Zba - Regular Meeting

Hello. Here we go. This is when streaming either. Is it streaming? Because streaming is here, but it doesn't say it's streaming. Isn't this supposed to be both? Okay. All right. Does it work?

Hello. This is the only one. Let's just just Yeah, let's get going. And um I don't need it.

I don't need it. I got a big mouth. Um the city of Bridgeport Inland Wetlands and Water Course Agency uh will come to order. It is Monday, November 24th. It's uh 6:15 p.m. Um the first order of business is to introduce the members seated tonight. Um to my extreme right is Ali no uh Eggberg Williams Ali Akbar Solad Nunes Cisero um and Bob Morton myself chairman Milri um and this evening um vice chairman Wharton will also act as secretary and we can call the first order of business application 25-04 of Southern Connecticut Gas Company constru construct a utility bridge over the Islandbrook Stream at the addresses of 29 Griffin Avenue, 39 Griffin Avenue, and 43 Griffin Avenue.

Good evening. I'm Matthew Pop, a consultant to the agency. Uh, this application's fairly minor. Uh, they're just proposing to put in a gas main down the road and it's going to cross over the the brook. I just have the plan uh be down here in front of me. Uh the beige area is the road. The blue is the brook. You know, it's flowing from the top of the sheet down to the bottom. The purple is the gas man. So, it's going to come down the road and it can't go underneath the bridge. So, it's going to come up to the north, pop up, and it's going to daylight over the brook and then back around. So, just above the brook, um very minor disturbance now in the area. Um there there is woodlands here and over here. Uh so we so we just had a few conditions of approval if it gets approved. One was to just to locate the trees on the plan here and here. Um you know maybe they could provide some silt fencing out either side just in case there is any disturbance the silt doesn't wash into the the brook. The next one was um there's some vines on the trees right through in here and here. It' be great if they can cut those. That's the first condition. And the next two is a certification from a an engineer or landscape um person that the plan has been conducted according to the plan. And then the last one was a $1,000 bond. I wasn't even sure if it needed a bond, but I think we always have bonds.

Yeah. Yeah. So, and that was it. It's a recommended approval. Again, it's all of pretty much all in the disturbed area. No. Is this a new gas line or Yeah, I believe it's a new gas line. I was just trying to look at that. I believe it's a new line. Yeah. I was I was wondering there wasn't a gas line. Yeah. All right. Well, thank you, sir. Any questions from the agency?

All right. Thank you. All right. Um, secretary. I um, do I have any any questions? No. No. Would any likebody like to speak in favor of this? This is a public hearing, correct? No public hearing. Oh, no public hearing. I'm sorry. Um, all right. Um, any discussion? Anyone like to make a motion? Yes. Second. Solid. I I don't know if she made a motion. She was asking. She said approve with conditions.

Oh, I I didn't know. I didn't know if there was a question in that or All right, we've got it. All in favor? No. Second. Oh, okay. I'm okay. We got a motion and a second. All in favor? I. Anyone opposed? Motion carries. October. Yeah, we have one that one item this this for acceptance. So I make a motion to approve the minutes. Thank you. All right. All in favor?

Anyone opposed? Minutes are approved. Thank you. Thank you. Happy Thanks. Happy holidays because we won't see you till New Year's at January.

All right, that's done. All right, we can start right away, right? Well, I mean Let me just get my stuff out. All right. Good evening. Uh the city of Bridgeport Planning and Zoning Agency will come to order. It is Monday, November 24th. Um it is 6:17 p.m. Uh the first order of business is to introduce the members seated tonight to my stream right is Ingret Williams. uh Ali Akbar, Solah Dan Nunees, Jesus Gadoo, um vice chair and acting secretary tonight, Robert Morton, myself, Mel Riley, chairman, and we can call the first order of business, which is an A24 referral. 8-24 referral petition of the office of planning and economic development requesting under section 8-24 of Connecticut general statute a favorable recommendation to the city council to discontinue a section of Calhoun Place to accommodate the completion of the new campus environment for Kobe Cathedral High School. So, uh, for the record, Jonathan Delgado, deputy director for the city's office of planning and econ economic development. Um, as, uh, was mentioned in the agenda, the city seeking a positive recommendation to city council for the discontinuence of this section

of, uh, Calhoun Street. uh it will require a two-way conversion and so not only will be going to city council we'll also be going for police commissioners get approval from the local traffic board I think as it relates to process I can answer any of the questions this is something that we're doing with the dasis of uh Bridgeport and they have representatives both from um Russio their representation legal representation but also attorney that cont answer any questions or u anything else that you'd like to validate this. So why do they need this? What are they doing? Why do they need it?

Yeah, I mean yeah, what are they doing that? So that's why I can let uh officer any Russo No, that's that's not home.

Commissioners Chris Russo with Russo Mizio. uh LLC offices at 10 Saskco Hill Road here on behalf of the applicant. So the applicant has buildings spread out multiple locations. Right now currently there's Calhoun Place the public street that goes in between them. So they have students that go in between here and it's just really not safe. The school's doing very well. Um and so um they're looking this road is not very traveled. Um, but it's still an open road. It's a oneway that goes in this direction to buy. And so with this, it'll kind of allow them will allow them to have kind of an enclosed campus feel and um, you know, keep this connection with the students going back and forth. We'll put a gate over here. Um, and then this would turn into a two-way. But that all has to be signed off um by Pavle after.

All right. Can you can you show us what um the other streets are just to give us an orientation? So So Washington asks here and this is California one way up the line and is running along north side and where is Oh okay. So where is um the entrance to 825? That's Coleman Street that's farther down. Farther down. Okay. But down all right. So where is Coleman? Coleman is so Coleman runs right along the cathedral. No, it runs between the apartments. Yeah, but it runs right along I mean

it runs between the apartments between the apartments. It goes right. You got the apartment to the left and then you have there's an

Okay, my mistake. I go by it almost every day. Sorry. Um but yeah, it's down it's down here. Yeah. Okay. Okay. Thank you. And that's basically it. Just create more. Very straightforward. Question.

Well, it it would allow so this is This will be a vehicular gate. This will be closed off and then you'll be able to but there's emergency access off of Washington I think. Um really the main entrance is going to be here and then they have their parking areas here between the the two properties um that you know they'll be able to now kind of share and easily move between. There's also an entrance right here on the north building. Okay.

Right. Yes, they use that street as a parents drop off. That's the parents drop off until that line that you put where you said the gate will be and then if you drive down there's like multifamily houses down there. Okay.

So, yes, as we understand it This will be coming to street will be a turn for buses and I believe that will also be not just drop off. I think drop off happens here as well just kind of really give a good experience for I don't think at this point.

Okay. Yeah. And and again because this is is one way. So right now if they come in here they go out here anyway. So it's the same pattern. So were there already study made for this change and based on that street how narrow that street is that that street could be converted into two way street. Yeah. So that's what's going before Pavle but we we've looked at it. We think it it's not a heavily traffked um uh street and so we think it's a it's an appropriate location for it to be abandoned. But that's engineering to do a whole review and they sign off. It's that's all part of the abandonment process. Okay. So right now we're just going to be referring referring it. So they

they do all the studies and and analysis for it next and then it goes to you know. Yeah. So the next step will go before city council and then subsequent to that it'll go to the local traffic authority who will look at traffic concerns and they'll get the final sign off uh before this will be made official. Okay. All right. Thank you. Thank you. Thank you. Appreciate it. Thank you. Would any like No. City. No. Thank you. All right. Next item, please.

C-1 2920 2934 2954 Madison Avenue. That's going to be petition of NAFTA LLC and Stacy Desabella seeking a zone change app. move from the N4 to the NX3 for the three parcels. They asked for a continuence. They asked for what? Continuous. A continuous. Is this the second time? No, this is the second Well, this is the final second time. Paul and I Yeah, Paul and I discussed it this morning. It's their second first one was in October. Oh,

October. Oh, okay. Second conion. So, January 26. January 26. Thanks for clearing that up. Thank you. Okay. 26 26.

Yep. Next on the agenda is 25-34 251 Commerce Drive petition of CDR-3328 LLC seeking a special permit site plan and coastal site plan approval to allow for the improve for site improvements to the continued use of outdoor storage of new and used motor views and employee parking in the MX2 zone and coastal area. There's a dealership. Um, what's the dealership called, right? Commerce.

It's the Fairfield.

Yeah, the What's the name of Good evening. James McTig, professional land surveyor with Arthur Howland Associates, representing the owners of the property CDR 32A LLC. Um, and Bar LLC, Bar Commerce Drive LLC. Uh, this is a interesting property. We straddle the town line between Fairfield and Bridgeport. Uh, and, uh, as I go through this, uh, um, we have a parcel here. This is what we're here for. This is 25501 Commerce Drive. Um, which only shows up in the deed. So, that's why I've been using this to describe this parcel. Um, it um, it wasn't even on the tax uh, maps. So, but

well, that whole area has changed when they moved when I was built, Ash Creek was down through here through this. They moved and then they moved the the move over to here, right? The town line didn't move, right? So, but the timeline used to be Ash Creek.

Yeah. So, we're we're here um for in front of you for this 0.642 acre parcel. Um we are um the two properties are own while they're different LLC's. It's the same owner across the street. Um the the Bar Commerce Drive L here LLC here. Uh this has been a car dealership for a very long period of time and we are going to be seeking permission with Fairfield to continue that use. Um and then we also own this parcel here uh which comes up to here and there's an additional parcel here 131 Commerce Drive.

The whole western side of the property here is leased by the adjoining automo automobile dealership and Mercedes dealership. Okay.

They will continue to lease this area. They have a long-term lease. We are proposing no no work in this area. Um they they have a retaining wall on a fence up to this area and we will be proposing to work basically from this portion of the property over between Bridgeport and Fairfield. And so this this parcel has always been utilized as inventory storage for the automobile dealership across the street. Um both properties are in a flood zone and both properties are in a flood way. So um in order to on this on on the on the 26 we're going to be making some modifications to the building. Um this is the service bay

um which is at elevation 13.85. The flood zone on this side is an elevation 15. This is part storage. This is at 16.4. And then this is the showroom. We're going to be tearing the showroom down. This is the proposed uh view of the showroom. Uh the service bay area is going to stay the same. The part storage is above one foot above the flood stage. Um but for for the remainder of the building though, we are going to be floodproofing it to elevation 16. FEMA allows you to flood proof three feet. So, we're going to flood proof three feet of the building uh to comply with FEMA's regulations. And as a result of that, we need to do a little bit of filling around the building and this on this side here and this side here to make it ADA compatible. And so as as a result of that, we will be filling 377 cubic yards at 26 Commerce Drive. And to provide the compensatory storage, we'll we'll be excavating 394 cubic yards at at 25501 and 65 to compensate for that. Uh so we want to we want to balance it out so that we don't push the flood waters off onto anybody else. Um so the um we're being very sensitive to the environment with this. We've we've had um a code enforcement review with Fairfield. So we've met with them um informally and showed them the same plans that you guys are are are looking at now. Uh they came back to us with several pages of comments that we're working on. Uh and so I wanted to get the process started uh with you uh regarding the parcel on this side. And so currently um a portion of this is paved

and then the rest of it is compacted gravel. Uh and so currently there is no existing uh drainage on site. And so we are proposing to uh add a hydrodnamic oil separator to a level spreader to capture uh the first flush that hits the site, renovate it before we release it uh um back out into the environment. And so that'll be a big plus uh for this project because like I said, currently there is no drainage system at all. And then we'll be doing the same at 26 as well too. So, you know, we did get uh I did receive um Bridgeworth Engineering's comments, and I have no problems complying with these. Uh and then um regarding the special permit, um the the proposed special permit use and accompany site plan are consistent with and implement the objectives and policies of the master plan of conservation and development. The proposed special permit use and accompanying site plan complies with all applicable zoning code regulations. The proposed special permit use and accompanying site plan will not impair future development of the surrounding area. The proposed special permit use will not be detrimental to existing development in the surrounding area because of its scale design and method of operations. We are surrounded on both sides with other car dealerships.

Right. Um the proposal in includes adequate safeguards to project to protect adjacent property and the neighborhood in general from any potential adverse impact and the proposed use is not likely to cause a depreciation the value of nearby properties and environmental impacts of Long Island Sound will be appropriately mitigated. Uh we also received comments from Connecticut Deep uh regarding our CAM application uh and they were and they were acceptable uh to us as well. Uh and and he mentioned he made a mention regarding um you know the water quality management the BMTs BMPs and we will satisfy that for Bridgeport as well as for Fairfield on this project. Uh and then regarding the CAM application um there are no impacts uh to the environment um from this proposal

um we are proposing the u hydrodnamic water separators on on both sides bar S4 which removes 80% of the suspended solids uh on and we will provide the uh maintenance um agreement for the care of the of the any BMP that we on the site. Um there are, you know, when we're done with this, there will be no impacts to any of the joining neighbors uh regarding uh environmental or flooding. We and we will address all those accordingly. Does anybody have any questions?

Um well, actually it's I have an Do we have a Goucher a letter from Galer? I don't know. I don't have it in my packet, but Oh, okay. So, we have it. So, we can um Okay. So, there there are some comments and Okay. So, that has to be a condition of approval. Yeah. The um the Connecticut Deep comments kind of echo the Bridgeport's engineering comments in regards to um managing the storm water. And so we will comply with all aspects of Bridgeport's engineering design manual and satisfy all

Okay. We'll just make that a condition of approval. If we approve and and there is an email from um Fairfield requesting that any um changes that we make as a result of going through their process um that we will bring them back to you for administrative approval.

Um yes. So the um Connecticut deep right here is the edge of vegetation on the property and then from there it slopes down into the ash creek. We are doing no work in that area at all. We're not removing a single tree. Uh we're not stepping foot in that area and I have no problems protecting that buffer. Um and we have no intention of doing anything on that slope or or affecting any of that uh existing vegetation. Okay. All right. Do I have any questions from the commission? No.

Would anyone like to speak in favor of this application? Is anyone opposed to this application? David, do you have any? I forgot this. All right. Thank you, sir. M closed.

Next, we have 25-35 1245-1255 Lindy Street. Petition of Cordderero Holdings LLC seeking a special permit and site plan approval to construct a two family dwelling in the N2 zone. I don't know.

Good evening, members of the commission and Mr. Chairman. Uh my name is Wilson Carroll. I'm an attorney with Cohen and Wolf right down the street at 11:15 Broad. and I'm here tonight on behalf of the applicant Cordderero Holdings. This is a special permit and a site plan application. Actually, not all that similar than the one I was in front of you last month of the month before with um this is for the development of a two-story two family up and down residence on the subject property which is in the N2 zone. Single family housing is permitted as of right in this zone, but you need a special permit to get that second unit.

Right. The proposed residence is a house B building type under the regulations. Each unit is proposed to have its own entrance and this design also includes off- streetet parking. There's a 9 foot driveway right on the right side of 1255. Um, even though that's not required under the regulations. Um, this went through concept review a couple months ago. Um, the main takeaway from concept review is their recommendation to add two large new trees which you can see are sort of at the mouth of 1255. uh Lindley Street as well as landscaping for screening along with the boundary line between 1255 and 1265. So if you take a look at that plan, you can see there's an existing rock retaining wall and then there's a proposed low retaining wall and sort of right next to it in between those retaining walls proposed to be a line of screening. Um, as I explained in my cover letter, 1245 and 1255 Lindley Street are both owned by the applicant, but the existing building, I can pause for a moment. I'll just make sure we have it all on the screen here. No worries. Um, so these two this is technically two parcels 1245 and 1255. Both are owned by the applicant, but there's an existing building encroachment. So the there's a there's already a residence on 1245 and its footprint extends a few feet into the record boundary of 1255. So there's there's a nonconformity there. And so part of this proposal is if we were to be approved tonight, before we could pull a building permit, we would have to file a lot line revision map um which would have to be go through the process and be accepted before that would be finalized. But the plans that are in front of you tonight show the proposed boundary. So this is as the lots would

be situated if the lot line revision was approved subsequent to tonight. uh with that lot line revision both 1245 and 1255 Lindy Street would be fully zoning compliant. They meet all the setbacks and all the other relevant requirements of the regulations. Yes. So on the left side of your screen is the existing residence on 1245 touch is not going to be demolished right or is it? No, they're not contiguous. So it'll be separate. Separate separate. So, it's going to be the two existing house and it's what we're talking about is the middle between these two houses, right? So, on the left side of the screen here is 1245 and then you can see a little bit of it on the far right

and the one on the corner is 1255. All right. Say again. It's 1255. The one on the corner the proposed new building is on would be on 1255. But there's no vacant lot with a tree, right? So, yes, that's why they have to Yes. So the evergreen tree and the and the tree behind it would be removed and replaced with trees that are at the entrance of 1255. Does that make sense? So we're looking in the sort of the the middle right of the screen. There's an evergreen tree and then a larger deciduous tree behind it. Both of those would be removed and sort of right where the cursor is is where this new res. Yep. Okay.

Uh the proposal meets all of the special permit criteria in regulations 1150.6. I went through them in my cover letter, but I'll just touch them on them briefly as well. Get them on the record.

Yes. So, first, uh, this application is consistent with the PC specifically with two goals. First is the housing theme or goal, which includes the equitable goal of encourage encouraging a diversity of accessible household types throughout the neighborhood. Um, it's also consistent with the robust economy theme. It grows the grand list. It reduces the tax burden overall for the people of Bridgeport and will result in the development of a vacant lot. um all of which are consistent with and further direct. Um with respect to the second special permit criteria, this application would be fully zoning compliant as proposed. That's what that permit criteria asks. Um special permit criteria three through six are I'm I'm treating them sort of related way. Um they ask whether the proposed residence will impair future development of the surrounding area, whether it would be detrimental to existing development, whether it includes adequate safeguards for adjacent properties and the neighborhood in general, and whether it is likely to cause a depreciation in the value of nearby properties. Um, and I have an exhibit that I'd like to submit into the record. This is a GIS map that I've marked up. Um, and it shows all of the two and three family homes that are in this neighborhood as well as the field cards for those homes which confirm that they are zoned multif family. So, just I'll hand this out now.

Thank you. So, if you take a look at the map that's in the front of this packet, you can see I've marked the homes in this area with either a two or a three in red. And then the subject properties 1245 and 1255 are in blue in the center of the map. And what you can take away from this exhibit is that this neighborhood is full of multif family uses, including one that's directly behind and adjacent to the subject properties. 608 Girden Street which is zoned three family as well as directly across the street 1264 Lindley is a two family and then there are a number of others just on this block. I could have gone further out but I decided to focus on what we're what's shown here. This is an area where single family and multif family uses coexist comfortably. Therefore, there's no risk that there's going to be adverse impacts on existing development or depreciation in nearby property values. Uh with respect to adequate safeguards to protect neighbors from potential adverse impacts, um the primary way we've addressed that is by the addition of the screening between 1255 and 1265 as well as the addition of the two large deciduous trees at the front. And finally, the last special permit criteria is whether there's any appropriate mitigation to environmental impacts to the sound. We're not anywhere near the sound, so that doesn't apply here. And finally, because we're in an N2 zone, the regulations also have a couple more questions for you in 1150.6B. Um, so you have to show that the special permit will not be in congruous with existing residential uses, that there won't be any traffic or hazard that's different than existing residential uses in the area. Um, with respect to traffic, as I mentioned, the applicant is including a driveway in this plan, even though it's not required, but that's, you know, I drove down there today. There's a number of cars parked

on both sides of the street. not as bad as other areas in Bridgeport, but um the off streetet parking is intended to alleviate that. And there is no inongruity with existing residential uses because as we went I showed in this packet, there's plenty of multif family in this area that coexists already with this single family. So I'm happy to answer any questions the commission may have. Um but otherwise, that's my presentation. Yeah, of course.

Springfield is a narrow street and That is not that enough of the building. No, the trees. You said you're going to you're going to cut down the trees because the build the building is 17 ft wide. So that that's that's a narrow building. The building is going to be narrow. So you're going to have to cut down the trees. Yeah. Going to replace right. So the trees would have to be removed. Yeah. You think you think the people are going to that neighborhood? equipment for the tree.

Well, the trees are are on my client's property. So, I understand that they have value as shade trees, which is offset or the intention is for it to be offset by the additional plantings, but it's my client's trees. Um, you said there will be a driveway. Is it a driveway for both units or just one? It would serve both units. Um, it's the maximum width allowed by the regulations 9 ft. So, intended to fit at least two vehicles. Thank you. one driveway that was called Phoenix.

Yep.

Anyone else? Any other questions? Oh, David. Yes. Well, as long as we're done with the questions, David. Yes.

Good evening, honorable commission. My name is David Codingham and I'm the design review coordinator with OPED. Um uh for the summary, we reviewed this uh project. Um the applicant came uh before concept design review on October 7th of this year. Um the special permits to allow two principal dwelling units within a single houseb building type. Um initially staff had uh identified concerns regarding the building entrances and the on-site landscaping. Um, since then the revised plans show that the applicant has addressed uh these items and have incorporated the recommended revisions into the updated plans submitted to for the commission's consideration. Um, the project includes an on-site driveway which is intended to alleviate parking concerns uh associated with the new development. And the applicant also proposes a landscape buffer and a low retaining wall along the rear of the property to provide screening and separation from the adjacent lot to the north. Um, and as the applicant has already mentioned, um, there are several multif family homes, one being right across the street. I can actually show that one since that's the closest one. Um, it's this property right here. And I can get a better angle of it.

So, same configuration. Very very similar. I believe their house might be a uh the proposed house might be a little bit more narrow, but yes, very similar in idea. Um and I believe the existing property um has its own driveway. Is that there's no So um again there would be Do you have any idea how long this lot has been vacant? I believe for a while but I don't know how many years. Um but that's all I had. Um All right. Thank you. Thank you.

Would anyone like to speak in favor of this application? You would like to speak in favor? Just a second, sir. We'll get there. Is anyone opposed to this application? All right. Step forward. State your name, address, and why you're opposed. That's fine.

Yes. Just if you can get What? You want the microphone? He's giving you the microphone. Uh, I'm pretty loud. I can. My name is Steven Bazi and I've lived on Lindley Street for 40 years. Okay.

I own a two family house and a single family house next door. I knew the gentleman who built that house. By the way, it was built in 1953 to his two daughters. Our section of Limley Street, I know there's been some changes, are all 50 by 100 lots. There's 10 houses on one side, six on the other. Basically from stop sign to stop sign you're dealing with about 450 450 of the 16 houses there are five multifamilies there's three two families and two whole total we have about 23 families living on that section of I always call the section that I I live on the nicest section of Lindley Street. Once you cross over Summit, Summit and Springdale, somehow the way the houses were laid out. This lot, I believe, is 40 by 100, not the 50 by 100. The way the neighborhood was developed over 100 years ago about 15 years ago, next to the two family that you showed there, Raul's house, it was a full garden lot, 50 by 100. A builder came, no one opposed it. They built a nice single family house driveway to the right fine and it fit right in the neighborhood the way the general the sign out front says two family house. Now I own a two family house and the way I understand a two family house is that if I go to sell it I have to sell the whole thing. I can't sell one floor different than the other. if a duplex is built, which I don't think that's what they're asking, but duplex is two individual homes. So on a

50 on a 100 foot frontage, because when Eric built that house, he said to me once, he said, "Bos, I built it in 1953. I put the house right in the middle so no one could build on either side of it, but he was working with the 50 by 100 lots." So a if if a duplex is what was proposed is a two family, one on top of the other. Yes. Yes. With one driveway. Yes.

Yeah. Because if it was a duplex and it was an individual home on a 100 foot frontage, you'd have three individual houses there where across the street you have 150 ft of three individual houses. So if it was going to be a single family home, like I said, the parking on our street is pretty backed up. When that neighborhood was built, started to be built in 1901, maybe the landlord had a car, maybe, but now everybody has a car and you go up the street on a Sunday morning and you there's no place to park. I believe that it's misuse of that 40 by 100. I happen to have grown up on Long Island. The the lots that I grew up on were 40 by 100, but the whole neighborhood was 40 by 100. They were just single family homes. The picture shows a beautiful The house is a beautiful house and a gentleman who bought it did a beautiful job with it. There's a house next door that's for sale. No one lives there. I can assure you if there were people living there, you might have two people standing up. I'm not opposed to developments in Bridgeport, but they should be the right one and take into consideration the way that if you come up Lley Street, crossover summit between Lindley and Springdale and you visually look not with pictures and not with drawings and you visually look where this proposed house is going to go. You can just see that it's being sandwiched in there because every lot from stop sign to stop sign is on a 50 by 100. Now, I was glad to hear a little bit that it's a two family house, one on top of the other. First of all, the duplex really wouldn't fit there because you only have 40 ft. If you have two driveways 10 feet each, you got a 20 foot house, you cut that in half, what

are you going to have 10 feet on the side?

That, you know, I'm still opposed to it because it's not being built on what the original lots were done. I understand in the state legislature they've made some changes as of recent. That's why some of these things could happen. You know, the gentleman who owns that that house there was going to do an in-law setup and use a little bit of his 40 ft. I think that would be fine. Or wanted to make an in-law setup to get another apartment to get another rent. I think that would be fine. But to put a whole another structure in between the two houses, the picture is good, but it really doesn't do it justice. Like if you're walking up the street and then you then there's a big beautiful tree there. That tree would have to go. But if you come up the street, like I said, it's only 450 ft on my side of the street, stop sign to stop sign. If we go with the one more street that faces Springdale, then we got 500 ft. 500 ft for 10 houses and the other six are on the other side. The street looks nice because of the amount of single families that were built. My house was the last house built in 1918 and then there was no houses built. But the other side of the street, what makes our street look nice is because of the amount of single family homes that were built there. It kind of gave us all a little elbow room. And that is probably one of the nicest houses on our street. It's beautiful the way it sits on a lot. See, the thing is when you go where the garages that used to be Eric's shop, I think you only I may not be correct. You may only have 30 feet. So, you're really squeezing a beautiful single family house and then a house and then the house that's for sale next door. It's just it's jammed up. Now, if Eric had built this house a little bit more to the right and the garage came out and you had a full 50 by 100 lot, that might

make sense, but you don't have the 50 ft, I believe, to the if you're looking at the house to the right side. The most land you have is if you're looking at the house from the right side to the other neighbor's house. All right. So, that's uh and the other Lastly, all of the multif family houses on our street are owner occupied. The landlords live there and most of the houses on our street except for a few rentals. I own one are owner occupied. It's been a good street for me for 40 years and like to keep it that way. Like I said, I'm not opposed to development. It should just be the right kind.

All right. Thank you, sir. Anyone else? rebuttal. Oh, you all right? Come forward. Thank you. Thank you.

Good afternoon. I'm Victor. Your name and address? I'm uh I'm Victor and I live in 1237. What's your full name? Victor Rodriguez. Okay. And where do you live? In 1237 Industry, right next to this house. Okay. I am not opposed for them to build more.

Can you hear me now? Yeah.

Sorry, this is my first time ever doing this. Um, so my name is Victor Rodriguez. I live in 1237 Linda Street, right next to this house. And I am not opposed for them to build another multif family house, more housing into our community. The only thing that I am worried about is parking situation because the Lindley Street is as full as it can be right now. Sometimes it gets really hard to find parking or even um other neighbors have parties and in the weekends or even throughout the week that it gets backed up and we are in the very last of Lindy Street where is in the corner. So, it's really hard for cars to even see other cars coming through, too, or even people walking in the street because sometimes people walk their dogs or they come from work and stuff like that. So, well, sir, we don't have a we don't have any parking regulations in the city of Bridgeport. So,

yeah, I know. I'm just trying to We really can't consider that. I'm just trying to just speak out a little bit just to make sure that we we are being heard as Thank you. Yep. Thank you. Anyone else opposed? Rebuttal.

Thank you. Very briefly and for the record, Wilson Carroll of Kona Wolf. Um I appreciate Mr. Bosiz and Mr. Rodriguez's input. Um just a few comments. Um you know, confirm this is not a duplex. I I understand there sign said two family houses. So there there could have been a little confusion there. I would have put two family house. Um with respect to 1265, it makes sense to me now that it's up for sale. We tried to one of the things that came out of concept review is why don't you try and reach out to that person who lives there because they're the one that would be most impacted. Um we were not able to do so as you can see from the abuters list that and the mailings. That property is owned by a either a bank or a trust based in Texas. Um, so they, you know, they got a letter, they didn't show up tonight.

You're a corporation, right? And notwithstanding that, we still included that landscape buffer because I think that's right just an appropriate use of that portion of the land. Um,

and just with respect to the the narrowness in general, you know, I I understand looking at the picture, it looks fairly narrow. I think part of that is due to the trees that are there. I think without the trees, it'll make a little bit of a difference. And also I I went to the site today with a tape measure uh based on something I noticed on the plans which is that 1265 which is the property that's owned by the trust is right up against the property line and it's I I measured it at not to you know they're not here so I I won't uh hold my tongue but it's a four and a half foot to the setback. That looks like a zoning like an encroachment to me, right? It looks like it's violating its own setback. And even notwithstanding that, we still meet the 15 foot minimum separation distance. And there's either I think it's a 9 foot. It's either nine or 11 foot setback on that side.

11 feet. That's why I think it shows on on the right side towards the house. Exactly. And then on 15 feet on the other side. Right. So So we're above that six foot minimum side step back. we meet the separation distance. I you know and I think those factors you know when you see it on the ground I think it'll look you know not quite so narrow as it does. Um let me just briefly look at my notes.

That's all I have for the question. I thank you.

The matter is closed and that ends the public hearing for this evening. Oh man, it's going to be thin. It's going to be narrow down. It's my whole house, right? Sorry. That's where they are less people.

That's where they're going up and down instead of side by side. Isn't that compliment? Yeah. 702. Well, we're not done yet. We're not done yet. That's what they're saying. Yeah. because it's 4500. Yes. All right. Are you ready? Yes. Back there. So, okay. We I don't think we need him right now, but we can stay back.

Right. We'll call if we need to. Um 824 referral. Pretty straightforward. Make a motion to second. All in favor? I 824 referral is approved or positive to the favorable favorable. There you go. All right. C1. Uh that's continued. We have to vote on it though. I'll make a motion to continue to January's m meeting. Second. All in favor? I. Anyone opposed? Motion carries.

2534 5 251 Commerce Drive car. Okay. Oh, I make a motion to approve it with conditions. Oh, we got to state the conditions. Oh, engineering conditions.

Got a bunch of conditions. mentioned that uh BMP which is best management practice in case you didn't know um the applicant should demonstrate to the commission that proposed BMPPS best management practices will be sized to effectively treat the volume of storm water that will be generated on site uh should be located so that they will be effective in treating the storm water and preventing adverse impacts to Ash Creek. Um that was mentioned by the applicant. A maintenance schedule shall also be included in the plan to ensure that the uh BMPPS continue to function properly after the project is complete. And there was a recommendation that the commission require that the vegetation buffer remain undisturbed uh along Ash Creek as a condition of of of approval, which he has agreed to. Okay, we got that.

That was No, no, that was the No, culture doesn't normally

engineering. Yes. And Fairfield. Oh, Fairfield. Yes. Fairfield requested to be right. But we have to No, no, no. There's any changes. Bridgeport. Okay. Okay. Take that old friend.

Yep. Thank you.

No. As per conditions. All in favor? I.

Anyone opposed? Motion carries. All right. Now it's We're getting down there. 2535 1245 1255 Lindy Street seeking special permit and site plan approval for a two family with conditions. type which have already been proposed. I have a I have a question. Isn't okay. The lot it's not 50 by 100. It's 40 by 100. Correct. 45 45 by Oh,

right. Because you're going to mod, right? You're going to 15 on one side and 11. on the left side facing 15 on the left and on the right

second. Oh, go ahead. All in favor? Give it to him. with the with the conditions. With conditions.

Yep. Yep. The trees. The trees. The the fence. Did he also say driveway? Is it was it a fence or retaining wall? Retaining wall. Retaining wall. Retaining wall. Yes. Yes. Yes. No. No. The trees are separate because he's taking down those

one one large and one evergreen small town. Yeah. 65. And the driveway to um the driveway to accommodate both units. Yeah. Oh, that's that's part of the Oh, that's part of the plan. Okay. Now, do we want to also mention the lot line revision?

I Okay. So, we don't have to remember. Okay. Okay. So, it's 45. Okay. All right. Yes. All in favor? I. Anyone opposed? Motion carries. Uh, do we want to do Oh, we'll do other business before we do minutes. The committee meeting. The committee meeting. Just

Yes. Yes. What are we putting on the record? Oh, the email. I think there's a motion. Just put it into the record. Isn't there a motion going to be? No. No. The uh No, there's nothing to do. I thought there was a motion. Right. Right. because it was only

well I don't know if there's should we vote on establishing a committee? We did. We did. We did vote on it. Okay. I thought it was I thought it was full. All right. Making a commitment. Fine.

Tomorrow.

All right. business. All right. And then minutes.

Anyone to approve the minutes? All right. Second. Who approve? Who made the motion? Edgar. Okay. And we have a second. All in favor? I. Anyone opposed? Mentor approved. That was right. He's I second. I second. All right. All in favor? Meeting adjourned. And Paul, it is 710. They don't anymore.

Just leave it on the table. Happy, happy Thanksgiving and happy holidays because we won't see you till January.

Well, the wife's working on Thanksgiving Day. What does What does she do? Um