Planning Commission - Regular Meeting

If you take roll from my left to my right. Am I left? Yes, I am. Brian Brockov, Linda Novak here. Randy Bman, Mark Zo, all present. Call this meeting to order. Adoption of agenda. Move we adopt the agenda. Second. Second. All in favor? I I opposed. Didn't hear anything. New business. Me, if you'd introduce the case to us. Absolutely. So, this evening we have a property over here on Ramsey coming to us uh for a lot coverage variance here. It's particularly uh small lot and looking to go ahead and have an expansion here. Um, let's see. Their their new swimming pool in the pool house that are proposed are going to reduce the current lot coverage by replacing most of the non-permeable surfaces with crushed limestone, which of course are permeable. The variance request we're looking for is 4.3% over the required maximum of 25% for maximum lot coverage of 29.3%. I believe we have some applicants here. if you want to come up and to the microphone, go ahead and introduce yourself and give us a little summary on what we're looking at here. Great. Um, my name is Sabrina. I'm with Moer Design. Um, and I'm here on behalf of the homeowner, Carrie Chapman, um, at 32877 Ramsey. um to hear and to present to you kind of requesting our approval to exceed the required 25% allowed imperous surface coverage on a property that is currently non-conforming. Um in this case, we believe we meet the standards for practical difficulty and

appreciate your consideration to approve this request. Firstly, the property is already existing non-conforming with its coverages. Instead of adding to this, we actually found ways to reduce the non-conformity um by implementing uh kind of the proposed improvements um by approximately 2,176 ft, which was that I believe uh 4.3% over. Um for example, uh we'll be changing the sport court to a highly per permeable turf. um which we kind of worked with Bill going over to ensure that it was just as permeable as the crushed limestone that you allow in the village. Um we also decided to make some patio spaces crushed limestone as well to ensure the permeability. Um and then we added a few kind of hard surface uh patios. Um but we wanted to make sure majority of it was permeable and being able to implement this. So, what's the Are you putting down a fabric of sorts for the turf? Yeah, it would be basically the same base as the crushed limestone. So, the crushed limestone usually is on a kind of a compacted limestone base to kind of be able to keep it stable. So, it would be on that same base and then uh limestone sand goes on top of it and then the turf is secured on top of that. So, it's completely draining all the way through. Um, what type of turf is that? Is that artificial turf? Yes. Because I thought that was against the ordinance now having artificial turf because of the uh rubber chemicals that are in it that make it. Um, from the specifications that I sent Bill, he said it was all within the means of the ordinance. I know Bill spent a lot of time looking at this and talking with you there. He did feel confident that the material they were proposing would be um meeting

the spec specifications to make it permeable and and not using any chemicals or anything. We had a case earlier the using artificial turf and it was from because of forever chemicals that was withdrawn and forever chemical type material has been banned in the village because we're on wells. I'm not sure. Do you know what material the artificial turf is going to be made out of? Maybe there are different type of I'm sure it's possible there are different There are but I'm not sure that that actually passed the banning of the turf, right? It was brought to council and council decided not to adopt it. Yeah. Well, then they can drink the water. Yeah, that's exactly because that was and that would make sense because I know Bill spent a lot of time reviewing this and talking with you here and felt confident that it was allowable. Yeah, we worked with him back and forth on different brands and the specific kind of brand that we landed on was one that he was very comfortable with having. So, the sports court is still going to be there under a different material. It'll still be the same shape, but it will not be a hard surface. It'll be permeable. Yeah. The one that you were talking about, Randy, was it wasn't just because of the hard of the Oh, surface. The rest of it, too. Well, but we did have discussions about the um the chemical artificial turf and the chemicals and that there were studies that showed that it was leeching into the water table and of course we're all unwell. So, um, it did not make it past council at this point, but it we have to I hate to say it this way, but as much as I agree with the fact that it's not a good thing, um, we can't do anything

about it. I understand. No, not trying to legislate. Just trying to point out what's what's there and what's not. Um, do you have a Can you show up a print on the screen? It seemed to me the homeowner should be concerned about this as well and everybody around them because the wells she's going to have a well and so this could get into her well. When you look at the setback on the could be in the top part of the screen there. North is up. Yep. And it looks like the pool house is is built into the setback. Have a dotted line showing the variant setback right here on the village. And I see a pool house is looks like what 80% of was in the setback. That is correct. Y probably 75 or 80% is that 10 ft 11 almost 11 10 9 on the one. Is the asphalt driveway in front staying in place? Yes, the front is not being touched. So your reduction from it's from 34 34% to 29% essentially comes out of the tennis court area. Is that what you're saying? Yes. Tennis court area and then kind of

reconfiguring the patios up by the house. Um and then right now it's a hard surface that kind of extends past the loia that's currently there. Um, and then we reconfigured those as well as made those crushed limestone. Let's see what else is. So, you're getting rid of the pool in No, the pool is is new. Okay. Sport on pool in No, sports court's there. It's just a different surface than was originally. Yeah. So instead of being cement or whatever, where are you planning to dispose of the water when they drain this pool because there is issues, you know? So we Yeah. And so we've implemented um a whole drainage system and have a leeching basin installed kind of on that lowest part of the um property kind of in front of the sport court. You're talking where the wetlands are up in front. It's on the side. Right here we've added the leeching basin. So all of this property basically all this kind of naturally grades here. So it's continuously going into there and then the leeching basin kind of helps it dissipate below grade. So we wanted to ensure that so it's leeching into their front yard. Is that what you're telling? Sideyard. No. Yeah. It's staying kind of still behind the house, but it goes into a catch basin and then it naturally percolates um through the peace base that's around it kind of naturally back into the ground cuz that side seemed like it was pretty wet and is usually always wet from what I've seen. Well, with the property to the south of it, that is where the culvert on the road and it kind of naturally gets a lot of water kind of right in this area regardless because of

this property here. So, it seems like from looking at the contours and the grading, a lot of this property as well as others and the road naturally drain onto that kind of side of the property of both lots. So, we just that leeching place. Does it have a cavity or where the water sits where water? So, yeah. So, it's like a 24 inch catch basin that gets dropped into the ground and then there's like uh 6 to 8 foot wide pee area below the grass that sits and then so as the water gets collected into that basin um from the soil as well as any drainage down spout pipes then it naturally percolates out into that crushed stone and then kind of into the grade down below. It's a way to kind of help collect the water and then let it slowly dissipate out and it's it's at the lot line. So, the neighbors next to them. There's no one on that side of the property. Another lot there. There is another lot and it has there's a culvert right underneath the road that shoots out right here and there's kind of holding water right here. But it is along the side of the property line. Correct. Street. Correct. Uh this is Roundy Way right here. Right. There's another house right here. Okay. And there's a lot right here. Me, have we heard anything from any of the neighbors? No, we haven't. No. No letters, no public comments, no questions or inquiries from any of the surrounding properties. Just because the lot to the south of them, I don't think there's a house on it. No. No. But that doesn't mean we can not buildable. What? It it's always been a wet land to Yeah.

But it's still a legal law. Yeah. We can't add water to it. Yeah. Yeah. So you reduce the uh the lot the uh coverage by 5%. But that really came by adjusting the tennis court. So yeah, by adjusting the tennis court and then like I said, slightly adjusting the upper patios um to be crushed stone. Those kind of get a little bit canceled out by the pads, but ma majority is that uh sport court and then a little bit of the patio up existing patio up by the house. But there is there is not a pool there now. No. Could you adjust the patio size around the pool? There is. So, this is all soft. Like, this is all lawn around the pool. The only hardscape is the pool house. These two chase pads and then the pool itself. Um, this is all crushed stone on these little patios and landing right here. And then this is an existing like Loia up here. Could the Could the exposed aggregate pads be moved to the other side? So the pool house could be moved in a bit to reduce the inclusion onto the setback. It's something we can certainly look into. Yeah, it's I don't know if the classification the tennis court area is considered has a structure because it's used it takes up the space and so your setbacks on both sides look like you've exceeded the maximum you can use. I'm questioning why that isn't down as a variance request.

Sorry, you've you've in you've included you've in intruded on the setbacks on both sides with the tennis court and with the the pool house. Well, the tennis court was already existing. I know it was I know it was there. I was saying but the pool house was not and you're you're limited on you cannot take a setback on both sides at the same time to the maximum. Mhm. And I don't know if the bill has seen that or not. That's why I'm I'm questioning it. Mick, do you know anybody? Yeah. Well, I talked to Bill about it extensively and when we were talking about it, he was um pretty adamant that you guys had been in good conversations and that he had reviewed everything that we were seeing here tonight. uh that you know given that the lot is already existing non-conforming and providing those constraints um that really his concern and what we were addressing this evening was at 4.3% that was going to so I know that he's reviewing that comments I would be surprised if that would be something that Bill hadn't already discussed with you if it was a concern but yeah he didn't mention it to me. Yeah. I mean, you're right. We We are here to hear. Yeah. You're And and here's your here's your two back 10 ft. Yeah. Here's when there should be 20. But the question you're asking, sorry, is why why isn't that variance on this agenda? Agenda. Yeah, I looked at and said I don't trying to figure that out.

Because the materials that they've changed it to is permanently the pool house should be on here. Yeah. I'm not sure. You are many feet into the setback. Setback. Yeah. Okay. Does that still leave any accessibility for uh DTE and so on to get back in there? Yes. Cuz they seem like they parked their trucks over here a lot. Well, they they certainly can't on the other side. There's about 11 ft behind the pool house. Yeah, but I'm Yeah, but on the other side there's not there's maybe three for the sport court. Are you on the sport court side? Yeah. Yeah, there's maybe three feet and they and they they need to sometimes bring heavy equipment back in. Yeah. Was that a variance granted originally for the sport court since it's no so close? No, we haven't heard this before. There's been no mention of any prior Yeah, prior. Interesting. That's not in the review, right? That there have Do you know if you had ever had so long ago? Cuz that I would be curious about. I mean, of course, the courts was already constructed and obviously um changing material, making it more permeable. That's great. I'm just curious based on its positioning if a variance was granted originally for the sport court. So where the fire pit and it's going to be crushed limestone. Correct. You know, we don't permit the sport courts necessarily. Is it possible that that was constructed because it

didn't require the permit to over there and then we wouldn't know. But see what what the phrase that's missing is it it doesn't say legally non-conforming. Uhhuh. That is not in any of the comments here. So, you know, when you look at it, we're looking at 34.6% y coverage that's not supposed to exceed 25%. And I can't get answers to that question. And I know they're reducing it by 5%, but it's still 4.3 over. I think when our coverage was originally what our coverage is, it wasn't% I mean, it's it certainly looks from the drawings like this sports court could be moved in several feet closer to the pool. Mhm. And it also looks like you could move those cement pads to the other side of the pool and move the pool house in a little bit. You know, our our our problem is not saying, "Look, you're a nice lady and you should have this. It's pretty." But it's the next thing that comes along in the next thing because we're setting a precedent with everything that we do. Mhm. Well, I can't move the sport. I mean, it's already Oh, it's already in. Okay. It's Yeah, that's been there. It's been there. Sports court's been there. That's why I'm curious. Well, what what you're saying about the sports court is you're changing material on the sports court, right? But that's the right now whatever the top. Yeah. Okay. So, you're removing the material that's already and we're replacing it with a permeable service, but the sports court has already been Yes. Um installed. How long ago? 10 years. Yeah. The problem is like

with fences, every time you change the material, Yeah. it it's it's a nonconforming use. And so every time you change the material, it's like we we go through this with fences that people's fences are falling down and they want to put another one up, but the fence that is there is a nonconforming use. And as soon as you take it down and change the material, that that use is no longer available. Mhm. But what you're looking at is a coverage of it. Yeah. What's what's it what's currently in the area where the pool's going to be? Just grass. So when it's just grass right now, the property is not is not legal is not non-conforming. No, it is it is it is it's all the exist all the existing hardscape as it currently sits today is that 34 34.6% coverage. And that's because of the patios, patios, sport court, the house, the front driveway, everything. Okay. Well, given the house is staying and the front driveway is staying, then we're dealing what's what's in the backyard and the sport court is staying and the sport court, but the sport court's nonconformity is decreasing with the permeable material, right? So, so the permeable material kind of balances out the Exactly. So, the the biggest offender so to speak at this point is the pool house, right? which is almost entirely in the setback. So, I mean, it would seem that if those pads could be moved over, how many feet

do they take up? And how far could that pool house be moved out of the setback? Yeah, they're 10. They're 10. So, that would bring the 10 out of the setback or pretty close, but that wouldn't be ideal for you because you've got your pool house there and that's where you want the cement. pool house in the pool. No, no, no, no, no, no. It's just you've got those two cement pads in front of it. Yeah. Yeah. As much as I don't want house in the pool. I really Yeah. I can think of it as a swim up bar. Um could they move the pool house and make it smaller? This if this goes in and this goes over close to the front door. That's what I'm saying. If these pads go here, this can move in. If these are 10 feet, that takes it entirely. I mean, it's not going to take it entirely. You're going to be talking you want a path in front of it a couple of feet in instead of Well, if you move if you move the pool itself closer to the closer to the sports court, right? Rotate it 90 degrees. You can do that. Rotate it 90 degrees. You can't do that. No. like the way we I know I know we're just Yeah. I mean, no question that we're, you know, increasing the permeable surface space by replacing the the material that the sport court is made out of. But the other question that has now come up that I haven't heard from Bill on is the fact that the pool house is setting so much in that setback. within our fence line and there is plenty of space doesn't necessarily come through our yard. They always go on the other side of the fence. It's it's the set it's a sideyard setback which you have

each side of the property and with a sports court is you're way into it. You're almost at the line and on the other side you're you've encroached heavily. So there's a limit to what you can do. You can't do both sides at the same time and use up all the setback. Yeah. It it it's not a matter of safety or somebody being able to get back there. It's a matter between neighbors what the regulations are in Franklin for setbacks for corners, sideyards, front back. So, if we were to table today, would we need to come we update what our application is currently sitting to add in the setback once we I'll have to review with Bill and just verify. Just question like you have been working with an issue with it and neighbors have an issue with it. Well, it's not really an issue. The neighbors are, you know, Everyone's kind of far apart. I understand it. It It's still non-conforming. I'm just seeing if I can get Bill really quick. Where Where's the located? Looks like it's in front of the front. It's in the front. Yeah, the existing wall is right here in front of the house. Yeah, there it is. Where's it? Where's the septic field? Or is it pressure sewer? I don't believe. Are you on the pressure sewer or you're not? You don't know? You are on septic. The question is

where's where is the septic field? I'm not sure. I think that would make sense. Sanitary is there. It would be. It's contrary. Usually sanatories here. The septic's in one area and the well is not next to it. Right. No, I know. That's why I'm saying maybe the well is somewhere else. Your well is in the front that's on here. Leeching basin here. You're right. is saying that the pool house only has to be 10 ft from the side or rear yard as an accessory building. Say that one more time. Sorry. Building is saying that the pool house is only required to be um the the setback for that is only 10 10 ft 10 ft from the side or rear yard as an accessory building. Okay. So it is and so by that if that's a standard then the pool house is within that and that would be why Bill hadn't brought that up. Thus why in the report we're looking at you know not that's not part of the variance that we're requesting and instead it's the lot coverage that we're looking at which we are reducing the nonconformity um you know from the 34 down to the 29 correcting and so the variances for that what is it 4.3 4.3 got it yes thank you existing sanitary. Is there any way to get it down below the 4.3 to get the the variance request down below the 4.3 existing sanitary? I mean, if he's okay with it, it's already there. Well, I'm not saying it is. So, and they're using a different material. Good question. I wouldn't want

to use that when you were drawing there. I wouldn't want to use material bottom if they do. You've got where's existing sanitary something? Not that I can see something again. What is those are existing sanitary manholes. So those are existing. We're not proposing anything. That's just what's currently on site. Who's using those? That's just that when the civil engineer goes out there, he just notes everything that's existing. Um so are they hooked up to anything? I'll have we'll have to look, but as of right now, I don't. So, Bill is saying that had the pool house really um required a variance for that setback that he would have denied it right away and wouldn't have even recommended it to ZBA because the pool house uh only has to be the 10 ft and it was accommodating that and we were reducing the nonconformity by changing that material is why it's over here and recommended. He doesn't to the sports court structure then. Yeah. He does not. No. Then really what we're talking about is a very minimal. Yes. Mhm. In fact a request that's reducing the nonconformity too. We have four septic wells in the front to the left. You said what for the septic? We have four septic. All pressure sewer. Yeah. No septic. No septic. Four sewer. I'm sorry. He said for sewer, no septic. You're on the pressure. Okay. No, that's helpful. That makes more sense. I explain why there's manholes and stuff that's there. But you said So you are on the pressure. Yes, we have to handle we have to work in such a way to reducing the deformity by doing this project. Let's go to finding facts. Okay. Are

there are there any additional comments? Uh, do you have any more additional comments? Uh, any questions from the board at this point? I I I make one additional comment. I know we take very good care of our yard. I know you have no doubt that and we're just trying to prove it and enjoy our understanding that we will continue to do that for a long time. Okay. Uh if there's no other questions, I'd like to move to finding effects and the to clarify for you our procedure is very simple. We had the introduction of the program uh and the case before us and you've had a chance to talk. There's no public here to ask for public comments. Uh we have questions from the board. If they have any, we air those publicly. Uh then at this point we close discussion and we'll have what's called a finding of facts and we'll state facts on which we'll we'll vote on entire group finding of facts and those facts are what we'll base our decision on. So it's not an arbitrary decision. It's based on on fact and then at that point we'll entertain a motion from the board on what we want to do at that point. It has to be in the affirmative and we'll have to correct it if it's not in the affirmative. So based on that, I'm I'm open to discussion of finding the facts. Um simple as in zoning RL the uh sports court the uh material has been changed. So it is now permeable. will not it's proposed to be changed to a permeable surface proposed to be changed to a permeable surface which would be which would be required in any

variance and also pool house is in fact in conformity and allowing 10.76 ft for an accessory building. Yes. In the in the in the setback in the setback setback in the setback I'm gonna try and word this correctly. Please do. The requested variance from current ordinance is a 4.3% additional coverage of non-permeable surface. However, that is an improvement from the existing nonconformity of 34.6% uh by changing the sports court and by changing of patio materials to a perable material which would allow the water drainage. Think you got that right. Well said. Did I get it right? Yes. Okay. Good job on needle threading. It's not legal jargon. was trying to clarify uh what's going on here because this I have to go call a neighbor and my phone is in the car so my house does not burn down. Can Oh, excuse me. Let me go call my neighbor. We'll take a break for a minute. Excuse me. I'm very sorry, but I'm fond of We appreciate you coming. Don't burn down the house. So we have the be

cement roasts, steel roasts for dinner, aluminum roast, but not asphalt that they're forever because that drains off over the years and causes problems. And currently in our ordinances, we're not regulating that material away from what we need to regulate is the forever use of any materials that have forever that are built forever chemicals substitute. Thank God because we want to live longer. Moz. Oh, I make Okay. Okay. We back. So, what are you cooking? We need to know. We need to sample it. Okay. A cake. I I had a cake in the oven. I got my family going tomorrow night. So, yeah, I put it in and I couldn't pull it out. So, thank you for indulging me. I just I'm fond of my house. I have great neighbors. It's the best thing about Franklin. Yeah, go in. Here's where my hot pads are. Get the cake out. All right. So, I think we're back here. 750 now with I'm just thinking. Yes. Trying to think if this we need any other facts or are we there? Well, we don't up state the obvious historic district. Okay. Right. Uh we do not we have not had any comments from neighbors pro or con. Uh it has been properly published and been given notice to people and we've had uh no public hearing here to make comments whatsoever. So those basically covered u and I guess the question is do you feel there's enough information to to vote on to have a motion and decides you have enough information to make a decision on I do one I'm going make the motion I need a

motion I move we consider let's see I'm trying to think of the right wording and you did the affirmative I move that we approve approve this variance. Then you move that we approve a request for variance. Request for yes a uh grant the variance of 4.3%. Yep. Over the required 25% minimum. Have a second. Second. All in favor? I I. Any opposed? Pass unanimously. All right. Thank you everyone for being patient while we sorted that out. I'm sorry our building official was this evening. Thank you. Thank you. I don't know how I missed. Hope they have your personal email. We're not done. Let's finish it up. Yeah. Yeah. Oh, wait a second. We got to We got to vote on the prior minutes. I move you accept the prior minutes. No, I think I got an error on that because there was Dana, you show there was not many There was only a few people absent. Wasn't there a person who was on on council now that was on our board? Um, other than that, I guess we're all set. What was it, Randy? Who were you looking at? I thought there was someone else missing from the uh the last meeting. I don't think so. Absent. There should be nine and there's eight. Linda Brian. No. Oh, Quincy. Oh, but was he at the last meeting? No. Yeah, he was. Quincy was at the last

meeting. We didn't have six. Did we have six voted last time? I don't think so. Will they show Quincy? They show Quincy present. Quincy was here last. Okay. Yeah, I think he was. Good. Yeah. Okay. I move we adopt the meet the minutes of the last meeting. Second move. All in favor? I accept the motion to close the meeting. Move we close the meeting. Move and second. Thank you. We're done. Second. I'm cold now. I'm