##VIDEO ID:oU57F3t1lYk## do we have Anthony hello Anthony hello all right I think we're ready to get started so um everyone I just want to want to welcome you um my name is Jay frery I'm going to do my best to act as the chair today uh our chairman is traveling and our vice chair is without power down in Florida so we apologize for that so I'll do the best I can um so this is a this is a meeting of the Yarmouth zoning board of appeals um we now convene the April of exes April October 10th meeting of the armor zoning board of appeals as required by GL chap 30A um 1825 pursuant to chapter 20 of the acts of 2021 an act relative to extending certain covid-19 measures adopted during the state of emergency as extended by chapter two of the acts of 2023 the public are able to attend this meeting either in person or via alternate Public Access members of the public may watch the meeting live on channel 18 or watch or participate in the meeting hosted in Zoom the meeting notice provides necessary instructions to join the meeting via Zoom please note that audio video and screen sharing functions will be disabled for all attendees you may request to participate by using the rais hand function we will Begin by taking a roll call for Corum Anthony president uh dick yeah and Barbara here and I'm Jay Freer I'm here so we have we have four people tonight um which gives us a quorum I just want to let you know that with four in most cases we're only we only can have one Des Center I think it is y in order to be able to pass something so just to let you know um if there's any problems with that on any presenters since we are missing one person um just let us know all right so given that uh the first petition tonight is petition 5130 Cynthia and Michael malalla here I'm sorry maau sorry come on up grab um property located at 21 Lewis Bay Road West Yarmouth Mass map and lot number 1763 zoning District r25 the applicant seeks to reverse the decision of the building inspector per 10223 paragraph three for the proposed Building height of an existing single family dwelling to be raised and replaced um would you like to tell us sure if if you don't mind I'm just going to read a prepared statement uh that's fine okay yeah um my name is Mike mcau and this is my wife Cynthia we live at 23 Lewis Bay Road uh we strongly oppose the building permit that was issued for proposed new house at 21 Lewis Bay Road we've lived at 23 Lewis Bay Road for nearly 5 years and butters on the right on the right hand side this property was brought to the zba last year September 28th 2023 case number 5053 and the developer ultimately withdrew their petition for their proposed five b 2 and a half story likely five plus bedroom house with a roof deck nearly 40t tall on a on a that's roughly around 6600 Square ft after hearing many of the comments from the zba and the neighbors that the house was too tall and too big for this tiny tiny lot in our very crowded neighborhood of mostly small single story Cape houses the developer stated that he clearly heard concerns expressed however new plans have been recently submitted and approved by the building department on August 13th 2024 this year and shockingly these new plans show the house to be slightly taller with the same roof deck as the previous plans that both the zba and the entire neighborhood has had strong objections to the rest of the house is now made slightly smaller so they don't need to come before you guys the F variances and uh they are conforming to the setbacks even so at over 2500 square feet this new house will still be the largest and tallest house in our area after the zba had made a point of saying they would likely never approve a house larger or taller than the previous two that were rebuilt at 27 Lewis Bay Road and 15 Lewis Bay Road and both of these homes are roughly around 2,000 square ft and roughly 26 feet tall the developer seems now to now be able to skirt the zba's previous requests and the neighbors's concerns by conforming to setbacks essentially removing the protection the zba provided and how neighborhood had value yet we don't think they are conforming to height requirements and are asking for the zba protection against building this tall in addition to the zba saying they would likely never approve a house 35t tall in our neighborhood even though it's technically allowed there was much discussion regarding whether the roof deck would ever be allowed by the building code the proposed house is 34.6 feet tall and the roof deck sits on top of it zba discussed the bylaws in section 20 23.4 and I quote height limitations shall not apply to chimneys spires CPAs antennas or other similar structures not intended for human occupancy and the board unanimously agreed that a roof deck was intended for human occupancy and therefore should be counted towards the height thus exceeding the height allowed the written decision issued by zba in last year's case 5053 States and I quote the proposed height of the home is 34.5 ft nearing the height limitation of 35 ft and board members agreed that the outdoor roof deck should should have been included in the height calculation we feel that a house this tall would be detrimental to our neighborhood it is not consistent with the character of our neighborhood and is entirely inconsiderate of the privacy of the neighborhood nearly all of us have lots that are roughly 6600 square feet and a roof deck on top of a proposed 35 foot tall house peers into at least six of our yards and removes a very small amount of privacy we have there's no precedence for this type of roof deck on our streets with tiny lots and it would certainly be the largest and most invasive structure around us when someone was on the roof deck they'd be standing at about 40 ft and it also includes an outdoor staircase leading up to up to it both our house and the left side of B's house are only one story tall the zba also stated that and I quote just because we have a 35 ft height limitation doesn't mean we will allow it and I'll end the quote a house this tall in a neighborhood like ours would be imposing and unpleasant even without the roof deck we plead with all of you to revoke this building permit and to help us to ensure that this new house will be a reason of reasonable height and considerate of our neighborhood thank you right thank you um I guess the first thing we're going to do is we're going to let board members ask questions so uh if we could start um Barbara would you like to start um I'd like to hear your comments first is that me you're looking at sure um in terms of questions I mean it's pretty much it is what it is it's uh I certainly understand the petitioners and neighbors concern over the height on such a small lot unfortunately if it meets all zoning um requirements in terms of definition of height and what's on top and it's got the sideline setbacks baile uh that it needs and the front setbacks and so forth I as much as we might not like it and as much as you might not like it I'm not sure we got a uh no not you not you the uh the uh owners of the property might like it uh might not like it they think that uh I'm not sure there's going to be a whole lot we can do but happy to listen to anybody's else's can I add something y when when we're talking about the um the height the reiling is going to be over 35 ft and the height limitation at 35t so we don't feel like it makes all the setbacks and according to all five zba members from our last hearing it didn't all five zba members said that the railings for the deck should be counted and therefore this is five feet over the height limit and that's why we were shocked that it was approved um in the building inspector reason for approving it was that it's historically been done that way historically the railings haven't been counted well let me let me read um a memo that came from um Mark Gillis who's the uh Building Commissioner to kind of identify how that worked um this was a letter dated October October 10th 2024 regarding 21 Lewis Bay Road the building department issued building permit blr 24346 on August 13 2024 to raise and replace the single family dwelling the existing structure was non-conforming on one side with a setback of 7.4 feet the proposed new structure shown in the site plan dated May 31st 2024 meets all the requirements of section 104.3 do2 paragraph 1 Item B for current Building height coverage and setback requirements the building height shown on the plan is 34.6 Ft from the average Street grade which is under the allowed 35 ft in table 20342 the flat portion of the roof that is intended for human occupancy is 34.6 feet measure the measurement was taken the guard rails are required by building code and historically have not been included in the calculation of the building height that's that's the comment from The Building Commissioner um I I also was on I mean I was there at the last meeting and was concerned about the height and I'll admit that but it was what they were looking for was something that was outside um outside of some of the other issues that we did have purview over um besides setback relief things like that so as a result of that we could make comments and we could encourage someone to make those changes in this situation it's a little bit less easy for us because everything that they've done is within the building codes so I just want to mention this letter that came to us from the Building Commissioner now let some of the other Comm um other members now ask any other questions okay uh Anthony do you have any questions I don't I just Echo what you said I was at the prior meeting I was strong about not wanting to um permit to move forward with their variance requests and part of that was discussing the building height though not though no variance was required for that Building height I you know we found it to be a factor in our consideration and what we were discussing but here where it meets all the the bylaws and the bill commissioner has approved with a building permit I don't know that we have unfortunately perhaps much to go on all right thank you um Barbara come back to you is there anything else you'd like to State no okay so I guess what we'd like to do then is uh we have a number of letters that have been submitted in in regard to this uh I can think we have seven letters of support is that right um I don't know that we have any letters against but I guess what we'd like to do is ask anyone who wants to come up um from the public and speak speak about this petition um that's in in favor of the petition which would be to uh to overrule the The Building Commissioner if they haven't already submitted a letter um or would like to say it in person and just let me know who they are and I'll I won't read the letter um I'd like to feel free is there anyone in the audience that would like to come up and speak sir right go right ahead to the leor and tell us who you are and where where you live and uh Tom Ashmore 27 Lewis Bay Road and my problem is is the height particularly the deck he has planned for the back of it it'll complicate the privacy of everybody there every at least a half a dozen houses between Lina Road and and uh and a street you know anyway that's my opinion uh it's going to complicate and spoil the backyard the privacy of of what we've had for a long time understood and otherwise than that I certainly don't mind a man building a house you know except for the height and the and that deck in the back so that's my comments and I thank you for listening thank you is there anyone else that would like to come up and speak in support of the petition please feel free just uh tell us who you are and where you live my name is elain how I live at 22 Lewis Bay Road um that right across the street they're right across the street in a little tiny I can't believe the size of the lot that they're going to build this huge house on but I want to say to Matt and to palamina I have no objection against you building a house I want you to build a house but I'm asking them to please consider the height and the privacy of my neighbors we've always been a nice neighborhood took care of each other and loved each other and this is really hurting a lot of people it's bothering a lot of people and and to think of having a roof deck that high in just such a small area I can see it close to the water are with houses more the size of that that are doing that but I just would like a little consideration I guess I want them to know I do welcome them to build a house but please be a little thoughtful all right okay thank you very much you is there anyone else that would like to speak either uh well for for the petition itself you know I do have some letters here that I'll try to quickly summarize um these are all seven letters of support um for sorry yeah go right ahead your name and add name and location hi this is Muhammad I'm the neighbor to uh the left side of the house so most of us uh supported this uh uh objection because in the last meeting we were told that the uh rails should be counted as part of the height and now that uh you know everybody seems to agree that it's not counted can uh Somebody explain you know what's why why did the decision change it's not necessarily A change it was a concern that we had as a group back on when it was originally brought to us last year and the fact that it was 34.6 um was we felt High anyway for the neighborhood but we had the option of being able to identify things that were a concern especially for the neighborhood because it would stand out um but we had concerns because there was also a variance that was required and with a variance we have some latitude to request the the uh the the uh owner or the petitioner to do certain things or to look at trying to do some things by eliminating the variance need he's now within the building guidelines the bylaws so we don't really really have the the position now where we can encourage it is under according to the building inspector this is under the 35 foot requirement because there are a few things like railings that don't count in the height okay but you the last time you actually said that it counted it does I mean that's the reason why I sent my email and that's the reason why I'm here because you this board said that it should count and whether we feel it should or shouldn't is irrelevant it's what it does and I'm just letting you know I mean last time you didn't know that it did I mean why is like different now if I can try you you explained it right but uh I mean we we were there was relief needed last time uh because it was going to be too close to the lot line I guess and a few other things and uh so when there's relief needed that gives us ability to you know take into account other things like you know just the height is overbearing to the neighborhood which it is and uh and so forth but but our hands are pretty much we're requesting an overbearing we're just saying if you feel that it's it should be counted as a board you should say that it should be counted and the height doesn't fit the requirements right uh shouldn't shouldn't you be doing that we we don't have that Authority if it meets meets all zoning requirements uh you know it doesn't it doesn't come before us we don't have anything to say about it actually uh bringing the appeal as it is to you know say that the relief had should not have been granted uh you know I I I again just doesn't give us any Liberty to to uh as much as we might like to to say we can U uh agree with you agree with the petition because it uh you know it it can work both ways it can have uh you know if the buyer if the owner of the property was still looking for some relief be it a sideline setback be it height be it whatever you know then we have a case then we can make some distinctions and H and do something but if it meets all the criteria as required by the town of yam zoning bylaws we uh I'm afraid there's probably not anything we can do okay so we our house is a little one on the left side we already feel that house is like 26 feet it's already Too Tall now this is going to be 35 40 ft you know our will feel like we are in a jail you know in a 6,000 square foot but it's just I understand thank you I I guess um well while we're doing this Tim would you mind coming up and just kind of letting us know the building Department's rationale and maybe some of the history that we've had in regard to these types of things yeah I mean I I know there's quite a few of these that exist along Bass River that are the same exact situation that you know the're basically like 34 35 ft with the flat part of the deck you know with the railings being above you know because you could put railings across the roof across the ridge as a decoration without that would meet the bylaw so that's why it's historically been through a you know building commissioners before even we were here before the current one and the one before that a couple of building Commissioners ago it was historically always looked at that way and and I believe there are other things that also don't count like Koopas koas yeah anything yeah that that basically you can't occupy a KO that's why we count the flat part of the deck as the part that's occupied by the person you know so that's how that's always been right okay thank you yep thank can I say something sure I mean I got to say I'm a little disappointed because this is not what we were told previously what we were told previously is that the railing would be part of the deck and the deck is is O occupied by human occupancy and that it would count toward the height and all five of you looked at the zoning bylaws and that's how it was interpreted and the reason the building inspector doesn't interpret it that way it's just it's historically not interpreted that way that doesn't seem like a good enough reason should they go to the law look at the law and interpret it not just do what's historically been done because the Lots he's talking about probably aren't that small and they're not in a crowded neighborhood like ours I I agree with you I feel the house is awfully large for the location but it's within the building code based on the way the building code has been interpreted in the town it is based on the way it is we had concerns about it last year and we voiced them it doesn't mean we knew the def definition at the time we just thought it wasn't appropriate and we wouldn't have allowed it because of the variants they were looking for because it didn't fit they've found a way to fit it within the building code when they do that that eliminates our ability on any discretion to make a decision against it it really does I I wish I could say otherwise but that's the that's the way it works you just have a bunch of concerned neighbors trying to protect their neighborhood going up against the developer who does this for a living and knows every Loop po right so we have no recourse to protect our neighborhood if we wanted to live on Rivia Beach we would be there well this is Cape car this is I I understand all we are as a first line of defense to be able to say as far as an appeal goes we probably have very little we can do to help you I don't know that there aren't other other situations you could do whether it's legal or whatever but as far as this board is concerned when what we're given as far as the duty to do um we're very limited um it's just it's that's the way it works I can read in the other the other support that is out here for it I should read it into the record if you give me a chance to do that just to make sure everybody's voice is heard um and then I'd like to hear if there's anyone that is against what your appeal is excuse me Mr chairman there's also a letter of opposition just so you're aware of that yes I must have missed that one there's one okay is it in the back of the letters here or do you know I didn't see it but I'll get to that let me do the first let me go um first of all um this came from Marilyn Brown uh Dr southw Southworth and I live on 40 Lena Road around the corner and four houses from 21 Lewis Bay we exclusively where an exclusively tall new home is being proposed we support the appeal of the building permit to build the proposed new home on 21 Lewis Bay Road we do not want such a tall house to be built in the neighborhood as a height of about 40 feet people on the roof of such a house would be able to see into many yards around the neighborhood and would Tower over the neighborhood it would be out of character for the rest of the neighborhood which is a Charming place to live thus we do not want the house to be built rebuil rebuilt as planned at 21 Lewis Bay Road based on the excessive height sincerely Dr Mar Marilyn a brown and Dr Frank Southworth the next one is from uh Samra and muham erdal um and uh dear Dolores we live on 17 Lewis Bay Road we support the appeal of petition 5130 for the building permit issued on 21 Lewis Bay Road contesting the height of the house which is about 40 feet in last year's zba meeting for the variance of the same house it was decided that the height of the house including the roof the height of the roof deck rails should not be more than they say 26 feet it's in a we do not want a 40 foot tall building next to ours it will ruin our view the people in the roof deck that tall will ruin our Peace Quiet and Prim privacy um sincerely zamra and Muhammad erell um I have the next letter is uh from Linda and Jerry Jarvis members of the arming board of appeals we are writing in support in support of Mike and Cindy macau's petition 3130 concerning the building Department's recent permit to Matt Marino to rebuild the house on 21 Lewis Bay Road last September 28th he came before the zoning board and was told he couldn't have a deck on the three-story house as it would be over the height limit the Lots on the side of the street are small and the houses are closed together as well as the houses behind him on another Street he he has now done away with the need for variances thus doing an end around the zoning board and going straight to the building department still has plans for a three-story house with a deck and no change in the height even three stories is too high for the area just to have open space and a bathroom as as indicated in his plans it seems his need for a third floor is to get the deck high enough for a view it would Loom over the neighbors giving them no privacy in their yards two other houses on street 15 and 27 Lewis Bay Road have rebuilt with twostory homes which fit the bet the area better than the three-story home we respectfully ask that your ruling on October 10th be the same as it was last September as nothing has changed in regards to height thank you Lind and Jerry Jarvis um I'm GNA try to summarize these a little bit quicker um this next one is from Carol Walsh um dear zba members I'm writing in support of the petition by Cindy and Mike mcau we own 15 Lewis Bay Road ra the Razer rep place the height of the home is 26 feet and two stories attic is a Crossway SP um basically it's in support again in support of your your concerns similar to the last one next one is from Frank pandolfo um this letter is being sent in petition 30 3 5130 reference to building Department's issue to Matt Marino to rebuild the house on September 28th the board of appeals petition stated the scale of the house must be more in keeping with the neighborhood building plans are not keeping with the zoning boorn recommendations the outdoor roof should be included in the height calculation we are not opposed to rebu rebuild the concern is a three-story house with a deck on top causing loss of privacy to our neighbors the next one is from elain Huff Huff I think I hope I'm saying that right apologize um members of the Yarmouth zoning board of appeals um I'm writing in support of appeal by Cindy and Mike McCalla regarding Matt marinos at Matt Marino at 21 Louis Bay Road I have owned 22 Lewis Bay Road a ranch house I think you spoke earlier um since 1967 my house sits almost directly across the road from the Mariners I am certainly not opposed to the Mariners building a new house in fact I welcome it the small neighborhood has always been a close knit offering help to anyone in need at this point I not understand the need to build a house of such height and adding the windows windows walk to an already tall structure in my opinion the marinos are infringing on everyone's privacy on Lewis Bay Road and Lena Road it can make for uncomfortable entertaining or just being able to enjoy your own yards the two newest homes on the road at 15 and 27 are 26 feet high and built with consideration to fit into the existing neighborhood this house will absolutely overpower our neighborhood of mostly small capes and small Lots Marino's lot is also a small lot at the hearing on September 23rd the board stated that the home should be scaled down and be more in keeping with the neighborhood the height is already almost 10 inches taller before than adding adding the deck and railings I'm urging the board to please consider the neighborhood and privacy concerns I have as I said previously I am not at all opposed to the building of a new home but I'm strongly opposed to this height I will affect it will affect the privacy of many homes and I also fear the property values will be affected as well and again that was from elen H um did I say your name right I hope anyway uh the last one I have is um from September 7th from Thomas and Alice Ashmore dear members of The Zing board of appeals we Thomas and Alice Ashmore of 27 leis Bay are writing in regard to petition 5130 brought by Matthew and and PMA Marino whose property is located 21 Lewis Bay Road West Yarmouth um a similar petition was brought to board same same issues last year um at last year's meeting the board agreed with us and the Marina's petition for variance was denied it was withdrawn by the way it wasn't denied um Mr Marino has recently submitted new plans to the building department for a home of the same height as previous plans we feel that a home of this height with a roof deck above it would be invasive to the privacy of many of the hes neighbors as anyone standing on the deck would be able to see many of our surrounding yards we are not opposed to Mariners building a new house on their property but feel that the plans for said house should be scaled down to a more modest home consistent with the neighborhood Hood keeping this with this in mind we are asking the board to revoke the building permit as approved thank you for your consideration um those are the ones I have in support um I guess what I'd ask is there anyone here that would like to speak against the petition to overrun overrule The Building Commissioner sir if you'd come up to the tell us who you are and where you live my name is Matthew Marino and it's my building permit at 21 Lewis Bay Road that mall are objecting to last September I came here before this board with a plan seeking relief or setback on one side and overlock coverage Mall's are objecting to a house feature that I did not even seek relief on last September Mr MC stood before this board and in his words told this board that I was a developer and he did not want the board to approve anything for me I can count on one hand how many times I've Built Homes but for this reason Mall's feel I should not be approved for anything he said I should only be able to to build what is by right yet I received my building permit by right and the mall are here again before this board wanting to deny me the rights given all residents under the bylaws I met with the building department on numerous occasions to arrive at a clear understanding of the rules and my rights and limitations I can tell you from personal experience that Mark grills the town Building Commissioner whose job it is is to enforce the bylaws know know the bylaw as well and the Massachusetts State Building Code you received a statement by Mark grills The yoth Building Commissioner that an entirely new set of plans I submitted to the building department met all of the bylaws requirements for setbacks lot coverage and height he further communicates that railings are not counted in the calculation of height the mall feel that this board should go against the building commissioner they want to convince the board that the bilage should prevent any home it's their preference that in any home shouldn't be higher than any other house on the street they want me to build a house with features that appeal to them and to my neighbors bylaws exist to protect the rights and interests of residents if residents have been granted these rights in the past then all residents deserve those same rights fact is homes are close in this neighborhood and you do not even need a roof deck to violate a neighbor's privacy the two other homes that were mentioned tonight have second floor windows that enable looking down into a neighbor's yard I'm trying to build my home given the rights granted me by the do bylaws is that that [Music] yeah I think that's I I we've I I've always been close with all my neighbors and the mall and it's hurting me that it's no we're no longer close and I never realized that a roof deck could bring it to this um I love the the ocean I I saw an opportunity that I could see the ocean from my home the bylaws allow that opportunity I have no intention of uh hurting anybody I like I said it's a close neighborhood and doesn't it doesn't take a roof deck to uh violate privacy uh that's all I can say thank you Mr chairman the letter of opposition is actually from Mr Marino and he's had an opportunity okay thank you I have the letter if you spoke and you read it that's fine I didn't read it oh oh I'm sorry I do have it um um would you like me to read it in also or yeah okay sure thank you sorry all right opposition to petition 5130 submitted by Matthew and PMA Marino 31 of 21 Lewis Bay Road last September the zba heard my petition 5053 I was seeking a special permit and for variance relief under bylaws section 10 4.3.2 and 203.50 for a lot coverage and setback on one side based on the feedback and the opposition I at the meeting I withdrew my application I began the costly labor intensive task of redes designing my home this required a thorough understanding of the building codes and my rights as outline outlined in the town of Yarmouth bylaws I was diligent as to conform to the rules described by the bylaws I constructed on numerous occasions I consulted excuse me on numerous occasions with the Building Commissioner and building inspectors and staff the building department reviewed my plans for compliance to math at Massachusetts building codes energy code and town of Yarmouth bylaws my proposed home was also reviewed by all required governing departments in the town of Yarmouth prior to issuance of my building permit on August 13th 2024 the armouth building department issued me a permit to raise and replace my home with building permit BLD 24346 this home is an entirely different one than than the one I petitioned the zba on September 23rd 2023 the letter dated October 10th 2024 written by The Building Commissioner mark girls uh referen building permit the building permit and states the proposed new structure shown on the site plan dated May 31st 2024 meets all requirements of section 10432 paragraph 1 Item B for current Building height coverage and setback requirements the flat portion of the roof deck roof deck that is intended for human occupy occupancy excuse me is where the 34.6 foot measurement was taken the guard rails are required by building code and historically have not been included in the calculation the building height quotes excuse me a second Commonwealth of Massachusetts general laws 143 section three describes the role of the Building Commissioner it reads the Building Commissioner shall enforce the State Building Code as well as the rules and regulations and shall be the administrative Chief and shall be solely responsible to the person or public body the town of Yarmouth website section under building reads the building department is responsible for the enforcement of State Building Codes as well as the town zoning bylaws the town of Yarmouth bylaws chapter 20 25-1 section under enforcing persons names the building department and its designes section 101 under the administration enforcement States this bylaw shall be enforced by The Building Commissioner at his or his his or her duly authorized and qualified designate section 103.1 under compliance certif C certification reads it is by the Building Commissioner my home plan is designed with features and functions that appeal to me in doing so I know that I cannot appease every neighbor's concerns and preferences with my revised plan I did however make an effort to address my neighbor's concerns for privacy while keeping the roof deck I moved it toward the center of the roof having seven horizontal feet of roof to the left and 14 feet of horizontal roof to the right with the intention that both visibly visibility down into my neighbor's yards and visibility towards me on the deck would be limited throughout West Yarmouth there are numerous homes designed and built having roof decks and railings these homes were built in conformance to the rules and the bylaws and an individual's rights to do so granted under the bylaws and building codes and enforced by The Building Commissioner in any Town board or governing official were to deny me and my family the same rights previously given to others it would be discrimination and that was Matthew Marina um so that's uh in opposition is there anyone else that would like to speak in opposition to the petition ma'am would you come up no it's opposition to the to the petition to the petitioner's appeal you want to I to I support okay um yeah we've kind of got passed that so I apologize you didn't come up but we'll make a note that there's one more person that uh oppos supports the petition um is anyone else here to to uh against the petition no okay hearing that I close the I close the um um input from the from the public and uh I'll turn it over to the board for discussion I can I ask one thing what are our options here you guys take a vote it's going to be what three out of four yes right you can withdraw yeah so if we withdraw we can withdraw or what with postpone or something we can post postpone it for another hearing um would you postpone an appeal you post an appeal no an appeal of I'm aware but anyway anon's Anthony do you want to say something yeah I don't believe that you can I think the options are to withdraw without prejudice by motion uh if they if we want to entertain that or for us to take a vote and make our determination okay no withdrawal so if you ask for a withdrawal without prejudice I think we can grant that correct no we okay no yeah so it's either withdraw a grant or we're gonna vote okay okay and um you know there if there are other Pro if there are other appeals that you need to make or ways to approach this that's up to you afterwards okay um is anybody like to discuss this or make a make a motion I'd appreciate it Anthony do you have anything else to say or I do not yeah I would be ready to vote on it okay Barbara um I kind of suspect that a lot of the opposition to this is just the size of the house to begin with that it's three stories um which is larger than you know I think a lot lot of houses on the street and then with the addition of the um the roof deck I can see where people are coming from I can understand the concern okay would you like to yeah I can also understand the concern uh an interesting little aside that I probably shouldn't do it uh I had the same situation with my previous house where I wanted to uh uh put a rooftop widows walk deck where I get a better view of the water and for whatever reason it seems like nobody ever went up there uh so I think if you're really worried about people partying up on a you know on top of the third story I I I would be surprised if that happens uh I can understand the the Marino's reason for wanting to have a peak of the water as did I uh but I don't think you should be worrying about any kind of party circumstance here and then I go back to what I've said before relevant to you know our situation is our hands are tied and as long as our hands are tied and they are uh the uh proposal had met all requirements of the zoning bylaw we can't really do much else go um I I have to agree with with dick um you know this it's uh what you have to understand is if there's a variance required then we have we have a lot more latitude because we can see if it makes sense to fit into the neighborhood if they've met all the guidelines from The Building Commissioner then we have very little we can do um we're just very limited it it does seem to meet the guidelines I have to I'd have to um vote against the appeal um for that reason that's that would be my opinion um I I understand the concern it's I think the house is large of the neighborhood and it's definitely different and uh is going to change things but it fits within the building guidelines that are voted on by the town um to uh that we're supposed to adhere to so given that is there anyone that would like to make a motion uh I'd move to see if I can get this right um uphold the decision of the building inspector uh uh for petition 5130 do I have a second I'll I would add I would add before we vote if we may I know there's a second there Sor Barbara that we would have to procedurally move to deny their appeal and uphold the decision of the understood uh Building Commissioner I will add that to it yes so there's a so there's there's a there's a motion to uh deny the appeal and uphold the building commissioner's decision um by dick and a second by Barbara I need to do a roll call vote on this one I believe so I'd start with Anthony uh we have one I Barbara hi Dick hi and I'm an I so as a board we uh we have to um reject your appeal and that's uh that's kind of where we stand thank you all right the next uh the next item on the agenda is petition 5135 agnoli sign company they come up Mr chair I'm here she's on Zoom okay I'm just gonna give people a second to to uh there's a lot of people leaving just want to give them a second sbody waste anybody's Loris can you hear me I can can you hold on a moment there are people exiting the room and then they'll begin and announce your petition yes you can let me know when they're done okay let me just read uh read into the record this uh publication uh petition 5135 agnoli Sign Company um I think I said that right Incorporated property location s Long Pond Drive um South Yarmouth Mass map and lot number 50.1 zoning District B1 applicant seeks a special permit per 30313 and or variance from 303.5 5.3 for signage size and number at Stop and Shop supermarket question is on Zoom if you tell us your name and Christina Morrow I'm with uh agnoli sign company and I'm representing Stop and Shop and the proposed signage changes will modernize their stop shop sign in keeping with the company's current branding the proposed replacement of the existing 4 foot Stop and Shop and Logo wall sign currently which is 122 square feet will be replaced with a new 3ot 3in Stop and Shop sign and logo with 117 square foot the removal of the six Department signs that are on the building currently will be replaced with Citizens Pharmacy and serving our community a total of 58 square foot less that's a net decrease of 39 square feet from what's existing currently the wall signs complement the architecture and size of the supermarket portion portion of the building and are visually aesthetically beneficial to the site and neighborhood the wall signs are set back approximately 300t back from Long Pond Drive and considerably screened from view by distance and vegetation on the 13 plus Acre Site the wall signs provide better utilization of the site without harming safety and convenience of towns inhabitants and Welfare of the citizens the wall signs will protect and serve the individual and economic interest of the town's residents and businesses while at the same time respecting Community character architectural design and Public Safety the wall signs meet the spirit and intent of zoning bylaw and will not cause or contribute to any undue nuisance Hazard congestion in the neighborhood zoning District of the town the proposed signs will beneficially contribute to dramatically improving the appearance of the property and make the property an asset to the neighborhood and the community uh this is the third time stoin shop has changed their signs in the last 20 years and it's consistent with what they've done in the past so we ask that we be able to change um to the new corporate branding basically that's it thank you let me just see if there's any questions from the board Barbara do you have have any questions um no so so I understand the proposed is the facade will be like a light gray as opposed to the stark white well the the facade is already painted exactly like it is right now okay so the only thing that building has already been painted years ago they painted it and the only thing we're going to do is when we take the Stop and Shop the old one off we're going to patch and paint to match the existing colors so nothing changes as far as the colors on the building okay it's just new signage new signage okay thank you yeah you're welcome anything else no and do you have any questions no no straightforward dick uh I'm sorry I might have missed it but what's what's the height of the existing Stop and Shop sign as compared to the foot four foot Stop and Shop right now currently and it will be reduced to a 3 foot 3 in that keeps in proportion with the square footage that's up there currently okay um and we're keeping Pharmacy and Pharmacy and citizens and getting rid of natural foods and getting rid of Fresh Bakery correct yep yep getting rid of fresh Bak get some stuff and and we doing a little bit else okay I'm we're adding fresh oh I'm sorry that was the the produce and the meat okay uh I don't have any other questions yeah it looks to me like you're actually reducing the large sign and reducing from six six small descriptions to three correct so it looks like a lesser if anything so that's always it's a reduction it's reduction Ru that's always good so um yeah looks good looks good to me let me see if there's any feedback from the community is there anyone in the audience that would like to speak in favor of this petition please come up seeing none is there anyone that would like to speak against this petition seeing none I'll close it to the public and uh open it up to the board to discuss or make a motion I would move uh this Anthony I would move to approve the application as BR okay Anthony moves to approve I'll second it dick seconds is there any discussion people would like to have on the motion no okay uh so um Anthony vote I I Barbara I Vick I and I'm an I so that's four to nothing um to approve the petition thank you very much I think thank you very much you know the way this works I think it uh I remember be registered with the clerk exactly and and uh you know there'll be 20 days for I think is it 20 days for an appeal yep and then bring it bring it back please bring it back to Dolores and after you've got it uh um submitted to the the county okay Dolores will provide the uh written decision right and then it will be stamped by the clerk I'll email you all the information she'll email you all your information she's she's wonderful I appreciate it thank you we we agree yes yes she helped me a lot thank you bye okay thank you very much bye um Z4 Z get my numbers right my notes okay um the next petition is petition 5136 Joseph Rano did I say that right I hope yeah being represented by Mr tardiff evening let me just read into the the the uh motion um the petition Joseph Rano property location at 167 bter Avenue West Yarmouth Massachusetts map and lot number 29111 zoning District r25 the applic con seats a special permit per 104.3 point2 D2 Andor variance from 2035 for sideb setback relief to construct an exterior staircase on the side of the garage attorney Paul tardiff is representing good evening evening Mr chairman members of the board uh for the record I am Paul tardiff and attorney in yarmouthport and seated with me is Jill Rano who's the owner of the property at 167 baav um this property is in the r25 zoning District um it's comprised of 2,293 square ft and 150 ft of Frontage on bter Avenue uh the lot is improved with a two-story single family dwelling which was recently built um after the former structure was raised um as part of the new construction a finished room was built over the new garage uh which is accessed from inside the home the detached garage that used to be on the on the site um was on the Northerly boundary of the property and was 10.8 ft from that boundary where 15 ft was required the new garage was built 16.4 ft from the boundary which complies with the setback so they pulled it back um after construction the applicant wanted to have a second means of egress uh and a way to move furniture into that space more easily rather than from inside of the home so um the plan um was to build a an exterior set of stairs uh on the Northerly side of the property um and that was commenced um but uh during an an inspection uh it was learned that uh that might be encroaching into the side setback uh itself and that he should come get relief which he immediately called me and that's why we're here so again just to to put this in perspective we had a a garage uh detached garage that was 10.8 ft from the boundary we are now going to have a set of stairs that will be 10.3 ft from the same boundary so um in essence you're we're we're 5 Ines closer to the Northerly boundary so um you have this is his property right here this yellow garage is the detached garage that used to be there and it was um again 10.8 um they since built the garage which is now uh 10.3 um it's not going to be substantially more detrimental to the neighborhood than um the garage garage without the exterior staircase um first the staircase is not going to be any closer to another structure than what the bylaw uh permits So currently you have a 15t requirement and if you have uh an abing property they have a 15 ft so you you have to be at least 30 ft away to be in compliance here you have um the the structure the stairs are about right there you have this neck for this uh other lot that comes through here and nothing's going to be built on that I think we can all agree that that that's a 20ft wide uh entryway with an easement over it and then this house is located 18 point let me just get this right 18.5 ft from this boundary so in essence what you have here is about 50 ft just a little under 50 ft uh between this exterior set of stairs um and um uh in the next house up there um it's going to be a benefit to um Mr Rano because he has first of all a second means of egress out of there if need be that's always a safety concern and that's good uh and it's going to make things a little easier for him to move um Furniture in and out it's not going to be um a a deck um it's just the usual Landing which I think is required uh and a set of stairs coming down to um the side of his garage his new garage and that's it so because the prior structure was pre-existing non-conforming and this is going to be further pre-existing non-conforming I believe that the proper relief here tonight is a special permit um I did ask for both in case but um I really think that this is a special permit we're just going another five Ines into a side setback uh not a front set setback but aside and also um because of its location it's going to be so far from the next house over over that I don't think it's going to have any detriment whatsoever um so we hope that you can uh see uh to issuing a special permit tonight um I'll hold off on any type of variance criteria for the time being if you'd like to at least discuss that um and we're here for any questions so thank you just a quick question of you Mr tardiff was this um did this come before us when it was raised and replaced before is that was a previous I don't believe so I think you got a building permit for and because he's over 25,000 ft in the r25 and everything was going to comply he didn't need to so he was already he was going to be off the off the side set back more than the 15 feet normally correct but what he took off he took the old garage out he was already he was correcting that so so it wasn't something that's come to us before didn't okay all right um that's it that's it okay um Vick why don't you start this one you have any questions I don't think so I mean it's pretty much there was no other place to put the stairway I take it no it's where it is on the inside of that building yeah did you take it off the back of that area then it starts to encroach on the leeching field I guess yeah he's saying the uh the the way the roof line is and the height of the door it just wasn't going to work okay um I don't have anything else okay um Barbara question no I don't have any questions Anthony no straightforward um I just had a basic question the the room that's above the new garage um is that part of the current house or is that's not a separate apartment or anything correct no it's part of the same same house okay um I don't have any questions either it seems pretty straightforward it's about half foot is what we're talking about closer than the than the old than the old one was we always like to see less um variants necessary but uh but it was there before and I I think I could support this so um is there anyone I'm sorry is there anyone in the in in the audience that would like to speak in favor of this seeing none is there anyone in the audience that would like to speak against this petition please come to the Lector and tell us who you are and and uh where you live Steve a stalie 163 back to ra we the abutter to 167 uh We've owned that house to the right of the house when you're looking at is that the one we're looking at the stairway and the windows and the door yeah um I'm glad he's rebuilding the house that's great we used to own that house years ago um we're rebuilding our house at 163 as well um we've honored all the conservation requirements all the setback requirements we've gotten all the permits required to build the new house and the house next door to us that stairway is very close to the side of our house where our our uh inside porches and our second floor bedrooms being in the setback brings that a lot closer to the house than it used to be so now from that side of the house we're looking at two windows in the door in the stairway I understand the windows in the door are part of the house that's probably fine it does impose different uh situation for us but the stairway brings it closer and it's in the setback so I'd like to see some I don't think the stairway should be there if it is there should be some amendment to make some kind of screening or tall trees or something to separate that stairway from our side of the house you're talking about on the property line type correct yeah so it's it's over it's into the setback our house is within the setback the new house and the property line so we're looking for some type of screening if you guys approve it if not great okay all right thank you for the input thanks appreciate it is there anyone else that would like to speak for well against this petition seeing none um anything else you'd like to say response to the comment um well again uh we're talking about if if if the green structure on there is this gentleman's house I think it is is that what he was saying say next again it is it's probably 48 to 49 ft away from the the seta stairs at this point just far and again it's more than what the bylaw calls for between AB budding properties however um you know we Mr Rano is willing to plant some trees you know a couple of bushes or shrubs or something that can grow um if to give it a little privacy again it's not going to be used every day and it it's infrequent and it's not a deck there's not going to be people sitting up there and having a party so you wouldn't wouldn't object if we put a condition to put a few trees to provide some screening that's fine all trees tall trees or ones that grow fast one or the other right they may not be tall when we plant them but they'll be tall amazing how fast things grow here on the cave right um okay I guess I'll I'll uh close it to the public and open it for discussion on the board um any comments dick I don't think so I mean uh especially if they'll go along with planting the trees I uh I don't think it's too much different than what uh was actually it's a little less nonconforming right than it's a little more non-conforming by 5 in yeah looking at the wrong figure here I guess okay uh no I don't think I have anything else to say anyways okay Anthony do you have any comments no I don't it's pretty straight forward I see what they're asking okay they've made the one condition that was asked them by neighbor okay Barbara do you have anything um no I like the idea of making a condition to put up some you know screening shrubs I think that might go a long way okay um would anybody like to make a motion for this I'll move to approve petition 5136 as requested with the condition of planting some high Shrubbery or trees yeah on the north side of the property um in order to uh block a view of the stairway from the adjacent property so in other words I don't think we need the whole that whole boundary right yeah some it's enough screening to block the stairway pretty much just enough um motions made by dick is anyone willing to second that motion I'll second it all right um seeing that we have a motion would anybody like to discuss the motion any comments I'll I'll discuss the motion uh only in to say that um depending on the type of tree used it might fully block during blooming season but limit uh during non- blooming season I would prefer the language of limit rather than block but I'm just being hypercritical that's fine that's fine dick Dick's willing to modify Barbara still second yeah okay we're good then third all right um hearing anything else uh let's take a roll call vote um Anthony hi Barbara hi Dick i n and I for nothing it's approved you know the r you you'll produce that document will over to I will tol lores and I'll uh for your signature I guess I'll sign it okay thank you very much thank you thank you Paul all right um thank you very much the next petition is uh uh petition 313 uh 5137 Felix Tories and the Fedora I oh boy diova Tores property location at nine Woodbine Avenue West Yarmouth Mass map and lot number 3792 zoning District r25 the applicant seeks a special permit per 10432 two- two Andor variance oh can I withdraw that would you like to on the former petition could I withdraw the variance request relief because it's without prejudice please Prejudice oh yeah uh motion I have a motion so move second second all those in favor say I I thank you for I thank you very much sorry about that blores would have caught us eventually all right um and I think I missed one before that too oh well sorry about that okay so um the applicant seats a special permit per 10432 DH per variance uh or variance from 30 2035 for rear setback relief to allow as built p belad 17. two feet from the rear property line attorney Paul tardiff representing good evening again again for the record Paul tardiff um and you've met teodora um the owner of the property um this again is in the art this is a very odd situation because this is very similar to the last petition we just heard uh in its own way um again in the r25 zoning District this lot is uh has 9 ,000 sare ft and 100 ft of Frontage on Woodbine Avenue which is right behind the Salvation Army building on 28 uh it's actually two separate lots that were put together um in 2021 after making inquiry with the about the buildability of the lot um I appeared with my client before the board seeking to overturn the decision of the Building Commissioner who had determined not this building the prior one uh who had determined that the lot was not buildable uh the board agreed that the determination was erroneous and found the lot to be buildable but um with a special permit because there was a pre-existing P foundation on the lot that they found um it measured 24t by 36 fet and it was built in the early 1970s um a site plan was presented and I also included it in the package tonight that shows that it was 13.5 ft from the side set back where 15 ft is the minimum in 2003 and based on that uh the final decision of this board um my client made the application with the the billing department to allow her to construct a new modu or home on the property uh the old Foundation was to be removed uh which it was and replaced with a new foundation and the project was to be fully compliant with all the current bulk requirements um the plans from the modular company uh were submitted with the application but failed to show the intention to construct an approximate 6t X 3T bulkhead on the rear of the property it was just straight uh foundation in the back without a a poured foundation for that bulkhead once the foundations were poured and the house constructed um an as built plan was submitted to the building department so that the certificate of compliance could be issued um but it was then that it was disc discovered that the bulkhead actually was put in and encroach into the rear setback where you need 20 ft it was now 17.2 so just under 3T into the rear setback um and that's the reason for the relief saw here and and again I believe that the relief the correct relief would be a special permit in this case because of the fact that we had a foundation in there previously that was too close to the side that was removed and we're just going to encroach into this to to the rear um I don't think it's going to be substantially detrimental uh to the neighborhood in fact I don't think you're going to be able to see it from anywhere um from from the street you're not going to see it from the Salvation Army property uh which has a a wooden fence along their parking lot you can't even see into the backyard of this property the neighbor to the right is the applicant and the uh only person who might be able to see it is the person on the on on the rear they they but uh back rear Lots back up to each other that was also the a form of relief that this board issued to build a house on that lot and that's going in and you have a letter from her um supporting this uh relief tonight so that's all good um it's also kind of important for um the the applicant because she can get inside her basement through the house but if you're bringing lawn chairs and other items in it's always good to have the bulkhead and another form of uh Escape if need be if anything happens into the basement so uh I think the board can provide relief in the form of a special permit for this oversight um I don't think that this was something that was planned I think it just um was a mixup between the modular plans and the foundation plans and so um it's no higher than a set of stairs that is going to that's already been constructed in the back in fact I think it might be a little bit higher maybe a couple inches but the stairs don't need relief and um the bulkhead does so because of the foundation so we're asking you to uh see to a special permit in this case thank you let me just before we go around the board um just understand I know that I remember this one um when we overdid the building commissioner's decision he then issued you a special per I should um a building permit was issued correct we have a building permit for the house right yep and um is there wasn't in the package there wasn't a uh site plan um at least I didn't see it well there were yeah what you yeah what I showed you here what I what I did include I think were the plans yeah that's the front page of the and you can see that that was the site plan um it says Foundation as as built you can see where it is is but if you look further you'll see that the site plans for the modular home did not have them did not have that bump out for this for the uh bulkhead so I'm looking am I looking from Woodbine Avenue I'm looking at this lot right let me let's go around and see if we have any questions from the board um start with Anthony Anthony do you have any questions uh I do not no Barbara um no I don't have any questions I know there's an alternative to putting in a bulkhead my kids did it but it's so the instead of having a bulkhead it's it's flush with the ground with kind of a huge grate over it so you have to unlock the grate and then you can get in that way but it's it's an added expense to do that it is and and and the thing is this has been poured already that's you're buding neighbors not objecting so I don't have any problems that no is it the 5.6 five foot bump out in the back on this diagram is that what the is that can can I come up and show you sure yeah that where it is yep is it it's right here is that correct that was the old that's the old this is the as I Haven that's what I was looking for okay the these were the plans that were submitted I don't have this do you have must you say they using the foundation that was there before no oh okay because it's yeah different there was an old Foundation it's roughly this is what I didn't have yeah it's roughly here it just wasn't on these PL it's 23 from the back excluding that okay thank you all right um dick did you have any questions nope I think I'm good okay I just had a couple um I noticed there it looked like there was a pour uh oh thanks it looked like there was a poured foundation for a garage is that on the on the right hand side is that being built is that it's intended to be built the budget will allow okay and that's still within the the setbacks and the Reg F yeah all right um that's all I really had um is there anyone in the audience that would like to speak in favor of this petition please come up to the microphone seeing none is there anyone that's against this petition please come up to the microphone seeing none I'll close this to the public and uh open it up to the board for discussion or motion anybody willing to make make a motion or have any comments I'll make a motion um to approve petition 5137 um as requested as requested yep okay do I have a second second Barbara seconds all right I think just for for clity again sorry um that we have to because it's a special permit and a variance request that we would say that we approve the special permit request of the application corre correct this is a this is a motion I believe dick to approve the special permit is that right yes it is VAR yep not the variance we we'll take the variance away surely all right that'll that meet your need Anthony okay yeah sorry that's all right no problem thank you for helping me along anyway uh so let's uh do a roll call vote on a motion Barbara hi Anthony hi Dick hi and I'm an I that that's approved for to zero you know the you know the the drill yeah I'd like to request to uh to uh withdraw any variance relief requested without prejudice without prejudice um do I have a motion to with draw without prejudice the bearings so move second second all right all right let's uh just a Voice vote all those in favor of withdraw of the variance without prejudice say I I I anyone against zero so it is approved four to zero thank you very much very much appreciate it thank you chair okay uh we are on to petition 5139 Michael T and Cheryl P kellerer property location 33 manakis Road West Yarmouth Mass map and lot number 2458 zoning District r25 the applic applicant seeks a special permit per 10432 -2 Andor variants from 203.50 from for front setback relief to construct the first and second floor Edition a patio and a deck attorney Christopher how SNY senny uh representing thank you very much you just tell us who you both are and that would be sure sure um my name is Christopher senny I'm an attorney I'm based in Brewster uh with me at the table is Dan ojala from down Cape engineering he's the Eng engineer on the project also here tonight is our client Michelle kellerer and I believe also the architect is here if there are any questions about architecture okay building design okay uh this property is at 33 Maes Road this is at the fork of two roads actually mes on one side and near Meadows Road on the other uh on this triangular property there's a small house it's about 1280 Square ft there's a small first story of about 930 ft and a very small second story of 345 Square ft uh it's a three-bedroom house and my client wishes to uh enlarge it and renovate the house it will still be a two-story house it will still have three bedrooms um but it will be larger it will go from 1281 ft to 24 57 uh we comply with coverage comfortably we comply with the side yard setback which is 15 ft and we provide 20 a little over 20 um in terms of front yard setback we have two because we have two roads going by the property uh the front yard setback on mat from mes road is honored by this plan it's a 30 foot setback and we meet that but on the um near Meadow side the existing property is within the setback that we only have 18.3 ft of uh of not of setback at this point which is a lawful non-conforming condition because it's been there a long time we do not U worsen that that setback we we keep it at 18.3 feet so in no respect have we um made any nonconformity worse uh in terms of the standards that are applied uh under 104.3 point2 we we don't think we increase the nature of any non-conformity we we don't think this is substant more detrimental to the neighborhood in terms of the general special permit criteria we don't see this creating any undue undo noise nuisance Hazard or congestion um or any substantial change to the character of the neighborhood I'll turn it over to Dan just so he can um describe a little bit of the plan going forward and answer any engineering questions sure Dan oela from downkeep engineering uh pretty straightforward matter I think you'll find um again we we we deflected the house at about a 15 Dee angle or so um to uh not get any closer than the existing on that yard setback um is a a small patio uh as was mentioned the the building coverage is only 14.2% where 25% are allowed the building height is 2728 is much less than the 35 that's allowed um redoing the driveway a little bit redoing the electric um the septic system passes inspection will remain it's shown approximately on there but we're not getting any closer to it so the health department will sign off on that I'm sure um again pretty straightforward I think it it falls easily within your criteria for not being more substantially more detrimental to the neighborhood and so forth i' be glad to answer any questions if you have them okay why don't we uh start this time did we start with you last time yeah start with Anthony then Anthony do you have any questions for the petitioner uh no I mean it looks like from the the lot itself it's very uniquely shaped and the property and the building sort of conforms with that uh the pre-existing structure and where the lot goes so you know to me it's a it's a nice design I appreciate what they're trying to do um and uh weh have the home so I I understand what they're looking for pretty straightforward okay Barbara do you have anything um no no I agree with Anthony it looks like a nice design um yeah no no more questions questions dick I mean I'm not thrilled about 18 something feet or or is it 19 you know from the uh near medows Road uh gu supposed to be 30 but it wasn't that to begin with so I guess as long as we're not becoming any more non-conforming I can live with it go okay um I kind of I'm ad is is that a fence along NE neom medows road right now is that fenced in that backside is that correct yeah that that's accurate they line with a dash is a fence along a brick patio that shows the currently existing brick patio back by in the back section is that going away and replaced by the new brick patio so that can be we can we can adjust that whatever needs to be that that has been there for years so if that needs to be adjusted happy to do it but are you removing it that's my question I just to remove not planning to because the two patios then overlap that's why I asked yeah would have to adjust it somewhat but the majority of would stay if possible and it's it is typically just seen as Landscaping um you know driveways go out into the street all the time little bit unusual to have a patio go out but where the fenes there unique neighborhood um given um but some of the things do kind of go across the property lines now that's why I kind of yeah I I'm just noticing that when you said that too that so I'm a little concerned about having the uh fence and the road layout I'm not too thrilled but so I'm concerned about that part is the fact that you know you're going across the property line with a few different items here the fence as well as the as well as the patio um really want doesn't spend there quite a while I'm assuming I did point that out to my client as well and we discussed it and she's willing to bring that patio uh in so that it does not go over the property line I don't how far is the fence in from the road itself so it looks it does vary a little bit three to five feet or so off the off the pavement this is um trees behind the fence the road yeah the fence is just really close to the road that's what I'm concerned about it is a dead end you know so it's not like a thorough fair this is a very residential dead end Loop that you know doesn't even Loop I don't think does it so uh very little traffic and everyone's acclimated to it um you know it seems you know pretty Dom Minimus I know mailboxes and some other things are often allowed in the road layout favorite word Dem Minimus just kidding anyway um yeah no I'd like to see it Tu I'd like to see the patio tucked back on the property if possible the fence it's been there for a long time I'm not going to ask you to move it um certainly if it falls down it would be great if you could just bring it back back a couple feet just to make sure that it's as close to the property line as possible those are some things I'd ask for um so I think can I make a condition like that sure so I'd like to make that as a condition but other than that you know I'd be supportive I'd be supportive of the of the uh the request but let me find out if there's any input from the audience is there anyone that would like to speak in favor of this in the audience uh please come up to the Lecter seeing none is anyone would like to speak against this petition please come up to the lecturn seeing none I'll close this to the public open it up to the board if anyone anyone would like to make a motion and or uh discuss it in any way comments I can do it sure were a few a couple at least two letters of support sent in I'm sorry let me just check I did see them okay let me read these in the record back to the public part of it anyway um um this is from Marie M mckern mckern I'm not sure if I said that right but hello my name is mar mckern I live at 37 near Meadow Road in West Yarmouth I support K the kers at 33 mes road to put an addition on their house and that would be where would that be located to your house just a little across the street and then we have one from uh Bruce Buckley um we are writing in support of Michael and Cheryl Ker's proposed Edition we have seen the drawings and are very pleased and that it will improve the appearance of our entire neighborhood we will improve the value of the entire neighborhood it will improve the the value value the entire neighborhood almost every property owner has done a lot of improvement um done a lot to improve their property over time it's getting late sorry we have watched with pride as the neighborhood has transformed over the last 25 years respectfully Anne Stevenson Bruce buckney 33 near meows Road West chouth um those are the two that I have I don't think I missed anything else tell me if I did again closed so do we have anyone would like to make a motion volunteers is this a special perona variance this would be that's that's a good question um any opinions on whether this is a special permit or variance I think what's your opinion my opinion that it is covered by the um the the special permit provisions of in increasing a non-conforming structure um we we noticed it for a very variance just to provide that notice to the public in case the board felt a variance was necessary but uh I believe this is a special permit application and we would be prepared to withdraw the the variance I would agree it's uh it's a it's less of a variance of a less of a problem than it was before but it still exists and it's uh probably under 104 so I would call it a special permit would be appropriate that all right all right so do I have a m I Anthony you'd like to comment uh no I was just going to say I i' make a motion to approve U the petition's special permit request okay um second without without any I I I did want to make a condition if that be all right with you to add get the uh patio back on the property if possible and yes and um to to improve the the setback of the fence when it falls down or next time it has to be replaced that'd be reasonable that okay I think that's a reasonable yes I'll second I will move as such okay all right um and Dick second all right let's uh do a roll call vote um dick hi Anthony hi Barbara I and I'm an I so it passes uh special permit passes it's no undue nuisance Hazard or the other things that it requires in the in in the PW um so is approved you you can submit a definition of what we said with those conditions um get those to Dolores and um and you want to withdraw the variance you like to withdraw the variance without prejudice I would ask if we may withdraw the variance application with prejudice without prejudice still moved dick moves Barbara you second second withdrawal to sleep over here dick second Barbara just a Voice vote all those in favor of withraw of the special the variance without prejudice say I I passes for nothing thank you very much thank you very much thank you for your time you and we're on to the last one sorry it's taking so long there's a fair number of them tonight no doing good okay so we have petition 5131 oh this is a comebacker yes yeah have you done everything Steve wanted this is a NCIS NCI Auto Incorporated property location 770 Route 28 South Yarmouth map lot map and lot number 33. 3839 and 40 zoning District B1 and B2 applicant seats a special permit per 202.5 for H4 use Andor variance from 31.4659 point2 to construct a 9,991 foot building for the Nissan dealership to include sales and service with parking rear car inventory storage landscraper and signs um and since I think you need both a special permit for the H4 use and a variance from 301 we probably need to do both yes okay why don't we start with the special permit um I would like to clarify whether we have a quorum or not because of um the missing people here do have a quorum okay um and we just need a three quter vote to pass it so with the variance as well because I thought we need four votes with the variance I don't want to yeah we need all four four or five for the variance you need all four I would think yeah yeah right and I wanted to clarify whether um um your board member online has has looked at the video and signed the certificate so that he could vote on this because I not sure oh Anthony were you at you weren't at the last one we went through all this there was not but I have looked through it you have look through it right okay thank you very thank you very much by the way thank you just want to make sure this is proper and that is great so we we do have a quorum we have enough people to vote um I know there was a concern from our chairman on a couple things that he asked you to bring I believe it was a landscape plan and you should have that in your packet the minutes from last time I forgot what the second thing was perfect we've got a couple of things let me introduce myself I am not Andrew singer um but I am from his office my name is Marian Rose and I'm from singer and singer and Dennis sport um I'm here on behalf of um applicant and we have the same Cas of characters who were here um two weeks ago um Steven's here to my left and then um we have the development team behind me so if there are any further questions we don't encourage them but if you all have any questions we are here and ready to answer them um my understanding from um talking to Andrew looking at the records and I did view the video of the last hearing is that I'm hope I'm characterizing this in the right way you all were favorably inclined to the project but that you needed some belts and suspenders in terms of just a few more documents and so in October 1 Andrew did submit the documents y all needed um the list is um a summary of the um relief required a color landscape plan showing the grass uh because there was a question about what that would be and it's grass there's a note there that it's grass there was some comment last time I think that it it might be um Pebbles rocks the other things turf turf that was kind of dissuaded against correct we have we've corrected it it's Grass Grass okay and the other note on the landscape plan was the retain tree I would like to talk about the retain tree a little bit later but um that is noted as requested um the other um two items were a revised minimally revised number number three of the site plan and that's just the site plan that we submitted one first to the zba it went through conservation it's the site plan that went through conservation so it's the one you all would approve so that's in your packet there's also um a color elevation of the front of the building because I think the chair wanted to see what the sign would look like um there are two signs there um if you count uh the Nissan logo as a sign we took off Nissan and there's just cap and Islands um all of those letters are conforming very consistent with the Kia dealership next door pretty much right we we heard the same memo and so that's that's the change that was done there um let's see and there's also a note on that plan that the building itself is 24 feet high whereas originally it was going to be 28 feet high and now it's 24 feet high so that is um not an option but but what will happen in terms of the Nissan sign the red sign how how much does it extend above the above the above the roof does not there was a I think discussion about the what we are counting as the the Nissan logo sign is just the logo itself and so that is an architectural feature that okay I think we're I think everybody was on the same page at that that at the last at the last hearing the the the height of that I think is on there and it's showing you from the logo itself that doesn't go above 35t anyway correct correct yeah it's all right well under 20 um I can go through um i' I'd like a bit I I don't want to extend my welcome here but I'm happy to go through Andrew went through the various arguments and submitted a summary of reasoning for the special permit which is required for the auto dealership um that's I think most of the summary of reasoning if anybody wants a refresher on that of course if Anthony would like to hear that because he wasn't at the first hearing happy to do so um in a brief form but how about if I leave it to Anthony to ask if he wants to hear more when when we get for questions is thatas sure he said he did listen so exactly questions exactly so basically just briefly uh with that special permit under 202 .5 um we'd argue to summarize that um it's a wonderful thing that the Kia dealership is right next door you can see how that was built and what was there I mean what what has been built there and what's been developed this will be very similar uh there will be intense Landscaping in fact um with the parking there's a requirement for um one tree per every eight parking spots there 54 parking spots here on the sides um there are 21 trees here rather than the seven that would be required um all three caliper trees there are also 30 odd bushes and some butterfly weed to add to that so it's intensely landscaped um because I think the feedback from um site plan review was that because the building is not quite a Cape Cod style building they want it to be really intense especially on the front especially in the front right so that's that message was heard we have a specialist here who always asks the questions about trees so I'm going to let him um I want I do have a qu I do have a bit to say about a tree at the end um but that's for the special permit for the variants um for the in lot trees in the back um Andrew just discussed this well as well the storage is for inventory and it just happens to be cars um it's not used as a parking lot um it's truly inventory they're stacked three deep on columns uh they're not spaced in the way that a parking lot would be and they're not used in that way because no employees or no customers would use that it's literally for the cars to be put in as tight an area as possible um because they're inventory but we hear you saying that a variance is needed here and but I do want to emphasize that limited use that inventory use is different than a regular parking use so we think that helps with our variant argument in terms of um why a variance would be um needed um lot shape size a lot soil conditions here there's Wetlands there's Wetlands on the back there's Wetlands on the side um there's um there's specific things you need to have in a car dealership and they have designed this in a way so that um they're not eing into the wetlands areas they're not or the buffer zones um the coverage is under what the would be the maximum allowed I think it's um 8% where it would be 25 and the um Site Area is um is 48 where it could be 75% or the impervious coverage is 48% where it be 70% as a Max and so this is designed um really trying to thread the needle and the hardship is undeniable um the hardship here would be they're not able to store the inventory that they have and and frankly it's much less than other National Nissan dealerships have and require um this would be a difficult business to go forward with they do need that inventory and they put it in the one place they feel that they can certainly better than in front like it is with a Kia that's an improvement right we trying so that's the argument for the variance um the freestanding sign variance under 303. 3.4.1 um I think this was reviewed pretty well at the last hearing um and it's like the Kia sign next door the heights conforming um the area is larger than that's why we need really not larger than the key assign but larger than allowed under the B let's see front facade that variance um we talked about this as well at the last Ing and that change was made to take out Nissan so it's just the logo and cap and islands and um you see that adjusted plan for you yeah I think the other that's right the other thing the chairman wanted was a comprehensive list of what you're really asking for right I remember that and so that's everything from the last hearing we have one thing to raise okay and how this came about is when we had the requirement for the land landscape plan I think there wasn't an understanding of where that larger caliper tree was on the site and so when we got the landscape plan and I hope yall are looking for it looking at it now um it is right at the entrance of this the the property um it is immediately adjacent to three May trees that are planned to be built there or planted there rather um we looked into I want to I have two different arguments first is a particular tree the tree is a London plain tree we believe what a London plain tree and I can show you a picture um London plain trees are known as City trees um they're in London and so they if they're in a good place they're a great tree our argument is basically this is not a great place but let me just so you're saying the tree is where the driveway intended driveway is coming in like close to it I'm very close to it in the landsape the sign I'm just going to put this in the record my apologies we came up with this as we were reviewing this week uh Mr chairman do you also need the minutes from last time there's a paragraph about your deliberation on the things that were needed I'm sorry do you need the minutes from last time with the paragraph on what you were do I have it in here can hand that to you right here if you want other other existing trees there there are exist there are there are limited existing trees from that photograph you can see other P trees along the sideline this tree and I will also um I was looking for some information about plain trees um the good is they're extremely tough they're long lived the bad is and I'm quoting their roots are so tough and aggressive that it can lift sidewalks and curbs invade sewer pipes and crack Foundation uh crack building foundations in some communities they've actually outlawed plain trees and it's suggested that plain trees are planted at least 8 to 10t in width and have a root barrier along the edge of a sidewalk or curb if that's involved and and if and if you look um if you look at page number six in the site plan that will show that the electric work we can go into more detail about this but that will show that the Electrical uh lines are going underneath and very near this tree so around the root balls there's also as part of the storm water permit a lot of draining drainage uh that needs to be done so the the dra the surface water has to be kept on site there's a drain right at the entrance and um site plan page number six shows that the drainage lines also go right through where that tree is with that with the grading that's needed we think there would be a disruption of the tree we also think that because this tree has the potential to grow so big it can be a 100 feet high it can be three feet wide you know at maturity which can be quite a long time from now but it can be very wide it can possibly limit sight lines as you're turning left out of the out of the property um we believe that plus the fact that we have 21 trees where seven would be required we are hoping that you would allow for this tree to be removed and we're actually perfectly willing to add one more on the sideline um as you're looking through the landscape plan too there have been notes all along the landscape plan the sidelines um all the trees that are over three calipers have been saved there lots of trees that are naturalized trees on the I'll say the right side sideline if you're looking at the um property from 28 okay um there are a couple other things I just want to bring up while you're here that were also asked for um and we'll talk about all this okay once we get started there was also the request I think um there uh the uh Health Department needed a list of fluids for the service area it needed to be submitted I guess that hasn't been submitted yet but we yes we can there's been a discussion about that I'll let Steve talk about that good evening everyone Steve Soul president NC um yeah I had quite a conversation with KY who I've I've worked with from the health department um as you all know I I also own the cap and Island's Kia next door and we kind of went over uh chemicals and things that get used and uh I do have two books for him and he said that they weren't required uh but we um he he was perfectly fine with that and we're both on the same page correct of health so would you be comfortable if we just state that You' need to adhere to all Health Department guidelines including submissions of fluid Etc and no car washing those were the things that kind of correct more than happy to do that and we do have them okay so um he said they're not required to be submitted because this is a a norm but they are required to be on file which we do have but okay um I I will have several discussions and if you want to put that on there that's fine yeah well there was a request to have a list so if you could if you could do that just adhere to the health department I think think that I think that would basically meet the requirement what you think be happy to do that okay and then mature tree trees no Turf I think I think that's it those other things you have covered so um that we're open to questions but that's the end of my presentation okay let's start with the with dick you like to talk about the trees and whatever else i' never like to lose a a fullsize tree those any consideration giving to moving driveway over a little bit um that would be well you want it centered I take it you're going to say come come up and or you can go up to the podium either way just introduce yourself um hello my name is Scott parella I'm with conerve group we're the architect of design engineer Building Company for this project so extensive extensive work has gone into calculations for existing conditions site work planning for utilities everything is where it needs to be that doesn't do it for me there's going back to what Marian discussed yeah we've reduced the site the the the footprint of this site to squeeze what would normally be in a much larger facility into this size facility including storage and in order to get water keep retain water from going onto the street we have drainage at the driveway where it is we have um water retention for where it is away from things I understand the water retention in the back uh I'm comfortable now with the parcking spaces in the back um I just don't think it's a good enough answer to say that uh you know it's it's going to produce some Roots so I tree produces roots and uh and why the driveway couldn't be moved over another few feet actually if it was moved over a three or four feet it would then line up perfectly with the sidewalk into the building uh and in in terms of you're saying that you the amount of space here is uh um you know that you could have built a much bigger building but we all know that you're trying to avoid the cape card commission by the 99991 um so I would ask I'm not I'm still not really comfortable with the removing a a big full-size tree uh that is in the buffer whether it's close or not uh I mean I know it's a lot of hoopla about a tree but I mean it's just so much nicer to have the full-size trees as opposed to these little ones that may or may not live well we were under the obligation to replant anything that doesn't live that's true but um in addition to that um the tree if you if you take a look it's a multi it's a multi- um what am I trying to say um trunked tree thank you I've lost my word for a moment a multi-trunked tree that in and of itself is sometimes an indicator of a tree that has issues with the root system itself um it's also makes it more likely to Decay because where those trunks come together there's that but also the bigger thing here is that that tree will be quite large if it grows to maturity um the other trees that are planned to be planted are not understory trees trees there are trees that also need sun there are trees that also need room and this tree will crowd those out and so there's there is a cohesive design here um and without um without the sunlight that these trees need that's it's it's not going to be I don't know if I agree with any of that but uh I'm you might me nevertheless okay you have any other questions I don't think so I mean they they've done everything that Steve seemed to be concerned about and we have everything written out properly now and and I appreciate that the we've added about the other trees and the sidelines beain be retained everywhere well actually I guess I was say before but uh no I don't think I have anything else right now Barbara um no I don't have any problem with this I agree the tree the you know issues with this tree don't sound like they could pose some significant problems going forward as far as uh pushing up sidewalks and pavement so I think if it can be replaced with something I think that would be a good idea Anthony you have do you have anything no question no you yet no no questions or comments okay um I would appreciate I appreciate that you put together the feedback um just those those front I'm just trying to understand across the front those uh two sections of three different bushes and some other bushes around them yes um is milkweed is that a tree no milk weed is um it's it's a perennial it's a it's maybe 18 in so it's a short it's a short less than two feet right but there are bushes there do them they look so large compared to some of the other things and I know hydranges can get pretty big so no they're they're more like a not to intercede so the the we're planning milk weed bushes in the front instead of trees see no there're trees there which one are the trees I see a zelus milked hydr milked seems to point to the bigger Green Tree or whatever yeah yeah trying to understand what you're putting in the front other side too [Music] you see what I'm asking am I missing something I just looks like you label each of the three different things it's just uh help me understand what's in the front the blue ones are as alas I guess yep two blue ones there a little hyd the little one is a hydrange then it points to milkweed yeah so are there existing trees out front that are being kept is that there's nothing yeah but it says here existing trees 4 in are going to be kept yeah on the sides there are the side and I think even on the right corner maybe possibly toward the front sorry yeah and I think there might be fullsize Tree on the right corner on the front can you just tell us if you could use the microphone sir tell us just who you are and maybe if you could just do it from there and just see if you can describe it if not bring It Forward hello again my name is Scott I'm with conerve group so this is the landscape plan maybe you can bring it closer to us I can't see that far may I approach the bench huh oh you need him on the microph that use the microphone right there all right are you able to hear me so not every tree is labeled in the plan but the symbols are reflective of Red Maple and honey locust as are one two three 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 all the way around what are these in the front the these big ones yeah are if you see the line it looks like right now you're pointing milk that's why well this this line is pointing to ailia right right there milk milk wheed is pointing to ccle big circle that's not milkweed I know that's hydrangea hydrange hydrange is in their front so so what is in front either it's either red maple or honey locust or a combination not La that understood and you also have existing tree to remain there which you're saying you don't want right yeah my understanding is across the front you're going to have combination of Red Maple and honey honey Locus or just is that what is that what you're trying to tell us correct that doesn't I didn't get that from what was labeled no I just thought they were all hydranges confused so just to clarify hang on need the microphone back and again if you need to present anything there's an easel right here the microphone should go over there and because people at home need to see it on telev and they can't do that sorry about that we settled um so the landscape plan that he showed you is the landscape plan that we we filed in on October 1st when we were told to show the grass and show the retained tree what we're suggesting is that we do not we do not delete the retrain retained tree and we suggested an additional Tree on the side and we have those draft landscape plans here if you would like to replace I'm sorry you're you're proposing something different than what we have right here right now we're proposing to delete remove the retained tree it's a different plan than we have right here correct that's what I need to have a plan have that plan for you we wanted to have this discussion okay and see if that's something that you would agree to and we do have that plan and this plan is what again this plan removes the retained tree okay and adds an additional Tree in that same corner but on the side you talking four on one side and three on the other type of scenario is that what you're saying I'm talking three there'll be three trees in the front on either side but on the sideline in that corner will be an additional tree because there was a bit of room there I can fit one there okay all right um you understand my concern it didn't these are not labeled these were labeled milk weights so right we can clarify that if if there's a if if if we made it a condition that you had seven treeses this make sense if we had Seven Trees could I help you with this I think I could help you if if I could bring this forward in each of these three f trees there is three two small letters they say RM you got to look at the fullsize plan if you look very closely you'll see they say RM need magnifying that is R red maple so they are labeled oh okay yeah I do see that so those are red Maples yes sir okay that does help thank you very much okay well it's a struggle we could you know the plans are only so big the ones you may have I don't know if you have the full size okay thank you and chair um in this package that I sent I gave you all a bit earlier the last page of that packet is our proposed landscape plan right that's even smaller RM we that's proposed okay it's proposed it says that the existing tree to be removed and replaced here so okay and I see you've added another little dot correct the north on this side so that is showing what we propose this one so in the end we would have 28 or 22 trees where Seven Trees would be understand the number I'm trying to I'm mostly focused on the front is what I'm trying to sure I understand okay um that was my main question just a future reference to I mean I can live with it but you know we like to see these trees of different varieties to have all red Maples in the front just doesn't look right especially if there's a dise disease or something um so if you wanted to change those over to a mixture in the front as well I would be happy with that we would like to make you happy okay thank you not too many people do that's not true all right um okay so what this we can make it a that there's going to be Seven Trees across that front and that there'll be a mixture of of Red Maple and honey locust is that the best thing to say or that's perfect all right we'll make that a condition um all right or allowing the existing tree to remain that was to remain on the plan there to be removed correct we'll do that now I had another couple questions is this gone to conservation already it has it's been approved and we've been issued a storm water permit approval as well so the Wetland area which is to the right in the back that's and the setback from the existing Wetland it's all Wetlands behind correct correct and on the on the right side correct so there's no housing back there there's no other businesses or anything like that corly yeah not close anyway um I think that's all the questions I had let me just see if there's any from the public which would like to ask any questions andw Anthony you had your questions answered right I did yes thank you all right um is there anyone in the public that would like to uh come to support this prop petition seeing none is there anyone opposed to this petition that would like to come forward seeing none I close this to the public and open it up for for uh discussion of the board anybody like to discuss this or give me their impressions and again um we need to look at this as two pieces I think we have to do a special permit to approve the use and then a variance for the other items right and we do have I believe we have all the things that were requested from the last meeting or we'll think a condition that is included or or followed um no no no feedback all right so would anyone like to make a motion on the special permit to approve an H4 use on the uh of the of the site some move do I have a second second motion second um let's do a roll call vote on the approval of the special permit for H4 use Barbara I Anthony I dick hi and I'm an I so there are four eyes Tok for the special permit for the use um then for the variance the variance is to Matt point of order sure because there are only four people here um four board members here and we need the four votes for the variant is there a way that I could ask for a PLL for that just I'm sorry what P like to pull the board I can ask if anyone has a big objection how about that that would be great does anyone have a big objection to the variance requirements just out of curiosity I do not you do I'm I do not you do not so I don't hear any thank you I can't guarantee anything but I understand okay there'll be a lot of conditions Mary yes all right so is there anybody would like to have a discussion on the variance or I should say do we have a motion do we have a motion with with the conditions and I'd like to make sure that we have include a condition for the front six plus one extra tree of uh varying types to be included as as a condition um trying to think are there any oh and that uh all of the requirements of the health department be fulfilled including a list of fluids and no car washing on site is anyone willing to make a motion to include those conditions I'll move what he just said un second that it's a lot simpler thank you dick with motions with conditions trees um I'm going to ask you to capture all this and put this together yes trees um and second Anthony okay um motion is made and seconded any discussion I just have one question um sure where you've sold a car and you're going to wash it where are you going to take it I can answer that so um we're going to uh do it at my Kia building next door where I have a full Cleanup Crew so you're going to use the say the Kia the the Kia building next door has a cleanup section yeah and that's where they're going to clean them okay yes thank you um um you have you have permission I guess from the health department to do to do it there I guess that's should that's not an issue anyway um any other comments from the board all right I have a motion i' like to do a roll call vote Anthony I who made the motion for clarity it was made by dick okay thank you and seconded by Anthony Barbara hi dick hi this is without that tree I'm an I so we have a four nothing vote four four four to nothing vote to approve the variance congratulations um so welcome so anyway if you would submit um the write up of this one to Dolores also the sign is we hav G the signs correct yeah sorry we missed a sign um I think as presented is there any questions I think the two things is a sign change that was presented there no sign change here yeah the sign change with the just the two parts Anthony go ahead no that's there was a sign you I sign change on the building as requested with those conditions correct variance was as requested with those conditions is that correct is the variance as requested with those conditions yes right okay yes with the conditions the sign so the changes that you've made with only the two parts to the sign instead of the three um and we approve the front sign as as presented somethings and and votes on that um I'll ask this is new I do do we uh do everyone agree to uh incorporate those conditions into the original motion for the variant you I all those that agree say I I we have four eyes so we've included those anything else we got it all covered looks like a good project better than better than an open yard and all the parking that's done on that as it is yeah all right well thank you very much if you could s that and you know the process no undue nuisance or Hazard I think to the neighborhood so we appreciate that thank you thank you all right we have a minutes say those things we have minutes that is anyone make willing to make a motion to approve the minutes from from September 26th I think it is thank you that's right thank you you too all right make a motion to approve the minutes anyone I'll make a motion minutes of 26 Barbara a motion anybody GNA second second I'll second dick already got you and all those in favor please say I I I I thank you for joining Anthony we know it's a thank you Anthony we really appreciate you being here um no problem is there a motion to adjourn so moved so moved second second all those that say I