there also pursuant to vermont law if you have an interest in an application that's before us i would encourage you to in the public say something at the he feels like they would like to join the g r b please contact town manager jeff or better let him know that you have a desi nest so first of the here on the schedule is ellen kraft application fourteen s o three for conditional use site plan review for the increasing number of children at the home daycare involved in this application at all so i don't believe i have a conflict but if anybody feels i have a conflict i'd be glad to hear that a bigger after school program which is a much needed thing in richmond it's pretty much ok so in what steps of you take it what are you required to do to increase the number of children that you are so that's actually a huge process that i'm going through at the moment and this is one of the steps along the way this apply for a condition you should be which is why you're here right now which we look at under five point five point six and in that basically we're looking to see that the community facilities can handle the project the character of the neighborhood is not affected the traffic can be tolerated but of under the specific standards  not just noise and no outside the splays of that you get your state provides another rack any other nasty chemical or explosives or safety that he will stay on with me but as soon as i step over six kids i'm legally obligated to have some they're ok and there's a whole strict process from the state  at that to get that decided today for you you'll get a letter from claire that with our decision and that's about what you need for your portfolio right thank you very much studied gender is application fourteen dash over for seven for an appeal of a notice of violations for the construction of the fence under de vry property located at sixty four huntington road  and indicates that and from what i understand she is moving the feds to the property line and since our notice of my lation that she's appealing was for the feds being on a neighboring properties i imagine  right now we're up to yes and it turned out after a bunch of hassling between neighbors and so forth that engineers went up that it all turned out that the problem wasn't anything that occurred they were current owners would were doing or not do it but that the original if the structure wasn't built correctly which says to me that they think whenever we approve a sub right we always say that but i think you have my might want to add to that that in the engineer certified to us that it was done so especially in a situation where we're talking about for the registered engineer i think it should say licensed engineer story the only changes claire is bringing out here that directly affects us is that there is a ambiguity between notice requirements under the subdivision regulations couple do it than just certified to you that they've got it anybody on the board have any other changes they want cleared to bring out or questions about what she has put up here sort of a compass is traffic and then that gives us more flexibility rather than some strict standard which may or may not apply i mean one of my frustrations such would be the application looks good to us if we have to deny it all or or work around the fact that there's some strict standard that seems not to make sense and gets in the way but that does give us more flexibility ok there's nothing