agenda is a new public hearing on seventy three underwood street before i ask barbara fiasco to to read the notice the one of our board members joe de stefano it has recused himself from this hearing because he is a property owner at thirteen under ward so he will join us for the meeting after this after we have completed this  update on cushing village and then jeffrey perhaps you can say something about item four see additional funds for enforcement proposed for the f y twenty eighteen budget beginning to wind their way through the whole environmental process it's actually very it's a pretty complicated yes process to get to allow them to move forward they also did change how they were going to do some of their th remove all the soils from the property now we're going to keep some on site so that sort of changes things up a bit in anyway so it's still one interest process but then we do have  sixty we do have a sixteen page memo of some detail from the town's consultant i think none of the we can certainly distribute it to the board none of the points i would say none of the points rise to a letter to the level of deep criticism and there are but there are points that one just needs to work one's way through yeah  return to the public here why don't we just finish four point see additional funds for enforcement which were of course highlighted in the town administrator is cover letter to the proposed budget my understanding is that there was a meeting of the warrants subcommittee today to discuss this and jeffrey do you want to say something about what the since the request obviously came out of can go out and do some touring important in begin to start dealing with some of these sort of outstanding issues and so that's what that the hope for this money is that we can do that bring somebody in in the short term basis they said there's a couple people that currently that town reaches out to building inspectors to when because of sickness and vacation schedules sometimes we're needing able to have that resource available to the town so that there's only bylaws can be monitored and acted upon appropriately yes yes i'm partial i can have one said to me several times will pause for a moment while you just step right and ordinarily the order in which we proceed is the applicant presents for the applicants architect presents then we take any comments from neighbors and others who are in attendance who wish to comment and then the board will ask questions and discuss it amongst ourselves as mr bianco pointed out to an applicant in earlier meeting because of open meeting laws while we  read these materials and study them this will be the first opportunity we've had to discuss them as a group so the it is a true public discussion that starts from ground zero i should read the notice first and you should notice a public hearing by the planning board an application for two special permits notices here by given that the bellhop planning board will hold a public hearing on tuesday march seventh two thousand and seventeen at seven pm in the board of selectmen meeting room town hall four fifty five concord avenue to consider the application of maria rita patty for two special permits under section one point five point four of zoning by law to alter a non conforming structure in order to construct a second story deck open prend deck already exists close friend at sixty three underwood street and a general residence the zoning district if you would come to the please come to the microphone each time you come to the microphone to speak please introduce yourself if that is we remember your name but for people who are turning on cable and watching it at home it's helpful if you reintroduce yourself name is kind patty i am agent for my mom maria patty as the applicant i just first wanted to state say that i think there's a typo and that there's only one but anyway no it actually is too special permits so one is to alter a non conforming structure and then one is from the rear set back alter so you're just there so your structure ask you would ask me about the two for clarity and i unfortunately gave you the wrong answer then and now i'm going to clarify it now i'm sorry ok so when we purchased the house there was a sun room in the rear of the house on the first floor and it was pretty much just a greenhouse made out of class and over the years with the stresses of the winters glass began to leak in the water was damaged the water was damaging the interior in december two thousand and thirteen we submitted and got our building permit to renovate that room so those ten room was ready made it renovated it was finished and march two thousand and fourteen and to finish the project it now had a flat roof where before it had ground glass roof to finish the deck to finish the roof we wanted to put some sort of decorative deck on it and we did that not knowing we needed to apply for a special permit went ahead and did that in two thousand and fourteen and the pictures are attached with our and after pictures and the materials used as well as some drawings from the that we did add are non non compliance so we planned to show that we're going to change that doing all the house and the way it was before it was on my soul the size that it was raining name into your old kind of all that stuff and by doing what we did i think i there you know you can really go off and sit there because it's really really hot but i didn't think it was a big deal seventy four i'm not from this country and i bought the so the my first set of questions are things that if you do not have the answers to we will just go and look them up if you have the answers they it's good but if not we can certainly find them  well i'm sorry again they can't they can't hear you at home in less you're standing at our floor mike we know that's a somewhat unnatural way to speak but it is what the technology require more of the two thousand and fourteen project and was there an architect i don't know if he i think there was because he did have plans for the sunroom but i don't know who one of them and you know whether the plans submitted for the permit included i think my mind next question is  and i could have i could have done gotten a ruler and done a cake up but probably better to ask is does the will you be does the does the project you were planning change the size of the de when when i looked at the when i used google earth technology is a wonderful thing when i used google earth to look at the property it would if it appeared that remote that the back just taking it up the taking it off the google earth shot which is a very imprecise way of doing things and i recognize that it was very hard since a paved surface does not qualify as open space it was very hard for me to see how one could have two thirds of that lot count me i understand that these numbers were provided by your architect not by you but not by you personally that's why i say we will look into this further but i just it's very hard to see how one could get a two thirds open space given the amount of the the there is there is the back is paved in its entirety and we look at another deck situation where the back was essentially paid so if you have a chance to discuss that with the architecture for you think that is something that we need to look into further there may be some confusion on the part of whomever provided these numbers as to how understanding is that this was a project that has already been completed yes but the project is completed are there are there any plans to are there any plans to change but but but the the applet but you invision changing the deck is that correct not the size but c unfortunately those stairs at that those stairs were non or didn't comply to the building code so they have to be redone so that's also that's part of what is contemplated here i don't have the stairs been we don't yet stairs they have to be to code and that's what this plans reflect right but i want to be very careful that we don't leap ahead to if there are going to be stairs because again one of the things that we've typically been i'm getting a little ahead of myself was flagged or it was i mean that the the deck was pleaded i'm just trying to understand how we got here to the planning or you may whisper in your daughter's ear and she may share your sentiment as long as she is standing at the microphone so i guess i have a question for you jeffrey about what actually constitutes a roof deck so i mean let's leave the stairs aside for now  what about let's just say i mean there's there's other homes around town where there's not really a back you know that people put furniture out on where the railing is pretty low it's  all and i guess actually that third floor lighter door that we looked on hasten would be an example maybe where if you like theoretically if there couldn't stared there were no stairs to that second floor door before it was there a second floor door there was no such because i did not describe it as a new there is a second floor there's a back  door to the top stairs with its own staircase exist and always has been when the greenhouse was there there it was just the greenhouse and we had rebuilt that it became a flat roof ok just so the concrete stairs were always there correct there and the yeah those are the ones in question the ones in question are iron rod iron stairs that kind of go from the concrete u often was a one story or a study or sun room kind of apple kind of location and so it may have had a door at one point that lead led from the bedroom to that space but nowadays it has to have th it also would be in some respects hard to keep people you know having had a son who was a teenager or her bits might be hard to control certain things from occurring on and a flat roof that sort of scre know i mean it's hard when you have a flat roof adjacent to it even a window which is all around right exactly just that i could ask a question of you of the so you have it as a pre formed concrete stairs that go up is there a platform that's also concrete that's ok so there were two two elements two new elements that were brought in to tie into the existing sun room  there are no sliding there's not one how do you get access to the jacket right now right now through those wrought iron stairs  that i was trying to understand if that was an exit because it says i you know exist in concrete stairs and i was going with that is the existing structure that's there that looks like there's two or maybe three sets of sliding questions i think that we need to try the answer questions we need to try to answer i think is this is not our first deck application right and i think we need to be careful and go back and look at the other data and in general that applications have been problematic here and so i think we need to go back there and look very carefully at what we've done on other cases to make certain that what we do in this case is consistent and fair i certainly think that we need to review the lock coverage issue because we did indeed rejected death because it was  increasing mass in an area where the paving had clearly been in excess of what was allowed by town by law and we'll need to look that we have we don't have a lot of neighborhood feedback but what we do have is i believe consistently negative and raises some quality of life issues that we would need to think about  we've we in the past we've had much concern with and does the house have a basement in the past we've had much concern we've been very concerned with exterior stairs t x because they allow a what is permitted as a one family to more easily be divided into a two family and again we're looking at stairs that were not that in the twenty thirteen twenty fourteen project that were added and again this is an issue we've looked at before and we've consistently said even when we've listened to safety concerns we've listened to say convenience concerns and we've said no on a more technical know just to clarify the stairs were not a twenty thirteen a post so again and i apologize to my colleagues and also to you because i did not see the last of the four pictures and the package that's my that's on me so i'm going back to my questions that i was asking about access to the deck i am going to go and please bear with me so i'm going to look at this this picture here  and so i was trying to follow that how do you actually get into the because it's there looks like it's boxed off on three sides of the railing do you have to go over the railing to get onto the d and i think we would all say it's as something on a list we need to have a clearer we need to have a clearer set of drives as to what they are now and what's going to be changed because it is genuinely difficult to to move back and forth between what was there what was added in and what was what was that what was that it would be nice to see be able to see other way you probably cannot do this i think one thing that you could do is it's to add to that point it was not clear it's not clear in reading the application for example that we're going to be new sliding doors compared to what was there now and that's part we need a picture of what's there now what was at what is there now and what is being proposed and i think we will have to think about very seriously about the again one of the reasons the board has been concerned about decks is that outdoor space is intrinsically a little more intrusive for the neighbors than indorse mace and there is a neighborhood concern that that short dimension on the non conforming dimension that needs to be that we need to think about you know and finally i understand that with the the homeowner may not be familiar with change because it was going to be a good business and it was a lot less trouble than coming back for a modification of the permit and we can contain our enthusiasm for that contractor given at least some of the few that we've gotten from the neighbors and just as you think about this project you know right now for the reasons you've given it doesn't seem like there's really a need for the sliding glass door on the back so this is something to think about when you can come back and and more fully explain the application because you mean you say you're not using it but there's a sliding glass door there we have neighbors saying they're concerned about their privacy and the disruption that noise neighbor's homes through google earth there are in the google or in the current google earth view of it there is a table with four chairs and two lounge chairs on the deck think anything else before we what we're now going to do is to make a motion is to continue the hearing before we do that since we can't we we have a full agenda for the twenty first so we recap continue with the twenty first we will leave to change the we will need and we need to continue it to a specific date if the state does not work for you you will need to get like jeffrey know as soon as possible and then we will find a mutually convenient date the next scheduled date would be the fourth of april but as jeffrey has pointed out to me a number of times since he wasn't certain i was listening the first time and fears i might forget it we cannot meet on the fourth of april because it is the town election so we will need to move our and you'll talk to your architect if you coordinate with jeffrey and see whether you can make the six th need new plans so just you'll need to be certain that you can have the material ready to jeffrey a week before that so in the next few days you want to talk with your architect and that he did with regard to the marquis harming as well as all things i could be permitted pending on what one chooses to apply for and we can go through that in a minute or so some interest as impressions of respect to those contractors signs and so there were some outstanding questions that had been asked previously that now are incorporated into this draft during that conversation  some additional issues with the ring group came up and so as a result of that one of the changes that was done was that the deshon definition of temporary sign  may come into effect for maybe less than ninety days so they have one other reason let me just interrupt you every second piece was we went back and forth you know we thought when you're thinking about a restaurant or a store front and there is a temporary sign like  in the window for a sale or you know some holiday event sixty days seemed like plenty but then the more we thought about it you know for sale signs also count as temporary sign and we were concerned  know the belmont real estate markets pretty high sixty days might be a burden you know would in peed the ability to sell its own property and so we decided for that reason to extend it to ninety days as a general rule but then we then realized that by doing so that's essentially just about a season and then we were creating problems for contractor signs particularly like lawn mowing services who then could like leave the signs up for the entire summer which was one of the reasons why the complain to you we're hearing and the reason to look back at the sign was generally which takes us to sort of where we are geoffrey left all right and that's why three this this the sub section three has two parts to it the first part relating to the lease or sale of a building which states that is signs that really to renovation and maintenance and that they should be removed within ninety days or when the project is finished whichever is the last so therefore then you know if you're doing for example an innovation project and it only takes among the signs to come in within the month you don't get the nine within that they did you don't get this an extra sixty days to make your sign up there so that's where that's how that break we also concluded that if the renovation went six months or whatever it that it was still fair to limit the temporary sign out front to ninety days yes on the assumption that the contractor is going to have his truck or trucks out front anyway and they're not really you know there's a balance between the community's interests and not seeing the visual clutter and you know the contractors interest  advertising expense are also raised a great issue but i think it's covered which is you know the pub the neighbors interest in let's say if a contractor backs up his truck and destroys the curb or driveway or something  the neighbors it's the neighbor would still in all likelihood after the signs been up for ninety days and the trucks out front with know who the contractor was to follow up you know right there were damage to the property so we thought that that struck a balance of interests in limiting ninety days even if the renovation went on for six months saying it was six it was seventy five and now i was being proposed reduced to sixty so the aggregate area of the sign on the virus is to be sixty as opposed to seventy five tell it more about that vendor's pictures when we laid them all out on a table made it clear to us that if you wanted to go for the biggest sign humanly part of allowed under the laws everyone would be skewed towards a particular design choice and we felt that we didn't want the bylaws to do that and we ought to be able to lay to write the bylaws awnings and valences and sign and wall signs so that when you lay them  table they sort of look equally as though likely appealing and there wasn't one where you could say oh i can maximize my letter or sign size in this one particular configuration over the others higher from the ground that dramatically construction says you may you may also have the six feet from the ground if you please is that the intent no the intent is that an calling we either need to find it or get rid of the free if it isn't the whole we should get rid of the phrase if it is called we need to understand where idiots because it's a leftover then we need to reread section five point two point one and make sure that it just slides the first with some clarity this just isn't a truck driver it's something if you're planning board   i had a question about seven be wouldn't it be more clear to say the sign may not be placed on public property without prior consent to it starting with the cla live with the building department to make sure they understood everything and so firstly out of that card they didn't have any issues or concerns or you know clarification that they were looking for which was really nice to answer well it's one thing up you want to say something about what you were and why you were why you were doing this and what you wanted to accomplish for so long first and foremost it was just to demonstrate what could be done under the proposed vial and give it a little bit of visual clarity and his mother standing behind the words there was also some concern with the seventy five percent of the valance and so very doing these drawings it allowed us to spencer's first set of drawings also gave us the opportunity to say the wonder when it happened to margins that we had originally thought we were ok with and the size of the lettering was too big and so we revisited those and now have two  of one day's more condensed version there and one b would be a more linear and then again the lettering is at sixty percent whereas before it was at seventy five percent and you literally were able to go across the entire  and so this just demonstrates what that would look like if you did the largest wall sign possible in combination with the largest balance sign so there's no science permitted on the slope is allowed in the balance and the wall and then three a b and c is sort of if you don't put any signage on the balance or on the wall you're allowed to do a logo and or business name on the slope and so there was a little bit more variation allowed here than had than other alternatives and so i did three drawings here to demonstrate what that could potentially be if you did in the contents condensed logo and business name the center  which is three a three b is a much more linear with you have two different logos on either and and then the name in the middle because again with this alternative view you're not limited to how many haven't really changed again it's also just a tool to sort of visualize what the different pieces are because there's a little bit of a nomenclature change between markey and on and it helped us figure out if we were creating drawing the dimensions that are allowed felt large to me so i did the drawing at this level then we went out and did a little bit of data gathering and determined that the average size of sandwich boards around town are actually what is the  right you would be so one two three four mean i think not crossing waverly street is a good idea but if we just did that would that be sufficient stopping at a street just i'm sorry not be a way really stopping it we're just not going to the omitting that we really section is the three feet notification and then what is if you just did a single residency and such  oh so yes so actually so thirty three it's actually thirty three and thirty five so there was between thirty three and forty three there was actually an extra lot that the prior owners purchased and then three didn't merge the two lots together and create a new deed in the new subdivision so i've no idea so that thirty five actually is a separate taxed parcel of right but is own by five thirty three looking at the burbank so we'll await the recommendations of the school superintendent and the aide by the architect in terms of what that would look like but coming coming  anything from c b c c b c sent a letter to the proponent of the what they kept calling the hatch yes shell that they did not think that the that the project was ready or had to settle this with the pinions of the neighbors enough and so they were formally notified that they could apply again next year i would expect at least half the meeting will be given over to the war and article you will vote signage will have to download delay back to vote that gave it out per is going to we will square minutes yes together with any and we have a general possibly we'll have a general discussion on a way really square but in any case we've had those much minutes now so with any comment