* This transcript was created by voice-to-text technology. The transcript has not been edited for errors or omissions, it is for reference only and is not the official minutes of the meeting. [00:00:01] THIS IS THE ZONING BOARD [ TOWN OF GREENBURGH ZONING BOARD OF APPEALS AGENDA THURSDAY, March 13, 2025 – 7:00 P.M. ] OF APPEALS. TONIGHT IS MARCH 13TH, 2025, AND WE WILL NOW HAVE A READING OF THE ROLL CALL. ROLL CALL. THANK YOU, MADAM CHAIR. WE'RE GONNA BEGIN. ROLL CALL EVE. BUNTING SMITH. PRESENT. OKAY. CHRISTIE. NECK IS ABSENT. LOUIS CRITCHLOW PRESENT. DIANE HUBLEY. PRESENT. WILLIAM BLAND, PRESENT. SHAUNA DICKINSON PRESENT. AND THAT CONCLUDES OUR ROLL CALL, MADAM CHAIR. THANK YOU. THE MEETING NOW WILL COME TO ORDER. WE HAVE FIVE CASES SCHEDULED FOR TONIGHT'S MEETING CASE 2321. BAIL INDUSTRIES 50. WAREHOUSE LANE IS CLOSED FOR DECISION ONLY. LOOKING FORWARD, THE ZONING BOARD WILL HAVE OUR NEXT REGULAR MEETING ON THURSDAY, APRIL 17TH. PLEASE MARK YOUR CALENDAR ACCORDINGLY. IF WE CANNOT FINISH HEARING A CASE THIS EVENING, IT WILL BE ADJOURNED TO ANOTHER MEETING TO BE COMPLETED AT THAT TIME. HOPEFULLY, AS IN THE PAST. IN ORDER TO SAVE TIME, WE WILL WAIVE A READING OF THE PROPERTY LOCATION AND THE RELIEF SOUGHT FOR EACH CASE. HOWEVER, THE REPORTER WILL INSERT THIS INFORMATION IN THE RECORD. THIS INFORMATION ALSO APPEARS IN THE AGENDA FOR TONIGHT'S EVENING MEETING. AFTER THE PUBLIC HEARING OF TONIGHT'S CASES, THE BOARD WILL MEET TO DISCUSS EACH CASE AT THAT TIME. YOU'RE WELCOME TO LISTEN TO OUR DELIBERATIONS, BUT THE PUBLIC WILL NOT BE PERMITTED TO SPEAK OR TO PARTICIPATE AT THAT TIME. AFTER OUR DELIBERATIONS ON ALL THE CASES, WE COME BACK ON THE RECORD TO ANNOUNCE THE BOARD'S DECISION FOR THE FORMAL RECORD AND TO BE BROADCAST TO THE COMMUNITY. IF YOU'RE GOING TO SPEAK TONIGHT, YOU PLEASE MUST COME UP TO THE MICROPHONE. STATE YOUR NAME AND ADDRESS AND OR YOUR PROFESSIONAL AFFILIATION. FIRST CASE WE WILL HEAR TONIGHT. TESTIMONY IS 2322. FAIL INDUSTRIES IF THEY HAVE ANYTHING THAT THEY WISH TO PROVIDE. THANK YOU, MADAM CHAIR, MEMBERS OF THE BOARD. MY NAME IS DARIUS ZEDA, ATTORNEY AT THE LAW FIRM OF HARRIS BEACH HERE FOR FAIL INDUSTRIES ON, UH, MATTER NUMBER TWO TODAY. UM, THIS IS AN APPEAL OF THE, UH, TWO DECISIONS BY THE BUILDING INSPECTOR. UM, THERE. THIS HAS BEEN GOING ON SINCE AUGUST OF 2023. UH, DUSTING OFF, UH, THE OLD PAPERS, UH, AS YOU KNOW, THE MATTER BEFORE THIS, WHICH IS, UM, ON FOR DECISION, UM, HAS A DIRECT IMPACT ON OUR APPEAL. SO IN THE FIRST INSTANCE, I KNOW THIS IS, WE'VE SORT OF BEEN FOLLOWING IN TANDEM THE FIRST, UM, MATTER. AND WE'D ASK THAT THIS BE ADJOURNED ANOTHER MONTH OR UNTIL A DECISION IS MADE ON THE FIRST MATTER. IN THE FIRST INSTANCE. I DON'T KNOW IF THAT'S SOMETHING YOU WANT TO CONSIDER IN THE FIRST INSTANCE OR WITH COUNSEL OR, UM, HOW YOU'D LIKE TO PROCEED. WELL, IF THAT'S THE REQUEST YOU'RE MAKING, WE'LL TAKE THAT UNDER OUR DELIBERATIONS. OKAY. SO THAT'LL BE OUR, MY FIRST REQUEST. I'LL GET INTO THE SUBSTANTIVE ARGUMENTS NOW THEN. SO THERE'S TWO ISSUES. THE FIRST THING IS THE BUILDING INSPECTOR ISSUED A STOP WORK ORDER. THE BUILDING INSPECTOR ISSUED THAT STOP WORK ORDER ON JULY 19TH, 2023. WE HAVE FILED AN APPEAL, THAT DECISION, SO WE'VE BEEN OPERATING SINCE THEN, AS YOU ARE ALL AWARE. SO OUR POSITION, AS WE'VE OUTLINED IN OUR LETTER TO THE ZONING BOARD, INDICATES THAT THE BUILDING INSPECTORS WAS WITHOUT THE AUTHORITY UNDER THE CODE TO ISSUE A STOP WORK ORDER. WHY IS THAT UNDER SECTION ONE 10 DASH 10 A AND B, THE BUILDING INSPECTOR, THERE'S VERY CLEAR LANGUAGE IN THERE THAT THE BUILDING INSPECTOR CAN ONLY STOP WORK OF A CONSTRUCTION ACTIVITY, CONSTRUCTION OF A HOUSE, EXCAVATION BUILDING, ET CETERA. THIS IS AN ONGOING OPERATION AND HAS BEEN AN ONGOING OPERATION FOR DECADES. SO THERE'S CLEAR AUTHORITY IN NEW YORK THAT CERTAIN THINGS THE BUILDING INSPECTOR HAS THE AUTHORITY TO DO, SHUT DOWN. AN ONGOING BUSINESS IS NOT ONE OF THEM. WHAT HE CAN DO IS HE FEE, IF HE FEELS THERE'S A VIOLATION UNDER THE LAW, HE CAN GO INTO COURT, LOCAL COURT ISSUE A VIOLATION, AND THEN THERE'S AN ACTION BEFORE A JUDGE IN THE LOCAL TOWN COURT THAT HE DIDN'T DO. SECOND THING HE CAN DO IS THE TOWN BOARD CAN DECIDE WE WANNA BRING A LAWSUIT AGAINST THA AND SAY THEY'RE VIOLATING OUR CODE OR SOME PROVISION OF OUR CODE. THAT'S ALSO AN AUTHORITY THAT THEY HAVE ON THE LAW. THE TOWN DIDN'T DO THAT. THE TOWN BILL INSPECTOR CAME IN AND TRIED TO SHUT DOWN AN ONGOING BUSINESS THAT HAS BEEN ONGOING FOR DECADES. THEY'RE WITHOUT THE AUTHORITY TO DO THAT. THE, THE, THE REASONS TOO, I WANT TO GET [00:05:01] INTO SLIGHTLY HERE. THE DESCRIPTION, THE STOP WORK ORDER, IS THAT A REAPPLICATION TO THE ZONING BOARD OF APPEALS IS REQUIRED THAT OCCURRED. SO THE STOP WORK ORDER ON THAT ISSUE IS, IS, IS NULL AND VOID. THERE'S ALSO AN ARGUMENT OF THE FAILED EROSION CONTROL MEASURES IN THE STOP WORK ORDER. AS YOU KNOW, WE'VE BEEN WORKING WITH THE BUILDING DEPARTMENT, WITH THE ENGINEERING DEPARTMENT FOR THE BETTER PART OF TWO YEARS TO ADDRESS ANYTHING RELATED TO, TO EROSION. SO IN THE FIRST INSTANCE, THIS STOP WORK ORDER IS NULL AND VOID. IT DOESN'T FOLLOW YOUR CODE, IT'S NOT ALLOWED UNDER THE LAW. AND THERE'S OTHER AVENUES THAT COULD HAVE BEEN TAKEN AND SHOULD HAVE BEEN TAKEN BY THE BUILDING INSPECTOR OR THE TOWN, WHICH THEY DIDN'T. SO THEREFORE, THE STOP WORK ORDER SHOULD BE DETERMINED TO BE NULL AND VOID. SECOND ISSUE, THERE WAS A NOTICE OF NON-RENEWAL ISSUED BY THE BUILDING INSPECTOR THAT WAS ALSO DONE AT SIMILAR TIME ON JULY 24TH, 2023. THERE ARE THREE REASONS SET FORTH IN THAT LETTER OF JULY 24TH, 2023. AND THIS IS ALL SET FORTH IN OUR LETTER, UH, MADAM CHAIR AND MEMBERS OF AUGUST 8TH, 2023, WHICH I'M SURE YOU HAVE LOOKED AT OR WILL LOOK AT. SO, THE ISSUE WITH RESPECT TO THE STOP, UH, THE NOTICE OF NON-RENEWAL, EXCUSE ME, WAS ALSO EXCEEDED THE AUTHORITY OF THE BUILDING SECTOR. THE SPECIAL PERMIT ISSUED IN 20 OH UH, 2 0 0 2 FOR THE OPERATION OF THIS FACILITY. NUMBER SEVEN SAYS THAT THE SPECIAL PERMIT SHALL EXPIRE ON THE 31ST DAY OF DECEMBER, 2002, AND SHALL BE REVIEWED ANNUALLY THEREAFTER BY THE BUILDING INSPECTOR. THE OPERATOR SHALL CERTIFY IN WRITING TO THE BUILDING INSPECTOR THAT ALL THE CONDITIONS OF THE SPECIAL PERMIT HAVE BEEN COMPLIED WITH, AND THAT NO VIOLATIONS WERE ISSUED DURING THE PREVIOUS YEAR. IF SUCH CERTIFICATION HAS NOT BEEN SUBMITTED BY JANUARY 31ST, WHICH IT WAS HERE OF ANY YEAR, THE BUILDING INSPECTOR SHALL NOT RENEW THE PERMIT SUBJECT TO THE OPERATOR'S RIGHT, TO APPEAL SUCH DENIAL TO THE ZONING BOARD OF APPEALS HERE, IT WAS SUBMITTED. SO THE AUTHORITY SET FORTH IN THE OLD SPECIAL PERMIT IS LIMITED. IF IT'S NOT SUBMITTED, THE CERTIFICATION IT WAS SUBMITTED. SO THE BUILDING INSPECTORS WITHOUT THE AUTHORITY TO AUTOMATICALLY TRY TO SHUT SOMETHING DOWN OR NOT RENEW A PERMIT BECAUSE HE FEELS AS NON-COMPLIANCE UNDER, UNDER THE SPECIAL PERMIT, THAT'S AN ISSUE FOR YOU TO DECIDE. AND THAT NEVER HAPPENED. SO THE, THE ARGUMENT IS THAT THE BUILDING INSPECTORS WITHOUT THE AUTHORITY TO SAY, I'M NOT GONNA RENEW YOUR PERMIT. 'CAUSE THE ONLY THING HE CAN DO IS IF, IF THE CERTIFICATION ISN'T SUBMITTED. THAT'S WHAT THE ZONING BOARD SAID IN 2 0 0 2. THE ISSUE OF THE SUBSTANCE OF WHETHER WE'RE COMPLYING WITH THE SPECIAL PERMIT IS AN ISSUE FOR YOU TO DECIDE. BUT THAT'S NOT BEFORE YOU TONIGHT EITHER. THE, THE ISSUE FOR YOU ONLY IS WHETHER THE BUILDING INSPECTOR HAD THE AUTHORITY TO ISSUE THE NON-RENEWAL. THE LOOK AT THE PLAIN LANGUAGE OF PARAGRAPH SEVEN OF THE SPECIAL PERMIT. HE'S WITHOUT THAT AUTHORITY, I'D BE HAPPY TO ANSWER ANY QUESTIONS. IF NOT, I'LL SUBMIT, UH, ON MY RECORD TONIGHT. AND ALSO ON THE, UH, MEMO OF AUGUST OF 2023, ANYONE ON THE BOARD WAS TO MAKE ANY COMMENTS? NO. NOTHING. NO, NO. I DON'T HAVE ANYTHING. I WOULD LIKE TO RESPOND. YES. ON JULY 19TH, 2023, 604 DAYS AGO, THE BUILDING INSPECTOR DULY ISSUED A STOP WORK ORDER FOR VIOLATING CONDITIONS SET FORTH IN ZBA SPECIAL USE PERMIT. OH 1 35. ON JULY 24TH, 2023, THE BUILDING INSPECTOR ISSUED A NOTICE OF NON-RENEWAL FOR ZBA SPECIAL USE PERMIT OH 1 35, FOR FAILING TO COMPLY WITH THE CONDITIONS AND TO RENEW THE SPECIAL USE PERMIT. APPLICANT HAS APPEALED BOTH STOP WORK ORDER AND THE NOTICE OF NON-RENEWAL OF THE SPECIAL USE PERMIT. THE FACTS IN THE RECORD SUPPORT A FINDING THAT THE BUILDING INSPECTOR NOT ONLY HAD THE AUTHORITY, BUT THE MANDATE TO ISSUE BOTH THE STOP WORK ORDER AND NOTICE OF NON-RENEWAL FOR THE APPLICANT'S CONTINUED VIOLATION OF ZBA CONDITIONS IN, IN SPECIAL USE PERMIT OH 1 35, ADDRESSING THE APPEAL OF THE ISSUANCE OF THE STOP WORK ORDER. FIRST, I WOULD LIKE TO PROVIDE THE BOARD WITH A FACTUAL BACKGROUND AND THE RELEVANT CODES THAT SUPPORT THE DETERMINATION THAT THE BUILDING INSPECTOR HAD THE AUTHORITY TO ISSUE THE STOP WORK ORDER ON JULY 19TH, 2023 FOR VIOLATING CONDITIONS SET FORTH IN THE SPECIAL USE PERMIT. ON JULY 12TH, 2022, FORMER BUILDING INSPECTOR ROBERT DAM ISSUED A NOTICE OF VIOLATION 22 DASH 1 44 26 TO FAIL INDUSTRIES, THE LESSEE OF 50 WAREHOUSE LANE FOR VIOLATING CONDITIONS OF SPECIAL USE PERMIT OH 1 35 FOR EXCEEDING THE MAXIMUM PILE HEIGHT AND THE MAXIMUM CUBIC YARDS OF MATERIALS STORED ON THE SITE. THESE VIOLATIONS WERE NEVER REMEDIED AND THE VIOLATIONS REMAIN OPEN TO DATE. ON MAY 12TH, 2023, THE BUILDING INSPECTOR, UH, FRANK MODO ISSUED A NOTICE OF VIOLATION 2 3 1 5 1 2 3 [00:10:03] TO FAIL INDUSTRIES FOR CONTINUING TO VIOLATE THE SPECIAL USE PERMIT CONDITIONS OF THE 30 FOOT MAXIMUM MATERIAL PILE HEIGHT AND FOR EXCEEDING 10,000 CUBIC YARDS OF MATERIAL STORAGE. APPLICANT ARGUES TO THIS BOARD, THEY IGNORED THE NOTICE OF VIOLATION BECAUSE NOTICES OF VIOLATION ISSUED BY A BUILDING INSPECTOR ARE NOT ACTUAL VIOLATIONS. THEY'RE JUST NOTICES. THIS ARGUMENT IS NOT SUPPORTED BY THE CODE OR SOUND LOGIC. TOWN CODE 126 CLEARLY STATES THAT NOTICE OF VIOLATIONS ARE ORDERS TO REMEDY VIOLATIONS OBSERVED BY THE BUILDING INSPECTOR. THE CODE EXPLICITLY GRANTS THE BUILDING INSPECTOR THE AUTHORITY TO ISSUE A STOP WORK ORDER WHEN THE BOARD, WHEN A BOARD CONDITION IS VIOLATED, TOWN CODE SECTIONS 104 105 A DASH FOUR AND 110 A CLEARLY AND UNAMBIGUOUSLY GRANT, THE BUILDING INSPECTOR THE POWER AND THE DUTY TO ISSUE A STOP WORK ORDER TO HALT WORK THAT IS NOT IN COMPLIANCE WITH CONDITIONS SET FORTH IN A ZONING BOARD OF APPEALS DECISION. THE APPLICANT HAS ARGUED THAT THE BUILDING INSPECTOR DID NOT HAVE THE AUTHORITY TO ISSUE A STOP WORK ORDER BECAUSE A HUNDRED A IS NOT INDEPENDENT AND MUST BE READ TOGETHER WITH A HUNDRED B. TOWN CODE A HUNDRED B REQUIRES WORK ON A STRUCTURE EXCAVATION, GRADING, AND FILL TO CEASE UPON RECEIPT OF A STOP WORK ORDER. APPLICANT SUGGESTS THEIR OPERATION OF CONTINUAL DUMPING, EXCAVATION, AND PROCESSING OF MATERIALS DOES NOT FALL INTO THESE CATEGORIES. THE BUILDING DEPARTMENT DISAGREES NOT ONLY WITH THE APPLICANT'S INTERPRETATION OF THIS CODE, BUT INSISTS THAT SEC SECTION 100 B WOULD APPLY TO THE APPLICANT'S OPERATION OF CONSTANT EXCAVATION, GRADING, AND FILLING. EVEN IF THE ZBA FINDS THAT THE APPLICANT'S INTERPRETATION IS VALID, IT DOES NOT NEGATE THE BUILDING INSPECTOR'S AUTHORITY TO ISSUE A STOP WORK ORDER UNDER A HUNDRED FOUR ONE HUNDRED FIVE AND A HUNDRED A 10 A WHERE THERE IS A VIOLATION OF A BOARD CONDITION, UNSAFE WORKING CONDITIONS OR FOR THE MISREPRESENTATION UNRELATED TO WORK ON A STRUCTURE EXCAVATION, GRADING, OR FILL. THERE IS NO QUESTION OF FACT THAT THE APPLICANT HAS EXPANDED THE SCOPE AND VIOLATED CONDITION OF SPECIAL USE PERMIT OH 1 35 AT THE TIME THE STOP WORK ORDER WAS ISSUED, THE LAST RENEWAL OF SPECIAL USE PERMIT OH 1 35 WAS BY FORMER BUILDING INSPECTOR FTA. IN FEBRUARY OF 2021, THE APPLICANT WAS OPERATING UNDER AN EXPIRED SPECIAL USE PERMIT WHEN THE STOP WORK ORDER WAS ISSUED IN JULY, 2023, APPLICANT MISREPRESENTED COMPLIANCE IN LETTERS REQUESTING RENEWALS FOR THE SPECIAL USE PERMIT ON 1 35 FORMER BUILDING INSPECTOR DAM AND BUILDING INSPECTOR MODO ISSUED NOTICES OF VIOLATION TO THE APPLICANT FOR VIOLATING CONDITIONS OF THE SPECIAL USE PERMIT AND NEITHER FORMER BUILDING INSPECTOR DAM NOR BUILDING INSPECTOR MODO ISSUED RENEWALS FOR SPECIAL PERMIT OH 1 35. PURSUANT TO TOWN CODE 104 105 A FOUR AND 110 A, THE BUILDING INSPECTOR HAD THE POWER AND THE DUTY TO ISSUE A STOP WORK ORDER TO HALT OPERATIONS THAT WERE NOT IN COMPLIANCE WITH THE CONDITIONS SET FORTH IN ZONING BOARD OF APPEALS DECISION OH 1 35. ACCORDINGLY, THE DECISION OF THE BUILDING INSPECTOR TO ISSUE A STOP WORK ORDER MUST BE UPHELD AND THE APPLICANT'S APPEAL DENIED WITH REGARD TO THE APPLICANT'S APPEAL OF THE NOTICE OF NON-RENEWAL OF SPECIAL USE PERMIT OH 1 35. THE FACTS AND THE RECORD ALSO SUPPORT A FINDING THAT THE BUILDING INSPECTOR HAD THE AUTHORITY TO ISSUE A NOTICE OF NON-RENEWAL CONDITION SEVEN. DETAILS. THIS APPLICANT HAS ARGUED THAT SUBMITTING SELF CERTIFYING LETTERS AFFIRMING THEIR COMPLIANCE WITH ZBA SPECIAL USE PERMIT OH 1 35 RESULTS IN AN AUTOMATIC RENEWAL OF THIS SPECIAL USE PERMIT. APPLICANT MIS MISCONSTRUES THE REQUIREMENTS TO CERTIFY COMPLIANCE UNDER THIS SPECIAL PERMIT BY SUBMISSION OF AN ANNUAL LETTER THAT IS NOT INTENDED TO RESULT IN AN AUTOMATIC RENEWAL WITHOUT REVIEW OR OVERSIGHT FROM THE BUILDING INSPECTOR. ADDITIONALLY, APPLICANT'S OWN TESTIMONY CONFIRMS FOR OVER 20 YEARS, THEY HAVE KNOWINGLY MISREPRESENTED COMPLIANCE WITH CONDITIONS OF SPECIAL USE PERMIT. OH 1 35 WHEN THEY SUBMITTED LETTERS OF COMPLIANCE TO THE TOWN'S BUILDING INSPECTOR, APPLICANT HAS OFFERED THE BUILDING INSPECTOR LUCIDO AND FTAS LETTERS OF RENEWAL AS PROOF THAT THE TOWN KNEW OF AND APPROVED OF THE APPLICANT'S CONTINUED VIOLATIONS OF CONDITIONS OF THE SPECIAL USE PERMIT OH 1 35 ASSERTING THAT THE FORMER BUILDING INSPECTORS EITHER TURNED A BLIND EYE TO THE VIOLATIONS AND NON PERMITTED EXPANSION OR SIMPLY RELIED ON THE APPLICANT'S SELF CERTIFYING LETTERS. IN EITHER REGARD, A BUILDING INSPECTOR DOES NOT HAVE THE AUTHORITY TO EXPAND THE SCOPE OR RELAX CONDITIONS OF SPECIAL PERMIT. WHAT IS CLEAR IS THAT THE APPLICANT'S SELF CERTIFYING LETTERS CONTAIN MISREPRESENTATIONS OF COMPLIANCE WITH THE CONDITIONS IN THE SPECIAL USE PERMIT. AND THESE LETTERS, ALONG WITH THE FORMER BUILDING INSPECTOR LUCIDO AND F'S, NOTICES OF RENEWAL ARE VOID. SETTING ASIDE THE VALIDITY AND THE VERACITY OF THESE LETTERS OF RENEWALS, THE FOLLOWING FACTS ARE DISPOSITIVE. [00:15:01] IN DETERMINING WHETHER BUILDING INSPECTOR OR LIBIDO'S ISSUANCE THE NOTICE OF NON-RENEWAL WAS REQUIRED. ONE. APPLICANT MISREPRESENTED CONFORMANCE WITH SPECIAL USE PERMIT OH 1 35 IN CERTIFICATION LETTERS FROM 20 2003 TO 2021. THE LAST NOTICE OF RENEWAL WAS BY FORMER BUILDING INSPECTOR FTA IN FEBRUARY, 2021. NOTICE OF VIOLATION WAS ISSUED BY BOTH BUILDING INSPECTOR DAM AND MODO FOR VIOLATIONS OF CONDITIONS OF SPECIAL USE PERMIT. FORMER INSPECTOR DAM DID NOT ISSUE A NOTICE OF NON-RENEWAL OF SPECIAL USE PERMIT IN OH 1 35. AND BY THE TERMS OF THE SPECIAL USE PERMIT, IT EXPIRED ON JANUARY 1ST, 2022. NOTICE OF VIOLATION WAS ISSUED BY BUILDING INSPECTOR MORDO FOR VIOLATING THE SAME CONDITIONS AND NEVER ISSUED A NOTICE OF OF RENEWAL. THE APPLICANT WAS NOTIFIED THAT THE SPECIAL USE PERMIT HAD EXPIRED BY ITS TERMS ON JULY 19TH, 2023 THROUGH THE POSTING OF THE STOP WORK ORDER AND THE LETTER OF NON-RENEWAL ON JULY 24TH, 2023. IN THE ABSENCE OF NOTICES OF NON-RENEWAL FOR THE YEARS 2022 AND 2023, COUPLED WITH THE NOTICES OF VIOLATIONS WRITTEN IN 2022 AND 2023, NONE OF WHICH HAVE BEEN REMEDIED SPECIAL USE PERMIT OH 1 35 BY ITS TERM EXPIRED JANUARY 1ST, 2022. THIS LAPSE TOGETHER WITH CONDITION SEVEN OF ZBA DECISION OH 1 35 GAVE THE BUILDING INSPECTOR THE AUTHORITY TO ISSUE A FORMAL NOTICE OF NON-RENEWAL ON JULY 24TH, 2023. THEREFORE, THE DECISION OF THE BUILDING INSPECTOR TO ISSUE THE NOTICE OF THE NON-RENEWAL MUST BE UPHELD AND THE APPLICANT'S APPEAL DENIED THE TOWN HAS WORKED DILIGENTLY WITH THE APPLICANT TO RESOLVE ALL ISSUES RELATING TO THE NEW SPECIAL USE PERMIT WHILE THE STOP WORK ORDER AND NOTICE OF NON-RENEWAL WERE STAYED TO ALLOW PARTIES TIME TO SATISFY ALL ISSUES. THE BUILDING DEPARTMENT REQUESTS DECISIONS ON BOTH MATTERS SO THAT WE HAVE CLEARED DIRECTIVES ON HOW TO HANDLE THESE MATTERS IN THE FUTURE. THIS INCLUDES THA WHO WILL HAVE ANNUAL NOTICE OF RENEWALS IN THE NEW SPECIAL PERMIT AS WELL. I AM CONFIDENT THAT THE BUILDING DEPARTMENT HAS HANDLED BOTH THE STOP WORK ORDER AND THE NOTICE OF NON-RENEWAL IN A LEGAL AND PROFESSIONAL MANNER AND IN FULL COMPLIANCE WITH TOWN CODE AND DEPRECIATED DECISION ON BOTH PARTS OF THIS APPEAL FROM YOUR BOARD DOCUMENTING THE SAME. THANK YOU. ANY OTHER COMMENTS? ANYONE ON THE NO. UM, NO ONE ELSE? UH, WELL, YEAH, AT THAT WAS DEFINITELY A MOUTHFUL, , AND, UM, I'M SURE IT WAS STATED SO THAT IT WOULD BE IN THE RECORD. UM, UM, I BELIEVE THOUGH THAT OUR DECISION BASED ON CASE NUMBER 2321, WOULD I HOPEFULLY RESOLVE THE ISSUE OF 2322? IT IT WOULD NOT, BECAUSE THE THRUST OF THE APPEAL IS THE BUILDING INSPECTOR'S AUTHORITY TO ISSUE A STOP WORK ORDER AND TO ISSUE A NOTICE OF NON-RENEWAL. SO WE RESPECTFULLY REQUEST WE GET A DECISION ON BOTH MATTERS. OKAY. SO THAT'S WHAT WE HAVE TO I'M SORRY, THAT'S WHAT WE WOULD HAVE TO DECIDE UPON. ALRIGHT. THANK YOU FOR CLARIFYING THAT. MADAM CHAIR, IF I MAY BRIEFLY YES. JUST ON THAT ISSUE, WE, WE DO BELIEVE THAT, I UNDERSTAND THEY WANT A DECISION ON MY APPEAL. NUMBER 22. WE FEEL, UM, ONCE A SPECIAL PERMIT IS ISSUED, ASSUMING THAT IT IS, AND WE WANNA WORK WITH THE TOWN, WE'VE BEEN WORKING WITH THEM TRYING TO GET AN, A SPECIAL PERMIT THAT WORKS FOR EVERYONE AND COMPLY WITH IT. SO WE FEEL IT WOULD MOOT IT. I UNDERSTAND THEY WANT A DECISION ON IT. I DON'T THINK IT'S NECESSARY PERSONALLY, BUT THAT WOULD ULTIMATELY BE UP TO YOU. AND JUST ONE THING, SUBSTANTIVELY A LOT OF ALLEGATIONS THAT, AND THAT WE'VE BEEN TALKING ABOUT FOR TWO YEARS NOW, YOUR APPEAL, THIS APPEAL IS VERY, VERY NARROW. DO DOES, UH, BUILD AN INSPECTOR UNILATERALLY HAVE THE RIGHT TO SHUT DOWN AN ONGOING BUSINESS. THEY HAVE A RIGHT TO ISSUE STOP WORK ORDERS RELATED TO CONSTRUCTION. IT DOESN'T SAY IN YOUR CODE, I CAN SHUT DOWN A BUSINESS ANYTIME I WANT. THERE'S AUTHORITY, THERE'S COURTS THAT HAVE TO DO THAT. I'VE SEEN IT. I'VE DONE IT. BEEN ADMISSIBLE LAWYER FOR 25 YEARS. YOU HAVE TO GO TO COURT TO SHUT A BUSINESS DOWN. THAT'S OUR OPINION. NUMBER TWO, THE ISSUE OF, OF THE NOTICE OF NON-COMPLIANCE WITH THE SPECIAL PERMIT. HE CAN SAY THAT HE CAN MAKE THAT DECISION. YOU ISSUED THE SPECIAL PERMIT IN 2022, NOT THE BUILDING INSPECTOR. SO HE CAN MAKE A CLAIM TO YOU TO SAY BOARD THEY'RE NOT IN COMPLIANCE WITH, WITH THE, UM, WITH THE SPECIAL PERMIT. AND THEN ULTIMATELY WE WOULD THEN COME TO YOUR BOARD AND, AND OR HE WOULD COME TO YOUR BOARD AND SAY, LOOK, THEY'RE NOT COMPLIANT. THEN YOU WOULD HAVE TO COME BACK TO US AND SAY, YOU HAVE TO SHOW US COMPLIANCE. THAT'S NOT WHAT HAPPENED HERE THOUGH. WHAT HAPPENED HERE IS HE TRIED, HE, HE TOOK IT [00:20:01] UPON HIMSELF, ONE PERSON TO SHUT DOWN, TRY TO SHUT DOWN A BUSINESS, AND THE LAW DOESN'T STATE IT BY THE APPEAL TO YOUR BOARD. AND THAT'S WHAT WE'VE BEEN HERE FOR TWO YEARS. WE WANT TO MOVE FORWARD WITH THE SPECIAL PERMIT AND HOPEFULLY AN AMENDED ONE THAT YOU GIVE US. AND IF ULTIMATELY A DECISION ON WHETHER THERE'S AUTHORITY TO DO WHAT COMES OUT AT THE END, IT'S FINE. BUT WE ARE, WE, WE WANNA WORK WITH THE TOWN, CONTINUE TO WORK WITH THE TOWN, BE A GOOD, GOOD BUSINESS IN THE TOWN AS WE HAVE BEEN, WE BELIEVE FOR THE LAST, YOU KNOW, MULTIPLE DECADES. THANK YOU. THANK YOU. ANY OTHER COMMENTS? UM, YES. SO FAIL OBVIOUSLY HAS NOT BEEN SHUT DOWN. CORRECT? BECAUSE WE FILED THE, AN APPEAL TO YOUR BOARD UNDER THE LAW. THERE'S AN AUTOMATIC STAY OF, OF THAT SHUTDOWN. THE ALLEGED SHUTDOWN ORDER. SO THAT'S WHY IT'S NOT BEEN SHUT DOWN. AND WE ENTERED INTO AN AGREEMENT, I DON'T KNOW, TWO YEARS AGO, REMEMBER WE'RE IN THAT HOT ROOM THE OTHER TIME, , RIGHT, RIGHT. AND SIGNED THE AGREEMENT TO, TO KEEP OPERATING. SO THAT'S WHY WE THINK IT'S NOT NECESSARY. BUT I UNDERSTAND THE, THE TOWN'S POSITION THAT A DECISION SHOULD BE MADE ON WHETHER THEY HAVE THE AUTHORITY TO RENDER, UH, A STOP WORK ORDER. BUT THAT'S UP TO THAT'S UP TO YOU. WELL, SORT OF ADVISORY IN OUR, IN OUR THOUGHT PROCESSES. WELL, WE KNOW THAT THE BUILDING INSPECTOR DOES HAVE THE RIGHT TO ISSUE A STOP WORK ORDER. AGREED. WHICH I THINK DOESN'T NECESSARILY MEAN THAT YOU WANT, WE WOULD WANT TO SHUT THE BUSINESS DOWN. AM I MISSING SOMETHING HERE? HEY, HEY, THE AUTHORITY IS UNDER 100 DASH FOUR, SUB FOUR I THINK IT IS TO ISSUE A STOP WORK ORDER. IT DOESN'T INDICATE WHAT HE CAN ISSUE A STOP WORK ORDER FOR, IF YOU READ ALL THE CODE PROVISIONS TOGETHER, WE BELIEVE IT'S FOR CONSTRUCTION. WHEN SOMEONE SAYS, HEY, I'M GONNA BUILD THIS HERE, AND THEY BUILT IT HERE. WHEN THEY'RE BUILDING A HOUSE OR A BUILDING, THAT'S, THAT'S WHEN HE CAN STOP THEM. OR, HEY, WE DID A LOAD TEST HERE AND HERE'S THE LOAD TEST. IT DOESN'T COME OUT RIGHT, BUT THEY, HE STOPS SOME, THEN IT'S RELATED TO CONSTRUCTION ACTIVITIES. OR IF THEY START DIGGING SOMEWHERE AND THEY KNOW THERE'S A SEWER PIPE THERE, STOP. YOU GET A BURST, A SEWER PIPE NOT TO SHUT DOWN AN EXISTING OPERATION. SO THAT'S OUR POSITION THAT THAT'S THE, THAT'S THE, THE, THE DIFFERENCE IN, IN THE THOUGHT PROCESS OF THE TOWN AND, AND US. BUT AGAIN, IF THE SPECIAL PERMIT IS, IS REISSUED AS, AS YOU, I KNOW YOU'RE CONSIDERING TONIGHT, YOU KNOW, IT, IT, IT, IT KIND OF MOOTS THIS ISSUE. UH, OKAY. OH YES PLEASE, SHAUNA. OKAY. UM, I JUST HAVE ONE QUESTION. SURE. WHO DO YOU THINK WHEN WE ISSUE A SPECIAL PERMIT, IF YOU ARE SAYING IT'S NOT THE BUILDING INSPECTOR WHO DOES OF TO WELL ENFORCES THIS SPECIAL PERMIT? WELL, MOST SPECIAL PERMITS. THEY, THEY'RE TIME WISE. SO YOURS HERE HAD ONE YEAR NO, NO. IF THERE'S A VIOLATION OF THE PERMIT, LET'S SAY THE PILES ARE UP TO A HUNDRED FEET, HE CAN ISSUE A VIOLATION. I AGREE. BUT HOW DOES THAT, BUT YOU'RE SAYING A VIOLATION, BUT THAT WE CAN'T STOP IT IN ANY WAY THAT ARE NO, IF, IF I THINK I'M, I'M TRYING TO UNDERSTAND WHERE IS THE TEETH SURE, SURE. OF A SPECIAL PERMIT. IF YOU'RE SAYING THERE'S NO ONE THERE TO ENFORCE IT, I'M NOT SAYING THERE'S NO ONE THERE TO ENFORCE IT. YOU ENFORCE IT AS THE ZONING BOARD 'CAUSE YOU ISSUE. BUT WE DON'T GO OUT THERE. WE GO UP, BUT I DON'T, I'M NOT GONNA GO ISSUE WITH STOCK ORDER. BUT MOST, MOST SPECIAL DEPARTMENTS, INCLUDING THIS ONE, HAD A TIMEFRAME ON, AND YOU HAVE TO COME BACK. RIGHT. AND YOURS IN PARAGRAPH SEVEN SORT OF SAYS IS A, THERE'S A ONE YEAR TIMEFRAME, BUT IT DOESN'T SAY TO COME BACK. BUT WHAT THE BUILDING INSPECTOR CAN DO IS SAY, I DON'T BELIEVE YOU'RE COMPLYING WITH THIS SPECIAL PERMIT. I'M GONNA BRING A, AN ACTION IN LOCAL COURT AND TELL THE JUDGE THEY WERE REQUIRED TO HAVE 10,000, UH, CUBIC YARDS OF MATERIAL. THEY HAVE 20,000. THIS IS HOW I KNOW IT. AND NOW YOU GOTTA FIND THEM GUILTY LOCAL JUDGE AND, AND ISSUE THEM A FINE. IT'S A TRIAL. RIGHT. YOU HAVE A TRIAL THAT, THAT THAT THEY'RE THE EXECUTIVE BRANCH. YOU'RE THE EXECUTIVE BRANCH. THE JUDICIAL BRANCH GETS TO MAKE THE DECISION. I KNOW, I UNDERSTAND. AND I'M JUST TRYING TO BE PRACTICAL HERE. RIGHT. SO, SO YOU ARE SAYING THAT THE WAY TO ENFORCE A VIOLATION THAT HAPPENS, LET'S SAY ONE MONTH INTO A SPECIAL PERMIT IS TO BEGIN A COURT PROCESS. CORRECT. WHICH, AND WE HAVE NOW BEEN DEALING WITH THIS ISSUE FOR, TO CLOSE TO TWO YEARS. SO THAT WITHOUT STOPPING A PROCESS THAT'S IN VIOLATION, WE SHOULD GET INVOLVED IN A THE ONLY TEETH YOU ARE SAYING WE HAVE FOR A NON-CONSTRUCTION PROJECT. NOT, NOT WHAT I'M SAYING. WHAT YOU ARE SAYING, AND I'M TRYING TO UNDERSTAND IT SURE. IS TO ENTER INTO A LENGTHY COURT PROCESS. SO, SO I DON'T KNOW ABOUT LENGTHY, BUT WHAT THAT, WHAT, WHAT HAPPENS WHEN THERE'S AN ILLEGAL USE, LET'S SAY SOMEONE HAS [00:25:01] A, UM, OPERATION OF A CANNABIS FACILITY IN A ZONE, YOU'RE NOT ALLOWED TO. NO, NO. LET'S KEEP IT RELEVANT TO WHAT THIS, I'M GIVING AN EXAMPLE. I'M GIVING AN EXAMPLE. SO LET, LET ME FINISH AND I THINK YOU'LL FOLLOW MY EXAMPLE, RIGHT? THE BUILDING INSPECTOR CAN'T GO INTO THAT CANNABIS SHOP AND SHUT IT DOWN. WHAT HE NEEDS TO DO IS EITHER VIOLATE THEM IN LOCAL COURT WHERE THEY CAN BE ISSUED FINES FOR AN ILLEGAL USE, OR HE CAN GO TO SUPREME COURT AND HAVE A COURT SAY, YOU'RE AN ILLEGAL USE. HAPPENS ALL THE TIME. WHAT SPECIAL PERMITS DO IS A IS A MORE NARROW ISSUE. USUALLY THERE'S A TIMEFRAME ON THEM. COULD BE TWO YEARS, COULD BE THREE YEARS, COULD BE ONE YEAR. AND YOU HAVE TO COME BACK TO THIS BOARD AND SAY, HEY, WE'RE STILL COM UH, UH, UH, WORKING, WE'RE HAVING OUR, OUR OUR USE THERE. HERE'S WHAT WE'RE DOING. REISSUE THE SPECIAL PERMIT FOR ANOTHER THREE OR FIVE YEARS, WHATEVER IT IS. BUT THAT'S NOT WHAT YOUR, YOUR CODE DID YOUR APPROVAL, DID YOUR APPROVAL IN OH TWO SAID CERTIFY IT TO THE BUILDING INSPECTOR. IF YOU DON'T, HE'LL SAY YOU'RE NOT, YOU'RE NOT IN, YOU DIDN'T SUBMIT YOUR CERTIFICATION. AND THEN YOU CAN APPEAL THAT ISSUE TO, TO THE BOARD. WHAT IT COULD HAVE SAID, COULD HAVE SAID SOMETHING DIFFERENT. BUT IT DOESN'T GIVE HIM THE AUTHORITY TO BE THE JUDGE AND JURY HERE TO DECIDE YOU'RE IN VIOLATION. SO I'M SHUTTING YOU DOWN. THAT'S OUR, THAT'S OUR POSITION. THAT'S WHY YOUR BOARD ISSUES THE PERMIT. YOUR BOARD CAN REVOKE THE PERMIT OR YOU CAN AMEND THE PERMIT, WHICH WE ARE HOPING YOU DO. OKAY. I THINK WE ON A ZONING BOARD WILL HAVE TO DISCUSS THIS FURTHER DURING OUR DELIBERATIONS BECAUSE, CAUSE MY UNDERSTANDING OF THIS, OH BOY, I DON'T LIKE IT WHEN OUR ATTORNEY LOOKS AT ME LIKE THIS. WHAT THE BUILDING INSPECTOR DID WAS ISSUE A STOP WORK ORDER. I THINK OUR ASSISTANT BUILDING INSPECTOR IS SAYING THERE'S NO REASON WHY HE CAN'T DO THAT. HIS ISSUANCE OF THAT STOP WORK ORDER WAS THE RED FLAG THAT WAS RAISED TO BRING TO EVERYBODY'S ATTENTION THAT THE APPLICANT WAS NO LONGER IN COMPLIANCE WITH THE SPECIAL WORK ORDER. AND THEREFORE, FOR THE LAST TWO, TWO AND A HALF YEARS, WE HAVE BEEN WORKING WITH THE APPLICANT TO TRY AND COME UP WITH SPECIAL CONDITIONS THAT THE APPLICANT CAN FOLLOW. AND WE'RE GETTING CLOSE TO COMING TO AN AGREEMENT WITH THAT. I'M FOLLOWING YOU. I AGREE WITH YOU. UM, I DON'T UNDERSTAND WHERE YOU'RE FEELING THAT THE BUILDING INSPECTOR'S ISSUANCE OF A STOP WORK ORDER WAS MEANING THAT THE APPLICANT CAN STOP WORK AND THEREFORE NOT MAINTAIN HIS BUSINESS. TO WHICH IN ANY EVENT, THERE WAS A STAY THAT WAS, UM, AGREED UPON SO THAT IN FACT THE APPLICANT CAN STAY IN BUSINESS MM-HMM . SO WHEN YOU'RE SAYING THAT THE BUILDING INSPECTOR WAS TRYING TO SHUT HIM DOWN AND MAKE HIM STOP DOING HIS BUSINESS, I THINK MAYBE THAT'S JUST A DIFFERENCE OF INTERPRETATION. IF I'M WRONG, IF I, YEAH. AND, AND I THINK THAT THAT'S WHERE WE ON THE ZONING BOARD HAVE TO COME TO AN, AN AGREEMENT. WE'RE NOT TRYING TO SAY THAT THE BUILDING INSPECTOR CAN'T ISSUE A WORK, UH, A STOP WORK ORDER BASED UPON THE CONDITIONS OF THE SPECIAL PERMIT. I DON'T KNOW IF I SAID THAT RIGHT. BUT, AND ED WILL, WILL CORRECT ME IF, IF I'M WRONG. SO I, I THINK THAT'S SOMETHING THAT WE JUST HAVE TO DETERMINE IN OUR DELIBERATIONS. CORRECT. WELL, WE FIRST HAVE TO DETERMINE WHAT THE, WHAT I SEE AS THE BACKUP IN THE LAW AS TO AND THE, AND THE STATUTE AS TO WHAT GOVERNS IT AND, OKAY. UNLESS YOU KNOW ALL OF THESE I CAN, I CAN GIVE YOU THE 110. NO, NO, WE, WE, WE WILL SEE THEM. YEAH. NO, IT'S, IT'S, IT'S SPECIFIC IN THE CODE. OKAY. WE HAVE IN OUR LETTER OF, OF AUGUST, UH, EIGHTH, 2023. IT'S THE AUTHORITY ISSUE. OKAY. I THINK YOU'RE SAYING, UH, MEMBER WHAT, WHAT IT MEANS, WHAT DOES THE STOP WORK ORDER MEAN? RIGHT. DOES IT STOP WORK? IF IT DOESN'T STOP WORK, FINE. THAT'S THE WHOLE POINT. IF, IF THE ULTIMATE SPECIAL PERMIT IS ULTIMATELY GIVEN AMENDED HERE, I'LL WITHDRAW THE APPEAL. MY APPEAL. I DON'T NEED IT. 'CAUSE WE'RE WE'RE OPERATING. WE AGREED TO, WE COULD OPERATE. NOW WE HAVE A NEW SPECIAL PERMIT WE CAN OPERATE THEN. WELL, NOT YET. NO. IF IT HAPPENS, NO, WE, WE UNDERSTAND THAT. OKAY. A TOTAL IFS. BUT IF NOT, THAT'S WHY THE, THIS IS STILL PENDING. 'CAUSE WE DON'T HAVE THE AMENDED SPECIAL PERMIT YET. [00:30:01] BUT I, I I THINK WE'RE SAYING THE SAME THING, BUT IT'S AN ISSUE OF AUTHORITY OF WHAT AND THEN ULTIMATELY WHAT IT MEANS, THE AUTHORITY. ANY ISSUE, A STOP WORK ORDER HERE. AND WHAT DOES THAT MEAN? MADAM CHAIR, I JUST WANNA NOTE JOSEPH DANKO TOWN ATTORNEY'S ON AND HE WANTS TO PROVIDE YES. TESTIMONY IT EVENING EVERYBODY. THANK YOU FOR HAVING ME. JOSEPH VANGO, TOWN ATTORNEY. I THINK THAT, UH, MS. GARRITY DID A FANTASTIC JOB LAYING OUT, UM, YOU KNOW, THE ARGUMENTS AND WHY THE TOWN BELIEVES THAT THE BUILDING INSPECTOR ACTED PROPERLY. I DO JUST WANT TO POINT OUT THAT IT IS BEING SORT OF FRAMED THAT THE BUILDING INSPECTOR CAME IN HERE AND TRIED TO SHUT A BUSINESS DOWN WITHOUT PRIOR NOTICE OF THIS. BUT AS MS. GARRITY POINTED OUT EARLIER, THERE WAS PRIOR NOTICE, THERE WAS ACTUALLY A NOTICE OF VIOLATION STILL OUTSTANDING FROM JULY 12TH, 2022. AND THERE WAS ANOTHER NOTICE OF VIOLATION STILL OUTSTANDING FROM MAY 12TH, 2023, TYPICALLY IN A OWNER OR A LESSEE OF PROPERTY WOULD'VE 30 DAYS TO REMEDY THOSE DEFICIENCIES. AND THAT WAS NOT DONE HERE. AND IN FACT, WE DIDN'T EVEN SEE, OR I SHOULD SAY BUILDING INSPECTOR DID NOT SEE A GOOD BIG EFFORT TO RECTIFY THOSE ISSUES. SO I BELIEVE BASED ON THOSE FACTS, AND BASED ON THE LETTER OF THE LAW, THE PLAIN LANGUAGE OF OUR CODE AS WRITTEN, THAT THEY DID HAVE THE AUTHORITY TO ISSUE THAT STOP WORK ORDER. AND IT WAS DULY SERVED AND, UH, TIMELY SERVED AS WELL. BUT IN NO, WHERE DOES IT SAY THAT FAIL INDUSTRIES SHOULD COMPLETELY STOP OPERATIONS? IS THAT CORRECT? SO I BELIEVE THAT THERE WAS THE RIGHT OF THE BUILDINGS INSPECTOR TO STOP OPERATIONS WITHIN THAT FACILITY. BUT, UM, YOU KNOW, THEY HAVE REPRESENTATION, THEY FILE AN APPEAL AND THEY'RE CORRECT THAT IT SHOULD STAY AT THAT POINT, AT THAT MOMENT, THE BUILDING INSPECTOR COULD HAVE ISSUED A DETERMINATION THAT THERE WAS IMMINENT DANGER IF THE OPERATIONS CONTINUED TO EXIST. BUT WE DIDN'T FEEL THAT WAS NECESSARY. AND I'M SURE IF WE DID FILE THAT, WE WOULD'VE ENDED UP IN SUPREME COURT, WESTCHESTER COURT IMMEDIATELY. UM, BUT BASED ON THE WARNING OF OUR LAW, IT SAYS EXCAVATION AND, UH, FILLING SHOULD BE STOPPED AS WELL. NOT ONLY THE CONSTRUCTION OF A BUILDING. SO THEN HOW DID WE GO ABOUT GETTING A STAY TO THAT TOWN? LAW SAYS A STAY IS IN PLACE WHEN THEY FILE THE APPEAL. AND WE ALSO WERE WORKING DILIGENTLY WITH THE APPLICANT TO TRY TO FIX ALL THESE ISSUES. SO WE AGREED TO THE STAY IN THAT HOT MEETING. AS DARIUS POINTED OUT EARLIER, WE DIDN'T THINK IT WAS GONNA TAKE THIS LONG. AND I DID WE CLOSE TO MEMBERS AT ALL? IF I COULD JUST PUT A, BRING A POINT OF CLARIFICATION. THE STOP WORK ORDER WAS FOR VIOLATIONS OF INTO THE MICROPHONE, PLEASE. SURE. THE, THE STOP WORK ORDER WAS FOR VIOLATIONS OF CONDITIONS OF THE SPECIAL USE PERMIT. THAT WAS THE AUTHORITY THAT ALLOWED THE BUILDING INSPECTOR TO ISSUE THE STOP WORK ORDER. THE APPLICANT IN OUR MEETINGS WITH THE ZONING BOARD STATED THEY CANNOT COMPLY WITH THE CONDITIONS OF SPECIAL USE PERMIT OH 1 35. THEY COULDN'T BRING THE PILE HEIGHTS DOWN TO 30 FEET. THEY COULDN'T REDUCE THE QUANTITY OF CUBIC YARDS ON THE SITE TO 10,000 BECAUSE THEIR, UM, BUSINESS HAD EXPANDED TO SUCH A CAPACITY THAT IT FAR EXCEEDED WHAT WAS UNDER THE 2001 DECISION. SO THE STOP WORK ORDER, YOU KNOW, EVEN THOUGH THEY SAID THEY, WE SHUT THEIR BUSINESS DOWN, THE BUSINESS WAS SHUT DOWN BY THEMSELVES BECAUSE THEY SO FAR EXCEEDED THE CONDITIONS OF THE SPECIAL USE PERMIT. THAT THE, THE BUILDING INSPECTOR HAS NO AUTHORITY TO EXPAND OR ALLOW TO CONTINUE. AND THAT'S WHY I THINK MY UNDERSTANDING IS THAT THAT'S THEN WHEN THE ZONING BOARD COMES INTO PLAY AND SAY, WELL, THE CONDITIONS OF 2001 OR 2002, THERE'S NO WAY THAT CAN BE MET. AND SO THEREFORE, IF WE'RE GOING TO RENEW, UM, THEIR REQUEST FOR, UH, A A A ZONING SPECIAL PERMIT. SPECIAL PERMIT, THANK YOU. YEAH. YEAH. UM, THE CONDITIONS HAVE TO BE SERIOUSLY LOOKED AT. RIGHT. AND THEN DETERMINE WHAT CAN BE DONE OR WHAT CAN'T BE DONE. RIGHT. YEAH. WE, I THINK WE'RE MIXING THE TWO ISSUES TOGETHER. I THINK IT'S A IS WHAT'S GETTING CONFUSED. I'M AGREEMENT WITH THAT. AND I THINK BOTH, UH, ED AND OUR, OUR TOWN ATTORNEY WILL HAVE TO HELP US TO UNDERSTAND IF WE ARE CORRECTLY INTERPRETING THIS. AND WE MAY YOU BE JUST RUNNING AROUND IN CIRCLES NEEDLESSLY. TH TH THIS IS A [00:35:01] NARROW LEGAL ISSUE ABOUT AUTHORITY. IS MY APPEAL THE ISSUE OF WHETHER THE SPECIAL PERMIT CAN BE RENEWED IN WHAT CONDITIONS ARE? THAT'S THE ONE YOU'LL BE, YOU DISCUSSED LAST WEEK AND WE'LL BE DELIBERATING FIRST DOCUMENT. THAT'S CORRECT. MINE IS A VERY, VERY, VERY NARROW LEGAL ISSUE ABOUT AUTHORITY. THAT'S IT. NOT ABOUT WHETHER THERE'S A VIOLATION IN THE PAST, NOT ABOUT WHAT THE NEW CONDITIONS WOULD BE, WHICH IS WHAT, WHAT THE OTHER APPLICATION IS FOR. SO I CAN JUST, DO WE AGREE THAT THIS ISN'T, UH, AN ISSUE OF WHO ARE YOU ASKING AUTHORITY? I'M, I'M SORRY, I'M LOOKING AT YOU. BUT I MEAN, IS THE BOARD LOOKING AT THIS AS JUST A VERY NARROW, UM, ISSUE OF AUTHORITY? IT WASN'T PRESENTED THAT WAY. SO I CAN'T SAY YES TO THAT. I THINK FOR, OKAY. SO I THINK FOR CASE 21, THAT'S WHAT THEY'RE ASKING US TO DO. DOES THE BUILDING INSPECTOR NO. AND THAT'S THE 22. SORRY. 20. YEAH, SORRY. WRONG CASE. I WAS GONNA MAKE THAT CLARIFICATION, UH, EARLIER. 'CAUSE IN YOUR ORIGINAL, INTO THE MIC, INTO YOUR ORIGINAL, UM, DISCOURSE, YOU DID INDICATE TO HOLD 21 FOR THIS REASON. BUT I THINK YOU REALLY MEANT TO SAY 22. I MEANT 22. IF I SAID 21, I WAS MISTAKEN. 22 SHOULD BE HELD RIGHT. I'M SORRY. UM, ELIZABETH, I JUST WANT TO READ THE FIRST PART OF 110 STOP WORK ORDERS IN THE TOWN CODE AUTHORITY TO ISSUE. THAT'S THE FIRST SENTENCE. CODE ENFORCEMENT OFFICERS ARE AUTHORIZED TO ISSUE STOP WORK ORDERS PURSUANT TO THIS SECTION WORK THAT IS NOT COMPLIANCE WITH THE TOWN CODE OF THE TOWN OF GREENBERG OR CONDITIONS SET FORTH IN PLANNING OR ZONING BOARD OF APPEALS DECISIONS. AND TO CLARIFY, WE'RE NOT LOOKING FOR A DETERMINATION IN 22 BEFORE 21. WE'RE LOOKING AT ISSUANCE OF FAULT DECISIONS AT THE SAME TIME, WHICH WOULD THEN NOT SEIZE OPERATIONS. JUST WANT TO MAKE THAT CLEAR IF IT WASN'T CLEAR ALREADY. UM, BUT THE BUILDING INSPECTOR IS ASKING US TO CLARIFY THAT THEY HAVE THE AUTHORITY TO DO THIS TYPE OF ACTION. ALRIGHT? YES. NO, NO. I'M GETTING A NOD. YES. NO, THE APPLICANT IS RAISING AN ISSUE. THE BUILDING INSPECTOR IS NOT ASKING FOR DETERMINATION. WE ULTIMATELY ASKED, MADE THE APPEAL. I HEAR WHAT YOU'RE SAYING. YES. WE APPEALED. UH, THE PERMIT ISSUE IS BEING ADDRESSED IN THE OTHER ONE. WE THINK IF YOU MAKE A DECISION ON THAT, WE DON'T NEED AN A DECISION HERE. BUT THEY WANT A DECISION HERE NO MATTER WHAT. CORRECT. BASICALLY. CORRECT. OKAY. THANK YOU. HOPE, HOPE THAT CLARIFIED. I THINK THAT'S IT. I JUST WANNA MAKE SURE EVERYONE HAS HAD THEIR SAY. ARE WE GOOD? YES. BECAUSE YOU INITIALLY ASKED IF ANYONE ON THE BOARD HAD ANYTHING ELSE TO SAY. YOU DIDN'T EXPECT THIS TO GO ON FOR ANOTHER I DID NOT. YOU DID. YOU DID. I DID. I DIDN'T EITHER. YOU DID. OKAY. BUT I THINK IT HELPED ME TO BETTER UNDERSTAND WHAT'S GOING ON HERE. THANK YOU. SO THANK YOU. THANK YOU. THANK YOU MADAM CHAIR. THANK YOU. ALL RIGHT. SO WE WILL MOVE FORWARD. THANK YOU. I'VE GOTTA FIND MY AGENDA. 24 DASH 31 THOMAS H. STERN PRIMROSE. YES. 19 PRIMROSE STERN. THERE WE GO. GOOD EVENING. MY NAME'S TONY ANO. I'VE BEEN, UH, HIRED BY THE CATOS WHO ARE ENTITLED TO THIS PROPERTY. UM, I HAVE A FEW THINGS TO SAY. UM, JUST TO SORT OF PUT THIS IN CONTEXT. SO MY CLIENT BOUGHT THIS PROPERTY WITH THE DRIVEWAY THAT'S AS IT IS NOW. UM, I SAW PICTURES OF THIS BUILDING IN THE LAST FEW DAYS. WHAT THEY ACTUALLY PURCHASED, IT LOOKED CONDEMNABLE TO ME. UM, THEY'VE RENOVATED THE BUILDING. THEY'VE HAD DOWNSPOUTS GO INTO THE GROUND. AND WHEN I FIRST, IT'S MAYBE SIX WEEKS AGO, I FIRST MET WITH THEM. AN ATTORNEY RECOMMENDED THEM TO ME. I'M A REAL ESTATE DEVELOPMENT ATTORNEY. I'VE DEVELOPED HUNDREDS OF RESIDENTIAL LOTS, CINEMA'S, OFFICE WAREHOUSE. AND THIS IS A DRIVEWAY. SO WE'RE IN VIOLATION. SO I TALKED TO MS. GARRITY EARLY ON AND I SAID, I'VE NEVER HEARD OF A CO FOR A DRIVEWAY. AND MY CLIENTS BOUGHT THIS. IT WAS BILLED BY SOMEONE ELSE AND IT HAD HAD A CO SHE ENLIGHTENED ME AND SAID, THERE'S A LAW THAT SAYS YOU HAVE TO HAVE A SIDE. YOU CAN'T HAVE A DRIVEWAY IN THE SIDE YARD. I SAID, THANK YOU. I INSTANTANEOUSLY FELT LIKE THERE WAS GOING TO BE MANY MORE OF THESE. AND SO NOW THERE ARE 10 OR 11 PEOPLE IN THIS 28 UNIT [00:40:01] SUBDIVISION, ALMOST HALF THE SUBDIVISION THAT'S BROING ZERO SETBACKS. SO I TALKED TO MR. LIEBERMAN ABOUT THE IDEA THAT YOUR BOARD MIGHT JUST GRANT THIS, THIS VARIANCE REQUEST AND LET IT GO. AND MY CLIENTS CAME HERE A FEW TIMES AND THERE'S BEEN INTERACTION BETWEEN MY CLIENT AND THE NEIGHBORS. AND IT'S BEEN UPSETTING EVERYONE AND I, AND I KNOW THE CURRENT SITUATION THERE. NOW, LIZ HAS GONE INTO THE RECORDS AND SHE'S VIOLATED 11 OTHER 10 OTHER PROPERTY OWNERS. THEY'RE ALL GONNA, AND I TALKED TO MR. LIEBERMAN TODAY, HE SAID THAT YOUR BOARD MAY ADJOURN THIS BE UNTIL YOU HEAR THOSE OTHER VARIANCE APPLICATIONS. NOW MY CLIENTS, I DON'T KNOW HOW WELL OFF THEY ARE, I HARDLY KNOW THEM, BUT THEY'RE NICE. I'VE MET THEM ONCE AND LENGTH. THEY HAPPEN TO HAVE THE WHEREWITHAL TO HIRE ME. THEY HIRED AN ARCHITECT. WE GAVE YOU A PLAN, BUT I CAN ALMOST GUARANTEE THAT ALL THE, AND THEN THERE'S FIVE TO $10,000 TO MOVE THESE DRIVEWAYS. I TOLD ED THAT. I THOUGHT IT WOULD MAKE MORE SENSE. THIS IS JUST A DRIVEWAY. IT'S HARDLY MUCH TO GET THAT UPSET ABOUT, I'M SORRY, WHO'S ED? LIEBERMAN. OKAY. SORRY. THANK YOU. WHO'S SORRY. UM, THAT IT WOULD SEEM THAT YOUR BOARD COULD COME UP WITH AN INTERPRETATION OR IF NEED BE YOUR BOARD COULD HAVE ONE OF YOUR STAFF GO TO THE TOWN BOARD AND SAY, LOOK, YEARS AGO WE GAVE COS ON ALL THESE LOT HOUSES WITH DRIVEWAYS THAT ARE IN VIOLATION OF THIS LAW. IT WAS SORT OF A MISTAKE. IT WAS AN OVERSIGHT BECAUSE YOU CAN, MY CLIENTS ARE GONNA SAY THEY WERE GOING TO LIVE THERE. THEY'RE NOT ANYMORE. THEY WERE GOING TO LET THEIR DAUGHTER LIVE THERE. SHE GOT MARRIED SATURDAY NIGHT, SHE'S NOT LIVING THERE. SO THEY'RE MOST LIKELY GONNA RENT THIS PROPERTY. SO IF IT HAS A DRIVEWAY TO THE REAR, THEY'LL BE SATISFIED. BUT JUST FOR YOUR ED SAID YOU WERE GONNA ADJOURN THIS, WHICH IS FINE BY MY CLIENT, UM, UNTIL YOU HEARD THE OTHER CASES. I DON'T KNOW HOW THOSE OTHER PEOPLE ARE REACTING. BUT YOU'RE GONNA HAVE THIS, IT'S GONNA BE THE SAME CASE, THE SAME CASE ONE AFTER THE OTHER AFTER THE OTHER. I DON'T KNOW WHY YOU WOULDN'T SAVE ALL THE PAIN AND ANGUISH AND JUST COME UP WITH AN EDIC SAYING DRIVEWAYS INSIDE YARDS IN THIS SUB, MAKE A DISTINCTION BETWEEN EXISTING DRIVEWAYS AND PROSPECTIVE NEW DRIVEWAYS AND JUST BE DONE WITH IT. UM, THAT'S SORT OF MY OVERARCHING KIND OF APPROACH BECAUSE I CAN'T QUITE GET MY HEAD AROUND THE IMPACTS OF A AT GRADE FLAT DRIVEWAY IS SORT OF GETTING PEOPLE UPSET. AND I ACTUALLY, I'D ALMOST LIKE TO APOLOGIZE TO ALL THE OTHER PEOPLE. WE HAD TO, YOU KNOW, VIOLATE TO GET SORT OF AN EQUAL APPLICATION OF THE LAW. BECAUSE I DON'T KNOW WHY, I DON'T KNOW HOW THIS HAPPENED. I MEAN, I, I KNOW HOW IT HAPPENED. I DON'T KNOW. WELL, WELL LET ME HELP YOU. I MEAN, I APPRECIATE YOUR ENERGY IN WHAT YOU'RE SAYING TO FACILITATE THIS TO MOVE FORWARD. BUT FIRST AND FOREMOST, THIS IS AN APPELLATE BOARD. WE DON'T SET THE ZONING CODE. YEP. AND EXACTLY WHAT YOU'RE SAYING IS EXACTLY WHAT WE DID PRESENT TO YOUR CLIENT INITIALLY, HOW NOT TO CREATE SET PRECEDENT THAT WOULD THEN CREATE A WATERSHED. SO THE RAMIFICATION THEREOF WHERE WE ARE NOW IS DIRECTLY BECAUSE OF NOT BEING ABLE TO FIND A REMEDY THAT DID SET THIS CASE ASIDE FROM ALL THE OTHERS. SO IN FACT, BY BRINGING THIS, THEY'RE THEY'RE ALL THE SAME. EXACTLY. BECAUSE THE FACT THAT THEY HAVE VIOLATED THE CODE, WE DON'T SET THE CODE RIGHT. WE ARE MERELY AN APPELLATE BOARD, WHICH THEN REVIEWS SET CASES. SO AS YOU SAID, EACH INDIVIDUAL WILL HAVE TO COME ON THEIR OWN. AND, AND, AND IF THAT'S THE WAY YOU WANT, THAT'S FINE. THAT'S YOUR, THAT'S YOUR BUSINESS. YOU CAN, YOU, YOU'RE GONNA GET PEOPLE COMING IN HERE NOT HAPPY AS THEY HAVE A RIGHT TO, AND THAT'S FINE. SO WE'VE SUBMITTED A PLAN. I I THINK YOU CAN APPROVE THE, THE DRIVEWAY AS IT IS. I DON'T SEE ANY IMPACT YOU'RE MITIGATING IF YOU LOOK AT THE FIVE STANDARDS THAT YOU HAVE TO REALLY GO BY. RIGHT. IS IT GONNA REALLY CHANGE THE CHARACTER OF THIS, OF THIS COMMUNITY? IF YOU MODIFY THIS DRIVEWAY LAYOUT? IS THERE SOME OTHER METHOD TO ACHIEVE THIS? WE'VE SUBMITTED TO YOU A PLAN. WE KEEP THE TURNING POINT IN THE REAR BECAUSE WE HAVE TO GET BACK TO THE GARAGE. AND WE'VE TAKE, WE'VE TAKEN UP THE OLD MACADAM WHEN THE DRIVEWAY USED TO BE IN THE FRONT. SO WE BETTER THE SITUATION. WE DON'T THINK THE VARIANCE IS THAT SUBSTANTIAL. [00:45:02] IT DOESN'T AFFECT ANY OF THE PHYSICAL ENVIRONMENT AREAS. AND IT'S NOT SELF CREATED. WE BOUGHT IT. SO IT'S HARD TO ALMOST APPLY THESE TO THIS, TO THIS CASE. BUT, BUT WE HAVE, SO WE THINK YOU COULD APPROVE IT WHERE IT IS OR YOU COULD APPROVE IT IN THE, AS PER THE PLAN WE GAVE YOU. YES. NO, I DON'T, I YOU LOOK LIKE YOU WANNA SAY SOMETHING TO MISS. SORRY, I HAVE, I HAVE A NUMBER OF QUESTIONS. GO AHEAD. OKAY. FIRST, IN MY MIND, WE SET HOW WE DO OUR JOB AND THIS IS THE ONE THAT'S BEEN IN FRONT OF US AND WE WILL DEAL WITH IT. OKAY. UM, I, MY, A COUPLE OF MY QUESTIONS, UM, ON THIS PLAN, WHICH I IS NOT PARTICULARLY CLEAR TO ME, AND I DON'T KNOW IF YOU CAN BRING IT UP, BUT TO THE LEFT OF THE RED LINE WHERE YOU SAY A FENCE IS GOING UP. LET ME START WITH THAT. WHAT KIND OF FENCE IS THAT GONNA BE? A FENCE THAT WILL BLOCK THE WATER. THE, SOME TOTAL OF MY QUESTIONS IS THAT THERE IS A PROBLEM WITH WATER RUNOFF. WE DON'T THINK SO. WE WANNA KNOW HOW WATER MITIGATION IS GOING TO, I WANNA SEE FROM MY VIEWPOINT, WHAT STEPS HAVE BEEN TAKEN TO MITIGATE THE ADDITIONAL RUNOFF BY THIS IMPERVIOUS SURFACE. WHAT ADDITIONAL RUNOFF? THE DRIVEWAY'S BEEN THERE FOREVER. IT IS OUR JOB TO LOOK AT EACH APPLICATION AS THOUGH IT WERE BRAND NEW. AND WE CANNOT TAKE INTO ACCOUNT THAT AN ILL LEGAL USE WAS BEING DONE. WE HAVE TO LOOK AT THIS AS THOUGH IT IS BEING TAKE A BRAND NEW LEGAL REQUEST. OKAY. FAIR ENOUGH. WE CANNOT SAY, OH, WELL THIS IS WHAT'S BEEN ILLEGAL ALL THESE YEARS AND LET'S JUST DEAL WITH THAT. THAT'S NOT HOW WE'RE ALLOWED TO LOOK AT THIS. SO THE CURRENT CONDITION IS CAUSING RUNOFF. WE HAVE DOWNSPOUTS OFF THE NEW BUILDING THAT ARE IN THE GROUND. I DON'T, I DON'T SEE THE PROOF OF THAT. SO MY QUESTION IS, IS VERY CLEARLY, I I SAW THE TWO DIFFERENT SETS OF SETS OF DOWNSPOUTS AND THAT THE DOWNSPOUTS BEING AIMED AWAY FROM THE HOUSE HAS BEEN CORRECTED AND NOW IT'S GOING DOWN. THERE WAS NO ADDITIONAL INFORMATION AS TO WHETHER THOSE WERE GOING INTO DRY WELLS OR NOT. THIS FENCE THAT'S UP HERE. WHAT I'M TRYING TO UNDERSTAND, IS THIS A DRY, A FENCE THAT WILL HELP STOP WATER? NO. FROM GOING, OKAY. ARE THERE ANY DRY WELLS? ARE THERE ANY SUM PUMPS? IS THERE ANYTHING THAT HAS BEEN DONE TO HELP A SITUATION THAT HAS BEEN IDENTIFIED? WE HAVE A LETTER, YOU, YOU HAVE A LETTER FROM US FROM THE PRIOR OWNER SAYING THERE'S NEVER BEEN ANY RUNOFF ONTO THAT PROPERTY. WE ALSO HAVE LETTERS SAYING THE PRIOR OWNER HASN'T BEEN THERE IN DECADES. BUT WATER PATTERNS TEND TO STAY THE SAME OVER TIME. UH, SIR, I, I REALLY TEND NOT TO AGREE WITH THAT. AND I DON'T THINK A LOT OF PEOPLE IN FLOOD ZONES DURING THE WAY STORMS HAVE BEEN CHANGING IN THIS COUNTRY. FOR WHATEVER REASON, YOU CHOOSE TO BELIEVE. SO IF, IF YOU, IF YOU, IF YOU WANNA GET CONSULT FROM YOUR BILLING DEPARTMENT, IF YOU WANT TO TALK ABOUT A SWELL, YOU CAN. I DON'T SEE THE RUNOFF RIGHT NOW. AND WE'RE SUBMITTING TO YOU THAT THERE IS NO RUNOFF. SIR, I UNDERSTAND YOU'RE NEW TO ALL OF THIS. UH, I UNDERSTAND WE HAVE BEEN, WE, WE HAVE BEEN IN DISCUSSIONS AND A HEARINGS SINCE NOVEMBER. AND THE QUESTION THAT HAS, I HAVE CONSISTENTLY BROUGHT UP IS WHAT MITIGATION MEASURES ARE BEING INTRODUCED TO THIS. I SEE A REPAVING. UM, I SEE THE, THE ORIGINAL GARAGE BEING TAKEN IN AND BECOME PART OF THE HOUSE AND PART OF THAT ORIGINAL DRIVEWAY BEING REMOVED. BUT THERE SEEMED TO BE TWO DIFFERENT TYPES OF CROSSHATCHING ON THE PLAN. AND I DON'T KNOW, UM, IF ONE OF IT MEANS IT'S NOT PAVED, I IF IT, IF ALL OF IT IS PAVED. I'M TRYING TO UNDERSTAND THE WIDTH OF THE DRIVEWAY. UM, THAT LOOKS TO BE OVER. I DON'T KNOW. THERE'S NO MEASUREMENTS ON HERE. IT, IT'S THE, I HAVE TROUBLE WITH, I THINK THE IMPORT OF THIS PLAN IS THE RED LINE. WELL, THE, WHAT WE NEED IS A FULL PLAN. NO, BUT THE RED LINE SHOWS WHAT WE'RE TAKING UP OF THE EXISTING DRIVER. BUT I UNDER YEAH, I UNDERSTAND. 'CAUSE THAT'S GOING ALONG THE PROPERTY LINE. YOU'RE FIXING THE PROPERTY LINE. I GET THAT. [00:50:01] WELL, IT'S SEVERAL FEET, BUT YES. BUT, BUT THIS IS THE, THIS, THE PROPERTY LINES ARE OVER HERE AND THIS IS WHAT THEY'RE SORT OF TAKING. WAS THAT OKAY? I THOUGHT THAT WAS THE NEW PROPERTY. THAT WAS THE CORRECTED PROPERTY LINE. THAT'S THE STONE CURVING, THAT'S THE CORRECTED PROPERTY LINE. UM, BUT I'D LIKE TO UNDERSTAND THE WIDTH OF THIS DRIVEWAY. UH, THERE'S NO MEASUREMENTS ON HERE. THIS IS NOT CLEARLY, WE WERE ALSO TOLD THAT THE SPACE BEHIND THE GARAGE, IT'S EIGHT FEET WIDE. UM, SO HE SHOULD PHONE IN TO TRY TO BE A, UM, HE WAS ON THERE. HE GOT THE OFF YOU'RE NOT AT THE MICROPHONE. I'M SORRY. I CAN ONLY TALK TO THE PEOPLE AT THE MICROPHONE. UM, I, AGAIN, I'M TRYING TO FIGURE OUT WHAT MITIGATIONS AND YOU'RE SAYING THERE ARE NONE? CORRECT. OKAY. IF I, IF I MAY, THE EXISTING DOWNSPOUTS THAT WERE ON THE HOME BEFORE THE CATOS STARTED, THEIR REMODEL WERE DIRECTED ONTO THE DRIVEWAY. THE CATOS HAVE SINCE CORRECTED THAT. AND, UH, THE BOARD HAS PICTURES OF THAT SO THAT IF THERE WAS RUNOFF, UM, FROM ONE PROPERTY TO THE OTHER, THAT THE, THAT HAS BEEN ADDRESSED. THAT THE DOWNSPOUTS ARE NO LONGER DIRECTED TOWARDS NEIGHBORING PROPERTIES. DO WE HAVE ANY VERIFICATION THAT THE RUNOFF WAS PURELY FROM THE DOWNSPOUTS? WE'VE NEVER RECEIVED A COMPLAINT OF FLOODING, BUT IT'S, IF A DOWNSPOUT IS GOING ON TO AN IMPERVIOUS SURFACE, IT TYPICALLY RUNS ACROSS IT. WELL, I MEAN, I I I UNDERSTAND THAT THERE'S BEEN NO FORMAL PAPERWORK FILED. I DO ALSO UNDERSTAND THAT PEOPLE CAME TO THIS MEETING AND TESTIFIED UNDER OATH THAT THEY DO HAVE FLOODING. SO I I I NEED TO HONOR. NO, I, I UNDERSTOOD. BUT YOU, I DON'T THINK WE HAD UNDER OATH. UNDER OATH. OKAY. I KNOW THERE WAS SOMETHING ABOUT UNDER OATH BEING UNAPPLIED, BUT OKAY. I TAKE IT BACK THERE. NO, I JUST, I JUST WANTED TO CLARIFY THAT THE DOWNSPOUTS THAT WERE DIRECTED TOWARDS NEIGHBORING PROPERTIES HAVE BEEN RELOCATED. RIGHT. AND, BUT WE, BUT WE DON'T KNOW THOSE. THE ARCHITECT IS JOINING NOW. HE MAY BE ABLE TO CLARIFY SOME OF THE OKAY. BUT THEY AREN'T, LET ME JUST FINISH THAT. WE, THEY ARE NOT GOING INTO ANY DRY WELLS OR ANYTHING. WE DON'T HAVE INFORMATION ON THAT. I DON'T, WE DON'T KNOW WHAT THEY'RE GOING INTO. DO WE HAVE ANY IDEA HOW DEEP THEY'RE GOING DOWN THE, THE ARCHITECT CAN SPEAK TO THAT. OKAY, MR. ARCHITECT, IT'S YOUR TURN. UH, I SEE CAESAR'S JOINT. I BELIEVE THAT'S THE ARCHITECT. IF YOU CAN UNMUTE YOUR MIC, PLEASE JOIN US. THAT'S NOT THE PLAN WE HAVE IN FRONT OF US. OKAY. CAN YOU HEAR ME? AH, YES. SO THERE WAS NO PROVISION FOR WELLS FOR THE RUNOFF WATER TOWARD THE BACK OF PROPERTIES PROPERTY. WHAT DID HE SAY? THERE WAS NO PROVISION FOR NO DRYS. THERE ARE NO DRY WELLS. IS THAT WHAT YOU SAID? YES. ARE THERE ANY SUMP PUMPS? NO. ARE ARE THERE ANY STONE WALLS TO BLOCK AND REDIRECT WATER THAT MAY BE COMING FROM GOING FROM ONE PROPERTY TO THE OTHER? WELL, ORIGINALLY WE WORKED ON WITH THE, UH, BELGIUM BLOCKS, BUT THEN IN LIEU OF THAT, SOMEONE SUGGESTED A FENCE, A SIX FIVE FENCE. AND THAT'S WHAT WE'RE PROPOSING. NOW. DID YOU, I DIDN'T UNDERSTAND WHAT YOU SAID AT THE END, SIR. JUDGE, DID YOU REPEAT THAT? HE SAID THAT IT WAS PROPOSED DAMAGE TO A FENCE, PROPOSED TO GET BELGIAN BLOCKS TO THE WATER, BUT THEN SOMEONE SUGGESTED A SIX FOOT HIGH FENCE THAT WE'RE PROVIDING THAT INSTEAD OF THE BELGIAN BLOCKS. BUT WE'RE BEING TOLD THAT THE FENCE DOES NOT BLOCK WATER. IS THAT ACCURATE? OH, THEY BLOCK SOME WATER, BUT IT WON'T BE ANYTHING, YOU KNOW, THAT HASN'T BEEN HAPPENING FOR THE LAST 30 YEARS. WHAT IS THE FENCE PROPOSED TO BE BUILT OF? MAYBE THAT WILL HELP CLARIFY. I THINK AT THIS POINT THERE'S GONNA BE ONE OF THOSE, UM, YOU KNOW, UH, PVC FENCE WHITE PBC. HMM. AND WHY DID YOU GET RID OF THE IDEA OF THE BELGIAN BLOCK? I THOUGHT THAT, UH, NOBODY LIKED IT BECAUSE IT WASN'T GONNA CONTROL THE WATER AND IT WASN'T HIGH ENOUGH TO [00:55:01] OFFSET THE WATER RUN OFF. SO BY PUTTING THE FENCE IN, IT WOULD STAY WITHIN THE PROPERTY LINE AND GO DOWN TOWARDS THE BACK OF THE PROPERTY. THEN I HAVE ANOTHER QUESTION AS I LOOK AT THE, OKAY. THE CROSSHATCHING, AS WE SEE IT NOW DIRECTLY TO THE LEFT OF THE RED LINE, IS A NARROW CROSSHATCHING THAT IS DIFFERENT FROM ANOTHER PART OF IT. ARE THOSE TWO DIFFERENT TREATMENTS? NO, IT'S JUST, UH, THE WAY THAT THE GRAPHICS CAME OUT ON THE FENCE. OKAY. AND WHAT IS THE FULL WIDTH OF THE DRIVEWAY, UM, ADJACENT TO THE RED LINE? APPROXIMATELY, UH, NINE TO 10 FEET. SIMILAR TO WHAT THE REST OF THE DRIVEWAY WIDTH WOULD BE. BUT YOU DON'T KNOW THE EXACT MEASUREMENT? NO, I ACTUALLY GET IT FOR YOU. BUT IT'S, YOU KNOW, IT IS GONNA BE ENOUGH FOR A CAR TO DRIVE OFF AND BE ABLE TO PUT IT TO THE BACK AND PARK IT. IT SEEMS NARROWER THAN THE, THE AREA JUST, IT SEEMS WIDER. I'M SORRY, THAN THE AR AREA JUST BELOW THE RED LINE THAT IT WIDENS OUT AFTER THE CURVE. OKAY. YEAH. IT, I MEAN, BUT YOU KNOW, THE INTENT WAS JUST TO MAKE IT ALL THE SAME. UM, MAYBE GRAPHICALLY IT DIDN'T TURN OUT THAT WAY, BUT YES, IT SHOULD ALL BE THE SAME AS YOU WALKED HERE. YOU COME INTO THE DRIVEWAY FROM PRIMROSE AVENUE ALL THE WAY UP TO THE BACK OF THE PROPERTY. AND FINALLY, IF YOU LOOK ON THE VERY TOP WHERE IT SAYS MCCADA DRIVEWAY IN A DIAGONAL CROSS HATCH, RIGHT. THE, UM, THE LINE STRAIGHT ACROSS FROM THE TOP OF THE GARAGE WAS ORIGINALLY WE WERE TOLD WAS ALL GONNA BE THE MCADAM WOULD BE REMOVED. AND HERE I SEE IT EXTENDED FOR, I DON'T KNOW, THERE'S NO MEASUREMENTS I WOULD'VE SAY ON FIVE FEET. RIGHT. AND THAT WAS THE INTENT WAS TO BE ABLE TO BACK UP OUT OF THE GARAGE, YOU KNOW, WITHOUT HAVING TO HIT THE GRASS AS YOU'RE BACKING OUT OF THE, THE DRIVEWAY OR THE GARAGE WITH A SECOND CAR IN THERE. UM, SHANA? YEAH. CAN I INTERJECT? YEAH, PLEASE. UM, I, I, I WASN'T HERE LAST MONTH MM-HMM . UM, I THOUGHT THAT WE WERE PRETTY CLOSE TO COMING UP WITH A RECONCILIATION ON THIS CASE, UM, WITH SOME DETAILS AS TO WHAT WOULD BE DONE TO HELP RECTIFY THE SITUATION. UM, THIS DRAWING, ISN'T IT, FRANKLY, UM, IT, IT DOESN'T ANSWER THE QUESTIONS THAT SHAUNA IS BASICALLY, UM, UH, ASKING AND, AND SHE'S ASKING VERY NICELY . UM, THERE, THERE'S NO WAY THAT WE COULD PRESENT THIS ON RECORD THAT WOULD HELP US TO, UM, IDENTIFY WHAT THE PROBLEM WAS, WHAT THE RECONCILIATION WAS GOING TO BE, UM, SO THAT WE CAN THEN SAY, UH, YES TO THIS APPLICANT. WELL, WE'VE BEEN VIOLATED FOR HAVING A DRIVEWAY THAT'S IN THE SIDE YARD SETBACK. YOU'VE ASKED US TO MODIFY IT AND WE'VE PROVIDED ON THIS PLAN WHAT WE BELIEVE IS THE MAXIMUM WE CAN GIVE BEFORE IT STARTS TO AFFECT THE PROPERTY AND THE ANGLES AND THE ACCESS TO THE REAR DRIVEWAY. YOU, YOU UNDERSTAND OF COURSE, THAT WE SEE MANY DRAWINGS FROM DIFFERENT APPLICA APPLICATIONS. SO DO I, UM, THAT GIVE A LOT MORE DETAIL THAN THIS DOES? WELL, WHY DON'T WE JUST TALK, WHAT WOULD YOU LIKE THIS? I MEAN, THIS IS A VERY, IT'S A DRIVEWAY TO THE GARAGE. THERE'S ONLY SO MANY FEET AND INCHES THIS THING CAN MOVE. WELL, VERY SIMPLY, I'LL GIVE YOU ONE OF THE RECOMMENDATIONS THAT WE MADE. YEAH. SO HE MAY ACTUALLY BE YOU MORE SUCCINCT THAN I WAS. YOU, YOU, YOU KIND OF MET SOME OF IT, YOU JUST DIDN'T GO ALL AWAY. GO AHEAD. SO ONE OF THE THINGS THAT WAS ASKED OR SUGGESTED WAS TO MOVE AS FAR AWAY FROM THE PROPERTY LINE AS POSSIBLE. RIGHT? SO YOU LOOK AT THE ARCHED OUT AREA TO THE LEFT OF THE RED LINE. MM-HMM . THAT IS WHERE THE EXISTING DRIVEWAY CURVED OUT. AND IT WAS INFER IT WAS, UM, GRASS WE HAD SUGGESTED MAYBE TAKE UP THAT SPACE ALTOGETHER TOWARDS THE HOME. THIS WAY YOU COULD OFFSET BEING ON THE LINE ALTOGETHER. [01:00:01] SO YOU KIND OF HAVE DONE IN WHAT SEAN IS, UH, MY, UM, COLLEAGUE IS ASKING IS THAT IN FACT YOU DID TAKE PART OF SUGGESTION BUT ACTUALLY WIDEN THE DRIVEWAY VERSUS MOVING IT OVER INTO THAT SPACE. SO THERE ARE THINGS, IN OUR OPINION, OUR OPINION THAT CAN BE DONE TO HELP THIS APPLICATION. YOU'RE ALSO ASKING US AT THIS TIME TO VOTE ON SOMETHING THAT WE DON'T EVEN KNOW THE EXACT DIMENSIONS OF. SO THERE WOULD BE SOME THINGS THAT WE WOULD DEFINITELY NEED TO SEE TO BE ABLE TO WRITE THIS UP IN A WAY THAT WOULD MAKE SOME TYPE OF SENSE. SO WE ALSO GO AHEAD. UM, BEHIND THE SCENES, HE'S GONNA LOOK AT ME HAD HOW, HAD OUR HANDS SLAPPED BY EVEN GOING SO FAR AS TO MAKE THOSE SUGGESTIONS AND THEREFORE IT'S UP TO THE APPLICANT TO TAKE WHAT WE SAID AND TURN IT INTO SOMETHING THAT WE CAN APPROVE. SO IT SEEMS OR DENY, YEAH, NO. SO IT SEEMS TO ME THAT IT'S, IT'S THE QUALITY OF THIS GRAPHIC THAT'S CAUSING SOME CONSTERNATION. NO, SIR. OKAY. TELL ME IT IS THE LACK OF INFORMATION. WELL, I WOULD SUGGEST DIFFERENT PHRASE, THE GUY WHO DRAFT IT'S ON THE PHONE, TALK TO HIM. I WOULD MAKE A SUGGESTION TO YOU GO AHEAD AND YOU, YOU SAY YOU'RE NEW TO THIS. UM, I WOULD SUGGEST THAT YOU MAYBE LISTEN TO THE, GO WATCH THE OLD MEETINGS, THE THE PREVIOUS MEETINGS THAT BEEN HELD ON THIS AND SEE THE ISSUES THAT HAVE BEEN RAISED. AND, UM, I THINK I, THE THREE OF US HAVE RAISED PRETTY MUCH WHAT THE ISSUES ARE. WE ARE NOT HERE TO TELL AN APPLICANT WHAT TO DO. NO. WE TOLD YOU WHAT WE'D LIKE TO DO. WE TOLD YOU WHAT WE'D LIKE TO DO, PLEASE ONE AT A TIME SO WE CAN GET THIS ON THE RECORD. OKAY. OKAY. WHO WANTS TO TALK? NOT YOU. I KNOW. SO, SO, SO IT IS UP TO THE APPLICANT TO PRESENT A COMPELLING ARGUMENT BASED UPON THE COMMENTS THEY HAVE HEARD AT EARLIER MEETINGS. BUT THIS, AND IT IS NOT FOR US TO MAKE YOUR ARGUMENT OR TO TELL YOU HOW TO MAKE YOUR ARGUMENT OR YOUR CASE. IT IS FOR YOU AND YOUR CLIENTS, AND I THINK WE'VE MADE OUR POINTS PRETTY CLEAR TONIGHT ON WHAT IT IS WE'RE LOOKING FOR. UH, WHAT BOTHERS ME IS THAT WE KNOW THAT IF WE HAVE TO ASK FOR MORE INFORMATION, THAT MEANS ANOTHER MONTH HAS TO GO BY. AND I WAS KIND OF HOPING THAT WE WOULD BE CLOSE TO COMING TO A DECISION. ME TOO. UM, AND IT, IT REALLY HURTS ME TO SAY THAT WE'RE NOT THERE YET. SO WE, LET'S, LET'S TAKE YOUR COUNSEL'S ADVICE. WE'LL ADJOURN THIS TILL YOU HEAR THE OTHER 11, AND THEN WE'LL SEE HOW IT ALL PLAYS OUT AND WE'LL COME BACK IN WITH OUR PROPOSAL AND YOU COULD APPROVE IT OR DENY IT. SO, SO ONE THING I WOULD LIKE TO SAY IS LIKE, THERE'S A LETTER FROM THE, FROM US ON DECEMBER 27TH WITH FOUR THINGS TO CONSIDER. OKAY. THERE IS THE ORIGINAL PLANS WE GOT IN SEPTEMBER, AND THEN THE ONES, WE GOT SOME POINT THIS WEEK, I THINK YESTERDAY. YESTERDAY. OKAY. THIS DOESN'T ADDRESS THE DECEMBER LETTER. SO IF YOU LOOK AT ALL THOSE THREE THINGS BEING NEW TO THIS, I THINK THAT THAT WOULD HELP YOU. COULD YOU, WITH WHAT WE WERE LOOKING FOR, COULD YOU EITHER GIMME THAT LETTER OR READ ME THOSE FOUR THINGS AND THEN WE COULD CLOSE THOSE OUT? WE'RE NOT READING THEM ON. NO. I'M HAPPY. IF YOU WANT TO COME AND TAKE MY COPY OF THE LETTER, YOU CAN HAVE IT . OKAY. SO ONE EXAMPLE IS WE SUGGESTED MOVING IT CLOSER TO THE HOUSE, BUT IT WAS MOVED CLOSER TO THE HOUSE, BUT MADE WIDER. OKAY. THE WHOLE POINT OF MOVING IT CLOSER TO THE HOUSE WAS TO GET IT FURTHER AWAY FROM THE SIDE OF THE PROPERTY. SO THAT, SO I THINK IF YOU LOOK AT THOSE THREE THINGS, YOU COULD SEE, YOU KNOW, WHAT WE ARE GETTING AT, WHAT WE WOULD NEED TO MOVE FORWARD. SO MY CLIENT, LET ME ASK A QUESTION. YES, MA'AM. WHERE ARE THE AIR CONDITIONERS? I MEAN, I, WE SEE THEM IN THE PICTURES, BUT IS IT SOMETHING THAT PROHIBITS THE DRIVEWAY FROM BEING MOVED? I MEAN, AND, AND THERE'S A CONCRETE WALKWAY AND YOUR DRIVEWAY IS THERE AND THERE'S A CONCRETE WALKWAY ADJACENT TO A DRIVEWAY. DO YOU NEED BOTH? [01:05:02] I I, THERE THERE ARE THINGS THAT WE HAVE TALKED ABOUT THAT YOU ARE UNAWARE OF, BUT IT WAS YOUR CO YOU AND YOUR CLIENT'S OBLIGATION TO BRING YOU UP TO SPEED BEFORE YOU CAME TO US TONIGHT. SO JUST ON A SAFETY LEVEL, 'CAUSE MY CLIENT'S TALKING ABOUT SAFETY OF THE DRIVING AND ATTORNEY RADIUS. HOW CLOSE DO WE HAVE THE DRIVEWAY TO THE CORNER OF THE BUILDING? JUST BECAUSE I HEARD WHAT YOU JUST SAID AND IT MAKES SENSE TO ME. YOU DON'T, YOU COULD WALK IN THE DRIVEWAY. THIS IS SHOULD BE JUST PEOPLE LIVING THERE. IT MAKES SENSE. THAT SHOULD BE THE RESPONSIBILITY OF THE ARCHITECT. RIGHT. AND SO THAT CAN HELP YOU WITH HOW YOU OPENED UP, WHERE YOU WERE TRYING TO HELP US. SO LET ME HELP YOU GO AHEAD AGAIN. ONE OF THOSE FACTORS THAT YOU NEEDED TO REVIEW WOULD, IS THIS DI MINIMIS IN TERMS OF THE ASK MM-HMM . SO WE WERE GIVING YOU SUGGESTIONS THAT WOULD HELP US WRITE THIS IN A WAY THAT WOULD SET THIS APPLICANT APART AS OPPOSED TO BEING A PART OF 11 OTHER NEIGHBORS THAT MAY HAVE TO COME BEFORE THE BOARD AT A FUTURE DATE BECAUSE OUR HOUSE IS CLOSER TO THE DRIVEWAY THAN THE OTHER HOUSES. NO, BECAUSE NOW YOU HAVE NO, WE DON'T KNOW. RIGHT, RIGHT. NOW WE KNOW THIS HOUSE HAS A, HAS A WATER PROP, WATER ISSUE. WHETHER YOU AGREE WITH THAT, I'M GONNA OR NOT, I'M GONNA RIGHT. YOU THINK THERE'S LOOKING, YOU THINK THERES A WATER REMEDIATION? WATER REMEDIATION, AND WE'RE LOOKING YES. MOSTLY WATER REMEDIATION. SO WE SHOULD DO A WHOLE DRAINAGE STUDY FOR THE SUBDIVISION. WHAT, WHAT, WHAT, WHAT'S THE EXTENT OF THIS REMEDIATION? THIS WE ARE ONLY LOOKING AN EXISTING DRIVEWAY AT THIS. THIS IS ABOUT THIS REQUEST TO ADD IMPERVIOUS SURFACE TO THIS LOCATION. ARE WE ADDING IMPERVIOUS SURFACE? SO, SO I, I THINK AT THIS POINT, UM, WE CAN ANSWER A LOT OF THESE QUESTIONS IN AN UPDATED LETTER FROM THE BOARD. RIGHT? I DON'T THINK THAT THIS IS PRODUCTIVE, RIGHT? IT ISN'T. NO, IT'S NOT. ADJOURN. ANYONE IN THE AUDIENCE WANT TO ADD ANYTHING TO WHAT'S BEING SAID THIS EVENING? MY NAME IS STU STEWART ZAMAN. I LIVE AT AND OWN 17 PRIMROSE AVENUE WEST, WHICH IS RIGHT NEXT DOOR TO 19 PRIMROSE AVENUE. I'VE LIVED THERE FOR OVER 50 YEARS. I'VE BEEN A MEMBER OF THE COMMUNITY FOR OVER 60 YEARS. UM, I'VE SPOKEN AT TWO PREVIOUS MEETINGS. UM, I THINK I'VE SPOKEN RESPECTFULLY AND, UM, ACTUALLY MADE RECOMMENDATIONS THAT COULD VERY EASILY RESOLVE THIS ISSUE. UM, IN THE PACKET THAT I GAVE YOU TODAY ARE SOME PHOTOGRAPHS. I TOOK THOSE PHOTOGRAPHS OVER A PERIOD OF TIME, INCLUDING TWO PHOTOGRAPHS YESTERDAY. WHEN I TOOK THOSE PHOTOGRAPHS, I WALKED OVER TO MR. UH, TO, EXCUSE ME, 21 FROM ROSE AVENUE. STOOD ON THEIR DRIVEWAY AND, AND TOOK A COUPLE PICTURES. WHEN I FINISHED TAKING THOSE PICTURES, MR. CATO GOT OUT OF HIS CAR, CAME UP TO ME AND STAYED EIGHT. I JUST WANT TO YES. CAN WE KEEP THE COMMENTS TO JUST THE DRIVEWAY WHERE THIS IS ALL ABOUT THE DRIVEWAY. THIS IS ABOUT THE DRIVEWAY. YOU GOTTA STOP WITH THE BACK AND FORTH. THIS, THIS IS THE, THIS IS ABOUT THE DRIVEWAY. OKAY. I DON'T THINK WE WANNA KNOW WHAT HE SAID OR WHAT DID YOU SAID. ALL I AM SAYING IS THAT, THAT I WANNA KNOW WHAT, AND MR. I WANNA KNOW WHAT YOU OBSERVED ABOUT THE DRIVEWAY OKAY. THAT WE HAVE NOT BEEN AWARE OF. OKAY. NUMBER ONE IS, UH, THE ATTORNEY THAT JUST SPOKE AND THE ARCHITECT THAT JUST SPOKE, STATED THAT THE DRIVEWAY WAS, UH, APPROXIMATELY EIGHT FOOT WIDE. IF YOU LOOK AT THE ORIGINAL DRAWING I GARAGE, I THOUGHT HE SAID EIGHT TO 10 OR NINE. IF YOU, IF YOU, IF YOU LOOK AT THE DRAWINGS, THE ORIGINAL DRAWINGS THAT THEY, THAT THEY PROVIDED, YOU CAN SEE AT THE BACK CORNER OF THE, THE NEW, UH, OF THE ADDITION THAT THE, UH, DRIVEWAY, THAT THE, UH, DRIVEWAY WIDTH IS, UH, APPROXIMATELY 12 FOOT 12 AND A QUARTER FEET, NOT EIGHT FOOT, NOT 10 FEET AT THE FRONT OF THE DRIVEWAY. THE MEASUREMENTS SHOW, I THINK, 15 FOOT AND CHANGE. A SIMPLE RESOLUTION TO THIS WHOLE ISSUE, WHICH WE RESPECTFULLY REQUESTED, WAS TO BE ABLE TO CUT BACK THE DRIVEWAY INSTEAD OF GIVING A ZERO SETBACK TO GIVE A THREE FOOT SETBACK OR SOMETHING WHERE THERE WAS OUS GROUND WHERE WATER COULD BE ABSORBED INTO THE GROUND INSTEAD OF RUNNING INTO MR. SPIN'S OR INTO 21 PRIMROSE AVENUE BACKYARD. AND MORE SPECIFICALLY RIGHT INTO SO, SO OUTTA DEFERENCE OF TIME. THAT'S EXACTLY WHAT I JUST SAID. OKAY. OKAY. THAT, THAT'S VERBATIM WHAT I JUST SAID. OKAY. SO, SO THE, THE FACT OF THE MATTER IS, IF YOU LOOK AT THAT DRAWING UP THERE, UH, THEY CAN EXPAND THAT DRIVEWAY AND WE WILL SEND THAT, WE WILL SEND THAT TO [01:10:01] THEM IN A NOTE TOWARDS THE HOUSE. AND, UH, THE FACT OF THE MATTER IS, UH, IF YOU LOOK AT THE, UH, PHOTOGRAPHS THAT I SENT, UH, IF YOU TAKE A LOOK AT THE FIRST PHOTOGRAPH, THIS PHOTOGRAPH SHOWS THAT ADDITION, WHICH HAS BEEN THERE FOREVER. WE HAVEN'T REALLY BEEN ABLE TO SEE IT THIS BADLY UNTIL THEY TOOK DOWN ABOUT EIGHT TREES OUTTA THE BACKYARD, WHICH THEY HAD TO DO. BUT NOW I HAVE THIS EYESORE THAT I CAN VIEW FROM MY DECK, THE SECOND PHOTOGRAPH FROM MY DINING ROOM, AND ALSO FROM MY KITCHEN. IT IS A MATTER OF, OF, UM, QUALITY OF LIFE FOR OUR FAMILY. MS. UH, WE'VE BEEN ACCUSED OF, UM, MAKING STATEMENTS THAT HAVE NOTHING TO DO. WE HAVE NO SAY, SIR. YOU'RE GETTING, YOU'RE GETTING OFFLINE WITH WHAT WE ARE HERE FOR. YES. WE UNDERSTAND WHAT YOUR CONCERNS ARE. ALRIGHT, IF YOU TAKE A LOOK AT THE THIRD PHOTOGRAPH, THIS PHOTOGRAPH HERE, YOU'LL SEE THAT THERE WAS A SECTION OF MCCADA THAT WAS ADDED PARTIALLY ONTO THE 17, UH, 21 PRIMROSE AVENUE AND PARTIALLY, UH, ONTO THE OLD DRIVEWAY. WE SAW THAT BEFORE. YES. OKAY. I AM, I HAVE THE RIGHT TO POINT THIS OUT. THIS, THIS DRIVEWAY CAN BE REDUCED IN WIDTH, AS YOU HAD SAID PREVIOUSLY. I THINK WE SAID THAT ALSO, AS, AS YOU HAD SAID PREVIOUSLY, WE THOUGHT WE HAD AN UNDERSTANDING THAT THE BACK MCCADA, THAT PARKING AREA, APPROXIMATELY 700 SQUARE FEET WOULD BE REMOVED AT THE LAST MEETING. UM, WE WERE TOLD THAT THEY WERE CONSIDERING PUTTING A TURNAROUND OR A, UH, AN AREA APPROXIMATELY 10 FEET WIDE, UM, EXCUSE ME, 10 FEET TOWARDS THE BACK OF THE GARAGE. UM, IN ORDER FOR THEM TO BE ABLE TO TURN INTO THEIR GARAGE AND BACK OUT OF THE GARAGE, ALL OF THE HOUSES IN OUR NEIGHBORHOOD, PEOPLE HAVE TO BACK OUT OF THE GARAGE, BACK OUT OF THE DRIVEWAY AND BACK INTO THE STREET. I WOULD RESPECTFULLY REQUEST THAT THAT BACK PAVEMENT, WHICH I HAVE TO SEE FROM MY BACKYARD, AS, AS YOU CAN SEE IN THE PHOTOGRAPHS, I DON'T WANT BOATS PARKED BACK THERE. I DON'T WANT TRUCKS PACKED, PACKED BACK, PARKED BACK THERE. I THINK IT IS REASONABLE THAT IF HAPPENS THAT AREA, IF, IF THAT HAPPENS, YOU CAN COME BACK TO US. IF THAT HAPPENS, THAT THAT HAS, THERE'S NO TRUCKS AND THERE'S NOTHING ELSE. THERE'S NO BOATS. IT'S A RESIDENCE. WE, WE WANNA DEAL WITH WHAT WE HAVE IN, AS I AM SAYING, THEY'RE ASKING FOR MCCADA PARKING LOT IN THE BACK. AND I AM ASKING THAT, THAT NOT BE ALLOWED. THANK YOU. THANK YOU. ANYONE ELSE? YES, SIR. OKAY, FOLKS. UH, GOOD EVENING, MADAM CHAIR, MEMBERS OF THE BOARD. I'M GONNA BE VERY BRIEF. UM, GIVE YOUR NAME, PLEASE. OH, I'M SORRY. BLA SPIN, UH, 21 PRIMROSE. I LIVE AT 21 PRIMROSE. MY PROPERTY IS TO THE RIGHT OF, UH, THE, UH, 17, UH, 1919. ONE OF THE THINGS, AND I, THE COUNCIL MENTIONED, OH, HE DIDN'T MENTION, IS THE FACT THAT THE PROPERTY AT SEVEN, AT, UH, 19 IS MUCH HIGHER THAN MY PROPERTY. IF YOU COME ALONGSIDE THE HOUSE, I, I DON'T KNOW WHAT THE MEASUREMENT ACTUALLY IS, BUT IT'S GOTTA BE AT LEAST TWO TO THREE FEET, UH, FROM THE HOUSE DOWN TO MY PROPERTY. AND THEN THE DRIVEWAY ITSELF FROM THE H WHEN THE HOUSE WHERE THE HOUSE BEGINS DOWN HAS, IT GOES DOWN APPROXIMATELY, PROBABLY SIX, SEVEN FEET TO GET TO THE BACK. I'M NOT AN ENGINEER, BUT WATER HAS TO GO SOMEPLACE. I KNOW THERE WAS NEVER A COMPLAINT. I'VE BEEN LIVING HERE FOR, SINCE 1972. WE'VE ALWAYS TRIED TO WORK THINGS OUT WITH OUR NEIGHBORS, AND I'VE HAD MAJOR WATER PROBLEMS IN, IN MY HOME TO THE EXTENT WHERE ONE DAY I WALKED DOWNSTAIRS, I HAD THAT MUCH WATER IN MY, IN MY, UH, PLAYROOM DOWNSTAIRS, AND IT COST ME $30,000 BECAUSE IT, IT WAS NOT, IT WAS, I DIDN'T HAVE FLOOD INSURANCE. AND SO I HAD TO PAY THE BILL. IT, IF I KNEW IT WAS ILLEGAL, I, I WOULD'VE COMPLAINED. BUT I, UNTIL THE BUILDING DEPARTMENT PUT A, A, A VIOLATION ON IT, THIS IS THE FIRST I EVER LEARNED THAT THIS IS ILLEGAL. AND I LIVED WITH THIS ALL THESE YEARS. AND MR. STERN, I, I BELIEVE THAT MR. AND MRS. COTA STATED THAT THEY HAVE A NOTARIZED LETTER FROM HIM STATING THAT HE HAS GONE OVER TO MY PROPERTY IN MY ABSENCE AND CLEARED MY DRAIN BECAUSE THE WATER WAS RISING. THIS IS SOMETHING I'VE DEALT WITH FOR OVER MANY, MANY YEARS [01:15:01] WHERE I'VE LIVING THERE, MY BEDROOM OVERLOOKS THAT, THE, THE MY DRIVEWAY. AND EVERY TIME I GET, YOU KNOW, THESE DOWN HEAVY DOWNPOURS, I'M DOWNSTAIRS LOOKING OUT THE WINDOW, MAKING SURE IT'S NOT BACKING UP. WELL, I GOTTA RUN OUT IN THE MIDDLE OF THE NIGHT IN, IN MY PAJAMAS AND, AND CLEAR THE DRIVEWAY BECAUSE THE WATER IS JUST RISING. I'M NOT GONNA BORE YOU ANYMORE. YOU MADE SOME GREAT SUGGESTIONS. AND, AND THE MR. AND MRS. CARDO HAS DONE NOTHING TO, TO MITIGATE THIS AT ALL AS FAR AS THE MORTAR FROM THE GUTTERS AND THE, AND THE, AND THE LEADERS OF THE GUTTERS. YEAH. IT'S, IT'S JUST A STEP IN THE RIGHT DIRECTION. BUT GOTTA DO SOMETHING AS FAR AS, YOU KNOW, HAVE SOME IMPERVIOUS GROUND TO, TO KEEP THE WATER OFF MY PROPERTY. I THANK YOU FOR YOUR PATIENCE. AND LISTEN IS ME. HAVE A GOOD EVENING, EVERYBODY. THANK YOU. YOU'RE WELCOME. AND YOU CAN LEAVE. UM, I GUESS I HAVE TO GO BACK TO WHAT I INITIALLY WAS STATING, WHICH IS THAT IF I LOOK AT THIS DRAWING UNDER A MAGNIFYING GLASS, I GUESS I AM KIND OF, SORT OF SEEING WHAT THE RECOMMENDATIONS WERE. LIKE THERE'S A MCADAM DRIVEWAY IN THE BACK AND THERE'S A NOTE SAYING PART OF THE EXISTING DRIVEWAY TO BE REMOVE REMOVED AND NEW GRASS TO BE PLANTED. UM, I'M SEEING AN ARROW THAT SAYS GRASS, UH, BLACKTOP. AND THEN THERE'S A NOTE SAYING THE EXISTING MCADAM STRIP TO BE REMOVED AND A FENCE TO BE INSTALLED ON THE RED LINE DUE TO TURNING RADIUS OF THE GARAGE. ALL PRETTY MUCH WHAT WE ARE SAYING, EXCEPT THAT THIS IS NO WAY THAT WE CAN PUT THIS ON THE RECORD. GIVE US A, A, A SET OF DRAWINGS THAT EXPLAINS THIS MORE CAREFULLY, WILL, PLEASE, WILL, WILL DO. AND AT WHATEVER, AND ANY OTHER SUGGESTIONS THAT YOU MIGHT HAVE, SUCH AS THESE LEADERS WHICH ARE NOW GOING INTO THE GROUND, UH, DO THEY ACTUALLY GO INTO A DRY WELL OF SOME SORT SO THAT IF THERE IS A, UH, A BIG RAIN, UH, THREAT THAT THE WATER COMING FROM THE ROOF DOESN'T ACTUALLY BUBBLE UP OUT OF THE GROUND AND STILL BECOME AN ISSUE. THOSE ARE THE THINGS THAT WE CONSIDER JUST PUTTING A A A, A DRAIN SPROUT. A DRAIN SPROUT INTO THE GROUND ISN'T THE FINAL ANSWER. OKAY. SO I SAID ENOUGH, BUT KEEP IN MIND WE'RE, WE'RE HERE TO ADDRESS THE DRIVEWAY AND THE IMPERVIOUS SURFACE, WHICH MAY LEAD TO, UM, FLOODING ISSUES THAT HAVE BECOME, UM, WELL, IT HASN'T BECOME, BECAUSE THE DRIVEWAY HAS BEEN THERE. SO WE KNOW WHAT WOULD HAPPEN IF WE GRANTED IT. I, I THINK WE ARE CLOSE. WE JUST NEED A BETTER, UH, DRAWING OF WHAT IT TAKES IN ORDER TO DO THAT SO WE CAN PUT IT ON RECORD. SO IF THIS WAS BETTER ARTICULATED OR AT A LARGER SCALE, WE'D BE CLOSER WITH DETAILS AND EXPLANATIONS. MM-HMM . UM, AND MITIGATION MEASURES THIS, I I, THE STORM WATER, I DON'T THINK TR THIS IS AN AREA THAT PEOPLE WILL CALL ME UP AND SAY, I HAVE WATER. IT'S COMING FROM THE NEIGHBOR. AND THAT'S SORT OF NOT FAIR. I, I GET THAT. SO IF WE CAN LOOK AT THE, BUT HAVING AN ENGINEER NOW LOOK AT THE, THE, ALL OF THAT ISSUE, IT'S QUITE A BIT. THERE ARE SOME SIMPLE THINGS WE COULD POTENTIALLY DO. AND I SEE THE DRIVE, I SEE THE WALKWAY NEXT TO THE NEXT TO THE BUILDING. UM, SO I'M GONNA TALK TO MY CLIENT ABOUT SOME THINGS WE COULD DO. WE'RE GONNA GET YOU PLANS THAT YOU CAN READ WITH A PIECE OF PAPER THAT EXPLAINS WHAT THE MITIGATION IS AND WE'LL TRY TO RESOLVE IT. PROPERTY. YEAH. I MEAN, WE'RE, WE ARE, WE'RE REALISTIC. I MEAN, WATER FLOWS DOWNHILL. SO IF YOUR PROPERTY IS LOWER, YOU'RE GONNA, I I HAVE THE SAME ISSUE. HOW ABOUT GO OUT? HOW ABOUT GRASS CREEK? YEAH. HOW ABOUT WE GRASS CREEK? THE DRIVEWAY GOES RIGHT IN THERE. WAYS TO MITIGATE. EXACTLY. THERE ARE WAYS TO HELP MITIGATE IT MAY MAYBE NOT ELIMINATE IT. AND I DIDN'T KNOW IT WAS ABOVE THE NEIGHBOR'S LOT. YEAH. I MEAN, BUT WE'RE, WE'RE, WE UNDERSTAND THAT. I THINK WE'RE JUST LOOKING FOR BETTER REPRESENTATION. I DO THINK THOUGH, LIKE TO ME IT LOOKS LIKE WHEN YOU GO TOWARDS THE STRAIGHT PART, PART OF THE DRIVEWAY, IT'S NOW WIDER THAN [01:20:01] IT WAS BECAUSE IT WASN'T MOVED OVER AS MUCH TO THAT. BUT IT MIGHT BE MY, BUT IT MIGHT BE MY MISINTERPRETATION OF THE LINES THAT ARE THERE. 'CAUSE IT IS A LITTLE CONFUSING. SO I WOULD JUST SAY LIKE, LOOK AT THAT AT A REPRESENTATION SO WE CAN ACTUALLY UNDERSTAND WHAT EVERYTHING MEANS. AND IN THE PROCESS OF DEVELOPING A REPRESENTATION, THINK ABOUT WHAT WE HAVE SAID. AS YOU SAY, THIS IS NOT YOUR FIRST TIME DEALING WITH WATER. IT IS A HOURS EITHER. YEAH. AND WE HAVE, IN MANY CASES, PEOPLE HAVE PUT IN A LOT OF DRAINAGE, A LOT OF TREES, SOME PUMPS, DRY WELLS. WE ARE NOT COMING UP WITH BRAND NEW IDEAS THAT WE HAVE NOT SEEN BEFORE. YEAH. WE'RE JUST NOT SEEING THEM HERE, YOU KNOW, BUT, BUT THAT GOES BACK TO THE CO PRIOR CO THAT GOES BACK TO THE OTHER 11. APPLICABLE. LET'S NO, THERE IS NO CO FOR THIS DRIVEWAY. PLEASE KEEP THAT IN MIND. SO I WILL, ANYONE ELSE, ANYONE ELSE ANYWHERE COMMENTING ON THIS? LET'S MOVE ON. I THINK WE'VE ALRIGHT. EXHAUSTED THIS. LET'S MOVE ON. OH, OH, CAN I JUST ASK ONE QUESTION? ARE WE GONNA ADJOURN THIS? WE DON'T KNOW WHAT WE'RE GOING TO DO UNTIL WE DELIBERATE. WE HAVE TO WAIT AND SEE. OKAY. OKAY. THE NEXT CASE TONIGHT IS CASE 25 0 2 . PROBABLY. EVERYONE READY? YES. ALL RIGHT. GOOD EVENING, MADAM CHAIR, OTHER MEMBERS OF THE BOARD. MY NAME IS BRIAN CROWLEY AND I'M THE ARCHITECT REPRESENTING MR. ROBINS ABBY AND MS. EMILY SHORN RESIDENCE AND OWNERS OF 3 3 3 GLENDALE ROAD. AND I'M HERE TO REPRESENT TO YOU, UH, OUR PROPOSED ADDITION FOR AN INDOOR THERAPEUTIC POOL. WE WERE HERE LAST MONTH AT THE FEBRUARY 13TH MEETING, AT WHICH TIME WE PRESENTED OUR INITIAL DESIGN AND WE RECEIVED SOME, UH, VERY CONSTRUCTIVE FEEDBACK, WHICH WE HAVE TAKEN INTO CONSIDERATION. WE'VE DONE OUR BEST TO RESPOND TO THE COMMENTS THAT WERE PROVIDED TO US. AND I'D LIKE TO WALK YOU THROUGH WHAT IT IS THAT WE ARE NOW PROPOSING. SO AFTER, UH, AFTER THE FEBRUARY 13TH MEETING, DURING MY INITIAL PRESENTATION, I MADE REFERENCE TO THE FACT THAT THERE WAS A PRE-EXISTING NON-CONFORMANCE ON THE PROPERTY IN TERMS OF THE IMPERVIOUS SURFACE COVERAGE OF THE PROPERTY. SO SUBSEQUENT TO THAT MEETING ON THE NEXT DAY, IN FACT ON THE 14TH, WE RECEIVED A REVISED, UH, LETTER OF LETTER OF DENIAL THAT MADE REFERENCE TO THE INCREASE. THIS THIRD ONE HERE, UH, THE INCREASE OF THE NON-CONFORMING STRUCTURE AS TO INCREASE SUCH NON-CONFORMANCE BECAUSE WHAT WE ARE POSING TO DO IS GOING TO MAKE THE CONDITION A SLIGHT BIT WORSE, QUOTE UNQUOTE. WE WERE, WE ALSO FURTHER RECEIVED, UH, THE CONSIDERATIONS FROM YOU BOARD MEMBERS, UH, OF WHICH THERE WERE THREE, WHICH I CAN GO OVER HERE QUICKLY, WHICH THIS, UH, WHICH OUR PRESENTATION WILL FOCUS ON. THE FIRST ONE WAS TO CONSIDER REDUCE REDUCING THE REQUESTED VARIANCE, PARDON ME. CONSIDER REDUCING THE REQUESTED VARIANCE REQUEST AND PROVIDE VISUALS DRAWINGS TO, TO REFLECT THOSE CHANGES. THE SECOND BEING PRESENT AT THE PROPOSED VISUAL LANDSCAPE SCREENING PLANNED TO THE TOWN FORESTRY OFFICER AND OBTAIN HIS COMMENTS REGARDING WHAT WE WERE, UH, PROPOSING AND A POTENTIAL TRAFFIC CONCERNS THERE MAY BE. AND THEN THE THIRD ONE WAS PROVIDE ADDITIONAL VISUALS IN TERMS OF, UH, RENDERINGS, ELEVATIONS SHOWING BOTH THE PROPOSED EDITION FOR AN UNDERSTANDING OF HOW WE'LL BE IN KEEPING WITH THE CHARACTER OF THE NEIGHBORHOOD. THOSE ARE THE THREE ITEMS THAT WE'VE BEEN CHARGED WITH TO RESPOND TO, WHICH I WILL SPEAK THROUGH RIGHT NOW. UM, HOPEFULLY YOU GUYS HAD AN OPPORTUNITY TO REVIEW THE INFORMATION THAT'S BEEN PROVIDED TO YOU, AND HOPEFULLY YOU FOUND THAT ACCEPTABLE. SO THE FIRST ONE WAS THE PRINCIPAL COVERAGE OF COVERAGE OF THE PRINCIPAL BUILDING. THERE WAS DISCUSSION LAST MONTH OF LAST MONTH'S HEARING AS TO WHAT COULD YOU DO TO MAKE THE OVERALL ADDITION [01:25:01] LESS. UH, THERE WAS ALSO DISCUSSION ABOUT AREAS WITHIN THE ADDITION THAT MAY NOT NECESSARILY BE A NECESSITY TO THE ADDITION. UH, WHAT WE SPOKE ABOUT MOST WAS THIS CABINETRY AREA, WHICH, WHICH PROVIDED UNDER SOME, SOME COUNTERTOP SPACE, UH, UNDER COUNTER REFRIGERATOR, SOME CABINETRY OR TOWEL STORAGE AND WHATNOT. LIKE WAS THAT REALLY NECESSARY TO PROVIDE WHAT WE'RE TRYING TO PROVIDE HERE. BEING THE POOL ITSELF. UH, WE RESPONDED TO THAT BY ESSENTIALLY REMOVING THAT COMPONENT ALTOGETHER. SO BY, BY DOING THAT, THERE WAS ABOUT A SIX FOOT EIGHT INCH WIDTH OF SPACE THAT HAS SIMPLY BEEN REMOVED FROM THE PROJECT, MAKING THE OVERALL ADDITION APPROXIMATELY 115 HUNDRED AND 13 SQUARE FEET SMALLER. UH, BY VIRTUE OF DOING THAT, WE WERE ALSO ABLE TO REDUCE THE REQUEST FOR THE IMPERVIOUS AREA, UM, VARIANCE REQUESTS BEING SOUGHT FOR AT THIS TIME AS WELL. UH, THE SECOND ISSUE WAS THE LANDSCAPE SCREENING. WE REVISITED THAT, UH, WHAT WE INITIALLY PROPOSED AND WE PULLED ALL THE LANDSCAPES BACK. CUT HIM OFF. YEAH, TURN IT OFF. YEAH. SEE, GET READY. DUNNO IF SOMEBODY'S, I DON'T THINK HE'S HITTING IT. JUST BE ON THE SAFE SIDE. IF YOU'RE NOT SPEAKING, YOU JUST TURN THE MICS OFF. OKAY. OH, THAT'S ALL RIGHT. HOT MIC SOMEWHERE. . UM, OKAY. UH, LANDSCAPE SCREENING. UH, SO WE RESPONDED TO THAT COMMENT, UH, BY RE BY PULLING ALL THE LANDSCAPING BACK AWAY FROM GLENDALE TO BOTH, UH, HIDE THE ADDITION MORE FROM THE STREETSCAPE AND TO NOT WORSEN THE CONDITION IN ANY WHICH WAY IN TERMS OF, YOU KNOW, TRAFFIC LINES OF SIGHT AND SO ON AND SO FORTH. THE THIRD ISSUE, THE THIRD ISSUE WAS THE CHARACTER BEING IN KEEPING WITH THE NEIGHBORHOOD. AND WE'VE ADDRESSED THAT BY MAKING IT SMALLER IN SCALE, REVISITING THE OVERALL COMPOSITION OF THE ADDITION, CHANGING ROOF LINES AND SO ON AND SO FORTH. SO THOSE ARE THE THREE THINGS THAT WE'RE HERE TO PRESENT AND DISCUSS WITH YOU GUYS AS NEED BE. UH, PROBABLY BE EASIEST TO DO SO BY JUST GOING STRAIGHT TO THE PLANS, UH, THAT HAVE SINCE BEEN REVISED. SO WHAT I'M SHOWING EVERYONE HERE NOW ON THE SCREEN IS THE PROPOSED PLAN AS IT SITS. NOW, IF, AM I, IS IT ME MULTITASKING? LOOK AT THAT. I, TRUE . ARE WE GOOD? OH, YEAH. YES WE ARE. OKAY. I, YES MA'AM. EXPLAIN THE LINE, THE TWO LINES ALL THE WAY TO THE LEFT. , CAN YOU JUST EXPLAIN THE TWO LINES ALL THE WAY TO THE LEFT THAT SAY 23, 10 AND 32, 2? YES MA'AM. IT'S, SO WHERE IS THE SIX AND A HALF FEET? IF YOU COULD SHOW US WHERE THAT IS? SURE. SIX FEET. UM, EASIEST WAY WOULD PROBABLY BE SHOW YOU WHAT WE PRESENTED LAST MONTH AND WHAT WE'RE PRESENTING NOW. OKAY. SO THIS IS WHERE WE HAVE LANDED AS OF, YOU KNOW, TODAY. AND LAST MONTH WE WERE HERE. SO THIS WAS THE AREA IN QUESTION THAT HAD SOME COUNTERTOP SPACE, SOME, UH, CABINETRY FOR TOWEL STORAGE AND WHATNOT. THE UNDER, UH, THE UNDER COUNTER MINI FRIDGE. SO THIS ENTIRE COMPONENT, OKAY, WHICH WAS SIX FOOT EIGHT WIDE HAS SIMPLY BEEN REMOVED AND THE ENTIRE ADDITION HAS BEEN BROUGHT IN CLOSER TO THE HOUSE BY SIX FEET, EIGHT INCHES. OKAY. UH, THE WIDTH OR THE DEPTH, RATHER OF THE ADDITION HAS NOT CHANGED THAT THE EXTRUSION FROM THE HOME HAS JUST GOTTEN SIX FOOT EIGHT SHORTER, BASICALLY. UM, SO AS I WAS SAYING, IN VIRTUE OF DOING THAT, THE, THE OVERALL ASK FOR THE BUILDING COVERAGE HAS BEEN REDUCED BY ABOUT 115 SQUARE FOOT. AND THEN THE ASK FOR, UH, IMPERVIOUS COVERAGE HAS ALSO BEEN REDUCED BY ABOUT 1%. NOW IT'S STILL A PREEXISTING NON-CONFORMING [01:30:01] CONDITION. SO I BELIEVE RIGHT NOW IT'S 35.5% IN, IN TERMS OF IMPERVIOUS COVERAGE, WE'RE ALLOWED 29% AS THE PROPERTY SAYS TODAY IT'S 35.5. BY DOING THIS, WE'RE WORSENING THAT CONDITION, QUOTE BY 0.1%. WE'RE ASKING FOR 35.6 AS IT SITS TODAY IS THREE 5.5. SO YOU DID A PRETTY GOOD JOB, UM, IN TERMS OF, YOU KNOW, MAKING THAT REQUEST LESS AGGRESSIVE THAN IT WAS PREVIOUSLY. IN TERMS OF THE, IT'S PROBABLY MORE APPROPRIATE TO SPEAK TO THE EXTERIOR CHARACTER OF THE HOME AS WE'RE DOING THIS. SO BY REDUCING SIX FOOT EIGHT AND OVERALL WIDTH, THE QUANTITY OF WINDOWS HAS GONE DOWN. THERE WERE FIVE WINDOWS ON THE FRONT. NOW THERE'S ONLY FOUR 'CAUSE THE BUILDING GOT SHORTER. UM, AND THE, BUT THE MOST DRASTIC CHANGE WOULD BE TO THE PROPOSED EXTERIOR ELEVATIONS FROM GLENDALE ITSELF. SO GOING BACK TO WHAT WE PRESENTED LAST MONTH, WHAT WAS BEING SHOWN AT THAT TIME WAS A, A LONG EXTENDED GABLE ROOF END ROOF LINE, BASICALLY EXTENDING ALL THE WAY ACROSS THE ADDITION WITH A SERIES OF SKYLIGHTS, 1, 2, 3, 4, 5 OF THEM AND FIVE WINDOWS ON THE WALLS PROPER AS WELL. THAT HAS BEEN CHANGED TO A SHORTER ADDITION THAT HAS ANOTHER REVERSE CABLE COMPONENT THAT TIES INTO IT, WHICH QUITE FRANKLY, IN THE END BALANCES EVERYTHING BETTER. IT MAKES IT MORE IN KEEPING WITH THE CHARACTER OF THE EXISTING NEIGHBORHOOD. UM, ONE OF THE GENTLEMEN THAT LIVES IN THE AREA RAISED HIS CONCERN LAST MONTH. UH, WE DID OUR BEST TO LISTEN AND RESPOND. I HAD A VERY CONSTRUCTIVE CONVERSATION WITH HIM LAST MONTH AFTER THE MEETING CONCLUDED TO PROPERLY UNDERSTAND WHAT IT WAS THE CONCERN WAS. AND IT REALLY REVOLVED AROUND THE MASSING, THE COMPOSITION, HOW THE OVERALL ADDITION WAS GONNA LOOK. UH, WE'VE SINCE SHARED THIS INFORMATION WITH HIM AS WELL AS SOME OF THE OTHER NEIGHBORS. AND EVERYBODY SEEMS TO SHARE SUPPORT OF WHAT WE'VE DONE HERE. SO I DO NOT BELIEVE THERE'S ANY MORE OBJECTIONS OR HESITATION FROM, YOU KNOW, NEIGHBORING PERSPECTIVES IN TERMS OF WHAT WE'RE TRYING TO DO HERE. UH, THAT'S, YOU KNOW, IN SHORT HOW WE'VE ADDRESSED THE THIRD COMMENT THAT WE RECEIVED, UH, FROM THE BOARD IN TERMS OF CONSIDERATIONS TO, TO, UH, TAKE INTO CONSIDERATION IF YOU WILL. AND THEN THE LAST ONE WAS THE LANDSCAPING. SO WHEN WE WERE HERE LAST MONTH, WE HAD A LANDSCAPE BELT THAT KIND OF HUGGED THE PROPERTY LINE ALONG THE CURB IN EFFORTS TO JUST SHIELD THE SHIELD, THE ADDITION FROM THE NEIGHBORS AND SO ON AND SO FORTH. BUT IT DID IN FACT, UH, POSE AN IMPEDIMENT IN YOUR LINES OF SIGHT THAT YOU'RE GOING AROUND GLENDALE AND SO ON AND SO FORTH. SO WE WERE KIND OF TASKED WITH DOING TWO THINGS, DO NOT WORSEN THE CONDITION IN TERMS OF LINES OF SIGHT WHEN IT COMES TO TRAFFIC CONTROL AND PEOPLE GOING AROUND THE CORNER, BUT WHILE STILL TRYING TO PROVIDE SOME KIND OF LANDSCAPE BELT TO CONCEAL THIS ADDITION THAT'S BEING PUT ON. SO WE DID THAT BY JUST TAKING THE PROPOSED LANDSCAPING THAT WAS LOOPING AROUND THIS BLUE LINE AND PULLING IT BACK FURTHER, CONNECTING FROM THE CORNER OF THE RESIDENCE TO THE EXISTING TREE AND SHRUB LINE THAT IS THERE NOW. AND IT'S A SERIES OF BOTH DESIDUOUS AND EVERGREEN TREES. UH, WE WERE, IT WAS ALSO SUGGESTED THAT WE PASS THIS BY THE, I WANNA MAKE SURE I REFER TO IT PROPERLY, REFER TO, REFER TO HIM PROPERLY. I THINK IT'S THE, THE TOWN FORESTRY OFFICER, WHICH WE DID. UH, WE SENT IT TO, UM, MR. SCHMIDT, AARON SCHMIDT. AND HIS RESPONSE TO US IS THAT, UH, I WILL QUOTE HIM 'CAUSE IT WAS, IT WAS NICE TO HEAR, UM, THAT OUR PROPOSED DESIGN APPEARS TO BE WELL THOUGHT OUT AND REASONABLE IN TERMS OF LOCATION AND QUANTITY. SO BETWEEN ALL THOSE DIFFERENT THINGS I'VE DONE MY BEST TO EXPLAIN TO YOU. I'M TRYING TO BE SHORT HERE GUYS, 'CAUSE I KNOW WE HAD TWO LONGER ONES THERE. UH, I DO FEEL THAT WE HAVE ADDRESSED THE THREE DIFFERENT CONCERNS THAT YOU GUYS RAISED AS A BOARD LAST MONTH, AND HOPEFULLY, UM, I'M CONFIDENT IN SAYING THAT WE DO HAVE THE SUPPORT OF THE SURROUNDING NEIGHBORS THAT DID RAISE CONCERN LAST MONTH. AND I'M, I'M HAPPY TO ANSWER ANY QUESTIONS YOU GUYS MAY HAVE AT THIS TIME. SO I JUST, UM, I THANK YOU. I THINK IT, I THINK YOU DID ANSWER OUR QUESTIONS, AT LEAST FOR ME. YOU DID. THANK YOU. UM, AND, UH, I DO THINK IT DOES, I AGREE IT FITS IN WITH THE NEIGHBORHOOD. WELL, DID YOU UP ON THIS, DID YOU UPDATE THIS FOR US? THAT GIVES, BASED ON YOUR NEW, UM, THE NEW SIZE OF THE STRUCTURE, EXACTLY WHAT IT IS YOU'RE ASKING FOR? NO, MA'AM. WHAT IT LOOKS TO ME LIKE IN JANUARY, IT, IT'S UH, IT'S ESSENTIALLY LIKE, UH, THE, LIKE EXACTLY LIKE THE REQUIRED THE EXISTING AND THE PROPOSED FOR THE ACTUAL VARIANCE. UM, I DIDN'T SEE THIS ANYWHERE. [01:35:01] NO, MA'AM. THAT WAS THE ORIGINAL COVER LETTER THAT WENT IN WITH THE ORIGINAL APPLICATION. UM, WE DID NOT REISSUE THAT WITH THIS REASONABLE PACKAGE, ALTHOUGH I DO APPRECIATE ALL THE HANDWRITTEN NOTES AND EVERYTHING ON THERE. , , THAT'S GREAT. UM, BUT THAT INFORMATION CAN BE FOUND ON THE PLANS ITSELF. OKAY. ON THE COVER PAGE. OH, I NEED TO SHOW YOU THE RENDERINGS TOO. THAT'S KIND OF LIKE, YOU KNOW, THE PROOFS AND PUT IN THERE. UM, THAT CAN ALL BE FOUND ON THIS UPDATED TABLE HERE. OH, OKAY. THAT SHOWS ALL THE QUANTITIES OF WHAT IS EXISTING, WHAT IS A AH, PERFECT. ALLOWABLE PROPOSED AND EXISTING. THANK YOU. BUT YOU KNOW, I REALLY DO NEED TO FOCUS ON THIS HERE. SO THE VISUALS THAT EVERYBODY WAS ASKING FOR TO GET A VERY GOOD UNDERSTANDING OF WHAT THIS THING'S GONNA LOOK LIKE. SO I JUST WALKED YOU THROUGH THIS LANDSCAPING PLAN, WHICH, UH, I'M HAPPY TO SAY WE, WE WERE, WE RECEIVED VERY FAVORABLE COMMENTS FROM, UM, MR. SCHMIDT, BUT THE RENDERINGS, SO THIS IS WHAT THE PROJECT IS GONNA LOOK LIKE IF WE'RE ABLE TO MOVE FORWARD AND DEVELOP IT AS BEING PROPOSED. WE PUT TOGETHER TWO DIFFERENT VERSIONS OF THE RENDERING. ONE IS WITH LANDSCAPING, ONE IS WITHOUT, AND THESE ARE ALL KEYED THE SAME AS OUR LANDSCAPE PLAN. SO YOU HAVE KEY 1, 2, 3, AND THESE ARE JUST, UH, SCREENSHOTS OF WHAT THE EXISTING PROPERTY LOOKS LIKE. AND WE DID THE SAME WITH THE RENDERINGS, WITH AND WITHOUT LANDSCAPING. SO IF YOU ARE DRIVING AROUND THE CORNER, UM, OF GLENDALE, THIS IS, THAT'S THAT RIGHT THERE IS THE ADDITION THAT WE VISIBLE WITH THE REVERSE GABLE COMPONENT OVER IT AND WHATNOT. WITH THE PROPOSED LANDSCAPING, IT WOULD BE MORE SIMILAR TO THIS. SO YOU WOULDN'T SEE MUCH OF IT WHATSOEVER. WHEN YOU'RE AT THE CORNER GOING AROUND GLENDALE AND YOU LOOK BACK AT THE HOME, SORRY, THIS IS THE PROPOSED ADDITION AS TO WHAT IT WOULD LOOK LIKE IF THERE WERE NO LANDSCAPING WITH THE PROPOSED LANDSCAPING. RIGHT. YOU WOULDN'T SEE MUCH OF ANY OF IT. SO, AND I GUESS I WON'T BE THE CONTRARY VOTE. THE FACT OF THE NEW GING OF THE ROOF YES, SIR. TO ME DOES BRING IT MORE INTO COMPLIANCE WITH THE NATURE OF THE NEIGHBORHOOD, WHICH YOU ARE NOW MASKING WITH A SERIES OF TREES, . SO I, I DON'T WANT TO BE A JERK ABOUT IT, BUT, UM, I THINK THE RENDERING THAT YOU PRESENTED WITH THAT NEW ROOF DOES MAKE IT FIT INTO THE NEIGHBORHOOD. UM, THAT'S JUST MY PERSONAL OPINION. WE'LL SEE WHEN WE DISCUSS IT. APPRECIATE THAT. THANK YOU. I WAS JUST WONDERING WHEN YOU, WHY DID YOU SAY THE WORD CONTRARY? 'CAUSE WE ASKED HIM FOR THE SCREENING. WELL, THERE IS SCREENING. YEAH, BUT IT MASKS. BUT YOU PUT TOO MUCH UP. IT'S TOO MUCH. IT NOW MASKS. IT NOW MATTERS. THERE'S NEVER TOO MANY TREES. WELL, WHAT YOU THINK IS THE BEAUTY OF THE ARCHITECTURE. YEAH. OH, THANK YOU VERY MUCH. I JUST WANNA THANK YOU. I WANNA ECHO MY FELLOW BOARD MEMBERS THING. THANK YOU FOR LISTENING. YES. AND RESPONDING AND TO WHAT THE, WE WERE ASKING YOU TO DO AND ASKING YOU TO LOOK AT. AND YOU REALLY DID RESPOND. AND THANK YOU, MA'AM. APPRECIATE IT. IT, IT'S VERY NICE OF YOU. CAN CAN WE, CAN WE CALL YOU BACK NEXT WEEK SO WE CAN HAVE YOU GO NEXT MONTH? YEAH, NEXT MONTH. WE'LL PUT YOU ON FIRST. WE'LL PUT YOU ON FIRST AND YOU'LL, I HAVE A, YOU'LL BE AN IMPROV. I I HAVE HAPPILY SERVED ON MY OWN VILLAGES PLANNING BOARD FOR ABOUT EIGHT YEARS NOW, SO I COMPLETELY UNDERSTAND THE SEATS THAT YOU'RE SITTING IN. AND IT'S, IT CAN BE FRUSTRATING WHEN YOU TRY TO PROVIDE SUGGESTIONS TO PEOPLE THAT ARE GIVING PRESENTATIONS AND THEY DON'T LISTEN AND RESPOND. SO, UH, WE REALLY DID DO OUR BEST TO DO SO TONIGHT. UM, BUT AGAIN, ON BEHALF OF RAMEN AND MELANIE, I'M SURE THAT THEY'D BE WILLING TO ACCOMMODATE ANY OTHER REQUESTS THERE MAY BE IN TERMS OF, UH, YOU KNOW, LESS LANDSCAPING, MORE LANDSCAPING. IF YOU'RE AGREEABLE TO WHAT WE'RE PROPOSING AND YOU, UM, AND YOU WERE TO PROVIDE OUR APPROVALS, IF YOU WANTED TO PUT A CONDITION IN THERE IN TERMS OF, YOU KNOW, FINAL QUANTITY OR, YOU KNOW, VARIETY OF LANDSCAPING TO BE DETERMINED BY THE BUILDING DEPARTMENT, WE'RE HAPPY TO DO SO. I MEAN, THE FACT OF THE MATTER IS, UH, WE'VE TRIED TO GO ABOVE AND BEYOND TO SATISFY THE BOARD HERE SO WE CAN RECEIVE YOUR APPROVALS AND PROCEED, UH, WITH THE BUILDING PERMIT APPLICATION BECAUSE, YOU KNOW, AT THE HEART OF THIS PROJECT, IT'S A THERAPEUTIC POOL, WHICH IS PROVIDING, YOU KNOW, MS. SHORN WITH, WITH, WITH THE, YOU KNOW, WITH THE THERAPY SHE NEEDS FOR THE PHYSICAL CONDI PHYSICAL CONDITIONS THAT SHE, UH, SUFFERS FROM. THAT'S REALLY WHAT IT COMES DOWN TO. THIS IS NOT A, YOU KNOW, THIS IS NOT AN AMENITY TO THE HOME OR ANYTHING LIKE THAT, OR THIS IS, THIS IS SIMPLY TO ALLEVIATE THE WOMAN FROM HAVING TO DRIVE BACK AND BE DRIVEN BACK AND FORTH TO LONG ISLAND A COUPLE, TWO OR THREE TIMES A WEEK TO GET THE THERAPY THAT SHE HAS BEEN PRESCRIBED IN NEEDS. AND I, I THINK THAT WAS MADE REALLY CLEAR ALSO WITH THE FACT THAT THERE ARE NOW HANDRAILS ON THE STAIRS AND THERE IS THE, THE AREA FOR THE FUTURE LIFT ALSO. YEAH. UNFORTUNATELY, THAT'S, THAT'S, THAT'S A NECESSITY THAT WE NEED TO ACCOMMODATE, YOU KNOW, AND PLAN FOR IN THE FUTURE. YEAH. BUT IT HELPS US SET THIS APART FROM OTHER PEOPLE WHO ARE ASKING FOR [01:40:01] A POOL FOR A LEISURE PERSPECTIVE OR SOMETHING LIKE THAT, THAT THAT WAS OUR INTENT. SO THANK YOU FOR, UH, NOTICING THAT. SO, UM, I, I WASN'T HERE LAST MONTH. NO, SIR, YOU WEREN'T. AND, UM, BUT I'M IN OVER IN LOOKING AT, UH, WHAT YOU'VE PROVIDED FOR THIS MONTH'S MEETING, UM, I, I GUESS OOHS AND AHS MAY BE, UH, OVERDOING IT. UM, AND WITHOUT MAKING YOUR EGO, UH, TOO BIG, UM, I I'M VERY IMPRESSED WITH THE RESULTS THAT YOU'VE COME BACK WITH BASED UPON THE, UM, CONDITIONS THAT, UH, THE, THE BOARD HAD RECOMMENDED LAST MONTH. I ACTUALLY THINK YOU'VE COME BACK WITH A, A BETTER SOLUTION THAN WHAT YOU HAD PRESENTED, UM, LAST MONTH. AND I REALLY, I GUESS WITHOUT GIVING AWAY WHAT MY, UM, UH, NAME WOULD BE, IS, UM, VERY, VERY GOOD. UH, YOU, YOU, YOU CAME BACK WITH A BETTER SOLUTION THAN WHAT YOU HAD PRESENTED PREVIOUSLY. THANK YOU, SIR. I APPRECIATE THAT. CAN'T TAKE ALL THE CREDIT. MY PARTNER IS THE DESIGNER BEHIND ALL OF THIS. I JUST DO MY BEST TO PRESENT IT AND CONVEY IT INTENSE. OH, SO YOU, YOU'RE NOT THE ONE THAT WE SHOULD BE, UH, APPLAUDING. WHAT'S, I'LL TAKE THE APPLAUSE. THAT'S OKAY. . OKAY. OKAY. I'LL TAKE THE COMPLIMENTS THEN. WE'LL COME THAT OFTEN. IT'S ALL RIGHT, . BUT, UM, BUT TRULY I DO, I DO APPRECIATE THAT. THANK YOU VERY MUCH. WE, WE DID OUR BEST TO LISTEN TO YOU GUYS. SO THEREFORE YOU, YOU WON'T BE, UM, FEELING TOO BAD IF WE DENY THIS APPLICATION. I HOPE THAT'S NOT GONNA BE THE CASE. . UM, WE, WE CAN, UM, JUST ABOUT THIS BECAUSE I, I THINK YOU, YOU, I GUESS YOU'VE ALREADY FIGURED THAT WE REALLY LIKE WHAT YOU'VE, UM, PRESENTED THIS MONTH. WELL, YOU KNOW, FOR WHAT WE HAVE CHOSEN TO DO AS A PROFESSION, THAT'S, THAT'S OUR GOAL, RIGHT? JUST TO MAKE A, MAKE OUR CLIENTELE HAPPY AND THE PEACE BOARD MEMBERS SUCH AS YOURSELVES AND SO ON AND SO FORTH. THAT'S, THAT'S PART OF WHAT WE DO. SO I AM HAPPY TO HEAR THAT YOU GUYS FEEL THAT WE'VE, UH, LISTENED AND WE'VE COME UP WITH A SOLUTION THAT IS AMICABLE TO ALL AS THAT. VERY GOOD. THANK YOU. THANK YOU. ANYTHING ELSE? IS THERE ANYTHING ELSE? AUDIENCE WELL, WELL, FROM ANY CAN, DOES ANYONE ELSE WANNA MAKE ANY COMMENTS? SURE. YES. HI, MY NAME IS, UH, PETER BLAIR. I LIVE AT 3 0 8 GLENDALE ROAD, WHICH IS DIAGONALLY ACROSS FROM THE, THE PROPERTY I WAS HERE LAST MONTH. I'D LIKE TO THANK, UH, THE BOARD, THE ARCHITECT, AND THE FAMILY FOR PAYING ATTENTION AND TRYING TO MAKE THIS BETTER. I THINK THAT THERE DID MANY BIG IMPROVEMENTS HERE. UM, I AGREE THAT THERE'S NOW A LOT OF SCREENING THAT YOU PROBABLY DON'T NEED AS MUCH, BUT . UM, ONE THING, I HAVE NO IDEA IF THIS BOARD, OR I'M JUST GONNA SAY IT PUBLICLY 'CAUSE I'VE BEEN ASKED TO, AND THAT IS, THIS IS, UM, THIS HOUSE IS ON, SORRY, INTO THE MICROPHONE, PLEASE. THIS HOUSE IS BUILT ON A CORNER AND IT'S A, AND THIS STREET HAS A, UH, ELEMENTARY SCHOOL AT THE OTHER END OF IT. AND, UH, DURING, UH, ESPECIALLY GOING TO SCHOOL, BUT ALSO COMING HOME, UH, THERE'S A, A NUMBER OF CARS THAT COME AROUND THE CORNER. AND I'M JUST HOPING THAT WHEN THE CONSTRUCTION IS HAPPENING, THAT WILL BE TAKEN INTO CONSIDERATION. 'CAUSE IF THEY BLOCK THAT, IT'S GONNA BE A PROBLEM. , THANK YOU VERY MUCH. I APPRECIATE IT. OKAY. YOU ARE WELCOME. ANYONE ELSE? OKAY. ANYONE ELSE? IF NOT, WE WILL MOVE ON TO THE NEXT CASE WE HAVE THIS EVENING. UM, I'M SORRY, CAN WE TAKE A SHORT BREAK? SURE. WE'RE GONNA TAKE A VERY SHORT BREAK. SO JUST, UM, JUST ONE QUICK QUESTION. IT'S, IT'S NOT FORMAL, BUT AT, AT, AT WHAT POINT DO WE GUYS, DO WE HEAR EVERYONE'S VOTE AND, AND WHAT THE DETERMINATION OF THE BOARD IS? WE HAVE ONE MORE CASE, THEN WE'LL ADJOURN FOR A BRIEF 10 SECONDS. GOTCHA. WE'LL CONVENE, HAVE CONVERSATION THAT YOU CAN'T COMMENT ON. SURE. AND THEN WE'LL COME BACK ON THE BOARD TO SAY YAY AND NAY. YOU COULD, YOU CAN, YOU CAN STAY. STAY. [01:46:55] I GOTTA GO. WE ARE BACK ON THE RECORD WITH OUR VERY SHORT HIATUS LITTLE, IS THAT WHAT YOU CALL IT? YES. AND WE ARE NOW ON CASE. OUR FIRST NEW CASE THIS EVENING IS 25 0 1. BRIAN MARSHALL. 4 4 14 TERRACE STREET. YES. GOOD EVENING. UM, MADAM CHAIR TO THE BOARD MEMBERS, MEMBERS OF THE BOARD. UM, MY WIFE MARLO AND I HAVE LIVED IN A GREENBERG AREA FOR 14 YEARS. UM, I GUESS THIS IS OUR FIRST TIME. I'M JUST A LITTLE NERVOUS. I'VE NEVER APPEARED IN FRONT OF BOARD MEMBERS OR ANYTHING LIKE THAT, EXCEPT FOR MY COWORKERS WHEN I HAD TO CONDUCT A MEETING. SO, EXCUSE ME, IF I'M A LITTLE, UM, NERVOUS, THEN MY VOICE GETS A LITTLE RASPY. I APOLOGIZE FOR THAT. UM, JUST IN, JUST INTO THE MICROPHONE, PLEASE. OH, OKAY. I, I AM HARD OF HEARING, SO THAT MY FAULT. I APOLOGIZE. AND YOU'RE TALL. . UM, MY WIFE AND I ARE HERE TODAY TO, UM, I GUESS TO TRY TO RECTIFY THE GRIEVANCE THAT WE HAVE, THE VARIANCE THAT WE HAVE OR THE LOCATION OF THE HOT TUB THAT WE HAVE. I GUESS, UM, THERE WAS A MISUNDERSTANDING ON OUR BEHALF OR HOW THE CONSTRUCTION OF THE PROPERTY IS, BECAUSE I GUESS FROM OUR UNDERSTANDING THAT WHEN YOU WALK UP TO OUR FRONT ENTRANCE, WHICH WE ARE AT 14TH TERRACE STREET, THE FRONT ENTRANCE IS 14 TERRACE. BUT TO GET INTO THE BACKYARD, UM, YOU HAVE TO WALK TO THE FRONT DOOR AND THROUGH THE BACK DOOR. NOW WE HAVE THE LEFT AND THE RIGHT OF OUR PROPERTY, [01:50:01] WHICH WE HAD CONSIDERED TO BE STILL TERRACE, TO BE TERRACE STREET. BUT I GUESS WHEN IT CAME DOWN TO THE BOARD, THEY'RE SAYING THAT IT'S A PART OF GIBSON, WHICH WAS A LITTLE, I GUESS, UM, CONFUSING ON OUR HALF BECAUSE ON GIBSON IS OUR DRIVEWAY. UM, IT'S A SINGLE CAR DRIVEWAY. THERE IS NO ENTRANCE INTO THE HOME UNLESS YOU'RE GOING TO THE DRIVEWAY, WHICH IS NOT CONSIDERED AN ENTRANCE WAY. UM, THERE IS NO MAILBOX, NO. I GUESS AMAZON MAY COME THERE TO DROP OFF A PACKAGE IN THE DRIVEWAY IF THEY DON'T KNOW EXACTLY WHERE THEY'RE GOING. BUT THAT WOULD BE THE ONLY WAY OF AN ENTRANCE TO THE, I MEAN, TERRACE WOULD BE THE ONLY ENTRANCE INTO THE HOME. SO I GUESS OUR MAIN CONCERN IS IF THE BOARD WOULD, UM, CONSIDER WHERE WE WANTED TO PLACE THE, THE HIGH TUB. 'CAUSE IT IS ALSO IN A MATTER OF PRIVACY. UM, AND ONE OF THE, THE PICTURES THAT WE HAVE, THAT WE HAVE TAKEN, ONE OF OUR MEMBERS, EXCUSE ME, FOR NOT HAVING THE LAPTOP AND HAVING EVERYTHING ON THE SCREEN, UM, THIS WAS, I GUESS, UM, ONE OF THE LOCATIONS WAS HERE WHERE IT WAS SUGGESTED TO PUT IT. BUT AS YOU CAN SEE THOUGH, MY NEIGHBOR THAT'S OVER, IF YOU ARE IN THE, UM, IN THE BACKYARD, IS TO THE RIGHT OF US. HE HAS A THREE, THREE STORY HOME AND THERE'S NO PRIVACY THAT'S BACK THERE. NOW THIS HOT TUB IS NOT FOR PARTIES AND PLEASURABLE. MY WIFE IS SUFFERING FROM A ROTATOR CUFF, AND SHE'S, IT IS BEEN SUGGESTED FROM THE DOCTORS, UM, THAT THAT WILL HELP OUT. SHE'S GOING THROUGH, UM, UH, ACUPUNCTURE AND SHE'S ALSO SEEING THE DOCTORS. AND SHE GETS, UM, UH, I FORGET THE NAME, THE CORTISONE SHOTS THAT SHE'S GOTTEN. AND SHE'S REACHED, REACHED HER LIMIT. AT THIS POINT, SHE CANNOT TAKE ANY MORE FOR RIGHT NOW BECAUSE THERE'S A LIMIT ON TAKING THOSE, UM, TAKING THOSE SHOTS. SO IT WAS JUST RECOMMENDED FROM THE DOCTOR, WHICH WE HAVE A, UM, A LETTER OF WHICH WAS GIVEN TO THE BOARD, UM, FOR THE WHIRL, FOR THE HOT TUB OR THE WHIRLPOOL. UM, AND LIKE I SAID, THE MAIN THING WAS JUST THE PRIVACY ASPECT ASPECT OF WHERE THE HOT TUB, WHERE WE SUGGESTED TO BE, TO BE PLACED AT. NOW, WE'RE NOT CHANGING ANY AESTHETICS TO THE PROPERTY IN THE BACKYARD. UM, IT'S IN NO WAY, UM, IN THE WAY OF OUR NEIGHBORS. WE HAVE TALKED TO, YOU KNOW, ONE OR TWO OF THE NEIGHBORS, UM, ONE OF 'EM SAID THAT THEY WAS GONNA SHOW UP THIS EVENING, BUT UNFORTUNATELY HE DIDN'T COME. UM, THERE WAS NO PROBLEM WITH THAT. LETTERS WERE SENT OUT. UM, WE WERE IN COMPLIANCE OF WHAT GREENBERG, THE TOWN OF GREENBERG, UM, WANTS US TO DO IN ORDER TO, UM, COME TO THE BOARD AND I GUESS RECTIFY THIS PROBLEM. SO I DON'T WANT TO TAKE UP TOO MUCH OF YOUR TIME, BUT, UM, THAT WAS JUST OUR COMPLIANCE THAT, YOU KNOW, OF THE PLACEMENT OF, UM, THE HOT TUB OF WHERE TO BE PLACED. UM, IT WOULD BE ON A PLATFORM. IT WOULD NOT BE ON, UM, THE DIRT, ON THE GROUND OF DIRT. WE HAVE ONLY, THERE WAS ALREADY, UM, A PATIO THAT WAS ALREADY BACK THERE, BUT DURING THE TIME WE'VE JUST IMPROVED IT. THAT'S ALL WE DID. WE DIDN'T CHANGE ANY DIMENSIONS. EVERYTHING IS ALL THE SAME. WE JUST PUT, UM, PAVERS DOWN TO MAKE IT MORE SOLID BACK THERE IN THE BACK. THAT'S ALL THAT WE DID. SO, UM, HOPE I'M NOT SAYING TOO MUCH. I'M NOT RATTLING OFF, BUT, UM, THAT'S ALL AT THIS MOMENT THAT I'LL HAVE TO SAY. ANY QUESTIONS, UM, THAT YOU, THAT THE BOARD MAY HAVE FOR ME, PLEASE FEEL FREE AND I WILL DO MY BEST TO ANSWER EVERY ANY QUESTIONS THAT YOU HAVE. OKAY. I HAVE A COUPLE OF QUESTIONS. YES, MA'AM. SO THE HOT TUB IS THERE NOW, IS THAT, UNFORTUNATELY WE DIDN'T KNOW. THAT'S WHAT I JUST SAID. WE DIDN'T KNOW IT. IT, IT IS THERE. YES, IT IS, IT IS PLACEMENT. ARE YOU, I'M SORRY. TRYING TO REPLACE THE ONE THAT'S THERE. HOLD ON. BEFORE WE ASK THAT QUESTION MM-HMM . I THINK THE ISSUE COMES UP AND WE'LL HOPEFULLY GET CLARITY ON THAT. WELL, THAT'S WHAT I WAS MY NEXT, THE RULING THE WAY IT IS IS WHERE THE FRONT YARD IS. VERSE THE REAR YARD. THAT WAS MY NEXT QUESTION. THAT'S CORRECT. IS THIS BECAUSE OF THE, WHAT IS, YOU KNOW, ESSENTIALLY THE GIBSON VERSUS TERRACE STREET? YES. YES. WHICH IS THE FRONT VERSUS SIDE OF THE HOUSE. CORRECT. SO THE ORIGINAL CONSTRUCTION OF THE HOME, UM, HAD THE GIBSON SIDE AS THE FRONT YARD, THE TERRACE SIDE. AND THE WHAT, UM, THE APPLICANT IS CALLING THE REAR YARD IS THE SIDE YARD. AND THE AREA WHERE THE SHED IS, IS THE REAR [01:55:01] YARD. SO IT'S AN, IT, IT IS A CORNER LOT. UM, UNDERSTANDABLY CONFUSING BECAUSE THE FRONT ENTRANCE OF THE HOME, THE TRADITIONAL FRONT ENTRANCE WHERE YOU WALK INTO YOUR HOUSE IS ON TERRA STREET. BUT THE WAY THE HOUSE WAS CONSTRUCTED ORIGINALLY, THE TOWN, UM, AND THE LOCATION OF THE PROPERTY COMPLIES FRONT YARD, GIBSON SIDE YARD, TERRACE, REAR YARD IS UM, AT THE, THE AREA OF THE SHED AND ALL THE, LIKE, IF, IF, IF IT WAS THAT TERRACE WAS THE FRONT YARD, ALL THE SETBACKS AND EVERYTHING ARE OKAY. LIKE NO. OKAY. SO IT HAS TO STAY GIBSON AS THE FRONT YARD. OKAY. NO, NO, NO. I JUST, IF IF, IF IT WAS, 'CAUSE THERE'S NO, IT JUST SAYS FRONT YARD TO REAR YARD. RIGHT. LIKE THAT, UM, IT'S PERMITTED. BUT EVERYTHING ELSE LIKE IMPERVIOUS SURFACE IS OKAY. YES. EVERYTHING ELSE IS COMPLIANT ON THE LOT. OKAY. YES. OKAY. THAT WAS, YEAH. MY QUESTION IS, WHAT IS THE LEGAL ADDRESS? THE LEGAL ADDRESS IS 14 TERRACE STREET DETERMINED BY THE POST OFFICE. SAY THAT AGAIN. YEAH. THE POST, THE POST OFFICE GIVES YOU THE, YOUR NUMBERS. RIGHT. OKAY. SO THE LEGAL ADDRESS IS ON TERRACE STREET, BUT FOR PURPOSES OF THIS ZONING LAW OF, OF THE, IT'S THE ENTRANCE IS ON GIB THE BUILDING LOT. YES, CORRECT. THE BUILDING LOT FRONT ENTRANCE IS GIBSON. WHO WOULD'VE THOUGHT NOT THE ONLY PLACE? PROBABLY NOT THE ONLY ONE. PROBABLY NOT. SO ARE YOU REPLACING YOUR I GOT CAUGHT UP IN LANGUAGE. I'M REALLY SORRY. ON THE PLAN IT SAYS JACUZZI AND YOU KEEP TALKING ABOUT HOT TUB. WELL, IS THAT THEY'RE BOTH, THEY'RE BOTH. THEY'RE BOTH THE SAME. I DIDN'T KNOW IF YOU WERE PUTTING IN SOME AN ADDITIONAL HOT NO, NOT AT ALL. NOT AT ALL. JACUZZI NOT AT ALL. WASN'T GOOD ENOUGH. I DIDN'T NO, THEY'RE, THEY'RE BOTH, WELL, I GUESS OF THE WORDING 'CAUSE THE WAY THE DRAWINGS ARE YES. THEY WOULD HAVE TO MOVE IT FROM ITS CURRENT LOCATION BECAUSE IT'S THEORETICALLY IN THE FRONT YARD. YEAH. YEAH. ARE YOU, THEY'RE ACTUALLY IN CHARGE. ARE YOU REPLACING IT OR ARE YOU'RE JUST LEGALIZING IT? WHAT'S WE'RE TRYING OUR BEST TO LEGALIZE IT. YEAH. LEGAL. YES. LEGALIZE IT. OKAY. OKAY. ANY OTHER QUESTIONS? NO. NO, I DON'T HAVE ANYTHING. I DON'T HAVE ANYTHING. OKAY. THANK YOU FOR YOUR TIME. THANK YOU. YOU'RE WELCOME. THAT'S IT. THAT'S IT. THAT'S IT. WE'RE GONNA ADJOURN. WE LET YOU GOING. KEEP GOING. ALRIGHTY. TOOK MY BREAK. YOU TOOK YOUR BREAK. GOOD. OKAY. WE CAN MOVE INTO EXECUTIVE SESSION. GETTING BAD SMASH. THANK YOU. OH, OKAY. SO WE WILL GO INTO OUR DELIBERATIONS. ARE WE, ARE WE GOING DOWN THERE? THERE ARE NO MICROPHONES. WE NEED MICROPHONES. SO WHY DON'T WE STAY UP HERE. OH, WHY DON'T WE STAY HERE? CAN'T THEY'RE WIRED. YEAH, THEY'LL BRING THEM OUT. EMMA, WE DELIBERATE YOUR REPORT. WE HAVE, BUT OKAY. SORRY. THE, THE FIRST CASE, WHICH IS, UH, 2321, YOU HAVE TWO THINGS TO DO TONIGHT. ONE IS THE NECK DECK, THE SEEKER, AND THE SECOND IS THE SPECIAL PERMIT APPLICATION. SINCE THE APPLICATION IS TECHNICALLY NOT COMPLETE UNTIL THERE'S A SECRET DETERMINATION, YOU SHOULD PROBABLY START OFF DISCUSSING THE DRAFT THAT YOU RECEIVED FROM GARRETT. YES. JUST AS A BRIEF OVERVIEW, WHAT YOU RECEIVED PRIOR TO THE MEETING IS THE NARRATIVE OF WHAT'S CALLED THE SECRET NEGATIVE DECLARATION. AND AS YOU KNOW, MOST OF YOUR SEEKER APPLICATIONS WITH THE AREA VARIANCES ARE TYPICALLY TYPE TWO. UH, THIS APPLICATION IS DEEMED WHAT'S CALLED UNLISTED. UM, AND THAT IS A CATEGORY THAT SEEKER REVIEW IS ELIGIBLE, UNLIKE YOUR TYPE TWO ACTIONS, WHICH REQUIRE NO FURTHER REVIEW. SO STAFF, WHAT WE DID IS WE PREPARED THIS NARRATIVE, WHICH DISCUSSES THE, SUMMARIZES WHAT THE PROPOSAL IS, AND IT BREAKS OUT THE PROPOSAL INTO THE VARIOUS SEEKER ENVIRONMENTAL REVIEW CATEGORIES SUCH AS STORM WATER, IMPACT ON AIR, IMPACT ON TRANSPORTATION, AND SO ON AND SO FORTH. AND WHAT WE DID IS HEAVILY RELY ON THE MEMO PREPARED BY PSNS TO, UH, TAKE THE MITIGATIONS THAT THEY IDENTIFIED AND THE VARIOUS RATIONALE THAT THEY PROVIDED, BUT AT THE SAME TIME ALSO FACTOR IN INFORMATION, OF COURSE FROM THE APPLICANT AND, UH, TESTIMONY THAT [02:00:01] WE'VE HEARD ANYTHING THAT REALLY, UM, CONTRIBUTES TO, UM, THE OVERALL SITE AND ENSURING THAT THE SITE CAN OPERATE SAFELY, THAT THE INTENT IS FOR THAT TO MAKE IT INTO THIS DOCUMENT. SO WE DID THAT AND THE DOCUMENT IS INTENDED TO SUPPORT AND COMPLIMENT A SUBSEQUENT, UH, SPECIAL PERMIT, UH, DECISION. SO, UH, THAT'S THE SUMMARY OF WHAT THE DOCUMENT IS, WHAT WHAT IT'S BASED ON. AND, UM, HAPPY TO ANSWER ANY QUESTIONS IF YOU HAVE THEM. AND I GUESS MAYBE MOST IMPORTANTLY, I SHOULD , ACTUALLY I SHOULD HAVE ADDED THAT, UH, THE DOCUMENT CONCLUDES THAT THE APPLICATION THAT'S PROPOSED, INCLUDING THE, UH, MITIGATIONS THAT ARE IDENTIFIED IN YELLOW, THE ULTIMATE NO IN THE YELLOW, YOU CAN DISREGARD. THAT WAS ACTUALLY, UH, UH, SOMETHING THAT I DID TO FOCUS IN ON AND I DID SO , BUT I FORGOT TO MAKE IT ON YELLOW. UH, BUT THE DOCUMENT CONCLUDES THAT THE, UH, PROPOSAL THAT THE APPLICANT HAS WHEN FACTOR IN THE VARIOUS, UH, MITIGATIONS, THE CONCLUSION IS THAT YOU ESSENTIALLY HAVE A WORKABLE PROJECT THAT WILL NOT HAVE A SIGNIFICANT NEGATIVE IMPACT ON THE ENVIRONMENT. AND IT SETS YOU UP TO, UM, RESOLVE THAT THIS SITE IS SUBJECT TO A NEGATIVE DECLARATION IF YOU SO CHOOSE. OKAY. DID YOU GIVE THE CONCLUSION, JUST SUMMARIZE THAT SO SIGNIFICANT ? YES. YES. SO ULTIMATELY THERE'S UH, NO QUESTIONS ON THAT. UM, WHAT WE HAVE PREPARED FOR YOU IS YOUR, WELL YOUR TYPICAL SECRET DOCUMENT MM-HMM . THAT YOU READ. AND INSTEAD OF, UH, THE TYPICAL WHICH YOU CONCLUDE THAT IT'S TYPE TWO ACTION, NO FURTHER REVIEW, RIGHT. UH, YOU WOULD ASK FOR A MOTION, UH, FROM ZONING BOARD MEMBERS, UH, TO DECLARE THE ACTION AND UNLISTED ACTION. YOU GET A MOTION SECOND AND APPROVE THAT. AND THEN THE SECOND END OF THAT IS TO REQUEST A MOTION TO DETERMINE THAT THE PROPOSED ACTION WILL NOT HAVE A SIGNIFICANT ADVERSE IMPACT ON THE ENVIRONMENT AND RENDER A NEGATIVE DECLARATION CONSISTENT WITH THE DRAFT NARRATIVE, UH, PROVIDED TO THE BOARD. OKAY. AND THAT WILL CONCLUDE YOUR, UH, SEEKER ROLE. THEN YOU CAN MOVE ON TO THE, UH, THAT WOULD PAVE THE WAY FOR YOU TO MAKE A DECISION ON THE SPECIAL PERMIT APPLICATION. OKAY. OKAY. AND I WILL ALSO NOTE THAT, UH, YANOS SEMAN FROM PSNS IS ON THE ZOOM AND HE, UH, PRESENTED ALONG WITH BRIAN MCPEAK LAST MEETING. BUT YANOS IS, UH, THE ENGINEERING TECHNICAL PERSPEC, UH, PROFESSIONAL. AND, UH, YOU KNOW, SHOULD YOU HAVE ANY TECHNICAL QUESTIONS, UM, HE'S AVAILABLE AND, AND CAN CERTAINLY ANSWER THEM. ED, ANYTHING THAT YOU WANTED TO SAY ON THE DRAFT SITE PLAN OR SOMETHING? WELL, NO, NOT ON, NOT ON THE NEC I, I'M SORRY. THE SPECIAL PERMIT PHONE. ANYTHING YOU WANTED TO SAY ON THE SPECIAL PRINT I SHOULD SAY? NO, THAT'S, UH, I'LL RESERVE UNTIL WE HAVE, SEE IF WE HAVE ANY QUESTIONS. OKAY, VERY GOOD. WE TRIED TO MAKE THE DRAFT DECISION ON THE SPECIAL PERMIT, OF COURSE, TO BE CONSISTENT WITH THE CONDITIONS IN THE NEXT DECK BECAUSE THAT'S THE BASIS FOR YOUR DECISION. ONE THING I WILL ALSO ADD IS THAT, UH, THERE ARE REFERENCES IN BOTH DOCUMENTS OF THE LARGER PROCESS, WHICH, UM, WITH, IF IT CONCLUDES TONIGHT WITH THE SPECIAL PRINTED ZONING BOARD, THERE ARE REFERENCES TO THE SITE PLAN. SO THE INTENT OF THE SEEKER AS COMBINED WITH THE SPECIAL PERMIT ARE NOT TO SAY EXACTLY HOW THE SITE WILL BE DESIGNED, YOU KNOW, TO THE NTH DEGREE IF YOU WILL. UH, IT'S NOTING THAT THE APPLICANT WILL THEN GO TO SITE PLAN, BUT YOU HAVE SORT OF THE BACKBONE OF THE GOALS THAT ARE TO BE ESTABLISHED, YOU KNOW, FROM A SAFETY AND ENGINEERING PERSPECTIVE THAT THEY CAN WORK WITH AND BUILD INTO THE SITE PLAN THAT GOES ON WITH THE TOWN BOARD. SO, UM, IN SOME LEVELS THERE'S UH, YOU KNOW, DECENT AMOUNT OF SPECIFICITY AND SOME LEVELS THE GOALS ARE MORE BROAD. AND WHOSE RESPONSIBILITY WILL IT BE FOR THE SITE PLAN DETERMINATIONS? SO ULTIMATELY THE TOWN BOARD, IT'S TOWN BOARD APPROVED SITE PLAN, THE APPLICANT WILL PUT TOGETHER A SITE PLAN APPLICATION COMPRISED OF THE DRAWINGS, THE APPLICATION MATERIALS. AND UH, WE WILL KEEP THINGS CONSISTENT WITH, UH, UH, PSNS GROUP WHO HAVE, YOU KNOW, MUCH FAMILIARITY WITH THE PROJECT. OF COURSE. UH, SO TO KEEP THAT CONSISTENCY, THEY'LL BE THERE AT THE TOWN BOARD LEVEL JUST TO ENSURE THAT, UH, THE FOLLOW THROUGH SITE PLAN IS CONSISTENT WITH THE SEEKER AS WELL AS, UH, UH, THE, THE SPECIAL PERMIT SHOULD YOU [02:05:01] GRANT IT AND JUST ALL BEING EQUAL, THIS NEG DECK SEEKER MATCHES WITH THE APPROVAL. YEAH, WE WORK, WE WORK SIDE BY SIDE TO UM, ENSURE THAT THEY, THEY ARE CONSISTENT. I THINK THAT'S WHY WE HAD THE LAST, THE CHANGES RIGHT. WAS TO MATCH IT. SO IF ED FOR INSTANCE, MADE RECENT UPDATES, I WAS VERY COGNIZANT OF THOSE AND UH, YOU KNOW, WE'RE WORKING TOGETHER BACK AND FORTH TO MAKE SURE THAT EVERYTHING'S CONSISTENT. SO THIS THAT WE GOT LAST, AND GARRETT AND GARRETT MADE ALL THE, SOME LAST MINUTE CHANGES AND I WAS VERY COGNIZANT OF WHAT HE DID. OKAY. MADE ADJUSTMENTS. I DON'T HAVE ANY QUESTIONS. I DON'T, IS THERE ANYBODY ELSE? I DON'T. THANK YOU GUYS. THE ONLY OTHER THING I'D SAY IS WE, YEAH, WE, WE DID OUR BEST TO, YOU KNOW, HEAR ALL VOICES, BUT OBVIOUSLY YOU AS THE BOARD DRIVE THIS THING THE DIRECTION YOU, YOU KNOW, YOU WANTED IT. BUT WE DEFINITELY LISTENED TO THE APPLICANT. WE LISTENED TO OUR PROFESSIONAL, WE LISTENED TO TOWN STAFF AND UM, YOU KNOW, TRY TO PUT TOGETHER THE BEST, UH, DECISION WE COULD, PROFESSIONALISM WITH WHICH EVERYONE HAS HANDLED. THIS HAS BEEN FANTASTIC. I MEAN, IT'S BEEN A REALLY LONG PROCESS. ARDUOUS. I JUST HAD LONG AND, AND I ADDED, ARGUABLY YOU ADDED, OH YOU, I'M LIKE, THERE WAS A QUESTION MARK. OH, I'M GONNA BE REALLY HAPPY TO GET RID OF THE BOX OF PAPERS. I HAVE HER BIRDS, HER BIRDS THAT ARE LIKE, YEAH, THERE'RE TOO MANY. IT'S GOING IN MY RECYCLABLE BIN ON TUESDAY. LIKE, IT'S BIG. BUT IT WAS REMARKABLE. I MEAN THIS WAS, YEAH, THIS WAS TOUGH. YEAH, FROM THE VERY BEGINNING AND EVERYBODY THERE HAVE BEEN TENSE MOMENTS, BUT I THINK EVERYBODY HAS JUST HANDLED IT PROFESSIONALLY. IT'S BEEN REALLY LOVELY AND I THINK LIKE FROM THE APPLICANT TO THE PROFESSIONALS THAT WE HIRED TO YOU GUYS AND HELPING US BECOME MORE KNOWLEDGEABLE IS VERY MUCH APPRECIATED. 'CAUSE I WOULDN'T HAVE NOT KNOWN WHERE TO GO ON THIS WITHOUT SOME OF THOSE EXTRA STEPS THAT WE TOOK. SO THANK YOU GUYS. DID WE HIRE THE CO CONSULTANTS? YOUR HONOR, WE SOLICITED THEIR INTEREST AND THE TOWN STAFF TOOK THE LEAD ON UH, ACQUIRING THEIR SERVICES. YES. AND I ALSO LEARNED MORE ABOUT QUARRIES THAN EVER I EVER THOUGHT I WOULD KNOW. I'M SORRY, YOU LEARNED MORE ABOUT WHAT? QUARRIES? QUARRIES. QUARRIES ARE VIRTUAL QUARRIES. YEAH. SO THANK YOU TO EVERYBODY. ALRIGHT. CAN YOU NOW PLAY MINECRAFT . ALRIGHT. OKAY. SO WHAT DO WE NEED TO DO NOW? NOW WE'RE NEXT UP. WELL, IF YOU'RE FINISHED WITH THE NEG DECK, YOU CAN START DISCUSSING OR AMONGST YOURSELVES THE, UH, SPECIAL PERMIT. DOES IT DRAFT? SEE IF THERE ARE ANY ISSUES YOU WANT TO COMMENT ABOUT, WHETHER YOU HAVE ANY REVISIONS TO MAKE. NOPE. NO, I THINK WE ALREADY SAID NO. YEAH, YEAH. I, I HAD SOME COMMENTS ALREADY BEFORE THIS MEETING WITH GARRETT, WHICH HE HELPED ME TO UNDERSTAND FURTHER. SO I REALLY DON'T HAVE ANY YEAH. FURTHER QUESTIONS. WHOEVER THOUGHT WE'D HAVE A SILENT MEETING ON THIS, HAVE ONE MORE THING TO DISCUSS. I WANT YOU CAN'T BEAT THE HORSE ANYMORE. OKAY. I HAVE NO QUESTIONS ON THE, UM, SPECIAL PERMIT. WELL THEN THE QUESTION BECOMES, UH, DO YOU WANT TO, ARE YOU INCLINED TO GRANT OR DENY BECAUSE THAT WILL IMPACT WHAT YOU CAN DO WITH THE SECOND CASE. GRANT. GRANT. GRANT GRANT. OKAY. SO I'M GONNA PUT THIS ON THE D FOR YOU. YEP. ALRIGHT, GREAT. HOW MUCH OF THIS DO I HAVE TO READ? IF READ START AT PAGE SEVEN, BUT THE MOTION GOES , CAN YOU SAY DETAILS WILL BE, WILL YOU FOLLOW THE MOTION? WELL, TYPICALLY WHAT YOU DO IS YOU READ THE MOTION AND THE CONDITIONS. OKAY. BUT THE CONDITIONS HERE ARE WHAT, FIVE PAGES? SIX PAGES? YEAH, THERE'S SIX PAGES. I MEAN, I CAN READ IT. SEVEN, BUT SEVEN SINGLE SPACE. RIGHT. UM, YOU DON'T HAVE TO AS LONG AS YOU REMAKE. UH, IF, IF YOU HAVE NO CHANGES TO MAKE, IF YOU HAD CHANGES TO MAKE, THEN I'D HAVE TO DO SOMETHING EITHER TONIGHT OR TOMORROW. UH, IF, IF YOU'RE NOT GONNA MAKE ANY CHANGES, THEN JUST, YOU CAN JUST GRANT IT AND WE'LL MAKE THE, UH, DECISION [02:10:01] AVAILABLE TOMORROW. OKAY. I SECOND THAT. AYE, WELL YOU HAVE, YOU NOT I WAS KIDDING. I WAS KIDDING. SO WE'RE UP TO 23, 22. THE ONLY THING I WAS GOING TO SAY ON THIS IS THAT IF, I DON'T KNOW IF PEOPLE ARE REALLY INTERESTED IN READING IT, UM, IS SOME OF THE ACKER ACRONYMS THAT THEY HAVE, PEOPLE GO, WHAT IS THAT? THAT , YOU KNOW, I THINK THEY'RE ALL IDENTIFIED HERE. ARE THEY NOT? I WAS LOOKING BEFORE AND I WAS TRYING TO SEE THAT, AND SOME OF THEM SPELLED OUT. THERE SHOULD NOT BE AN UNLED OUT ACRONYM. UM, USUALLY ANOS EXHIBIT D OF MY LETTER HAS A COMPLETE LIST OF THE ACRONYMS IF YOU WANT TO TAKE THAT, SIR. SO WE COULD ATTACH THAT. THE ONLY THING THAT I THINK MIGHT WAS DEC MIGHT NOT BE THOUGH, YOU KNOW, LIKE THE, THE STATE DEPARTMENTAL NAMES. THAT THE ONLY ONE I THINK WE SHOULD, YEAH, WE'LL GO THROUGH IT. AND THE ACRONYMS, WE WILL, UH, MAKE SURE THEY'RE SPELLED OUT. JUST PUT AN APPENDIX AND PUT HIS APPENDIX ON IT. NO ACT, ACTUALLY, MY RECOMMENDATION IS THAT YOU, YOU FIRST SAY THE WHOLE, UM, MEANING OF THE ACRONYM. NO. WHAT DO YOU MEAN? NO, . OH, SO WE'RE GONNA CALL IT OUT ONE TIME AT THE BEGINNING. SO SW IS REFERENCED PROBABLY THREE OR FOUR TIMES HERE. THE FIRST TIME WE SAY SW AND THEN IN PEREN. SW YEAH, THAT'S WHAT PPP HERE ON ALMOST EVERYTHING. EXCEPT FOR DEC IS THE ONLY THING I THINK THAT YOU DON'T, WE JUST GOTTA MAKE SURE THAT WE, THERE'S NO ACRONYMS THAT ARE NOT SPELLED OUT. SPELL THAT ONE OUT. IN MY OPINION, IN MY OPINION, IF ONE OF THE THINGS THAT MADE IT DIFFICULT FOR ME TO READ THROUGH THIS WAS GOING BACK TO FINDING OUT WHAT THE ACRONYM MEANT. WHEREAS USUALLY YOU WOULD SPELL OUT WHAT IT IS AND THEN IF YOU REPEAT IT AGAIN IN THAT SAME PARAGRAPH OR THEN YOU CAN USE THE ACRONYM. BECAUSE OTHERWISE I'M LIKE SAYING, WHAT DOES THAT W ACTUALLY YOU ONLY HAVE TO DO IT ONCE PER DOCUMENT. YEAH, I KNOW, BUT IT, IT'S A LEGAL REQUIREMENT. HE'S SAYING FOR EASE OF . WELL, I WOULD SAY PUT THE APPENDIX ON THE BACK IT ATTACH IT. CAN I SAY THE APPENDIX? AND THEN YOU COULD JUST GO TO THE APPENDIX, SAY, CALLING IT OUT EACH TIME HAVE THE, UH, APPENDIX. IF IT'S A, IF IT'S REFERRING TO A MATTER OF MAKING IT A LEGAL DOCUMENT, THEN FINE. WE HAVE DIGITALLY, IF IT'S A MATTER OF ACTUALLY READING THIS, YOU HAVE IT DIGITALLY. I UPSTAIRS IN THE COPY TO GET THROUGH IT EASILY. WE NEED, WE'RE GONNA PUT AN APPENDICES. I WOULD JUST WANT IT TO BE, WE'RE GOING TO PUT IN APPENDICES. CORRECT. THERE ARE SOME APPENDICES. PERFECT. OKAY. OKAY. NEXT. NEXT. ACTUALLY, THE ACRONYMS ARE REALLY TYPOS THAT WERE TYPED IN AT THREE IN THE MORNING. THAT'S, THAT'S WHY YOU DON'T UNDERSTAND THEM. THAT'S OKAY. ALRIGHT. ANYWAY, THAT WAS JUST MY SUGGESTION FROM SOMEBODY WHO READ THROUGH THAT WHOLE THING. THANK YOU. I HAD TO TAKE A COUPLE ASPIRINS AFTERWARDS AND THEN I HAD TO READ THE CLA RESPONSE, WHICH OKAY. MADE IT EVEN MORE DIFFICULT. ALRIGHT. ALRIGHT. WE'RE BEYOND THAT. AND THEN TIMES THE CHANGES. KEEP GOING. ALRIGHT. NOW THAT YOU'VE DONE, IF YOU ARE GOING TO GRANT THE SPECIAL PERMIT, WHICH PERMIT, WHICH YOU APPARENTLY ARE, WE GO TO 2322. AND THERE ARE TWO ISSUES THERE. ONE IS THE AUTHORITY TO ISSUE THE STOP WORK ORDER, AND THE SECOND IS THE AUTHORITY TO ISSUE THE NOTICE OF NON-RENEWAL. THE, THE APPLICANT'S ATTORNEY HAS TAKEN THE POSITION THAT WITH RESPECT TO THE NOTICE OF NON-RENEWAL, THAT BECOMES MOOT BECAUSE THE ISSUE IS RESOLVED BY THE ISSUANCE OF THE, UH, NEW PERMIT. THE BUILDING DEPARTMENT TAKES A DIFFERENT POSITION, WHICH IS CONFUSING TO ME BECAUSE THE BUILDING DEPARTMENT IS JUST SAYING THAT THE BUILDING INSPECTOR DOES HAVE THE AUTHORIZATION TO PRESENT A STOP WORK ORDER. WELL, THAT, THAT'S A STOP WORK ORDER. THAT'S TWO. THAT, THAT'S, THAT'S PART ONE. RIGHT? SO PART THAT'S THE ONE. YEAH. THEY'RE SAYING THAT THE BUILDING DEPARTMENT HAS THE ABILITY TO SAY THAT IT CAN'T BE RENEWED. RIGHT. THE SPECIAL USE PERMIT, WHICH JUST RAISES THE RED FLAG, WHICH WAS WHAT I HAD SAID WHEN WE WERE UP THERE, WHICH THEN INITIATED THE WHOLE MM-HMM . [02:15:01] UH, SPECIAL PERMIT. RIGHT. BUT NO, NOWHERE DOES IT SAY THAT THE BILLING INSPECTOR CAN'T DO THAT. NO, NO, NO, NO. WE TALKING ABOUT THIS. SO WE'RE DENYING WE'RE WE'RE TALKING ABOUT DENYING THERE ARE TWO PIECES. THE NOTICE OF RENEWAL 2322 AND STOP WORK ORDER. SO ON ONE HAND VIOLATION OCCURS, WE GONNA PUT UP A STOP WORK ORDER. BUT THEN THE BUILDING DEPARTMENT IS ALL SAYING, HAS THE LE THE LEVY TO BE ABLE TO SAY THAT YOU CAN'T RENEW IT, THE SPECIAL PERMIT. SO IT'S TWO FOOT AND HE, WELL, MAY DIDN'T RENEW IT. IS THAT WHERE I'M CONFUSED. BUT WE'RE SAYING WE HAVE THE RIGHT TO RIGHT. RIGHT. AND THEY'RE SAYING, SO WHAT AM I MISSING? PLEASE DENY THE, PLEASE DENY THAT, THAT THERE SHOULDN'T BE A RIGHT TO SAY YOU CAN'T TO A NON, MAYBE YOU SHOULD DIS THE MORE, THE SIMPLER ISSUE IS THE STOP WORK. IT'S NOT NECESSARILY SIMPLER, BUT IT'S CERTAINLY MORE CLEAR CUT. THE ISSUE OF THE AUTHORITY TO ISSUE A STOP WORK ORDER. I'M OKAY WITH THAT PART, BUT THE NON-RENEWAL THE WAY, LET'S, LET'S DO ONE AT A TIME, ONE AT A TIME. OKAY. THE STOP WORK ORDER UNDER THE CIRCUMSTANCES HERE. THE QUESTION IS, UNDER THE CIRCUMSTANCES HERE, DID THE BUILDING INSPECTOR HAVE THE AUTHORITY TO ISSUE A STOP WORK ORDER? I I VOTE. I SAY THEY DO. I FEEL THAT THEY DO. I THINK THE ATTORNEY WAS TRYING TO WHICH ATTORNEY RAISE ? YEAH. WE'VE GOT A LOT OF THEM HERE. UH, THE NEW ONE, THE ONE REGARDING THIS, I DON'T KNOW THE, THE APPLICANT'S ATTORNEY. THE APPLICANT ATTORNEY. THE APPLICANT'S ATTORNEY. WELL, THE APPLICANT HAS MULTIPLE ATTORNEYS. SO WHICH ONE ARE YOU ASKING ABOUT? WELL, YOU SAID THE ATTORNEY. WELL, SO WE'RE TRYING TO FIGURE OUT ONE, WHO THE ATTORNEY IS WAS HE WAS THE ONLY ONE THAT SPOKE TO THEM. YEAH. REALLY FOR THEM. THAT'LL WORK. YEAH. YEAH. OKAY. I THINK HE'S JUST TRYING TO RAISE A SMOKE SCREEN TO SAY THAT THE INTERPRETATION IN OUR, UM, CODE SAYS THAT IT'S ONLY FOR RESIDENTIAL WORK OR FOR THIS WORKER, FOR THAT WORK INSTRUCTION. AND THEREFORE SHOULD NOT BE REL UH, RE RELEVANT, RELEVANT TO A, UM, STONE CRUSHING, UH, COMPANY. AND I THINK THAT THAT'S JUST A SMOKE SCREEN. SO YES, I BELIEVE THAT THE BUILDING INSPECTOR HAS THE RIGHT TO ISSUE A STOP WORK ORDER. AGREED. I'M TRYING NOT TO GET MY, AND I THINK HE BASICALLY, HE SAID THAT THEY, THAT ONE 10 B ONLY GRANTS THE BUILDING, UH, DEPARTMENT THE RIGHT TO, UH, PUT A STOP WORK ORDER ON CONSTRUCTION ACTIVITY VERSUS AN ONGOING BUSINESS. SO THAT'S WHAT HE THAT'S WHAT HE WAS SAYING. AND BECAUSE THIS WAS AN ONGOING BUSINESS, THEY WOULDN'T HAVE THE RIGHT TO DO THAT. I DON'T AGREE WITH IT, BUT THAT'S WHAT HE WAS SAYING. I, I, SO I THINK MOST OF US COULD VERY EASILY HAVE BEEN NOT AN ONGOING BUSINESS. I THINK MOST OF US ARE SAYING TO DENY THE APPLICANT'S REQUEST, REQUEST ON, I THINK INSPECTOR DOES HAVE THE RIGHT ON THIS PART OF, ON, ON PART ONE OF 23, 22. SO NOW WE'RE UP TO THE SECOND PART OF 23, 22. THE SECOND, THE SECOND ONE HAS THE NON-RENEWAL HAS TWO, TWO, UH, ISSUES. JESUS. ONE IS THE TECHNICAL ARGUMENTS THAT WERE RAISED IS OVER THE AUTHORITY. AND THE SECOND IS WHETHER THIS IS STILL A VIABLE APPEAL GIVEN THE FACT THAT THE ISSUANCE OF THE SPECIAL PERMIT IN CASE 21 RENDERS THAT THIS ONE MOOT. OKAY. I'M CONFUSED . SO YOU DON'T NEED IT. SO THEY DIDN'T NEED THAT. SO THEY, YOU DON'T HAVE TO BASICALLY, YEAH. LET'S TAKE THE UNITED STATES SUPREME COURT. IF THEY CAN AVOID, IF THEY CAN AVOID DETERMINING AN ISSUE, THEY WILL, THEY'LL USE ALL KINDS OF I'LL GO WITH YOU. LET'S GO. WHAT? I THINK IT'S MOOT. I'M GO WITH HIM. I'M GO WITH THAT. I DON'T GONNA HAVE TO DECIDE THAT BECAUSE WE'RE GRANTING THEM A NEW PERMIT. RIGHT. OKAY. RIGHT. GOOD ENOUGH. YAY. SO WE, WE HAVE THREE DENIES. WHAT DO YOU TWO SAY? NO, NO, NO, NO. HOLD ON. YOU'RE SAYING NO, NO, NO. WE THREE, WE DON'T, WE DON'T THINK THAT IT, IT'S NOT A DENY, IT'S A, THAT WE DON'T HAVE TO DECIDE THAT IT'S MOVED. WELL, YOU ARE, IT'S MOVED. YOU'RE DENYING IT. WE'RE DENYING IT'S MOVED. IT'S BEEN RENDERED MOVED. HONOR. WELL THAT'S WHAT I THOUGHT FROM THE BEGINNING. I JUST, OKAY, GOOD. OKAY. YES. OKAY. SO YES. MOTION. YOU HAVE A DRAFT? YES. PERFECT. BEAUTIFUL. OKAY, LET'S [02:20:01] GO. YES, YES. OKAY. NOW I DID HAVE ONE QUESTION BECAUSE I DON'T KNOW IF THIS EVER COME BACK UP AGAIN. WHERE'S GARRETT? HE'LL BE BACK. VIRTUAL QUARRY. WHERE DID THAT LANGUAGE COME FROM? YEAH. OKAY. ALRIGHT. AND WELL, NEVERMIND, I'LL FIND OUT LATER. SO WHEN YOU GO OUT THERE, I'LL FIND OUT LATER. YOU SEE ALL THESE, THESE REAL QUERIES FILES, THEY REALLY DON'T EXIST. THEY'RE VERY RARELY VIRTUAL . RIGHT. THEY'RE HOLOGRAMS. GOT YOU. ALRIGHT, I GOT YOU. ALRIGHT. A JUST ASK QUESTION. YOU KNOW, YOU CAN'T OKAY. AI GENERATED. OKAY. ALRIGHT, WE'RE GOOD. NEXT, UH, WHO'S POPPING A BOTTLE OF CHAMPAGNE? , LET'S GO. YOU CAN. ALRIGHT. ALRIGHT. WHAT'S NEXT? 24 DASH 31. THE STERN. OH GOD. FROM ROSE. WELL, IT SOUNDED LIKE YOU WANTED MORE INFORMATION. WELL, WE TRIED TO, IT WAS THE MOST UNPREPARED PRESENTATION. IT WAS I HAVE EVER SEEN IN MY TIME ON THE BOARD. WELL, HE DID OPEN UP WITH THE FACT THAT HE'S NEW. THEY HAD A, THEY HAD AN ATTORNEY. RIGHT. AND THE ATTORNEY PUT HIM IN THE, IN THIS ROLE. WELL, HE SAID HE IS ONLY HAD IT FOR TWO TO THREE WEEKS. RIGHT, RIGHT. YOU AND YOU AND I WOULD'VE CRAMMED. AND IF IT WERE MY PROPERTY, I WOULD'VE MADE SURE HE WAS UP TO SPEED. I WOULD'VE STAYED OR I WOULD'VE ASKED TO ADJOURN IT TO GIVE HIM TIME. BUT IT, IT WAS, WELL, WHEN YOU, WHEN YOU BUILD AN ARGUMENT, HIS, HIS ARGUMENT WAS GOING TO BE THE FACT THAT WE ARE GONNA GET 10 OTHER COMPLAINTS. AND THAT'S EXACTLY WHAT I WAS TRYING TO AVOID FROM DAY ONE. THAT YOU WERE ASKING FOR SOMETHING AND I SHOWED THE PHOTOGRAPHS AND VIDEOS OF THAT TIME OF ALL THE OTHER PROPERTIES WHICH WERE PROBABLY IN VIOLATION AND DOLLARS OF DONUTS. THAT'S EXACTLY WHAT HAPPENED. SO NOW, UNLESS YOU CAN DEMONSTRATE SOMETHING DIFFERENT THAN EACH OF THOSE INDIVIDUALS, JUST AS YOU ARE, WE'LL HAVE TO COME AND ASK FOR SOME TYPE OF A RELIEF THEMSELVES. NOW, I ALSO OFFERED THEM PRIVATELY WHEN WE DID MEET WITH THEM BEFORE, YOU KNOW, THERE WAS ANOTHER OPTION OF RELOCATING OR CREATING A NEW GARAGE AND THEN GET RID OF ALL THE IMPERVIOUS SERVICE TO THE REAR OF THE HOME. TURN THAT INTO A REC ROOM. SO I THINK WE GAVE SIGNIFICANT ALTERNATE SUGGESTIONS AS TO, TO BRING THAT PROPERTY INTO A CLOSER ALIGNMENT WITH THE OTHER HOMES. I'M NOT GONNA SIT HERE AND LISTEN TO THE NEIGHBOR THAT NOW THAT THE TREES ARE CUT DOWN, LISTEN, THAT'S NOT PART THE APPLICATION. RIGHT. WE ARE FOCUSING ON THE DRIVEWAY. MM-HMM . AND THE IMPERVIOUS SURFACES. SO AGAIN, WE GAVE OPTIONS AND THE FACT, IF WE RECALL, WE CAN GO BACK TO THE LAKE HOUSE AND THE BREEZEWAY AND THE DOUBLE GUARD GARAGE THAT WANTED TO STRETCH FROM ONE END OF THE PROPERTIES THE OTHER. AND WE ST WE WE, WE HELD FAST TO THE FACT THAT IT WAS ABOUT IMPERVIOUS SURFACE. I KNOW IT MAY LOOK BEAUTIFUL OR PLEASING TO AN INDIVIDUAL'S EYE. AS I SAID, I HAD THE CONTRARY VOTE ON THIS ONE. WE SAID PUT UP SCREENING AND THEY BUILT A FOREST. RIGHT. . SO I THINK THEY WENT IN THE TOTAL OPPOSITE DIRECTION. SO THE POINT IS, I THINK, YOU KNOW, WE, WE ARE USING OUR TEST FACTORS APPROPRIATELY IN TERMS OF WHAT THE, THE COMPLEXION OF THE NEIGHBORHOOD LOOKS LIKE TO ALL RESIDENTS THAT LIVE THERE AS WELL AS TRYING TO PROVIDE RELIEF TO THE INDIVIDUALS. WELL, I WOULD, I WOULD SAY THAT I FIND IT EASY TO SEPARATE THIS ONE FROM THE REST OF THE NEIGHBORHOOD. THIS ONE HAS A WATER ISSUE. AND IF THE OTHERS COME FORWARD WITH WATER ISSUES CAUSED BY A NEIGHBOR OR THAT THEY ARE CAUSING NEIGHBORS, IT'S NOT CAUSED BY THE NEIGHBOR, IT'S CAUSED BY THE WELL WHAT I'M SAYING, I WON'T, I DON'T WANNA GET TOO F*****G, BUT, BUT THE ISSUE IS WE DON'T KNOW WHAT'S CAUSING IT. BUT THE POINT, WE DON'T KNOW HOW LONG THEY'VE HAD IT. RIGHT. BUT, AND THEY'VE NEVER MADE COMPLAINT BEFORE. THEY, I MEAN HE, I THINK HE EXPLAINED THAT BECAUSE HE THOUGHT IT WAS LEGAL. HE DIDN'T KNOW. BUT THE ISSUE TO ME IS MORE THAT THERE'S BEEN, WE HAVE ASKED PEOPLE DON'T THINK THAT WAY. , I GUESS I HAD PROBLEMS AND I DID. SO I, MAYBE I I'M DIFFERENT. NO, I'M TALKING ABOUT WHAT YOU SAID ABOUT HIM. I, YOU KNOW, THEY, THEY, THEY MENTIONED THAT THEY HAVE LEGALLY GONE AFTER THE FORMER OWN. WELL THE CURRENT OWNER OR WHOMEVER HAS A DEED AT THIS POINT. RIGHT. SO AGAIN, TO ME THAT'S STILL A MOOT ISSUE. BUT THE, BUT THE ISSUE IS I DO NOT BECAUSE OF THE WATER COMPLAINT THAT HAS COME TO US. WHETHER THEY KNEW TO MAKE A FORMAL COMPLAINT OR WHATEVER BEFORE, I DON'T KNOW. WELL, THEY MIGHT MADE A LOT, THEY MADE A LOT OF COMPLAINTS TO US. OKAY. RIGHT, RIGHT. KIND OF LIKE, I'M NOT BRINGING UP, I THINK THAT DIFFERENTIATES IF WE HAVE, OF THE 10 MORE PLACES THAT COME BEFORE US. IT'S IF TWO OF THEM MENTIONED WATER ISSUES RELATED TO, YOU KNOW, A NEIGHBOR SAYS THEIR OVERSIZED DRIVEWAY HAS CAUSING ME WATER PROBLEMS. WE'LL DEAL WITH THEM INDIVIDUALLY. IF THERE ARE, I DON'T THINK [02:25:01] IT MEANS THAT WE HAVE TO TELL EVERYBODY. THEY'VE GOTTA DO EXACTLY THE SAME THING. I THINK WE DO. BECAUSE AGAIN, IT'S A PRECEDENT. IT'S NOT BECAUSE THIS IS UNIQUE. KNOW IT, COMPLAINTS OF THE WATER DON, I DISAGREE. IS THE WHOLE TOWN YOU HAVE TO DEAL WITH WITH ALL OF THIS. I DISAGREE. 'CAUSE I, I THINK THAT WHAT THEY'RE, THEY COULD SET IT APART, BUT THEY'RE NOT. OKAY. NO, NO, NO. WE'RE TALKING ABOUT THE OTHER 10 NEIGHBORS WHEN THEY COME, WHAT IS GONNA BE DIFFERENT FOR THEM? EXACTLY. IF THEIR, IF THEIR PROPERTY, IF THEIR DRIVEWAY HAS A ZERO SETBACK AND IT SHOULD NOT, HOW DO WE NOW WRITE THAT UP? YEAH. WELL AND THEY HAVE, WELL, HOW DO YOU NOT WRITE? RIGHT. HOW DO YOU NOT WRITE? HOW DO YOU NOT WRITE IT UP? YEAH. THAT'S THAT. SO THEY TOO SHOULD HAVE TO MOVE THEIRS AS WELL. CORRECT. I TOTALLY AGREE WITH YOU. YEAH. EVEN IF THEIRS ARE NOT CAUSING WATER PROBLEMS FOR THE NEIGHBOR, IT IS VIOLATING THE ZONING CODE. THAT'S, THIS IS WHAT I WAS TRYING TO GET AROUND. YEAH. UNLESS YOU SEE THAT'S WHY YOU REALLY SURE. WELL THAT'S WHY I'M SAYING THIS ONE IS UNIQUE. I DON'T YOU DON'T KNOW. WE KNOW. WE DON'T KNOW THAT. WE DON'T KNOW THAT. WHY WOULD I ASSUME SOMEBODY IS WHY THAT A NEIGHBOR IS LYING? THAT HE IS, DO WE WANT HIM TO BRING RECEIPTS FOR THE WATER COMPANY? WE DON'T EVEN, WE DON'T EVEN KNOW IF THAT IS WHAT IS CAUSING THE WATER. I MEAN, THEY'RE DOWNHILL. I, MY, MY NEIGHBOR'S HOUSE RUNS OFF INTO MINE AND IT'S ON LAWN. IT'S NOT EVEN ON IMPERVIOUS SURFACE. AND WE GET A REALLY HORRIBLE STORM. I HAVE TO GO CLEAN OUT MY DRAINS TO MAKE SURE THERE'S NOTHING IN THEM OR IN THE MIDDLE OF THE NIGHT MY GARAGE WILL FLOOD. WILL FLOOD. AND THAT'S ONLY HAPPENED IN THE LAST 10 YEARS BECAUSE OF THE RAIN THAT WE'VE GOTTEN AND THE STORMS. SO I CAN'T, MY, WHAT IS MY NEIGHBOR SUPPOSED TO DO? HE'S UPHILL FROM ME. RIGHT. I LIVE IN, IN A WHOLE HILLY AREA. SO WE DON'T, WE DON'T KNOW UNLESS WE GET AN ENGINEER OUT THERE AND YOU KNOW, TO TELL US WHAT'S HAPPENING, WHAT'S CAUSING THE WATER. WE DON'T, WE CAN'T SAY THAT'S WHAT IT IS FOR STRIP OF DRIVEWAY. WE DON'T KNOW. AND THEY DID INDICATE THAT THEY WOULD PITCH THE DRIVEWAY BACK TOWARDS THE HOME. SO ALL OF THOSE I THINK ARE NO, THEY DIDN'T MENTION THAT AT ALL TODAY. NO, NOT TODAY. NOT TODAY. IN THE ORIGINAL SUBMISSION THEY DID. BUT THAT'S WHAT I MEAN. THEY DID, BUT THEN THEY MADE THE DRIVEWAY WIDER AND LEFT IT. THAT WAS AND LEFT IT. THAT WAS THE POINT THAT I WAS RAISING. YEAH. SO AGAIN, IN TERMS OF THE PRECEDENT SETTING THAT I WAS TRYING TO SAY BEFORE, IT WAS, WE WERE GOING FROM SOMETHING TO A ZERO SETBACK. WE GAVE SUGGESTIONS AS TO HOW TO MINIMIZE BEING ZERO. RIGHT. OR TO PUT OR TO CREATE A, A FOOT. WELL THE BUFFER WOULD BE CREATE WOULD BE MOVING THE DRIVEWAY AWAY SO PEOPLE WOULD APPLES AND TOMATOES, APPLES, GREEN APPLES AND RED APPLES. WE WE'RE MOVING IT AWAY FROM THE PROPERTY LINE. WELL WE ALSO SAID, AND WE ALSO INDICATED TO PUT IN NATURAL SCREENING AND THEY'RE PUTTING IN A FENCE AND THE FENCE ISN'T GONNA HELP. WHEREAS THE NATURAL YEAH. AND THE NATURAL SCREENING, THE PLANTINGS WOULD, YOU KNOW, POTENTIALLY IT'S A ZERO SETBACK. THERE'S NOTHING. WELL, BECAUSE ORIGINALLY WE WEREN'T GONNA HAVE IT BE A ZERO SETBACK. YOU CAN'T, THEY MADE IT SO WELL, BUT, ALRIGHT. ALRIGHT. CAN I SAY SOMETHING? GO AHEAD. LET LET IT FIRST. LET IT NO, NO, NO. OKAY. DID YOU FINISH WHAT YOU WERE GONNA SAY? NO, I WAS, I'M FINE. YEAH. OKAY. WE, WE REP, WE PRESENTED TO THEM LOTS OF RECOMMENDATIONS TO HELP RESOLVE THIS ISSUE. WHICH ISSUE? AND BECAUSE THEY HAVE SEVERAL ISSUES. OH, RIGHT. WELL WE GAVE, WELL THEY DIDN'T GAVE THEM, WELL WE, THEY DIDN'T DEAL WITH ANY OF OUR RECOMMENDATIONS FOR ANY OF THESE ISSUES. WE GAVE THEM LOTS OF OPTIONS TO THE POINT WHERE WE WERE, UM, UH, RECOMMENDED THAT WE WENT TOO FAR AND THAT THAT WAS A RESPONSIBILITY OF THE APPLICANT TO COME UP WITH WHAT WOULD BE THE RIGHT SOLUTION OR THEIR SOLUTION. AND THEN RE REPRESENTED TO THE BOARD. I THINK WE WENT OVERBOARD IN PROVIDING THEM WITH SEVERAL OPTIONS OF WHICH IN, IN, IN THE, UH, ATTEMPT TO BRING THIS TO A QUICK END THAT WE THOUGHT MIGHT BE, UM, HELPFUL TO BOTH THE APPLICANT AND THE NEIGHBOR. UM, THEN THEY COME BACK WITH THIS DRAWING, WHICH IF YOU LOOK CLOSELY UNDER A MICROSCOPE, YOU CAN SEE IT DOES SORT OF, KIND OF, UH, TAKE INTO ACCOUNT SOME OF THE, UH, SUGGESTIONS THAT WE HAD, UH, PRESENTED TO THEM. WHICH ONES? WELL, IF YOU LOOK AT THEM, IT DOES ALMOST ALL OF THEM. MM-HMM . BUT IN SUCH A MANNER THAT IT WOULD BE, UM, I WOULDN'T SUGGEST THAT IT GO ON THE RECORD. WELL I THINK THAT THEN, THEN WE FOLLOW UP WITH THE CASE [02:30:01] AFTER IT AFTERWARDS, WHICH IS LIKE EXACTLY WHAT YOU WOULD NEED IN ORDER TO SHOW WHAT AN APPLICANT WOULD NEED TO DO TO, UM, SHOW WHAT THEIR, WHAT THEIR SUGGESTIONS ARE. WELL, MAYBE YOU WANT KIRA TO SEND A COPY OF THE PLANS THAT WERE SUBMITTED IN THE LATER CASE TO THEM. . THAT'S TO SHOW WHAT YOU'RE LOOKING FOR. UM, WELL I'M, I'M SAYING THIS AS HERE AT OUR TABLE, UM, WHERE WE'RE JUST LOOKING AT, UH, DIFFERENT THINGS. I'M NOT SAYING THAT WHERE ARE YOU TAKING IT? I'M A LITTLE CONFUSED. THE DRAWINGS SUCKED. THAT'S WELL THAT, SO I ALSO, I ALSO SAY THAT THEIR NOTES, 'CAUSE I, I WAS LIKE, 'CAUSE SEAN WAS LIKE, WELL I DON'T SEE IT. I GO, YEAH, IT'S NOT IN THE DRAWING. IT'S IN THE NOTE ON THE SIDE. AND SO ON THE NOTE ON THE SIDE, THEY WOULD SAY THEY ARE, BUT THERE'S NOTHING IN THE DRAWING TO SHOW ME THAT THEY ACTUALLY, THERE'S NO MEASUREMENTS. THERE'S, THERE'S, IT'S ONLY THE NOTES TO THE SIDE. IN FACT, FOR ME, FROM A DIFFERENT DAY FROM ME, THE DRAWINGS ACTUALLY IN SOME WAYS GOT WORSE INSTEAD OF BETTER. ABSOLUTELY. FROM WHERE THEY WERE BEFORE. CORRECT. LIKE THE IMPER, THEY DID IMPERIOUS SURFACE IS ACTUALLY PROBABLY GREATER, GREATER THAN LESS. WHICH IS ACTUALLY NOT GREATER BECAUSE THEY TOOK OUT THE MACA DAM AND IF THEY DID TAKE THE FULL MACA DAM OUT FROM THE REAR, IT MIGHT'VE MITIGATED SOME OF IT. BUT, BUT IT, THEY DIDN'T SAY THEY DID, THEY JUST WROTE ON THE NOTE THAT THEY WERE GOING TO, BUT THEN THEY DIDN'T, THE OTHER SIDE, THEY, THEY DID THE TURNAROUND AREA. WELL IT JUST SHOWS. NO, THEY SHOW THAT. BUT THEN THEY HAVE AN ARROW POINTING TO THE EXISTING MCADAM AND SAYING THAT THAT'S GOING TO BE TURNED INTO NO, THEY'VE ALWAYS, THEY'VE ALWAYS SAID THAT. THEY SAID THAT LAST TIME, BUT THEY SAID THE WHOLE AREA. NOW THEY'VE KEPT PART OF IT. THE PROBLEM FOR ME IS THEY SAY THEY NEED THE TURNAROUND. SO THE PROBLEM FOR ME IS THAT THEY, THEY OBVIOUSLY, YOU KNOW, THEY'VE HAD TWO MONTHS 'CAUSE THEY GOT PUT, THEY POSTPONED IT LAST TIME TWO TIMES, DIDN'T THEY? YES. LAST WEREN'T THE LAST TIME THEY HERE DECEMBER. NO, THEY WERE HERE JANUARY. JANUARY AND I WASN'T HERE FEBRUARY. MY CONCERN IS, BUT YOU DIDN'T MISS IT BECAUSE THEY ADJOURNED IT. THEY ADRE. YEAH. OKAY. SO YOU THOUGHT YOU COULD GET OUT OF IT IN TWO MONTHS. BUT THEY HAD TWO MONTHS TO COME UP WITH NOTHING. THEY'VE COME BACK, THEY'VE GONE BACKWARDS. OH. WITH NOTHING MUCH. THEY CAME BACK WITH AN ATTORNEY, DIFFERENT ATTORNEY, BUT BUT A DRAWING THAT HAD GONE BACKWARDS INSTEAD OF FORWARD. OH, THAT BE, YEAH. WE, WE DON'T, WE DON'T KNOW IF IT WENT BACKWARDS. WE DO. SHE HAS, SHE THAT'S WHAT SHE POINTED OUT. SHE . WELL, NO, WE DON'T KNOW BECAUSE THERE'S NO MEASUREMENT ANYTHING ON IT. WE DON'T KNOW. SO I, I AM, IT JUST LOOKS THAT WAY. MY CONCERN IS, AND AND THE FACT THAT THE LAWYER WASN'T AWARE ISN'T REALLY THE ISSUE. I MEAN, THIS IS NOT, A LAWYER DOESN'T DRAW UP PLANS. IT'S AN ARCHITECT. WHAT HAS AN ARCHITECT BEEN DOING FOR TWO MONTHS? IT HAS A DIMENSION THERE. 2.4 WITH AN ARROW THAT DOESN'T REALLY DO WHAT WHAT WHAT'S THE PROPERTY LINE? BUT WHAT'S THIS DIMENSION RIGHT HERE? WE DON'T KNOW. SO AGAIN, SEE THIS TURNOUT RIGHT HERE DOESN'T TURN THAT TURN IS WHAT WE WERE, THEY SAID EMPHATICALLY LAST TIME THAT THEY WOULD NOT WANT TO ENCROACH IN THAT AREA. AND THEY DID. SO THEY'VE NOW ENCROACHED IN THIS AREA. BUT HAD THEY JUST MOVED THIS OVER, IT MIGHT'VE MADE LIFE A LITTLE SIMPLER. ENCROACHING INTO THIS WAS WHAT WE RECOMMEND. CORRECT. BUT THEY DID DO SEE FROM LAST, THEY, THEY ENCROACHED BUT SO THAT THEY COULD PUT A BAR BARRIER HERE AND THEN THEY DIDN'T PUT THE BARRIER. AND ALL THEY SHOWED IS A RED LINE. WHY THERE WAS LINE THERE. ONE OF THE THINGS I THINK, SO KNOW THEY PUT THE RED LINE IN THERE, MATERIAL, THIS BOX, THEY'RE PROPOSING FOR THE FENCE BECAUSE THE SOLID FENCE MAY HOLD WATER BACK. BUT IF IT'S A THICK FENCE, IT'S NOT GONNA, IT'S NOT GONNA HOLD ANY UNLESS THERE'S A CURB. THE CURB BLOCKS WOULD DO IT. THE ORIGINAL LINE, THE CURVE BLOCKS WOULD, WOULD SOLVE ALL'S THE DRIVEWAY, ANY POTENTIAL WATER ISSUE. NOT NECESSARILY. IF YOU, IF IT'S FLOODING IF'S UP, IF IT'S UP FOUR OR FIVE INCHES OR SIX INCHES I HAVE, IT WOULD RETAIN INTO THE WATER'S TAKING AWAY. SO, WELL THEY HAVE THE NEIGHBORS HAVE A STONEWALL, SO IT'S YEAH, MINE A STONE. BUT TO ME, MY BIG QUESTION IS, IN TWO MONTHS THERE HAS BEEN NO PROGRESS AND WITH, WITH DIRECTION, AND I'M NOT, I'M TRYING TO UNDERSTAND WHAT GIVING THEM ANOTHER MONTH, WHAT ACCOMPLISH. WELL, IN TWO MONTHS THEY TURNED THE LEADERS AND DUG A HOLE AND PUT IT INTO THE GROUND. WE DON'T KNOW IF THAT WAS DONE BEFORE OR AFTER THE PHOTOS WERE SENT TO US OF THE LEADERS GOING OUT. WE DON'T KNOW WHAT THAT WAS THE REACTION WAS IT? WELL, IT WAS DONE WITHIN THE TWO MONTHS. YEAH, THAT I, BUT IT MAY HAVE BEEN DONE WITHIN THE LAST DAY AND A HALF. WELL THAT'S TRUE TOO. YEAH. 'CAUSE IT JUST, WELL, IT, BUT TECHNICALLY WE GOT IT YESTERDAY SO IT RIGHT. BUT, AND WE GOT SOME PHOTO OF THE GUTTERS GOING TOWARDS [02:35:01] THE HOUSE. BUT YOU'RE OVER DAYS, FOUR DAYS AGO. BUT YOU'RE LOOKING, YOU'RE OVERLOOKING THE FIRST ISSUE THAT CAME UP. AND THAT IS, IS THERE VALUE? AND I HAPPEN TO THINK THERE IS TO ADJOURNING THIS UNTIL THE OTHER CASES COME IN SO WE CAN DETERMINE WHAT PRECEDENTS WE ARE, WE'RE SETTING SUPPOSED TO, WHETHER THERE'S AGREE WITH THAT, WHETHER THEY'RE SIMILAR OR DIF SUFFICIENTLY DIFFERENT THAT YOU CAN RULE ONE WAY IN ONE CASE AND ANOTHER WAY IN ANOTHER CASE. FOR EXAMPLE, THIS IS ONE OF THE FEW HOUSES IN THE, IN THE NEIGHBORHOOD THAT HAS A SIDE FACING GARAGE. GARAGE, CORRECT. ALL, VIRTUALLY ALL. I THINK THERE'S ONE OTHER, UH, GARAGE, BUT I THINK THAT ONE MAY BE NEAR A CORNER OR SOMETHING LIKE THAT AROUND THE CORNER. I THINK ALL THE OTHERS, ALL THE OTHERS WERE LIKE THE HOUSE WAS TO BEGIN WITH, WHICH HAD A, HAVE FRONT FACING, SOME HAVE TWO CAR GARAGES AND THAT'S WHY THEY'RE CLOSE TO THE PROPERTY LINE. BUT, SO THERE, THERE'S A DIFFERENCE RIGHT THERE. THEN THERE WERE, THERE WERE ANY NUMBER OF VARIABLES THAT MAY RENDER THESE EITHER DISTINGUISHABLE OR SIMILAR. AND YOU REALLY HAVE TO TREAT EVERYONE AS EQUALLY AS YOU CAN. AND THEN YOU CAN'T DO THAT UNTIL YOU KNOW WHAT THE OTHER CASES ARE. AND THAT'S WHY THE, THE, THE ATTORNEY OVERSTATED WHAT I SAID TO HIM, WHICH WAS THAT YOU WERE GOING TO ADJOURN IT. I SAID I WOULD RECOMMEND IT THAT YOU ADJOURN IT. HOW LONG? SORRY? HOW LONG? WAIT A MINUTE. HOLD ON ONE SECOND PLEASE. JESUS. IT SEEMS LIKE EVERY TIME I WANNA SAY SOMETHING, EVERYONE, YOU ALWAYS WANNA SAY SOMETHING. WHERE'S ROHAN HELD IT? BUT YOU SHOULD WAIT YOUR TURN. THAT'S ALL. I'VE BEEN WAITING MY TURN. WHERE'S ROHAN? AND WITH, WITH NO SUCCESS, LOOK. OH, COME ON. FIRST OF ALL, HOW LONG BEFORE THE OTHER CASES COME BEFORE THE BOARD? DO YOU HAVE AN I A TIMEFRAME? WELL, THE BUILDING DEPARTMENT ISSUE VIOLATIONS AND THEY HAVE A CERTAIN AMOUNT OF TIME, I THINK WAS IT 30 OR 60 DAYS TO FILE AN APPEAL MM-HMM . SO WE COULD BE TALKING QUITE A BIT OF TIME. NO, 30, 60 DAYS, THEN THEY HAVE TO GET ON SCHEDULE. THEN THERE'S MORE THAT MIGHT HAVE TO TAKE PLACE. THAT'S CORRECT. WHEREAS WE HAVE THE OPPORTUNITY TO, TO LOOK AT THIS CASE INDIVIDUALLY. AND THEN YOU MAY BE TREATING IT DIFFERENTLY THAN THEN. THEN YOU MAY BE EITHER THEN YOU'RE SETTING YOURSELF UP, YOU'RE SETTING A PRECEDENT THAT MAY BIND YOU IN THESE OTHER CASES. CORRECT. SEE, THAT'S WHERE I, I'M CONFUSED BECAUSE MY FEELING IS BY LUMPING THEM TOGETHER ALL AT ONCE WAY, WELL NOT LUMPING 'EM ALL TOGETHER. YOU'RE MAKING IT ALL A PRECEDENT. YOU'RE THEN, IF YOU JUST DEAL WITH THEM ONE AT A TIME, IT DOESN'T MATTER HOW MANY, MANY, IT'S ONE, IT'S A PRECEDENT. CORRECT. IT'S A PRECEDENT. WHETHER IT'S TODAY, WHETHER IT'S 10 YEARS FROM NOW OR WHETHER IT'S ONE OR TWO. THE DEAL IS IF WE SAY THE SPEED LIMIT TO EXIT HERE, YOU CAN ONLY MAKE A RIGHT HAND TURN. SO IF WE'RE LOOKING AT 10 OF THESE AT THE SAME TIME, WELL, I DON'T THINK THERE ARE 10 AND 15 IS HOW MANY MAY WANNA APPEAL IT. IT DEPENDS ON WHAT PEOPLE WANT. I THINK THERE ARE 10. SOME MAY WANNA APPEAL, SOME MAY NOT. THE COMPLAINT WAS SPECIFICALLY FOR FIVE, BUT THERE ARE OTHERS THAT EXCEED THE SIDE YARD. YEAH. OKAY. SO THERE ARE FIVE. OKAY. SO IF WE, AND WHEN WOULD THE EXTEND THIS TO MEET WITH THE OTHERS? IF THEY GET, THEY GET 30 OR 60 DAYS NOT TO APPEAL. UH OH. IF THEY GET 30 OR 60 DAYS TO APPEAL, THEN THEY SAY WE WANNA APPEAL TO, THEN THEY GET ANOTHER 90 DAYS TO GET THEIR CASE TOGETHER AND GET THEIR DOCUMENTS TOGETHER AND ALL OF THAT. THE A CASE IS A CASE. THEY, SOME MAY RUN FASTER THAN THE OTHERS. I DON'T KNOW. YOU CAN'T PREDICT. AND ISN'T THIS APPLICANT ATTEMPTING TO CONSTRUCT OR DO RENOVATIONS TO THIS? NO, THEY'RE, THEY'RE WORKING BUT, BUT THEY HAVE NO PLANS TO LIVE THERE AS OF TODAY. THEY SAID, WELL, IT'S GOT NOTHING TO DO WITH IT. THAT IT, THEY'RE NOT LIVING THERE AND IT'S, THEY'RE NOT, THEIR DAUGHTER'S NOT, THEY'RE GONNA RENT IT. YEAH, I HEARD THAT. SO, WHICH I DON'T KNOW IF THEY SHOULD HAVE SAID THAT, BUT ARE THEY ABLE TO CONTINUE? IS IT, DO THEY HAVE A BUILDING PERMIT? THEY HAVE A VALID BUILDING PERMIT. YES. SO THEY CONTINUE ABSOLUTELY. ABSOLUTELY. ON THE HOUSE. YES. ON THE HOUSE. YEP. YEAH, THEY JUST CAN'T DO ANYTHING. REMEMBER IF YOU ARE, IF YOU ARE CONCERNED ABOUT HOLDING THEM UP, REMEMBER NOT IN ANYMORE. NOW THAT I'M, I'VE BEEN TOLD THAT THEY HAVE A BUILDING PERMIT AND WE'RE NOT HOLDING THEM UP. THEY, AND THEY CAN CONTINUE THE EXISTING APPROVED DRIVEWAY. THEY HAVE A DRIVEWAY THAT'S LEGAL. THEY JUST DON'T HAVE NO, THE ONE THAT GOES STRAIGHT ON TO THE, TO THE GARAGE. THE ONE THAT'S CURRENT THAT WAS BUILT WITH THE HOUSE. THAT'S DIDN'T THEY LEGAL DIDN'T, DIDN'T THEY GET RID OF THAT NOW? THEY NOT YET. THEY'RE TALKING ABOUT IT. THEY'RE TALKING ABOUT IT. THE PROPOSAL IS TO REMOVE THE DRIVEWAY IS STILL IN EXISTENCE THAT THERE'S NO LONGER A GARAGE THERE. THAT GARAGE HAS BEEN SINCE CONVERTED AND CLOSED OFF AND CLOSED OFF. THE, THE ONLY GARAGE IS THE TWO CAR THAT HAS TO BE ACCESSED [02:40:01] USING THE DRIVEWAY TO GO INTO THE BACK. OKAY. BUT THEY DO HAVE A DRIVEWAY. WHILE ALL OF THESE OTHERS, IF YOU WANT TO CONTINUE TO DO EVERYTHING IN A GROUP WAY, THERE IS A DRIVEWAY THEY HAVE, THEY CAN CONTINUE TO DO IT. YOU JUST CAN'T PARK IN A GARAGE. I KNOW LOTS OF PEOPLE WHO DON'T PARK IN GARAGES. YEAH. THEY TURN INTO GARAGES. IN FACT, THEY HAVEN'T BEEN PARKING IN A GARAGE BEFORE. IT'S BEEN USED FOR STORAGE. HOW MANY TIMES DO WE SEE THE GARAGE IS STORAGE AND THEY'RE PARKING THE CAR OUTSIDE. OKAY. WELL, A LOT OF TIMES OTHER PEOPLE BARELY NEED A GARAGE FOR VARIOUS REASONS. RIGHT. BUT I'M JUST SAYING, SO THERE, THERE IS A DRIVEWAY WHERE THEY CAN PARK WHY THEY TURN THEIR GARAGE INTO A, A FOOTBALL, UM, MEMORABILIA WHERE EVERYBODY NO, WHERE EVERYBODY GOES TO WATCH FOOTBALL, A MAN CAVE, TELEVIS MAN, TV ROOM, MAN CAVE, MEDIA ROOM MAN CAVE. GOT YOU. SOMETHING LIKE THAT. YES. OKAY. BUT ANYWAY, SO ALL RIGHT. MY, AGAIN, MY ONLY POINT WAS GOING BACK TO THE VERY BEGINNING ABOUT CREATING A PRECEDENT OR TYPICALLY WHEN I WRITE SOMETHING UP, AND I'VE SAID THIS BEFORE, WHAT IS GONNA DISTINGUISH IT? AND RIGHT NOW WE'RE STUCK ON A SETBACK ISSUE. WE GAVE THEM AN ALTERNATIVE TO DIMINISH THE AMOUNT THAT THEY WERE REQUESTING AND THEY DID PART OF WHAT WE ASKED AND ACTUALLY MADE IT WIDER. SO WHAT IS, AS FAR AS, UM, IMPERVIOUS SURFACE GO? CORRECT. SO WHAT IS THE SO OUR TWO OPTIONS ARE, BUT REMEMBER THEY ARE CONFORMING. THAT'S NOT AN ISSUE. YEAH. 'CAUSE THEY'RE GETTING RID OF THAT FRONT DRIVEWAY. RIGHT. SO, SO NOW IT'S A SETBACK ISSUE. YEAH. THE ONLY ISSUE, AND IT ALWAYS WORKS. IT'S THE ONLY ISSUE WE HAVE. YEAH. OKAY. SO MY GOES TO MY QUESTION. SO OUR TWO CHOICES ARE TO SEND IT BACK TO THEM AND HAVE THEM FIND AN ARCHITECT THAT'LL DRAW A BETTER DRAWING THAT EXPLAINS WHAT IT IS THEY'RE GOING TO DO AND MAKE ANY MODIFICATIONS THAT THEY MIGHT HAVE. FIRST YOU HAVE TO WRITE THIS RIGHT NOW. IF YOU HAD TO WRITE IT RIGHT NOW, WHAT ARE THE RATIOS FOR THE SETBACK? ZERO. HOW FAR, HOW FAR UP THE DRIVEWAY? OH, I, YEAH. I, I, NO, NO, I UNDERSTAND. SO SO YOU'RE SAYING WE CAN'T DENY BECAUSE I HOW WOULD YOU WRITE IT? I DON'T EVEN KNOW. YOU WOULD WRITE IT. OH, YOU CAN DENY, SAY WE'VE DENIED THE DRIVEWAY AND YOU'VE GOTTA USE THE ONE YOU GOT . I MEAN THAT, THAT, THAT'S THE DENIAL. BUT I THINK WE NEED TO SEND, BUT I'M SAYING SO, SO REGARDLESS IF WE DECIDE TO LUMP THEM, NOT LUMP THEM, BUT HEAR THEM AT A SIMILAR TIME WITH THE OTHER FIVE, WE STILL NEED TO GIVE IT BACK TO THEM BECAUSE THEY STILL HAVEN'T ADDRESSED OUR, OR OR EVEN IF THEY SAY, NO, WE CAN'T DO IT, THIS IS IT. THEY HAVEN'T GIVEN US THE DATA THAT WE NEED TO ACTUALLY APPROVE ANYTHING. 'CAUSE WE DON'T KNOW WHAT, WHAT THE ACTUAL SETBACK THEY'RE LOOKING FOR IS. THERE'S NO MEASUREMENTS ON ANYTHING. SO THERE'S TWO OPTIONS. YEAH. AND I, WELL JUST RIGHT. OR SEND IT BACK AND I WOULDN'T DENY IT. I WOULD SEND IT BACK PERSONALLY, BUT, OKAY. AND I DON'T KNOW THAT WE, WE HAVE GIVEN THEM SO MANY IDEAS, SO MANY COMMENTS. I, I DON'T KNOW THAT WE NEED TO MAKE ANY MORE RECOMMENDATIONS TO THEM ON WHAT THEIR RESPONSE SHOULD BE. WE GAVE THEM THE, GAVE THE LETTER, I GAVE THE GUY THE FILE THAT I HAD, I GAVE THEM, I SAID, AND I WROTE ON IT AND SAID, THIS PLAN, THIS PLAN, THIS LETTER, THIS LETTER. AND I HANDED HIM MY LETTER FROM DECEMBER AND SAID, HERE IT IS. LIKE, AND WROTE NOTES ON IT FOR HIM. SO WE ALMOST GIVE, GAVE THEM A LIST OF ALL THE THINGS THAT THEY NEEDED TO DO FOR US TO, UM, AGREE TO THEIR APPLICATION. RIGHT. AND, AND WE HAVE TO, WE HAVE TO BE PREPARED IF WE GET BACK SOMETHING, WHICH, WHICH I THINK WAS WHAT ED WAS SAYING, WE, WE WENT OVER BEYOND AND, UH, ABOVE AND BEYOND IN DOING THAT. OKAY. SO BASICALLY WE SAID THIS, CAN WE DO WITH OTHER PEOPLE WE'RE GONNA ADJOURN THIS ONE? YES. OKAY. MOVE ON. MOVE ON PLEASE. BUT CAN WE GIVE, WE'RE GONNA ADJOURN IT, BUT CAN WE GIVE KIRA LIKE GUIDANCE? LIKE I JUST SAY WE'RE ADJOURNING AND WE SUGGEST YOU MAKE MODIFICATIONS AND SEND IT BACK TO US AS PER THE HEARING. HOW ABOUT IN COMPLIANCE? I DO NOT GO INTO DETAIL. WE, WE'VE DONE AN UPDATE. NO, NO, NO. I, I WATCH THE VIDEO. WELL, WITH DRAWINGS, GO TO THE VIDEO. WITHDRAWING. PUT ON RECORD FOR TWO MONTHS. TWO MONTHS. NOT LIMITED TO THAT. I DON'T WANNA LIMIT IT TO DRAWINGS TO PUT ON RECORD. JUST GO WATCH THE VIDEO. WHAT, WHAT VIDEO FROM THE HEARING? THE ONE THAT'S OUT THERE. OH. OH. I THINK THEY CAN GO BACK FROM THE NOVEMBER PAST CON, PAST CON UH, CORRESPONDENCE FROM THE, FROM THE BOARD. YEAH, THAT'S WHAT, LIKE, THAT'S ALL. OKAY. OKAY. KIRA, DO YOU HAVE WHAT YOU NEED? YES, I DO. THANK YOU. ALL RIGHT, NEXT. NOW WE GET TO THE BEST PART OF THE MEETING. TWO MORE. [02:45:02] I APPROVE. ALRIGHT, WHICH ONE IS THIS? YOU LISTEN, THE POOL. DO YOU REALIZE, DO YOU REALIZE HOW MANY CASES TONIGHT HAVE TO DEAL WITH WATER? , , SOME OF THE ONE IN A HOT TUB, ONE IN A POOL? UH, THE LAST THREE. YES. ONE RUNOFF, RIGHT? THE LAST THREE. MY THING IS, THE ONLY REASON THAT HE SAID THAT HE WANTED TO HAVE IT WHERE IT WAS, WAS BECAUSE THE NEIGHBOR WOULD HAVE A VIEW IF HE HAD A POOL OUT THERE. OH NO, YOU JUMPED. THE NEIGHBOR WOULD HAVE A WE'RE NOT THERE YET. WE'RE NOT THERE. WE'RE AT THE CORNER. WE'RE AT THE POOL. POOL. OH, WE'RE AT THE POOL. POOL. WE'RE AT THE POOL. POOL. OH, I LOVE THE POOL. POOL. YEAH. WE ALL AGREE POOL. I I'M TOTALLY FINE. BUT IF WE, BUT NO A BUT I ACTUALLY AGREE WITH YOU THAT THE VEGETATION IS A LITTLE OVERKILL. IT WAS LITTLE TOO, BUT LIKE, I DON'T, DOESN'T BOTHER ME. I THINK IT'S THEIR DECISION. I DON'T SEE A NEED TO PUT IN. WELL, NO, WE PUT IT AS PROVISION. SO THEN WE'D HAVE WHOEVER WRITES IT WOULD'VE TO JUST TAKE IT OUT. NO, YOU CAN REFER. WELL, YOU, DO YOU WANT SCREENING AT ALL? I DON'T, REGARDLESS OF THE AMOUNT. I THINK IT NEEDS IT IN THE FRONT. I DO. I THINK THAT SHE, I IF YOU WANT SCREENING THEN, AND YOU THINK THIS IS OVERKILL AS OPPOSED TO STARTING FROM SCRATCH, THE FORESTRY OFFICE USUALLY GOING FROM SCRATCH. YOU SAY GO TO THE, THE FORESTRY OFFICE. WELL, THEY'VE ALREADY DONE THAT. IN THIS PARTICULAR CASE. THEY'VE ALREADY DONE IT. THEY HAVE A PLAN. SO YOU COULD SAY INSTALL SCREENING AS PER THE PLAN SUBMITTED IN SUPPORT, UH, OF THE APPLICATION DATED WHATEVER. YEAH. ARE YOU OKAY WITH THAT? EXCEPT FOR THE EXISTING I'M OKAY WITH IT EXCEPT FOR THE EXISTING DECIDUOUS TREES THAT ARE ALREADY THERE, WHICH ARE OF A CERTAIN HEIGHT. ANY ADDITIONAL SCREENING IS GONNA TAKE SOME TIME TO GROW. UNLESS OF COURSE THEY'RE GONNA SPEND THE MONEY TO GO OUT AND BUY. THEY'RE NOT PROBLEM. THEY WERE IN MY NEIGHBORHOOD THAT DEER WOULD'VE EATEN THEM. SO THEY, THEY ALSO, THEY ACTUALLY GAVE RENDERINGS OF WHEN THEY FIRST PLANTED IT VERSUS WHAT IT WOULD GROW INTO THIS PLANTING PRETTIER ON THE FIRST PLANTING THEN WHEN IT GROW, IN MY OPINION. BUT, UM, BUT YOU COULD SAY, YOU COULD SAY THAT ABOUT ANY CASE WHERE YOU HAVE A SCREENING CONDITION. YEAH. THAT IT MAY, IT'S GONNA TAKE TIME TO GROW. TIME TO GROW. YEAH. YEAH. UNLESS YOU, IN THE VERY, VERY RARE INSTANCE WHERE YOU SAY, AND IT'S BEEN OFFERED, DID SAY SOMETHING WHERE IT'S OFFERED THAT, THAT YOU HAVE, UH, TREES THAT ARE 12 FEET, UH, ON PLANTING. AT PLANTING OR SOMETHING LIKE THAT. WE DID THAT ON ONE, BUT THAT'S VERY RARE. IT HAD TO BE SIX FEET AT AT THE PLANTING THAT THEY HAD TO YEAH, I THINK THEY COULDN'T BUY LITTLE ONES THAT WERE THEY OUT? THEY CAN BUY LITTLE ONES. A TWO, A FOUR. COURT ONE. OKAY. NEXT. OH. SO ARE WE GONNA REMOVE THE CONDITION OF SCREENING? NO. OKAY. JUST LEAVE IT IN THERE AND YEP. LET THEM SCREEN IT AS IT'S BEEN APPROVED. NO, YOU HAVE, THEY THEY WANNA PLANT IT. THE TOWN FORESTRY, A PERSON APPROVED IT. NO, YOU INCLUDE THE CONDITION. BUT THE CONDITION IS AS PER THE PLAN, THEY'VE ALREADY SUBMITTED NOT TO COME UP WITH A PLAN, THE DEER, EVERYTHING RIGHT ALONE. BUT THAT PLAN, WHICH THEY'VE SUBMITTED SHOWS SCREENING THAT WE MAY BE OVERDOING IT. OH MY GOD. WHAT IS, WHAT IS THE WELL, WHAT YOU GONNA DO? YOU'RE GONNA SAY WE'RE GONNA YOU, UH, SCREENING PER THE PLAN EXCEPT TAKE OUT, TAKE OUT SOMETHING. YOU CAN DO THAT, BUT I DON'T THINK YOU WANT DO THAT. CUT IT. DON'T LET IT GO OVER SIX FEET, FOUR FEET TALL. WELL, YOU REALLY WANT TO GET INTO THAT LEVEL OF DETAIL. GIANTS, THEY DON'T NEED THE GIANTS THREE YEARS PER THE PLAN. GIANTS APPROVED BY FORESTRY OFFICER OR SIMILAR PLANTING. BUT HE ALREADY, HE ALREADY HAS APPROVED. YEAH. OR IF THEY WANNA CHANGE IT, THEY'D HAVE TO GO BACK TO 'EM. THIS, THEY WERE LITTLE GUYS. RIGHT. OKAY. RIGHT. WHAT NOW THE JACUZZI. WOW. THE DEER IS DOING THAT. I I'VE HEARD TO THEM. IT IS FINE. FINE. I'VE HAD NO PROBLEM WITH THAT AT ALL. NO, NONE. YOU WERE ABOUT TO SAY YOU HAD SOME ISSUE. YEAH, BECAUSE WE'VE HAD A LOT OF RIGHT OVER THE LENGTH OF TIME. . YEAH. WE POOLS BEING PUT PLACES WHERE, YOU KNOW, IT'S UNUSUAL, RIGHT? YEAH. BECAUSE IT'S THE DETERMINATION OF THE PROPERTY TYPE. SO WE'RE GONNA NEED HELP IF WE WERE TO PROVE THIS TO WRITE IT, BECAUSE THIS, IT IS THE FRONT CHART. WELL, WAIT A MINUTE, I'M SORRY. WE MOVED ON TO THE NEXT CASE. YES. BUT I I BUT AT SOME POINT, WHAT MAKES THIS UNIQUE, I THINK IS THE FACT THAT THE FRONT DOOR AND THE ENTRANCE, THE ENTRANCE DOOR AND THE OFFICIAL MAILBOX, THERE'S MANY, EVERY, THE PLANS, EVERY, EVERY CORNER HOUSE HAS THIS PROBLEMS DEPENDING ON HOW THEY BUILD IT. THE PLANS, RIGHT? YEAH. BUT THAT THIS, ON THIS ONE, IT'S LITERALLY THE CORNER HOUSE WHERE THE GR IT DOESN'T EVEN HAVE AN ENTRANCE ON THAT SIDE IS VIEWED EXCEPT FOR THE GARAGE. JUST THE DRIVEWAY VIEWED AS THE FRONT OF THE HOUSE. THERE'S NO DOOR ON THAT SIDE OF THAT HOUSE. SO IT BASICALLY MAKES IT SO [02:50:01] ESSENTIALLY LIKE TWO SIDES. THEY WOULDN'T BE, THEY HAVE TO FOLLOW RULES FOR I I AM. OKAY. AND, AND IT'S LESS VISIBLE WHERE THEY'RE PUTTING IT. RIGHT. IF THEY WERE TO FOLLOW THE GUI, THE, I'M NOT SAYING GUIDANCE. I'M OPPOSED TO IT. I'M SAYING HOW DO WE WRITE IT? YES. WELL SHE'S STILL, SHE'S OPPOSED TO IT. OH, YOU'RE OPPOSED. OH, WHO IS I I'M NOT OPPOSED TO IT. I'M NOT OPPOSED. IT'S JUST HOW DO YOU WRITE UP THAT THIS IS AN EXCEPTION TO THE RULE OF HAVING IT IN THE FRONT YARD. RIGHT. AND IT'S, SO FOR EXAMPLE, MANY OF THE HOMES THAT WE KNOW WE HAVE ON THE SOUTHERN SIDE, UH, ALONG THE BRONXVILLE PARKWAY, THEY HAVE NO BACKYARDS. SO COULD THEY NOW PUT A JACUZZI IN THEIR FRONT YARD? I THINK, FIRST OF ALL, I THINK THIS IS MORE ON THE SIDE YARD THAN THE FRONT IN SOME WAY. IT'S THAT. IT'S WHAT? IT'S WHAT IT'S WRITTEN ON THE BOOKS BRICK. YEAH. YEAH. I KNOW OPERATIONALLY WHAT WE'RE DOING. BUT WHAT IS IT ACTUALLY CALLED? YOU, YOU COULD DRIVE A CAR. THE NEW, THE NEW CARS LIKE THE, UM, NEW CHEVYS. YOU, THEY HAVE THE DUAL STEERING WHERE YOU COULD TURN AND DRIVE SIDEWAYS. SAY IT WAS ALLOWED TO REMAIN IN ITS CURRENT LOCATION. I, I HAD THIS SUMMER HOUSE A LONG TIME AGO. 'CAUSE WHEN YOU'RE ON THE WATER, THE FRONT OF THE HOUSE IS WHAT FACES THE WATER. RIGHT. AND THE BACK OF THE HOUSE IS WHAT FACES THE STREET. AND ANYTIME YOU WANTED TO DO ANYTHING, THE BACKYARD IS WHAT'S ON THE STREET, NOT BY THE WATER WHERE NO ONE COULD SEE IT. SO IT WAS ALWAYS A PROBLEM, PROBLEM, WHATEVER YOU WANTED TO. BIG PROBLEM. SO DON'T HAVE THAT HOUSE ANYMORE. LIKE THAT. THAT WAS ALWAYS A PROBLEM WHENEVER ANYBODY WANTED TO DO ANYTHING. SO HOW DO YOU SUGGEST IT BEING WRITTEN UP? I DON'T KNOW. THOUGHT. WHAT ABOUT THE IDEA? THERE'S NO DOORWAY. OH, HOLD ON. IS THERE SUGGESTED RIGHT UP? THERE YOU GO. YOU THERE? THERE YOU GO. IT'S WRITTEN UP FOR YOU. THERE WE GO. YOU CAN WRITE IT UP. KIRA TO THE RESCUE. IN WHAT WAY? SHE'S GOTTEN IT WRITTEN UP. YEP. . I LOVE THAT. AND NOW WE'RE GET A LITTLE SMILE. THAT LITTLE LOVE THAT LITTLE SMILE THAT SLOWLY CREEPS UP. DOES IT, DOES IT MEET YOUR WELL, IF YOU WANT TO ADOPT THAT, I DON'T, CAN I SEE IT THAT THE NOTE FAIRY MOTION FERRY. BLESS YOU. ZONING AI , THE GOD THE GRAMMARLY OF ZONING BOARDS. UH, IS IT GOOD ENOUGH THAT WE CAN READ IT TONIGHT? NO CLOSE. YOU SAY YOU CAN'T APPROVE IT. I THINK YOU CAN IMPROVE IT, BUT THE LANGUAGE OF FINDINGS HAVE TO FOLLOW. I NEED A LITTLE MORE LEGAL JARGON IN THERE. OKAY. AS TO, SO ARE WE OKAY WITH THAT FROM A LEGAL PERSPECTIVE? OR DO YOU WANT US TO CLOSE UP FOR DECISION ONLY AND THEN NO, NO, YOU CERTAINLY, UH, DO IT TONIGHT. THAT'S OKAY. SO THE FIRST, THE SECOND ARE WRITTEN UP, THE THIRD ONE'S BEING ADJOURNED. THE FOURTH ONE, THERE ARE THESE TWO THAT HAVE TO BE WRITTEN UP. YOU'RE GONNA DO THIS ONE? I, I TELL YOU WHEN I HAVE DIFFICULTY, I, I DON'T, I DON'T. YOU, YOU JUST LIKE YOU RIGHT HERE. I DUNNO. WELL, IT'S 25 0 2 ALREADY WRITTEN UP. IT MIGHT BE LET LOOK AT MY FOLDER. KI HAS SUCH A NICE SMILE THAT DOES THAT MEAN YOU HAVE, WOULD IT BE HELPFUL TO ADD THAT THE POSTAL ADDRESS IS ACTUALLY ON THE POST THAT TERRACE? NOTHING TO DO WITH IT. IT DOESN'T MATTER. OKAY. IT'S LIKE WHEN THEY PUT UP THE HOUSE NEXT TO ME, IT WAS A VACANT LOT. AND WHEN THEY PUT IT IN, THEY KNEW IT WAS A VACANT LOT. IT WASN'T ALL THE SAME PROPERTY GOING BACK. FIRST WE HAVE FOUR VOTES BECAUSE THIS IS FOR YOU AGAINST, BUT THE BIRD, AS I RECALL, EITHER AGAINST, I'M GONNA, I'M GONNA EX ABSTAIN ON IT BECAUSE I JUST HMM. OH, WHAT JACUZZI CAN, YES, IT CAN BE. I MEAN, AND AND WHERE WOULD YOU MOVE IT TO? YOU COULD MOVE IT ANYWHERE. IT IS WEIRD THAT IT'S NOT NEXT TO THE HOUSE. I WILL SAY THAT. WELL, YOU SHOW THE JACUZZI SO YOU CAN RUN IN AND OUT. THEY'VE GOT A LOT OF, THEY'VE GOT A LOT OF SPACE. IT IS NEXT TO THE HOUSE. SO YOU COME OUT THE IT'S NEXT TO THE HOUSE. IT'S NOW, YES, IT'S RIGHT THERE. I THINK SO THEY WOULD HAVE, THAT'S RIGHT THERE OVER, HOLD ON, THERE'S A BIG SPACE THEY HAVE, OH, SORRY. THEY'RE USUALLY DOWN HERE. HOLD ON. UNLESS THESE PICTURES ARE SAYING SOMETHING DIFFERENT. [02:55:01] HOLD ON. I THINK THE ONLY PICTURES THAT ARE AT THE VERY END THAT SHOW, SHOW THAT SHOW THAT THEY HAVE A LOT OF PICTURES, BUT ONLY ONE THAT SHOWS THE HERE IT'S THE LAST PAGE. THAT'S THE RIGHT. SO LAB, IT DOESN'T SHOW YOU IT'S THE LAST PAGE AND THEN YES. YOU DON'T THIS WHAT EXISTING? THAT'S THEIR HOUSE. YEAH. IT'S HOW THAT EXISTING, RIGHT? YEAH. YEAH. THIS RIGHT THERE. SO THIS IS THE DRIVEWAY, RIGHT? BUT IT'S NOT NEXT TO THE HOUSE WHERE THE ELECTRIC DOESN'T HERE. BUT THE PROBLEM IS HERE'S THE FINAL FENCE. RIGHT? OKAY. THAT'S RIGHT HERE. SHE WAS SAYING WHERE COULD YOU MOVE IT TO IF, AND IT'S SIMPLE TO, WELL HOLD ON. SO HERE THIS ONE COMPLAINT WAS THE NEIGHBOR SEEING IT. BUT NEIGHBORS CAN, WOULDN'T WANT, NEIGHBORS CAN SEE IT WHERE IT IS. YOU CAN'T, IT'S NOT A VALID POINT. RIGHT. AND IF IT WAS A VALID POINT, ALL YOU GOTTA DO IS PUT UP SOMETHING AND IT BLOCKS IT. SO FOR ME ON THIS ONE, WHICH WAS THE QUESTION THAT I ASKED IS IF AWNING ANYTHING, YOU KNOW, IF THE FRONT OF THE HOUSE WAS CLOSE LINE, WHAT IS AESTHETICALLY THE FRONT OF THE HOUSE? WOULD THERE BE ANY VIOLATIONS? AND IT'S, NO, THAT'S, AND THAT'S WHY, THAT'S WHY I'M A YES ON THIS BECAUSE AESTHETICALLY IT IS THE FRONT OF THE HOUSE AND THERE, IF IT WAS LEGALLY THE FRONT OF THE HOUSE, THEN THERE WOULDN'T BE ANY VIOLATIONS. I TOTALLY, IF THERE WERE THEN I WOULDN'T THINK THAT'S WHERE WE ARE. THEN IT WOULD, THAT'S WHERE THE FOUR OF US ARE. THAT'S, YEAH. AND I THINK, I THINK IF I HAD BOUGHT THE HOUSE, I WOULD THINK THAT IT WAS THE BACK OF THE HOUSE. I WOULD, ESPECIALLY WITH THE POST OFFICE ADDRESS BEING THAT I WOULD, AND AS THEY SAY, YOU BASICALLY GO IN ON TERRACE STREET, YOU GO OUT ON THE PATIO, JACUZZI SIDE. I MEAN THAT'S HOW FLOW OF THE HOUSE WORKS. THEY HAVE A, DEPENDS ON HOW YOU DEFINE SIDE AND REAR. NO, THIS IS EVERYTHING FROM HERE. IT WOULD BE REAR. OKAY. YOU WANT IT THAT WAY? YES. IT'S PERPENDICULAR. NOT THIS. NO. THEN YOU WOULDN'T HAVE NO, IT'S THIS, IT, IT IS ONLY PERMITTED IN THE REAR. IT COULDN'T BE ON THE SIDE. SO, WELL YOU NEED A VARIANCE POOLS AND HOT TUBS ARE RESTRICTED TO THE REAR YARD. THE WAY, THE WAY THIS PROPERTY IS CONFIGURED IN THE WAY IT WAS BUILT, IT'S, IT'S IRREGULAR. UM, OOPS, USE THAT WORD NOW. IRREGULAR. GO AHEAD. IRREGULAR, IRREGULAR, IRREGULAR. UM, WITH TERRACE STREET BEING THE AESTHETIC FRONT OF THE HOUSE AND GIBSON BEING THE ZONING FRONT OF THE HOUSE. SO JUST TAKING THAT, MAKING TERRACE THE FRONT, THE JACUZZI WOULD BE COMPLIANT IF TERRACE WAS AT THE ACTUAL FRONT. BUT BECAUSE THE WAY IT WAS BUILT, IT, IT'S IN THE, UH, FRONT YARD. AND THAT'S TO ME, WHAT MAKES IT UNIQUE WHERE I CAN SAY YES, IT'S NOT SETTING A PRECEDENT FOR SOMEBODY ELSE WHO WANTS TO DO IT, BUT WE NEED TO, WE DO IT ALL THE TIME. WELL, FOR SOMEONE ELSE WHO HAS THE EXACT SAME CIRCUMSTANCES YOU'RE SETTING, YOU'RE RIGHT, YOU'RE SETTING THE PRECEDENT FOR CORNER LOTS, RIGHT? UH, ONLY ONES THAT HA WHERE ADDRESS WITH AESTHETIC, THE FRONT, ALL THIS OTHER STUFF. YEAH, A LOT OF THEM DO. UH, BILL MY HOUSE SIDE PLEASE TO GET IT. THE HOUSE NEXT DOOR TO ME HAS A, YOU KNOW, THE NUMBERS SKIP BECAUSE EVEN IF WE MOVE IT BACK, THEY NEVER PUT IN SIDE YARD. THEY NEVER PUT A NUMBER FOR IT. SO WHEN THEY BUILT THIS HOUSE, THEY WANTED ME TO CHANGE MY ADDRESS. I'VE BEEN THERE FOR 30 SOME YEARS. I SAID NO, I'M NOT GONNA DO THAT. THEY JUST MAKE IT 14 A THE REGULAR NATURE OF THE NO, THE POST OFFICE HAS TO DO IT. SO YEAH. TELL YOU YOU NAME IT. 14, THEY SIGNED A NUMBER. NOT FRONT. IT WAS A DIFFERENT NUMBER. OH, THEY DIDN'T DO LIKE 14 DASH ONE OR FRONT POSTAL FRONT. ALRIGHT, SO ARE WE A YES ON THIS OR? YEAH. YOU'VE GOT FOUR YESES. THE QUESTION IS WHO'S WRITING UP THIS ONE AND WHO'S WRITING UP THE POOL? I'M WRITING UP THE POOL. OKAY. AND YOU'RE WRITING UP THIS ONE, RIGHT? SO WE'RE GOOD. 16. I DIDN'T SAY, I DIDN'T SAY THAT YET, BUT 16. YES. LET FIND SOME. OKAY, WE'RE DONE. MAGICAL LANGUAGE. I HAVE A LONG DRIVE AHEAD OF LONG, IT'S A MAGICAL LANGUAGE TO OH, THAT'S RIGHT. YOU DO. WHERE YOU GOING? YEAH. UM, THE HOUSE HERE IS IN THE MIDDLE OF BLACK MOLD REMEDIATION. SO I HAVE TO DRIVE BACK TO THE MANHATTAN PARK. CAN I, I CAN'T WALK INTO THE HOUSE. NINE O YOU AND ME. BOTH MY, MY SON'S BIRTHDAY. THEY KEEP CALLING ME TO CUT THIS CAKE. WHAT THAT WHAT? MY SON'S BIRTHDAY. THEY WANTED ME TO COME HOME AND CUT THIS CAKE. OH. WHAT TIME ARE YOU GOING? WELL, WE'RE NOT, WE'RE NOT READING ANYTHING INTO THE RECORD. REALLY? FIRST. AND THEY'RE THE FIRST CASE. I DON'T KNOW WHAT WE'RE READING. YOU HAVE THE NOTES ON THAT ONE, ED, THAT I HANDED DOWN? YOU HAVE A SHORT ONE FOR NUMBER TWO? YEAH, BUT THIS, THIS IS WHO I DO THE, THE WRITEUP. KARA, DID YOU HAVE ANOTHER COPY? [03:00:01] WE DON'T EVEN WRITE UP THE DENIALS. KARA DOES THOSE. SOMEBODY HAD THE WRITEUP FOR THIS ONE? NO. IS THIS IT RIGHT HERE? IT'S JUST DENIED. THIS IS THE HOT TUB THAT DO FINDINGS. DO FINDINGS DO 5 0 1 SOMETHING THAT IS JUSTIFIED THE COURT, UH, IF IT'S APPEALED, YOU NEED A RECORD THEN FIND IT FOR A DENIAL IS SAYING YOU DON'T NEED, I THOUGHT I, IT WAS JUST DENIED. I THOUGHT I READ THEM THE ONES I NO, NO, NO. WE, OKAY, WE'VE, WE'VE WRITTEN UP DENIALS. WE DON'T DO A LOT OF DENIALS, BUT YES, WE WE WRITE THEM UP. WE JUST SAY NO. WHAT DO WE WRITE UP? WE STILL HAVE TO HAVE FINDINGS. YEAH, WE, I'VE WRITTEN UP DENIALS BEFORE WHICH, ALRIGHT. UH, 23, 22. YEAH. 22. YOU GOT IT. SO THIS IS IT HERE? YEAH. LUKE SOUNDS GOOD TO ME. LUKE KI IS STANDING. OKAY, HERE. SO YOU'RE READING, UH, 22, 21 AND TWO. THE LAST TWO AND THE SECOND, THE THIRD IS BEING ADJOURNED. AND THE FIRST WE'RE NOT READING INTO THE RECORD. OKAY, SAY THAT AGAIN. SO 22 AND YOU'RE READING, I'M READING, RIGHT. AND THEN YOU SAID SOMETHING ABOUT TWO BEFORE OR AFTER THAT. THE NEXT TWO OR SOMETHING. YOU SAID THE THE FIRST, THE THE NEXT ONE IS BEING IS ADJOURNED. IS ADJOURNED AND OH TWO AND OH 1, 25, 0 2 AND 25 0 1 ARE BEING GRANTED TONIGHT. OKAY. AND WE, I HAVE OH TWO. WELL THAT'S WHAT'S THROWING ME OFF BECAUSE THE NUMBERS ARE OUTTA LINE. YEAH. WHO'S READING THE DENIAL OF 2322? WHAT? WHOEVER HAS IT, I'M HOLDING IT NOW IN MY HAND. SIGNED IT YET. I THOUGHT YOU SAID YOU WERE TAKING IT. TAKING, WHAT DID YOU SAY? HE'S TAKING, HE'S TAKING UH, 25 0 2, RIGHT? YES. OH, SEE, THAT'S WHAT THREW ME OFF. I'M STILL THINKING 25 0 2 IS THE LAST ONE. IT'S NOT. OKAY. I CAN STILL READ THE DENIAL FOR 23, 22. OKAY. WHAT, WHAT IS, WHAT IS THAT SQUIGGLY THING MEAN? AND I HAVE, UM, YEP. 19 PRIMROSE 5 0 2. THAT RIGHT. PRIMROSE IS, PRIMROSE IS GETTING BOUNCED SECTION PROBABLY. NO, I DIDN'T MEAN PRIMROSE, I MEANT GLENDALE. WHY CAN'T THEY JUST SAY SECTION SHEET FOR HIM? YOU'RE DOING, YOU'RE DOING NO, I'M DOING UM, MARSHALL. OH, YOU ARE DOING MARSHALL. OKAY. YEAH, I GOT MARSHALL. ALL RIGHT. I MADE MY ADJUSTMENTS. OKAY. ANYBODY WANTS TO, SOMETHING WANTS TO WHAT? I SAID IF SOMEBODY WANTS TO ASSIGN ME SOMETHING, JUST HAND IT TO CASES. LOU, YOU WANT TO HAND THE CASES? THAT ONE, THE 25 0 2. IT'S BEEN A LONG TIME. 22. YOU'RE WELCOME SO MUCH. THANK YOU CHAIRMAN. WE ARE BACK ON THE RECORD WITH THE RESULTS OF OUR DELIBERATIONS THIS EVENING. AND WE'RE CASE NUMBER 2321, WHICH IS THE INDUSTRIES. I WILL READ THE SEEKER STATEMENT. WHEREAS THE GREENBERG CBA HAS REVIEWED THE ABOVE-REFERENCED APPLICATION WITH REGARD TO CA COMPLIANCE. AND CAN I MAKE A MOTION DECLARING THAT THE PROPOSED ACTION IS AN UNLISTED ACTION? AYE. MOVE SECOND. ALL IN FAVOR? AYE. AYE. ALL IN FAVOR. GOTTA BE MORE THAN TWO IT THAN JUST NOW LISTED. ACTION. I CAN GO ANY FURTHER. CAN I HAVE A MOTION NOW DETERMINING THAT THE PROPOSED ACTION WILL NOT HAVE A SIGNIFICANT ADVERSE IMPACT ON THE ENVIRONMENT AND RENDERING A NEGATIVE DECLARATION CONSISTENT WITH THE DRAFT NARRATIVE PROVIDED TO THE BOARD. DO YOU HAVE A MOTION ON THAT PLEASE? I, I SO MOVE. I SECOND. ALL IN FAVOR? AYE. AYE. THANK YOU. UH, BECAUSE [03:05:01] OF THE, UH, THE, THE, THE MOTION BEING SUBJECT TO 20 CONDITIONS, I WILL NOT READ THOSE TONIGHT BECAUSE IT TAKES UP SINGLE SPACE OF AT LEAST SIX AND A HALF PAGES. WE STILL HAVE TO DO THE MOTION ON IT THOUGH, DON'T WE? OH, WE, WE DID. WE JUST DID THE SEEKER. YEAH. YEAH, WE JUST DID THE SEEKER. I'M SORRY. OKAY. CAN I HAVE A MOTION? UH, WITH RESPECT TO GRANTING THE APPLICATION FOR A SPECIAL PERMIT SUBJECT TO THE FOLLOWING CONDITIONS, AS I INDICATED WILL NOT BE READ THIS EVENING BECAUSE THEY ARE QUITE SUBSTANTIAL. AYE. SO MOVE. AYE. SECOND. ALL IN FAVOR? AYE. AND THEREFORE I WILL READ THE FINDINGS. SHOULD I OR NOT? IT'S UP TO YOU ALL. UH, FINDINGS. APPLICANT LEASES APPROXIMATELY 1314 0.3 ACRES LOCATED SOUTH OF THE INTERSECTION OF WAREHOUSE LANE AND WAREHOUSE LANE SOUTH IN THE TOWN OF GREENBURG. THE PARCEL EN ENCOMPASSES WAY WAREHOUSE LANE SOUTH AND IS BOARDED BY CROSSED POR PAUSE ON ANIMAL SHELTER TO THE SOUTH ROCK OUT CROPPINGS TO THE WEST AND NORTH AND THE WESTCHESTER COUNTY WALKING AND BIKE TRAIL AND SAWMILL RIVER TO THE EAST AND IS LOCATED IN THE GI GENERAL INDUSTRIAL IN DISTRICT. THE LEASE RESTRICTIVE ZONING DISTRICT IN THE TOWN, THE ZBA CASE ZERO 1.35 IS APPLICANT'S LANDLORD OBTAINED A SPECIAL PERMIT TO OPERATE A ROCK CRUSHING AND AGGREGATE RECLAMATION FACILITY ON THE SITE SUBJECT TO SEVERAL CONDITIONS DESIGNED TO MITIGATE THE IMPACTS OF SUCH INTENSE USE. ONE OF THE CONDITIONS REQUIRED ANNUAL REVIEW AND RENEWAL OF THE OPERATION BY THE BUILDING INSPECTOR. AFTER ONE SUCH REVIEW ON JULY 9TH, 2023, THE CURRENT BUILDING INSPECTOR FOUND THAT THE APPLICANT'S OPERATIONS AT THE SITE VIOLATED SEVERAL OF THE CONDITIONS OF THE 2201 SPECIAL PERMIT AND ISSUED A STOP WORK ORDER APPLICANT APPEAL THE ISSUANCE OF THE STOP WORK ORDER AND NON-RENEW NON-RENEWAL OF THE 20 0 0 0 FIRST 2001, 2001, OKAY. SPECIAL PERMIT TO THIS BOARD IN A SEPARATE APPLICATION UNDER CASE ZBA CASE 2322 AND SIMULTANEOUSLY FILED THIS APPLICATION FOR A NEW REVISED SPECIAL PERMIT PURSUANT TO SECTION 2285 DASH THREE THREE A SECTION TWO B OF THE ZONING ORDINANCE, THE FILING OF THE APPEAL IN CASE 22, 23 22, STATE ENFORCEMENT OF THE STOP WORK ORDER WHILE REVIEW OF THE TWO APPLICATIONS WERE, WAS ONGOING, THE APPLICATION HEREIN HAS BEEN THE SUBJECT OF EXTENSIVE AND LENGTHY REVIEW STARTING IN SEPTEMBER, 2023. PUBLIC HEARING WAS CLOSED ON JANUARY 23RD, 2025, BUT THE WRITTEN RECORD WAS KEPT OPEN UNTIL FEBRUARY 11TH, 2025. DURING THIS PERIOD, BOTH THE APPLICANT AND THE REVIEWING AGENCIES OF THE TOWN, INCLUDING THE BUILDING AND ENGINEERING DEPARTMENTS, ENGAGED IN EXTENSIVE CONVERSATIONS AND NEGOTIATIONS TO ATTEMPT TO COME TO MUTUAL AGREEMENT CONDITIONS, AGREEABLE CONDITIONS TO MITIGATE THE IMPACTS OF THIS INTENSIVE USE ON NEIGHBORING USES SUCH AS THE ANIMAL SHELTER, AS WELL AS POTENTIAL IMPACTS TO THE PUBLIC FROM THE PROXIMITY OF THE OPERATIONS TO THE WESTCHESTER COUNTY WALK OR BIKE TRAIL AND THE SAWMILL RIVER. GIVEN THE TECHNICAL NATURE OF THE CONDITIONS, THE BOARD RETAINS PS AND S AN ENGINEERING CONSULTING FIRM TO ASSIST IN EVALUATING THE POSITIONS OF BOTH SIDES. THE ZONING BOARD HEREBY CONDEMNS CONDI COMMENDS, I'M SORRY, BOTH SIDES FOR THEIR PATIENTS' PERSEVERANCE AND THEIR WILLINGNESS TO COMPROMISE AS SET FORTH IN THE ACCOMPANYING NEGATIVE DECLARATION. WE HEREBY FIND THAT THE ISSUANCE OF A SPECIAL PERMIT, AS WE HAVE CONDITIONED IT WILL NOT HINDER DEVELOPMENT OF THE DISTRICT OR IMPAIR THE USE ENJOYMENT AND SAFETY OF ADJACENT LANDS OR BUILDINGS AND WILL NOT RESULT IN A SIGNIFICANT ADVERSE ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACTS. WE'VE HERE, HERE, HERE. THEREFORE GRANT THE APPLICANT'S REQUEST FOR A NEW SPECIAL PERMIT SUBJECT TO THE APPLICANT'S RECEIVING SLIGHT SITE PLAN [03:10:01] APPROVAL AND ALL FEDERAL, STATE AND LOCAL PERMITS AND APPROVALS, CONDEMNS AND MENTS. I DID . OKAY. PLEASE CORRECT FOR ME. THANK YOU . OKAY. UM, THE NEXT CASE IS CASE 2322. EDC SEVEN LLC FAIL INDUSTRIES. THE APPLICANT HERE HAS, IS APPEALING A DETERMINATION OF THE BUILDING INSPECTOR TO ISSUE WELL THAT'S WHERE WE ARE AT THIS POINT AND ALSO A STOP WORK ORDER WHEREAS THE GREENBERG ZBA HAS REVIEWED THE ABOVE REFERENCED APPLICATION WITH REGARD TO SECRET COMPLIANCE AND NOW THEREFORE BE IT RESOLVED THAT THE SUBJECT APPLICATION IS A TYPE TWO ACTION REQUIRING NO FURTHER SECRET CONSIDERATION. SECOND, DO I HAVE A MOTION? I I HAVE THE MOTION. I MOVE THAT THE APPLICATION IN CASE 2322 IN SO FAR AS IT APPEALS THE ISSUANCE OF A STOP WORK ORDER BY THE BUILDING INSPECTOR BE DENIED. AYE. SECOND. ALL IN FAVOR? AYE. AYE. AYE. CHAIR VOTES. AYE. OKAY. FINDINGS, THE APPLICANT IS APPEALING THE NON-RENEWAL OF A SPECIAL PERMIT ISSUED TO ITS PREDECESSOR ELMSFORD REALTY CORP ON APRIL 18TH, 2002, AND THE ISSUANCE OF A STOP WORK ORDER BY THE BUILDING INSPECTOR ON JULY 19TH, 2023. ON THE GROUNDS THAT THE APPLICANT'S ROCK ROCK CRUSHING AND AGGREGATE RECLAMATION OPERATION IS IN VIOLATION OF SEVERAL OF THE CONDITIONS SET BY THIS BOARD. IN GRANTING A SPECIAL PERMIT, THE BUILDING IS SPECTOR ASSERTS THAT SUCH VIOLATIONS TOGETHER WITH THE FAILURE OF EROSION CONTROL MEASURES WARRANT THE ISSUANCE OF A STOP WORK ORDER PURSUANT TO SECTION 100 DASH 10 A OF THE GREENBERG DOWN CODE. IN A SEPARATE APPLICATION, THE APPLICANT IS SEEKING A REVISION OF THE 2002 SPECIAL PERMIT AND OR THE RENEWAL THEREOF AND HAS THEREFORE REQUESTED THAT THIS BOARD ADJOURN ITS APPEAL FROM THE NON-RENEWAL OF THE SPECIAL PERMIT TO RUN. CONCURRENTLY WITH THIS BOARD'S CONSIDERATION OF THE APPLICATION FOR A NEW REVISED SPECIAL PERMIT, ZBA CASE 2321 APPEAL FROM THE ISSUANCE OF THE STOP WORK ORDER, THE BUILDING INSPECTOR CITED NUMEROUS ALLEGED VIOLATIONS OF THE SEVEN CONDITIONS ATTACHED BY THIS BOARD TO THE APRIL 18TH, 2002 SPECIAL PERMIT AS REASONS FOR THE ISSUANCE OF THE STOP WORK ORDER PURSUANT TO SECTION 100 DASH 10 A OF THE GREENBURG TOWN CODE. APPLICANT ARGUES THAT SECTION 100 DASH 10 B OF THE TOWN CODE PERMITS THE ISSUANCE OF A STOP WORK ORDER ONLY FOR WORK ON ANY BUILDING OR STRUCTURE EXCAVATION, GRADING, OR FILLING ON A SITE. IT ARGUES THAT VIOLATIONS RELATING TO THE AMOUNT OF MATERIALS STORED ON SITE, THE HEIGHT OF THE PILES OF MATERIALS THEREIN AND THE HOURS OF OPERATION AMONG OTHERS DO NOT RELATE TO THE DEVELOPMENT OF THE SITE AND THEREFORE THE BUILDING INSPECTOR DOES NOT HAVE THE AUTHORITY TO STOP SUCH WORK. WE DISAGREE IN INTERPRETING AND APPLYING THE TERMS OF STATUTE OR ORDINANCE. WE ARE REQUIRED TO GIVE MEETING AND EFFECT TO ALL ITS LANGUAGE IF POSSIBLE AND WORDS ARE NOT TO BE REJECTED AT SU SUPER FLUS MCKINNEY'S STATUTES 2 3 1 SECTION 110 A OF THE TOWN CODE LIST SIX CATEGORIES OF WORK FOR WHICH A STOP WORK ORDER SHALL BE ISSUED INSOFAR AS RELEVANT TO THIS APPEAL. SUBSECTION FIVE OF SUCH SECTION PROVIDES THAT A STOP WORK ORDER SHALL BE ISSUED TO HALT WORK THAT IS NOT IN COMPLIANCE WITH CONDITIONS SET FORTH IN THE ZONING BOARD OF APPEALS DECISIONS. WE FIND THAT SUCH VIOLATIONS HAVE BEEN ESTABLISHED IN THE RECORD BEFORE US AND THAT THEREFORE THE ISSUANCE OF THE STOP WORK ORDER WAS PROPER AND WITHIN THE AUTHORITY AND JURISDICTION OF THE BUILDING INSPECTOR TO ISSUE APPLICANT'S ARGUMENT THAT NOTWITHSTANDING THE SIX CATEGORIES OF WORK SET FORTH IN SECTION 110 A FOR WHICH A STOP ORDER SHALL BE ISSUED ONLY THE WORK DESCRIBED IN SECTION 110 B CAN ACTUALLY BE STOPPED IS CONTRARY TO THE CLEAR LANGUAGE AND INTENT OF SECTION 100 DASH 10 A, WHICH IS NOTED ABOVE WE CANNOT IGNORE. WE THEREFORE DENY APPLICANT'S CHALLENGE TO THE ISSUANCE OF THE STOP WORK ORDER APPEAL FROM NON-RENEWAL OF THE APRIL 18TH, 2002 SPECIAL PERMIT. WAIT, WAIT. THE WAY YOU WORDED THE MOTION YOU'RE GONNA HAVE TO DO A SECOND MOTION. OH, OKAY. I MOVE THAT THE [03:15:01] APPLICATION INSOFAR AS IT APPEALS TO NO, THE NON-RENEWAL OF THE 18TH, APRIL 18TH, 2002 SPECIAL PERMIT BE DENIED. AYE. SECOND. ALL IN FAVOR? AYE. AYE. CHAIR VOTES. AYE. OKAY. IN LIGHT OF THE FACT THAT THIS BOARD HAS GRANTED APPLICANT'S COMPANION REQUEST FOR A NEW SPECIAL PERMIT ZBA CASE 23 DASH 21, WE HEREBY DENY ITS APPEAL FROM THE NON-RENEWAL OF THE ORIGINAL SPECIAL PERMIT AS MOVED. THANK YOU. AND THE NEXT CASE WE HAVE ON OUR AGENDA IS CASE 24 31 THOMAS H UH, STERN AND WHEREAS THE GREENBERG ZBA HAS REVIEWED THE ABOVE-REFERENCED APPLICATION. NO. WELL THAT'S RIGHT. WE'RE JUST GOING TO ADJOURN. SO, UM, TWO MONTHS. MAY 16TH, JUNE, MAY, YEAH. AURN 16TH ADJOURN FOR ALL PURPOSES. KARA WAS SUGGESTING MAY IT'S MAY 16TH IS MAY, MAY 16TH, 2025. ALL THE NEXT CASE WE HAVE IS CASE 25 0 3. BRIAN MARSHALL 14 TERRACE STREET. NO, NO, NO, NO. I KEEP, KEEP READING IT WRONG, RIGHT? IT READS WRONG. SEE THE WAY IT'S WRITTEN ON HERE, THAT'S THE WAY IT IS. YEAH. UM, SORRY ABOUT THAT. CAGE 25 0 2 RAMIN ROBBI 3 3 3 GLENDALE ROAD SCARSDALE. WHEREAS THE GREENBERG ZBA HAS REVIEWED THE ABOVE-REFERENCED APPLICATION WITH REGARD TO SEEK A COMPLIANCE AND NOW THEREFORE BE IT RESOLVED THAT THE SUBJECT APPLICATION IS A TYPE TWO ACTION REQUIRING NO FURTHER SEKER CONSIDERATION. DO I HAVE A MOTION? I SO MOVE. AND DO I HAVE A SECOND? WHO HAS IT? WHO HAS IT? ALL RIGHT, SECOND. ALL IN FAVOR? AYE. AYE. AYE. AND WHO HAS THE MOTION? UH, I DO. MADAM CHAIR, I MOVE THAT THE APPLICATION IN CASE NUMBER 25 0 2 BE GRANTED PROVIDED THAT THE APPLICANT OBTAIN ALL NECESSARY APPROVALS AND FILE SAME WITH THE BILLING DEPARTMENT. THAT CONSTRUCTION SHALL BEGIN NO LATER THAN 12 MONTHS AFTER THE GRANTING OF THE LAST APPROVAL REQUIRED FOR THE ISSUANCE OF A BUILDING PERMIT AND PROCEED DILIGENTLY THEREAFTER IN CONFORMITY WITH THE PLANS DATED MAY 5TH, 2023 AND LAST REVISED JANUARY 10TH, 2025 AS WELL AS LANDSCAPE PLAN L ONE DATED MAY 3RD, 2023 AND LAST REVISED FEBRUARY 19TH, 2025 SUBMITTED IN SUPPORT OF THIS APPLICATION OR AS SUCH, PLANS MAY BE HERE FINE MODIFIED BY ANOTHER APPROVING BOARD OR AGENCY OR OFFICER OF THE TOWN. PROVIDED THAT SUCH MODIFICATION DOES NOT REQUIRE A DIFFERENT OR GREATER VARIANCE IN WHAT WE ARE GRANTING HEREIN THE VARIANCE IS BEING GRANTED ARE FOR THE IMPROVEMENTS SHOWN ON THE PLAN SUBMITTED IN SUPPORT OF THIS APPLICATION ONLY ANY FUTURE OR ADDITIONAL CONSTRUCTION THAT IS NOT IN CONFORMITY WITH THE REQUIREMENTS OF THE ZONING ORDINANCE SHALL REQUIRE VARIANCES EVEN IF THE CONSTRUCTION CONFORMS TO THE HEIGHT, SETBACK OR OTHER VARIANCES WE HAVE APPROVED HEREIN. SECOND? YES. ALL ALL IN FAVOR AYE. AYE. AYE. CHAIR VOTES. AYE UH, FINDINGS, THE APPLICANT OWNS PROPERTY LOCATED IN THE R 20 ZONING DISTRICT AND PROPOSES TO CONSTRUCT AN INDOOR POOL ADDITION ON THAT SUBJECT PROPERTY. IN ORDER TO DO SO, THE APPLICANT REQUIRES THE FOLLOWING VARIANCES FROM THE PROVISIONS OF THE ZONING ORDINANCE FROM SECTION 25 12 B THREE A OF THE ZONING ORDINANCE TO INCREASE THE MAXIMUM PRINCIPAL BUILDING COVERAGE FROM 18% WHICH IS PERMITTED TO 23.5%, WHICH IS PROPOSED FROM SECTION 2285 DASH [03:20:01] 12 B 3D TO INCREASE THE MAXIMUM IMPERVIOUS SURFACE COVERAGE FROM 29% WHICH IS PERMITTED TO 23.5% EXISTING TO A 36.5% PROPOSED AND FROM SECTION 2 85 DASH 42 C ONE TO INCREASE A NONCONFORMING STRUCTURE SO AS TO CON SO AS TO INCREASE SUCH NONCONFORMANCE WHICH IS IMPERVIOUS SURFACE. IN GRANTING THIS APPLICATION, THE ZONING BOARD HAS WEIGHED THE BENEFIT TO BE DERIVED BY THE APPLICANT FROM THE PROPOSED VARIANCES AGAINST THE IMPACT THAT THE VARIANCE MIGHT HAVE ON THE HEALTH, SAFETY AND WELFARE OF THE NEIGHBORHOOD AND COMMUNITY. AFTER DOING SO, WE FIND THAT GRANTING THE VARIANCES WILL NOT RESULT IN AN UNDESIRABLE CHANGE IN THE NEIGHBORHOOD OR DETRIMENT TO NEARBY PROPERTIES PROVIDED THE CONDITIONS ARE FULLY COMPLIED WITH BECAUSE THE APPLICANT CONSIDERED RECOMMENDATIONS AND CONCERNS OF NEIGHBORS AFFECTED AND REDUCED THE SCALE OF THE PROJECT AND DESIGN TO BLEND WITH THE SURROUNDING NEIGHBORHOOD. THE GOAL OF THE APPLICANT CANNOT BE ACHIEVED BY SOME OTHER FEASIBLE MEANS WITHOUT OBTAINING THE VARIANCES. WE ARE GRANTING NOW BECAUSE DUE TO EXISTING NONCONFORMITIES, THE APPLICANT WILL REQUIRE VARIANCES TO ACHIEVE THEIR GOAL. THE REQUESTED VARIANCES ARE SUBSTANTIAL IN RELATION TO THE REQUIREMENTS SOUGHT TO BE VARIED IN THAT THE REQUESTED RELIEF IS 23.0% COMPARED WITH 18% PERMITTED A 27.7% INCREASE AND 35.5% COMPARED WITH 29% PERMITTED, WHICH IS A 20.68% INCREASE. HOWEVER, WITH THE EXISTING COVERAGE OF 33.5% COMPARED WITH A 35.7% WHICH IS REQUESTED, THE PERCENTAGE INCREASE WOULD BE AN ASK OF 6.57%. GRANTING THE VARIANCES WILL NOT HAVE AN ADVERSE EFFECT OR IMPACT ON THE PHYSICAL OR ENVIRONMENTAL CONDITIONS IN THE NEIGHBORHOOD OR DISTRICT SUCH AS DRAINAGE, STEEP THROAT, STEEP SLOPES, WETLANDS, AESTHETICS, VIEW SHEDS, IMPERVIOUS SURFACE FLOODING CONDITIONS, ET CETERA, ET CETERA. BECAUSE THE PROJECT IS ENCLOSED FULLY AND APPROPRIATE SCREENING APPROVED BY THE TOWN FORESTRY OFFICER HAS BEEN COMPLETED, THE APPLICANT'S NEED FOR THE VARIANCES WAS SELF-CREATED BECAUSE THE APPLICANT PURCHASED THE PROPERTY WITH KNOWLEDGE OF THE REQUIREMENTS OF THE ZONING ORDINANCE. HOWEVER, THE FACT THAT AN APPLICANT'S NEED FOR AN AREA OF VARIANCE IS, IS SELF-CREATED, DOES NOT BY ITSELF REQUIRE US TO DENY AN AREA OF VARIANCE. THANK YOU. AND THE LAST CASE WE HAVE TONIGHT IS CASE 25 0 1 BRIAN MARSHALL 14 TERRACE STREET AND WHEREAS THE GREENBERG ZBA HAS REVIEWED THE ABOVE-REFERENCED APPLICATION WITH REGARD TO SECRET COMPLIANCE AND THEREFORE BE IT RESOLVED THAT THE SUBJECT APPLICATION IS A TYPE TWO ACTION REQUIRING NO FURTHER SECRET CONSIDERATION. I SECOND. ALL IN FAVOR? AYE. AYE. CHAIR VOTES. AYE. AND IS THERE A MOTION? YES MA'AM. CHAIR, I HAVE A MOTION. I MOVE THAT THE APPLICATION IN CASE NUMBER 25 DASH FIVE BE GRANTED. PROVIDED THAT ONE THE APPLICANT OBTAIN ALL NECESSARY APPROVALS, ALL NECESSARY APPROVALS AND FILE THE SAME WITH THE BUILDING DEPARTMENT. TWO CONSTRUCTION SHALL BEGIN NO LATER THAN 12 MONTHS AFTER THE GRANTING OF THE LAST APPROVAL REQUIRED FOR THE ISSUANCE OF A BUILDING PERMIT AND PROCEED DILIGENTLY THEREAFTER. IN CONFORMITY WITH THE SURVEY DATED OCTOBER 15TH, 2024 SUBMITTED IN SUPPORT OF THIS APPLICATION OR SUCH PLAN MAY BE HEREAFTER MODIFIED BY ANOTHER PROVING BOARD OR AGENCY OR OFFICER OF THE TOWN. PROVIDED THAT SUCH MODIFICATION DOES NOT REQUIRE A DIFFERENT OR GREATER VARIANCE THAN WHAT WE ARE GRANTING HEREIN THE VARIANCES BEING GRANTED AND IS FOR THE IMPROVEMENT SHOWN ON THE PLAN SUBMITTED IN SUPPORT OF THIS APPLICATION ONLY. ANY FUTURE ADDITIONAL CONSTRUCTION THAT IS NOT IN CONFORMITY WITH THE REQUIREMENTS OF THE ZONING ORDINANCE SHALL REQUIRE VARIANCES EVEN IF THE CONSTRUCTION CONFORMS TO THE HEIGHT, SETBACK OR OTHER VARIANCES [03:25:01] WE HAVE APPROVED HEREIN. SECOND. ALL IN FAVOR AYE AYE. AYE. FINDINGS, THE APPLICANT OWNS THE PROPERTY LOCATED IN THE, IS THIS AN R FIVE R SEVEN FIVE RR FIVE ZONING DISTRICT AND PROPOSES TO LOCATE A HOT TUB IN THE FRONT YARD PROPOSED WHERE PERMITTED IN THE REAR YARD ONLY ON THE SUBJECT PROPERTY. IN ORDER TO DO SO, THE APPLICANT REQUIRES THE FOLLOWING VARIANCES FROM THE PROVISIONS OF THE ZONING ORDINANCE FROM SECTION 28 2 285 DASH THREE SIX G SUBSECTION THREE OF THE ZONING ORDINANCE TO LOCATE THE HOT TUB IN THE FRONT YARD. PROPOSED WE ARE PERMITTED IN THE REAR YARD ONLY, SUB ONLY ON THE SUBJECT PROPERTY. AND GRANTED THIS APPLICATION, THE ZONING BOARD HAS WAIVED THE BENEFIT TO BE DERIVED BY THE APPLICANT FROM THE PROPOSED VARIANCE AGAINST THE IMPACT THAT THE VARIANCE MIGHT HAVE ON THE HEALTH, SAFETY AND WELFARE OF THE NEIGHBORHOOD AND COMMUNITY. AFTER DOING SO, WE HEREBY FIND THAT ONE GRANTING THE VARIANCE WILL NOT RESULT IN AN UNDESIRABLE CHANGE IN THE NEIGHBORHOOD OR DETRIMENT TO NEARBY PROPERTIES PROVIDED THAT THE CONDITIONS ARE FULLY COMPLIED WITH, WITH BECAUSE OF THE IRREGULAR NATURE OF THIS PROPERTY, THE GOAL OF THIS APPLICANT CANNOT BE ACHIEVED BY SOME OTHER FEASIBLE MEANS WITHOUT OBTAINING VARIANCES. WE ARE GRANTING HEREIN DUE TO THE I REGULAR NATURE OF THIS LOT. THE REQUESTED VARIANCE IS NOT SUBSTANTIAL IN RELATION TO THE REQUIREMENTS SOUGHT TO BE VARIED AND THAT THE PROPERTY IS LOCATED AT THE CORNER OF GIBSON AND TERRACE STREET AND 1952 UNDER THE BUILDING PERMIT UNDER BUILDING PERMITS, 606,444 THE TOWN DESIGNED DESIGNATED THE FRONT OF THE PROPERTY TO BE ON TERRACE STREET. NO DESIGNATED THE FRONT OF THE PROPERTY TO BE ON GIBSON. I THINK IT WAS TERRACE IT ON TERRACE. OKAY, WE'LL LEAVE IT ON TERRA. ON TERRACE. EVEN THOUGH AESTHETICALLY THE, EVEN THOUGH AESTHETICALLY AND PRACTICALLY THE ORIENTATION OF THE HOUSE IS MORE CLOSELY REFLECTED AS THE FRONT OF THE HOME BEING ON GIBSON AND THUS THE SIDE YARD FACING TERRACE WHERE THE APPLICANTS ARE SEEKING TO LOCATE THE HOT TUB, GRANTING THE VARIANCE WILL NOT HAVE AN ADVERSE EFFECT OR IMPACT ON THE PHYSICAL OR ENVIRONMENTAL CONDITION IN THE NEIGHBORHOOD OR DISTRICT IE DRAINAGE, STEEP SLOPE WETLANDS, AESTHETIC OF VIEW, SHEDS, IMPERVIOUS SURFACE FLOODING CONDITION, ET CETERA. THE APPLICANT'S NEED FOR VARIANCE WAS SELF-CREATED. THE APPLICANT PURCHASED THE PROPERTY WITH THE KNOWLEDGE OF THE REQUIREMENTS OF THE ZONING ORDINANCE. HOWEVER, THE FACT THAT THE APPLICANT'S NEED FOR AREA VARIANCE ITSELF CREATED DOES NOT BY ITSELF, REQUIRE THAT WE DENY AN AREA VARIANCE. THANK YOU. THANK YOU. YOU WENT THROUGH THAT PRETTY FAST, WHICH THOSE YEAH. YOU GOT ME RIGHT. * This transcript was created by voice-to-text technology. The transcript has not been edited for errors or omissions, it is for reference only and is not the official minutes of the meeting.