continue public hearings seventy nine leonards street which is a waiver first signed by law that's been withdrawn so we will be addressing that this evening thirty marine street has a public hearing on two dormers that are proposed for a two family house in the general residence district we will discuss that third thing on the agenda this evening we will have continued public hearings on the zoning amendments we have  two issues that we're addressing in the zoning from them it's the first one we have to warn articles that have to do with the general residence owning district the first one is elimination of the sunset adult use marijuana proposal which will go on the warrant the first one is to which we are proposing we hope that passes is to extend the march or him on this until december thirty first twenty eighteen that would give us time to write zoning bylaws that reflect what the commonwealth comes out with guidelines the second one is basically a placeholder which is if the moratorium isn't extended it's basically some basic zoning for the adult use marijuana overlay district the fourth thing on the agenda this evening is the is to look at documents related to parking definitive plans and affordable housing for the bradford we will address those this evening and they will have updates on potential cases from the planning board and committee reports and that will be it this evening so i will begin with the continued public hearing for seventy nine for thirty maureen street seventy nine without prejudice on seventy nine letters street joy here second that's all in favor of thank you for the public hearing and that's been withdrawn at this point with a prejudiced now we move to thirty more rain so you've basically done you basically taking the third floor which is an attic now right right and you putting in two bedrooms and two bathrooms and plus the closet or two and there's a sitting room as well here who would like to speak to this at this point so here's the checklist so you're fine in terms of the lobby area right you have so many four hundred square feet you know that's that's  yes i saw that yeah yeah we'll talk about that take a thank you for going to the effort to do that so in terms of the lobby area you're conforming you're conforming in terms of the frontage you're conforming in terms of the dwelling coverage because you're thirty six percent open space as opposed to the requirement forty percent you have an awful lot of paving i say you have a lot of paving and you have the ok and let's lot but this is not a typical for the general residence district i just want to point these things out and decide you're fine on one side but see other side that you're  institutional uses some commercial uses as well with regards to a lot size the applicant's property is a little under seventy five hundred square feet the average for the neighborhood is about fifty two hundred square feet and the average for  families which is the applicant property is a two family the average lot size is fifty four hundred square feet so it's a relatively large lot compared to the neighborhood and other two family properties the existing the total of all the area or t l a the africans property is about a little over twenty three hundred square feet and it's pretty much on average with the neighborhood it is  small compared to other two families which on average are twenty six hundred square feet or a little bit over twenty six hundred square feet and as proposed as proposed the t l a is over thirty three hundred square feet which the guards to the existing f they are currently it's point three two which is lower than both the neighborhood average as a whole as well as other two families and then the proposed f a r is point four five which is still a speaking of bedrooms the neighborhood average is four and a half the existing at thirty moraine is for the two family average is four and a half and then the proposed thirty brain would be six bedrooms so it's above both the overall neighborhood average as well as that for two families and so with regards to stories it's two and a half about existing and proposed which is a little bit taller than the neighborhood average but generally around the same for the two family averages which is two point two five there then now who is going to collect it introduces the board this evening so as i as i call on people i introduce them let us take the theory you look at this and there are some issues that come up that have to do with the nonconformity on the left hand side of the property where we are four feet short of what would be a conforming set them on that could move and visit the east side the east side four feet to meet the required sad fact of ten feet you could still you wouldn't lose very much square footage and you could still work your plan i mean the bathrooms for that to slide over a little bit i know you need an eyebrow for the stairs so that that obviously would be an exception to moving that room are pretty big when you combine the two of them so if here we're making that a little smaller too because really what you're doing is providing a little space to your next door neighbor and if you look around at the examples of the neighborhood a lot of the dormer sir actually set back from the face of the wall the love they're set in to the roof and they actually look quite nice i mean i think i think i think i think good series is trying to is trying to to help you with is that we don't we generally are not in favor of extending a nonconformity and so the the houses that you're citing are non conforming ok they're certainly existing in one of the issues that we had in the general residence zoning and we've been talking about this and one of the reasons that it changed is that there's a sense of some houses were overbuilt or in some cases they parts of the hoses were extended into areas which were considered to be create a you know too much space and too much space for the house none from for the neighbors and things so when those over built cases which are now nine conforming we probably wouldn't allow many of those today so to use a case on me to say that we want to be non conforming like her neighbors is running against her zoning laws so our senses that we want to help you on this but we don't want to extend the non conformity because if you put the full sched dormer out there you're you're extending your nonconformity ok so there who is a planner an architect is trying to help you find a way for us to get a compromise on this so that you can get most of what you want but we're not extending the non conformity and that's what we hear from you know most people in the general it is only applies to all of the general residents district not just your neighborhood that they are so what's your suggestion for how we can so we can help among us i mean i just i thought  introduce a little variety in the east dormer which just feels really quite full keep given how that six feet from your neighbor's happens and so you know i was fooling around with tracing paper because i'm an architect and i can't help myself and i was trying to find ways to sort of push what you're looking for into the box that you create even if that wall when in a few feet and i know i know the stairs one thing i know you need the bathrooms there because your stack so maybe that needs to come out you know another foot or two to make it work but i think you have an opportunity to play with the plan and make it so it's not that entire wall sitting in the it's set your architect here because because otherwise we could talk with  bit i think it would be i mean i think theory has some interesting ideas and if your architect could talk about that talk with community development talk with there about that we might be able to on this find a way to make it work for you and still you know be in the spirit of designing life ok i mean we're willing to work with you on this and i think maybe specific landscape plants there are a couple maples on here and i suspect they may be norway which gets big and overgrown really too big for the amount of space between the house the concrete i would think we would like to see that in a plan to write because you non conforming in terms of that i think you talked about eliminating part of the paving i think it was was it the paving of the f well yeah so that because that causes coverage when you're short on that so you need to show us on a plan on a landscape plan a proposed landscape plan how would you would address that i think  with the extension of the nonconformity and i must say i've looked around the neighborhood pretty closely and there aren't any shed dorms as big as these are really big shed dorms and so i think they are right on the right track definitely of trying to get you to push those back a little bit if you can can that be done and still get you know so  that that may be part of the compromise i think i think it's definitely you do need something on that side i know because of the stairway and it may there may be room for but but but right now you're basically looking like you're building a third story and  pretty close to the very close to the neighbor and i think that's what we're trying to address s meeting of the minds on this and we could probably come to something that maybe will work better or at least pretty good ok thank you so geoffrey did section two d which is the elimination of the sunset provision in the of the section that has to do with new to family single family into family residences in the general residence district the only change that we've made in this think we've made any sense last one it's just the women that we certainly don't want to do that we have so we're simply going to delete that section is there any comment on that at least a two day session so i don't know which day it will come up ok they used to say typically it's a second day but then things started showing up on the first day so it's just you know thank you again fully support residents who kept a close eye on this we appreciate it we appreciate it we're kind of you know crowdsourcing so so that works well thank you very much the second amendment which is sixty is is the one we've which which frankly we all would try to do in that is we're trying to get some of the smaller things that basically have to do which are zoning issues which we initially went kind of heavy on this and we thought about that again got reactions and we changed but we had some of the language from the s r c zoning that had that had been put in place after this that sort of crept in and some of this is a bleed through so we want to get rid of that and there's a section in particular here jeffrey which is the bleed through that we want to get rid of that if the building as reconstructed will be located on the same footprint as the original non conforming structure would be no greater volume across four areas the original non conforming structure and then there's the language there of if the building commissioner terminus this and it wouldn't exceed it that then they would be able to to do that that's that's in addition to what we had before right this demolished radon infestation or some structural damage that just didn't make sense just to fix the damage and start from scratch rebuilt the exact same location exact same house that the bord line didn't feel that that was fair that they should have to go for a special permit because the special permits are just that you're not going to able to build what has already existed this does not allow for any enlargement whatsoever this is outside in on the inside yes it had to be told you he just was not economically feasible to fix this is when i moved to florida and i'm fucking without this provision you would require a special permit which this was discussed because i don't remember those i was gone for six months or so i think that i think this is good i think there are a couple of other things that are good at some point that we might want to address but i think for what we're doing great now i think we from what we we've heard in responses to things i think we should put this aside they would come back to this in the fall or so but this wasn't in the general residence as it was in place so i think we should strike section steve i agree i think that this makes sense at some point to and this is kind of an eleventh hour discussion right now i mean we've had several hearings and this is the first number really talking about it because we've been focused on those really key issues which is from which are keep talking so i keep talking key issues it's not my house also consigning some of the smaller projects to the zoning board that's what we've been talking about for the last six weeks on this so i would agree i think we should strike this am i'm also not sure that we want to include paragraph one which is a discussion about it's just a rephrasing of a nurse or another provision i'm not sure how the dormer thing got in here because the door is always been if you beat that which is ready to minute sort of pushback on dormers but you're right that's just since that's just a restatement of something that's already in the in the law i don't have any problem with that you can so it's just that section three i think it's a noble idea but i'd like to talk about it some other time i think i think i kind of to think that that in some of the s r s the other things would be and i think jeffrey you're absolutely right she could and maybe  should be discussed and maybe could be adapted into the general residence but i think we should have a discussion about that and do a couple things at once i think we just want  buttonhole one thing here cindy just you know when we first started this process someone had raised the question if they had a fire their house and lost their home completely that's a separate issue  as i read this section three you're right this is not voluntary versus a fire in and adding additions to the general residence that we sort of at this point we want to extend the general residence which is the first part of the second part and we just want to allocate a few things i think what we should do is we should prepare a package maybe for the next town meeting of three or four things but them forth in a public hearing that we'd like to change and that might make more sense i think this is cleaner to go to go forward in the way we're talking about lot when i first saw it and i think we i think it behooves us to go back and revisit a lot of that stuff but if i do this isn't changed no no no no i mean i'm just earlier on there were a lot of other things i thought that you were aiming toward doing some town meeting i think we're kind of agreeing to to just to stick to the queen's things we can but let's do revisit this and maybe open this up for further discussion as we move along because there has been some of the info input that we've been getting from the public has been putting forth some some interesting ideas about how we can simplify things it's all of it i think that deserves further hearing but not now and i also think i think there's some of the lessons that we've learned from the g r that would inform us on that without having sort of the issue of going before a town meeting in a month or so  on this so if we strike section three geoffrey then we do we basically have what was there before with the only difference is that we have the section for silence that's i mean tell me if i'm wrong but but but that's something that's not stated clearly that's something that you have to in first isn't it better to state it clearly keep that language and you can you can simply you can simply put the then after section two and you can make that section three if you want homeless that don't comply and just put that in there and then all you have to say is in accordance with special permit issued by playing board word z b under section sixty two or just the special permit with the special permit issued under section sixty yeah yeah yeah ye this is exactly how the sausage love this is taking a bit of time it's worthwhile that we get this right take a look at this because this will be blackletter zoning when this gets put in place so if you have eyes on this the paragraph is about the point so that sentence just this is not a good place to put its to put it up higher and this could be three ok punctuation mark and a dollar for a misspelling so take a look at this as as we just we struck up what was part three before we and thanks to kevin we cut this and we just put this down here so let's just take a look from the top again jeffrey if we could still let me let me just read this out loud in the general residence zoning district as provided by master susan is general lodge chapter forty eight section six preexisting non conforming structures may be extended or altered with a special permit b board of appeals provided that no such stench and alteration shall be permitted unless there is a finding by the zoning board of appeals that such an extension or alteration shall not substantially more to the student be substantially more detrimental to the neighborhood than the existing non conforming structure notwithstanding the foregoing dormers that comply with section four point two point two the litter requirements shall be allowed with with or without review by the zoning board of appeals t same thing that he did before ok here's the case if the building commissioner determines that such a proposed alteration or structural change increases the close gross for area of the non conforming structure by more than three hundred square feet either as a standalone application in and of itself or when combined with the glose gross floor area added to the structure during the five year period preceding the date of the pending application then the proposed alteration or structural change shall require a special permit permit should be capitalized right from the planning board pursuant to section sixty of this voting by law in section sixty which is new construction of the single and  not be voluntarily demolished to reconstruct it except in accordance with a special permit issued by the planning board of the section sixty of this zoning bylaws so we've taken the monster apart and we put it back to together and the only changes in that part with the small things we have comments anybody see anything that doesn't seem to make sense you jeffrey reshape that you are very good on that is very good the first the first article would be to extend to december thirty first twenty team this is to provide the board the county board the and the board of health the town time to figure out what do we really want to do about adult marijuana the question has been raised when we voted as a community as a state to legalize marijuana where were we voting to allow it legalize it in the state or to also put it within the town of belmont  me and so this would give time to sort of figure out the impact of those regulations the other option here is which is a sentiment that has been expressed certainly is to move forward on this issue and stop the leg to adopt a women voters and other places i know people talk to you because your community planning what your sense of my sense is that there's a lot of confusion out there and there's a lot of education that needs to take place and a lot of understanding and a lot of  soul searching the right word but certainly some discussions about you know we don't use marijuana and we really should be located do or do we mean one even in town that's so there is  if you only put forth a moratorium you know perhaps that there may or may not be as great a push to get that system titian because it does allow more time for everybody talking to figure out what are we doing on this anybody want to speak about more to come for yeah yeah i mean it's it just sort of seems like it's it's hard to know what the playing field is and so i mean it's two of the seven thirty first of if the town the size if they want to go forward marijuana the question i have with this moratorium is because the state rules are so much in flux how comfortable not comfortable would you be going to town meeting with just the moratorium on the warning no we'll get to the debate the other issue i think there are two independent things but in terms of the state regulations and the type of the state regulations i would imagine by the fall we'll have we'll have a good idea what the state is pretty effective here already know that i would i would defer to legal counsel or or jeffrey as to the strength of the moratorium i really it doesn't seem like anyone's going to get around  i think we had sort of the informal discussion about location and i think the district seems fairly clear if it were to go forward i worry about the other language definitions i don't know if if the definitions where those came from and then just sort of the details of the rest of it i sort of worry about and i don't know if there's any wisdom in just having a locations pinned down if you don't have the rest of it in pla approve the moratorium if we don't offer an amendment however to put zoning in place then that strengthens the argument for voting for the moratorium which i think we all agree would be a good idea i mean  it so that so that putting it putting forward some proposed zoning amendments to cover it gives sort of an incentive to  it was that that issue of how do how does the town meeting body feel or more people in the camp of just a moratorium and having more thought or more people thinking about moving this process along farther and faster and not wanting to be caught off guard and expose and not have any kind of regulation was the driver for this regulation you know i think we need to go but we've drafted our best attempt based on where the state is in case that's not the will of the town meeting but our recommendation is the moratorium and letting the state and the state and further that what what is the regulations are really meant to do if you've been involved in this which incredibly successful you know i don't know of any example of a moratorium where the town meeting has said no we don't know when the board in the past has always said tory and there's always been your call in terms of where you want to go for the my since the board is that we're supporting the word tory and we're we're putting our cards on  all just to say you're not moving forward with this to warrant it will come at it in another point in time but really do i hear a motion that we do not go forward  with the proposed adult use marijuana establishment by law at this time while we wait for further incomplete guidance from the commonwealth in regard to this thank you very much refresh me jeffrey of not correct about this but there are a series of conditions that have to do with a building permit for the bradford that have to be be met before it can go ahead at this proposing for the elements of the structures we had some of those before but we haven't got the additional ones that's further down the line right because they actually bring samples in correct but that's not for this part will have to do a mock up remember they're going to do a whole lot of things we have to look at those before before we approve them so what we have to do now the hurdle that we have to that we have to but they have to get over now for the building permit is it's the parking plan ok so the operation in the parking plan it's the definitive plans for the building and it's the affordable housing confront of things and we've been very fortunate in that we've had two members of the board who look closely at these things we've also had for the full of opposing we've had assistance from the housing trust on this in terms of the operation of parking control plan it's jessica hasn't looked at that closely there are there were questions that were asked of the developer in terms of that  they had submitted to us their parking plan we had questions on that and ed would you like to walk us through the parking when the responses and where we are at this time  what your recommendation sure you know my office was closed last wednesday so this was a great but what great great thing to do over during the day you know and you'll have something to do like tomorrow tomorrow  absolutely that i see you asked me to to take a look at the site operations and parking plan so i reviewed it against the conditions and the the earlier approval to make sure everything was in there and i also just looked in general for areas of vagueness or where there might be might be room for for future interpretation and kind of trying to smooth that out  and first section of the of the plan has to do with snow removal with specifically with clearing and storage the the applicant there in the clearing section they hit all the areas that were specified  snow on site or not on site on i'm sort of public public ways that it would also not be stored in surrounding neighborhood see if there was also one missing condition and they are specified that all damage landscaping due to snow removal will be replaced or repaired by the owner so that was added in from the condition section two is the the parking management section  there was a there was a mismatch and in the roman at two there where there was they're referring to fourteen spaces instead of the thirteen so that's been clarified that seven of the spaces will be limited to thirty minute parking and the remaining six will be for a one hour parking is a requirement for signage stating the time limits for each space i just i'm not a big fan of too much signage in the world so i decide to the extent possible let's try to minimize individual signs for each for each space and then there is also a way i think this is probably my major concern coming out of the review the document later section so i guess we'll all get there will they get their next there's a section talking about the intermediate term parking in the garage we did have  a one comment on that actually came from chalk following up on on a previous citizen comments about some of the public parking in the garage needs to be used to be convenient for fuel so i asked for a plan clearly the marketing where where the public parking would be versus the residential parking lot so that's been that's been provided that it's fairly fairly straightforward to me it appears to be relatively convenient i can't say it doesn't i guess depending on which part of the complex here you're looking to patronize it's going to be more or less convenient but it's not it's not all buried in the back corner it's fairly fairly central  just for the people here that may not have this plane or people at home see if we have it it will show  is exactly what you would if you went on line so you would see it know i think this intermediate term parking area also highlighted some of the complexity of the different regulations on the parking with with time limits and overnight limits again begging the question how are we going to how is this going to be enforced  we had no comments on the residential parking section or on the minutemen section moving on to the other parking management considerations this is where this where the applicant laid out their proposed process for violations so just over a that site stuff will make regular daily site inspections if violation of the fire lane parking restrictions or parking time limits or feedback you had to choose which was why i added in request to two of a curb in response to a comment so if the violation of the fire lane parking restrictions or parking time limits are found safe management will contact belmont police of ticketing is required prior to removal once the p d has responded and if necessary issued citations the vehicle will be remove service hired by the property manager which does seem clear gee i have to get a police response for for a parking violation but i have been sort of puzzling over this myself it's it's not really the planning board's world of devising enforcement methods for parking violations i remember i had a lot of parking tickets at college and they didn't get me until i want to my diploma ask for a twenty first century approach to parking management that would be electronic rather than things on the dashboard and stuff like that i suppose we can you should be able to scan a license plate and say whether they've paid or not paid or whether they have a current pastor don't have them we shouldn't be going around paying asking belmont police or the manager to try to keep up with the number of spaces that are in this this is the biggest parking lot outside the town center and and we got it i think we want to update the management well is that within the scope of this special permit i mean i would actually say if they were smart that that's what they would do and the language about the parking permit that could certainly be an electronic one there's nothing that says that there has to be paper right well but there is language in here about passes being displayed in a prominent place but on the driver's side window that's exactly what we want to get away from  that we throw this out as a sort of a sub condition though i think carl's got a good point it's going to be some sort of electronic they're going to they're going to close the gate on the garage certainly at night i imagine i don't i don't mean to hold up the discussion for the night but i think it's an it's an area that we could look at ok we have there's no one here certainly open to twenty first century suggestions and we're looking into this systems we don't have and are chosen to thi ok there were some of the section on deliveries specifying hours or week days hours for weekends trash pickup not allowed on sundays or federal legal holidays only on street deliveries from propellor road and common street should be permitted on sundays no deliveries on federal legal holiday is a subset of that addressing move in move out for residents so the property manager will designate a move coordinator who will coordinate that process again with hours from move in move out similar to the delivery hours that's no move in move out on sunday so i had no comments on the section for public use of outdoor space this one was a little problematic for me not  planning board member which has someone trying to imagining how are we going to enforce that this down the road and that sort of reads like any group shall you shall be granted a who wants to use the public space shall be granted access to it i can imagine situations where there are certain groups that nobody in town wants to see use a you know get up get a puppet for a demonstration or something i want to make sure that the property owner has discretion to do that and doesn't have to accommodate everybody the best i could do there was to suggest the property managers just stay in close notification with the town about all of unscheduled to be held in the public space there but again that's getting out of it's getting out of planning board jurisdiction there is a section on public transportation basically requiring that the the applicant make residen of coming back there when we take a look at this here ok from the public this is a public hearing does anybody have any address the board in terms of this dog echanism to to keep that parking parking spaces public permanently and i want to speak a little bit more to what happens after year five you're saying it's  just up to the discretion it's up to selected those publics spaces that that's the agreement between the board of selectmen and the developer that doesn't have to do with the playing board so they would they would be the ones to address that not us so five years from now we could speak to the selectmen encouraged them to continue the term such that they remain public i would speak to them before they got here and there's probably some sort of renewal provisions i haven't  documents that's nothing that we have any control exactly that is not playing what issue played has enough issues though so anybody else from the public that wants to comment on that so let me go a separate section tonight on the number of units and changes from bedrooms but the overall number of units stays the same correct and the crushing square overlay district calls for one spot per unit so so the parking that was proposed back in the original plan states say yes ok and then you can auto can you just clarify how many bicycle parking spots there are for private homeowners versus folks visiting the commercial areas are wise to where the i don't have those numbers in front of me but i can buy them from where we do have public  secure or near caged or something that allows for twenty four seven three sixty five days storage and i couldn't tell from the superman whether that was the case gate that only if you're a tenant of the building can you get through there to access those spaces so the bicycle parking spaces are  so can you walk us through that gate as a from looking the still bike that's kind of what i'm getting at is if you're if we're trying to promote alternative transportation and you want people to really look at a bike as a viable load you're going to want to provide some kind of secure spot for them to have it outside of an apartment and that's what whether it looks like a cage is that alewife or some kind of set up where you feel comfortable it's easier for tonight but not in the long run  garage to look building plans and specifically to look at the apartment study and then issue which has already been looked at and had already been addressed but i wanted to look at it with fresh eyes were a new board and  the unfortunately information had not been passed along to us from the first survey so i started out with the office plans which was the last definitive set before the changes and went through and just read line pencil ed and found whatever i could find and then went and looked to see what rough magick and and toll brothers had gone through and found that we were in complete agreement on the stuff so it was nice to look at it fresh and then have that sort of validated on both sides that they were both looking at this in the same way and then looked at the solutions and and and found them to be that it seemed instances  were acceptable some apartments were conceded to be two bedroom units and they were identified as such or have been identified as such as in other instances where  s study then was right at the entrance way to the apartment that plans have been altered to open that entrance up and and and bring it up to the ceiling rather than have it in a closed sort of doorway that could be  screened off and closets have been moved around etc to make it less attractive or less you know people are going to do what they do with their own apartments but it would be made it less obviously a place where somebody could would be uncomfortable bedroom and i felt like that was addressed satisfactorily in the process i found a number of typos which which both in labeling the number of bedrooms in the in the on the plans  and also i found some curious things about areas and i don't know if those have been addressed but but jeffrey had had sent those and i soon they have been it always makes me nervous when i'm looking at it through a four pages of a big stack of building plans to find as many typos as i found in there and i understand this happens with cad and a lot of revisions it's easy to leave leave a number in and change it but it was kind of dismaying  errors there were a few errors and we had at some point leave this was at the request of a prior board member back waiting we had we said we have a limit of two bedrooms sixty two bedrooms i think is th this conversation about bedrooms is not at all suggesting that these rooms necessarily meet building code so of these bedrooms are interior and do not have windows some of them may not even have closets or a door but they are situated such that from a practical standpoint they could be easily used as a bedroom which has been found to happen in other instances so it's not just so people who rent these don't personally have to use an interior bedroom as a bedroom but for the purposes of the two bedroom count which has to be kept  sixty it cannot exceed sixty units it was important that those space that could be used as bedroom be counted as a bedroom and knows spaces that had to be changed or had to be changed places you know i'm pretty sure that would be your plan because there really aren't attractive as to bedroom apartments per se but yes and so i think we all understand that and it counts came out floors of fifty and justifiably alarmed that these were more bedrooms than i thought but it still is well below the sixty cap don't think so again i think this condition has been at the qualifications for the monitoring agent that's one of the conditions the monitoring services agreement and the marketing plan and those three are have there are a number of concerns about those on their agenda i don't think we're prepared absent what they come up with i think we want to do this in consultation with them at this time to to sign off on those conditions however  we did agree that those are conditions that are immediately of concern to construction that those are things that can be worked out over the next a few weeks or so and certainly not dragging this out forever but can we can we can allow time there is no reason for us to hold up the construction of the building or going going forward with a special permit for those three items there are important items the you guys have been i think very very much willing to work with us on this and we expect to see more of that the next few weeks so that's thank you steve we're going a public meeting that is not a public hearing but i know there are people here that are concerned about but the project and these are the issues we have to do it so if you'd like to speak on any of the items from the bradford that we brought up the microphone is yours to that the total hasn't changed it's just the qualification with them right that's what i'm saying sure brothers i would like to make one clarification that total unit count dropped we were permitted for under fifteen hundred zero zero yes if you read what i sent her to you and that had to do with the architecture right the building was designed from after this so just just real quickly this is shows just to get this is a great example right in this area the black actually the black lines an opening to a study this was the study and then you could continue on down the hall to the living space in the bedroom what the what has happened as a result picking up on the red lines is that this clause it right here has been moved to this location so this now becomes just a large front vestibule  but yet so they just pick up on this the red lines what you want to be seeing when you're looking at these individual plants yes you would have to get to the building could repeat access to public away from the closest street basically that would be the point of that if you possibly for us just say you know to a gate and has an exit right right if we don't need it as we don't need it as a means of us we're certainly happy to eliminate it but i but and you can see here there is landscaping but that doesn't eliminating that path doesn't eliminate the cut through and i think what would eliminate the cut through is section of fence running from the corner of the property on the left there to the corner of the building half way up on the right yeah right there yeah yeah and that would solve for you know if we if if we do need it for eat grass where we would have to provide some form of gate i think you know again but i will you know we can look into that and confirm that that if that has to be there you know we have to you know the would be some way to either eliminate or mid mitigate the cut through right for this is for go down to the page now right on that one too no it's not this is the corner so this is the question right here  if this isn't this is a common straight right it's a drawing but i'm trying to get the side this is on thirty one this is what we want so that would be a management issue for the management company but that's so you can see that this is this is a stair this goes back to the path stairs to provide access to the access at this level up to the street this is fencing for you can see long to open early next year or late this year late this year so starbucks for christmas to make a motion that we approve this what's the best way to do that want to make a motion that that we approve the review would approve the proposed conditional approval of conditions related to the one comet you see we have neighbors here you have many neighbors that are vitally interested in this because it affects their neighborhood one thing and i know you're concerned about the one thing that i hear is that it's hard to get answers from toll brothers if i'm not asking you for answers if you could reach out to the neighborhood a little bit more if you could think yes or thank you square and they started put together some great mapping to help us better understand existing uses out there the square footage of buildings square footage of uses existing parking and so made ing with them and then they'll be coming before the board so nothing you know just quickly report on c b c so yeah so we have six projects going to town meetings  path of growth park a pro field in town field affordable housing trusts higher higher of an discussion about the veterans memorial and making sure that those parties are talking to the folks who are designing the path that's going through there and then we've had some back and forth discussion on the fundraising aspect of those projects from the ones we p q park down field and what should be the obligation there and how should that be structured so after town meeting adam dash is volunteered to kind of take the lead on making morse the same t p c regulations so that the next group that comes forward has a better sense of kind of when they have to put skin in the game how do they go about doing that project this will be the first dormer of this sort that you've seen because the one is at two different grades right the lot slopes significantly so the base is actually a story so the house existed three stories and now they want to be thursday april fifth additionally the third tuesday would otherwise be april seventeenth but the bulk of the meeting on tuesday april twenty fo i thank you very much everybody good night