this is a regular meeting of the fairen Zoning Board of adjustment adequate notice of this meeting has been given pursuant to the provisions of the open public meetings act time of the board of reorganization in January of last year the board adopted its regular meeting schedule for the year notice of the schedule was sent to and published in the Asbury Park Press in the Star Ledger on January 20223 that notice is also posted on the bulle board in burough Hall and has remained continuously posted there as required of the statute copy of the notice is and has been available to the public and is on file in the office of the B clerk copy of the notice has also been sent to such members of the public as have requested such information in accordance to the statute adequate notice having been given the board secretary is directed to include the statement in the minute to the meeting before proceeding with a formal meeting tonight I'd like to say a few words to the applicants or experts in the audience about the role and authority of the fair and Zoning Board of adjustments board is a separate independ count Municipal legal entity and its limited Authority is specifically set forth in B ordinances and the New Jersey municipal AMS law this qua are judicial in nature and the members of the board are unpaid volunteers appointed by the mayor of council the zoning board does not enact B land use laws and regulations the bur Council does that the zoning board does not enforce theous laws of the bureau fair this is the responsibility of The Bu code enforcement officer this board deals with appeals for relief from the requirements of the bur's land use laws or denials by the zoning officer and is never entitled to a variance also known as an exception to the zoning regulations but must meet specific criteria with pror to the New Jersey municipal lands law and the Varan ordinances by satisfying certain required standards of proof the board has no authority to wave these requirements the burden of proof is an applicant to show that he or she is entitled to specific relief requested the applicant must prove that a deviation from the regulations will advance the purposes of the ordinance and that the deviation would substantially outweigh any detriment of the Zone plan variances relate to the use of the land and are not intended or authorized temporary or unique personal situations roll call please Mr here deel here Mr Bridgeway here Mr Ryan here Mr here loer here Mr here Mr here Mr here please Jo me United States of America to the which stands one nation God indivisible with liy Justice for All okay um so as I said as I was stumbling in um this is our January organization meeting and we have some administrative things to take care of with regard to board business um we will be moving into executive session and then we will be moving to the decant matter um as new business uh once we return from clst session um did we do Oaths for the newly appointed members delate we have enough okay did we get reappointments for our two members who had terms expiring would I be the one that's supposed to know that I believe I Haven been I haven't been repo you're about to find out might be a short night well there would be two other people sitting in those seats I suppose showed up but you haven't heard from anybody I was given a copy of a resolution of record rep tion 2024 d03 years is unsigned but it appears to be authentic concerning a meeting held on January 2nd 2024 it identifies as far as the Zoning Board of adjustment Dr Skip laer four-year term Paul canella alternate one A two-year term and Council person's Cole and K one year term I guess as the Lea Zone I not I have and Alternate anymore you are an alternate you are alternate one we're still trying you out we're not sure I thought I was Advanced up at one point how about we deal with that outside listen I'm happy to be but just so everybody knows um to the extent that we've been engaged in the processes we've moved alternate members up into full seats and we've moved new members into the alternate roles that is not happened every single year it requires a lot of juggling of things because you actually move into somebody else's balance of their term and then the alternate is the shorter term but I'm not quite sure what was done but the good news is that you're here and you're supposed to be here and for the next two years we need you to be here and Skip I gu you go um folks if you're willing sure sure we have a Bible just to make sure dist correct four more years two more years I was a cheer for drer yes you like individual or would you like to do this on MOS I will defer to you you are full member we're good we're good we ask you to stand I state your name I Samuel aler Paul repeat after me do Solly swear that I will support the Constitution of the United States I will support the constition of the United States and the constitution of the state of New Jersey theti of the state of New Jersey that I will bear true faith and allegiance to the same that I will bear true faith and allegiance to the same and to the government government established in the United States and in this state government in the United States and in this state under the authority of the people under the authority of the people and that I will faithfully impartially and justly perform I will faithfully justly and partially inform and I will faithfully and justly and partially inform all the duties of Paul Zoning Board member alternate number one all the duties of Paul Zoning Board member alternate one all the duties of this according to the best of my ability ACC to the best of my ability you may so help me God or so help me go go gentlemen I'm gonna ask that you sign just above where your name is printed and return those to off thank you printed just how long time is this for 4 you're in for the duration 30 read that before you sign you are here for four years oh wow got awesome thank you John right good thank you guys okay uh now we need nominations for chair and vice chair as we've done so many times in the past and we'll continue to do I will nominate yet for another term Mr to leader who leads us with un unequal are there any other board members who are interested in uh moving in this Direction with an eye towards the future leadership of boort I'd say yes but [Music] alterate all right then you need a second second a second dud um even that you accept yeah I I made many mistakes in this is so I I take this all very seriously I I think every time I've been asked to be chair I asked whether or not others want to step in I communicated that there's a limit to what I will do and I continue to break my own rules um this term runs mine for another few years um I did shed uh participation in the planning board last year um in part because uh I wanted to make sure I had enough time for this so I very much appreciate uh the trust of the board members um and would be happy to serve again thank you thank even though there are other Nomes she still take in the absence of a a debate um roll call please Mr yes dangel yes Mr Richmond yes Mr Ryan Yes Bon yes Dr loer yes and Mr canel yes just like the democra primary in New York City un opposed my friend you win the primary you win it all uh Vice chair to nominate uh Peter NZ I I really don't think that um well yall don't get to see some of the stuff that we're doing behind the scenes but um eater's um co-leadership of the board is very significant I I thoroughly endorse um him remaining right where he is um if he's willing to [Music] continue yeah what a helmet we'll do another year I appreciate your uh your confidence me thank you and yes I acceptation any other discussion roll call please sh Mr I'm sorry Mrs D'Angelo yes Mr Bridgeway yes Mr Ryan yes Mr Forte yes Dr W yes Mr canella yes and Mr leer yes word secretary yeah thank you uh could someone please hand Shi with a short straw I think I you got um do we have a nomination for board secretary yeah Point she will nominate Sheila Olson as appointment of board secretary second any discussion Sheila very much appreciate having you on board and thank you for your service to the B yeah roll call when you're ready Mr Mr n yes Mrs de yes Mr Richmond yes Mr Ryan yes Mr for yes Dr Walker resting yes Mr ler yes okay Doug so the next one is the appointment of board professionals um as everyone knows um we did the fair and open process this year so we solicited proposals and received proposals for attorney engineer and planner those materials were circulated to you in advance of this evening um it is my intent to go into executive session to discuss those appointments and um that that's the way I expected to hand do no problem doing that do you want to do the approval of your meeting dates and official not newspapers most your yeah sure why don't yeah let's do it thank you um so the the reor dates are in front of you um there was some confusion over tonight's meeting um but it was resolved um the reorganization meeting in 2025 is being set for January 9th if everybody could eyeball these dates what we're looking to avoid is school um conflicts or holiday conflicts that that we can see and anticipate I think we're good I think we adjusted two of the dates yeah when we put this together so I think we I think okay I'm not sure about as a teachers convention I could try to look that up in September November no it's November yeah I feel like it's late October but I don't know for sure it's November 7 a problem okay then we should probably move this it's the seventh day yeah the 14th yeah uh yeah well is that the first what's the what's the first November so wait did we move it from no November 1 I think we November 1st is a Thursday because Halloween this year is going to I think we moved it because we thought the Friday it's Friday November 1 Friday so then that's that's move then we'll move it to the 14 yeah that's the next logical they too everybody give with that sure any other things that we see there that we need to address okay I'd like to make a motion to adopt formally the proposed 2020 dates recognizing that we've adjusted November 7th to November 14th second thanks roll call please Mr yes Mr yes Mr yes yes yes yes yes approv of the official newspapers I believe that we are um publishing certainly we parallel what the buau does and I believe believe in the opening notice um that I read the adbury park prats the Two River times and I did not read I'm sorry star lger I'm not sure that I read all those three every time but ASB Park PR Star Ledger two of times are the papers selected by the bureau uh I would make a motion to approve those three papers uh for our official uh newspapers for publication in 2024 second call Mr yes Mr dangel yes Mr Bri yes Mr Ryan yes Mr yes drer yes Mr waer yes okay D so setting up uh the discussion in close with regard to professionals um should we put anything on the record with regard to the submissions are those submissions a matter of public record they are after the fact after the fact okay uh so unless we need to put anything further on the record I'd like to make a motion that we go into an executive discuss session to discuss the appointment of the board professional for 2024 second roll call you ready Mr nees yes Mrs D'Angelo yes Mr Bridgeway yes Mr Ryan yes Mr for yes Sergeant loer yes Mr leader yes you AC time uh so here's what we're going to do um we're going to ask everybody to give us 20 minutes and because we just have doors I'm going to ask if everybody maybe wants to go to the upstairs Lobby and when we're finished we'll send somebody up to let yall know that we're going to reopen we will wait until everybody's back um to reopen um if you're in the building you'll hear us when we tell you we're open if you're outside of the building um we'll be reopening the that you um that's what we'll do yeah the so so we have let's do the appointments so you can vote on those then we'll move right to we'll do the minutes say is do you want me to stay until the end happy to if you want to oh if you we're going to go through the de I I do hope to do that okay so I I think get better right okay um she roll call please yes yes yes Mr canella yes sorry Mr sh here Mr ler yes start with the T here okay so we're going to be moving ahead with the appointments of the board professionals I will make a motion to appoint uh Mr kovat for board attorney for 2024 subject to subject to approval of contracts yes I think one was submitted with the materials was it believe was requir okay I didn't review it we just going to going to check it against last year's is it the same no it's l what's L the hour rate you reduce the hour rate 140 still for the for the regular 140 for everything and then the 500 for that's that's all good so okay so so we'll just do it subject to me reviewing the contract and signing it but that that's all we need to do that should have been given to you in the package what's that that should have been given to you in the package yeah second a roll call please Mr yes yes Mr yes Mr Ryan yes Mr yes yes Mr V yes thank you very much appreciate your representation and guidance of the board appointment of board J make a motion to appoint C Associates for the board engineer for the 2024 year subject to approved the contract second MREs yes Mr Mr yes Mr ran yes Mr foron yes Dr laer yes Mr leer yes Jordan thank you very much we appreciate your guidance and your service we look forward to working with you in 2024 appreciate it thanks um for the board planner we will be I will make a motion to appoint the CCH Clark Kon hint uh to continue their work as board planner subject to approval of the contract second Mr yes stand yes Mr Bridgeway yes Mr Ryan yes Mr Forte yes Dr yes and Mr yes okay uh we have completed our reorganization business we have completed our executive session that brings us into new business and uh we're ready to call the deacom matter uh the record Mr Forte is refusing from the D someone's gonna tell me I'm pronouncing it wrong I'm sure D Dion [Music] [Music] yes before you start testifying please State your for re spell the last name got trouble just make recording this if anything [Music] happens Mark exhibit this is the same doc that we have yes okay uh the the CH permission I'd like to Mark the following exhibits I'm really referencing September 28 letter [Music] to um I'd like to Mark 81 81 will be the documents identified on the letter as 123 four and six that is number one the zoning board application ID lines in part three the list of variances waivers requested legal reasons why variances should be approved number six completed land use development checklist as A2 we'd like to Mark the zoning officers denial letter dated August 7th 2023 A3 will be the five images photos in about the property A4 will be the Fair Haven historic preservation commission memorandum of action dated February 28 23 85 number 12 will be survey prepared by Charles sumon dated July 7 23 A6 will be the signed and sealed architectural plans tile diacon residents pred by jiz design and development this two pages dated 9:15 and 23 also would like to have marked as zva1 the November 7 2023 letter CME over the signature of Jordan Rizo consisting of eight pages inclusive of four images and also zba 2 email correspondence between uh our engineer C I'm sorry CME Jordan Rizzo and the applicants architect dated November 7th through the 9th concerning certain aspects that were agreed to or at least uh I think was concerning the upper space I think that's important to put that on on this part of the record you have any other exhibits that you want to have marked uh one definite one potential one I this is the add FL plan was a question attic floor plan we're going to mark that as A7 and Mar that this is in the historic commission so I thought what was presented to the historic Bo earlier T here in case the board wanted for reference this this references the eaves and the window treatment and the okay so let's mark that as A8 this is store condition exhibit you have a date on that what's that uh date yes that would be February 1623 Fe 16 23 and the ad for plan do you have a date on there that would be uh December 28th point right any other exhibits uh that would be it Mr di only for my comfort if you could grab yourself a chair and a chair for your wife I was gonna ask I didn't know we're doing I standing R and we sit uh is your okay thanks for seeing us tonight I'm Chad Dion That's d a o and is and Nick and Tom this is my wife Lee you guys know our architech Al um we live on 36th of Normy the property question here we we moved in approximately Labor Day of 2022 um I think coming Fair Haven was a long time dream of ours and we've got two small children now son Wes who is three um daughter CeCe who's one and um you know we've been looking with friends in the area we've been looking for a while to come to town obviously the real estate market during Co made things a little bit tricky to to get in but we were really happy to get in and we we'd loved to living here um ever since um I just interrupt you just for a second apologize asson have you confirmed that we have jurisdiction to check mailings yes I have thank you Mr do you want to do the uh checklist waivers now too or we've broken a stride why don't we go ahead and do that no no problem go ahead Jord what do you got so there's a few um very standard ones um they are ownership disclosure statement several outside agencies M County planning board F FD M County Health Department and then all e all ements uh these in cements which I assume are not applicable to this application um so nothing out of the ordinary I don't take any exception to documents that Prov and the request is that we wave those requirements for the application anybody have any questions regarding those items okay I'm going to just propose that we uh without objection that we proceed to the application if there's any concerns related to those items we'll address them when they come up otherwise we would wave them when the board takes actiones that make sense yep good y yes so obviously we we left the town we want to be here along long term um you know upon living in the house for a little while it became apparent that the floor plan lives a little bit awkwardly uh currently there are three bedrooms upstairs although the one bedroom that's the area in question really functions more like a finished attic but we do have a three-year-old son and one-year-old daughter um they need to be on the second floor with us that room is now where my one-year-old daughter sleeps uh it's a little tricky just given the low ceilings um and it's it's just not a great functional space so that's that's one reason why we're here we want to improve the space for our kids um recently this project has taken on increased importance to us because we found out um I'll just throw this in the record um that Lee's expecting very early so um now we're going to have three kids in the uh in the space and our objective here is to create two bedrooms on the existing uh floor space without increasing the ground space um that we're talking about uh in question here over our garage um what else sorry I made some notes I want to make sure that I hit on um you know the other area of our house that is considered bedroom is really downstairs and far away from the entrance to the upstairs it's a um sliding glass door room next to our porch it's very narrow it's not really a functional bedroom so that's not realistic especially either having us stay down there we're having one of the kids down there um and um so that room has become more of just like a pseudo office SL part of an extension of what what I think Al explain to you a bit is becoming more a playroom than than a bedroom um and so I think we've been trying to work with the town and follow the process through as you can hear from the dates on all those documents it's taken us a little while to get to this point um but you know we we made sure to follow through the historic commission process we went once informally to solicit feedback and try to be mindful of the fact the homes of the historic district and take that uh feedback into consideration with the design that we put forth we came back and then we're um got the approval of the hisor district um and then we tried to make sure we cover all the basis in terms of what we're doing here um I think you'll see the house the lot we have it fits in the R5 Zone but it's not really the Performing lot as many Lots in that area they're kind of chopped up in in unique ours is oversized and the house is sort of uniquely situated back far from the street whereas many other houses in the store District are right up on the street so I think the uh square footage increase that we're requesting here is fairly modest and it won't feel obtrusive from the street because it's going to be set back quite far from the street and above the garage it'll kind of look like if you look at the house from the street right now it's almost cut off in the middle and it looks almost lopsided because most of the mass is on the ground floor and it hangs back behind the fence line where you can't see it uh so I think when we you know give a get approval and complete this project long make the house look complete and more balanced from the street and help improve the neighborhood aesthetic um while I hopefully not imposing on any of our neighbors or or the neighborhood in general um because I think it's kind of like finishing space that should sort of be built the way that it is now um so you know I guess I'll let Al kind of introduce the project but I think that's that's how we're thinking about it um appreciate the consideration so I want to I want to touch on three preliminary matters uh and I want to do them in this sequence the first thing I want to talk about is the three resolutions of approvals for the three variances that have been issued for the structure that's there today the second thing I want to talk about is exactly what variances deled by the application and make sure the board understands exactly where you need latitude and the last thing I'm interested in understanding is the process before the historical commission and whether or not you made any adjustments to your plans and specifically what they've told you but if we can start with the resolutions yeah the resolution I I actually don't I I don't have the resolution um I know there was previous work done I'm not sure exactly when or where 1993 so there's three um each of them have um specific things one deals with a fence one of them conditioned the removal of a garage um one of them related to a deck I Believe Miss Olsson you have you have all three de I think we should start with the oldest and I think I just want to understand what was granted I want to know if the still there and I want to know if there are any conditions whether or not those conditions are still being satisfied for purpose of the record we should probably mark this we mark one exhibit as zb3 dba3 the oldest appears to be August 27 1984 the I'll read this in record construct a 6' High stockade fence on the south property L line line and variances for lot Frontage rear yard and accessory building rear yard most of this was form it says the subject prop premises is unusually shaped lot the lot has a frontage of 48.3 three ft where 50 ft is required the dwelling has a rear yard of 10.3 ft where 30 ft is required and an accessory building par garage closed par has a rear yard of 2.2 ft where 10 ft is required applicant proposes a 6t high fence or a 5 foot high fence is committed the board granted the relief and as to the conditions it appears that the applicant finally the the approval for the fence was granted however the final H ft of the fence at the front of the property sh sloped at a consistent angle from 6 feet to 3 feet at the front of the property so I'm interested in understanding whether that fence is there whether it complies with the condition of the resolution I'm also interested in whether or not the setbacks are still the setbacks that you have and if they were talking and looking at the same structure that we're looking at today there's two more which is highly unusual so we don't normally have this step because we haven't usually seen so much activity is the fence there I believe the fence to referring to along the South property B is basically the right side uh the fence is there and it does come down the property and it slopes to a low white fence around front of the property so sounds like it's still going with that and what would setback St 10 foot and then there's an accessory is there accessory building on the lock though no I think the accessory was the remote garage I think it was an older it appears that the garage it's a subject Frontage Frontage appears to have been the same or continues to be 48.3 feet were 50 feet as requir yeah the survey is showing 46.4 yeah yeah and it says the dwelling has a rear yard of 10.3 the the new survey shows in the upper left corner which I doubt was a I wouldn't think would be a garage was 10 or is 10.6 where 30 ft is required that's the original structure to the back corner we talking about so that wouldn't have been would not have been done so problem in this corner okay then it says the accessory building Parn garage POS pattern has a rear yard of 2.2 feet where 10 ft is required now there's no that it was removed next resolution requ where did the one and a half story garage come from next resolution requires that it be removed so we can move on to the next one um the next resolution appears to be dated November 19 1993 um they requested relief to construct a twostory addition and a one-story twocc car garage at the premises located at the city site one story two story it says a twostory Edition and a one story twocc car garage one story so I assume the garage that you have today is the garage that they're referencing yes and that the addition on the main house where you have your bedrooms was approved in 1993 just because the definition changed it's considered one hat you we can have we can have that discussion the applicants basically the existing garage the only condition approval was granted for the relief requested that I read into the record with the condition that the existing garage shall be removed is there any reference S votage at that time of course yeah that would have made it easy yes there's nothing in the resolution about an increased square footage and that's why I requested resolutions because I was trying to figure out how we got 3,000 ft yeah I'm interested that too and Mr M is going to help us through that I'm sure um I suspect that the one car of one story rather was not originally shown with a room above the garage and that that subsequently been expanded um that's third resolution appear to be dated March 25th 1994 and here the request was to construct an elevated 10 foot wide by 8T deep elevated deck to the rear of the existing dwelling what were the dimensions Dimensions were to construct an elevated 10 foot wide by 8ot Deep elevated deck to the rear of the existing Welling off the ground 10 by8 yeah there the only thing that's close to those Dimensions off the uh C barage and then there's a deck that kind of squares off between what appears to be the original home and the twostory previous Edition is that deck also elevated out uh maybe foot and a half yeah something like that it's a low deck but it is it is elevated why do we measure it's not it's not the same deck and is likely the old deck was gone and they constructed a new deck and you didn't build a deck did you no it's an old deck okay so it's within the setback and my guess is that it doesn't keep b um and if there wasn't a Varian granted I can't see how there would have been a permanent problem um so why don't we talk a little bit about what's behind the structur now just so we can get a handle on it in rear yard yeah just behind the structures as they sit that's all decking as shown on your plan yeah say a twole deck uh there's a small deck let's say for B bark 7 by1 behind the gar G uh the one one and a half story garage and then there's a deck that's a little bit lower again maybe a foot foot and half all gra that's squared off and then there's some brick walkways that attach and give access around the left and right side of the house I'm just curious on the rear yard setback because we've got 10.6 according to the survey is there a reason we didn't measure to the deck when we measured to the out if it's that high yeah I don't know that's why I'm just curious what the that yeah that on you see on the there that little bit that's sticking out I would say if we're measuring to that it looks to be I took it as plus or minus seven feet okay yeah right about there seven to eight feet it's just a matter of record it doesn't matter the setb back's 30 fet anyway so it doesn't you know yeah it's all inside the setback um if you could just so so you're saying there's a deck behind the garage there's another deck in sort of the junction of where the house sits together so it's all decked back there yeah okay um and you said two levels it's all ground level but you're saying if there's a step or something yeah there's this this section behind the garage two I think two risers higher but I would say so that may be what uh two feet two and a half fet allr it's almost like a wi wide walkway that's how you that's how you enter the deck from behind the garage there and then I have P just show the change change elevation that that looks [Music] be so I'll confirm that the uh existing first floor plan what you have marked as existing deck does not run all the way back to the edge of the uh it does not there is it kind of squares off with the original what appears to be the original home here and there's a little Landing that juts out that you can see on the survey and this survey was updated so it appears to me to be accurate so that remaining distance that is listed at block 50 lock five that's where that is written that's long that's all long thank you hope and in your lock coverage calculations you have all of that decking included right uh rear deck yep I've got the walkways yeah that that includes that okay and the setb to the garage set the yeah is how much 29.1 all right so it's all inside of the setback it looks as though it was all done and none none of it's been approved that's okay yeah um I was just a little confused on the survey that it shows the entire left side of the house there is twostory dwell uh it should really be it's really you look on ch1 you can see that the two story section is really here and that one that that should it's not uncommon for surveys they show it like that but really if I was drawn a line This is the twostory portion this is I would call one it's Cathedral and then this is the one and a half garage of the V yeah and I think that was an I think it was a bungalow originally in this back corner kind of odd location but yeah you're right the whole thing is not too kind of see I mean this is proposed elevation um actually I do hav exist my other question was about there's a a separate AC unit on the North side we know what the setback is to that AC unit on I have it's about sevenet it's just it's a mini split that's one so 7 feet on that side and then on the south side it was seven uh it's a little less than seven because that AC is closer to the property line than the than the garage is right yeah looks yeah looks a little less than seven and then here is this this would the store commission an existing elevation you can see that's the two stor portion this is kind of peeking out the U the original what appears to be the original house and here here's the rear elevation you can kind of see that decking that steps down there is railing that's not drawn but this is I think the original house looks like there might have there at some point where the survey says open porch is that like a deck or is that that that deck and there is there also some solid walls up around the portion of it um yeah like a wooden B wall so it's open to the air around the perimeter is solid F and it wraps around the top got hatch in the middle of it to get down into the because the house doesn't have B okay so the other two questions were what variances are triggered by the proposal and then what happened before the historic Comm y so the variances the existing to remain uh 50% loot coverage Max 56.7 existing and that counts basically everything uh other than one uh and that's to remain the proposed additions above the existing footprint uh minimum rear yard setback 30 ft required 10.6 existing but we have a minor encroachment uh by building up here that's 29.1 so it's about a 1 foot encroachment on that 30 ft uh minimum side guard set pack is 7 ft any size 16 total uh wor 6.9 on the front corner so that's an approach minor but still encroached and then 15.7 combin no that encroaches on that combined because of the total so again seven 7 fet single 16 combined two variances in my mind 6.9 and 15.7 combined did you say rear yard setb back rear yard setback 29 .1 10.6 is existing but we're encroaching on that 30 ft none of these are changing right these are all so so the the lock coverage isn't changing but the the the rear yard setback it's encroaching you're right it's not it's not going beyond the existing 29 that's what are we changing any any of these setbacks it's not changing it's yeah it's just encroaching hold hold on there's a 30 foot setback you need to respect the 30 foot setback or you trigger VAR if you're going in line with the existing wall of the garage you're inside of 30 ft you trigger a new rear yard setback variants for the expansion laterally right yeah okay with regard to the side yard setbacks are you ex are you is that right side of the garage is that conforming or non-conforming non-conforming and you're extending that laterally as well exactly so you're triggering a rear yard and a side yard y nothing in the front right and a combined side yard as well the combined as well and then you've got a square footage and and I struggle with the idea that we have a pre-existing non-conformity existing condition with regard to lock coverage I think that what we've established is that we have illegally constructed decks and I know you didn't do it because you haven't owned it long enough but without a question it seems to me that we have 6% overage based on people not pulling permits and coming to the zonning board to do that yeah seems like it yeah as far as I can tell I mean I know testified they haven't done any of this work but what I could see this is all older construction M but yeah I assume it was with that a per um and the last variance is the four area cap not the ratio uh 2200 is the cing Zone uh were my calculation square footage again at the outside of the outside wall but not counting the attached barage gives us a total of 3,31 and proposes 3,37 okay uh what happened at the historic Comm his historic commission went pretty well uh as Chad mentioned went in front of did an informal meeting as they recommended there wasn't that much that came from that the only real thing that they seem to be happy overall with the design they agree there's architecturally there's not that much to pull off of um they did note to the house is not historically contributing because of the time that it was built um so their stance was more along the lines things that would be more historically contributing would be you favorably so that's what we tried to incorporate in design so the the main thing I think that came out of I don't think it was very significant overall uh it was more of a detailing issue uh not only the addition in the front but also the existing front uh they wanted us to add some more additional detailing which was similar to what I had shown here uh with the EES and the window casing did they adopt the resolution Yes actually produced the writing dated February 28 23 yeah and I I do have a copy I assume you have a copy as well it should be in our packets and and the proposal tonight you're stipulating that you'll comply with the recommendations of the historic commission yes okay why don't you read this into the record because as I have it before the the structure is not historic de contributory no Elements which require preservation and that's primarily because they found that while the Reconstruction was built in the 19th century the existing visible from the feet was built in the 1950s um the say no Elements requireed which require preservation contingencies were that the window casings if you can read the regard to the window casings any leave returns yes can you read that um if I'm reading the right part it's kind of toward the end of the resolution yeah where it says windowes language side to that so window casing Crown to exist on top with flat stock on sides historic sill at the bottom no AC from below so it's slightly variated from this image that I presented in front of the board the historic commission I mean um again that was the original plan uh e returns flat copper watch across width of the horizontal rake return patching the diagonal rake in Flash uh The Rake will be 6 in in depth the horizontal rake returns to be 8 in in depth the free return is not to extend the entire width of the r those Chang made slight at this point on the elevations that are in front of you and I think we agreed at the time is that if we were to get approve for zoning that we would submit final plans for them to I think administrative reflecting those things from so those are not presently reflecting uh they are not in those photos I sent but they are reflected in the new updated elevations hard see to yeah I just want to point out that if the board sees fit to to Grant an approval tonight that it'll be based on those plans now you've explained to us that you're going to use the window casings and the returns that are referenced but you could not make any further adjustments sequence is out of order if they ask you for anything further you just want to make sure you understand that these are the plans that the board's considering without any adjustments other than cases in their to provide you a detail know some need I'm I'm sure they got it so if the board if the board was interested we could require something to to see it and make sure we understand it we can deal with that at the end um okay look I I I think I know Peter said the same thing but I'm really interested in understanding how you're at 3,000 ft today um in terms of that issue in that particular variance think it's straightforward how you get to the other variances but help us understand how this house measures yes so on the publicover A1 uh you can See's been with his own off generally me and other Architects have been submitting little diagram showing exactly what's measured just so every been so you can see that on the cover sheet and I've got a thick dash line with PS look Shad that measur fa measur the outside of the outside wall and that's what's included so those numbers that you see in zoning calculations on the cab floor area first floor 1888 to remain second floor increases from 1143 to 1482 that 1482 number is shown on this diagram in the upper left so that I'm sorry uh yeah on the second floor again first floor per Zone the attached garage does not count so that is to the outside face of the residence inside face then on the uh second floor it would include basically not basically it include the perimeter of the uh of the home including the addition but get the addition it's just the existing just doesn't say 3,000 sare feet well hold on one second how did you measure the area above the garage now previously um well I don't see it on the plants yeah so I so this is only proposed I believe so Rec when you say this we can't see that on what you're please oh there's a bedro of the gr now yes okay isn't that in the top second floor right side that's the what the existing is could I think what what they're honing in on is the B the difference between te and proposed would be 339 square feet did you and you counted that room over the garage in your numbers your existing I did not I did not count that uh because trying to remember exactly why I did not count that are we talking about the bedroom in the bottom right yes the existing second floor plan what was apparently addict at one point that probably converted without a permit I think that wasn't included it was not included was included do you agree his number the 371 existing yeah I'm pretty sure that was that was count Okay the reason I'm thinking was not and I think I think I maybe didn't count that so makes it look like we're adding more the way I presented it is that that by the way it's a little little gray area as to how they're counting FL area or not no they're not no it's entirely clear have you read the new ordinances yeah it's 100% clear out I don't think that would count because it's very low it's almost like an absolutely it would count CU it's because it's contiguous to a living space we've worked all that through yeah but it gets more complicated how how tall is it at the center at the Peak at the center of the peak of the addition the I think we're at what's it around six feet or so it's it's a little above six I can walk down the middle of it standing up but it's probably seven so if you were to remove the actual Joy creating let's call it 8 ft something like that so it's measured to the bottom of the joy uh the rafters but that's but that's that's the ordinance says it's measur to the bottom of the rafters yeah so it it's not an attic yeah it counts but it's more complicated it counts to the perimeter yeah all of that so if we were to count that that would make the existing higher it wouldn't make the proposed higher it would make the existing exactly what you have proposed to renovate and you would have the same square footage at the end of the day you still need variances yeah but would measure the house exactly as it today Sil plate to silate that's the way it should be measured okay okay go back and read those ordinances we made them as clear as we possibly could if you find something that is unclear you let me know and we will fix it because we don't want to have this discussion every night yeah um okay and I I think maybe at the time not being clear I thought it was I didn't think it was fair to show it like the square footage staying the same because in my mind we're increasing the volume there fo it's a little odd because they're using it as a bedroom to not count it as Qui it strikes me as quite odd yeah uh but okay um you're still triggering variances because you're exacerbated you're well within the setback on both the side and on the rear so you still have an issue um saying maybe the square footage is existing to remaining yep subject to uh to Jordan agreeing with me with regard to any exception that could be created based on the actual height of the Ridge and the measurement from the subfloor to the bottom of the roof joist um but we specifically have tried to avoid this in new construction and the back door is that if you have a situation where this already exists it's already B you can use it the idea was that before and that's drove people moving to the um detached garage now there's a thing with space it that we know so yes we're going to count okay it's there it's count okay so I think what we're saying is the existing actually is not 331 it's actually what we're also proposing 3370 existing and proposed yeah look I I think that still needs to be confirmed okay but it seems to me that that's very likely the way that it'll that'll it'll it'll shake out when you eventually figure and I think on that note similarly I did more of a detailed analysis of the law question and that is I don't know I P in cop I don't know if it's distributed I know the area excludes PL of less than 30 in so I'm assuming a portion of this is going to be less than 30 that's correct yeah you're absolutely right it doesn't go so plate we gave you 30 in that's right I don't know where that line is I'd have to I guess I could follow up with exactly a that number and confirm existing square footage but I'm confident in the proposed but existing may be more than what sh well isn't isn't the combined square footage of bedroom 3 and bedroom 4 more than the existing bedroom that's there now yes so why isn't so why isn't there a change there why isn't there a step up in square footage well that I think that's where we're we're talking about it that if he didn't me he didn't count this in this measure I didn't count the existing in the measur so I'm showing like a 320 or 360 square foot increase whatever that number is as if that walk was narrative G but I think what we're saying is actually some of that would count under the current definition so it wouldn't it wouldn't affect the proposed square footage but it would bring the existing square footage closer to what's proposed closer but but still what's the difference between between what is proposed and what is existed yeah I I'd have to I'd have to look at exact I mean if we were going to take just the if we're going to take these knee walls are higher than 30 in but I don't know exactly how far into this we would go if we were going to measure just the actual space that's framed out it's about 20 by it's roughly 250 sare ft if you were just measuring but those knee walls if we're saying 30 in is where it's measured that that 250 would probably be a little bit more than that sense Dr L this is what's happened the calculation of square footage has been simplified so there is less of this to worry about Jordan correctly pointed out it's not SE plate to se plate even on a pitched roof we start at the point that's 30 in above the floor so he had Alon done it but what you would do is you would measure from 30 in and then you measure everything in between and everything would count when they eventually do this project they're going to flatten out that roof there's going to be walls so what what Mr Shas has drawn and shown you as the proposal is a true number that's the 3,335 yes sir uh 337 3370 so that number is rough the question of how would calculate the existing spaces what is become confusing but it is either going to be from the 30 in and all of that or because it's so low there's some reason it's not counted that I can't think of right now but it is certainly possible but they're using it as habitable space so you know certainly it would seem as though it should count for something and I think it will but too far there was a question in my mind I told it's better to show existing being less I didn't want to show it like we were we were increasing it less than we were I guess it's where I was coming from um I continue with the yes so there was a question as to the second the original key story structure there's a technically it's two and a half stories there's a space up here and this again I think yeah I can see the Scot distributed this diagram shows exactly what the floor plan is and more importantly that the mensions um the finished but the best I can estimate the the sub of the attic to the underside of the claming at the ridge is 73 in change um but I think we've determined that that's not that does not count to for a yeah so conservatively everyone has this exhibit right a the way it's shown on here is you have the Dimension 7t and 3 and 12 in to the top and then there's a dimension to 5 11 and a/4 in and then that line carries down to the the bottom FL PLS the dashed line um that's less than 7 feet but conservatively that area is approximately 100 of square feet um which divided by the second floor below it comes out to less than 10% so the real number which is 7et tall is even less than that number so count correct doesn't count as full story it's finished attic but it's floor area don't use that word doesn't EX in the code that's published how is it accent it's there is a staircase from an exist bedroom um right here on proposed second floor plan but again exist there's a bedroom in the rear with a set of stairs going off to the wall there's a fixed staircase fixed staircase yeah so it's a fixed staircase to a finished space and we don't know whether or not it's a half story it's a half story as opposed to a full story yes is that what we're talking about yeah and then from there we're talking about whether or not the S footage is in the number them yes and then it's it's not counted on that definition of the Town it would not count for habitable FL because it's too small under the less than a third right yeah you're in agreement on that yes and and the space isn't used as a kitchen bedroom or bathrooms right and the real usable height is what 5'11 yeah it's six foot basically you got another illegal I mean there's no variance for the fixed staircase fixed staircase wasn't permitted until we just changed the ordinances put one in you didn't put the staircase in did you no that's doesn't staircase doesn't me code but we don't need to Grant bar because it doesn't it's not in the existing ordin well it doesn't trigger really doesn't trigger it would six months ago it would but now no but you're looking at a lot of deck 6% over in terms of lot coverage you're looking at Finish space on the third floor with a fixed staircase that's been there also likely without Okay so we've spent a lot of time talking about a lot of details but you haven't just given us your presentation about your plans why it Mak sense why this is the plan I think we should talk about that yeah I I think Chad did a good good job over you know we B review of the functional issues um second floor is really what we're looking at second floor right now has again this this garage attic SL inverted bedroom situation it's not really a bedroom functionally you guys can barely fit in it um uh it's not insulated it does not really function as a bedroom uh as they mentioned there's a third kit on the way most houses want to have four bedrooms on the second floor they need four bedrooms between three kids and them um if you're not counting that garage of that third bedroom that we're proposing to remove we really have a master suite and one fairly small bedroom in the rear so the proposal the goal is to really get three bedrooms three kid beds four bedrooms total and also a second kids bath the the existing kids bath is pretty small I find on my end most most people with three kids one bedroom is pretty hiy nowadays so the goal really is to get two beds and one bath dis um so that's that's what we proposing here um how many bathrooms are on the second floor now one master one kid two to and you're adding a third bathroom yeah and you're taking the the one room above the garage and turning it into two two beds one bath is there any other renovation of the existing structure that's being proposed other than the exterior with some of the detailing no other reconfiguration that so um yeah so that is the proposal at least from the plan perspective givs two decent size kids beds at 12 by 15 fairly small kids bath at 5 by and a half storage is also a little bit of an issue I'll get into that there's no basement in this house so a little bit of storage up here too what's the square footage of the Second Story without that garage space if we just fully removed it I would say it would be 300 [Music] 8 outside outside wall from zoning 21 21 by 236 495 493 494 and what's the first floor Al together first floor Al together is 1888 1888 yeah I should be able to add those two numbers and reach sorry different scale up here I'm sorry that 36 yeah say did not make sense uh this is 28 by 316 second Flor 28 by 3 28 by 316 minus in that garage area so in the 868 sare ft that you have on the Second Story right now you've got a master suite which is a bedroom and a bath you've got a small kid bath and a small bed bedroom yes but you're not proposing to renovate or change any of that that's going to stay the same yes correct yeah um oh by the way so that was 868 what' you say the first floor was 1888 plus 1888 yeah there go that's still 27566 so so we included the extra bedroom that's shown about the that's how they we came up with the that's where you got the 3,000 that's it's including the 250 of finish space I think number so if that's right you're 2756 without that space above the garage yes and the space above the garage is almost 600 square feet not 300 square feet yeah that's correct I I apologize this I normally do quarter inch I think I did 316 to fit this this is 21 Space by 276 Al did you include the attic space that we discussed from the fixed there no that was not I'm just trying to I I can't I can't come up with the right number so I apologize got a lot of house and not a lot of rooms yeah it's not making any sense yeah so that's that's where I'll I'll be G with this is um let me just get this down 27.5 you're right that area above is actually about 591 this so just for reference in an R5 2200 is the cab and there's four bedroom houses built with two bathrooms upstairs all over town yeah four bedrooms upstairs 2200 F feet we're looking at an existing structure that is probably I still don't know to be honest which bothers me yeah but it's it's something around 3,000 yeah and we have a bedroom a small bedroom a master suite A small bedroom and an un insulated area above a garage is what you testified to yes well the the issue isn't that it's not right it's clearly not right there's clearly problems in the way the house is designed the question is what you're proposing yeah to add two new rooms to increase the size of this structure yeah in the context of that yeah right yeah the first floor that's that really P you is that the existing or the original House portion in the back is what's really that's that's exactly yeah no it's the lamb it's because the house has been done in seven different parts your first floor is only 1,800 Square F feet if you were at 3,000 you still got 1,200 square feet that's more than what a 2200t R5 house has with four bedrooms yeah and two B so you only 1100 on the first floor You' got and 11 on the second was 19900 on the first floor which is wasteful I I used the 3,000 to be fair though in our five zoning 2200t houses on a 5,000 foot lot whereas this house is on a 10,000 foot lot the problem I have front portion of the flag there is here here's the problem with that we we've been doing this a long time and we know that there's a lot of these Lots in Vari yours is kind of harder to deal with than most but you can't do both you can't say I'm R5 and therefore I get a 40% 50% lock coverage and be over it by 6% and then say that I should be compared to an r10 which would give you a I don't know what would it be 35% lock coverage maybe 40% which would mean you'd be over our 10 standards by 16% and that would be 3,200 square F feet and you're still exceeding that yeah yeah that's that's why we're here that's the challenge um to hit on some of the points is really the issue is that there's a huge imbalance between the first and second floor I think that's the nature of how this house has progressed over time being apparently a bungalow that maybe had these additions on the side from the roof line they decided to do a two-story Edition this area in the back really not not to say it doesn't contribute to the house functionally but there's no basement that's part of the issue is they they this is going to end up being used kind of as their basement equivalent I think over time it's already starting to be from a kids perspective so from their from their Outlook the way they're living in the house they're not going to have bedrooms on the first floor their Master's on the second floor they already have a kid's bed they're they're trying to get four beds up there for three kids the ordinance has a fix for that and if it's the permitted use of an attic space and you've got a Stairway to an attic it just isn't very tall yeah but the place that the ordinance directs you is up it would tell you to change the pitch of that roof make that space a kids play room and do it that way just because you mentioned that yeah perm sorry no yeah yeah I'm I'm processing what you're saying um yeah I think the issue here if they didn't need to if if doing an addition wasn't what made the most sense for them they they would do something different they don't want to spend the money on the addition uh but the way the house is laid out what they've inherited is something that is proving a challenge for a grown family they didn't inherited they purchased it yes yeah um but but there and lies the r the other and you haven't this because we in spended time I speak that actually exists for the numbers in terms of your your proofs for your variance relief yeah I don't see how you claim a hardship yeah I and I don't I don't see how this necessarily well got out under under C2 how this independent of their needs benefits The Zone plan and zoning ordinances by doing this particular dwelling from from a planning perspective and I and again I'm not getting into the numbers or those things I'm just trying to see as the guy who's going to write this thing one way or the other yeah as to where your proofs are once you finally get your numbers down assume I know that's driving you to distraction but but are you claiming a hardship are you claiming a C2 I I think so I think the the main hardship we have is the oversized lot which I know too much room hard de well it's the cap it's not the ratio that we're running up against the the cap would be hit I think i' ran the number at 5,500 sqare foot lot 5,000 is a minimum we're at a 10,000 sqare foot lot that that to me is the main well the cap is divorced from the size of the lot the cap is for the Zone exactly because yeah there are oversized Lots in zones and because the floor area ratio allows for that yeah but separate from that there's a cap on the Zone it's not it doesn't relate to the size yes no yeah understood um I think to me that that is I think all the hardship that I'm seeing is that it's an oversized lot and a I think to be debated is very restrictive for the size L that is can we pull table say it is necessary when we talk about the lot being improperly zoned to evaluate the zoning in total of the zone you think you're most similar to so if the argument is we're most similar to an r10 I think we need to understand how the r10 standards would apply not only to what you're proposing but what you've got in terms of in terms of all the various bits and pieces of it such as lock coverage for example the law coverage for sure look you've got pre-existing nonconformities with regard to the law you don't need us for that you don't need an approval to build on this law yeah there's a grandfather ordinance you can proceed but everything you need to build needs to comply now you've got the benefit of R R5 setbacks but you don't meet them you're arguing size based on R 10 but you don't meet the setbacks for even our fell with regard to the square footage even if we looked at you as an r10 you don't even try to meet the r10 standard with regard to square footage you're proposing to add more but you're not proposing to change any of the existing I understand that that's not easy I do understand it but Al said it right you bought the house this is the way it was it's not an easy house to work with it's it's very difficult to understand how to how to figure it out look let's assume for a second that 30 in from the perimeter you've got existing square footage you're still folding the walls up and you're exacerbating the pre-existing non-conformities in the rear you're only off by a little bit my argument is no one could even ever notice it it's back off of the street I get it that's not true on the side you're proposing to add substantial volume to this structure measured properly we think it's probably 3370 that's a really big house in an our five Zone you have to make sense of that yeah so the design needs to be sensitive to that yeah I don't think it's insignificant that you're creating sheer walls above that garage the house can you show the house again the historical existing or yeah the existing yeah this is what we're talking about so put on the left lower left of E2 you've got a low garage on the right you've got a single story structure on the left and then you've got the bulk of your structure in the middle of your law it's away from your neighbors you've there's already been variances granted in order to develop that I understand that when you simply take a second floor and extend it the other direction it needs to make sense and and with all due respect because very nice people I read I read at the beginning I don't know if you were here we're not allowed to take into consideration your personal situation we're prohibited from doing that if somebody were to challenge our decision and we didn't have a sound basis to Grant it then they could they could try and overturn the approval we can't think about that stuff it has to make sense I'm not telling you you're done what I'm telling you is you need to start talking about why this makes sense yeah look at this house from the street there's a fence line comes directly into the front of this house so what you see from the street is here over I mean it's looks off balance it's clearly wouldn't design it this way if we're going to build a house today I'd much rather have been able to buy a house that was probably one of the 22 2500 homes that was situated more conventionally however this is kind of you know obviously this is the house we bought um there's not a lot of inventory in the town and from a appearance standpoint I would argue almost the benefit of of the the neighborhood um improving the the side of the house by building this out would potentially you know improve the uh CB pill for the entire Street I understand that we're impos here and it would most directly impact our neighbors to the South actually here um but I don't think given where our house is situated on the lot uh most of the other houses on our block are situated in the very front up on the street ours situated laying back it's kind of a unique situation obviously the lot is unique and that's one of our one of our issues um but I think that we're sort of stuck with non performing code that's written obviously for the benefit of the town on a broad scale but this house does not really fit into the you know the square peg in around the whole situation here and I think you know I hear what you're saying in the existing structure but I don't see a financially feasible and or you know way that makes sense to reduce the space of the existing structure or adjust it um to put that elsewhere um you know even I know you suggested potentially the stairs into the attic on the third floor um you know as being additional living space um I mean that's that's not realistic it's dangerous right the stairs are very steep we have small children um you know and if you're thinking about living in the house as it is we've got this awkward space here that's where our one-year-old daughter currently sleeps and I know you can't take family consideration in the matter but we've also got these small rooms over here so everything's chopped up and it's living very weird and if you were in this house you wouldn't necessarily understood I don't understand how it's a 3,000 foot house and I live in it every day so that's that's part of the issue as well I again this is more of an architectural thing but to Chad point if you drove by you'll see most what you see from the street that the property line is pretty much right there roughly in Center I think by adding this over it makes the house feel more balance on the lot if if that's of any consideration I mean it fills up the rest of what you see from the street though yeah so as far as airl and open space you you're filling in the rest yes of the air light open space that you see from the street of that lot I I think to keep in consideration though even though you know I think you guys are acknowledging the setbacks are of minor you know variance 0.1 and 09 in the back 0.1 on the side3 on the combin the setbacks are pretty close obviously were infringing I think again from an architectural perspective what's what's really thrown this off is this original portion of the house that was kept for whatever reason by the owners they probably just didn't want to give up space from a massing perspective you really don't even notice this definitely not from the street but even when you're in the driveway in the front this portion of the house is Warped by the existence you have a photo of it too it's it's an A3 in everyone's package there's no like I guess there the rooms AR when you walk into the house people are like shocked that there's like we talk about do you know what the dimensions of living room are and that first the TW story section there just add of curiosity front room is let's see here 19 deep and if you're counting stairs about 27 why okay so um not that it matters like that's the size of the of my house the the footprint of that that living room is the footprint of my house say okay is is all of this in the previous bungalow being used it says family room Den office and then there's an unmarked room here um left open to that room that's actually a par wall going now I mean is this like what like 800 square feet let's say excluding the B roughly 30 by 30 see5 yeah 8 mons is probably pretty close so you got 800 square ft that's cut off from the rest of the house it looks like an in-law suite to me yeah okay um I don't know what utilization you're getting out of it currently um so I mean it it looks to me like you've got a house here with with 800 square feet of of room that I I don't know if you're using it or not but but from looking at it practically I don't see that that's the bathroom and it's a full bathroom is really part of the the house so so that's that's where you're I I see where you're way over if you're planning on putting this second story over the garage yeah you know if if if if you if you cut that off which I'm not telling you to do certainly then you've got a house that appears in your proposed if you cut that off yeah you've got a house that appears functional and isn't you know 800 square feet more over the C yeah um but I you know I've never been inside the house I don't live the house this is just my perspective as as trying to fit this into the parameters that we have here um so so yeah it's it's it's over it's been over it's I don't know because because you're not getting a four-bedroom house out of this you're getting really a five-bedroom house the way it's laid out and the fifth bedroom being that in-law suite yeah shaped looking thing on the left hand side of the house there that was the original house it's it's um it's a lot of it's neither how many bedrooms there are no but it's it's well I just want to point that out for the applicant and and for sh just it doesn't you can have 16 bedrooms that that's not our business that's not the way our ordinances work at the end of the day you've got a project got a property which has split bedrooms first floor second floor houses are like that I will make it personal but I've been in a house like that I sold a house like that it didn't work for my family I get it um that what the things that make sense here from a zoning perspective may not make sense economically and that's unfortunately not anything that we're allowed to consider you've got a C1 and a C2 variance that's what you're up for right those are your options youve got a C1 hardship or a C2 flexible C you want to go through what that actually means so that you explain to everybody what the Board needs to consider in order to Grant the variant hardship again need to the lot for C1 uh you can take into consideration existing structures at the site you can take into consideration topographic conditions you can take into consideration I would suggest to you in this instance the fact that it's a flag number that you're not having you know your usual that most of your building is going to be to the back which may give you some relief by way of your frontages along the street because it's a fly lot you're not going to see the usual Frontage that you're the city but in terms of having sufficient area to the rear it's not as though you can't construct something that would be conformed to the Zone it's just that what you have conf presently is difficult on an economic basis to build informance of the zone that in and of itself does not constitute a hardship your Flagship lot for your existing conditions doesn't preclude you from meeting your side yard and your re it may preclude you from leaving your rear yard setback but it doesn't really preclude you from making your side guard setback so it's difficult to in my view to carry the day on the on the hardship on the C2 variants we don't take into consideration hardship whatsoever it's good hardship doesn't come into it it is that this particular development that you're proposing is not beneficial NE necessarily to the property owner themselves but it is beneficial to the Zone planning zoning ordinances and by that I mean sometimes you'll see his Zone but for for whatever reason there's dense multif family development putting up against a residential area and then sort of after that block there's you know your traditional single family homes and an applicant could come in and present and again I'm I'm deliberately trying to use an example that doesn't apply here okay an applicant may come in and say on this on this block I'd like to build a two family I know you don't usually like two families but it's going to be a nice transition from this very dense development as a nice transition area into your single family residential and in that instance saying if you will that we won't have all residential buting up against the density this is a better Zone plan it creates a transition into it I in terms of a better zoning application it seems to me that the burough has already really built in your C2 criteria I don't want to get too far into theg with this but basically what Fair Haven has done is say okay take your lot and what does your lot most look like in terms of other residential zones in the area and and I think this is what the chair room was going to before you know you see you're more you're not really an R5 you say you're more like uh you know one of one of the other residential zones okay how are you building consistent with that but you're not even meeting that standard that's what's unique to to Fair Haven to my mind a lot of municipalities don't look at things like that you know um if you're in an r75 Zone and you're the only R50 house there you know you know you can make some arguments then to say look treat me like an R50 because that's what my lot signes is like I don't know that you necessarily have that in this instance you're you're to to your architect's credit he is trying to do for you what any good architect would do get the best for what he's got on an economical basis I just don't know that that you can't from the planning board's perspective consider the financial cost of it which which is ludicrous obviously but we can't really take into consideration it would be too expensive to demo and rebuild this thing we have to look at what we have for our side guards what can we meet without you've got some things goes back to some of the things the other thing chairman going Beyond his question but you you've even got some proof issues as to whether or not it's a legitimate pre-existing nonconforming because in order to establish a pre-existing nonconform you have to demonstrate that it was placed there legal look the takeaway from the C2 is that this is better what we're proposing is better than the zoning because the zoning wasn't focused enough on our law but when you weigh the positive and the negative this is what makes the most sense thank you you can read the board with regard to whether or not it seems like that argument is sound if you wanted to argue that you're most like an r10 then you have to be able to come in and argue we comply with r10 standards except and where we don't here's why you don't really have those arguments at least they haven't been presented that's where I see your seat on your C1 hardship you do have hardships in the structure you certainly have hardships in the land and I think that the zoning board has three times granted variances for prior owners of this house to make accommodations and so if the zone board in 1993 was presented with a 3400 foot house we don't know what they would have said but we know that they approved something smaller than this and they granted those deviations in light of all the circumstances the fact that it is difficult to work around is is a hard thing to rely on on its own if you were taking the second floor and gutting it and you were going to reconfigure it and make four bedrooms and you needed to move over in this direction if you were going to raise ra the pitch of that roof some and create a bedroom and you were asking for a minor deviation over here but what I'm seeing is just adding two more rooms to a house that has gotten an assembly and that's your right one more room because there's a room there right now not legally the room of the garage is legal because the variance of 1993 asked for one and a half it was approve as a garage well I think the didn't it say one and a half one St it was one story no it was approved is a garage I don't think it complies with the uniform construction code with regard to habitability it's not insulated it seems very obvious to me that it was finished to the extent that it's finished illegally my guess is that the third story was finished with an attic illegally you somebody got approval for a deck in the back and then had the goal to remove it for some other owner did and then expand it without getting approvals these are not it's not your fault but it's the reality that we have to deal with because when you're gone and your house is built the next people are going to come in and they're going to ask for things and we have to treat everybody the same and so if you can develop these arguments and we can get there this board always wants to try and make sense of things that's what we're supposed to do but we're giving you candid feedback as to what it is this looks like and I think we're struggling with it and and and to be clear just for purpose of the record as to the November 19 1993 approvals what was requested was to construct a twostory Edition and a one story two carage okay sorry this one and a half story different okay so would it be Val I we obviously have to go like regroup and come back with with a revised plan but I think what I'm here what you're saying is maybe come back with a plan that reflects assuming that our yard is more like an r10 and making it comply with something r10 is a weaker argument here's the problem if you compare this loot to r10 just because it's 10,000 square feet you run into a 10 foot side yard setback minimum and a 25 foot combined sidey yard setback minimum which is much farther from where you are with the r five um the issue being that yes it's 10,000 square feet but 4,000 sare feet of that is unusable it's unbuildable because it's all sits in the front there you got to look at that portion they rectangular portion back but I I mean it's it's new there but look at some of the development in the neighborhood there are homes that are now much closer to the street that are filling up you know we were talking about filling up the space when you look at it from the street there are large homes I just tax property information for that block 50 and there's two houses other than yours that are recorded in the tax records as about 2500 square feet and everything else is between 1,800 and 2,200 square feet in that block no I think what he's saying is that all the others are closer to the street which I agree there there are definitely I mean I respect that but I believe there's homes that are potentially larger than that I'm not going to not well hold on a second hold on a second to the extent that the neighborhood is consistent with what you're proposing let's talk about it but don't speculate don't just say you got to show us show us the tax show us something okay um but but I want to I want to amplify that the setback issue is a good one it is a good one the fact that you were extended back from the street and that the bulk of this house will not be as readily Apparent from the street level as if you were already that's a good one the the irregularity as to the shape of the lot is also a good argument with regard to working around things your existing structure and your need to efficiently figure out a plan that's the strong foundation for an argument it's just not complete right it it look in an R5 you have a smaller setback because you've got less to work with so you can't take all the benefits of having 10,000 squ feet without providing in for the greater setback that's air light in open space that's the reason you moved here and so it's specific to trying to make sure that as we're making sense of these old structures that we accommodate that in a way that is sensitive to the neighborhood around it and while I get it I totally get it the second floor would make sense after this I don't know that I can see all of it making sense and I I actually think that this conversation is intended to elicit the information that the Board needs in order to proceed favorably with regard to the application and I think that with all this feedback I think that we can continue and talk about where you think these plans fit in with that as for what alternatively might make sense there this board meets once a month we've done this hundreds and hundreds and hundreds of times and the analysis of the way a house looks under an r10 standard even though it sits in our fog has been our staple for 10 years but that argument needs to run from top to bottom and make sense it is not your fault that you're at 56% but somebody did it illegally and it's Troublesome when you have 10,000 square feet it's off to cover 56% when you look at the survey it it's just off it's all lock up it's there's a lot there I know you bought it that way but when it comes to the when it comes to the structure we're we're more partial to having this extra living space in the house than some of the other lot coverage issues so you know I understand that deck for example and you know not being done via permit and some of the other things that are causing coverage um you know maybe things that are overtime things we'd be willing to you know to part with and or scale back in order to well that was going to be my next question if we were able to make a concession of the deck uh and turn that back into the ground coverage like is that the kind of concessions that you're looking for us we can't play Let's Make a Deal and we don't the truth is look look it's obvious to us ripping off a deck that you paid good money for sure that seems ridiculous why would we want you to do that but I assume that if I'm standing on your deck I can almost jump into your neighbor's property I assume it's super close right uh no not really but I mean in the very back it's yeah it's like walkway withd but to to be candid the houses all around us are all homes that are built in the front of their lot so we are not up against any other existing structures which I think makes this particularly unique and another challenge of the lot that we're standing in but I think that context would really help like if we're looking at you know this this being our house here the home on the corner of Clay Street and and Normandy is in the corner over here the two homes on Clay Street that we border up against are both closer to the street over here the homes on gesp are all homes that are up against the road and the home next to us to the South are yeah um are all homes that are away from our structure so I I think I understand the point that where you're getting to and why why this is tough but I ALS also have to just argue that it's it's as far as being over the limits it's as minimally invasive as an increase in space could be given where it is on the home and where the home is situated on the line you don't you don't think that the additional bulk of a second story wouldn't be more appropriate over the single story to the rear that's hidden from the road well I don't think that's structurally feasible either no but and also that's I think it's a good question um I would say arguably closer to the other houses closer to the houses on that side I I think at least one of the benefits we talked about not that this was drive this project at all but one of the benefits is from the street you'll see more of the house right now it feels like the house is Jan cor You could argue that maybe this Street's not very uh it doesn't add much to the the street Street Front because it's so far set back but I think if we push the bolk to the back corner but by its nature Mr say I feel like I feel like we want you to do the opposite if you've got more than you're supposed to have hide it hide it don't show it and I know you're setep back and I get it and and that helps but the truth is that we want people to drive by and not know your house is larger than others if you're creating something which is going to make it more EV that it's larger than others that's something we struggle with for you to be able to say I've designed this in a way where you're never going to know it's there that's a really strong argument if you can make it it's G to be all hidden no one from the street will ever know that this was even built yeah um I guess to the counter argument there there's already a low slung garage there and it's not particularly aesthetic from the streets so it would arguably be an improvement in appearance from the streets putting something over here we're talking about the old structure would you know I'm not an engineer but I would make a strong belief that it would require removing the entirety of that old structure in order to build in that direction well then you guys said you can't take economic Financial concerns in it that would be a much more intensive much more expensive project with question uh the back has a cathedral fing that would be gone we'd have to access it right now we we design it in a way that's efficient wise to just rip off the floor probably sister new joist to the attic above the garage the rest of the second floor is unaffected the garage is on a f build if we were to do that um I I could see the point we are hiding more of the bulk from the street Chad point maybe it's more imposing on some of the neighbors than than the proposed but without a doubt I it would I don't know what the budget is if there's a budget for this project it would go well beyond what this would be I just I throw it out rhetorically I'm not suggesting it makes more sense what I'm I'm doing is I'm I'm explaining to you that your argument that it squares us up in the front and creates more um balance between that 48 foot that you look back the the negative side of that is that you're over yeah if you weren't over yeah then yeah okay that sounds nice but when you're over that bulk being right there it it's it isn't particularly helpful um the overage needs to be hidden this is over by effectively 12200 squ F feet and I realize that that doesn't feel right to you because 10,000 foot lot but you're 48 feet at the street and you're in R5 with a whole bunch of small houses around you you have large ones but they're on the water right they're on totally different size logs and I think the reason that people love that area so much is because it's kitchy it's small everything's C if if this fits in with that let's talk about that yeah we could present photos I guess at least two homes across you know across the street that are as large or larger from the street than this house is you know from an appearance is an appearance but um I think from again this is more from architectural made l zone the overage in a lot of ways you could say even though it's existing it's this back corner you don't really perceive this definitely not from the tree in fact not from a lot of the property it's really hidden around the corner um I think this balances out the structure better than it is right now yeah that that's actually a pretty good argument yeah that the 800 sare feet that Al was talking about our Al is actually not seen at all and if you think about what you're proposing to build are you 2200 ft um if you were G to knock off if you just ignored the stuff that isn't useful to you let's say it was if we were GNA knock it off we saying rough 800 yeah 800 minus 3370 is that 20 uh 2600 2600 somewhere around there that's probably about that number what's that real number what's the number of that the existing stru the old structure exist I think what threw me off is that 316 scale I think it didn't it must have included the original what we're assuming is the original structure and and let's just say less less that bathroom that bathroom been the footprinted the newer twostory okay so you said including bathroom less the bathroom so the bathroom I would say those four rooms uh what's that 30 sorry 33 time 2060 plus 16 * 8 16 * 8 plus 48 128 60 seven somewhere around 800 what we say 33 you're swwa 800 feet what it is yeah somewhere around there so 800 if you were to less sa than 37 puts us roughly 26 upper 25 um and so one other thing to talk about we did talk to the historic board and we weren't sure how they were thinking of it what we did was within still keeping functional space we did drop the roof line we added a dormer uh kind of popup Dormer to match the roof line that they they were okay with it they thought for the house the house as is they seem to agree that it's an improvement but as pad pointed out earlier they're they're also they're not trying to act like this is a house of really contributing to the neighborhood historically they seem to be okay with that because of you set back but I do think it is a better looking house in this this basically looks like this was the original house with two little additions even though you really don't see that so um I just want to I just want to say I don't agree I think the existing house is super cute and really nice it's balanced it makes sense the house that you're proposing looks more 2020 it's much more regular it doesn't have that it's just different um I also understand that our our ability to work within the architectural stuff is about how the architecture affects the bulk variances that you're reting so the sensitivity that we would have to architecture is how you utilized architecture to soften the bulk that you're proposing to add so so I assume that you dropped that roof line because you were trying to soften the look of it from the street but the ridge still all the way up and it still feels big to me but I think that I agree with what they proposed but for different reasons um in terms of whether or not it's an improvement and is is helpful in terms of understanding how the variant could be granted yeah so go ahead I me I mean the only other thing that I was going to say was that you know if you were talking other than whatever hardships you might find on the lot about the C2 and any benefit that there would be from this application to the Zone plan or anything like that certainly bringing something like bot coverage into conforming status you know when you got brick walks that completely encircle the property yeah I agree on the front would deck in the back if you were to bring that bot coverage into compliance I think that that you know even though it's you're not asking for a new variance for lot coverage uh eliminating an existing what what what you could all an existing non-conforming although it's it's more likely you know an illegal yeah addition of the deck you know after whatever 1993 yeah deck was was replaced you know that's certainly something that's part of the equation when this is all being considered and and I we've had a lot of discussion recently about um storm water and lot coverage and certainly raining it into at least conforming but the Forefront development on River Road I mean so much discussion about problem they were creating for gpe you know but houses like this certainly contribute to that with regard to lck coverage but what I was going to say is in order for this in my mind this does get subjective in order for this to be a C2 variant that made sense I'd have to look at your proposed number and say that if we were starting from scratch with this lot this is what we would come down to and I think the chances of that are less than zero I think that moves you to the idea that my mind goes to hardship and the question is where is it what are you doing to mitigate the hardships where are you trying to offset it and where are you trying to strike the right balance and I guess that what I see is the least expensive the most logical place to put the rooms given the existing tours in configuration so I get that but at what consequence and so I'm not seeing a full balanced approach to addressing legitimate hardships in the structure and I don't say the land because the land's not causing you any problems really um you know assuming that the setbacks kind of are what they are if you're going on um yeah I mean to to at least uh discuss a lot of coverage you know you guys time in but I do see a lot of areas that could probably to not much St we have you know from the house over this is like an antiqu walkway of old bricks that's falling apart which we could literally yeah I'm just saying that's that's the easy part and I was surprised that it wasn't addressed to begin with as as kind of a give yeah to to offset some of the take in this application yeah we're not the only people that that read this stuff I mean and I know most residential attorneys wouldn't offer to do all this but certainly you could have you've got three resolutions they're part of our file that we got them from the burough records there's nothing in there there's specifically something with the debt that isn't lined up with yours but yet the plan invest an existing condition and that's nothing to worry about but it's clearly not um just a little bit of homework shows that um I want to make sure that we've gotten your testimony on the record I want to be sure that we open to the public because I do know that there's a number of residents that are here uh and I expect they came to speak on the application I want to be sure that we do that um and and we've also engaged in a very interesting Sol we here tonight that's I can't remember doing it quite like this before um but we are where we are but I don't what I don't want to do is I don't want to affect your ability to put on the record to the extent that you're asking us to proceed tonight with a decision whatever information you have in order to establish the proofs for the C1 and the C2 because as much as it may feel the way it feels that's what we want yeah we want to know that what we do makes sense in light of what the rules are yeah yeah I'm I'm clear on that I appreciate that I think most most of our arguments been made tonight um I I guess we would need to talk about if I think I'm getting the vibe uh if we're going to come back you know we would have to make sure we approach those you know more specifically I think again for us you've already hit the main ones oversized lot that's where we're hitting the cap I I know that's uh kind of been refuted to some degree we're working with the ex within the existing footprint the setback variances I think are relatively minor uh I I don't think that's the issue I think it's the floor area and I think it is trying to make a home that I think unreasonably well again nobody on the board it's not the town it's it's not the homeowner fault uh really it's a two bed second floor which for the size house doesn't really make sense the the and again these are particular uh maybe architectural hardships but that rear portion of the home is not very usable for bed rooms uh there is no basement so they don't have the benefit of square footage I always think that Medium to small homes make uh the basement makes the house much more usable for most families they don't have that this is likely to be what I would think of as a basement alternative so if you were again if you were to take off this portion of the house and make it a basement and you know if you were to rebuild this house that would be in the basement the square footage would be closer to or conforming possibly um again I think it's just trying to make this a usable house for today and a twoed second floor if we're not counting the legal bed over the garage family to deal with and I I don't know who would buy that maybe that that type of house if you can only have two beds on the second floor but can we turn it to A2 is that your yeah I want to dig in on your on your um your your uh your setback issues so to the rear show us the rear elevation please rear elevation is right here okay so your rear setback requirement is 30 ft correct correct and that's the R5 requirement yes you know what it would be in an r10 30 that's good so you would satisfy the requirement but for what's the what's the encroachment uh 109 okay so slightly under a foot so roughly imperceptible from the property line whether it's 30 fet or yeah 29.2 right yeah probably all agre what's the ridge height of the addition once it's all done Ridge height would match existing from average grade 28 ft 28 ft and what's the maximum in the zone maximum in the zone is 30 okay so you're 2 ft under what the maximum R height is from the rear you're within a foot of what the setback would require I suppose one could see this as being a diminished the Minimus deviation with regard to the bulk of the new structure on its own right you make that argument yeah let's look at the side yard side yard uh side elevation right side is right here okay what is the the ridge height there is 28 uh yes so you're increasing the rich height from what about 16 to 28 after the addition yes okay so and how far is that uh structure from the property value uh that would be the 6.9 where 7 FTS required s FTS required on one side what's the other side toal combining in no the the opposite side is 8.8 and what is it supposed to be in the R5 Zone minimum seven combined 1650 6 s and 16 yeah so you're a touch short of seven the requirement seven it's di di Minimus deviation as to the minimum sidey yard in an R5 what's the second on the other side that you're not touching what are you leaving uh ma 188 and the total of that is within a foot of what 15.7 and 16 is require all right so you're you're you're within a hair of that as well okay now how close is the structure to you on that side um oh no no no sorry sequ what would it be in an r105 10 10 on one and 25 total 24 component so we're not close to meeting the r10 standard with regard to 7 how close is the structure on that side of you how close is the neighbor s it's not on the survey you know the top probably so so now we're just going to hold that for a second because I'm going to ask you to put it on the record once you uh and we're going to swear you in but so if we assume for a second that that house has a similar to an R5 setback what we're talking about is exacerbating that condition laterally by 12 fet and we're creating that problem but it's only happening within about a foot of where the property boundary is and border line to Minimus but not close to r10 in order to have a 3200t house in r10 you got to be 10 and on the other side you're going to be 15 so the whole thing's going to be pulled in more now what's the Delta it's four feet these are your arguments I'm walking through it because I want you to have a better record before you decide to do what you're going to do this is the argument and in the front there's no front yard setback issue we're simply talking about the bulk from the street and there's an aesthetic difference of opinion as to whether or not it looks better or worse perhaps but you don't need anything on that side the only reason we care about what it looks like is because you need a variance that's a BK variant right ask question the setback between the covered porch and this sort of intermediate front lot line what is that is that a side yard is that a that's Harry on FL the front yard har on flag 5.7 than any of the other George is getting paid to be here what does that yeah that is a side yard so then is the minimum side yard now 5.7 that's a side yard and what do you consider the combined if that's a side yard I I don't know I'm I'm asking why you said a side uh it's not a front yard so I think by the Fall everything else becomes a side yard even though it's to the front of the structure yeah interesting yeah they're on yeah ran into that it's always been I wouldn't have guess I'm asking yeah I don't know the answer I'm ask that's why I'm asking the question I would want to back up one sec to to Mr Leader's point and just for his information that between their house and the house to the east I think that's East roughly South um any that house is significant is for Ford of so we're talking about the two setbacks that's that's relevant the the bulk on the the subject property would be visible in the is is abing the backyard the yes the another factor to consider here because we talked about how much space you have between all your neighboring houses that is because they've they've adhered to the setb and you don't so the reason that we have a sense of space there is because it's created by the zone and if everybody came in for exactly the same thing then we wouldn't have that space and frankly if they come in for a variance and it's granted they won't remain but I just want to point out the sort of ill logic of suggesting that we should take advantage of things because it only goes one apprciate that but I think it's also because the original historic structure probably built level FL of the zone and code was in place and that's what they had to work with the original the original they had to start with as the structure so they they would have had to you know I'm sure obviously this happened in the 1800s then it happened in the 1950s then it happened in the 1990s we're not talking about at that point in time they didn't level the original structure start with a perfect square lot build it in the middle of the lot this is a progression of over almost 140 years now but they did require variances to do that second that that two floor addition and they did require variances to add that one story two guard Garage on that side they also removed a garage that was less conforming and created a more conforming condition and they approved it with the understanding that it was going to be a garage which it isn't and you're proposing to renovate it further but we're not looking at all the facts right we're looking at the progressive analysis of the latest step in the progression of the house the original footprint certainly predates all the zoning stuff there's no question about that but the new stuff was assessed and evaluated and granted leniency based on the standards the ml standards and the zoning in place in 93 and 94 um but it seems like it's a moving Target which is challenging because you know there's there's little little to no chance that the zoning or or the store committee would allow a two-car garage on a house in the store District on the front of the building currently so I mean we're kind of well they they're advisor they don't allow or disallow I I understand that but we're trying to be sensitive to the to to all parties uh I it is difficult to build in a historic district we very much appreciate you working with them and complying and adjusting and that's a part of the process it's one of the reasons the town is what it is and unfortunately this process is too and I know you hate me but I just I I I'm not allowed we we just have to work through it as best we can because next month and the month after what we did tonight needs to make sense it needs to make sense in total um and and by the way the board hasn't voted you know we're working through it we're trying to understand it we just went through arguments as I see them with regard to what you're proposing um I think if I cover everything I want to get to the public so um if you've if you're reasonably satisfied that you've okay then I'm going to open to the public with the understanding that we we'll come back and have another discussion about where you're at so um if any members of the public that have any questions or any comments regard this application ask you to step forward I'm going to ask you to come close enough to the table so that we can pick you up and ask you to um to give us your name and address for the record and then um Mr that's Mr where okay the testimony before the board be the truth the whole truth nothing but the truth yes state your name for the record spelling your last name Nathaniel Matthews m a h ews and I 32 so to the property to the South so that's the property we were asking about with regard to that side yes that's you so we're about 7t to the property line okay and our the back of our house is say 5T forward to their front of their garage so where your house stops 5T before their house starts the corner of the garage starts yeah the rest of starts forward that not meaningfully no it's that house basically a plane except for the porch in a plane of the garage I mean it might be a couple feet but that's also what 20 feet away so it's how long have you live since 2016 so we and we've actually lived there for three owners from 36 it's turned over three times six mon turned over five times since it's it's his teson only since yeah exactly so um yeah the first point I would make is we've spent a lot of time in the house with the previous owners with these guys and their arguments about the that back original structure are I think it could be emphasized more that that is should be considered basement of this house or like the finished playroom area um so if you're going to play this like how much how ridiculously over the SP footage game you could reasonably discount that because it is it doesn't make sense with the rest of the house whereas if you add this sort of footage over the garage it doesn't make sense um I just think that's especially since there's not a Bas that actually holds water um and other than that I think you know you're concerned about the we elevated height on our property line you know there's already a tall Peak roof just a blank slate of white next to our house with a window unit because you know I think probably three own stop a window un because that's not properly regulated space actually that's another thing about the back corner old partment house um has separate hbac because it's so disconnected from the to the house yeah um oh that's that Min split that's that mini split that was discussed at the beginning um so I think J I think the point is they're making a good effort to improve the property it's not negatively affecting anybody around them we would be the one that I think we have thing if there was one have and um I support them is your house two story house yes well that's an interest yeah I guess it's a one and a half story house we we renovated it two years ago um and did similar what these guys are doing we just pitched the roof up um so there was there was a three foot knee wall in the attic and we just pitched it up did you get a variance or did you build with regard to the stay we just stayed within what we could get away without Happ to go here so you're immediately adjacent to the South what about the property on the other side what's the what's the nature of the house that's sitting over on that side is that a two-story house that's like a two and a half story house that's this the singon house it's the corner PL actually house so that has I know that has like the PE roof there's thir St I think and is that house similarly situated relative to the lot line to yours I I I I know you have magday so I'm just I want to understand the character no set probably set back a little bit more from D Normandy because it front on BL Street okay so there's more distance between that house that fronts on Clay senson house and well there's way more distance between their house on this is the subject property okay actually has a shed right about there I think all right so there're substant distance between that house and this house on between you and them it's relatively tight it's you have a similar set back to them yeah and what about behind I'm looking behind I see another Str something there's a big garage shed something on the on the the property that backs up to them okay um and then there's another kind of dilapidated shed on we both sort of share a backyard nebor um on bus so so garer shed type buildings close to the property line the big one the big one's very close and kind of you would arue dominates their backyard view skap um and then the little one I don't know if you can see it from it does on the area it looks pretty significant yeah the big quite large but the main house property is Street much closer to GL so it's not is this the only flag lot on the Block yeah yeah you kind of sit back in the middle of the block everybody else is it's almost like a bunch of neighbors put out a big Square in the middle of their properties and gave it to these people back in the whenever it was okay did you have any other questions call no anyone else yeah thank you oh here's what we need to do we need to come over to Mr kovat he's in charge of letters and numbers and such we're going to ask you to give us your name and your address thank you my name is Gregory Willis and my wife do swear you both sorry just in case you had a com please raise your right hand s to testimony be the truth truth describe for me what what are in these exhibits my name is Greg Lewis Barber we live behind the applicants and um just to show you quickly seven photos first of all thank you for everybody being here answering our questions I'm going to ask you to place your house please on the tax map because I I thought there were a number of houses behind that's 39 it's it's it's right behind it would be right is your house the garage where it's not that's that's my thank you you put not a so your house is 11 lot [Music] 11 most yes I'm going to ask you stu closer to the table so that we can pick you up on the um the owl or whatever this thing is thank you got situated you know our main concern we want to work with our neighbors and you know we have one question and hope that you know you could be sensitive about it is the height of the structure because our whole house if I could just quickly show go through these seven pictures you'll know exactly what we concern about and the first picture you know these houses are very unique we're close to other properties hold on one second you mark this I'm going to mark it I want to mark it I want everybody to get it and I want talk about until they have what they had Mr just gonna ask you to can you describe what you handed generally um seven photos of the front the back um also the sides of the house and a few pictures of the inside of our kitchen of the of the house on subject house second house and and when were these photos t uh just in the last week last week okay is there your this this is our yes um we moved down 12 years ago um and uh we did some Renovations it was a, 1500 foot house and we put on 200 square feet um we W you know we didn't have to ask for variany it works for us fine it's great um but you the one thing that's kind of tough about it it's very Shad if you look at it you'll see the front of the house on the first page you've got um 18 foot 20 foot Ares on the left then you've got 18t 20 foot um Cherry h on right that go all the way back so sorry I I I desperately want to follow you you've got on this on this insert we've got seven pictures when you're at the front of the house is that number one and is that your house that's our house okay and I just wanted you to see that that we don't get any there's no sun coming into our home um on the first floor whether it's front or the two sides because we have overhang for which is Beau but we we cherish any son that comes into the house are these your Cher Lords on the side no they're our neighbors okay so there's nothing we can do about it and then our nice neighbor hat that lives lives next door you can almost see his house um blooming above the arbor body so it's just nothing but it's like living like a racehorse with blinders on and except the back and if you look at photo two um those are all the windows in the back of our house and those are the only windows that we get sun late in the day um and those three windows in our kitchen and then we've got a patio door and that sun doesn't start happening until late in the afternoon and that's in page three page three you'll see I should say photo three in photo three um you can see that's our kitchen and that's the only place on the first floor where we had sun and um you can see above the cottage what you call in the cottage is the garage on the left side I put an X there that's where the addition is going is G nope nope totally lost you picture three is looking out your backyard and you can see the light on the kitchen table and you've got an arrow to it and what you're what you're showing us is that there's limited light that comes in did you move up to picture four yeah okay it's a four um judging by the you know the addition going as high as the existing roof line on the existing house that's and I drew a red line where it would be so so that is your kitchen looking out the back towards the applicant's house the structure in the front is the garage and the structure behind it is the second story of their house yes the Orange Line the orange the orange line indicates where the the proposed the proposed addition is going to be I'm going to say that again because I think I said it wrong and I think you agreed with me the the main structure that's facing you white that's isn't that your garage that's yeah it is okay behind that there is a structure and that's their house and you're the yellow lines up with where the existing garage roof is oh yeah I'm sorry the yellow is where the existing garage roof is okay and the red line above that is roughly where the addition is going to go that high and how did you calculate that I just drew to the peak of their if you follow the peak of their roof line there okay okay so that's the view from our own three windows in our kitchen we only get sunlight in those windows it bounces in in our floor and it goes into the rest of our house that's that's how we love our downstairs um let's go to boto five and that's just a different angle if you move to the right of our kitchen facing their house um that's just a different angle that you could see and it was a little later in the day I missed this up but you see the next photo today I was say we'll take photo on five the red line on five that's that's where the sun sets all winter you know from the beginning of the red line to the right it's way the sunsets but you've drawn a red line from the peak of the existing house over to where they would effectively create the addition and then back down again and you took this picture from what table height looks like you you were like squatting down when you took it well I couldn't because I had to get below the the line of my my uh your per right okay um I missed the sunset there but today I was able to take a photo and you know photo six you could see the sun coming into our house and that's the only time the sun comes into our house that's the same shot as five uh no well six is off five is in the right side of kitchen six is in the left side of the kitchen but that's looking over the same table do the same doors are just not open yes yes and that's the morning no no this is three four like from all winter long from 3 o' 4 o' up to well 4:30 maybe even 2:30 3:30 4:30 we get that sun coming into our house in the in the summer it moves way off to the right where you were all talking about doing a proposed addition on the other section which actually love to do you know what you're thinking about doing now you know the original but could be controlled somehow but anyhow photo 7 is showing you the only light that comes in when it comes in those windows bouncing off our t y and finally the the uh I'm looking at your proposed right side elevation and I'm just confused I the back on the back I'm sorry that very bad the the roof line that you're proposing is it is it the same time the proposed right side elevation I guess that's oh that yes what is the difference between this and that think I think it's three or four feet I could scale that much but it did drop it on the elevation it's showing equal I think it didn't back drop about foot which one's wrong Dr that uh the front and rear that Ridge was an original design that would Dro so I would say it ended up dropping so instead of being plus or minus 28 I think that dropped [Music] scale about a foot and a half okay that that no no the floor is yours I I'll jump in later thanks um that I mean I was hoping I was trying to scale it out but you get it in 316 doesn't even have that so I was coming up at three 3et 4 feet 2et I didn't know but I was hoping so the other elevations aren't correct this thisd line drops down about so the front elevation on your plane is wrong now right yeah that bridge line there is shown higher than it would actually be and the right side elevation is wrong also because it's actually higher than no this is this is correct this is shown Dr so this this right here what's that space yeah that's a foot and a half so the The Ridge of the proposed addition dropped 18 in when this roof line that wasn't updated there one other thing to just keep in mind is by turning the Gable so the gables are 90° to each other that Ridge line in background is is further back than this facade back so in that regard it's not going to loom over quote unquote your property as much as the existing twostory because you're just catching that front Eve right so just whatever that and in your it doesn't Blom as far as the structure but sunlight is so important to us in our house and we're just trying to we want to work with you and we want you guys to to be able to build your dream only and we we want to see it happen but in a way that it's not taking taking the sunl from Mark okay so what we've confirmed is that the elevation wrong and that you have a 18inch reduction of the ridge height and that all the numbers we talked about said 28 were really 26 and a half that came down because the architectural uh committee asked you to bring the roof line down to soften the twostory look why did you bring the ridge down well the whole thing dropped and and for the record it wasn't historical it was more just in design and it just didn't get up fun but that ridg line dropped in a way just to give it a little as much insurance as we could while still providing okay and the reason we're here is that like I said we want to work with people we want to work with you know nice but just every inch is so important it really is because it's all about some in our house and if you ever drive by and you look at the front of it you'll see how the warming houses in the bushes and that's all we have in the back in the back you know in the morning we get sun but the front porch just you know it blocks it so we're trying to figure out you know do you have any ideas that we haven't thrown around here tonight with regard to what might be done in order to improve the situation for you I like your idea of keeping it on on the side that they want to do it on because if it goes to the other side small garch it's even really more room for all the other neighbors so I'm sorry if they were to move the addition to the other side and it's rins are summer sunsets summer length so that would be worse that would be worse okay now it's it's pretty bad the way it's set up now but in the summer if you decided to do something in that corner it's going to be actually more looming for us and I don't think economically that that doesn't make a difference for the N for you know applicant and so we'd be willing to work with them as far as keeping it on that side but how can we make it work okay I I what I want to point out because it's super important is that the situation that you really nicely described in what you've handed to the board is a comp lexity of things right it's certainly not all this property for sure and so we need to keep that in mind but the other thing that's super important to me is that the ridge height is proposing is proposed to be less than what's permitted in the zone so they could propose to put it at 30 and they wouldn't trigger any new variances with regard to the sidey yard we're talking about something less than a foot in terms of the movement in the direction that is going to have some effect on you but only for that distance and the overall square footage doesn't really tie to that and if they had just decided to build a house from scratch it could be far far worse right because they come up to 30 and they could put it Central in the lot in fact zoning would require that that's not to say that you need to like it or that there aren't other ideas I just want to sort of put your comments in context in terms of how zoning leaves you um and and that's always part of what we struggle with um would a new have to adhere to the setback set today so yeah I don't want to take this too too far but yes you would have to comply to the R5 setbacks but you could go to 30 ft and until such time as you triggered a variant and and we had to get involved you know you do whatever you wanted to um but when we're looking at what the proposal is we put it into the framework of what the council members tell us it's supposed to be and the element that you are saying is going to be problematic for you is not directly Tethered to what they're doing although the ability to build an addition at all is but as an independent element I'm just pointing out um that that's a conflict in where the Zing would permit them to do it but for the square footage right but um but a 30 foot high house that is set in the middle of the property would affect us as much as you know the addition one of the things we talked about was taking out the entirety of the existing house and then considering this as its own thing and it would be 2600 square feet it would be more than R5 but less than r10 they would probably if you were starting from scratch You Pull It in a half a foot You Pull It in a half a foot and they pretty close to conforming um with a six foot higher Ridge by the way we've seen it many times where a a new construction looks far worse than a remodel and it shocking you know how distinctively different those things are which is why we actually like Renovations the town does it adds the character anyway but we're trying to figure out how we can just and you know something that's and we love the design we love you know the way you put the windows in it there's a window in the back and it's not just all black roof and um I was on the histor commission when I first moved down here and I appreciate everything you know doing Forks know how it works um but now I just don't want to lose light that and if there's it's it's you're saying it's a foot lower right now basically than been to the house fo half and again I I'm not saying was done for consideration for your purpose but by doing the cross Gable and having the uh uh the spring point of the uh roof lower on this facade and adding dmer details that reduces the scale the apparent scale of the addition right um and again that roof receding from your house helps a little bit but without going down a full like more of a true one and a half story lowering it which probably do except the fact that it leaves very little room for the actual purpose which is two bedrooms that it's kind of difficult to lower it by much more well wait a minute isn't the um isn't the ceiling of the existing second floor and the proposed second floor going to line up yes and so the existing attic area that's finished we discussed before was seven seven and a half feet right Bridge so you're six feet below that so you've got six feet of attic up there don't you I know it's not as simple as I'm making it sound yeah I I don't know if it helps I'll just give a rough number on that I think the attic attic is probably cleaner from the bottom of the bridge um probably somewhere around 5 and a half fet but you're at it above and you need a roof pitch unless down there right it's already not it's very steep they're not going to be walking up there it's if if anything it be like decoration storage and stuff like that it's it's not what you would think of as an add what is it a 12 on 12 12 on 10 I would say this is probably roughly like a seven maybe a seven on 12 on this side it looks flat from the side elevation what am I missing is that your point that I can't flatten out anymore I'm matching I believe I was matching or closely matching the existing pitch to try to architecturally tie it in um might that you're seeing the top yeah I would say this is on well but if the p is different on the side it's not that important that it's matching the front I mean not really I'm just trying to fure so what we're doing it's either eight 8 foot 8 foot first Flor second floor the addition would also be 18 across uh we pulled down roof line again to give some interest and scale it down within reason without impacting the interior and that's that's kind of where where we're at so I'm not sure we going with that but I'm just saying that to reduce it further does take away from your square foot also I I appreciate you guys coming out and voice your concern we'll try to do the best we can to accommodate what also want to just say I think the the sunlight issue is also seasonal um so we're talking about a part of the day for a part of the year so it's hard to I respect that you want the sunlight and and I can empathize with that but I think the issue may also be more uh the trees and other structures that are near the house than the our roof line um on the whole it's like we're talking about if because because we know the Sun is obviously moving across the sky throughout the year so we're talking about a a portion of the Year where this addition is really um imposing um and I and I I want to be sensitive about not going up to the the max height and building something um that would be very offensive but um but I also think that that's sort of a moving Target as well it's not that much you know but it's but again it's it's only have it's the only time it shines back if you may have been asking this before maybe I wasn't interally it's like if we took the existing roof and exuded it up about 8 feet that some question that we asked well look I I think it's true that I'm looking at picture four and the biggest impediment to getting light in is your own garage and um the house the proposed house is going to be further back let's say your garage wasn't there and this were built i i i as you draw it I guess it would take the entire space up but it's uh but the biggest impediment is the garage the other thing I'm looking at is there's only so much you can do with that roof line to make it function and have it look decent and so Mr shid I don't know what that distance is or what the rise of the run is is but that actually is looking flat to me now that I look at it and I'm getting it and I'm I'm I'm wondering if there's any fat in there and and it's not obvious to me that there's much we could I'm taking out loud here if we were to drop the plate height or or the the E height lower again it's already dropped about a foot and a half below be normal construction where they would just build up the 8ot wall and go on top of that what is what that I'll call it a wall but what what is the the height of that wall uh it should be roughly six and a half so on the inside at these Corners they're going to see a little bit of a an angle so it'll be about a 6 and 1/2 foot uh if we were to drop it much lower if we were literally just to drop it they would use lose any attic storage which is one of the things you're trying to get a little bit of um also it'll mortal and the floor plan the other option would be to increase the steepness of the roof line but in general I find especially C like this it's probably better to keep the roof slopes equal make it look less like an addition so I don't think making this steeper makes sense I I don't think that does much for us um overall considering it's technically 2 and 1/2 stories to be 26 and2 plus or minus Fe that that's relatively low for that I I just don't know I think there'd be functional issues to drop it low so could it be drop lower yes but there'd be tradeoffs from their perspective and I'm not sure how much lower we could really get it while still getting in your space it wouldn't be it wouldn't be easy there would be a tra I mean i' like them to get what they want as far as their interior space but that line Som I we work with you your next time have to come back here you yeah like okay um it's it's a valid point an interesting well you don't I mean you can't it's you start doing you know what else but by saying that what you're saying is this is the best place if you're going to go up at all any further this is the best place on the existing structure that you can do that yeah okay it's a better alternative than did you have anything more for us that's I thank you thank you one point out we wanted to point out that we noticed on your your left side elevation second floor is missing two window second floor left side the existing second floor floor plan shows a window two windows but you have no windows on elevation existing yeah that is correct be one one in a master one I'm sorry was there anyone else from the public that have any questions or comments regard of the application got the record black all right look so I wanted to make sure that we were able to get to the public um this is a hard lot it's a hard project we kind of went through a lot um but I think that you know we did get around some of the things that were you know that were hard to understand if you've got some problems with your numbers um what what do you want to do you really you really have two choices you can either um sort of wrap it up with a with a closing or give us any more evidence that you want to provide the board will deliberate and the board can vote the alternative to that is that you can ask the board to carry you can take the input that you got and you can go see what you can do and come back with different ideas what I never like about that is that there's this sort of implied suggestion that tonight we came up with a better idea I I I I've struggled with all of this I'm not sure how the other board members feel I won't let them talk um but it's hard it's hard I think that your neighbor shows you how hard it is um but that yeah you want to take a minute yeah I I guess I I would wring point that doesn't mean there's back with but yeah um if we could carry and at least Shore up the numbers even if it's the same proposal when we come back we can at least round out on that if that makes makes sense correct the elevation I would like to see the numbers correct uh uh solidify because the overall numbers way too many questions of what's included what wasn't included what's the real number can you provide um on your page one of A6 in the top you show a diagram post did that but for existing and show the line is with your 30 in is on the front back I think the only thing else I would ask if there was any other thoughts that weren't aired by to get do an actual detail of the window and the eaves consist hisor history so the bo can see that it actually is on the elevations it is drawn correctly it was just a photo details were what I showed the board and then those got discussed and edited so what's shown on the elevations the the 2D drawings is what the uh you know even though it's dra have the eve detail also yes I will yes okay yeah okay so what we're going to take a break a comfort break before we come back into our administrative so you're going to have that time if you guys wanted to talk before you before you ask this directly with regard to the question of is there anything else we didn't talk about we don't do the kind of well here's what you should do kind of thing right but I do want to say to the board that if there's anything that you've observed with regard to what you're looking at that you think would be helpful to the extent that the applicant you know goes back to take another look at it things that we haven't talked about certainly I would invite you to to communicate that now um and that doesn't mean I like it or I don't like it I'm not asking that I'm asking whether not you've seen something that we haven't talked about by way of other options shuffling sing we shared it you shared it you good I'm good I don't think I'm I think we've discussed in great detail the different options as we always do we're not suggesting one way or the other but I think it's it's a difficult project um I'm hoping you picked up the vibe as you said and they think yeah and have enough information not to say that if you come back with something that we would approve it but you're you've got a morage yeah than anyone else okay I I'd like a uh I'm concerned about lock coverage I'm very concerned about lock coverage and I would like to see a plan a functional house plan putting the two rooms where you had intended to put them being that that's the best option for the neighbor also uh and also and trying to eliminate the back left portion of the house okay I know that's a little bit more intrusive in terms of in terms of uh cost but that's going to solve it's going to give you what you need in terms of your um bedrooms it's going to get rid of a lot of your excess square footage and I think it's going to be a a good look to the house especially since it's push back sorry did you said you said you're eliminating the back part of the house just to that is my issue this is a 3,000 foot house and you want to go to 3,300 square feet it just there's a lot of house there's a lot of house I live in a 2600 foot house and we have four bedrooms albe one of them is on the first floor but that's very common to Fair Haven every Cape that was built in this town has a first floor master bedroom it works for people so you know it's a very big house as it is considering a lot of houses in this town there's a way to make it work without I think exacerbating beyond that 3,000 square fet yeah I think one thing that was pouched on but we really go into detail about is is there any opportunity to re reconfigure that second floor I understand he's a construction you're kind of just packing on of the garage but is there any opportunity needs to look at that second floor as a whole and still maybe get the bedrooms up there but maybe not as big of an addition you've got a very big master bedroom and you got you've got one of the rooms down on the first floor that's a that's a Bice something could be worked with that second floor we could eliminate the back left portion of the house consolidate into the existing portion of the house build your addition over the over the uh over the garage by lowering the the roof line also solving the other problem and I think that you might have a functional plan I think you're back far enough where you you eliminate a lot of issues including lot coverage by doing so yeah it's all the I think you're suggesting that we rebuild the entire house not really not really I think you're just taking off you're just locking off the back left portion of the house and you're uh you're heading where you want to head and also by comparing it to the cape cods in very and it's it's not necessarily a fair comparison either because we also know that this is a very old pH bones that started in the store District as well so um I I I appreciate that trying to think about different ways to get the math to work but um but I can already you know almost suggest that's a non-starter because we're not going to well you you asked me for my thoughts no app I apprciate it might not be a fair comparison yeah but it is a very generous comparison when you consider there are many many many many houses in this town that are well below 3,000 sare F feet that have four bedrooms I use my example because I live in a cape it's been expanded out we still have our master bedroom on the first floor it works for us I understand it doesn't work for everybody but there are ways and I think Dr laford touched upon them there is a lot of room in that house I I understand and I I appreciate the fact you're not allowed to take economics into consideration here but I can also I think you guys can appreciate the fact that it's a very uh it's not an inexpensive town to live in and it's a very big reach for us to come into this town and be here and get a house that we consider to be a Dream House of ours and now these sort of things make it you know make me question the long-term viability of living in the town if the suggestion is really you have to take a part of a perfectly good house that is functioning and remove it so that you can put the square footage elsewhere when really you can just do something to a structure that is already for intens allp physically already there aside from Raising it up and I understand it creates variance needs but um we're talking about taking something that's there not causing any issues and something that's effectively there without the upper part of it um you know I I could see that argument if we were talking about if this entire side of the house wasn't here and we were going to put that on but we're we're talking about this and we're talking about getting rid of this so that this can exist I just don't see the the reality of of how that is a legitimate tradeoff or suggestion respectfully it's a property that was expanded with variances back in 1993 since then it's been through six different owners most of whom have owned the property for maybe two years and maybe that pattern at least in my head says that people didn't see the viability of expanding it and moved on that's that's just my opinion of the pattern of ownership of the house and and pattern of variance you know two two owners go still live in town either Frank or Ron they have a bigger family they have a bigger house the last set of owners but not that house car my opinion yeah no I mean that that may be the case but that's reality the reality situation is that's that's our house and um and we're trying to make it work for us and we want it to work for you and these are just suggestions and someone who just went through renovation um finished it in the middle of covid I cannot be more sympathetic then you're going to have to do some renovations to your house because now things are even worse and more expensive than they were two years ago we want you to renovate your house that is our goal we don't want new construction we want renovation we want something that's going to work within the neighborhood with in our structures and that all we're doing is giving suggestions that's it and and we need you to give us the proofs that give us the legal hook to hang our decision on so you need to give us something that fits into that hardship or that benefits the the purpose of the Zone plan so that we can say he yeah this is a good idea and have that supported if somebody in the end says you know we don't like your decision we appeal it and what was your leg legal leg to stand on give it some look I know it's super hard and and I know it feels like it's harder over there than it is over here you have no idea how hard it is to meet really nice people that want to do really nice things and have to talk about changing dreams okay it is super hard to be up here be objective and not just give you everything you want every single one of us wants to do that but we can't we're legally not allowed we wouldn't be doing our job if we did we have to forget that you are people and look at your structure and look at the rules and make sense of it the town is built one house at a time and so the hard job is shared by all to make it it all worked if I were the attorney that you called when you were buying the house we would have talked about all of this you would have known it and you probably wouldn't have bought it but that's not something we can fix now at the end of the day what you're dealing with is something that is not unique because it happens a lot but it is not without a solution you've heard a ton if you go around the state and sit before a zoning board you will not find an experience like this you will not find people that will share these thoughts with you and try and work with you to figure it out I would ask you to look at our annual reports which exists for over 15 years and I want you to see how many applications we approve over 90% it is a ton because we try to figure it out so I understand it feels hopeless I get it I understand all of it I could have stopped it a long time ago I appreciate I do I really appreciate your feedback and talking through all of the experience I do the the the optimal situation here is to take a fresh look at this house and figure out a way with your budget to rethink what you want and how you can get there the rules give you latitude to work within the existing conf confines of the structure if you weren't before us no one in town cares that a lot of things that are built in that house are illegal just we do okay but that's a problem you know you know whoever did that like that's not good um look you guys want to carry yes okay so you're asking us to carry we have um a site plan that we're hearing in February it will take up the entire meeting um what do we have in in March we have anything scheduled we haven't scheduled that that was some of the items that we were going to talk about do we have completed applications that are waiting to be scheduled yes okay so what we're going to do is we're going to we're going to we're going to we're going to vote on your on your request to carry and then we're going going to communicate with you either later tonight or we can communicate tomorrow as to where Things Fall we'll try and get you on in March to the extent that you're ready to come back and talk about what you've done uh we stay late we'll try and figure it out um see you asked carry yeah we need a stipulation uh uh of an extension of our time to act as a condition of of carrying asking for you to stipulate for an extension of time or to act on your application so that you can yes I'm asking for an extension time to whether it be March or the nearest State P you know it won't be February it's possible it could be March it could be 2nd in March we can communicate all of that and let you know um so I'm going to make a motion to carry uh the DI comp I say it right yeah um uh application um uh based on the applicant's stipulation of an extension of our time to act um uh to uh a meeting not sooner than March um and we'll announce it later tonight that was really that's my second I second ready for a roll call please yes yes yes Mr yes yes yes yes yeah thank you guys I know I know we have a lot of time way more feedback APPA we are going to take a minut yeah yeah yeah so we're gonna take a five minute recess do a quick roll call please yes R here I'm here I think I'm here um physically so we've got um just a couple of administrative things to talk about um and then I was hoping to actually just set the stage again for um for for the issue of a site plan being presented to the zoning board um why don't we here uh minutes from the December 7th meeting uh I think all of the adjustments were sent to you Sheila um that being said I want I'll make a motion to approve the minut from December 7 second yes yes yes yes yes yes yes uh resolution Ryan 9917 River Road I'll make a mo motion to approve the resolution as submitted second yesel Mr yes yes M yes drer yes Mr yes it get to me on that one no later yeah okay that solves that the only the next discussion is on schedule hold on a second what about the annual report we did done okay fine so okay let's talk about so 2023 was the slowest year in zoning that I ever remember we had a really just a very limited amount of stuff 2024 is not shaping up that much so um we've got a series of things that we need to schedule what we talked about um late last year was issues about people being here and I think that what we all just need to remember as we proceed is that there's going to be some D's there's going to be some stuff we really need everybody the goal is to have nine people here every night if we don't have nine you certainly should have eight seven is the bare minimum right you can't even hear a d if you don't have seven so just look at your calendars if you've got things let us know so that we can get it scheduled so that we know that we're short and then everybody else can be that much more focused on making sure that things don't pop up and then people are getting sick my whole house is sick you'll all be sick tomorrow been there but uh you know anyway so that's that sh what do we have right now that's yet to be scheduled okay so I have a question about the Whispering Wood um which I had sent in an email that had been this is before I started there was something that was carried from September then to October okay so so what it is is it's a follow on hearing related to a prior matter which was litigated the attorney that's handling that is Mike Irene and what I think you can do is shoot Mike an email February yeah they're not um what what what exactly have you been asked can we be heard when are we be I want to set that to the side because uh Peter and I have discussed that whether or not we may need to set in a special and I was just thinking over the last five minutes that maybe the P would be the special so so what else do we have uh then we've got mad here we got mad in February and then we so we have H kis [Music] stream stream tomson DWI those three those are all from what I see on this 120 days to act March the 8 March the 30th March 20 okay and that okay so so B stre I'm waiting on additional information before I think they're ready so it's notem complete that one I in complete okay so what one of the things that we're losing a little track of and I think it's because Sheil is transitioning in is keeping track of where things are relative to their um approval by right because we failed to add so you're front and center on that and what I want to be able to do is to have you establish for us how we're going to keep track of those dates in other words when you say I've reviewed it we're good I've reviewed it we're not good you need to be able to help Sheila you guys figure out your code you've got Doug if you need to lean into him and Peter and I let us know but what I want to know is that Sheila you always not when we need to put an application on the agenda so it doesn't get approved as um because we failed to act that exists and that is a disaster it's never happened I don't want it to happen so it's super important y so I'm sorry so I spoke that's not Poli stre it's um yeah just Thompson and d and Di we have two that are that are um complete and ready to be heard plus the one from tonight and all of them need to be heard by March right sounds like they're all on for March you can put them on in the order that they found based on completion not submission but completion whoevers finished first gets first on that agenda does the agenda still say that we can change the order of it don't see it there something on the back to what's that on line under the date great um when we get those settled in you notify them that they're going to be on I want you to tell them that we have not yet determined the order and you can tell them that we have three on that night but that we will um have them on the agenda for that evening this application may not be back in March and then we only have two will'll be good but we're going to deal with it these guys may have to be third because we're going to have to hear pieces of and it wouldn't normally be like this but we kind of lost a little bit of time but moving forward it's not going to happen again so we won't be Jambo how to stop how to stuff look beyond that I'm sorry is it quiet other than that or is it active we have two more that came in um 45 day completeness is beginning of February okay so and two applications that were incomplete we're just waiting for them to resubmit so there's four in the wigs it's a lot yeah that's as much as we heard all last year um four that a letter have been issued on two more than a letter have not been issued okay I want to reach out to Michael who's who's sitting for uh P who's the P gr one two three four the Whispering Woods payo David you're on that you're on that you're all on that everybody be her you guys we need a special meeting yeah because we can't push him back to April you need something between middle of February to end end of March um maybe what we do Sheila is reach out to Mike tell him that there's no way that we're going to be able to set them into a regular agenda before April maybe May because because of what we've got going on just based on what's scheduled um so that we've suggested that they set a schedule set a special and have Mike reach out to Jen figure out what they can do and toss some dates back and then you're going to have to pull the board and then we'll we'll call for a special meeting am I missing anything what else we going to do right I think we also going to declare once you get that for the special meeting hope we need to clarify if they're resubmitting any any plan or documents so put Jordan on the email with Mike ask Mike tell him to get on with Jen enough enough um you the amount of movement and changes and and nobody's fault but it's everybody's fault it's too much too much so the last thing I just wanted to touch on I felt like when we started the last meeting we had a site plan in front of us and it was like wow we haven't seen one of these in a while you have from the planning board but the rest of you guys have not so what I wanted and didn't start that meeting with and I just want to make sure that everybody understands is that the zoning board has concurrent jurisdiction with regard to site plans right so we've seen them before the reason it came here is because there's a d varant and so the D variance relates to the use it relates to the change of the pre-existing non-conforming use and so that's where the kind of Heart of it is but when the applicant got started the applicant started talking about a lot of site plan stuff and we got it got really quickly off into the weeks that's a very unique property because it exists today nobody's looking to take a piece of a farm and build that what they're looking at is an existing facility and they're trying to make sense of it when they start next time I'm going to try to restructure that a little bit so that we pull it out of them in a way that makes sense because it seems to me that the Baseline is this building's right here right this building was previously approved for a commercial use like we're getting caught up on lighting there is no lighting so as they're trying to comply with site plan stuff they're sort of muddying the waters as to the Baseline which is I've got a building I need to reuse it I'm limited to a bank uh this is what I propose to do if I change nothing else this is where I am then build from there I just don't want to get caught up in in a lot of what they are trying to to show us and lose sight of the underlying fact and that is it's a structure that exists true and also In fairness to the to to the board is very you brought your planner in good for you to do that but she did not prepare a report for you want to ask the planner to prepare to report the sys so that you don't get lost in the reads they have and you have a SC sure can you can you please reach out to CCH and um tell them that we discussed tonight um the meeting in February and ask them to confirm that they are preparing a report and ask them when that report will be made available to us I believe that when she left I forget her name Sor ter I I I believe that she said she was going to prepare something yeah um but let's just make sure that we're not um that we didn't Mis communicate on that Don Don so he's to follow his script yeah yeah yeah wonder what wonder what big holiday we'll have in February that we can Mo out me that was really clever okay uh any members of the public Trac you already said your piece Susan that the record reflect Tracy and Susan are the only two die hards still here 13 minutes of the LA we appreciate you thank you anyone else for the good of the order motion toour all in favor be hell