WEBVTT

METADATA
Video-Count: 1
Video-1: youtube.com/watch?v=7N0SFFmb2ig

Part: 1

1
00:05:52.393 --> 00:06:28.720
[music] Good evening. Uh my name is Arts Brew. I'm chair of the planning board. This is the Town of Cadam Planning Board hybrid meeting July 27th, 2026 and it's 5:00 PM. Please note this meeting is being recorded and will be available shortly

2
00:06:28.720 --> 00:06:44.720
hereafter for scheduled on demand viewing on any smartphone or tablet device. If anyone else is recording the meeting, including the use of AI note-taking apps, please notify the chair. I see no one at this point. Uh pursuant

3
00:06:44.720 --> 00:07:00.240
to Governor Healey's March 28th, 2025 signing of chapter 2 of the acts of 2025 extending certain COVID measures adopted during the state of emergency isend suspending certain provisions of the opening meeting law general laws chapter

4
00:07:00.240 --> 00:07:17.280
38 section 20 until June 30th 2027. This meeting of Chattam Planning Board is being conducted in person and via remote participation. Every effort will be made to ensure that the public can adequately access the

5
00:07:17.280 --> 00:07:38.000
proceedings on as provided for in the order. A reminder that persons who would like to listen to this meeting while in progress may do so by calling the phone number 508-945-4410 conference ID 961239741 pound or join the meeting online via

6
00:07:38.000 --> 00:07:54.720
Microsoft Teams through the link in the posted agenda. While this is a live broadcast and simal cast on Chattam TV Xfinity channel 1072, despite our best efforts, we may not may not be able to provide real-time access. We will post a record of this meeting on the town's

7
00:07:54.720 --> 00:08:12.400
website as soon as possible. Begin with a roll call vote. Katherine Heparn >> present. >> Orin Orin Chain >> present. >> Bob Worer >> present. >> Frank Shear >> present. >> Bob uh Bob Dwis >> present. >> Um Arts Brew, I'm present. and Charlene

8
00:08:12.400 --> 00:08:30.080
Greenhall is absent tonight. All right. Begin with on the minutes for July 13th, 2026. Are there any comments or edits to these? >> Yes, Frank. Um, I had many more, but I went through the

9
00:08:30.080 --> 00:08:45.440
revision and it looks pretty good now. >> Okay. I don't have that many now. Uh the bottom of the first page, a motion was made and [clears throat] seconded by to I the the bottom of the first page. Sorry. >> Yep.

10
00:08:45.440 --> 00:08:59.920
>> The line beginning. A motion was made. >> Okay. I'm sorry. I didn't mean >> Go ahead. Uh you repeat that >> at at that the end of the line there. I I would delete the words moved at the planning board. So it simply says

11
00:08:59.920 --> 00:09:17.440
seconded to release follow. So you would release she would delete the words to move that the planning board. >> Okay. Um, >> yes. >> Then >> on

12
00:09:17.440 --> 00:09:31.760
let's see, yeah, in the middle of page three, the third page, the the paragraph beginning the presentation team. >> Yep. >> One, two, three, four, five lies down.

13
00:09:31.760 --> 00:09:51.360
>> Yep. Uh I would say the PB chair perhaps planning board chair explained that the board is concerned because insert because there is a policy not to have cars back into public ways. Period. And then delete that. That's right.

14
00:09:51.360 --> 00:10:09.600
>> Oh yes. >> Okay. >> And then finally >> Yep. Um, Charlene left the meeting at some point before the end of the meeting and >> that's correct. >> That should be noted in the minutes >> at that point. >> I I would say right after the uh vote,

15
00:10:09.600 --> 00:10:28.240
the uh reorganization vote, she left the meeting. >> Yes, that's correct. >> All right. All right. Do we have a motion to >> Hey, I got >> Sorry, Bob. Bob, >> first of all, the last page I'm back on

16
00:10:28.240 --> 00:10:44.079
last page. My name is not spelled correctly. >> Oh, >> but I read the very end. >> Yes. Okay. Seconded by Mr. Wit Chef. [laughter] >> I have some witf.

17
00:10:44.079 --> 00:11:00.720
Um, in the paragraph above that, I I did um we did have a discussion about pursuing higher um >> correct >> standards and it isn't in here and I think it belongs in there. >> Yep, I agree.

18
00:11:00.720 --> 00:11:17.920
>> That was that was something that I was uh researching and providing for. I I do have the background on that, but I'll I'll review that next time we this comes up for >> Okay. >> May I discussion? May I make a suggestion? Would you would would the board feel all right if art draft made a

19
00:11:17.920 --> 00:11:35.839
draft of what we should say to add that point in and then um are we okay to go with that or would the board like to review it? >> I just want to make sure it's acknowledged in the meeting that we discussed that. Yeah. >> Yes. >> I can bring them back revised for the

20
00:11:35.839 --> 00:11:50.959
next meeting and you can just >> No, I think I think I can suggestion is a good one. Yes, as we'll support what art >> okay >> proposes. >> All right, I'll draft something on frame just what I said.

21
00:11:50.959 --> 00:12:07.040
>> Okay, do I have a motion then to uh accept the minutes as amended? >> I'll move to accept the minutes as amended. >> I'll second. >> All right, do a roll call vote. Uh Katherine, >> approve. >> Warren, >> approve. Uh Bob, >> approved. >> Frank,

22
00:12:07.040 --> 00:12:21.600
>> approve. >> And Bob, >> approve. and Art Sprew I approve. All right. Uh next item on agenda is approval not required for 111 Enterprise Drive Bird Hill. Thad, if you could uh

23
00:12:21.600 --> 00:12:41.040
introduce yourself and walk us through. For the record, Thad Eldridge Southeast. Mr. Hilbert owns several lots out here. They were when we did these uh two industrial parks in town, the road was put in first and then lots were cut out

24
00:12:41.040 --> 00:12:57.440
as people wanted them. >> Fortunately, Enterprise Drive, the property owners were the foresight to convey the road to the town, unlike Commerce Park. Um so drainage is supposedly kept up with and >> yep,

25
00:12:57.440 --> 00:13:14.399
>> they certainly don't have the big puddle in there. Um, so in this case, we have two of the properties that were conveyed to the Hilberts, uh, the former lot three, the former lot 15, and we're reconfiguring those to leave adequate frontage for future division or

26
00:13:14.399 --> 00:13:31.440
subdivision of the remainder. >> Mhm. >> That gives us parcel A, which in itself is unbuildable. There's a note that states as such um the remainder of the lot has adequate frontage on a town road that is maintained by the town. Um and

27
00:13:31.440 --> 00:13:46.720
otherwise it's a simple ANR if there are any questions. I'm happy to answer them. >> Okay. So just just walk us through this again because there's um a lot of lines on here. Um, >> yeah.

28
00:13:46.720 --> 00:14:03.279
>> So, uh, I see parcel A, but are you merging the other the one that has an address of 111? Are you merging the other lot that's adjacent to it? Because there's actually two lots there. Is that right? >> There are two lots there. And I don't

29
00:14:03.279 --> 00:14:19.040
know if we can call the plan up on the screen. >> I think they're they're working on that. >> That would be really helpful. >> Yeah. So, the deed that was conveyed last called out for four parcels, >> um, one of those is across the street

30
00:14:19.040 --> 00:14:36.160
that was developed. And that's correct. Office. >> That's another one that you came before us on. Yes. >> Yeah. >> Another parcel includes lot three, which is most of the building at 111. >> Okay. >> And most of the lots to the west.

31
00:14:36.160 --> 00:14:53.680
Another parcel is lot 15. And then another parcel is lot 21 that you can see down at the bottom of the plan. I don't know why the deed was cut up that way. >> We have the plan and do we have a laser

32
00:14:53.680 --> 00:15:10.480
pointer? >> It should be on the on the other um >> Thank you. >> Yeah. I I think it just walk us through this. I don't think there's any issues here, but I think it's it's important that we understand how this is all being

33
00:15:10.480 --> 00:15:25.040
put together. That's all. >> Even though the deeds called for separate parcels, >> the building at 111 extends over the property. >> It it extends over it. Yeah, that's why I wanted to understand what you're uh putting together here. >> There's a constructive merger there

34
00:15:25.040 --> 00:15:44.000
anyhow, even though two different lots. >> Oh, green one. So we have lot 15, lot three. What do we have? 6, 8, 20, and 21. >> Right.

35
00:15:44.000 --> 00:16:00.720
>> So this is one parcel on the GIS and in the deed. This is one parcel and then the rest of it is all one parcel. >> It's all I see. It's all one single parcel. I see >> in the deed. But then the deed calls for all the various plans. I'm not sure why

36
00:16:00.720 --> 00:16:16.079
the the attorney did it that way, especially when we had the building over the line. >> Mhm. >> So rather than getting into all of that, said we have a plan of this, we have a plan of this, and that's what we're focused on. >> Yeah. >> So we're merging together the two lots.

37
00:16:16.079 --> 00:16:31.279
>> Those two there. Got it. >> And then we're taking out the little parcel >> that which is you're going to combine with one of the others, right? >> Correct. >> Okay. That but that one you're going to do subsequent to this. >> That'll be subsequent. They're not sure what they're going to do out there yet.

38
00:16:31.279 --> 00:16:48.560
>> So, today is really um the lot one and the lot 15 that are being merged together with parcel A being carved out. That's what this ANR is about. >> That's what it's all about. Okay. >> So, this will be one lot. >> One lot now. Yeah. >> Okay. And this goes here. >> Yeah. >> There is a note on the plan um saying

39
00:16:48.560 --> 00:17:05.679
that the the small triangle piece that um Mr. Eldridge is referring to is a non-buildable a non-buildable lot obviously. Um the actual myar that you're going to be signing has some of the layers turned off. So this looks a

40
00:17:05.679 --> 00:17:21.839
little bit different from what you had received in your um packets the other day. >> Uh any other comments from your um your memo there? Uh Christine, that you want to share? >> Um I would just say that it um you know

41
00:17:21.839 --> 00:17:38.720
based on what I said with with regard to the parcel A as being non-buildable, that's fine. We went back through the lots. We we've gone through those. Those are okay. It'll meet the the zoning for frontage and lot area, all of those those items. So, no, there is nothing

42
00:17:38.720 --> 00:17:53.200
else. >> Okay. Uh any other comments or questions from the board members? Katherine, Warren Bob >> this is zoned commercial or >> industrial? >> Industrial. >> Industrial. So, there's no house. So, I don't have time to have my standard.

43
00:17:53.200 --> 00:18:09.360
There is no such thing as a residential nonbuildable lot anymore. [laughter] >> I Well, I don't think you can put residential in the industrial. >> That's why I'm not going to worry about it. >> Yep. That's exactly right. >> You can do an apartment incidental. >> No. But

44
00:18:09.360 --> 00:18:24.640
>> so a house could be or a dwelling. >> There is no on a residential zone. We do we can no longer assume it is uh not be available anymore because of the of the small lot >> yes [snorts]

45
00:18:24.640 --> 00:18:40.400
>> decisions. I just want to make sure we're not dealing with that here because this is industrial. >> So that's fine. >> Frank, any any comments questions? [laughter] >> No. Uh I do have the other issue that I raised with you but >> Okay. >> Later.

46
00:18:40.400 --> 00:18:56.640
>> Okay. Bob, >> no problem. >> I have no problem. No comments or questions. So, do I have a motion to approve? >> I I move that we approve it. And do I have a second? >> I second. >> Okay, we'll do a roll call vote. Katherine,

47
00:18:56.640 --> 00:19:11.120
>> approve. >> Endorse, we should say. >> Endorse. >> Excuse me. Endorse. Yes. >> Warren, >> I I endorse. >> Uh Bob, >> endorse. >> Frank, >> endorse. >> Uh Bob,

48
00:19:11.120 --> 00:19:27.039
>> endorse. and Art Sprew I approve to endorse >> and thank you for catching that because I was going to pipe up but >> yeah that's right so uh Frank why don't you bring up your item >> because that was so uh helpful in uh

49
00:19:27.039 --> 00:19:42.880
giving us all of the relevant laws. Um the um subdivision control law says that the plan needs an endorsement by the um board or by someone authorized by the board. And I've seen in the past that

50
00:19:42.880 --> 00:19:58.240
we've had everybody sign, which is fine. We could continue to do that. But unless there's a reason otherwise, um I would be uh I I would move to have the town planner and the chair of the zone of of

51
00:19:58.240 --> 00:20:16.240
the planning board to jointly have the authority to endorse uh a a planning board. >> Um if if that's okay. >> We used to do it that way. >> Used to. >> Yes, we did. >> Oh, we did. Okay. >> We did. Yes. But I think you need an

52
00:20:16.240 --> 00:20:32.240
authorization to do that. I think you're right. So that you had some clarification you want >> planner signature on file with a with a registry of deeds. >> We do have we have uh a full a full contingent. >> Okay. >> They have I have all of their

53
00:20:32.240 --> 00:20:47.360
signatures. >> But is your signature at the registry of deeds? >> No. Well, >> you can't sign the plan unless your signature is registered with the register of deeds. >> Right. So I I wouldn't sign your plan anyway. This is a planning board. This is a planning board thing. So I would not feel comfortable doing

54
00:20:47.360 --> 00:21:03.520
>> I used to do it just the chair. >> Yeah. I I I'm trying to make it simpler obviously but I think it would be good practice to have at least two signatures. >> Yeah. >> So I I could say two members of the planning board including the chair. >> Okay. >> Does that work?

55
00:21:03.520 --> 00:21:19.919
>> Okay. >> Works for me. And I can put my signature at the registry. >> Okay. >> So we have that as well. But I would prefer that you all sign. >> Yeah. Okay. Do >> we need to vote? >> Uh, that's a good question. You want Why

56
00:21:19.919 --> 00:21:36.720
don't we make a motion to do that then? >> Well, I I did make the motion. Um, I'll move. I'll try again. >> Okay. >> I I move >> for the for the ANR. We have the motion and we have the second. >> Yes. Now, we're now we're making about >> to endorse. Yeah. So I would move that u

57
00:21:36.720 --> 00:21:53.600
the chair of the planning board and one other member uh have the authority be delegated the authority to to endorse uh ANRS that are approved by the planning board. >> I second the motion. >> Okay. Well we'll do a roll call vote.

58
00:21:53.600 --> 00:22:07.679
Katherine >> I approve. >> Warren. >> I approve. >> Warfrafter. >> I approve. >> Frank >> approve. >> Approve. >> I approve. >> And Arts I approve. >> Okay. All right. Have a great evening. Thanks. >> Thank you.

59
00:22:07.679 --> 00:22:23.120
All right. Uh, next, where's my agenda? Just a minute. I got All right. Next, we have a site plan approval. This is for 1615A Main Street. This is Chattam Moods. I think that we

60
00:22:23.120 --> 00:22:39.360
need to um to move this again to a future meeting. I would move this to the second meeting in August. Um, the applicant has still working on his components for the application. So,

61
00:22:39.360 --> 00:22:54.880
all right. What's the second meeting in August at? >> The second meeting is August 24th at 5:00 p.m. >> That That's my suggestion unless the board wants to do something else. >> I also gave you two dates in September

62
00:22:54.880 --> 00:23:10.240
if we want to wait till after his busy season. >> It >> those meetings start at 5:30. >> Yeah. the and it's fine. It's fine whether you want to do it in August or September as far as I'm concerned. So, what do you think, Catherine?

63
00:23:10.240 --> 00:23:26.320
>> Well, I think taking into account his busy season is a good idea and um continuing to se September might be a better idea. Mr. >> Chairman, I I I know it's only a minor point, right? I might not be here in in August on those dates.

64
00:23:26.320 --> 00:23:42.320
>> Okay. >> Might not. I I >> All right. So, why don't we go for why don't we move it to September then? The first the first Tuesday in September. >> So, because of the way Labor Day falls, it September se 14th is the first one, the first meeting you'll have, and that's at 5:30. >> That's good. >> You give a date and time, certain.

65
00:23:42.320 --> 00:23:57.679
>> Okay. So, Kath, why would you make that? Um, I move that we continue the matter of the site plan approval change of use for 1615A Main Street uh to a date and time certain uh to our September 14th,

66
00:23:57.679 --> 00:24:14.640
2026 meeting no earlier than 5:30 p.m. >> I'll second that. >> All right, we'll do a roll call vote. Katherine, >> I approve. >> Warren, >> approve. >> Bob, >> I approve. >> Frank, >> approve. >> Bob, >> approve. >> And Archspur, I approve. All right. Last

67
00:24:14.640 --> 00:24:34.320
uh I had spent time with um um with Christine and Sarah and with Jay, our building commissioner, and we went through uh there's a spreadsheet that's attached to your packet. We went through some

68
00:24:34.320 --> 00:24:52.640
suggestions, but both Jay and Sarah have been bumping into and they're hoping that this is some uh just to uh their recommendations to make some adjustments to the bylaw is to clarify some things that they keep running into um both from

69
00:24:52.640 --> 00:25:09.039
a zoning board standpoint as well as Jay is running into with uh uh from a building uh commissioner standpoint with his applications. Um I think Christine was been working with them on this. I want her to walk us through it. I have a couple of comments on some of them um

70
00:25:09.039 --> 00:25:25.279
from my discussion that I had with them, but I think Christine can walk us through a little bit quicker than me. >> So yes, we have a number of um items. We're looking to get the bylaw in um a good working order for um eventual

71
00:25:25.279 --> 00:25:41.760
um putting it on the what we call ecode, which is an online system. Um, right now the town's general bylaws are on e-code. So, what we'd like to do is we'd like to make some of these revisions and uh do some formatting. I will bring to you next um some formatting things where we

72
00:25:41.760 --> 00:25:57.520
found problems with it and um eventually we'll be putting this on after if this is approved, we'll be putting this on the e-code system um after town meeting this year. So, the first item is um strictly uh usually when people look up

73
00:25:57.520 --> 00:26:15.679
in the um in the bylaw, the first item is it says Upland buildable, but really it's it's about buildable upland. So, we want to just change the order of it because that will work a little bit better um for people finding it. So, that's an ease of use one. We're only going to change the the semantics there.

74
00:26:15.679 --> 00:26:32.080
Um the second item is building coverage. And what we found is that there are some problems with regard to roof overhangs and eaves. So the ple that you see in red is just some additional language that we'll be adding. So ultimately will say building coverage means the the

75
00:26:32.080 --> 00:26:48.080
buildable upland portion of a lot which is covered by buildings including porches. And then we're adding and roof overhangs because sometimes we end up with these huge ridiculous overhangs. So we want to make sure but excluding parking areas, pools, decks, e and eaves

76
00:26:48.080 --> 00:27:04.000
as defined and any other permanent structures which do not have roofs. Then for the second sentence, we'll be adding a whole new sentence and that is building coverage shall be calculated by measuring the area of the roof structures as measured to corner boards

77
00:27:04.000 --> 00:27:20.000
in relation to contiguous buildable upland portion of the lot expressed in square feet and as a percentage. And that's because everybody calculates this in a different way and we want to have it all be the same basically. >> Yeah. >> Um then we are adding two definitions.

78
00:27:20.000 --> 00:27:37.360
So we have one for eaves and then we have one for pool and spa. So you can obviously read the whole the the definition there for eaves because the whole thing is in red uh means a horizontal production of roof rafters beyond the face of the exterior wall.

79
00:27:37.360 --> 00:27:55.120
Eaves exceeding 24 in in depth shall be considered overhangs and shall be counted towards both setbacks and building coverage. Um and then as far as pools and spas the the um we are going to be taking out further down on the list um swimming pools because now we

80
00:27:55.120 --> 00:28:10.320
have pools like >> plunge pools, we have swimming pools. We we also had in that older um definition we had a for some reason a 15 foot length um and that's kind of in or

81
00:28:10.320 --> 00:28:26.080
diameter. So you know we're getting pools of all different sizes and they all come in different means. Some people are calling them spas. So, we're giving you a whole new definition there and that will say pool/spar, meaning a pool or a tub permanently constructed either above or below grade

82
00:28:26.080 --> 00:28:43.039
and designed to hold water more than 2 feet in depth to be used for recreational purposes. >> So, by keeping it simpler, we'll be >> right. They they were sort of getting around a lot of the way the language was written and both Jay and Sarah uh came

83
00:28:43.039 --> 00:28:59.279
up with this approach as addressing that. Um it's and I thought it was a good idea to Yeah. >> If you if you have something that's two feet, I don't care if it's a plunge pool. I don't care if it's six by six or 10 x 10 or whatever. >> Uh you know, it'll fall underneath the

84
00:28:59.279 --> 00:29:15.760
category so that you don't circumvent it. That's all. >> Do you want us to talk about each of these as you go? >> I I I would talk about these as as we do them. >> All right. And let's Could we go back to EES? >> Sure. Well, these are all tied together like the building coverage was going to

85
00:29:15.760 --> 00:29:32.159
pull, but go ahead. >> Ease means the horizontal projection of roof rafters. Well, they >> they don't necessarily have to be horizontal. I mean, if this this is my eve is that I mean I think you're assuming that's horizontal, but it

86
00:29:32.159 --> 00:29:49.120
isn't. It's at 15° or 25 degrees. I mean, that I I think you're going to run into people. >> Yeah. I assumed that it wasn't horizontal and it wasn't the depth but it was the length of that. >> Exactly. But it is >> maybe a clarification needs to be done

87
00:29:49.120 --> 00:30:05.679
on clarification. >> The word is horizontal is the is the right about roof rafters. So it could be horizontal or or >> that but in any event I think the concept is that they can't extend more than >> 24 in I get you in length. I totally get

88
00:30:05.679 --> 00:30:21.760
everything except for the horizontal projection of roof rafters. And and I think you're right, Bob. There need that needs to be somewhat clarified. >> Something horizontal or less >> the word horizontal. >> Yeah. >> Yeah. >> Yes. Just remove horizontal. I would agree with that. Definitely. >> Fine. That works.

89
00:30:21.760 --> 00:30:37.360
>> I agree. >> And then change the word depth to length. >> Yes, good idea. >> In length. >> And I have a question about the pools. >> Are you talking about pools and spa? >> No, eaves. >> Pardon me. You say

90
00:30:37.360 --> 00:30:54.080
>> eaves. Oh, eaves. Got it. Okay. See >> where it says depth and >> Oh, that's right. That should be >> change that to length. >> Yeah. Yep. Okay. Now I got it. H how's the definition uh with you, Bob, for the pool spa? That work for you? >> Yeah. >> Okay. Anything else, Katherine?

91
00:30:54.080 --> 00:31:11.440
>> Yeah, I have a question about the pool spa. I am glad we revised this because it is true that people were using that to get around a lot of the intent of our bylaw in the um flood zones quite frankly. However, what about a fountain?

92
00:31:11.440 --> 00:31:26.720
Do we want to say since we've made it now a smaller, shallower, any kind of installation like that? Could we include the word fountain? We have pool, spa, fountain. >> Interesting point. Yeah, because so you're saying that some of these

93
00:31:26.720 --> 00:31:43.120
properties might have a fountain that's >> they might have just a decorative fountain or they might call it a fountain >> and the kids eat in it anyway. >> Yeah, they might make an infinity pool that is an infinity fountain and use that nomenclature to again get around the

94
00:31:43.120 --> 00:31:57.760
>> All of these are going back to both Jay and Sarah and they're going to flush them out and we still have to have a public hearing on this. >> Yeah. >> But they wanted to share where they are with these. Oh, I get I I like these these thoughts and these suggestions back to them.

95
00:31:57.760 --> 00:32:14.559
>> Are there any water holding? [laughter] >> I think that's a good idea >> because I mean I I could see somebody No, it's a it's a trash can >> and we put water in it. [laughter] >> It's to feed the bird. >> Six foot trash can.

96
00:32:14.559 --> 00:32:31.440
>> I I mean it is >> Well, water is not a portable bucket, right? [laughter] >> Yeah. Well, it Yeah, >> because there was a lot of misuse of that particular >> Mr. Chairman. >> Yes, Bob. >> I noticed on when you had the pool thing, it's if it has less than two

97
00:32:31.440 --> 00:32:48.640
feet, same with a with a fountain. If it's less than two feet, it doesn't count. >> It doesn't count, right? Just making sure that that stayed in. >> Well, they were the ones that suggested this as the demarcation line. >> I'm in favor of that. Two feet. >> You're okay with the two feet? Yeah. Okay. >> And if kids want to walk through the

98
00:32:48.640 --> 00:33:04.320
thing, I don't think that's a problem. >> Okay. No, I I I just set up a one foot high pool for for a little kid. So, yeah, >> we can't you can't take that away from you. >> You know, just a comment here. Is it is

99
00:33:04.320 --> 00:33:20.880
it clear to the to the the people who's drafted this that >> um that an above ground pool, you know, that is not a permanent structure. It's just sitting on the lawn. Well, no. There's some above

100
00:33:20.880 --> 00:33:37.679
ground pools that are permanent. >> There are way they are built and used. It could be a 4 foot above ground pool. >> Is it clear that all above ground pools are deemed to be permanent with respect to this uh bylaw >> and would be covered by it? I would think you would wish to have the same

101
00:33:37.679 --> 00:33:53.919
restrictions on an above ground pool as you'd have on any other. >> Well, in fact, looking at looking looking at the history, uh you would you would construe it that it does not cover it because it used to if if you look at the definition, it would it includes portable pools. >> Oh,

102
00:33:53.919 --> 00:34:08.800
>> under the definition, it was one of my my comments. So, by taking that out, we've now by implication allowed portable pools. >> So, when you what do you what do you mean by portable? because >> well I but I agree we should we should

103
00:34:08.800 --> 00:34:25.760
take some of the wording sorry I agree with Frank and Warren's concern that we should take some of the wording out of the original definition that says the term includes any permanent under or above ground pool and any portable pool and in this case it says more than 2

104
00:34:25.760 --> 00:34:40.639
feet in height or depth but we would just say you know >> well well they're going to delete they're going to delete that whole definition it's going to be replaced >> I And I'm suggesting that we take out of that definition and add it to the new definition. >> A new one. Got it.

105
00:34:40.639 --> 00:34:57.200
>> The term in this sentence, the term includes any permanent under or above ground pool, spa, or fountain and any portable pool, spa, or fountain. Period. >> Yeah, >> I have a problem with that with the two feet. If it's a portable pool and it's

106
00:34:57.200 --> 00:35:13.440
less two feet or less, you shouldn't include it. >> Right. Two to four feet, I would include it. Well, it's not included because the main definition says of hold water more than 2 ft in depth. >> More than two. So, those are all >> We're going to take that out. >> No, we're putting

107
00:35:13.440 --> 00:35:29.839
>> No, no, that's in. >> No, we're putting it back in. All right. All right. >> We We're going to see this again. Okay. So, we'll throw back these these points that we have and then we'll see this again. >> Can go ahead. Uh >> can we go back to coverage for a minute?

108
00:35:29.839 --> 00:35:44.240
>> Could you say uh >> go can we go back to building coverage? >> Oh, yeah. go back to anything. >> Okay. Um, and this is like just to expose my ignorance. What are corner boards? >> Corner. >> Corner boards are something that the

109
00:35:44.240 --> 00:36:00.640
building commissioner uses in order to uh measure off of like it's right at the just above the foundation, I think. I mean, >> okay. Do we measure to the out exterior of the corner board or the interior of the quarter board? >> The exterior of it. >> Exterior. Yeah.

110
00:36:00.640 --> 00:36:17.359
>> Okay. Is that clear? Is that does that need to be added or is that clear? >> That that's a good point. Might as well make that clear. >> All right. >> Exterior of corner boards. >> Exterior of two. >> Now, what if there isn't a corner board? >> I mean, >> how do you um >> You mean it's round?

111
00:36:17.359 --> 00:36:32.960
>> Yeah. >> What What if there's a bay or something like that and it's a round structure? >> Well, it's possible. It could be. You're right. So in other words, why don't we just have the uh footprint calculated? I mean it could

112
00:36:32.960 --> 00:36:50.400
it can it could be done through any Yeah. I I I think the reason why a lot of these come up is because they they try to get around things for, you know, inches and half inches and stuff like that. I mean, some of these are

113
00:36:50.400 --> 00:37:04.880
>> are tight lots and >> I will ask the building commissioner. I know that um he one of the things that had come up throughout our discussions about this had to do with building footprints. Yeah. So that's why we stayed away from that. But >> my only question is I actually owned a

114
00:37:04.880 --> 00:37:20.480
house which had two circular structures attached to it. You're >> right. And my only question is how to deal with that. >> How do you deal with that? I'll leave it with you on that. >> Pie use pie. I I can tell I [laughter] can tell the the best thing to do with

115
00:37:20.480 --> 00:37:36.480
this is have them go back and do some other adjustments and have them bring it back to us and we'll review it again before a public hearing. We probably won't do a public hearing on it until next year anyway, beginning of next year. >> We have plenty of time. >> Could I ask a question, Frank? I'm not

116
00:37:36.480 --> 00:37:52.079
quite sure I understand your concern. You're trying to Are you trying to differentiate between building footprint and building coverage? >> I wasn't. I I was just trying to come up with a definition that would work and

117
00:37:52.079 --> 00:38:09.119
there there may be buildings that don't have corner boards, but they do have a footprint. >> Yeah. >> So, I I was just throwing that out as a possible way to compute the area. That's all. >> But I think it's up to Christine now to go back

118
00:38:09.119 --> 00:38:25.440
through. >> Yeah, Jay is the one that I think has the particular things he wants to clarify in this. So once we we uh throw your um your question to him, I'm sure he'll be able to come up with something to clarify. >> And if I could mention, usually when one

119
00:38:25.440 --> 00:38:41.599
refers to the building footprint, it does not include all the things that are being included here for building coverage. It usually does not include um overhangs, porch. It might not include porches and roof overhangs. So

120
00:38:41.599 --> 00:38:58.400
it just so as is as it's generally used. >> Yeah. When when when I talked to Jay about this, he said that these are some of the things that keep bumping into and it's gray areas and so he he wanted to just clare the fight language on this.

121
00:38:58.400 --> 00:39:14.160
If we think we should he should work on it again, we'll we'll ask him to. Okay. >> Well, now that we're reading it, y measuring the area of the roof structures. The area of the roof structure is a lot bigger than the

122
00:39:14.160 --> 00:39:28.880
>> could be >> perimeter. Yeah, >> definitely. >> Do we mean the and do we actually if it's like a pitched roof that we're counting the the air the actual area of the roof? >> No, I I think it's >> we're not that's we do not mean that.

123
00:39:28.880 --> 00:39:44.800
>> We're counting the area of the perimeter. Yes, >> we mean the area of the perimeter of the roof structure including all overhangs and porches. Again, that's another point to clarify. >> Yes. >> Yeah. >> The example that the building commissioner has

124
00:39:44.800 --> 00:40:00.320
>> it's it's the uh >> the the perimeter measurement of the perimeter. >> Yes. Of the roof. >> It's not the area. >> Yeah. Yeah. That's a very good point. Yes. >> All right. Go ahead. Just a minute, Christine. Oh, so I was going to say is

125
00:40:00.320 --> 00:40:16.560
that so part of the conversation with the building commissioner in this particular piece was um people were extending so far out. >> Yeah. >> You know, they they were almost making like other porches and other things they were making basically rooms, you know, out from the edge. And so that's what

126
00:40:16.560 --> 00:40:33.280
they're trying to avoid and by by limiting how far we can go. But I can ask him the question about >> May I make a comment? We actually are considering the area, but we're considering the area as defined by the perimeter. Yes. >> Of the roof structure and overhangs and

127
00:40:33.280 --> 00:40:47.839
porches >> and that >> solves his problem because the perimeter of a curve is the [snorts] per is to have perimeter. >> Yeah. >> So, we have to think through the wording carefully, but I think it's a valid definition of building coverage.

128
00:40:47.839 --> 00:41:03.119
>> I think the the thing we'll do with uh Jay is we'll we'll bring up a couple of examples or questions. Well, how do you how would you address this? Does this wording cover that? We'll we'll have him come back to us then after we uh give him some examples that that each of you

129
00:41:03.119 --> 00:41:19.119
board members have raised. >> Okay. All right. I think we can skip down. What is it? Exterior mechanical systems. >> Nope. We're on structures. And I would just I skipped one. Sorry. >> We have the existing um the existing definition. Obviously, we need to take

130
00:41:19.119 --> 00:41:35.200
swimming pools out there. that's not highlighted in your thing, but we'll take it as just pools, pools and spas or whatever we call it, end up calling it. And then we add an additional piece to this one. Um, hardscaping such as patios, driveways, walk and walkways shall not be considered structures and

131
00:41:35.200 --> 00:41:51.839
are not required to meet setbacks. Um, again, that's that's a clarification thing. um because it seems to to be an issue that a lot of times, >> you know, we we have driveways close to the uh the property lines in some cases that have been allowed. You know, we

132
00:41:51.839 --> 00:42:09.040
have walkways and the way the definition is right now, they're considered structures or there's always a question with regard to that. >> Go ahead. >> I can build my patio right up on my neighbor's >> I think so. That's what he's saying.

133
00:42:09.040 --> 00:42:23.920
I don't know if I agree with this addition. >> I don't like that. >> I don't think anybody else would be happy with that. >> Yeah. I I mean, I don't know how the other board members feel, but I'm not sure if I would agree with it. >> So,

134
00:42:23.920 --> 00:42:42.720
>> I I I have the same problem. Yeah. >> Just just don't agree. >> I'll add my disagreement to that. >> You can't build those things right up to the property line. No. So we want to take that one. I think

135
00:42:42.720 --> 00:43:00.880
>> I think patios belongs in the uh but not limited to buildings. Patios, tennis courts belongs above. >> So a lot of these uh let's go to driveways as an example. A lot of these driveways are are are being like shells or gravel. I mean, would would that be

136
00:43:00.880 --> 00:43:16.720
allowed to be, you know, built up next to a >> I think it's a problem having a driveway right on the on the line. >> I'll tell you that's I've seen that happen all the time. >> I'm sure that doesn't mean that be. So, >> right, we're trying to define what it

137
00:43:16.720 --> 00:43:32.640
ought to be. >> Mr. Chairman, you have some >> You're going to open up a big can of worms [laughter] because I bet you over 50% of the driveways are on the lot lines. >> I agree with you. Um, I've seen it that way too. >> And they do that >> because of the structure being put in

138
00:43:32.640 --> 00:43:47.200
there and then they want to put it go into a garage or something. In order to swing into the garage, which cannot face out, has to face to the side. >> They need to have their driveway on the lot line. I'm not in favor of that. >> It's been a standard practice to keep

139
00:43:47.200 --> 00:44:04.800
them on the lot line. And that's uh I just think that's a >> What about walkways? Same thing. >> What? Walkways. >> Walkways. Same thing. >> Yes, walkways. because some places they have an easement to have a walkway down to a pond and it ab butts the lot line. >> Uh so those two in particular are not a

140
00:44:04.800 --> 00:44:21.040
very good choice >> to put on here right now. >> So Bob Dubis I'm not understanding are so you are not in favor of adding this? >> I'm not in favor of dealing with the driveways on the property line and the walkways on the property line. the the

141
00:44:21.040 --> 00:44:36.640
the [snorts] >> patios you'd go for. >> So like like a deck or something like that or >> patios. Patios that that are made out of brick. >> Yeah. >> Not decks, but patios. >> Yeah. >> They have there's a lot of places in

142
00:44:36.640 --> 00:44:51.520
this town that they they come closer than the setbacks. >> Yeah. >> All right. And and usually they don't go to the property line, >> right? In a rare instance, you probably would see them. But I think you're you're stepping on things that have been

143
00:44:51.520 --> 00:45:08.560
in existence for so long that now really is not the time to change it. The time to change it would have been in the 70s. >> Yeah. >> Okay. >> So, am I correct in understanding that because of existing conditions and we'd be creating many non-conforming lots?

144
00:45:08.560 --> 00:45:25.440
>> Well, yeah. And I don't >> that are already non-conforming. non-conforming part. Uh it just means they don't have to mow the lawn there andor there's a lot of places down in the village. There's a lot of places in in some of the tighter lots where the

145
00:45:25.440 --> 00:45:42.160
only spot they do have to put a patio is close to the lot line. I know of a couple right right down by the Coast Guard station where they're packed so close doesn't they usually put a hedge or some bushes around the lot line and then put their patio in there or or a

146
00:45:42.160 --> 00:45:57.280
fence there and and uh I just think it's not not appropriate at this time. >> All right. So I I I think the thing on this is let's uh Christine and I kick this back and ask you know about this

147
00:45:57.280 --> 00:46:15.200
because I I share your uh concerns Bob um I've seen many of them built exactly >> I know one person one person that has a yellow shirt on that his driveway is on the [clears throat] little the line. So I mean you you can understand if you

148
00:46:15.200 --> 00:46:31.680
drive by some of these places. Well, >> you know, that's a good What about a uh panhandle lot? Okay, you take a panhandle lot, >> you put a driveway in in there and you can't you can't comply then. So, I I I think that we're creating a problem

149
00:46:31.680 --> 00:46:48.560
>> because that's considered part of the lot. >> Yeah. Like I said, in the 70s or the 60s or 70s when they first started doing this, uh the um on on Baklav, the farm is the first subdivision in town uh by Camp Panelli and Cardi and they they set

150
00:46:48.560 --> 00:47:04.880
precedent about a lot of that. The lots are small. The driveways are are some of the driveways go into the drive garage facing the street. >> Yeah. But the ones that don't face the street, they need that. >> They need to make it in. I've seen all the new ones that way where they they

151
00:47:04.880 --> 00:47:19.680
curve in. >> It's kind of too late. >> I don't think anybody's suggesting that driveways and walkways should should be part of this. The question is the p Let's go back to the patios. Mhm. >> I I think you made a distinction between

152
00:47:19.680 --> 00:47:36.160
a patio that's up up near my neighbor's property that has a a buffer between it and one that gets right on the on the borderline. I mean, some we're getting some very elaborate patios these days

153
00:47:36.160 --> 00:47:53.200
and they've they've got speakers and they've got lights and they've got all kinds of stuff that I there, you know, I I think it's more a question of how do we put a how do they can go right up to the line as long as

154
00:47:53.200 --> 00:48:10.560
there's a buffer or a fence or something. Yeah. is >> Bob I don't think I don't think 15 feet with a speaker on it going to do any any different whether it's 15 feet or 10 feet of five >> it's just the perception of gosh this person is looking right into my

155
00:48:10.560 --> 00:48:25.760
>> yard from the from >> not with nothing between us I I have to put up my you know the barrier so I I don't I think it's just it's a gray area >> okay so Katherine and then Warren So

156
00:48:25.760 --> 00:48:41.520
just a couple of comments. I mean we also have that small lot thing now. So So because I was thinking for this situation if I could just finish um we've done it in the past that we've defined something in the bylaw to

157
00:48:41.520 --> 00:48:59.359
pertain towards new construction and so we've left out existing conditions. So that's something that we might consider for this one. Um, but then I remembered now we've got this small lot situation with the small lot situation.

158
00:48:59.359 --> 00:49:14.480
You know, we almost have nothing to say about it in a way. Is that am I wrong in >> Well, if we're going to set some criteria like this and you apply it to a small lot, you might not be able to build anything on a small lot. So I I think that I think we have to be careful

159
00:49:14.480 --> 00:49:30.720
about this and maybe ask a lot more questions and have, you know, Jay and Sarah come back to us about about this and how uh why they think that [music] this has to be an element that has to be

160
00:49:30.720 --> 00:49:46.400
adjusted, >> right? >> Because I I think there's problems with all of these if you put them as part of a setback. I I can see examples of it that you couldn't build on some most of these lots then. >> Yeah. I >> Well, put it this way. If if you're

161
00:49:46.400 --> 00:50:02.240
going to go with the criteria that the garage is not going to be, you know, facing forward where you can offset it, then you're going to have to put it on the side. Now, all of a sudden, you just wiped out 15 ft. >> Yeah. I I think the I'm I'm sensing that at least the majority of the board

162
00:50:02.240 --> 00:50:17.839
doesn't really have a concern with the driveways or walkways. We can take that off the table. I think it's the patios >> and I for one am very concerned about having a patio or terrace right on a property line. >> Okay. >> Now in terms of the ones that are

163
00:50:17.839 --> 00:50:34.000
already out there that's easy to deal with. >> You just say this is just going forward. >> So um and even the small lots are 10,000 square feet. I think that's the minimum which you know is not that small. So

164
00:50:34.000 --> 00:50:50.319
there are five foot I mean five foot there are 50 uh,000 square foot uh or five square 5,000 square foot there we go lots in this town somebody takes the house down now wants to rebuild it now wants to put a patio

165
00:50:50.319 --> 00:51:05.839
>> patio on it. Yeah. >> I just think that you're pushing you're pushing the envelope that should have been done way way years ago. Now it's now it's uh you're going to cause a lot of aggravation. Well, I think going back to staff is a great idea. >> Yeah. I >> I don't see how any of these are going

166
00:51:05.839 --> 00:51:21.920
to work in my opinion. Examples, including a patio, depending on the size of the park. >> I think the main concern >> is the small lots. >> Yeah. >> So, I think it should be possible to factor those out >> of of the issue. >> Right. Right. So, one of the things that

167
00:51:21.920 --> 00:51:37.760
they were trying to uh do with this, and you'll see it when we get down into the mechanical systems. Um, a lot of times th this criteria will put an applicant into a uh they have to go file for a

168
00:51:37.760 --> 00:51:55.040
special permit or variance or something like that. And that requires them to go through a lot of ownerous uh applications and documentation and also um you know a survey associated with the property because if it's dealing with property lines the only way

169
00:51:55.040 --> 00:52:10.000
you're going to get that is you have to have a surveyor go out there and do this and this has been a huge issue for both the building department as well as the zoning board. Okay. So what they're what they told me for for items like this and

170
00:52:10.000 --> 00:52:26.240
the mechanical assistance that we'll discuss later on there's certain aspects of it that they want to take out of the equation so that it's as of right and then only the ones that are the ownorous ones they want to leave in there so that if they have to file all the

171
00:52:26.240 --> 00:52:43.760
documentation for that okay um so you you'll see a similar type of discussion that we're going to have on mechanical systems and My discussion with them was okay what is it that is the most bothersome on this and we went through that discussion I would say

172
00:52:43.760 --> 00:52:59.520
>> but I >> all of these as far as I can see >> no way you're going to deal with a setback of 15 ft just not going to happen >> there there's the discussion is very different with a 5,000 foot lot any twoacre lot >> I don't care if it's 5,000 or 50,000

173
00:52:59.520 --> 00:53:15.680
>> no but but the point that's being made is that small lots >> yeah are a problem. Yeah. >> And I don't think they I don't think it is a problem when you're talking about an acre. >> I'm going to give you an example. You could have a halfacre lot and 75% of it

174
00:53:15.680 --> 00:53:33.760
is uh restrictions from conservation in that and you only have so much upland area and it could the upland area could be next to the property line. I don't think that you should be pushing those entities just because you want to have a setback on a patio. I I don't agree with

175
00:53:33.760 --> 00:53:50.000
that. I think you have to be a little bit more reasonable on this. >> Well, I think they need to go back and come up with a slightly tinkered version of the draft. >> But my my observation, my comment would be that regardless of what it gets

176
00:53:50.000 --> 00:54:04.960
approved, let's assume it's drafted to our satisfaction and approved and becomes part of the bylaws. Um the vast majority of the lots of which I'm aware in town are non-conforming. And when you want to build something on the property line,

177
00:54:04.960 --> 00:54:20.319
all you've got to do grant it surveys. Yeah. You go to the zoning board of appeals and say, "Well, it's no more delletterious to the neighborhood than the non-conforming lot and the non-conforming structures that are already there. So, I want to build my patio next to the next to the property

178
00:54:20.319 --> 00:54:36.079
line. And most often they get a special permit to do it because that's what happened." >> That's an ownorous process just for a patio. Come on. Why? It's not a structure. That's their point is it's not a structure. >> My point is >> so therefore take that out of the

179
00:54:36.079 --> 00:54:52.800
equation. A setback should be reserved for the structure, not not hardscape surfaces or landscaping or anything like that. >> Here's another may I may I whether a given item is included or excluded. That's not my point. My only point is

180
00:54:52.800 --> 00:55:08.880
regardless of what it actually says, my observation is as a practical matter. If you want to go build a patio, it doesn't matter what the zoning is because you go get a special permit because you're a non-conforming product on a non-conforming.

181
00:55:08.880 --> 00:55:23.839
>> I disagree with you completely. No, you can't have that. Everybody's going to have to be required to do this and >> and they and well, they should be. >> Well, they do [laughter] and they get and they get a special permit from the ZBA because >> you're not going to get two-thirds vote on this one. I'll tell you.

182
00:55:23.839 --> 00:55:40.720
>> I've I've I've been through that process in favor or opposed to anything. I'm just saying my observation is based on the lots that are around me and what I've seen in TVA is that when somebody wants to build something, they just go in and they get a spe they request a special permit because they're a

183
00:55:40.720 --> 00:55:58.000
non-conforming house on a non-conforming lot and therefore they are requesting that their patio next to the property line or their pool or their whatever plug it in. Doesn't matter what's prohibited by the zoning. >> No, you're making an assumption that's a non-conforming lot. I've seen lots that

184
00:55:58.000 --> 00:56:15.119
are conforming and they still run into this issue. >> The the vast majority of lots in the town are non-conforming. So I'm told >> so what I've seen. So in fact what happens is they come in and whatever the zoning says doesn't really do whatever

185
00:56:15.119 --> 00:56:30.640
they want >> whatever they want to build close to the property line. >> Let me say that >> they say it's no Katherine wants to speak after one. >> Yes. I would like >> I'm just observing that's what the ZBA has done in my observation. So that's what they're going to continue to do. >> I'd like to present another point of

186
00:56:30.640 --> 00:56:44.960
view please. >> Okay. >> And this is a completely perhaps different point of view. >> Our zoning [clears throat] bylaws should define what we want to be what we want to see built in this town according to

187
00:56:44.960 --> 00:57:01.440
what we actually want to do. We know that many people will go to the ZBA and get, you know, waiverss and not do what we want to do. But I don't think we should just start changing all our bylaws to accommodate all the things

188
00:57:01.440 --> 00:57:17.440
that have been done that are not really ever what we wanted to do in this town. Um, I know there are issues about creating non-conforming lots, etc. But in my point of view, and many of you may not agree with this, I think building

189
00:57:17.440 --> 00:57:33.359
coverage should include patios. It should include driveways. It should include it should include everything that is built as part of that structure. And I think all of that should be subject to setbacks.

190
00:57:33.359 --> 00:57:49.520
I know that probably won't be a popular opinion, but I think the intent and purpose of our bylaw is more correct to do it that way, >> but you're don't mix building coverage with structure. Okay. Well, I'm saying they're trying to clarify here.

191
00:57:49.520 --> 00:58:06.640
>> I'm defining these things as structures. I'm saying I want to define those things as structures as well. >> So, I'm I'm absolutely against this. Patios. Patios are in the dirt. >> Yeah. >> And there they are. Structures are decks

192
00:58:06.640 --> 00:58:22.640
that are attached to the house. >> House. Yeah. >> Anything that's not attached to the house physically is not a structure. >> I have a patio that's attached to the house. >> Okay. I >> What do you do? Is it nailed? >> Yeah. >> Oh, yeah. It's It's very attached to the house. >> What kind What's it made out of?

193
00:58:22.640 --> 00:58:38.319
>> It's made out of stone. There are foundations there. there. It's a cost a mint to make, but it's attached to the house. So, but there there are my my point >> normally it's a wooden structure that's attached to the house. I I I'm I'm against all of this what you're saying.

194
00:58:38.319 --> 00:58:54.559
So, I don't have to deal with >> I have a suggestion. >> Yeah. And that this is going to apply to patios. It's going to apply to generators. It's going to apply to other equipment. >> It does. >> Wait a minute. >> Yeah.

195
00:58:54.559 --> 00:59:12.000
that if it's out if it it's so if it's falls within the normal setback, it must be um buffered so that to um the you know protect to

196
00:59:12.000 --> 00:59:28.079
>> shield the other the other neighbor just like it we would do in in a business. We if there's a dumpster they got to put a little sur they they can't >> Bob right now if you put a if you put a uh um an air conditioning unit out there

197
00:59:28.079 --> 00:59:44.079
it's supposed to have a fence and trees around it. >> Exactly. That's that's all we need to say for all of these is they just th the those items that are are not within the setback need need to have a >> a a um >> that are within the setback

198
00:59:44.079 --> 01:00:00.799
>> that are within the setback >> require um an acceptable um shield buffer. >> How and how wide should that set that buffer be? like 10 feet or >> No, no. It just needs to It could >> You have to say something about >> Well, no. It just It could be six

199
01:00:00.799 --> 01:00:15.520
inches. It could be a fence. >> It could be a fence. >> All right. >> Yeah. >> Well, I I think that >> we need to see >> I think you're going to be going down a a long difficult argument to get your

200
01:00:15.520 --> 01:00:31.839
your flush it out, but uh I'm not quite sure they're going to want to move in that direction at all. And and and I agree with Bob. I I really don't support this concept. >> We we residential now. Okay. >> We have residentials

201
01:00:31.839 --> 01:00:47.200
driving. >> I got you. You're talking about residential which is where people are living and so having an air conditioner right on my property line without any shield uh any noise shield or visual. >> It's not supposed to be on the property

202
01:00:47.200 --> 01:01:02.400
line. >> Yeah. Well, we're talking we're giving opportunities here for minimum >> um >> that that's a an item that we're going to talk to later on down. >> Decks don't make noises.

203
01:01:02.400 --> 01:01:16.880
>> So, let's >> decks do make noise. They have people [clears throat] on them. They do. >> All right. Let's uh let's just say that there's going to be a lot of controversy on this one. Okay. We'll we'll convey this Christine and I will convey this to

204
01:01:16.880 --> 01:01:33.040
both Sarah and Jay >> nowine I I hope that's clear now and [laughter] >> um we we mentioned to them that they may have to come and clarify a few things if this will be one of them. Okay.

205
01:01:33.040 --> 01:01:49.359
So um all right so let's leave that one for now. Let's say it's un it's not resolved. Um, next Christine. >> So, um, the next two are the swimming pools. We're deleting that definition. The next one is simply that we're going

206
01:01:49.359 --> 01:02:06.160
to do some renumbering because there's a problem in that section. And then we're on to exterior mechanicals, which art is going to explain. >> Yeah. All right. So, here's the problem with this one. Um, and I think we've experienced this that have come before our board because we were asked for an

207
01:02:06.160 --> 01:02:22.720
opinion from the ZBA on this. um when you have a a an existing building and they're and >> yeah, >> it's it's already near the property line and everybody's moving into these mini split

208
01:02:22.720 --> 01:02:38.079
systems. All right. Now, when you put it outside the structure, um the if the structure is uh within uh within the setback already, all the mechanical systems are going to be no matter what

209
01:02:38.079 --> 01:02:55.680
you do. So you're almost stuck on this. So one of the things that they wanted Jay wanted to avoid is that every single time this happens they have to go to the to the ZBA and ask for a variance in that. So his suggest the suggested

210
01:02:55.680 --> 01:03:12.720
language on this and Christine if you could go through it. This is what they're proposing because what they like to do is all with these mechanical systems except for generators would fall underneath this criteria as of right and and generators would have to be meet the

211
01:03:12.720 --> 01:03:28.799
setback requirements. So when you when you're listening to the wording that we have in here, that's the distinction that they want to go through because every single time that they run into this with these mini split system and and the what Sarah told me is what the

212
01:03:28.799 --> 01:03:45.760
ZBA does is they approve all of them. Period. So why why are you insisting upon putting everybody through this? And that's their point about these mechanical systems. We're talking about mini splits and things like that. These things are not nuisance items and that

213
01:03:45.760 --> 01:04:03.039
was their point. All right. So, think of it that way when you read the language and hear the language, but they were very difficult to try to come up with a resolution on this because they say there's so many things that are coming before the zoning board and they automatically just approve them. Period.

214
01:04:03.039 --> 01:04:20.160
So, so why are we doing that then? So, Christine, go through it. So they want to add to this definition um or be located entirely within 10 ft of the structure on a subject property. Generators shall be required to meet the applicable

215
01:04:20.160 --> 01:04:37.200
minimum building structure setbacks in appendix 2 except by special permit from the zoning board of appeals. And part of this would be that um we want the mechanicals within 10 ft of the of the structure. they can measure off from the structure as opposed to putting it

216
01:04:37.200 --> 01:04:52.640
further away towards a property line or towards something like that. So that's the main purpose of this one. Um generators are a little bit different. Um which is why they've they've accepted that in another in another way. >> So >> because we don't want to put things closer to somebody else's property again

217
01:04:52.640 --> 01:05:09.280
because of noise and and all of those other things. >> Right. So their point is it doesn't make any difference if it's right near the property line. On a lot of these applications, they're approving them. Period. All right. And there's no reason why they see that they shouldn't approve them. If somebody wants to put a mini

218
01:05:09.280 --> 01:05:25.440
split system in mechanicals and a lot of people are just moving to this type of of technology right now that, you know, they're stuck. You know, the structure is already there. And this is this is included as part of a restriction associated with it the way it's going

219
01:05:25.440 --> 01:05:41.039
now. And the only way that they can resolve it is they've got to go to the zoning board with a variance request and they have to have full documentation on this, a full survey and everything. And that's and it's a very expensive venture

220
01:05:41.039 --> 01:05:56.240
just to put one of these little mini split systems in and they're trying to get away from that. That's all. So I hear that but I'm asking myself because I why 10 feet?

221
01:05:56.240 --> 01:06:14.079
I mean you you know >> because he looked at the Jay the building commissioner looked at the size of many of those units. So it has to be entirely within the 10 ft. So you know we would want to give them enough room to put whatever they're putting in their 5 by 5x5 or 5x6 or something like that

222
01:06:14.079 --> 01:06:30.559
>> including the unit itself. >> Yes. Yes. It has to be it has to be within that. They can't be outside of that. Now, if the property line is >> [snorts] >> um 8 ft off, then it's got to be within the 8 ft. Okay. So, whoseever is closer,

223
01:06:30.559 --> 01:06:44.960
>> that's >> we want to keep future future mechanicals closer to the house that they're right >> that they're they're serving. For all intents and purposes, we don't want them to put them closer to your yard. They really should be closer to the building.

224
01:06:44.960 --> 01:07:01.359
>> That was where I was going. I got 14 feet between me and and my neighbor and you're going to let that person put it four feet from my neighbor and 8 feet from his own home. I mean, it seems like the

225
01:07:01.359 --> 01:07:16.400
calculation has to be >> so put it so take this 10 10 ft down. >> Well, in some in some cases there are safety there are safety issues where >> you got the safety issue into >> so it has to be so far away from from their house from the right. So, we don't

226
01:07:16.400 --> 01:07:31.839
want to move it closer to your house. I I guess. Yes. >> I mean, they can be they can be within a they just need circulation. >> Yeah. >> Right. >> Yeah. >> So, they can't they can't be right up against the house. >> So, let's ask Jay if you live with a shorter shorter distance. Okay.

227
01:07:31.839 --> 01:07:48.400
>> Than 10 ft >> cuz I mean the the biggest units I can think of are about this big. Yeah. You got to put it a foot and a half maybe is the max that you you need to be away from it to get the right circulation. That's 6 feet, not 10 ft.

228
01:07:48.400 --> 01:08:04.319
>> My my AC units which I just replaced, they're 6 in away from my wall from the foundation and they're about 30 in. >> Yeah. >> By 30 in. >> You know, question. What happens if the split unit is not sitting on the ground? It's just mounted to the foundation.

229
01:08:04.319 --> 01:08:20.000
that's that's still treated as as >> that's that's not necessarily clear from this. >> Yeah. Well, I think we came across this once with one of the ZBA request to us. We asked the same question >> and they said they treat it whe whether

230
01:08:20.000 --> 01:08:36.159
it's on the structure hanging or on the ground. It's it's still still that still needs to be addressed. Uh, >> as long as that's the wording they're proposing makes that we could ask that the appropriate Yeah. >> Uh, objective.

231
01:08:36.159 --> 01:08:53.679
>> So, we'd like something less. So, have them suggest to us, you know, 7 feet, 8 ft, 6 feet, right? We can have them pick a number for us. >> Yeah. >> Yeah. Okay. >> So, less distance and adding wording about that it doesn't matter >> that it includes suspended or on the

232
01:08:53.679 --> 01:09:08.239
ground units. And also we did we want to add some language about creating a shield or a buffer or a fence or something like that? I think Bob Wchfter was >> well if it was less than if you were

233
01:09:08.239 --> 01:09:24.560
over the setback it then some kind of of um keep calling it shield but fence >> fence or some shield. >> Yeah. Enclosure something. >> So we have to add that too. I mean that that creates other issues for an air

234
01:09:24.560 --> 01:09:39.679
conditioner cuz you can't you don't want it >> correct. You don't want too too much obstructions too close to it. Yes. >> Okay. >> Okay. >> Well, they want to flush these out now because >> they they'll have plenty of time to go

235
01:09:39.679 --> 01:09:55.600
back in and refine them. And I and I do like the idea that generators are not included because um if you want to have a generator then you have to have it on your >> near you not not near the

236
01:09:55.600 --> 01:10:11.360
>> you have to move it and you can take and put a generator in a very different >> it's very different animal than >> than the these other units and and th those are the noisiest things that are out there. very noisy if it's a large. >> Absolutely.

237
01:10:11.360 --> 01:10:27.120
>> It is more noisy. >> Yeah. So, and so I I got I got them to put an exception on that. That has to be set back and they were no problem with that. >> Okay. >> Okay. That's good. >> All right. >> We only have a few more and we can go. >> Okay.

238
01:10:27.120 --> 01:10:41.520
>> So, on the back of the page, um the first one is uh zone coastal A and that is a requirement because of the the state and FEMA definition. So, we're just adding that definition. So it is zone coastal A means the area landward

239
01:10:41.520 --> 01:10:58.080
of velocity the VE zone where breaking waves are between 1.5 and 3 ft high. It is delineated on FEMA maps by the limit of moderate wave action. >> So

240
01:10:58.080 --> 01:11:13.360
>> that's a standard that's a standard definition. We cannot change that at all. So then that goes into the next one with prohibited uses and we want to add that um to section 4B5 um and we need to just add that in front

241
01:11:13.360 --> 01:11:28.480
of um the VE zones. So we'll that one will say the following uses and activities are prohibited in the coastal A and V zones. >> So >> and there there is no discussion with regard to that. we have to meet the uh

242
01:11:28.480 --> 01:11:46.040
>> yeah so this is criteria that FEMA has and um it's just that we've never identified the coastal a uh before but it's it's been there with FEMA so uh they want us to include this into our bylaw clarification

243
01:11:46.080 --> 01:12:03.520
>> it it seems to me that we could probably just say something like means the area landward of velocity zone uh as It's delineated on FEMA maps by the limit of moderate wave actions. I I I I'm not sure how the breaking waves

244
01:12:03.520 --> 01:12:19.440
are that's the definition, but it's delineated on FEMA maps. Um >> why not? >> Again, that's their definition. We we can't change it even if we want to. We did not write this definition at all. I mean, maybe somewhere down the line they'll change that. >> This is FEMA's definition of of what

245
01:12:19.440 --> 01:12:35.679
coastal A is. >> Okay. >> Yeah. Um the next one is we're just adding the word area after building because we just um the way this one says addition, alteration or reconstruction of an

246
01:12:35.679 --> 01:12:51.679
existing structure that results in an increase in building and I think in the past they had just left out the word area. >> Well, right right now it says footprint. >> It says footprint instead of I'm sorry it says footprint. Yeah. >> What's the thinking of that was part of the I'm sorry. I take that back. That

247
01:12:51.679 --> 01:13:07.520
was part of the problem when I had said to you earlier >> that he has a problem with foot with the footprint. >> Why? >> To be clear why >> why >> is that a problem? >> I don't I don't remember what the reason >> because actually footprint is more clear. >> Yeah, I did mention that to both

248
01:13:07.520 --> 01:13:23.280
Christina and I, but I'll be if I can remember what that was. There was an issue with footprint. >> Well, we'll have to find out what that is. >> You could take a house that was twotory. >> Yeah. You can now make it one story and your area is the same and you've doubled

249
01:13:23.280 --> 01:13:39.120
the amount. >> You've doubled the footprint. >> Exactly. Exactly. That's exactly what I wanted to do. Right. >> Yeah. >> I just wonder what the thinking was behind changing a footprint area. There must be some thought there. And >> deal with footprint is actually more clear. >> You asked this question. He did tell us

250
01:13:39.120 --> 01:13:54.480
and I didn't write it down. >> Well, footprint is actually more clear. Yeah. >> So, we might want to not do this. Well, let let's let's understand what it is and we'll come back here. >> Obviously, we have to come back on a lot of other stuff. So, >> because I mean there I I always I always

251
01:13:54.480 --> 01:14:08.480
thought and when we were looking at these properties that and they're they're going up. Well, the footprint needs to stay the same. >> Yeah. >> Exactly. Yeah. I mean that's how we define a lot of our rules about building

252
01:14:08.480 --> 01:14:24.560
in the in the flood plane and in um in other delicate areas we define it by not we have to keep the existing footprint. So >> and there's a reason why we define it that way. >> Okay. >> Yeah.

253
01:14:24.560 --> 01:14:42.480
>> Okay. And last one Christine footnotes. So I I think for that that previous one to answer your question, we don't have a definition for footprint in the um bylaw, but we do have something for building area >> in an area. >> I will ask him to follow through

254
01:14:42.480 --> 01:14:58.000
>> on it. I will ask for clarification, but um and then the last one is um in the in the appendex we have a footnote 7 which always becomes an issue and we want to make it clear that that is for vacant lots um because it's those lots that

255
01:14:58.000 --> 01:15:14.480
were um in existence prior to 87. And there are like three of them. >> There's there's three of these lots, but there >> that are still vacant. >> It intended that this applies to vacant lot, those three vacant lots. Nothing else. >> Okay. Cuz right now it it it doesn't uh

256
01:15:14.480 --> 01:15:32.080
really say that. >> So again, this is your first pass at it. Our first pass at it. We're going to go through it a couple of times here to get the language just right. I will make sure I know the answers to your questions a little bit clearer next time. I think it was a good start. You did say

257
01:15:32.080 --> 01:15:47.440
something about not having a definition of building footprint. It seems like we need one. We >> need one. Yeah, >> we do need one since we use it so often. >> The perimeter, you know, and it involves the perimeter, you know, the the footprint, the existing perimeter of the

258
01:15:47.440 --> 01:16:04.719
footprint and not >> so I think here they had used building area a lot of times. And when I look at building area, it means the total ground floor area as measured on a horizontal plane at the main grade level between the exterior faces of the walls of the

259
01:16:04.719 --> 01:16:21.199
principal buildings and all buildings exclusive exclusive of decks, terraces and steps. So basically that is our that is our footprint, right? I mean that is your still your footprint. still the exterior walls >> and I think that's the reason why they

260
01:16:21.199 --> 01:16:37.679
said okay we have a definition for it but it's but it's building building area not building footprint and I think that's the reason why they asked to change it we'll we'll clarify that though >> but make a go ahead so essentially our definition of building area is what normally would be

261
01:16:37.679 --> 01:16:53.600
>> the definition for building footprint >> it's not the square footage of the building which could be >> the combined area of all the floors So, but I'd just like to make a comment if I might about this. Um, I mean, there's some

262
01:16:53.600 --> 01:17:09.520
consideration about ease of practice um going into these changes, but I would just maybe I'm just old school, but I really think our bylaws should reflect what we actually want to have happen. I think unfortunately, and this is not a

263
01:17:09.520 --> 01:17:26.800
criticism intended for anyone, but unfortunately over the recent decades, there's been a lot of stretching of what we actually wanted to see happen in Chadam and in a sense a lot of abuse of the bylaws as written. Um, and I think

264
01:17:26.800 --> 01:17:41.920
rather than allow that to continue, we actually want to pull back on that. >> That's my opinion. I know others may not agree with me, but that's my opinion. Okay, that plenty of things to go over on this one. We'll kick it back and we'll see

265
01:17:41.920 --> 01:17:58.480
what all right so that and anything important on the correspondence. >> Just regular correspondence. Nothing. Okay. Um major concern. You all had it in your packet. >> Any other issues want to raise before we adjourn?

266
01:17:58.480 --> 01:18:11.760
>> Nope. >> Move to adjurnn. >> Second. >> All right. Do a roll call vote. Katherine, >> I approve. Warren >> approve. >> Uh Bob I approve. >> Frank >> approve. >> Bob >> approve. And Artsboro I approve. And the

267
01:18:11.760 --> 01:18:23.000
time is 612. >> Yeah. Thank you. [music] >> All right.