Planning Board - Regular Meeting

Next up is the third item adoption of resolution of approval for accessory apartment application number PAA25-2 for existing approved accessory apartment transfer to new owner 18 Holly Place R40 zoning district Joseph Melli. Any questions or comments from board members? No. I move adoption of the resolution. Motion from Eileen. Second. Second from Jane. Jane. I. John. I. Alen. I. Steve. I.

And I for me. Okay. And the final one for business items request for a 90-day extension of the resolution approval for subdivision application SD23-04 and steep slopes application SS2-13 for the development of vacant parcels located at for the construction approximate 3,000 foot business office through storage board. Additional additional improvements include driveway parking area storm water mitigation facilities landscape and screened areas SBL 2.9-1-2 and three owners Brighton Avenue Properties LLC. And I believe this one they are going through the extension because they're getting their ducks in a row. That's correct. 90 days request.

So an additional 90-day request. I think this is like the second or third one roughly. Yeah. Yeah. Yeah. I think it's the second one. And and they if you remember DOT had issues with their curb cuts. So that's what they're Yeah. So it's a question about them getting their DOT curb cuts approval. Make a motion to grant for 90day. Motion from John. Second. Second from Eileen. Jean I. John. I. Eileen. I. Steve. I.

And an I for me. Okay. Okay, next up, continuing public hearing. This is something we uh had a public hearing in the past [clears throat] and now we're back. So, item number one and the only item for continuing public hearing 790 Hartsco Road subdivision one lot into two for the development of a one family dwelling application subdivision PSD2-2 location 790 Hardsco Road Chapa section block lot number is 99.6-1-4 6-1-4 zone R40 owner Terrun Gers Gershani applicant architect is Michael Picarillo Architecture welcome that come on up we need to have a motion to reopen the public hearing yeah it's still open no we

no it just stays open okay it stays open we're good y come on up welcome to state your name and [snorts] where you're from uh Taran Gersahani from Chapo New York 790 hearts Thank you very much. Okay. So, um do you have anything to present? Yeah. So, I uh let me just get a coffee.

Thank you. Okay.

So um in the last public hearing uh there were a number of questions a few questions raised by the public in attendance. So we submitted all our responses I think uh two to three weeks back. Um so we have compiled and submitted everything. We've done the tree survey etc. So um uh we could go two ways. uh you could review this document okay quickly or if uh you have reviewed it I mean you can uh sort of move to the next stage but I can go through the queries raised so I went through the public hearing last time and I have noted down everything in a vigorous manner so we can go through that if that is okay with the board.

Okay. So I think the the one big the big topic we should probably hit first is is the other road.

The back road I guess you can call it. Yeah. So [clears throat] if you see page number two. Okay. So uh this is back in towards the end of 2024 beginning of 2025. We had a presubmission meeting with Pat uh the the inspectors uh where we considered various options uh to get uh access to the backlog. All right. Uh the first option was to see if uh some of the folks who were present last time there is there are two pleasant roads uh in the vicinity. Uh one option was to use the option number one the pleasant road which serves 806 hard scrabble and 793 hard scrabble. The second option was the pleasant road that serves uh if you see the second option that is the the back road option one of the options that we looked at at that time which has a 25 ft right of the way and the third option obviously which we talked about was building a new frontage. So back in uh January of 2025, we did consider three options. So it's not like we proceeded with the option three here without considering other options. All the three options were in play. We chose the option three at that time. U if you move to the next page. All right. So I prepared this for my our own assessment but I we use this document quite extensively to really look at three factors right are we disrupting neighbors what is the cost what is the environmental disruption and there is the section 28A which you know it's quite confusing but our main goal also

was to obtain a building permit when we build uh the access to the backlog. Okay. And in our discussions throughout, I think the option three was something that uh there was broad-based agreement with the inspectors across the board to use this option would be very viable and it would satisfy option 28A compliance and we would be able to obtain a building permit. the town town staff engineer and all that were in agreement or com with option three. Yeah. I mean they have passed that option. Yeah.

So that was what you were in agreement to before the planning board meeting. Um, and the the driveway that's not included in this um analysis is the one that would run along the rear of 765 hard scrabble next to 763 hard scrabble. That one was that was a surprise to you at the meeting. I think right along if it went back here along the rear of this house. Yeah, that was the one that

Yeah. So there were zoning issues uh that were brought up at that point and there is extensive vegetation there and it would sort of bring another group of neighbors here with their concerns as well. So that option was considered but there is massive vegetation. Who who considered it? Huh? Who considered that option? So me I think we talked about these options right at the upfront right because we wanted the best route to go back. So I want to be specific when we say we considered it. Who who considered option that option between 763 and 765? Was it you? Was it who was waiting? Did you discuss it with staff or anybody?

So in that discussion that we had there were a number of options presented and this was one of the options also. But the section 28A keeps coming up again. Right. But they the question they're asking is who did you discuss this with specifically? uh the the January meeting the presubmission meeting that we had and that's where we discussed the town uh Pat was there the town

yourself and the building inspector building I can clarify that's so the the option two was not discussed at that meeting we were unaware of that back of the rightway that exists behind the property I think we all learned of that after that presubmission meeting so at that point the applicant decided to continue with option three which is what was I think their preferred option. Um and that's when at the last meeting you heard Joe building inspector indicating that we didn't know about that. That was not a disc we didn't sign off on that. That was we were unaware of that option at the time. So what we learned from that meeting is that the applicant has done some work. Um that is a right of way. It's a map street. They have legal frontage on that back parcel but there is existing vegetation that exists in the area. will say the vegetation that exists is is invasive species. It's a bamb it's a lot of bamboo back there. So the loss of that is not a negative thing necessarily, but I think to the applicant's point, it will engage other neighbors who may have a differing opinion with respect to that. My advice to you is the neighbors don't get to vote on this. You get to vote. So you should evaluate the least impactful, most appropriate

alter. So, I'm having a hard time following Let me just keep So, so when we met last time here at the Planet Board, did you meet with town staff again? No. Or was it back in January? This was we met once. Did you And you're saying January of of 2025? That's a year ago, right? So, since then, for an entire year, a year has gone by and this is where we've landed.

Oh, during the year, we actually did go to zoning. we came back to planning and [cough and clears throat] so there have been number of iterations since then and this document though I was did submit to the town engineer and the town probably 3 weeks back I mean I didn't hear back from them I did ask uh the the board uh I mean the folks here they didn't respond back so I was assuming uh everything was fine so

I thought at the meeting the last time that the that The driveway that Dave Smith pointed out would be like that over here. Am I mistaken? Take it to the end of there. That's where I thought the drawing showed it. But I I thought I I thought the the output of the last meeting was reviewing that option that was not on hard road that it was behind the property, the Pleasant Road option. But so that's the southerntherly Pleasant Road option. Yeah. [cough] But that that was really the conversation we were supposed to come back to the board with, which I I'm not hearing that conversation tonight.

I mean, I went through the video. I mean, nothing was written. So, I went through the video. I did not find that. One of the neighbors, he did bring it up. Again, you're assuming I own 765, so that might be a viable option. So, uh just because I own 765 doesn't mean I would be okay with that option. Because if we went if we went back to the meeting video Yeah. and we looked at the output or what we decided to do, you were going to explore a different option to see if it was viable or not. And I'm not getting clear understanding if it is viable at this point or not. And that option was behind not going on to hardcope or going on to Pleasant Road. So did we have any analysis or assessment based on Pleasant Road?

Yeah. That's what the applicant submitted to you. Okay. So, I'm still not clear on what was the output of that submission that there was a road with some vegetation on it and that was a concern. So, so extend to this.

So, there are three options that he just described to you. So, the first option, the North Pleasant um road, they would have to create a right ofway or an easement to give access to that rear property. Nothing exists today. the southerntherly provision uh option option two there is a connection and a right of way that gives access to the rear lot so that's already there and the applicant as you as you just indicated owns that rear parcel as well he's saying tonight I don't that's not my preferred option he wants to go with the with option three three which is the flag lot option off the front okay and the issue with that is that there's bamboo grown in

the option that's southern opt option. It's wooded with invasive species. Option three. Option two. Option that's option two. Option three is simply the flag lot. Okay.

So I mean so there is disruption in everything. Right. So if I go on the pleasant road option that you just talked about, right? So I would have to share that with five other neighbors. So we would be having a similar meeting with five other neighbors that would complain about this. All right. And what we eventually decided is to do something which is in my control meaning it is all situated and limited within the perimeter of my property that I own so that I'm not disrupting my neighbors. Yes, there is some environmental uh you know displacement here which I completely agree which we have assessed based on the tree survey. We have plotted the trees on the new path that we wanted to build. There is less than uh I think there are like four large trees that would be disrupted and the there overall there'll be seven trees disrupt uh 11 trees destroyed.

So that the house you live in is 765 parts gravel road. Correct. Yes. So that's this house here and then that's this house over here. Yes. That's his house. So you you are creating because we heard from the public that night. The people in 806 and the people in 790 were and a few others were not happy about the long road. So how long is this road between horse road and the lot because the the one on Pleasant Road is 25 ft. How long is the driveway for the proposed option that you prefer which is option three? Uh it it's

I think it's 15 ft. It would be a driveway not a road. That's the dist that's the difference. So this is a a driveway serving the back lot. Pleasant road is a road. Um but but how long is that from Heartscover Road to the house? It's a it's quite a distance. It goes the length of of the 790 to the back where they would subdivide the What I'm reading is from Pleasant Road from Pleasant Road is 25 ft and it looks double the length between Horsesco Road and and the home or seven where the lot is the lot is proposed to be built.

So you would be coming into Pleasant Road, right? Coming in. So you do the distance that you would do either way and then you would cross in to the 25 ft and then you would have to create another slight deviation to get in. So yes, the the 100 ft one is is longer absolutely, but it is contained within my within my property. it doesn't disrupt. And uh just on the options that we talked about right out the way, I do have a well there as well along with the bamboo vegetation we talked about, I do have a well there. My well 765 is right there as well. So, uh considering those different things, I think

Yeah, but I think I I hear you have a well and you have things going on, but I think I remember 806 had things going on at that property, too, that you're putting a driveway right next to number 806. uh but it's on my side. Yes, I get it. So, you know, I have put in my conclusion that I am willing to do whatever it needs even if it's building separation. Uh meaning putting trees for privacy sake. Uh yes, there's a driveway, but I mean uh that's a viable option that is self-contained. I'm not disrupting anybody. I'm just using my own driveway to go back. Can you clarify where your well is on 75?

On 765. Yeah, it's it's right here. Oh, it is. So, if he just indicated the location of the well for the back lot is almost adjacent to the dog leg of Pleasant Road. Um there's a setback around wells within which you can't build stuff. He would have to improve that area which you could not do without but he's pointing to it with a pen. But how do we know that's correct? I think we would verify that. Yeah.

But that's that's actually the most pervasive issue that he's presented to you tonight with why that option is not a particularly viable option. I mean conceivably you could have him move as well. um if that's your preference for that. But that's but the health department has setbacks around wells and he would have to build a driveway within that area that he could not do. Okay. Any other questions from board members?

I had a couple of thoughts about this. I'm not sure that what you submitted analyzes where I thought that Dave Smith said that the Pleasant Road driveway where he would go in would enter [clears throat] to the west side of 765 between 763 and 765 and go into the back of the new lot. That's where that's what I thought the drawing was of. So that's where Yes. And that option is not analyzed in what's here. Right. Number option two shows it at the beginning of the lot. Yeah, it could option four could be at the back of the lot.

Okay. Um having said that, I think that um engineering might have bigger plans for Pleasant Road South if we go from four houses on that to five houses. And it may go I mean we call it a road, but it's like 12 ft wide and it's got it's lined on both sides. Um, and they may want it to now be a 20 foot or ride ofway instead of right now two cars can't pass each other on that. Once you start adding houses, it might not be viable to stay at 12 ft. And then we'd have the neighbors very upset at 757, 753 because suddenly they're going to have, you know, a wider a full-on road instead of a driveway. Um, I drove to the back of Pleasant Road to the end and I counted um two pine trees and one uh large deciduous tree along that westerly lot line of 765. So that they would have to come down for um a roadway to go in there or driveway to go in there. But I'm have mixed feelings about that because that's, you know, we may be opening up Pandora's box there that it's going to turn into something bigger because the more cars you come, you know, sharing, it's essentially like a shared driveway. We're calling it a road, but it's the width of a driveway. So, I have, you know, that concern. Um, as to the um impact to the neighbor at 806 hard scrabble, um, we discussed doing a shared driveway coming into 790. And for 50 reasons, you wouldn't want to do that. The new owner wouldn't want to do that. The board may still want to consider that, but something that might soften the blow of an additional driveway. Um, I don't know

how much distance there is between the existing driveway and the lot line that abuts 806. If you have the room to use the existing driveway, add a driveway and throw a row of arborite or something and evergreen that that blocks their view of the new driveway. That might satisfy that concern. Yeah. which I put in my conclusion that that is something that we were willing to do and we would definitely do uh to help uh some of the concerns there.

Also right now while they enjoy the vegetation that's there maybe some of it can be saved but really if you wanted to couldn't you just go in there and mow it all down. It's on your property. you're, you know, it's almost they're enjoying the benefit of your vegetation which you have control over. I mean there is um I can see their house actually uh there is very sparse like a lot of those trees which are the 12 diameter in I mean they are almost dead there. So okay. Yeah. So, I'm saying like both I guess I'm saying this is this is a tough one because there are are many things to consider.

Yeah, that's why we've been at it for a year now. So, yeah. And I mean to that point, we haven't heard from Dave yet, but I think if we were to use the Southern Pleasant Road, he'd want some improvements to that road, minimally widening it, but drainage improvements and so forth. So, it's conceivable, you use the phrase can of worms, it it could be a can of worms and the type of improvements that would be necessary for that. Okay. Just something else for the board to consider if we want to go with that. So, we don't have all the information we need to have.

I I think Mr. Chairman, two options. If you are inclined to go with his flag lot option, you can ask him to provide a screening plan and the landscaping that he might do for that. If you still want to consider the Southerntherly Pleasant Road option, I think we need to hear from Dave and what would be required in terms of improving that road, if anything. What what's what's the issue with the option he chose of three? You chose three. Mhm. What's that issue? The neighbors. Neighbors. At the public hearing, they had some issues. This guy, this guy here in 806, the driver's going to be top of his house. He's saying this guy, this guy here.

Yeah. And the one in the back 793 also is concerned 793 will get no part of the tribe though but I think he's more privacy concerned right his was a privacy concern which I mean we will put the arboras there to so the the option one gym was coming this way correct. Mhm. There is not a right of way for option one. You'd have to establish that, right? So, that's kind of the most cumbersome

and we know that that neighbor has opposed the project. So, it's unlikely they would agree to a right away across their property. You've already removed the But, you know, with option one, I'm sorry, we'll bring it up. uh because the 806 neighbor was concerned about creating another driveway on my because they would have two I mean that is something that we did consider that you know just let us use your right of way so that then we don't create another one and sandwich you that was their concern but if they're not willing to help us I mean I'm not really left with a lot of options here

are all these neighbors around you against this whole thing uh well last time 806 and 79 3 and 763 were here. 763 um uh M uh gentleman was more concerned about the marsh thing and uh again privacy, but uh he wasn't really uh concerned about the driveway, but he was more concerned about the uh would there be drainage issues on his property if he were to do something? And I think one of the gentlemen here said this might actually help him rather than right. So yeah because no matter which way we go someone's gonna be unhappy.

So you know if I if I go with that suddenly option I'll be unhapp I'll have five or six unhappy neighbors here. I would have one unhappy neighbor. Um yeah but you know two two they were there were two 793 and 806 were both Yeah. I mean 793 he wants to buy the land back there also. So he's trying to negotiate with me. So he's negotiating with you. Yeah. He wants to buy the land. What what does he want to do? He wants to build a house too. Now he just wants to he just wants uh he was just to buy it. That's it. He says he wants it for He said at the meeting that he wants it for privacy to assure his future privacy. Yeah.

But we might be looking at him to build a house. You never know. Future owner or someone. I wanted my parents to move there. Uh but you know, it's been a year, so I don't think they're going to move. But uh I'm just looking forward to any viable option here really. So I think with option three, if we were presented with a screening and landscaping plan would be uh probably favorable to present to the neighbors is my thought. Yeah. if we had a uh if you could show it whether it's on TV or or drawing that we could kind of get our eyes on it. Here's what it is.

Yeah. Cuz I'm I'm wondering why there was so much input or people here for the last meeting. Nobody's here tonight as far as I know. And I'm wondering why it's cold. It's cold actually. It's was holiday season. There was a lot of input. So I I I think I think we need to probably if we're going to do consider any of these options, I think they need to be fully vetted out with the landscaping plan and then get those get the the the questions answered from Dave Smith on option four. I guess it was so we can present to the public a more option four is coming from back here.

Yeah, it's not listed but that was what we talked about last week. But option four is he has to get permission from this guy. I think Dave's drawing showed that it was there for that that southern call it the southern option and um access the rear of that 79. How does that option four not work for you? as well. There's a lot of vegetation, extensive trees there. And my neighbor 6 763, he's not going to be happy about that if he has a road in front of me. And I own 765. He he has a well there, right?

We have Oh, that's the other option. This the back one the back absolute back one 763 would not be happy with that. And I'm assuming since we're building a road in All right. The well the well is on the this side. The well is over here. So on this side there's no well. Okay. We're going to we're going to avoid if you want to come up and join your husband, you're more than welcome. But we can't do it from the back unfortunate. Come on up. Yeah, we would go into zoning for that. Uh because

up into zoning if we go with option four because then we will not meet our R40. Uh we lose our 1 acre then. Yep. So, I think we really need to speak to Dave Smith and find out whether there would be road or widening requirements associated with option two or option four because that would result in the loss of a lot of vegetation going up through there and um it would they they would have a road closer to it's a much bigger project to run whatever that 400 ft of road, you know, widening the whole thing. Um, so I want

I want to know if Yeah. If if that would be required. If it wouldn't be required, then it's a easier job. Yeah. Because I think there's just pieces a few remaining pieces of the puzzle we need to plug in. I think you should um you prefer option three. I think you should dazzle your neighbors and the board with the landscaping that you're going to do there so that it's not disruptive. and we'll get the answers from um the town engineer about what is involved in using the southerntherly pleasant road. Okay. Does that make sense? I I agree.

Okay. So, I take care of the screening and the uh landscaping plan and uh they will be followup here or should I follow up with the town? No, you can resubmit to the board. We'll get it back on the next agenda. Uh no for the two and the for the option two and the four right where you're adding the landscaping we'll we will clarify the lower option the southern option okay is anything else uh all the other issues that were raised we have noted them uh the marshland thing we looked at the EF mapper so there's no uh marshland issue there

u and uh critically environmental areas obviously we are not in that area uh in that area so that's something folks had raised uh so yeah I mean and we've done the tree survey in the end so if there's we plotted the trees that would be displaced in case uh we were going with option yeah they've satisfactorily addressed those other issues okay let's just kind of figure out these remaining questions and I think we have a more complete conversation okay thank you for coming out thank Uh, adjourn the public hearing. A motion to adjourn the public hearing. Motion from Eileen. Second it. Second from Steve. Jean. I. John. Hi. Eileen. I. Steve.

I. And I for me. Okay. Next up is a new application. It's um not a public hearing. It's 174 Arthur Avenue, Thornwood to legalize a accessory apartment on first floor of existing residence. Application accessory department PA25-3 location 174 Arthur Avenue Thornwood section block lot number is 106.19-2-37 zone R10 applicant is Steven Thomas Herszburg welcome Mr. Hzburg. Yes. Welcome. Hi. State your name and who you are.

Uh, yes. Stephen Hburg. I'm the applicant and owner of 174 Ar Avenue along with my wife Rain and two school age children. Okay. So, so give us a little background if you can. Yeah. There's a um essentially an inwall apartment on the south side of the house existing. Uh he just want to legalize that for an accessory unit. So is it is it in an apartment today? Uh it's not in use. No, it's we just have it empty. So it's been an empty apartment and it's been an empty apartment for years, I guess. Sorry.

How long has it been empty? Uh it's been empty every six months. Six months. Yeah. Okay. Yeah. Yeah. Mr. chairman. So the the apartment was there, but it was never legalized as as an accessory apartment. That's why he's back. He's performing. I think it predates everything. So how long how long how long have you lived in the house? Uh 20 24 February. Okay. So you bought the house that had a an accessory apartment in it. Yeah. Then located the information said it wasn't legal, so meant to legalize it to make it Okay. Um

cuz usually after a title transfers they come back sooner than there's a little Yeah. The the evo doesn't have any uses in testing. It was never identified as an accessory apartment. It was just there. Okay. So no one knew it was an apartment when it was transferred. Okay. So it's so it's not it's never been okay. It's never been. So this is the first time any legal action would be taken to legalize that space. So as of today it's not an apartment. All right. It's not a legal apartment. It is an apartment, but it's Well, it's an apartment, but it's not legal. It wasn't permitted and it wasn't approved. Yeah, it's set up as an apartment. As far as the town's concerned, it's not an apartment yet. Yeah, correct. Exactly. Okay. There's a a kitchenette that will have to be legalized.

Okay. Okay. Any other qu any questions or comments and board members? And the good news, Mr. Chairman, this complies fully with the accessory department requirements in this. Right. I saw that. Any other questions or comments for board members? Have you gone through the permitting for with the town like? Yeah, with the building department. I I'll do that right after this process. Uh they the building inspector did inspect the property in there and Yeah, he inspected it. So, we have his report already. Yeah, he inspected it last week and approved it. Okay. What do we have to do with this? Is that a public hearing?

Okay. Is there a So is there there's no CO for this space? Like it was never COed. It wasn't permitted. So he inspected it without filing any permits or anything. No, he inspected it based on the application that has been filed. No one's ever applied, you know, permits like to get a CO for the space. So correct. Like has the electrical been that's why the building inspector went out there and all of it is compliant. Building code, plumbing, all of that's compliant. Yeah, he he approved it with the caveat that um we'd have to get a third party inspection to check plumbing and the electrical and you'd have to approve the accessory department.

So all that becomes is typically conditions of your approval and then that goes on a co. Yep. So he's going to the right process. He didn't skip completely the right process. The the pre-existing apartment was not his cons issue, right? And when he purchased the property, he either knew or didn't know, but it didn't matter because it wasn't established as a legal apartment. He just thought he bought two kitchens. No. Yeah. And it's good that he went he is going to the process so we can get this done. And it makes everything much better for you long term. So it'll be better for selling it and for making upgrades to that space to make it Yeah. more usable for tenants.

100%. Okay. So, with that being said, I think all we have to do if the board decides to do it is schedule a public hearing. I'll make a motion to schedule the public hearing. Motion from Eileen. Seconded. Second from Steve Jean. I. John. I. Eileen. I. Steve. I. And I for me. Okay. Thank you. We'll see the public hearing.

Okay. The last one is um two Broadway Hawthorne conversion of a singlestory commercial structure to a three-story mixeduse storage of residential structure. Application site plan number PSP25-12 location to Broadway Hawthorne section block lot number is 112.9-3-10 zone HHCA owner to Broadway LLC applicant architect Jonathan Bani Associates welcome good evening Jonathan Milani with Luna Balani Design Consultants representing [clears throat] Bridgepoint Group to Broadway um this site plan was previously approved plus or minus three years ago um for a three-story structure uh building on the existing footprint. Um we reintroduced the project in a presubmission meeting with Mr. Clary and Sal Vanella uh to establish the approval process since this is now falls in the HH zoning district with a different set of design parameters as well as zoning compliance. So we fell into a a difficult situation where we had a previously previously approved site plan, but now those design criteria kind of throw couple of wrenches into the to the mix. We um received the review comments from Mr. Clearary uh and it looks like there's some alterations to the existing design that could make the zoning compliance more compliant. Uh as well as but there are some pre-existing non-conformities that we'll never be able to to establish, meaning that the property is undersized. Number one. Two, we established a site plan design which is 100% pvious surface which you're only allowed 90%. So there's there's different parameters that we won't be able to meet as well as the guidelines. Um so I guess the process that we're establishing now is that we want to make the building more compliant, establish our zoning variance that we will need to

uh get approved. um in the meantime taking those DI design guidelines and trying to implement them in this this uh site which is a very small irregular site. So for example, there's some design guidelines that Mr. Clear is asking us to do as far as maneuvering of cars through the parking lot. Now this was there was several meetings about the parking layout on this property that established this parking layout. Now, it was just and if we go back to the notes, it was established by a few that the maneuvering is difficult, but they preferred this site design as far as the parking layout. So, there's there's difficult design parameters that need to be addressed that we can address at the next planning board meeting. The question is, I wanted to be able to introduce this already approved site plan and and make sure that you're aware of the irregularities that occur with this site when reviewing it under the HH zoning district. So, so I'm imagining we have to design we have to uh establish the zoning variances and then represent to you taking those design guidelines into into account.

Okay. And there was some parking conversation too, wasn't there some parking restrictions or Yeah. No, under the new guidel benefiting us is your your new guidelines. It benefits us where we're compliant with the parking. You are okay. But the parking layout is is a little difficult.

So, um just to update you. So, the prior approval, those issues were addressed. Um there was a lot of back and forth with respect to those. Eventually did obtain approval. He has to go through that again. New rules, new zoning criteria. So all of the justification of how the manu backing maneuvers and so forth, you have to go through that again. That that's that the old approvals is is expired. So he's got to go through it all over again with this new plan. So he's got to justify everything. He's got to demonstrate that sewer and water is adequate, that all of that stuff works again, which he did initially, but he's got to do it again because there's different rules.

No, I remember it and I and I get it. Yeah. I guess it's just a reintroduction so that you guys understand where we're coming from as well as and we already we already actually to a point where we got the engineering design the the drainage was approved for the site. So we're just reestablishing what enforced what design criteria you can enforce versus what was approved prior. So can you walk us through the floor plan?

Sure. Um yes. So you're just so let me take this off. So, this is the the site. Um, odd shaped 3,900 and something square feet. Uh, the building is pushed to the corner, which is creating some non-conforming setbacks. Um, but we're building on top of the existing footprint. So, uh, we're keeping the footprint as is. Uh, let me I'll turn around. So, I'm sure you guys are well aware of what the building looks like. Now, this is the proposed elevation existing commercial on the lower level. two two um one-bedroom apartments above and we're going to do a rooftop garden on top. Um this is the elevation.

What's the square footage of the apartments? Uh I believe they're around close to 900 800 something. Let me see. One sec. 3D views. Um one sec. So, here's the lower level, which is a storage actually for the owner who's going to be occupying the first level, second level, and repetitive on the third level, the the one-bedroom apartment. It's roughly 30 by I'd say 30. It's around 900 ft². Uh, the owner's going to occupy the first floor. [clears throat] When you say storage, is it going to be a storage facility or storage for a business or just storage for a business? Okay.

So, there won't be people coming and going or dropping. Okay. Yeah. I mean, the the elevation, it looks like there's garage doors there. Those aren't garage doors. Those are windows. Yeah, there won't be curb cut. It's uh there's no curb cut there. So, it's just going to make [clears throat] it look like a big glazed opening.

And one other point about this, when we went through this last time, this is an area that could use some reinvestment. This was generally viewed favorably, although it's a tiny tight site. So, that was the dilemma. I think we were supportive of redeveloping, but it's a tight property. It's a very very tight property and it's very hard to you know proposing this is for for a business to go there is very difficult but if it's just for storage uh clear uh Mr. Clearary's um communication identified 10 area variances needed to comply with the district. It looks like four of them are for existing conditions. Correct. I think that um you should do whatever you can to reduce them. Whether you're increasing the height of the stories above and you have a concrete area in front of the building if you could turn that over to green space, you know, put a little lawn there. I mean, you've got like

Yeah. No, that was um is I mean I I don't know if that was an option because that was poured by the the town poured that whole sidewalk along um Broadway and it just so happened our building was set back so they did the whole sidewalk to his building. So I don't know if it's if it's available, he can cut 4T or so of it. And yeah, the town went to the went to the building, not extended beyond the property line. Yeah. So I I my opinion is we could we you absolutely could [clears throat] reclaim that area whether it's it might get but it might get you to your 10% whatever that No, that's fine. No, we that's definitely an option. I just didn't know whether or not we can cut back the existing sidewalk that was poured by the town. I I just get concerned that it becomes a parking space and messes with the sidewalk. And

if we can make it green and eliminate one of the variances, that's good. No, that's not that's not I just I don't know if it's even going to it's going to I don't know if we can hit hit that mark even with that. Even if I go 4T by the length of the building, the length of building 40, we need 390. Okay. So it's going to be we can but in an effort to make that attempt it'll be you know I guess helpful right it's less than 100 less than the variance less than 100 [clears throat]

so so I guess this just this meeting for me was just to reintroduce and see how the previous design needs to be altered to comply with the zoning as well as design guidelines from the HH zoning district what is there in there a lobby Right. Yeah. There's a lobby right here. Yeah. So, the stairs go up this way. Gotcha. And the rooftop is a terrace area, right? Yes. Yeah. Open space, which we're going to Y. So, that's the first floor. And then that's the Boco door, the stairs to the roof. So, the the tenants be able to use that, right?

Well, yeah, they they they all can use it from the first floor to second floor. The first two tenants, but not the bottom floor. They they're going to lock it for the tenants, I believe. Yeah. Just for tenant use. Okay. Okay. So, it's reintroduced. We have any other other questions or comments? No, but we do need to deal with seeker on this. So, you can designate lead agency and get that process started. Okay. So, we have a decision to make. Do we want to establish ourselves as lead agent, which is typical? I'll make a motion that we designate ourselves. Motion from John. Second it. Second from Steve. Jean. I. John. I. Eileen. I. Steve.

I. And I for me. Okay. Merry Christmas. Just from a just from a clarity just to make some I go zoning first then back. Still come back to show us what you're doing in terms of those modifications. All right. And then the planning board theoretically can send a positive recommendation with the zoning board. Okay. Because you've done a good thing. Okay. Thank you. Merry Christmas stands. Okay. Any motion to close the meeting? Motion. Motion from John. Second. Second. Jane. Jane. I. John. Hi. Eileen. I. Steve. I. And I from. All right. Meeting is closed. And we can kill the mic.