good evening my name is liz allison i'm chair of the belmont planning board and i'd like to call the monday september nineteenth two thousand and sixteen meeting of the planning board to order as is our custom i'm going to begin by two applications to build additional debt one at thirty five thirty seven chandler street one hundred thirty two sycamore street however before we begin the discussion we have i have a brief report on a conversation with the fire chief since the issue of safety with fire safety was raised and then we will move on to the chandler street and sycamore street so just by way of introduction and the general topic of decks i think we need to step back and do forget applications what we did after we had one hundred few applications under the general residence known which is to say we can look at each case as it comes and try to deal with it with  judgment common sense and someone but i think it was much more satisfactory where we approached it with some kind of general framework for these are the questions that we're going to ask these are the numbers that we're going to look at these are our gatekeeper question when we try to take at least one i tried to take the approach that we used for new housing homes a larger structural additions and applied them to get x i find that very hard to do in part because and again i put this forward in a strop hardly a straw man way we've always said good development should enhance the neighborhood and i think it's very hard to argue that gets enhanced the neighborhood they almost by their very nature create they bring your neighbor closer to you they create more possibility of noise outside activity at night and in some cases of multiple family i'm not sure that the where when i can go with it is therefore we will accept we will reject all deck applications but i do think we need to it would be good to see what people starts are about how should we approach should we try to have some standards of signs should we try to have some of the higher it goes the more potential for destruction should that govern how we look at things and again i have i've given this some thought but we i think it would be very helpful if we could have a general discussion a cell with that i've thrown the floor open for any  and we have to be very careful with them so the simplest way to put it is that if we listen to a town meeting said i think that would be part of the conversation because they're part of the and density can set back and stop the encroachment on open space so to me we have to be really careful with the way we handle that x so to allow tax to become home more massive and structure more coming down on a piece of property i think is is something that we have to carefully consider so if we just keep in mind but time meeting said i think we take some look at the overall volume of the proposed house the overall mass of it i think it does i mean i mean i'm not saying that we we have to we have to eliminate the need for a might come across like we're trying to control things in a negative way that negatively impacts one particular applicant but i don't think that's the case at all i think what we're trying to do is what time it in put us and charges to do which is basically take things into careful consideration and to look at the way massing is done and to in fact approve things that actually enhance neighborhoods and complement neighborhoods and at the same time be mindful of the density that we could actually be creating and we did something that would make it a fully intact neighborhood but has greater impact on the neighborhood you know from the third floor death one can look into the neighbor's second story in a way you can see from the ground zero and they just think this particularly after hearing clay clancy talk about you know about the difficulty of managing let's say landscaping plans in perpetuity you know we can't tell someone to plants you know thirty fifth trees  to to screen the knavery can't assure that those trees would stay there and sell anything that you know maybe some kind of a look at size but i think it's almost on my experience i guess is colored by the fact that the first place we lived after student housing was in a neighborhood of mostly three and some two deckers and every one of them had a deck on the on the back and many in my experience that they tend to be used for keeping it real maybe for one or two people to sit out them on the porch by themselves i didn't ever feel like the people that there were only thirty or forty feet away from me were bothering me and i didn't feel like i was bothering them when i was sitting out  i didn't spend that much i mean you know when you if you if you take the two hot months and the two cold months and then what you're left is a few months in the spring in the fall that you would sit out on the deck and i think there's a real difference between  it's interesting to have this collection of photographs because i think there's a real difference between people that have turned a back deck into a room as in nine eleven you're not going to have a party out there you might you might go out there with one or two other people for a drink but you're not going to have a party out here and so i think the openness is important i think the size is important i think the size needs to be limited to and i know we could probably come up with a with a fraction that says it can't be more than x percent of the full width of the back of the house the i don't think you want a deck that goes from one side to the other maybe it's half maybe it's sixty percent but when i look at this photograph of eight and ten frederick street it brings back actually quite happy memories of sitting out there occasionally and and and not very often and and so i guess i'm i don't feel like it's a question of adding the same mass as it would be if you were turning it into  an enclosed fully enclosed space that are one story and some there are two in the houses were built that way and if you look at the back yard on those the back of them the back porches are within the  building and they were built that way and they were about i measured mine i think it's eight by twelve or so which seems to be the size of those things you see some places where people are adding on decks in the back of relatively newer buildings not within the building on below and you see a like a wedding cake there wide at the bottom and then they get smaller as they go up that encroaches the bit more but the fact of you know decks in the back is i'm ok with with that that's fairly traditional in the in the g r it's a question of how big they are and some of them a quite large and they go the full length of the house and the more traditional ones would seem to go there i don't know how wide the houses are but they're not you know they're twelve twelve thirteen feet or so they're not that full length of the house th would just add i find the enclosure of the front porches to be much more distressing in terms of their impact on the neighborhood than what happens on the back end and good example we have of three seventy nine belmont street where we're both the first and second floor porches have been enclosed i find to be much more objectionable in terms of its impact on the neighborhood and if you done if you're on i love the lake st i think i'm the only house that doesn't have enclosed which i think i'm almost everybody else does a one in the front if i'm not mistaken once you have a forts like for instance the three eighty five so it i guess what would probably come to the conclusion that it's probably a case by case basis and it seems like it seems that from the cases that we've seen up to this point it seems would people want to do is they want to expand in the that you know that that's at least in the g r district and that's the only place you have remote room to expand because everybody else is pretty close to the street the street yeah one case a car recall where we were thin if we stayed like if you have the overhang and you have one porch here and like we saw a case i think that make you come up at some point for a second porch gets put it if it doesn't encroach anymore if that's in the flow of the neighborhood if it's in that space yes faces the deal gets the other thing open space also right you know got a lot of coverage as well so  you know being a developer i'm not a guy i'm not against any type of development but i think we need to be cautious and what we one thing that i don't want to do personally is i don't want to have a two family house portrayed the illusion of being a three family house yet so that's what's really for me anyway that's what's important because i think it i think it looks more like a tenement type situation where  we don't make an architectural mess out of it with and that's the distinction joe between the front yard in the back yard very cushy i think there's more leeway in the back here than there is in the front there isn't a body neighbor on the other side you know so there's someone that has to look at it you know so it's like i just i'm not saying absolutely not one way or another i'm just saying we need to be cautious and that's why we go through the special permit process and if this is a good it gives us an opportunity right to take a look and hear what the neighbors but i think this is a us and a nine by fourteen get on the third floor is a lot of intrusion into a large and it's a small bedroom in those third floor gag could be a fire safety aspect for escape yes and it had been asserted that the chief was sympathetic to that view and i think it is fair to say on the basis of our conversation that that is not a correct reflection of the chiefs who agrees that you could construct a case depending on the particular fire and the particular circumstances and the topography of the property and the timing of the arrival of the fire department where that might be useful but his major point was that if your concern is fire safety there's a large number of things that you can do to make your house and for this is one on the list and it's not the top  chiefs i have also asked the police department if we could have and if there is information about noise complaints and where they go in the residential areas and where they come from which may also be helpful to get you but it will be that turns out to be a more complex  all right and i think unfortunately the africans could not be here tonight but they were hoping that given what they understood the sort of outstanding question to be but their own space and their mind that having been resolved i hope that you could proceed anyway without them not being here but at the same token open space calculate correct certainly unfortunately they because of the chain yes they did make it to the wednesday but not the monday and so anyway so i don't so it's really be here tonight the applicants cannot be here that the applicant that's correct and if so they they cannot represent themselves can argue their daughters correct but as i said they thought the the outstanding issue with the open space and so and that having in their mind being resolved to leave it left up to the board decide whether they wanted to proceed or to continue to the following me that they're going to read details i had that was not my understanding i thought it was but that was not my understanding but i think there are eight and a number of questions for example with respect to the plants that are certainly not dealt with in this drawing and that being the case i also have a question about the open space calculation question is was this calculation was reviewed by the building inspector did it involve a visit to the site no it was based on a separate plot plan but that's his that  again the second time but i'm more comfortable with the fact that as you said geoffrey he did agree to you know cover the pressure treated post rail i i feel i would feel more comfortable if we had that want to do our share of it for the record rather than having this attached to a previous one which shows exactly what we talked about that we didn't like so to me the drawing needs to be updated i don't know how everybody else feels me i'm fine with feeling i agree with that i think that would be most prudent and our next meeting he is on the  that as well so we're going to continue it so we will not be closing the public hearing and i need a motion to continue the hearing on should so we now move onto thirty five thirty seven chandler street and with the applicant care to get him to the microphone introduce yourself and make a statement we do have your letter and the in the discussion we had at the beginning of this meeting i'm actually pretty curious to hear this this is something that was brought up to the board and the board members each one express their opinions and one thing i kind of notice each one ha it there are two schools of opinions so one thing i understand about american legal system is everything is interpreted according to the current law if something that's not perfect then we walk on the legislation but all  the decision making should based on what's already written in the plan don't law and i read through the whole document there is actually no specific language about that back so in the case of for me to plan the building you know renovation project we followed to our own interpretation of the laws there is no specific language so you probably already know that the renovation of the addict's authority approved and it's already built a one one point which is expressing all latter is that back that that door will become the only big entrance to allow any big furniture to be moved into the house  and i also heard that you know people are concerned about having this is a disturbance to the neighborhood and i would argue that's also maybe subjective because i think i've heard here also some other member of the board they think it's a kind of nice thing and you have neighbors coming out having fun and actually guys to increase the beauty of of the neighborhood and my neighborhood next door which is i have a future for that  we are good friends and they have very beautiful when you jack and i and he has a very nice plants you know placed out i see that as a good thing if i hated it i wouldn't request a bill one like that so and also the second point i want to make is at the very first hearing that it was assumed that having this certain level structure would increase the town then city so i any questions for the well i just have in terms of planning in zoning the past is not pro war to the present so that many of the houses that do you see here think almost all of them had their  that is and were under different zoning but ok zoning by law is change the intent of the general residence changes have been put in place and there are different than that so when you walk down the street and you might see in certain places over in the area there you'll see driveways they go right across the front lawn and go down their parking garages under the houses we don't allow th arguments so that's what that's what the issue is on that and i think part of the issue is just in terms of many of the places we see the three levels of the tax for the most part per triple decker houses there are a number of two that have grown in our concern is the mass on things and i think we i think we had spoken before about we we  permit in terms of the zoning also the other thing to keep in mind is that this is a special permit process that you go it through so it's not allowed as of right so we can there's a number of questions if we can influence what gets built on this because you're asking for a special permit to do that is the should dormer that you're putting on your house you can do as of right we cannot do this as of right so you have to come through us so it's a very i say look forward to to work with you guys but just from regular citizens when whenever the planning happens we refer to the law to something that's written right so then we plan to build this right everything you know is designed every time we have the architect to design this and coming to the meeting also takes time so it turns out you know today i had so the board actually still discussing how we going to handle facts in a universal way so so so you know it becomes very it's very hard for regular citizens what affect us as a family is if if we don't have this war opening over again so that will not be able to allow to use the stace because our our particular staircase that the back is relatively five i also would like to hear after this discussion what are the major concerns that i can help to address  and that but that comes from you know a very significant vote at town we where more than a majority of the town has voted that we need to change the direction of development in the town in the we're charged with carrying out the spirit of those laws by laws which require us to think  about things like the impact on the neighborhood and that's not just then they were to your left and then they were to right right now but that's you know kind of forever more changing the face of the neighborhood and so it's you know it's a very significant decision to make it to to grant a special permit and it's you know we don't take it like lee and we're trying to really  follow the lead of town meeting and make sure that over developments last forever of open space and impact on the neighborhood isn't going to take place unless the balance of the rights of the homeowner or the interests of the homeowner way out with all the other factors that we need to consider and so that's kind of why we're here and that's you why you've heard from us before tonight that we have a lot of concerns about the third story back and chuck right you don't have a right to a third story deck and as you were planning for your interior design that's really something that you needed to take into consideration that it wasn't a given that you would get you know a door and a desk  in this particular case if we as citizens we look to what's already posted online i look forward to have the decision making to eventually you know to a point that this become so clear it's written on the zoning laws third floor the acts are no longer are allowed right so if it's written on that so i wouldn't have put forth the application from the first place right and also if there was this clear it could have been rejected from the get go and i'm coming here for the fourth time and still it's still an open discussion that means we are still willing to you know decide on a case on his by case basis so that's that means it's not set in stone right so we're still hearing opinions and some of the same store you know may be subjective right some people correct that would be the first of a number of statements that i want to correct that the preparers of existing decks is not what we're talking about that's clearly allowed with the building  second your greek characterization of the fire chief statement was not correct he did not place this that number ten and the attempt to move it up on the mention of decks but there is clearly a charge to the board to use judgment now you may wish to review regard referred to that a subjectivity we consider a judgment i certainly consider  judgment we have a set of criteria that we look at quality of life dance density mass and so on and speaking only for myself when i go through those criteria i do not see that the balance of owner interests and neighborhood interests are met there is potential for a third unit there is a considerable increase in mass and particularly in light of the other two decks that are being proposed and the dorm or the the size of the debt would allow considerable night time activity and it is high i referred to the point that barbara made earlier that the ability to look all around you hire the deck the more potential for invasion of privacy  suggestion to go back to the point that chuck was raising if the suggestion that you have made that this is not contemplated in the bylaws i think is just simply not correct no one the bylaws describe the circumstances under which a special permit is required and the consideration of the issues that the board should consider and i think before is considering them we may not weigh them out the same have never felt where it could lead to a group but we have never felt that we all have to have the same view on an issue that is why in the end will vote but if your letter was well argued we appreciate your writing of the photographs for excellent but the rest of your points i think i cannot take more i think i think there's a i just have one last point just to get clear and this just has to do with the special permit process in the g r so most of the houses are you know the what size is all that almost anything that you have on rather than repair what you have in place almost anything that you had on in the g r probably anything that you had on has to come through the special permit process ok in the special permit process is an individual process where the planning  looks at you as a shim and then makes a decision based on what you want to do against the benefit but the detriments to the neighborhood and there are no one two three four things i'm going ok so it's the process and people have a hard time with that and i understand that when you when you're in a situation that you have to go the special permit process it means that it's a very different kind of thing than if you read the zoning it says in the us are one you have a thousand square foot lot you can build a five thousand square sheets case by case it's case by case let me bring up one ok in the thing though that we spoke with you about before i think if if you ask us to go ahead and we vote on this now then you potentially lose the expansion of the first in the second floor deck's if you if you with if you change your application there's probably a good chance that we might look favorably on the first floor the process if you wish to do that is just that you must withdraw the current application in writing with fiat and email to jeffrey wheeler ok so we just withdraw this application i have no choice but yes do you understand that you'll need to send an email to geoffrey and you have geoffrey c email address by now i  so i want to continue  what you have in front of you is a draft plan for how we might evaluate the impact of the zoning revision and the results of our work in this area as propose suggestion is that we collect the following information first which jeffrey has already accomplished is just simply an inventory of all with the status of these cases three four and five relate only to properties that we've heard where the home has been the property the work has been completed and it contemplates that we ought to have a photograph of each of these properties that we are to have the kinds of dimensional statistics that we use at a hearing  total living area number of bedrooms number of bathrooms and so on and that we are to collect the selling price on all completed properties  in addition and this is still in the way of data collection that we also need to go back two years prior to the passage of the general a statistic dimensional statistics and acquire photographs of those houses that were coming pleaded in the period immediately preceding the by law so that we have something to compare it with and hopefully when we line up the pictures it will be relatively easily to say for after but in any case we will see if it occurs to you maybe to move on to process that we want to look at all of this this is this is a draft list of information to be collected the thought is that we should everyone should look at it and see if there are any additions and revisions it would be before we set about large scale data collection we should perhaps talk to the by last month's us to say what were you looking for does does the information that we proposed to collect and the questions that you would want to ask about whether this by law was a success if we're going to do a study you might as well post it community development website for public comments on methodology you would be surprised at the number and sophistication of comments one gets from the larger like community about how you're doing this study and how you might do it better many of which are very helpful once we finalized the approach to the template the data that we've see said is necessary and the reason for doing that is we have funds and we got the grant money that we received last year is still there so that we can hire a research assistant under jeffries direction to go out and collect this data in detail but all my experience with research assistants says before you send someone off to collect data do it once yourself do one pace yourself so that you're sure you understand what you're telling this person to do otherwise you can send someone up they work very hard for six that wasn't quite what you really wanted so that you see that is the straw man and so we'll take another look at this next week and then i would hope to finalize it and start moving ahead so comments reactions now across the across the courtyard in the home or building here welcome so i i am one comment not so much on the data collection but that ultimately went once the data is collect know so that the one twenty two of the one twenty two or three we really three homes might go in a separate bucket which where we want to look at the dimensional statistics and and you know and perhaps actually we're going to think about comparison bucket so we could also assess that aspect of the g r and and that says we should be certain to pick up the day for the application was approved because once we do that then it's a simple look up statement to see if it was before or after the core information for three four and five and for you thinking the single venue's single two families for all properties all projects meaning  yes i know one other comment that it's not so much a look back you know on the impact of joining your vision but to look at trends i mean i think we're going to talk about this in a little while but you know how much density increase are we seeing as a result of the zoning revision or not and because that's something that we now have and we're living with and we're faced with a lot of different density issues as they  arise and we are i think also thinking more generally are we should be thinking more forward thinking about planning and knowing whether this is if we compare it to the existing to to the preexisting right right right right  no no no no as soon as i find the yellow all right so i found i'm glenn close ups of patience last week very helpful and a good start and on the theory that if we're going to start improving the enforcement process we might begin by improving the way we do some things before we ask glenn to begin proving the way he does some things so what you have before there is a set of suggestions of things we might do differently  the first is by the time a hearing is over and we are imposing conditions that in spite of jeffrey's valiant efforts to get us to list them out clearly and listen as he reads them back there is a slight tendency we must be honest about this to say to jeffrey well you've got all of that don't you fortunately because belmont media it is always possible to come back and make certain that that is the case but the first suggest mean in terms of enforcement clarity is where you always want to start  my thought is that when we do a when we approve an application with conditions that the at our meeting following we are to take a moment to do a look back and just throw up one powerpoint slide that has the conditions that we imposed on that application that because that will assure that we all are that what we're seeing is what we thought we voted and that there is a piece of paper that we've all looked at that can then be sent to glenn so that he has a very clear record of what he's supposed to be enforcing that's  one and as we are looking at that slide particularly those who are most familiar with the inspect the building inspection process it's clearly better to catch the blame described early in such a series of inspections that take place as we impose as we look at our list of conditions we should try to identify those that could be  in blends discussion we should  particularly attentive to the conditions that would have to be picked up by the shared building inspectors be our guys have our laptops it was not clear to me the building specters who work for the town of belmont have the laptops with all this information on it was not clear to me that the shared inspectors have laptops with this information on it that's a question for glen but in any case again define what we'd like the plumbing inspector to look for what we'd like the electrical inspector to look for and so on as well as our own building inspectors would be helpful  with the notion that when we've done this we could send it to glen we might want to add some quarterly review as to where permits stand and finally to develop a list of changes and that even though they're not on the condition first even though they're not on the list of conditions might well affect something that the board tough about cares about the example here is if someone if we had said there is an uninhabitable attic no dwelling space no bedrooms and certainly there are movable skylights added to the plan that is not strictly speaking a violation of any of the conditions that we impose but it's certainly something you'd like building inspectors to pick up on because it's worth a question a tablets that they carry around but they basically are pulling paper and i think that one of the things that i think one of the things that glenn said that i caught was that they're doing this specific task to make sure that they put the bathrooms it right they put the electricity in and one of the things that i know he made this clear enough is we're expanding the scope for the building inspector for what we're asking him or her to do and and that's something that's something in addition to what they initially do i guess and to be aware of this he's talking about some things are red flags and all that and so i think probably  of the more difficult things to do from our point of view and with glenn is to enlarge the scope of that plugs and scope of what the inspection is and i don't know if there's like one person that should be looking at that or if there's like a representative of the border system someplace else who has that more on their mind is that being done you know the way we said as opposed to there's electricity work and all of that that's sort of and you know i think this well what we're beginning to talk about i think i see that is of the two to a potential sticking point inspection system if you will and putting different points in to this to the process that would be you know the initial building permits and mission checking to make sure that people planning zoning  wouldn't be a need to come back for this board if someone changed the swing of a drawer or if it bedroom went from you know ten by twelve to eleven by ten where the hallway went from three feet wide to like four feet wide  i just there and that scares me because that person that you're hiring i think they need to wake up they need to interpret a little bit on the job of like what's allowed and what's not allowed to and you know adding a bathroom is clearly y issue it's it's it's someone's stepping over the bounds of what what's been approved but i think or a reconfiguration of like air hallway or you know i think that they just need to know that because being in that survives encounter with the enemy and hopefully one of the reasons for going through our conditions is that the conditions by being clear about what is important it's called look for this but not that so you change the swing of the door you don't talk to us about it you change the number of bathrooms you do the right you know i'd be more careful about you asked for just like we're talking about one of the porches we didn't have the we didn't have the drawing today this evening did specify all the changes really we've requested i mean i think that's a recipe for disaster because that's like know we can go back and watch the money here again but the drawings don't show the details so to me i think it was prudent that we we asked to have that drawn into detail what i guess what i'm trying to what i'm trying to say  agree with everything that everybody is saying but i want to make it like a very streamlined user friendly type process where someone's not just stumbling every two feet and actually developing something in fear that they're going to have some guy come up wait a minute wait a minute this just planted that's not what that's not the tell the process i would like to create conditions tend to things like the fashion and they basically say this is important  very i just want to do what i've been trying to say you know we're aware of we're in candid camera tonight and i just want everyone to understand that we're trying to streamline things and not complicate them and you know to the average person  that may be watching i just want them to know i think that's our intention to make things easier for everybody but it can seem complicated when he said well what of it you know me as a developer of never had i been before planned it was a bit before  have never had a person the jeffries actually going to bring on staff right now come up behind me and say oh by the way this is you know to have a person come through and actually check about what's going on on the other hand i kind of like if i draw something and i say i'm going to do it that's what i do so with that reason or we have these conversations work out a couple of situations now where people have actually had to approve plan and and added bathrooms that it because catching things really makes it much easier to stay friends so can i push that a little bit was that because i will you know greater clarity at two weeks or three weeks after the outlook and has appeared before us in person is that too late and is does that there's an outlook and have to expect to come back to see the  conditions up on the screen you know once your priests finalized them and in should we just have the conditions up on the screen at that meeting and just be done with it i am if if people think that is doable i point out that when we get into the detail conditions i am generally not the one with the most views about what the what i think did with weather and i don't  doing it on the fly if we can do it on the fly i think we should but i think that should be done is when goodwin when the building department of community development actually issues the government i think along with that permit as part of that pack to that permit this side of the landing and there should be not exactly the conditions that we put on that program so that's part of their package and they have it in there and they have it with their permit just like right so hopefully people are picking that up as we will read draft reflecting the suggestions and  started into some of them into some bigger picture classical planning potential projects and then some more specific design issues and then a bucket of just other things that have been suggested so under the big picture topics we have two items that we haven't discussed the first is making commercial centers vital and  i think every planning document that's been written her you would know for belmont says we need to revitalize commercial centers and you need a stronger her face and while those documents have been restaurant rows and strong commercial basis and so on but we are now and that is an issue that is just not been looked at carefully or seriously that would be a big project we'd have think about how to organize to do it but that is one of the second is apparently tired of i give the superintendent john feeling great credit for saying people moving into belmont  having a huge impact on the school system let's hire someone to do a really careful study of who has moved into belmont what are their demographic characteristics what are their needs and so on and so forth they're going to complete that study late this fall and my thought is that when that's done we should take a look at it and i mean obviously this school and i'm just looking at it in terms of the impact on schools but it will have many other impact as well and that would be an important thing for us t a school lands would i think be a very doable project for us and we've already discussed a look back at the work to date in the general residence on industry so those were the top three in big topics any other additions suggestions sense is we would need to hire some help to do the first the study of making commercial centrals centers vital we have to think about how we wanted to approach it but we belmont is something we can do that we need to do ourselves we need to read it we need to consider it come back to this on october fourth just under so many issues right now we have to do one is to do that and i put this on with years on the one hand there are things that are huge really be fixed on the other hand around the line between technical cleanup and substance as we saw in the discussion of single residence speed of c rather is a very tricky thing and it's hard to open this and with somehow opening up many many zoning issues that one never intended to open  it would be an improvement to have standard notation and terminology and so so i'd like to make a comment now i come from a professional life where i find those things extraordinarily annoying at the same time i haven't through the course of my work on this board see any situation where there's been an inconsistency in language or a numbering system issue that has caused any substantive issue that we've had to face before the board we don't know if that's true for the zoning board of appeals but it seems like probably not the highest and best use of grant money to pay a lawyer to fix something that well maybe not perfect isn't broken experience with the redrafting that led me to believe that taking it up would not  question which is in some level related to the making commercial centers of idli here which is whether we should consider using the rezoning in particular of the air intersection to have the maps or i suppose there's a rather version of that which is should we be looking at the beginning of the i'm the business district in general and opposing this this came up relative to the fact that if you had a chance at all to look if history to address is to them that and my question is well why not maybe that wasn't an appropriate district for those proposed use is maybe it's not the question of those uses but maybe it's a question of looking at the district itself i was whether or not a special permit could be granted for a big boutique hotel and the zoning board appeal said no because in their opinion in the way they were the by law it's not allowed because of a need because it was not cited right use to meet was it became a bigger court it wasn't just simply a question now of dunkin donuts boutique hotels all this and both these cases were denied and there was a lot of public involvement in any way is going to  benefit or even be welcomed by either neighborhood i think i guess i don't know where we're going with but the whole conversation because i think that they both went to street is is actually the retail which was really it really started as a fruit market that had no retail store front to it anyway you know it's it was i don't think are well designed at the time you know maybe for a fruit stand it was  three seasons a year because certainly it wasn't enough glass fare to really have a vibrant retail there in my opinion but that being said i don't know that i can't say one way or the other  the hotel extended stay hotel was the solution here and that's my point was really about i don't know what rezoning would be for this district at all but it sort of read to me became a question of what's neighborhood what are they all thinking about this area you know there are some good stuff here and there's some snow usually don't see usually no city neighborhoods with housing values like that with that kind and being actually at an accessible and easy access point to route two on route sixty at the gateway to belmont i think raised some concerns with some of the neighbors upon should we look at that area and at a minimum do some clarification because for certain if it were clear that you could not put a full hotel there we would have saved everyone some time and effort and the fact that well informed well intentioned people could have a very long discussion as to whether that was the system with the zoning by lot or not consistent with the zoning plan does point to a problem  meeting that would be thought right so i guess i think that i agree with but already that said that i think it's a bigger picture issue i don't think that we could it would be i think short sighted of us coming let's say from lincoln and i read is that going to divert traffic more traffic to pleasant street off of proposal road at the you know the waverly why and what are we thinking about what's being done in terms what you're saying is let's focus on one leg and then rezoning to the x rezoning it's only going to be a piece of it and to extent it's necessary let's look at holistic approach really been very reactive in the cookie village thing with very reactive it would be nice if we could you know obviously we're not the commercial developers who are you know choosing what happens in this town we react to some extent we could be a little bit more proactive in the good that would in clayton zoning that encourages the development we want i think we would be in a better place he you have to be able to provide incentives for intensity of the kind of uses that you but that's what that's what holes that like but i would say chuck that might be a conclusion of the study ok that's just my i know i understand that is your view and the know you agree with this i think we were getting clearer on them but we'll just continue to get better all right again give it some thought we'll come back to this a so tennis road you can see that you know the three to four to butter radius and a lot of that incorporates the grocery playground so in a way it  seventy five all over road this also is that thirty percent greater although the applicant while tennis rode the applicant is giving all