so now we're in Somerville and we have um we are a licensed group home so we're licensed through dddd and what just for the record what's DDD uh Department of Developmental Disabilities okay and that's a state agency correct okay correct so we have very stringent guidelines that we have to follow um lots of policy and procedures um in our group homes we are only allowed to have a maximum of for all intense purposes unless there's an exception but we have to go in front of a board uh four people per house um and we also are required to have two staff members um at all times when any Resident is home when when the residents are home um and that's a wake staff so it's 247 so at night um our staff has to be awake and to ensure the safety of our the people that we um Supply services to okay and what when we talk about de developmental disabilities what types of population would you see here I mean what type of services would you provide and how do they integrate themselves into this proposed group home so a big thing with DDD is that um they they like for um the demographic to be you know emerged into the community so a lot of the guys um we serve are I would say it's a multi- um some are artistic some are um Down syndrome like it's a multi- there's not one it's not one size fits-all kind of thing um and a lot of things that we do is work on their um living skills and right because the the the the whole process is about helping to you know make them more independent help them with their life skills help them with laundry help them um you know be in the community and how are these residents brought to your attention I mean what's the vetting process if you will uh before they're accepted into your program so they have to be on um the Community Care waiver which is through DDD so it's a pretty extensive waiting list um that that they have to go through they have to have a um a support coordinator that works with our you know the agency like our agency um and we just make sure that the people that we choose are cohesive together and it's a pretty intens a vetting out process they come out the parents come out the support coordinator comes out um you know we meet and they meet it's in peac meal you have one resident then you have another Resident then you make sure that the third resident would be okay with the other two residents so it's a pretty long process and what is what what's the expectations imposed upon these residents I mean what how much can you tolerate before they may lose the privilege of staying with your uh in your home I mean do you dismiss anybody or once they're in they're in um it depends right everybody is different um it depends on what their needs are um but for the most part I mean we V people out and make sure that they would be a good fit for our home we're not a behavioral home we're not a medical home um so that's that's and and when we talk about a medical home that would be well what is what's a medical type home a medical home is completely different you know it has to be outfitted for um a Hoyer lift or um you know could be a tra tube or anything like that anything that would to require nursing um need not not that's not true either because we have to have a nurse also so an extensive medical need okay that would require medical attention dayto day not that and and a on a behavioral uh uh you don't take uh residents with behavioral issues so I mean some of our residents could have a behavioral issue but we we're not a behavioral house so there's a behavioral house is a behavioral house like it it's pretty it's we're not that I I don't know how to explain it um so the expectation is the residents who are going to be here are not going to be um problematic for the other residents and the community at large correct cor all right correct um and once accepted into this program or into this home um what would be kind of a typical day for these residents so um most of our residents go to Day program from 9: to 3 um they go to you know different different day programs in the area and they usually get home around 3 o' um some some people have activities outside they go to a music class or something like that um and then dinner and then go for a walk and and go to bed and start all over the next day all right and do any of these residents Drive no so how do they get from or how would they get from this home to their day program or job that they may be right so we're we are required um for every four people to have a a vehicle so licensing is that's a requirement for licensing and that vehicle would be operated by one of the two staff that are on site yes all right um now are these residents um allowed to have visitors come to the home yes um and typically how often does that happen um it depends on their parents if their parents want to come um you know we have parents that come once a week every Saturday they come and hang out or take you know the resident out for lunch or whatever um and we have some parents that don't really come at all so it varies and the idea behind this is that this group of unrelated individuals kind of function as a family unit correct correct all right correct um and we have family dinners we have um different projects that you know we get involved in um but that's our job is to to make everybody feel like they're at home and and with that though come certain familial obligations they may have correct like I mean cleaning the table that's part of BU our skills building you know that that's part of what our job is also is to to help you know ensure that they have an opportunity to become independent and that that's what our goal is all right um now within this home is there you have four bedrooms four bedrooms all right is there and obviously a kitchen in a dining room is there space allocated in the building for activities you know group activities that the residents would participate in yeah and where would that be um where would that be that would be um in the the front of the house there's so much space in that house it's great there's a a living room and a den and um which is great because if we have two residents and you know to they like to play Xbox or whatever we can have that designated area um and then if they want to build Legos or something like that they could do that in the other room so it's it's adequate space for everybody all right well specifically I'm going to ask you what Mr Colin's report raised an issue about the attic and the attic right now has arguably what what's a kitchen up there how do you propose to use that attic space just as extra um like an extra recck room extra space extra maybe for arts and crafts or something and it would be your proposal that you would consider uh or would agree to remove so it's not a functioning kitchen up there yes all right um and then there's also a basement in this structure correct correct yes what are you going to use the basement for for storage and for recreation also cuz it's it's partially finished all right so there's no intention of putting a bedroom in the Attic no no intention of putting a bedroom in the basement no and why can't you do that anyway as a practical matter right we're not allowed to and when you say you're not allowed to who won't allow that DDD and Licensing because we're a licensed group home we have to go by the licensing standards all right um and with that licensing does that come with you know inspections and and followup yes okay very often all right um and you're going to have a vehicle for the residents what kind of vehicle will that be um probably a minivan which is we have two minivans now okay um and you'll have uh space I guess for the two residents to to park correct for the two residents I'm not residents the supervisors I'm sorry right so we'll have um space for two dsps which will be on shift and then the third is for supervisor that will come occasionally to supervise the house okay um Mr salvaji yeah I'm sorry I'm confused because at the beginning of the hearing there was some discussion about no more than five op occupants and there are four bedrooms and I thought I heard somewhere else four four occupants that's it can we clear that out is it is it four occupants or what so there's F go ahead go ahead so there's five bedrooms um but right now we are only allowed to have four residents that could change if they allow us to have a fifth but that's not on the table right now for us all right no because that was not clear yeah why is that um they have to come out and inspect and make sure that it's adequate and it's also based on the people that we choose to to live in the house um they have to make sure that it's not um you know they're trying to get away from institutional living right for for our our the demographic that we serve and that's how they do it they they don't want a lot of people living in that type of you know I think it's on the main floor second floor second floor oh yeah now if you were to add if DDD at some point were to agree to allow that fifth resident it doesn't change your Staffing obligations still have two staff at all times corre correct okay yeah it's based on their tier their tier level you know and their need and and that's it's all based on that it's individual individualized of how many how many dsps but we we will not have more than two people on shift are the staff on shift sorry are the staff on shift yes okay yes and what are what's the shifts 12 hours eight hours the shifts are um if people are in the house we have to STP at 9 to 3 and then it's 3 to 11 and then 11 to 9 thanks let's just want to clarify that have two people St at all if not during the day if nobody's home we don't have to have anybody there yes yes I mean if it yeah if it can I'd like it to yeah we'd keep the bathroom yes basement yeah you will yes MH should we make that a condition of approval if we are so inclined to approve yes that's fine by us all right DDD wouldn't allow us to have a kitchen up there I understand but this is the board's approval I just want to okay yeah do any of your U residents age out they don't they haven't um it depends on their need um you know the residents that we have are on the younger side um yeah so I haven't come into that but the the idea is that they don't age out right unless they need to have different you know if they have different needs then they would not fit into the to the home but no it's your residents like 18 and older or are they teenagers 21 and older 21 and old or um it doesn't it it could be either or it it does it they can have mixed female or male and anybody have a criminal history no will they get jobs in the community yeah absolutely if that's one of their goals they will that that's like that's very high on on you know I if if that's what we want to do you know we want to be part of the community so yeah definitely you said that when they come back from their class yeah absolutely y you're welcome that answers that question continue all right uh if you guys don't have any more questions for let me check what the board anybody from the board have any questions of the testimony just given no we're not required to have a nurse on staff at all times you have somebody available we have yeah she she um our nurse is there our our RN is just there to make sure that medications are there she has eyes on our guys to make sure that you know nobody's sick or nobody you know has anything going on that needs attention um but she's not on staff 247 so the nurses are called in like an ad hoc basis correct okayed build yes one of the things we the approval itly it was a mess I me a mess for a long time two to three High construction was delayed for a long period of time and I thought on the testimony that we had that night was going to go pretty quickly was there a problem back then the reason I'm asking is there going to be a problem I don't know if I'm really qualified to answer that question do I mean what was the hold up I don't I don't remember yeah she I mean I mean there was a hold up with with um the the sprinklers and the having to put the the pipe out to the road I remember that sir if Bill burn who was the architect on that project is here he could probably elaborate on that Wendy is and and oversee the construction part of it so what is your frame I think we're going to start right away I mean bill can speak to that you know we're going to go over there after this meeting right now and I think you'll hear too this is an this is an easier conversion than the other one yes yeso because were ex get and but a happy note it is beautiful inside thank you there quite a bit with the fire department sorry I know we're just there I think Saturday yeah but I mean inside is gorgeous thank you okay I'm sorry Hudson Hill is a tenant in the building correct I didn't hear you yes because Hudson Hills the last testimony was that it's not a not for-profit so because it's a for-profit entity it's not eligible for tax exempt stats yeah but even though we can't use that as basis for acceptance or denial our architect is prepared to talk about that um getting back to what Morgan was saying on the other one uh there was another application in that that general area and a lot of people had a problem with the residents in the group home basically wandering free in our home yeah testimony try given a testimony yeah we weren't opened yet they somebody came in and they were concerned about that I think but yeah we weren't there yet so so if one of the residents uh gets a job in town for example and they have to walk to work they will be supervised on that walk or will it depend upon it'll depend on um what their what's in their um ISP they're they're in their um plan in their plan of care basically um but you know we have people that have jobs now and we take them to their job so they would be supervised because Bas if it's in their plan that they can walk to work then they can walk to work but for the most part we walk them to work or we drive drive them to work so all the are all the residents in or out at the same time in and out at the same time around roughly around I mean for the day for daytime um usually out yeah by 8:30 8 8:30 and home around 3 from 3: to 4: some some residents go to the same day program some president some residents go to a different day program so it's not all at the same place but a lot of coming and going and someday programs pick up you know residents and we don't have to use our car transportation they they provide transportation any other questions from board anybody from the audience have any questions or the testimony just given okay thank you thank you thank you all right um we'd now like to get into some of the engineering issues Matt thewit wife found out go ahead I do sure it's Matthew you yes thank you and I found out tonight that Mr D is a graduate of immaculatus that is true he's a kind of a home Town guys so uh anyway um after you graduated from high school uh what did you do to LED you up to uh being qualified here hopefully as a civil engineer sure so I do have a bachelor degree from NGIT um and I am a licensed professional engineer in the state of New Jersey um for over um 14 years I've testified over to um 3040 different municipalities throughout the state for similar three locally please What's that name three locally um Ron um middlex sville okay okay good union so thank you and your license is current cor correct yep all right y let's go all right thank you Mr chairman um Matt why don't you walk us through I know there's not a lot of engineering issues but there are some conditions and I know Mr Cole had uh called out some topics for us to address as well correct yeah just for the record on the location um we are obviously at 25 West High Street Somerville block 113 Lot 1 um the site is located on the south east corner of West High Street and Maple Street um is it is located in the Burrows p p Zone which is professional office one Family Residence Total Property size is 0.126 acres to the deed line which is just past the sidewalk by Maple Street um and then .11 acres to the RightWay line as there is a um Street RightWay that comes onto the property just past the the sidewalk um under existing conditions as we've discussed it is it is the Standalone two and a half story um structure that is was is or was to use as a professional office um and the rear of it right now is completely paved um you know up to the neighboring houses on Maple Street um all B bulk zoning conditions remain the same um except for impervious coverage which was mentioned um I believe we're going from we're going from 76% yeah down to 65% so um I know one of the comments from Mr Cole's letter was regard to storm water um in that regards the grades in the back and in the front and the side are all going to be the same same runoff patterns um however with the reduction of impervious coverage it's going to improve the situation there'll be less runoff um especially with the with the proposed lawn area back there um so it should improve the condition of of runoff you know coming onto Maple Street um roof drains are all intended to function as they are um which do discharge through um openings in the curb on Maple Street um and then so proposed conditions really the only site changes are in the back instead of all pavement the intent is to create a um a fenced in patio area for the residents as well as a lawn a lawn area um an area of lawn and then um the remaining area just past the curb facing Maple Street would be four parking spaces um that would stretch the 3 36 feet of the existing curb cut um that that really summarizes the the proposed improvements um also in response to to Mr Cole's letter the applicant is okay with planting the some Street trees I believe three were requested and that's that's agreeable to the applicant so that would be part of the site work as well as trimming some of the existing Landscaping um I believe that came up as well so will that alleviate any waiver or anything like that on that issue yes okay I just want to confirm we'll I believe also Matt you had testified that the sidewalk actually you know is into the right of way correct um and Mr Cole had asked for an easement to the to the burrow so and the language we can figure out but the Min uh the applicant has no objection to correct yeah correct that's really to protect the applicant yes exactly not it's just correct it's basically looking out for the best interest of the applicant there in case there a trip fall typically it's a lot cleaner if it's in the right way as opposed to on private property that's that's exactly right so we'll we'll agree to that and however mechanically that gets done whether I go through uh Mr Gibbons or or the Burl attorney um you know Matt I meant to ask you there's a sign in in front of that building now what's the plan for that sign I believe it's to remain okay as I understand it and it will just call out you know uh the the applicant or the address yeah yeah just the address of the property yeah it's not going to call out like group home for developmentally disabled it'll just be the address so that when people come to pick up residents or whatever so yeah yeah the site plan or the plot plan shows it to to be removed saying that's going to be changed to remain yeah just as long as it's compliance that's right with the burrow ordinance and sies I just haven't checked that because the note was to be removed on the plants also in regards to the sidewalk um the applicant I believe another comment was to relevel it or to yeah there was it seems it has settled a little bit next to the curb there's a tripping Hazard there so yeah the applicant does agree to address that as well as uh and repave yeah the uh pavement to remain yeah I had a question about the thickness whether just whether you can there's something to Mill right right right uh if we can check that should the board approve it that that the thickness is suitable for Milling if it's not suitable it's too thin then it's just ripping it out and reconstructing it repaving it got it now Matt I want to ask you uh with the removal of U some of the impervious uh coverage in the back um and kind of the realignment for the parking is there adequate space for the four uh Vehicles we propos to be back there yes we're proposing a standard parking stall which is 9 by actually a foot longer than a standard I believe if they're 9 by9 proposed which typically you'd see 9 by 18 um and then in regards to the number of stalls I know by zoning three is required we're proposing four and I believe the intent there or you know to why we need the fourth is with the two full-time staff you know let's say they'd be parked there along with the van um during shift change you know let's say the new staff member comes in they Park in the fourth Spot while the other employee leaves so it's kind of like a it could be used as kind of a you know transfer spot right during shift changes um and as as far as just you know the overall traffic or you know maneuvering of cars it's real we really only see it um happening at the shift changes which there's only three throughout the day so really you know there's not going to be it's not like it's a coffee shop where there's tons of cars coming in and out this is a very um in you know three times a day maybe more with the van to take people here and there but we don't see this as a very active um situation where you're going to have cars in and out of that driveway and what are we proposing cuz some of as Wendy had testified there's a shift change in the evening hours I think 11 o' um what do we propose uh for lighting so that you know the staff coming and going can do that uh safely yeah so I believe there are two like uh mounted lantern lights on each side of the door so I believe the applicant was going to you know first in check those for adequacy but but definitely need some kind of um you know egress Ingress of the folks walking from the van to the door um so one idea was like a shielded um you know building mounted down light just to the immediate back area uh back door to the parking area and then obviously to the you know um so there will be exterior lighting and it'll be done in accordance with the B because just so the board knows it's a plot plan and the checklist doesn't require lighting because it's not technically a site plan application at least I don't interpret that way because it's hand on a single family home yeah so I think the first step is the the existing lighting would be evaluated if we need to supplement it it's a small site be per I don't see a heavy lift but just so the board knows it's not an oversight from the applicant it's not on there because it's not required by the checklist for the type of application of this okay um I think Matt I um I think you addressed um you're going to add I don't know if you had indicated we'll add Mr Cole um in article Roman numeral 46 ask for fence detail yes uh we're going to provide that um and I the landscape notes we we'll add those right as well any consideration the stacking in the cars that would reduce the driveway and allow people not to back out on Maple Street you come in a clockwise movement between executive properties which is to the South there's an easement there correct it's tight between the building if you do it that way you I agree that Maple Street is not a heavily trafficked and I I also understand that we're not talking about huge y traffic coming off the site it would just reduce it and you would be facing out potentially if you came around you would just drive out onto Maple Street as opposed to backing out that's where I was coming from right and I think that was that was considered um but just with the narrowness I think it's only 9 feet N9 or 10 feet between the two buildings and by doing that that would eliminate the lawn and probably most of the patio which I believe the applicant would would like to use as an out door space that that's you know kind of why we arrived at just the four um you know spots along Maple instead of the pull through so when the the residents uh go to work in the morning or come home after their morning events they from 9: to 3 they were talking about where are they being picked up and dropped off I believe it would be is it right in the parking stall and to the extent and I know this is a little unorthodox I'll ask when for some of the programs that actually provide transportation they'll be picked up in the front yes and and just so if you've seen the plan the front of the very front of the building is no parking allowed anyway it's it's striped off there so be kind of a natural spot just for the van to stop and and allow them to board but I I think rather than going through each one of Mike's comments I think we've tried to address uh those that pertain to um the engineering we'll do the same thing with the architectural in a moment uh but if Mr Cole we've missed anything please let us know I just don't know the some pumps is that going to be the architect I had some comments about inspection in the building I don't know if yeah Bill Bill's going to address that bill will handle that okay anybody from the board have any questions of Mr dit anybody from the audience thank you Mr D thank you all right Mr burn good evening bur could you please stand and raise your right hand you solemly swear the testimony you're about to give in this matter will be the truth so help you God yes I do please State your last name and please state your name and spell your last name for the record sure it's William bur B thank you very much do you need an easel I think we're trying to get one for you probably be helpful sure uh Bill why while they're trying to retrieve the easel um you were here actually as recently as March correct that's correct uh Mr chairman he was accepted as an architect at that point and Bill your license is still current since March right yes it is okay yes it is we do have we have our own easel thank you oh very good thank you want stand thanks so um Bill you were the architect resp responsible for the uh preparation of the plans and the design of the we're not doing much on the outside obviously but the the interior layout correct that's correct all why don't we kind of walk us through uh I guess first we'll start with what it's going to look like from the outside and then we'll move to inside sure so uh what we have here is sheet one of our submission and this sheet reflects the exterior elevations the four sides of the building uh primarily as they exist today uh the only changes that are being proposed are the removal of two windows on the left side elevation that's um the area that was discussed by our engineer that's a 9 or 10 foot space between the building so again that elevation is not highly visible from from any of the other neighbors and again we're just removing two existing Windows the siding material will be replaced so again it's not they aren't the only windows on that side we don't feel like it has a very significant impact on the building okay so let's kind of slide into now the uh proposed interior layout of floor plans so what we have here is sheet number two of our submission as submitted and this reflects the changes that are being proposed to the building um which again are not very significant we have a basement plan here which is obviously uh the lower level um the basement's not fully underground there are some pretty nice Windows around the perimeter typical of old homes certainly in this area High Street and parts of the basement are finished um to the left and to the right of the stairway there's a small finished room here and there are some parts that are unfinished and so those areas are going to be retained and I think as uh Wendy had testified they'll be used for some recreational purposes um there was a question on Mr Cole's report as to the ceiling height down there and we did verify that the ceiling height in those finished areas is approximately 6' 7 Ines so not not super high but not so bad for a basement and there's no bathroom or kitchen facilities on that basement level there is a a a a half bath on this level there's a sink and a toilet along with some mechanical equipment no kitchen or cooking facilities however okay um to the right side of the sheet is our main level plan and again not significant changes a few minor changes we are enhancing the size of the kitchen to some extent just to be more appropriate for the family dining and the family use and again um we are adding a a laundry room here on this floor as well just carving out space from what's there currently which is primarily offices and office type spaces um we are designating a bedroom um in this back right corner which that space is currently an existing office as the remainder of the second floor would be but otherwise there's there's not a significant amount of change occurring here it's a beautiful building and nicely kept okay now we'll move on to the second floor in the attic space to the left side of the sheet and I will say that this um drawing has been revised since our original submission so I'm assuming we want to enter this I'd like to have it marked in as evidence yeah A1 make it A1 with today's date thank you and and Bill while you're doing that this was uh in response to I guess some of the questions we're going to get to in a moment that Mr Cole had raised correct it is and I'll I'll defer um some of the explanation till I get to the items in his report but but what wasn't changed was the plan that we had for the upper level the second floor and again the the work that we are showing here is really just the creation or division of of two closets um to allow for each of the bedrooms to have a closet and again those rooms are currently used as an office obviously the house was at some point a residence and a very nice one and and when it was converted to office space I don't think the changes were all that significant I think they just did a a very typical residential to uh commercial conversion from residential and we do have um two bathrooms that we have uh on this floor one is existing without change and the second one is um receiving a shower and an adjustment to the sink area and that's really the reason that we have to remove that window is just because it's going to be in front of a sink otherwise the attic plan represents the condition that exists today um again that attic space is finished it's a full walk up stairway so the stair Is Not Unusual in these older homes extends up to that that attic floor and that is just an open space finished obviously there's Dormers in the front and the two sides and partial Dormer to the rear for the stairway we've got a full bath here with a tub fairly small and we have a small run of Cabinetry which includes a stove a sink and a refrigerator and as previously testified we would be removing the uh the uh kitchen from this for future use uh I know in discussions that we had we would like the ability to keep that sink on this floor just because it's currently there and I think as Wendy had mentioned it it may get used as a craft room it may be helpful to have that sink there if that would be okay but otherwise we'd be certainly willing to remove the cooking component or anything that would technically qualify it as a kitchen now Mr Cole in his report and I think this goes to the yellow if you will had raised question about whether this is a full atic uh half Story full story um you've had an opportunity to look into to that and and what's your opinion as to that issue so again Mr Cole had raised the question that this area that is completed um could could technically qualify as a story if it didn't meet the definition of a half story and for the benefit of the board um a half story um would consist of the space under a sloping roof that has the line of intersection of the roof and Wallace not more than 3T above the floor level in which space the possible floor area with hrum above 5 ft F feet I'm sorry 5T or less occupies at least 40% of the total area of the floor directly beneath I'm sure you guys have had this explained to you a million times so go to a class on this yes I I I had a feeling he did because when you read it at first it was a little confusing I know my guy and I read through it and we're like we dealt with this before wait what is this saying and but I think we've got it um so again what what we did for the benefit of the board um is just run some calculations um the floor below 971 square feet so that's the that would be what's here on on the floor directly below the area highlighted on this plan represents the area that's 5 feet or lower and this qualifies because the roof at the perimeter rests on the wall plate below so that wall meets the definition it's not three foot or higher it's it's three it's lower than three feet and so again we added a dotted line and we highlighted an area that designates the area 5 foot or less so the area 5T or less is 459 Square ft again the total at 971 so we're 47.3% um therefore we meet the requirement requirement and this qualifies then is what to to be determined is a half story not a full story okay now when we do that the purpose of this for the board knows is just to get the proofs right in terms of it's a c variance for height if the height uh and Cliff chime in if the height is a stor complies with the height but not the stories it's the C variant if the height is greater than 10% it's a d comes a d variant so I just want to call out to make sure the record's right on whether this is a c variance for height or not it's not for UCC is it'll chime in for UCC it's a different story but for this for the purposes of zoning this is what he's doing well we've concluded it's a c correct no he's saying it's not a c he's saying it complies with a half story definition right the the space that exists on this attic would comply as a definition story there's no relief required for the height or the story correct for the Zone District correct that's what I want that's what we we want to know right and to differentiate that as you pointed out the uccc has a definition that would consider the ability to use this space in a residential purpose as a habitable attic which has a totally different definition than the local ordinance does not you know not so distinct it's kind of the same idea just technically it's worded a little bit differently yeah that's okay now um with this layout I know U Mr Cole had raised a question building going to be sprinklered not sprinklered if sprinklered how how so you've looked at that obviously it's part an architect's responsibility what's the proposal here well again I think when that question had come up in Mr Cole's report and I think it was a question that was derived from the the Fire official uh it was indicated that obviously the building um in its present use uh or its proposed use would require Sprinklers and that is technically correct and and um essentially what it is is that the the New Jersey um code would stipulate that um This falls under a use group R3 essentially um five or fewer persons receiving custodial care a facility with five or fewer persons receiving custodial care shall be classified as a use group R3 and shall comply with the IRC um providing an automatic fire sprinkler system is installed in accordance with sections 903 uh of the international residential code so basically um in reviewing that section of the code what would be required by the uh the construction code would be a sprinkler system for the full building that would comply with the residential um sprinkler system standards now in the request of the local Fire official his request was that he would like to see that enhanced to be a full sprinkler system not a residential sprinkler system um you know again I think there's a lot of reasons why we would prefer not to do that however in discussions with my client and and discussions prior to the hearing it's been determined that we would be willing to um comply with that request and and provide a full sprinkler system in the entire building the code requires a 13d I think Bobby was asking for a 13r I don't think he's asking for a regular 13 system so a 13r we can accept that yes yeah yeah yeah 13d is it protects the egress that's all yeah we 13 a little more enhanced a a little bit more relaxed yeah and we could agree Mr G that would be a condition of you 13 RS be will be a condition of approval okay thank you um one of the other things that came up under Mr Cole's uh comments with the architectural is um the property has uh three electrical meters um I don't know if you know why that is and uh there was a question about maybe kind of consolidating into one hard to say not working I'll try to speak l we haven't gotten that far into our investigation as far as the interior work which again is not that significant why there might have been three meters but the assumption is that the building broken into different Poss hard we would certainly willing desire to remove any that we reasonably could but we're not looking to do what we did on7 West where we gutted the whole building which again I think greatly added to the time because obviously we found a few skeletons in the closet that sort of that's not what we're proposing here so to the exent reason we will absolutely remove we are going to have to try to sub and Bill your reference to the other property um and and the board's concerns about the delay and everything else um just to kind of fill that space in or answer those questions what was some of the reasons for the delay I mean you just mentioned one we also wasn't there there was a delay because the um conversion of the attic in that building so so that's correct there was that particular building there wasn't please speak into the microphone which there oh no it's red that good it's talk F okay great 10 seconds go okay so I'm sorry the question again no the delay on 87 construction delay we filed for a demolition permit obviously um to to expose what we could as far as what was in there because there was a lot going on with the full sprinkler system we had to install again that was a conversion to a two family so we had four bedrooms or you know residents per unit it it was sort of a different level of of intensity than what we're proposing here um so there was some time taken in that the the there was some issues with I um scope and the sore line if I remember correctly we had to again bring in a full uh water new water service line so that created some delays just in approvals and Road opening permits and things like that I think especially with that scoping there was some time delays um the ramping I think changed a little bit because there was some grading um concerns or questions as to how we would best be able to do that so I I felt like there was uh and and to the credit of the construction the official who I I feel like you know we were back and forth on several things there excellent to work with I mean I just would like to compliment just having such professionals on on the uh staff here is just a pleasure compared to a lot of places that we work so again there were delays but the attic we because we had to come back correct we did have to come back because it was determined that although part of the attic was finished when that house was built it wasn't really being used it didn't seem feasible to use it but as we got into the project and realized that we could get the HVAC equipment to the sides you know that attic level became very practical so given your intimate familiarity with that project and looking at we uh what's going on here should the board expect this to come online much faster than the last it absolutely should there's there's there go I can use that one please okay I can't even sit down yeah you can because of the level of finish that we have on on this building and the level of work that's being performed I don't wouldn't expect nearly the duration of time for construction there's very little exterior work so I wouldn't anticipate seeing a lot going on I can't necessarily speak to the parking but I I would assume the same it doesn't seem like an extensive amount of work okay um and um I know you're not here to to justify the um the F but the calculation uh came in at 68.3 7% um that calculation we're not doing anything to exacerbate that that's just current conditions correct that that's correct yeah there's nothing that we're doing that's increasing the floor area in any way and and we're really not proposing a change so all right um I don't have anything further from Mr burn um I hope we we addressed Mr Cole's comments um in the course of his testimony did they uh you're basically saying you have no issues with the comments in the report like we didn't really say about Tois in San se but it was just covered saying we'll we'll address that we'll comply with that so I think they've covered uh most of the issues we didn't go over every little point but I the blanket statement saying they will comply with IT addresses up what was the comment about the P Sun pump was inspect some pump to make sure there's no there's no uh connections that shouldn't be in the sanary sewer the sanary sewer connection is unless they can show bvc whatever it just televis it to show the Integrity of the line U with the change of ownership of the sanary sewer anything on the street is now New Jersey Americans responsibility so in reality it's from the clean up in the building in this case it can't be more than 20 ft or 30 ft because the building where it sits um that that was that comment and then it was a question about if utilities have to be upgraded uh looking putting them in the ground but the testimony essentially is we're not looking to do that right to the extent possible to to consolidate The Meters it's everybody's best interest because you pay whether you ECT away everybody pays the $20 monthly charge over right yeah the meter fee sure so there right yeah there's a big advantage and a reason that applicant would want to do that so I I think we certainly will as it's as it's possible I think you had a point too on the number eight uh regarding new air conditioning or HVAC equipment and and we're not really proposing any it's it's probably over service currently because the use is professional office had higher standards than we would as residential so we'll be okay with that and they look to be a good repair and I always say this if you're increasing bedrooms the new policy from the srds say is they want to determine whether there's a connection fee and they're taking the policy or the position that the county is taking that they want to see every application to see if there's a connection and make that determination so it's in here they're adding technically two bedrooms so in theory does the flow go up from the site potentially versus an office it's to me it's di Minimus I don't anticipate connection fee charge but the srsa will make that determination Mr salvaji can we make uh Mr Cole's report compliance of Mr Cole's report a condition of approval if the board is so inclined to approve the application yes very and that reminds me I wanted to U and Wendy can be here to authenticate Mr Co raised a question about underground storage tanks and that um so part of the due diligence prior to purchasing the property uh the applicant uh had a tank sweep done and2 this ISS of that tant thank you I don't have anybody from the board have any questions of Mr Burns testimony anyone from the audience okay thank you Mr bird you're welcome all right um so as we had mentioned uh several times now uh we do need that F variance there's also some bulk variance relief that's triggered you know by the change of of use in the property so we're obligated under the law to provide planning testimony in support of that variance relief so to my left is uh Mr Hamilton who will be here uh to offer that justification do you Solly swear the testimony you're about to give in this matter will be the truth so help you gu I do please state your name and spell your last name for the record William Hamilton h m i l t o n thank you Mr Hamilton Mr salagi yes Mr Hamilton um if you could uh offer for uh the board the benefit of your educational background experience and the status of your license and anticipating the chair's question uh three boards that uh Mr Hamilton have you appeared before us before you know I was thinking about that I can't remember that I've been before this board I've been before most of the towns around here Bridgewood riton Bedminster it's good enough and your planning license is uh valid it is okay um so uh Mr Hamilton we'll get right into it I mean uh we do need some variance relief you've had an opportunity to review the materials Mr Cole's report um in your professional opinion uh starting perhaps with the F what's the justification for uh the board granting that relief here so well and and you've heard that there's no changes to the footprint of the structure that's being presented tonight um but we do need to get relief except for area width depth and Frontage of the lot as Mr Cole pointed out in his letter in accordance with Section 201 1221a of your ordinance um and so we need a D4 as well as C variances um associated with the application now let's start with the D4 uh we're looking at the uh floor area ratio um existing condition is 68.3 % uh whereas 25% is permitted by your code uh the special reasons test for a d4 variant is a little different than a regular use variance in that we need to show that the site will accommodate any of the problems associated with the floor area larger than what is permitted by code and clearly that's the case in this situation uh we propos to uh reduce the number of parking right now you can fit a about six cars out at the site we're down to to four uh and we're going to in decrease the impervious coverage from roughly 76% to 65% and there's really no other changes that relate to bulk standards that are proposed in the application um as I indicated there's also a number of C variances um and I'm just going to list them first the first is maximum Improvement coverage uh we're at uh 65% proposed 50% is permitted by code and right now there's 76% as I mentioned earlier uh front yard we've got 20.6 feet from West High Street 1.7 feet from Maple Street existing and there's 25 fet as required by code sidey yard uh 2.7 ft exists uh 8.7 ft is required uh par parking uh we have zero setback uh the way the parking is proposed and that's existing uh and we also I'm sorry there's 5 foot is required by code uh maximum driveway width as you heard Matt explained is U 60 feet uh 36 feet existing and uh 25 ft is required by code um with regard to the C variances uh release is justif if IED in our opinion under the C2 criteria where a purpose of planning as outlined in the municipal land use law uh would be Advanced by the granting of the deviation and uh the benefits of granting that deviation would substantially outweigh any betri detriment excuse me uh and there's three um goals of planning that we think are Advanced the first is promotion of public health safety morals and general wealth Ware uh the second is to provide adequate light air and open space uh and the third is to provide specific space in appropriate locations for a variety of uses to meet the needs of New Jersey residents um the variance we believe is Justified uh based upon the objective use of the site which is essentially an inherently beneficial use um which by Nature promotes the general welfare um impervious covers being reduced we think that's going to add to open space goal of improving the open space and then um with regard to the negative criteria we have to look at that from both the D variance as well as the C variance perspective uh all these variances We Believe can be granted without substantial detriment to the public good and without substantially impairing The Zone plan and zoning ordinance this is a permitted use uh with an existing structure with very minor site improvements as you've heard um testimony to uh the proposal is consistent with your 2019 master plan stated goal to provide a range of housing types that meet the resident population needs and preserve established residential areas within uh Somerville itself uh in addition it promotes the master plan policy of strengthening business and Retail activity in the central business district by supplying uh residents uh nearby in this group home that's being proposed um we do have one exception uh which is the curbing which was mentioned earlier for the parking spaces none exists today and we do not propose one um we believe that that request to be reasonable and within the general purpose and intent of the r regulation um just as an aside too I mean you could probably make an argument that even a C1 would be I mean everything is there I mean you know there's you know you could make the argument of a C1 as well and I say that C1 variance which is you know you're facing a hardship because what's already there existing condition exactly um and and again nothing the the bulk variance that we've referenced none of those were triggered by what this applicant is proposing that's correct um and even if it was being used in a commercial context the town would be faced with or this property would be faced with the similar bulk variance non-conformities absolutely um and I and I guess along those same lines even with the F that's true that's true it's an existing condition so um um I believe under section four maybe you've touched on this and I you know I think you're also uh it's also an argument that you you could consider this an inherently beneficial use yes which would essentially obviate the need well I take the position that it largely obviates the need to prove the positive criteria because it already presumptively uh proves it again I'll leave that to you it's just my thought didn't hear that so I just thought I would mention that I think that's that's true I did mention that it was an anally beneficial use which would satisfy the positive criteria right okay I I I I missed that I'm sorry yeah Mr gibons it's it's Somerville is rather unique because you guys have gone out and recognize this as a permitted use uh in in this Zone um I don't I don't think that takes away from the inherent benefit of of the use um but uh but I agree um and and Mr Hamilton to your point even under the D4 while it's inherently beneficial use this property can still accommodate the issues created with that correct absolutely yes just for the completeness of the record I thought I'd mentioned that I appreciate thank you I don't Mr chairman I don't have anything further for Mr Hamilton um um and uh you know I perhaps the board or Mr Cole may have questions anybody from the board have any questions of the testimony given by Mr ham anybody from the audience thank you Mr chairman just have to do that so uh Mr chairman we're concluded I I would hope that uh through the course of our four Witnesses we've addressed uh board's concerns the issues that Mr Cole had raised in his report um we are here it's kind of unique the use itself is a residential use which doesn't necessarily prompt a site plan as Mr Cole has noted although uh we have tried to address a lot of site plan related questions um I believe as Mr Hamilton has just concluded um the f um use variants uh this property has been there it's been there for for many many years um and that F has been been kind of uh you know part and parcel of the property uh our use certainly is not going to um are you so certainly be compatible and can be accommodated on the property the bulk variances we're not doing anything to exacerbate them that's their current conditions however the applicant um you know in an effort to you know provide some more green space for its residents uh is removing approximately 11 12% of the coverage uh which um does you know reduce the impervious surface helps with the ground uh excuse me storm water uh so I believe on balance we've been able to establish uh that the relief the use and bulk Vance relief is appropriate here uh and um I know Mr Gibbons will go through but you know we've agreed to a number of conditions Mr Kohl's uh presented you including the removal of that kitchen on the third floor planning of the street trees releveling of the sidewalk um and again I'm sure there's others that I've probably missed but we appreciate the courtesies extended to us and uh you know if there's any more questions we're certainly here to answer those M do you have anything someone want to move the U closing the public portion of this application move second move second all in favor I the conditions that we have the conditions that were that are have been established are first of all that the kitchen will be removed uh that the 13r sprinkler system will be installed uh as discussed Street trees will be provided by the applicant so that'll obviate any need for a waiver and um let's see oh oh that the existing side that that that the sidewalk will will be releveled or in the alternative I want to make sure I understand this it'll be releveled or it will be essentially redou it will be either releveled or repaired whenever to get rid of the tripping Hazard okay and that and and that compliance with Mr Cole's report in addition and our standard conditions of approval and that should do it Mr chairman okay with the exception of the four parking stalls backing out the applicants proposing to keep that Arrangement will they be stacked or no they the applicant is saying they they don't prefer stacking they prefer to have the four backing out in Maple Street as opposed to stacking it parking head in right and it is narrow between the two buildings if you do the clockwise and the flow of traffic coming off the site is very light in my opinion Maple Street is travel so I don't have a big objection to it with that I'm just calling out that's an exception the report so that we're clear that the applicant it's going to be that what's proposed in the plan is what is is should the board approve this being approved also too I don't know Mr gimons uh about the fire the sprinkler system uh was another condition that we would 13 R correct yes make sure rich I know that's the you rich and Ed I mean that's that's as I understand it it's 13 R is the proper designation okay good and it's in my report but approval from the fire marshal he did specifically write a letter on this he said should the board began approval I reflected saying he would request a 13r and the system with the details of that system will go through his office so approval with the fire marshal sub would be a condition of approval okay very good and I think with that we're we're we've got it oh the sink we were going to put a bathroom was there going to be a bathroom up there anyway or I mean again there's one up there already there's a full bath up there there's a full bathroom we would just keep the the sink you know just you know if they're I see a problem keeping s yeah all right s St all right someone like to move the application any more discussion roll call please chairman Adair yes Mr allet yes M carpinet yes Mr mlin yes Mr O'Neal yes Mr Flores yes thank you everybody I appreciate it the rest of your summer what's ever left I will coordinate the preparation of the resolution with your office Mr salvaji thank you for everything what do we have it's the uh 20239 Z 41 fth Street compliance correspondence a little background for the board on this is the board approved the SE boxes and the use of the site for landscapers it was used previously by m&a which was a uh tree tree tree company that split wood and brought logs in was primarily uh removal of trees so it was the condition of approval that obviously it's in the flood Hazard zone so they need to get D approvals or Jack documentation to that extent uh during that process the original application had an office trailer uh a salt dome in mulch uh he was initially flagged or I asked the question uh do you need a d permit for that uh the applicant got back and said yes we're going to take it off so was off the plan so it was this c boxes was like five or six c boxes shown on the plan the board approved it uh subsequent as a condition always to get DP approval documentation is part of the part of our standard conditions of approval right is part of any structure in the flood Hazard Zone DP requirements is you have to Anchor them you can't you have to tie them down you can't have things floating in the flood so uh during the compliance which is process of making sure theyh to all the conditions I reached out to Dave Myers the co and said is this a UCC construction item being the anchoring of the c boxes his answer is absolutely need a construction permit I'll handle that so during that process when he he was looking at this from an anchoring I looked at it to help out in the buoyancy CS because the plans did not show the specifics of the anchoring um during that process it turns out that the general permit which I knew there was a general permit for this only allowed for 200 square feet of structures so it doesn't appear that a general permit is applicable for this given the multiple c boxes on this application so that was thrown back to Craig uh Craig sty is the applicant and uh we're going back and forth on that but you have one of the emails in front of you that came from the applicant's engineer I think uh it was requested from Cliff to put that on the agenda so that's your basic backup on um what is going on with that project so the general permit was for the zoning permit or was that for UCC permit the zoning permit the the zoning permit was conditioned upon getting a d approval or documentation the UCC permit oh you're right thank you for saying that uh how it works is for a UCC permit to be issued you have to show demonstrate prior approvals a prior approval in this case would be a z well not every case is zoning approval compliance with the board requirements and D approval or documentation and just general permit you don't need gfd permit to automatically do it so you're right it was it was flagged during uh zoning is a d approval needed and it came up I took a hands off on because I shouldn't be reviewing it if it's a UCC I'm not inspecting it it's a UCC issue so I let the construction Department I I'm supportive I don't take the lead because I don't have jurisdiction why because the UCC permits required they're going to inspect it and they're going to review it so during that process uh it came up to me Michael uh these plans don't show the anchoring at all doesn't show how many anchors what's going on here so I said this cuts to the chase I'll do the math send the applicants engineer in terms of what he has to do for this thing and during that process I went through the general permits D General princial flood Hazard and the 200 S foot came up so I threw it back the applicant look uh there's already C box here we have five or six if you look at the quantity there's no way this complies doesn't mean you can't do it it just means you may need a different D approval this board had approved it but it's conditioned upon correct getting whatever you need from D to use this so that which is customary with the way we do every app every approval how big is the C uh 8 by 20 8 by 40 or classically in in this design they show 8 by 40s like one or two 8 by 20s this is the design where you had c boxes with the mass covering so they can put equipment so they had multiple c boxes shown with mass over it structure to for for to getting stuff out of the rain the Rope is we never got DP approv we don't we're it's not through it's not the applicants engineer is very reversed he just got an individual permit for a different application so I'm taking a back seat showing letting him because he knows this well to demonstrate that it's permissible either by General permit or to obtain the individual permit and the other Avenue is to do a jurisdictional determination of D say the D this is what I'm doing what do I need that's a jurisdiction so um it's still the last email was we we wind up in 0708 there was two or three applications in front of this board m&a to May or Joel was it was m&a is the tree guide the the application was uh to Mayor Joel during that process the D permit was obtained for the use and I think for the one C box out there so an 0789 there was a d permit issued for the use so to do this analysis in my opinion you should have the DP permit so we're right now the request came from the applicant's engineer to you have a copy of that permit I reached out to uh at that time tomato Jewel was done by Dave Styers different engineer Dave has a copy of the request he doesn't have a copy of the actual permit I I the bur has it but I did an Oprah request too so we need to get that and I'm going to get that to the applicants at engineer but the number that's just the question came up is the existing seox out there grandfather or permissible under an indifferent permit because the rule says that it's cumulative you only allow 200 square feet cumulative from 07 on right so I know there was a EP permit issued for to or drool I just don't know if that covered the C box and what the interplay is with that c box versus the six or seven additional c boxes they want to use the applicants in here needs this information to quantify exactly what the square footage of these buildings are these are technically uh considered unoccupied structures buildings they're unoccupied but they're still structures they have a roof blah blah blah correct so well that's where that email came up from so what do you need from us I think this is just uh FYI right that's yeah it's more FYI than anything else and I was kind of surprised but I I wanted to make sure the board knew what we were up to what's it take to Anchor typically you can use H coils a lot of cables or some people for concrete pad anchor them down um they're quite BL we had in ' 07 on an original approval we had steel cables put in for the logs if you look out there there were I beams the logs were against and the idea was we're going to strap them doing this do that I you I think it used to be permissible to allow it to float like a dock with a tether the new roles current rules right which are recently revised say you cannot do that they have to be anchored you cannot tether them you know if you put Bowlers around something let it float up with the flood just make sure the bowlers will keep it there let it go up and down like like a boat does in the tides right like a dock I don't have a problem with that the bdp says specifically that is not permissible you have to Anchor it you cannot allow the structures to float oil so right yeah so um we can't and we can't wave that that's D it's not reir it is a d uh requirement and the Cs I came up with with these c boxes 8 by 20 weigh about 4,000 pounds empty so you have to assume it's empty the calculations came out with 69,000 PBS of voy popping it up so if you take the 4,000 you have to Anchor it with 65,000 pounds to keep those structures from popping even a full one floats so right so I one behind Ed one ended up in the river but we're not even there yet we took a step back because before we can look at buoyancies and structure it is it permissible under a general permit if it's not then it has to be handled in an individual permit which I think the D in the individual permit will tell you exactly how this is going to be handled anchoring wise so we a little bit of a u a delay of snafu s of be during this whole process it appears the property was sold so the applicant in front of the board is not the applicant we're dealing with now it was sold and they're trying to occupy which they can certainly occupy the board approved it it's just a question of the c boxes that's the only hold up is the c boxes which um frankly I don't have control this war doesn't have control the burrow doesn't have control over it's if you look at the new flood hasard you're looking at 7 feet of water on that site which we all know it so it gets a lot of water yeah I know so that email it is what it is it's just letting the board aware what's going on because they might be coming back for an amendment on this I don't know well we thought the board should have a sense of what's going on yeah the issue is DP is the structures you can put a pile it's all this grandfathering on General fmit for piles of soil piles if you're been if you've been on the site lawfully since 07 you allow you to continue however the structures are really it's very instrict Pags on structures so that's what we're dealing with and um I'm trying to get all the information to the applicant and I it's in hindsight there was a hold up because the condition of approval was an easement from the burrow board recalls there's a stone wall on the property the stone wall is predominantly in the burrow right away so you need a license agreement so there was a pulled up during this process to get that addressed and hindsight this should have been brought up at that time but because of the uccc permit i l the Construction office and that in hindsight that was a delay of about six weeks it should have been brought up earlier earlier but I can't be the the lead on a is on a UCC item the lead is the Construction office I can't I can't run lack of a water a rough shot or something and say no no this is no no no they're going to inspect it they're going to get their own permits I I'm I'm in the support role at that point correct so in hindsight it should have been kicked to the construction Department sooner to address this and hindsight but other than that it's uh it's going to work its way out um it's just is a delay yeah one other thing um about a year and a half ago we approached the mayor and Council planning board about getting help getting a zoning officer we have a new zoning officer one of the things that we need to do is ensure just as Frank did and Gary Huka back our fellow Al wean that the zoning officer comes to our meetings because everything we do is predicated on his or her rejection or denial of an application so I would like that person to be at our meetings WR a letter that's did last time yeah follow with the Chairman's comments is my understanding of jenica chinman I don't think her scope of job duties includes going to the night meetings we need to change that because I disagree look I I've articulated that both boards when Frank Roso came here I thought it was very beneficial because he would fill the board in why the applicant is here exactly what the violations are and the policy of the burrow has always been if you're in violation the penalties are stayed until the board reviews that I think it's good to have that backround so I'm in totally support having a zoning officer correct at these meetings to to uh many municipalities do it it's not we we always did going back to the 70s I know Matt Carell wean G hooka they all came Frank Roso I'd like to draft the letter of for approval for next meeting we present it to Theo Council again okay anything else to come before the board someone want to move for motion to adjourn move second all in favor I