really good on two items three and four and i was going to switch over to three or four i'd prefer to take up but i did four which is for the condition of twelve point b of the special permit granted for the fishing and a temporary stormwater management plan so in order for a foundation permit to be issued we need to approve this plan for our special conditions and  responded to the questions that we sent in and there were three pages of much of the thorough both feet construction company nazi construction and allen and major the engineering firm responded to every every item and basically answered it clarified it and or corrected some issues or made some changes that were suggested with the exception of one that i just wanted to talk about quickly and that is the notion of i believe it's during construction street cleaning operation that's supposed to go on it was mentioned in one of the notes on one of the many parts of the erosion plan that it would be done on a frequency of the  body the adjacent streets would be cleaned on some type of frequency and i just wanted to kind of pin down that that would happen and almost automatically not to have to wait till it got to a degree where somebody had a complain and somebody had to call somebody i just wanted to be done automatically my only other issue entrance is an exit saw on the site were a big concern and it's been it's been clarified on when you're sketchy point three i think shows the flow of traffic in and out of the site  street and vice versa so i think the plans in order in that it's really kind of a perfunctory thing at this point again glen clancy reviewed the same plan and agreed with everything except it's recreating it as well so the adjacent streets will be done during the construction period the second for the discussion will favor i pose thank you and stay with the same with the same project the owner of the development team has has put in a request for an extension of the special permit and just by way of a little little history background the special permit was granted nearly two years ago and the date of its expiration as determined by george hall town council is obvious nineteen it expire if the building permit or components of the building permit are not issued and a component of that would be the foundation plan but we just approved the erosion plan for there  things currently up until now that we're holding up the inspector's office for issuing the foundation for one was our approval of this erosion plate which we just did the other one is the board selectmen approving basically the financing package that's before them so that the owner can close on the municipality law property till they close on that property no building permit or date i'm sure they have the owner is concerned that it will expire prior to that approval being granted you know that is that it's not automatic that it will be granted but you know assuming everything goes along properly they just a little bit more time to approve out of i'm sure many people that live around it in the town are as well and so that there's no impediment to that they've asked for a year extension and before i go and give my thoughts i comments or thoughts i'll share some of my own afterwards but i just want to i was concerned that they're asking for a year after all that the time of the town has invested in this that seem like an unnecessarily long period of time in a year seems longer on the other hand one would not want to have a project in with which the planning board has voted to approve which we think would be beneficial for the town  fall apart simply because the selectmen couldn't meet for two weeks and therefore didn't finish their review and they didn't have a signed deal and then before the nineteenth questions of things that maybe they can that to us with that we need to get involved and we're not meeting it would be it would be difficult i think not to extend some time and share my thoughts i think i think a year is a long time x six months is a long time what i think is important is to give the board of selectmen the time it needs to do its due diligence and weigh in either in favor or against the plan and i thought it would be to grant an extension giving the given the time to the selectmen in the event they vote the package down then i think whatever extension would be granted should end at that point and it would expire if they if they vote the affirmative that you know that the plans accepted then still a little bit of time after that has to be given to the to the inspection services department to go ahead and issue the permit me to do that but by you know look at any way there should be an upset time and  way yet so that was my thought in the nation which is discussed it that sounds reasonable to me i'm i'm fine with that barbara being an attorney would be nice to have her w so is the concept here that if the selectmen saying no we won't sell the parking lot the permit and it's passed past the nineteenth the permit will terminate immediately even if that happens before our meeting on the eighth of september i mean because we're assuming it's past august nineteenth when they for a three month period from august nineteenth to extend these special permit for a three month period beginning which runs from august nineteenth except that during that period should the the board of selectmen vote to reject the financing package and not proceed with the sale of the parking lot the extension is immediately terminate so is it really or in terms of rejecting the finance package or not approving the sale would would either rejecting the finance baggage that you know that jeffrey checked with the town council on on how the planning board goes and being able to extend a special permit and the rules are quite clear and i was special permit that we have the ability to do that internally as it has a vote and that's what how i would like to proceed i think it's the right thing to do in an effort to to move the project the law so it's jeffrey anything else before we  just wait a minute to bring joe de stefano we couldn't sit through the question village because he's recused himself from those proceedings just briefly this this was a project that initially showed a modified front porch that was going to be enclosed and a single door put it at the top of the stairs it was going to although we were going to vote on it it showed a connecting bridge from the second floor boards to the roof of the garage which could which was going to be torn down and made into a and since then and mostly i think due to some of our comments and some of the questions we had they've eliminated any of the work to the front entry so that's remains we're going to remain unchanged we're not going to close that in and i'm going to put a in the bay window right yeah right on the second floor pushed out of the bay window so you want to go around the room seems the a lot of around the table seems like a likely place to start to see if everybody understands or has any other questions are any anything on your review proportion as the big large bay window that's up on the second floor which totally in my opinion doesn't compliment the neighborhood at all it doesn't enhance the neighborhood it actually singles itself out from the neighborhood so i've got an issue with that and you can't lever over two feet and i know i was getting to the dormers aren't as out of scale with the rest of the neighborhood as your bay window is on the second floor that would be my car so that being said that would be one of the the setback already encroaches on on on the zoning so for me to add something to the outside of the house is for me a no no and i don't think it puts the design of the house either so that's something i would i would like to see removed so that was one point on the landscape drawing a s one drawing it talks about planting on some mulch to some plantings that they don't talk about the size and other point which gets the whole driveway with your side of the house is essentially all asphalt from the street all the way back to the gradual from the lot line right up to the house i think it's too much and too much asphalt n we can talk about it in a few minutes and then before we get on to the metrics one should come up with what you can answer a couple questions but i just want to understand that the notion of the garage first of all so there's a note that says it's going to be that that says a shed is going to be demolished there's another note that says the garage is going to be torn down and replaced to the same footprint your old a drawing showed a flat roof on the garage the new address shows a sloped roof you so have you  which shows sloped the shit sheds gone and it shows a slope garage so i just don't want you to be want it to be disingenuous if if if you're building in and i don't know when you're going to be tearing down the garage for building the new garage if it's not part of this phase of the work i don't see the drawing at all because it's confusing to us if later on you know you can go to zoning and get them to approve that you know good good luck to you but where you've got note saying it's go demolished and put back up with a slow proof if it ends up showing up later on with a flat roof and a deck i just think that's not the way to and is it ok to demonstrate it and i would if so if if that is the case if it's not going to be part of this phase i would rather you take take the garage off altogether and and think that no doubt yeah it's existing it's an existing garage because you're under this permit if it were granted you wouldn't be allowed to take that garage down and rebuild it you'd have to get a rather have you say have a note on it that says you know and i said not in contract or not out of this contract or you know potentially future work or something like that your so just doesn't indicate on the drawing if you're going to do something to it ok has the largest windows the other on the other comments about the outside or inside them just from the design perspective so so to summarize just so that we get to the know jeffie takes copious notes i'm going to remove any of the notes pretending to any construction with the garage  couple of us have stated that we'd like to see the bay window removed and keep the facade as it exists you need to remove that and again i'll just reiterate i did i'd like to see a strip of grass maybe the grass that's in front of the house continue up along the side or some type of planter going up the side so that you have a break up of asphalt from the from the property one to the home which is to take the neighborhood as we have defined it which in this class includes fifty three three structures and ask where twenty nine thirty one flet road w stand in term in terms of the rest of the neighborhood if the plan as submitted were approved were granted a special permit so let me just run through the we look at five dimensions the first is lot size where broadly speaking small is bad large is good because the whole general residence zoning is about restricting density so this is a relatively small lot it's the sixteen out of fifty three so it's clearly below the average for the neighborhood as a whole when we move to the other air measures the other metrics and when we move to the other metrics they are larger is dancers so in terms of the spirit of the general residence rezoning big is bad or at least a question total of the fifty three units total living area would be forty fifth out of the fifty three the number of bedrooms would be fifty first fifty first the floor area ratio would be fifty first in the bedroom number of bedrooms per thousand square feet of lot size would be fifty seconds so in terms of these metrics  this is clearly in the upper twenty five percent and really close to the top in all of them let me just then ask you kind of the second page of metrics which is the information is not new we've been look it's the same information that we've been looking at all along this is the one with lots of little circles in various colors so what i tried to do was pull together some of the information that we gather and then present it in graphic far so just to run over what we're what's summarized on this page the first item is when was this property sold or when was this property acquired and obviously whether it was before or after the rezoning before town meeting passed the new general residence restrictions  we look to see whether the taxes are current which they are whether the resident of has turned into census farm which the resident which the applicant has and whether it's owner occupied which it is  the second change is the the second new set of graphics and this was in response to michael's question last time which is could we see not just where it's going to be but how much  changing from what's there or not so i just computed those percentages obviously for a lot size there is no application in which the lot size changes so that is and a total living area is house as it stands conforms to current zoning for the general residence district and how that degree of conformity would be impacted by the proposed the plan submitted by the applicant this is the this is the first time around for this so this is something of a draft and i have no doubt that as we work with it we will improve it but let me just run through kind of the kit the high points on it we now we have a minimum lot size with a special permit for a two family house of five thousand and twenty five hundred per unit here we start with a lot that is twenty two hundred forty two square feet and obviously remains that so it is non conforming in terms of how big a lot would be something better to be clear on i then they the next set of conformity that this are included here are the setbacks and i mean i was somewhat unclear and i think the discussion of the garage  somewhat clarified of what the rear setback is going to be but essentially the rate the setbacks are non conforming now there is not a substantial change  this new construction at least as i'm reading it the question of their height is conforms to the current zoning and it's continues to when the house was built in on the plot plan you can see the actual setbacks and what we use is setbacks is always the minimum dimension on the side jeffery late unless there's a the stairs are allowed that they don't count the search there are certain exceptions rights so  on this particular drawing eight hundred feet is a front step back twenty three fifty is what was used here but what where that's coming from here is an applicant puts his dimensions together they're doing it for the addition effort jeffrey pointed this out to me that prior to this owning if in addition were were built and it were conforming to the current zoning even though the house wasn't it would be allowed by right it's changed  t but i think this is meant to show what the setbacks are that the setbacks are actually within the house proper or to the to the new zoning it's irrelevant to your to your for are the to the the next categories covered are lot coverage and open space and lot coverage this is easier to figure than setbacks because it's thirty percent this is currently over the thirty five point seven and i'm not clear where we get the thirty five point eight but it may have been if you are not and right now but in any case it is still non conforming in terms of open space it is very close but if the requirement is forty percent and it was and remains so as i said this is the the quite tile analysis we've seen before and i think we've pretty much got work out this is an attempt extend it and to get clearer on what's happening with the addition and in the the question it raises for me is you there is a there's a property that is substantially non conforming in the dimensions that are most impactful to the neighborhood lot coverage open space it's it's going to be it will clearly increase density in the neighborhood by any measure and my question i think for the rest of the board is before one tries to improve the redesign my is in the upper ten percent in terms of every density measure maybe we shouldn't we should say that this should go forward not that it should be improved but they don't make things significantly more dance joining changes accomplished but it is an existing two family and we have allowed by special permit the ability to take out a two and put up a two by special permit if we feel it does the things you is if i could imagine it the the degree of nonconformity of substantial so if we are going to allow to increase density with this degree of nonconformi is this do we want to make it do what is that something we want to make it possible broadly speaking because it's very hard to say yes in one case and no in another unless there a substantial in less there are some differences now i still i buy in entirely to the enhance the neighborhood test not a numerical test but i'm very hard put to see how with a family be able to fit on a substandard life if you could if it could be done that we would at least be open to here doesn't mean we're going to grant it yes but but i also understand what you're saying i mean how far down the road you want to nap or to go generic spending time and money in this board's time if at the end of the day there's no way it's going to accomplish what it is we we need to accomplish and one does not want to encourage future applicants to come forward with a very big very dense plan with the notion that then the board will start negotiating from that point that gives that does that mean that makes the process longer and more painful and probably produces more density than he really wants then t the spirit of the new bylaws and pound eating vote concurred i understand what he has to balance the equities here but i think you know the question is if if if this is how does this enhanced the think that your numbers are striking those and they give me pause for sure and i see that if we saw applications like this over and over again we're going to see crete so that could eat meat the dent will go will seize yeah seven bedrooms will see right you know full dormers on each side of the third floor and they think it's a very difficult question to answer in an individual case by case basis it's also difficult to draw a line in the sand and say well if three parameters here were in the next twenty five percent but not the highest twenty five percent maybe we'd feel more comfortable but it's hard to start the concerned with was singles being torn down and sent to duplexes and sideways to going in not much of it was about finishing off an attic or putting a couple of dollars out and it i struggle with that because you know particularly for an owner occupant as your family grows it it makes sense to try to expand into into that attic however you know i am sensitive to the neighborhood and how it fits in at a density and all of that i mean just the parking alone you know you have to have four spaces in a two family but with all of these bedrooms if you know as kids get older and they get their own cars where the car is going to go you know that's just the normal kind basement with a full back and four separate rooms one looked at the original plan with the bridge from the garage to sell on the potential and this is not intelligence nine look at capacity not in that it lends itself to a more than two family home really easily not legally not legally but what in fact i mean which is answer to my concern about the density it's the fact that the basement layout looks so much like an apartment enhance a neighborhood you know and that's one of the criteria of the zoning board and so i think it's i think it's a test and should take on here which were certainly talked about  but the amount of specific discussion of this point was somewhere i have not gone back to look at the transcript which is always a really useful exercise and i will certainly do that is slim but my recollection is it's dormers per say everything is in relation to the size of the lot to the rest of the neighborhood and whether how it how it impacts the density of the neighborhood and whether it's  scale with the rest of the neighborhood so it's not a design feature for say it's the overall impact in of the project on the neighborhood and the consistency of the project with an existing happy to have that happen as long as there's some if there's some change in it because baghdad it's something that we can work with but if it's if it's you know minor little tweaks and that you know just kind of forewarning you that it's it's it's the density thing that's that's the big and you know because this house all wise isn't isn't the issue in this case where it could be on another one but here it's it's more the density it's and again as as liz said that basement is  are we is everybody willing to to have the up and go back and try to make it work and just the we can do it without adding that thing you know trying to keep it the same number of bedrooms you know your obviously you increase the number you know you can you can sleep for four kids in a room if you want to but but where we're not looking at that we're looking at you know numbers of bedrooms and what that means and what it means is more people in the home that were there before and that's been a concern of the neighborhoods and that's why they gave us the charge to do something about it that's why we're you know that's why we're here you know there was a time when you could have done this by right probably and other than that even with come back in and know that you know if we want we want to try to make it work for you but it's got to work for us and for the neighborhood and you know you've got to do the design when i get the design of for you we only get to say yes or in a bigger basement i mean everything's pushed to the max and we we can't have that so you know and i know you've done something about that for now anyway but the cracks in the front entry now you know we're going to arrest them and come back so willing to continue with it we'll have a motion a second to do that you'll need a little bit of time to get stuff together we like to get information two weeks before we meet the next time we needed somebody not disintegrate if it gives you some time to pull stuff together so we define a neighborhood and yeah and then and then liz and jeffrey culminate all the information from all of those buildings put it on this metric sheet and it compares your home to all of those properties existing and proposed so we know how it compares to all of them we know what they look like you know some of them should never have been allowed in the first place so that's why we're i guess that's why we're here today is because you know the neighborhood said we put a stop to this and that's what we're trying to do we're trying to scale it back and make it fit the neighborhoods not to modify the neighborhood that some of them have become because of the projects that were allowed in the past but but the traditional neighborhood you know that was there doing if you're willing to pull something together and try to get a forest i'll have the vote and and we'll we'll continue it otherwise if you rather we can just have a vote up and down to vote on the project today as it exists if you if you again a non conforming structure looking to add some do  very similar project to the previous project it just starts showing up on a much bigger and and there are other significant differences yes very much so anybody have any this neighborhood in which there are ninety two structures this is the eighty eight pious lot the eighty eight largest lot so it's clearly one of the biggest lots in the neighborhood  with the additions being proposed this will also be one of the largest houses it'll be red structures it'll be eighty seventh out of  the ninety two but when we combine those two to look at floor area ratio it is still below the median it's thirty it would still be thirty six out of the ninety two and in terms a bedroom is perth thousand square feet it would be fifty eight so it's slightly above the median but not much when you move to the other information and since i have now been corrected on the use of said x to be treated i will not review information that i now know is incorrectly stated bow run through the rest of the house last sold to the current owners in june of two thousand and nine according to the assessor's records real estate taxes are current the residents turned in their census and it is owner occupied  in terms of changes the total living area is being increased by just under thirty three percent bedrooms by twenty percent moving along to compliance a gain broadly speaking the with the exception of the setbacks this the house was conforming and will be conforming and in several areas in particular block coverage requirement is thirty percent the both current and proposed is twenty six point nine percent so it is below the what's required and open space the requirement is forty percent and this was and remains fifty seven point one percent so there it is it's conforming as you can see i am working for a color coding scheme where if it's entirely green it means it's not only conforming but it's really it's it exceeds expectations so  key i'm planning to have as soon as my first priority is to straighten out the substantive issue of the setbacks but once i've done that i will go back to the aesthetics of the presentation complete with the key  know i know i'm just trying to i i don't see enough of it to like figure out how you can make this work but i'm just doing a lot of you doing a lot of work here so because i would just love to know if there's another alternative in making bedroom three but it's you know very interesting to see if they are not go up much at all and i was also struck by you know the open space at fifty seven point one percent i mean when you think about the alternative for a lot th size and what town meeting was thinking about you know one alternative is creating an incentive for this house to be raised in a very large single family to be put in its place taking up a larger footprint yes ace and that is something that i think we just conforming a lot of property as you're going to find in the general residence just and that's a major difference as well as a lot size the relationship there i guess that's the point yes that's the relationship there it the lot is big enough that that you could do some generous planting around the h p a sea and i think one of the most visible examples of where that's been well done is on concord ave the what's the number of the commercial development where were this board asked for substantial planting around the age v a c equipment and if you go by there now i think it's a very well landscaped and i would just suggest that as a as a condition that that in order to place the age of a sea as this convoy contractor is recommending that there be adequate screening of the equipment that would be my only comment and i think my only concern is that the location of it and i may be getting a little jumbled between all of the projects here but is the request for this project to put the h b c unit within a set that was not well  front yards i think you got to find a place to put it other than they can give me that it's such a big lot it you know between the garage in the porch somehow or around the back of the porch but we don't say that in the bible it says it can't be from home watch it to it's similar to what the problem was with the dimensional histories there and said this is a slightly different because this is the criteria for you and should you choose to cause point if they if a landscape is heavily and you know i think this i think it would work here it's not going to be a noise problem because the new condensers like sixteen syria can even hear it very very quiet so i don't think they're going to have an  take i don't see a fair i just don't see where this could work in any of the locations where i think the the location shown in the illustration adequately planted would that it's because it's a you know in essence this is their side of the house it's but because it's quite a lot they're both called front lots front yard so if again the board is is good with that i'm ok with my next question and if we get past this is is just what is there for new vegetation and again forgive me if you've got nothing everything's good so when they put those dormers on if they destroy a tree or already they well we're going to we're going to ask you to come back and show others remember it this way because we had neighbors come here to the meaning of origin and jeffrey made the excellent suggestion that we allow the neighbors to speak even though we hadn't exactly opened the public introduce yourself stay where you live disclose whether or not you're a first cousin of mine yeah or any of the rest of us probably twenty five let out i think i'm the oldest person living in that neighborhood and i've known that house has it of itself for a long time and they're really called neighbors and they're just trying to grow a family and they take extra care they are  comments or ok are we in a position to make a motion for a vote not this front is their side and i probably should say karl also mentioned because it's like the i'm going to the northeast corner or whatever the corner of the house not necessarily the middle there but towards the rear of the house i think i mean i'll do it i have moved that we approve this special permit subject to the conditions that we have outlined and to be submitted by the board to the owner  graduations thank you moving right along  begin by pointing out that there is a there's an issue just as when when we did merrill have there was an issue about the size of the law that needed to be resolved because there was a discrepancy between the clock plan and the assessors numbers and in this case there is a discrepancy between the assessors numbers in terms of  area and the number that it is was submitted the application and it is substantial and it is it is driving the analysis so as i as i report let me give you the number of total living area number as recorded and the assessors database which is obviously the total living area on the basis of which and that is the low the substantially below the number that the applet provided on the application and when we come through the change in living area you'll see it makes a very substantial but let me just run through the metrics using the assessors database which was the database as i said and which taxes were paid but i think we will have to return to this issue just as me good with the plot plan n the total living area is of the at as proposed would move this to the sixty seventh largest out of the eighty two which is in the upper twenty five  percent number of bedrooms isn't in this case it is in the upper half of the third clark trial and the lower half of the fourth quarter kyle ranking doesn't work because there are so many units that have six bedrooms that ranking just doesn't doesn't work very well the floor area ratio is seventy first out of the east too so that is a clearly in the top twenty five percent and is among the largest in the neighborhood bedrooms protests and square feet sixty fourth which increase in total living area is seventy three point five percent and a fifty percent increase in bedrooms moving up to conform and whether their conforming minimum lot again this is a small lot four thousand four hundred eighty nine square feet it is nonconforming and it will remain non conforming the frontage is seventy non conforming lot coverage climate is thirty percent this is a twenty eight point six and will move to twenty nine point nine so just on the line open space forty percent is the  requirement it's currently fifty percent and it will move down slightly to forty eight point two above the currently proposed such that i think this is one that might actually review those numbers before i get so to speak read them into the record house will be to and i think he's trying to do this is what they're trying to do this is to make us look like a single family that's actually two family trying to get trying to make it look like a single family house that's going to service a two family house and have in knowing what drives look like and cost to do i think that the applicant is probably willing to work with the board to get something that might be like oh a little bit small so it's not like quite a twenty nine point nine percent of the live coverage and maybe the front looks a little bit different a mix of you know i think that  think this is a workable application which is what i would say because i think that we could have seen something  nicely as this could do with a little bit of work so i think we get from some some work to do but i think that i like the drive way on both sides to be quite frank to have seven two on one side and a front door you change the first four around maybe play with the windows a little bit and try to work with the applicant to produce something that  layout i think you see a kitchen family room here where they have about you go upstairs it's two more bedrooms up there you go up to thirty four there's one more bedroom there i mean i know that we're great we're gaining a couple of bedrooms here but i think someone is using their space a little more creatively and we need to find out if in fact the third floor which i believe has to be has to be counted because they have an office up there and i think the numbers can come down but that being said i listen i am i'm comfortable with the idea that we're going to work with this but i i just would point out that if the if the original assessors number is correct the the clock the plan in the assessor's database says this is a the footprint is thirty six by twenty five which does give you total living area of around two thousand square feet that this is a substantial increase in mass and i think it's different from the case the first case we discussed this evening because it does not increas conforming it's it's less on conforming it doesn't increase nonconformity and indeed could reduce it with a little creative work right i'm just looking over here as i'm looking at the existing height of the building and get twenty eight to me i think it needs a little bit of work but i think there's twenty six eight twenty nine  and in the way we try to guard against that was by having the two front doors at the front within so much percentage of each other and his one front door and the other one's internal down this long corridor and i just i'm just having trouble getting by that because it's really just by placing a door it's kind of putting this this sideways duplex on a line you know this smaller lot sweeter talked about one y we were drafting the bible was they may have to additional two just because of the with all of the lots in the parking and everything else and you know i mean i'd like to try to make it work too and maybe we can achieve that by somehow put up a front door on the front isn't two front doors in the front i think you could love more boxcars i think when they look more like a traditional to it what are we trying to accomplish i mean she wanted to look at the more traditional two or do we want to get creative and have housing that just looks the statically good i mean do we have to say that i mean can we have something that did is two years there that maybe doesn't look like it's two units i think that they at that gets if it conforms with the other rate we put in place you know you have to front if you have to have a door facing front you can't have a door on the side for you know you can't have an address that this is this doesn't have the door on the side so that it's gone right so we get rid of that so my question to you is the way the space it's a long hallway for that first unit just to get to the back you know i mean to not go back and you know everything overall a good move everything over is way down so that that you know that's a but i guess the point is it seems like we're all going the same direction we want to try to  you know make this the best it can be so that skiing the whole front of a ship of change and the entire plan yeah a little bit you know just a little bit later we're not we're not out of time you know i think it's i think that they're going to function the same way i don't get any more runs out of it but i think it because it certainly is a good first step that i wish that was just my family on there to that same footprint you know michael if you think about this stuff it's actually if you add the twenty point six to the four point six you're going to be getting a house that's twenty five feet wide the houses that went up  without mentioning streets or anything like that because they're already up was substantially more narrow than that you know they were maybe a just a sixteen feet really narrow really like a box and both front doors on the side specific and it says both both front doors have to be at the front elevation but i think you can achieve that i think you can do it with this with this house here after you're going to have to play with staircases even if this well if this lot were five thousand feet or bigger i would go i would say no you can't do it  i guess is significantly a significantly different and deeper but it is less but i think that you know it can't be that much more significant it is but it isn't because if you look at it again if you look at lot coverage line are they jeffrey i've used plants online if they could be online that would be helpful because this really gets at the core of the general residence zoning that we worked on with the moratorium and then we had the lively debate at town meeting about the front doors and i'm sure you remember that and we prevailed that both doors have to face the street and if if this isn't clear we could we could work with you on an amendment so i haven't seen that but yes we would want both front doors if it has to notice a public hearing application for design cycle and review notices here by given that the belmont planning board will hear you hold a public hearing on tuesday july twenty first two thousand if there are people here that will speak to it when the time comes what we'll do that but in the meantime i'd like to just to bring up a couple of points that that i need a comfort level with him and that is so that's why this is a  lane is essentially a street it's been called a paper street i don't know what the actual definition of it is the applicant has had his attorney look at it and makes an argument  memorandum that it is a he buildable lot an existing lot that fronts clark lane and i think that's great and in hope it's correct it is kind of a unilateral decision i think it's important disagree or say so i don't want to get into a you know a lot of the design or anything else tonight i think i don't think it's it's you know it's warranted until we know what what they have to say about what he has to say about it but having said that there were two issues just something to think about as something to bring forward and i think down the road just one of them that struck me was that part of the front steps are over the  and i know that you know we had people before us a perfect recently where we've not allowed anything to be built over an easement i mean hence the definition of these mint i mean it's it is i don't have a right away this will be able to tear it up if they need to so i need you to look at it and see if you can figure out a way to move it back that few feet to get it out of the eastman it looks like you should be able to do it i know you can figure the lot with an angle and maybe that's why it's pushed a little forward but i think it's something that you've got exterior if anybody else on the board wants to add anything or make any comments to that i think for the time being that's probably where we really should keep it to until we find out from the drug trial unless you have any specific things that you'd like to know so people roads are there in town and their potential and pretend it means you got how we should be very we should be clear on how broad his of we should absolutely seek his opinion i didn't do metrics for this because i think that if that's the first step and i don't want to take a step down the road until in the words of the general i'm all lawyers i've ever worked with why didn't you call me first just curious that it does have no bearing on this i'm just curious if you would just you know everybody knows where you are thomas have which i believe you have an apologist for the record make sure that if you are referring this to town council i did submit a letter in part describing the issues at the the butter's have with the bulk of this especially in an area  that has very limited access many non conforming sites most by way of very narrow easements getting into this area and they progress of development for that reason as well as the access on clock lane not actually legal  access on that on that way you know my clients to speak more of that issue because they're familiar with having lived there my only point is i also raised the notion of the legal frontage i don't believe that clark lane provide legal frontage basically it looks to me like a result of a subdivision that has been specifically designed to accommodate whatever the current zoning minimums are maximums i guess depending on what perspective you're taking and we're not in favor of this kind of additional especially on the heels of just getting our taxes raised on the premise that the school districts going bankrupt and other things are falling apart and that having been approved which is now coming and that's now that's not the five years or ten years for belmont high school god knows what else but connecting the dots you know all these things have the impact which you know better than me probably and we feel very strongly that this would compound that issue but thank you and i own the property across from the proposed to clark lane across here across from the road and my my understanding of my property i've owned it since ninety three so for over twenty years is that i am actually the first property clerkly i know i'm number two but i'm also referred to as number was and my tax documents are number one and  number one and my and my understanding again as i believe i read it the first property clark laid the properties next to mine again across are actually clark street and extension of clark street we guess they aimed for maximum confusion i'm not sure this was done before my time my understanding was there was a farmhouse that burned down answer for ok thank you thank you if she and i live at ninety two clark street which is right next door to this home i notice that the parcel has been split into two different lots and i also am against this in so far as it does congest the street that is very very narrow and there's a potential of a second home if the first one is allowed which would add more  traffic to a very narrow street and i believe my property goes into car lane so i want to be able to i'm glad it's being continued so i have the time to look into the anyone else my name is tim lay and the husband is sanya komarr that's sixty six thomas street which is on the thomas street side i have a concern about this particular  possible development in my mind it's going to be the fourth structure if you include the shed between thomas street and clark lane if you go from thomas street you draw a line to clark lane this will be the third house within that line if you include the shed that's in there currently and with the force structure to me i think your job here is to look at the all these developments and how they relate to the harmony of the neighborhood in my mind it is it isn't in harmony with  a safe street there's a lot of flooding in that street i have questions on fire safety in terms of that being another structure back there that i would want to know about i'm hoping that there's coming up sunni for comment the next time because the actual timing of this meeting was quite difficult for a number of the about hers we actually didn't get the notice till friday and that's only a couple of days ahead of this meeting it be great if you know folks can comment the next time around hoping that is this isn't the only thousand that the density to fire safety is a big big issue in just area we've discussed her off non conforming structure and very little frontage and he also received the kind of have to same question for clark lane it's  of a basin level is at ninety two feet plants and ninety eight so new construction what if you are even higher than it is in the cross section and it's to us it looks kind of massive compared to our house almost covering the whole area maybe even two or more houses that clogging gets more demo and even more flooded and it's a private way so the question is who comes up for that i don't know if the town thomson in the case and i mean if the street and it comments at the continued hearing assuming we have an answer back on council so in the meantime to entertain a motion to continue  with the with the upcoming general can you take it outside please thank you with the upcoming special meeting it was it was talked about tonight want center issues i just wanted to kind of go on record and not to take a vote as a board because i don't think it's something we need or should take a vote on but i've read in a couple of articles that the whatever the committees name was asked us to review it and we looked at it and i think carly and myself they were the only two sitting members that were on it at the time and we did review it and we made some suggestions and we will be recommendations that we sent back to the traffic a a committee into the office of community development they took some of those ideas recommendations implemented them they didn't others and it never came back to watch for any anymore ok but i want to give anybody an opportunity to speak about it if they wanted to at the board it's not a public hearing and i would open it to the audience but if anybody wants the opportunity to speak i i personally don't have any issues with either of the drugs i got at the time i didn't i don't today you know green area is green area the size of it is really you know everybody's entitled to their own in the words of daniel patrick moynihan everybody's entitled to their own opinion nobody's entitle to their own so that the glens discussion what points are still