►
From YouTube: Beacon Zoning Board 5 16 23
Description
The City of Beacon Zoning Board Meeting from May 16, 2023
A
A
A
Second,
by
Elaine,
all
in
favor,
aye,
aye
and
I'll
read
our
little.
My
intro
here
good
evening
welcome
to
the
May
16th
meeting
of
the
city
of
Beacon
Journey
board
of
appeals.
My
name
is
Jordan
haug
and
I.
Am
the
chairman
of
the
sport
joining
me?
Are
the
rest
of
the
members
of
the
board.
We
also
have
our
city
staff,
including
purse
flower,
the
building
inspector,
our
new
attorney
and
Amanda
Amanda,
our
zoning
board
secretary.
A
If
you
wish
to
comment,
please
step
up
to
the
podium
and
talk
into
the
mic,
that's
something
people
commonly
forget
to
do.
Please
state
your
name
and
address
for
the
record,
so
Amanda
can
take
that
down.
We
ask
you
to
speak
to
the
different
factors,
so
we
often
zoning
is
a
balancing
test,
at
least
for
the
variances
that
are
on
tonight.
A
One
thing
also,
that
is
important.
We
have
a
full
board
here
tonight,
but
I
always
like
to
state
that
there
needs
to
be
a
majority
vote
of
what
can
be
a
quorum.
A
quorum
is
three,
so
you
need
three
votes
to
pass
so
tonight
we
have
five
members,
so
you
have
the
ability
to
get
five
votes,
so
you
have
the
maximum
the
maximum
board
here.
A
C
A
D
Evening,
good
evening,
Rea
Siegel
representing
the
owner
who's
here
tonight.
In
case
you
have
any
questions
for
her,
so
the
properties
at
five
Willow
Street,
it's
in
the
T
zoning
district
and
the
application-
is
to
renovate
the
existing
two-story
garage
to
create
another
third
dwelling
unit
on
the
property,
we're
thinking
about
doing
it
as
an
accessory
apartment.
But
the
existing
house
is
a
two
family,
so
that's
that's
not
allowed
there.
The
the
T
zoning
District
allows
for
a
number
of
residential
types,
single
family,
two
family
multi-family.
D
D
So
but
there's
there's
a
few
variances
that
we
would
need
in
order
to
allow
that
building
to
be
fixed
up
and
made
into
another
dwelling
unit.
So
there's
the
first
one
is
a
variance
for
the
requirement
of
having
more
than
one
main
building
on
the
lot.
There's.
Also
some
small
setback
variances.
Where
there's
you
know,
because
again
it's
an
existing
building,
it's
close
to
the
property
lines,
so
so,
there's
a
side
yard
in
the
rear
yard,
variance
request
and
then
for
the
off
street
parking.
Technically
six
spaces
are
required.
D
The
the
way
the
family
is
going
to
use
this.
They
don't
think
they
need
more
than
three,
although
in
in
the
future,
six
could
be
made
to
fit
there
if
necessary,
but
you
know
just
instead
of
Paving
the
whole
yard
and
taking
all
the
grass
away
that
they're
asking
for
three
parking
spaces,
so
so
that
that's
generally
what
the
require,
what
the
request
is
and
and
then
you
know,
we-
we
think
that
it
fits
into
the
criteria
for
the
variances.
It's
not
significant
it.
You
know
it's
an
improvement
of
an
existing
situation.
D
F
E
Just
to
give
you
a
little
background
about
the
rehab
of
the
barn
I
lived
in
that
house,
it's
my
grandmother's
house,
so
I
lived
there
from
the
ages
of
10
to
13.,
so
the
rehab
is
absolutely
personal
to
me
that
Barn
has
been
dilapidated
since
I
was
growing
up
there.
We
reinforced
it
I
think
about
10
years
back
and
renting
out.
The
property
has
given
us
the
means
to
be
able
to
rehab
that
barn.
Now
so,
let's
see
I'm
excited
to
rehab
the
barn
and
have
it
be
an
apartment.
E
We
do
believe
that
three
should
be
enough
for
the
time
being.
We
do
have
a
large
Bush
up
in
the
front.
We
could,
if
necessary,
tear
that
away
and
make
room
for
some
extra
parking,
but
we've
had
I
believe
four
adults
on
the
property
for
two
years
and
we've
never
needed
more
than
two
vehicles
in
the
driveway.
So
that
was
my
thought.
A
A
A
I
Actually,
there
could
be
a
combination
if
they
were
to
take
that
building
out
to
be
able
to
be
a
combination
of
commercial
commercial
like
professional
office
and
residential,
it
could
be
multi-family.
Obviously,
one
and
two
family
homes
are
allowed
within
that
zone
without
looking
at
the
table,
there's
probably
a
couple
of
more
that
I'm,
forgetting.
F
F
I
Families,
so
with
this
case
I
guess
it
was
proposed
to
create
a
separate
primary
dwelling
unit.
So
on
the
lot.
So
there
is
a
section
within
the
zoning
codes
that
you're
allowed
to
only
have
one
primary
dwelling
unit.
You
know
and
everything
else
would
be
considered
accessory
to
that
this
one
would
be
considered.
I
guess
another
primary
dwelling
unit
as
a
single
family,
home
I.
G
G
I
D
C
I
I
I
None
that
I
know
of
this
is
again
I'll
go
into
here
a
short
time,
but
from
what
I've
kind
of
gone
through
I
haven't
seen
anything
similar
to
this
actually
I
have
to
I
have
to
attract
it.
There
is
one
similar
property
on
Ackerman
Street.
It
has
a
two
family
in
the
front
of
the
property
and
a
a
single
family
to
the
back
of
the
property,
which
is
all
on
one
lot.
It
was
a
pre-existing
non-conforming.
It's
been
there
since
prior
to
well
prior
to
the
60s.
Okay.
D
Oh
well,
I
mean
the
requirement
is
two
spaces
per
dwelling
unit,
yeah
that
they're
asking
for
basically
one
space
per
dwelling
unit,
because
it
you
know
I
mean
just
to
avoid
the
Paving.
You
know
all
that
front
area,
that's
on
the
drawing
there
and
and
they
based
on
their
experience.
It's
worked.
Fine
that
way.
H
J
If
I
cannot
find
on
this,
it's
it's
an
area
of
variance
because,
as
Bruce
mentioned
there
is
the
223-12a
says
that
you
can
only
have
one
main
building
per
lot.
If
you
want
to
have
a
second
main
building,
regardless
of
what
the
use
is,
you
need
a
variance
from
that
section
to
allow
a
second
main
building
is
an
area
of
variance
in
and
of
itself.
J
Everything
here
is
an
area
of
variance
what
you
would
need
a
use
variance
for
would
be
if
there
was
for
a
use,
not
in
the
transition
District,
not
in
the
t-d
district.
You
would
need
a
use
variance
to
say
you
know
what,
if
you
wanted
to
build
a
baseball
stadium
in
the
backyard,
for
example,
you
need
to
use
variants
to
put
to
put
a
baseball
stadium
there.
These
are
permitted
uses
one
family,
two
families
multi-family,
so
it
takes
us
into
the
area,
variance
analysis
of
it's
a
separate
building.
If
it
was
connected,
it's
different.
J
If
here
there's
not
one
building,
that's
accessory
to
the
other,
if
it
was
accessory
to
it,
that's
different
story:
you
don't
need
a
variance
from
this.
You
would
still
need
area.
Variances
for
the
setbacks,
you
would
still
need
if
you
were
to
connect
the
buildings.
Like
someone
asked,
you
need
an
area
of
variants
because
there's
work
going
on
in
the
setback,
so
that's
how
it's
been
sort
of
packaged.
It's
just
sort
of
the
existing
conditions.
I
have
led
to
to
this
point.
What.
J
Accessory
dwelling
unit,
this
just
does
not
qualify
for
because
it's
it's
a
two-family,
it's
up
to
the
board
to
determine
how
they
want
to
view
this
application.
If
you
guys
have
you
know,
objections
or
concerns,
you
can
ask
those
questions
and
get
the
answers.
There's
not
necessarily
one
law
that
takes
precedence
over
the
other.
J
It's
just
the
situation
that,
because
they're
separate
it's
it's
the
way
to
do.
This
is
the
narrow
variance.
If
you
were
to
convert
this
to
anything,
even
if
it
wasn't
the
dwelling
unit,
if
it
was
another
permitted,
use,
permitted
principal
use
on
the
property,
you
would
still
need
this
area
of
variance
to
allow
more
than
one
building
if
it
was
an
accessory
use,
that's
different
because
you
can
have
accessory
uses
accessory
to
the
main
building
so.
J
I
don't
want
to
opine
on
to
what's
permitted
but
yeah
if
it
was
a
permitted
principle
use
that
wasn't
a
dwelling
unit
if
it
was
an
art
studio,
for
example,
let's
say
I'm,
not
making
any
representation
as
to
that
being
permitted
in
the
T
District.
You
would
still
need
the
area
variants
to
allow
more
than
one
main
building
more
than
one
principle,
because.
G
J
F
J
G
J
Would
have
to
look
further
into
the
Adu
law
on
that
respect,
I
I,
don't
want
to
make
a
representation.
I
said
knowing
it
by
heart
right
now,
but
I
could
look
further
into
that
again.
If
we
have
concerns,
we
can
ask
questions
and
then
we
can
push
it
back
another
month.
If
you
guys
decide
to
go
that
way.
It's
really
a
determination
of
getting
the
information
from
the
architect
and
the
representative
here
and
sort
of
seeing
how
you
guys
feel
at
that
point.
B
D
D
Building
there
they
can
have
it
generate
something
and-
and
or
you
know,
bees
for
the
family
later
on,
but
really
it's
just
you
know,
making
use
of
that
additional
structure
and
and
the
the
way
that
it's
been
put
together
was
you
know,
I
mean,
like
I
said
we
did
go
in
with
the
accessory
dwelling
originally
and,
and
then
after
that
was
reviewed
by
your
predecessor,
yeah.
She
she
thought
that
the
best
way
to
handle
it
was
to
you
know
to
to
treat
it
as
a
another
main
building
and.
C
A
I
F
J
Those
those
will
need
variances
in
terms
of
setbacks,
but
in
terms
of
the
first
variants
being
sought
for
more
than
one
main
building.
They
would
not,
because
now
this
is
accessory,
the
the
two,
the
two
family
dwelling
unit
would
be
the
main
building
and
this
would
be
accessory
to
the
main
building.
But.
J
B
J
Yeah
but
yeah,
arguably
I'm,
not
sure
about
four
with
parking
I'd
have
to
look
more
into
it,
but
really
number
one
correct
if
it
was
an
accessory
use
unless
there's
something
that
limits
accessory
uses
which
I'm
not
aware
of
you
wouldn't
need
the
first
one,
but
because
it's
a
principal
use
you're
having
two
principal
uses,
so
you
need
more
than
one
quote-unquote
main
building.
That's
what
number
one.
H
J
I
I
H
A
But
it
is
not
it's
a
two-family
home,
so
they
need
a
variance
to
from
the
zoning
law
to
allow
a
second
main
building.
So
you
know
if
it
was
a
single-family
home,
it
would
be
an
accessory,
it
would
be
the
primary
is
not
a
single
family
home
and
it's
a
two-family
home.
Then
it
becomes
a
variance
request
as
opposed
to
an
application.
The
planning
board
for
an
exception
to
so.
H
What
works
we're
being
asked
by
the
owner
is
to
allow
a
second
single
family,
a
second
dwelling
unit
that
is
not
attached
to
the
first
one
correct
and
that
doesn't
seem
to
be
actually
in
either
of
the
paths.
It's
it's
not
clear.
It's
possible
here,
because
I'd
have
to
be
attached
to
be
a
multi-family
unit
right.
C
J
Yeah,
to
the
extent
that
if
if
it
was
asking
to
be
an
accessory
dwelling
unit,
you
know
again,
we
would
look
further
into
the
path
again
I.
Don't
want
to
tie
myself
to
any
representation.
That
was
my
initial
instinct
is
that
that
would
be
a
use
because,
as
you
stated,
you
are
asking
for
a
use,
that's
different
than
what's
permitted.
J
The
accessory
dwelling
unit
is
a
use
if
it
was
an
accessory
dwelling
unit,
but
with
you
know
the
smaller
footprint
or
larger
footprint,
whatever,
then
we're
into
area
variants,
but
you
still
need
to
be
able
to
get
to
the
accessory
dwelling
in
it,
which
is
a
use.
This
is
a
complicated
situation.
Obviously
the
our
firm
did
analysis.
My
predecessors
have
done
analysis
on
this,
and
this
was
the
way
that
we
found
the
code
just
makes
sense.
This
way.
J
It's
it's
a
twisty,
Turvy
way
and
Arya
I
believe
you've
spoken
with
Drew
in
the
past,
and
you
know
you
and
I
had
some
conversations
about
correcting
some
some
things
on
the
drawing.
So
that's
how
we
are
here
today,
but
again,
if
you
guys
have
any
questions
or
issues.
This
is
a
time
to
this
is
the
perfect
time
to
get
them
out
any
questions
about
the
factors
as
well.
Remember
the
five
factors
for
the
area
variants
are
considered,
because
these
are
all
area
variances,
so.
D
D
F
D
I
I
J
J
C
One
of
the
things
we
did
years
ago
was
we
were
trying
to
get
rid
of
two
family
houses
that
were
complete
rentals,
because
a
lot
of
people
from
out
of
town
would
buy
these
houses.
They
didn't
care
about
them,
they
put
in
you
know
they
didn't
care
who
they
put
in
there
and
it
really
just
it
was
part
of
the
down
the
the
dark
days
of
vegan
and
we've
been
I've,
been
on
this
board
for
like
15
16
years
now,
so.
F
J
And
the
applicant
today
indicated
that
this
has
been
their
family
home
right
so
right
now
it's
owner
occupied
for
the
near
future
might
be
owner
occupied
again
we
can
look
into
permissible
conditions
and
if
that
could
be
a
permissible
condition,
if
that's
the
route
we
want
to
go.
You
know
we'll
continue
here
to
determine
the
route
we
want
to
go
and
we
could
always
adjourn
one
more
month
and
come
back
when
we
are
more
comfortable
knowing
what
conditions
we
could
place
and
and
a
way
that
goes
forward
that
works
for
everyone.
Yeah.
B
B
You
want
to
make
it
a
condition.
My
overall
concern
with
this
whole
application
is
number
one
to
me.
It
seems
pretty
substantial
number
two
I,
don't
really
hear
a
you
know
this
existing
in
other
parts
of
the
city
right,
so
a
precedence,
I'm,
not
hearing
a
financial
hardship,
a
true
financial
hardship
behind
this
and
I'm
afraid
of
what
the
Precedence
this
would
set
in
the
city
and.
J
To
that
extent,
you
know
with
regard
to
financial
hardship
and
and
stuff,
you
know,
that's
that's
a
question
that
you're
more
than
welcome
to
ask
I
do
want
to
just
caution
that,
if
it's
being
analyzed
as
a
factor,
the
financial
factors
are
more
for
use.
Variances,
not
area
variances,
so
I
just
want
to
caution.
To
that
not
saying
that's
what's
happening
in
terms
of
setting
precedent
going
forward,
this
law
is
sufficiently
large
to
permit
this.
J
First
of
all,
anyone
that
comes
again
in
the
future
would
need
to
get
a
variance,
but
also
it's
the
size
of
this
lot
that
sort
of
permits
this
a
smaller
lot
would
not
permit
it
because
of
density
requirements,
and
if
the
lot
was
smaller
and
they
said
hey,
we
want
to
convert
this-
we
they
would
also
need
a
density
variance,
and
that's
where
you
could
say:
that's
where
you
ask
the
questions
and
you
make
the
determination
on
density.
So
it's
not
necessarily
going
to
open
the
floodgates.
J
B
J
The
the
the
the
side
yard
and
rear
yard
setbacks
and
I
believe
that
they're,
you
know,
we've
gotten
some
letters
about
this
from
from
the
public.
That's
a
byproduct
of
the
fact
that
the
structure
currently
exists
that
that's
what
it
is
if
it
was,
if
you
had
another
application
that
said
hey,
we
want
to
put
a
second
building
on
the
property.
Well,
when
it's
a
new
building,
you
have
the
freedom
to
move
it.
You
have
the
freedom
to
require
it
to
be
outside
of
the
setbacks
and
everything.
G
D
G
F
F
F
I
G
I
G
G
I
A
A
I
D
A
Know
right
so
I
wanted
to
I,
guess
determine
or
put
on
the
record
was
that
in
theory,
your
client
could
do
that
yeah.
The
reason
why
they're
seeking
a
variance
is
because
they
don't
necessarily
want
to
reduce
the
ecological.
You
know
the
grass.
So
it's
it's
either.
You
know
in
theory
right.
We
give
the
variance
that
particular
variance
and
there's
less
parking
required,
or
you
know
you
just
say:
okay
well,
I'm
gonna
pave
that
and
not.
D
And
and
like
I
said
we're
also,
you
know
if
you
wanted
to
make
it
a
condition
that
you
know
we
could
treat
it
sort
of
like
a
land
bank
parking.
We
know
that
we
can
provide
it,
but
you
know
if
we
could
hold
off
on
providing
it
in
unless
it
became
a
problem.
You
know
the
the
way
they
do
it.
Land
banking
on
you
know
larger
projects,
so
so
right.
K
F
F
A
I
guess
the
question
is
right.
Something
that
I
would
weigh
is
what
is:
is
the
value
of
taking
six
cars
or
three
cars?
You
know,
potentially
off
the
street
more
or
less
than
the
value
of
not
Paving,
that
area
of
the
property
like
there's
value
to
that
too,
in
theory,
right,
ecological
value,
right,
so
that
that's
aesthetic,
that's
a
question
for
us
to
determine
right
what
the.
A
C
I
C
F
L
E
E
H
L
L
We
want
like
it
seems
like
a
great
thing
that
it's
getting
rebuilt,
but
we
do
have
concerns
about
the
one
foot
variants
in
the
plans
there's
exposed
Foundation,
where
there
doesn't
really
seem
to
be
so
now
so
it
seems
like
the
whole
Foundation
would
have
to
be
dug
up
and
how
much
work
would
have
to
come
into
our
yard
and
it
doesn't
seem
to
be
plumbing
and
electrical
or
like
a
drainage
plan
in
the
in
the
plans
either.
So
we
were
just.
L
We
just
had
some
some
concerns
about
only
one
foot
and
it's
also
Cedar
the
plants
they
have
cedar
siding.
So
if
they
ever
needed
to
be
painted
or
to
clean
the
the
window,
they'd
have
to
come
onto
our
property
and
there's,
and
then
there
would
be
a
window
looking
into
our
backyard
when
there
previously
wasn't
someone
like
living
there,
and
we
now
have
a
small
child
so
we're
a
little
concerned
about
like
digging
in
our
yard,
with.
L
Even
you
know:
if
it
happens
next
year,
she'll
be
walking
by
then
so
I
don't
know
just
wanted
to,
and
we
did
write
a
letter.
We
just
wanted
to
show
up
in
person
to
say
that
you
know.
We
hope
that
the
structure
can
get
rebuilt.
We
just
have
a
little
concerns
for
our
privacy
and
the
with
the
one
foot
sure
yeah.
A
D
We
wouldn't
be
going
outside
of
the
footprint.
That's
there
now
so
I
I
wasn't
clear
about
the
foundation
thing
that
you
mentioned,
but
we're
basically
would
stay
right
on
that
footprint
and
build
up
from
there
or
you
know,
repair
from
there.
Also,
the
the
I'm
not
sure
are
you
on
the
right
or
yeah.
There's
one
small
window
there
and-
and
you
know,
I
I-
think
we
could
work
it
out
so
that
there
wouldn't
be
a
window
there
and
there's
no
window
on
the
back.
So
the.
A
A
F
A
C
J
J
No
finger
pointing
at
this
point,
but
it
was,
it
was
canceled
due
to
notice
issues.
I
forget
exactly
which
variants
it
was,
but
it
just
sighted
to
a
an
incorrect
section
and
I
believe
that
Aria,
the
drawings
were
cleaned
up
a
little
bit
right
to
remove
any
references
accessory
dwelling
units
which
we've
established
is
not
the
case
here.
So
that's
why
it
was.
It
was
minor,
but
procedurally
significant.
C
A
Guess,
I'm
gonna
try
to
just
get
a
feel
of
the
board
if
the
board
feels
as
though
we're
prepared
to
move
forward
and
make
a
decision.
A
determination
on
the
four
variances
this
evening
or
if
the
board
as
a
whole
would
like
more
time
to
consider
the
the
variances
as
a
whole.
Getting
an
indication
that
we
have
a
split
on
on
to
my
right.
C
J
A
So
let
me
let
me
read
the
correspondence
into
the
record
and
then
we
can
start
to
go
through
the
factors
of
each
variance
request
and
then
again
we
don't
have
to
vote
until
we
are
prepared
to
vote
right.
So
we're
we'll
just
we'll
continue
to
move
forward
now
and
if
we
feel
we,
if
that
changes
from
a
majority
of
the
board
so
I'm
to
minority
the
board
feels
as
how
to
make
a
decision
type.
We
can
always
adjourn
this
or
at
least
put
it
off.
K
J
I'm
not
sure
off
the
top
of
my
head,
but
okay,
you
could
close
the
public
hearing.
You
could
continue
the
public
hearing
to
next
month
and
you
know,
if
there's
no
comments,
you
can
immediately
close
yeah
make
a
decision
at
that
point.
They're
they're.
You
know
there
are
multiple
paths
here.
You
don't
necessarily
have
to
make
a
decision.
J
You
know
if
the
applicant
feels
more
comfortable.
They
could
also
request
to
come
back
next
month
with
some
revisions
in
a
way
that
it's
a
different
plan
and
you
guys
will
then
see
changes
it's
up
to
the
applicant
as
well
how
they
would
want
to
proceed
whether
they
want
to
get
a
decision
tonight,
I'm
not
saying
that
they
guide
this
but
communication
between
the
board
and
the
applicant.
The
applicant
sometimes
says
sure,
don't
make
a
decision
tonight
we'll
come
back
next
month.
We'll
have
some
things.
A
All
right,
so
let
me
first
ask
Amanda:
are
there
three
letters?
Are
there
more
than
three
letters?
I
have
I
have
three
that
I
have
available
to
me.
I
have
one
from
two
from
one
two
from
two
arnoffs
and
then
one
from
Gabrielle
Berger,
which
okay
yep,
and
that
is
that
and
then
there's
one
that
just
came
in
so
so
far,
all
right.
Okay,
so
let
me
let
me
read
these
in
and
then
we
can
figure
out.
A
A
Then
I
have
a
letter
from
Lisa
Arna,
also
dated
March
20th
and
she
states
as
Property
Owners
on
the
Main
Street
Corridor.
We
want
to
applaud
and
support
the
five
Wall
Street
accessory.
We,
which
is
not
a
necessary
but
a
second
second
main
building
apartment,
rehab
and
Renovations.
It
seems
this
project
will
Foster
the
vegan
residential
community
and
will
be
a
boon
to
the
area.
F
A
H
A
H
A
Received
our
Amanda
received
day
correspondence
dated
May
13th
from
a
Derek
Adams
stating
I
received
a
letter
regarding
the
application
in
the
hearing
for
tonight.
His
house
is
in
the
next
block
over
so
it
doesn't
say:
I'd
be
effective
affected
by
the
by
The
Proposal.
He
does
ask
the
following:
could
you
tell
me
how
the
pros
and
cons
of
this
variance
will
be
granted?
Okay?
So
it's
more
of
a
procedural
question
or
what
the
potential
issues
of
the
house
having
one
foot
away
from
the
property
line?
Obviously
we
talked
about
that.
A
If
I
live
next
door,
I
guess
I
might
not
want
it.
Well.
The
person
that
was
the
next
door
spoke
to
that.
Do
we
know
if
our
median
neighbors
oppose
the
project.
I've
seen
the
structure.
It
looks
like
it's
about
to
collapse,
some
all
for
having
it
renovated,
but
from
a
garage
into
a
single
family
home.
For
that
decision
he
would
defer
to
the
city
and
to
the
neighbors
to
the
right,
which
I
guess
is
us
and
the
person
that's
here
so.
A
J
H
J
Or
we
would
look
into
that.
I
know
certain
municipalities
for
large
commercial
projects.
You
know
require
land
banking
and
you
have
to
provide
where
it
would
show
up
on
a
plan
how
you
plan
to
maintain
it
that
you
have
to
maintain.
In
the
meantime,
we
would
have
to
look
into
to
the
best
way
to
go
about
that
and
maybe
depicting
it
on
a
plan
as
well,
so
that
that
you,
you
show
where
the
cars
can
go.
Yeah.
H
A
C
A
Wishes
all
right
so
we'll
go
through
each
variance
and
we
will
consider
the
five
factors
for
each
variance
so
we'll
take
them
in
in
the
order
in
which
they're
listed
so
the
first
variants
that
we're
considering
actually
I'm.
Sorry,
let
me
let
me
do
this.
First
can
I
have
a
motion
to
close
the
public
hearing
motion.
G
A
A
C
G
B
Yeah
I
would
agree
with
that.
To
me
it
is
an
undesirable
change
because
of
that
precedence
that
it
says
two
primary
buildings
in
the
one
lot,
so
I
do
think
it's
I'm
sure
cosmetically
ultimately,
with
the
worker
would
look
too
pretty,
but
I
think
it's
undesirable
from
that
perspective
from
the
two
primary
buildings.
L
A
B
I
am
concerned
again.
I
am
concerned
about
the
house
UPS
I'm
kind
of
bleeding
to
the
third
one.
How
I
see
this
as
substantial
I
am
concerned
about
the
side
and
rear
yard
setbacks
of
a
living
space
of
continuing,
even
if
that
it
does
exist
in
some
of
the
older
structures
in
Beacon.
I
am
concerned
about
that.
The
gentleman
from
the
public
raised
a
very
good
point.
What
happens
if
painting
has
to
go
has
to
go
on
the
other
property?
B
H
A
A
J
D
D
B
D
A
G
A
A
C
J
C
H
C
C
C
A
G
A
G
G
C
A
F
A
We
can
throw
that
out,
but
then
you
still
need
the
size.
You
still
need
the
existing
structure,
so
I
think
that
that's
the
main
one
right.
It's
like
how
many,
how
many
Lots
in
Beacon
have
the
size
and
then
the
existing
structure?
Are
we
going
to
have
people
line
up
for
and
say,
oh
well,
we
want
to
do
what
is
being
proposed
here.
There's
nothing
there!
A
I
I,
don't
think
we're
setting
a
precedent
there
and
also
we're
considering
this
application,
as,
as
you
know
on
this
particular
on
this
particular
lot,
I
I,
don't
think
when
you
do
that
and
when
you,
when
you
develop
a
record
like
we
are
currently
I,
don't
I.
Don't
really
think
it
is
precedent
setting
I'm,
not
I'm,
not
concerned
about
setting
a
precedent,
because
I
don't
I
think
that
each
each
lot
is
unique
and
I
think
that
we
are
identifying
the
different,
unique
aspects
of
this
lot.
A
In
our
discussion,
whereby
you
know
if
applicant
Z,
you
know
comes
next
year,
we
can
differentiate
that
that's
not
to
say
that
I'm
not
concerned
about
the
application
in
you
know
the
factors,
however,
just
speaking
to
the
precedent
setting
that
has
been
discussed
as
far
as
factor
four
I
believe
Judy
was
the
only
one
to
speak
to
that
so
far.
Anyone
else
wish
to
speak
on
the
adverse
physical
or
environmental
conditions.
A
B
J
I
I
A
A
A
To
the
second
variance
we
are
now
going
to
discuss
223-17
Point
D,
which
is
the
one
foot
side,
yard
setback,
I
I,
think.
Maybe
we
could
discuss
the
two
setbacks
together,
rather
than
do
this
twice
so
we'll
consider
the
two
17
dot
DS,
so
the
one
side
yard
setback
where
10
feet
is
required
and
the
1.8
foot
requested
rear
yard
setback
where
20
feet
is
required.
C
C
F
A
There
is
no
change
or
with
regards
to
the
use,
there
will
be
humans.
You
know
in
theory
occupying
it
where
there
was
not
humans
occupying
it
before
so
I
guess
it
speaks
to
the
concern
of
the
gentleman
that
spoke
with
regard
to
you
know
having
there's
going
to
be
humans
in
the
in
the
structure
with
the
ability.
If
there
are,
you
know
Windows
to
right,
you
know
that's.
D
D
C
H
A
A
Well,
I
think
that
then,
that
opens
up
a
can
of
worms
right
that
that's
the.
That
is
what
I
was
speaking
to
before.
If
if
there
was
nothing
there,
I
think
I
would
and
I
think
I'm
getting
the
feeling
that
most
people
would
on
the
board
view
this
as
a
different
application.
If
there
was
not
already
an
existing,
somewhat
historic
structure
there,
so
there
were
I
think
the
the
applicant
is
relying
on
that
to
push
the
application
forward.
A
G
H
H
C
A
A
I
think
so
I
think
that
I
think
in
in
my
opinion,
I
think
that
if
someone
wants
to
put
a
you
know,
a
shed
is
different
than
a
garage
and
it's
different
from
a
bedroom
and
so
that
that's
where,
whereas
in
other
applications,
you
know
we
say,
oh
well,
it's
in
the
it's
in
the
same
footprint.
You
know
we
say
that
all
the
time,
but
the
use
you
know
in
a
lot
of
the
time
already
is
dwelling
in
that
footprint
and
then
they're
just
creating
more
dwelling.
So
it's
it's
not
really.
A
You
know
somebody
could
go,
look
out
the
window
that
already
exists
in
this.
You
know
hypothetical
example
that
we've
done
in
the
past
and
there's
just
going
to
be.
You
know
something
else
there
that
also
you
know
someone
who's
already
in
and
can
dwell
in
I
think
that
it
changes
when
the
use
changes.
J
B
A
A
Sure,
okay
and
then
discussion
on
22326
dot
f,
which
is
for
the
allowance
of
three
parking
spaces
where
six
parking
spaces
two
per
dwelling
unit
is
required.
We'll
go
back
to
the
first
factor,
which
is
whether
an
undesirable
change
will
be
produced
in
the
character
of
neighborhood
or
a
detriment
to
nearby
properties
will
be
created
by
the
granting
of
the
area
variants.
Yes,.
G
That
that
area,
and
especially
that
end
of
the
block,
has
a
lot
of
parking,
especially
on
weekends,
throwing
three
extra
cars
out
into
those
and
in
the
winter,
when
you
cannot
park
in
the
streets
and
Beacon,
you
have
to
figure
out
where
to
put
those
other
three
cars.
Currently
they
may
not
need
them,
but
you
can't
guarantee
that
in
the
future
those
conditions
are
going
to
stay.
The
same
say
they
sell
the
property
or
move
out.
C
A
I
So
usually
the
planning
board
uses
that
for
so
that
people
aren't
over
building
parking
lots,
so
the
applicant
would
offer
up
land
banking,
X
number
of
parking
spaces.
For
some
reason
you
know
after
the
building's
been
in
use
for
a
period
of
time,
and
you
know
the
parking
lot
you
know
is
basically
overflowing.
You
have
people
that
are
parking
in
the
grass
parking.
Wherever
at
that
point,
I
believe
you
know
the
the
applicant
would
be
required
to
build
out
those
parking
spaces
in
order
to
fulfill
the
needs
of
the
building.
A
I
Guess
it
would
for
this
to
to
our
attorney,
but
I
believe
the
resolution
will
be
written
so
that
if
there
is
a
future
need
for
parking
that
it
could
be
enforced
by
the
by
the
building
department
office
to
require
them
to
build
out
those
parking
spaces.
So
that
there's
not
a
you
know
an
on-street
parking
issue,
correct.
J
The
way
the
way
I
Envision
it,
the
resolution
would
include
it
Rea.
You
would
be
able
to
revise
the
drawings
that
indicate
where
three
parking
spots
exist
so
that
we
can
confirm
that
they
do.
It
is
feasible
and
then
the
building
Department's
determination
in
the
future,
whether
it's
based
on
on
need
in
the
neighborhood
or
whatever
the
case
may
be,
and.
A
Then,
just
as
far
as
enforcement
goes,
let's
say
you
know
to
determined
that
that
is
a
need.
You
send
the
letter
to
the
owner
and
say
you
have
to
build
the
parking
spaces
and
they
say
we
don't
have
any
money
to
build
the
parking
spaces.
They
don't
respond.
What
is
your
your
action?
Stuff
done,
cite
them
and
bring
them
to
court
at
that
point.
Yes,.
A
I
I
That
would
be
difficult.
We
have
to
narrow
it
down,
I
guess
to
it
being
specific
to
that
property,
but
it
would
be
based
upon
investigations
of
complaints
from
the
neighbors.
If
the
neighbors
you
know
what's
going
on,
we
can
investigate
it
or
if,
for
some
reason,
the
police
department
May,
because
there
may
be
an
issue
with.
B
I
B
I
It's
hard
to
tell
with
you
know
most
of
the
time
the
land
bank
is
because
you
want
to
try
to
keep
more
green
space
or
impervious
surface.
You
want
less
than
the
amount
of
appropriate
surface
without
all
the
details
of
you
know
having
a
some
type
of
a
plan
to
show
where
all
the
water
is
going
to
go.
Because
again,
you
know
you
don't
want
to
have
water
running
off
onto
the
neighbor's
property,
because
that
would
create
a
another.
D
J
J
When
the
building
department
knows
it
doesn't
necessarily
have
to
be
quote-unquote
land
banking,
if
you
Google
land
banking
and
see
what
it
gives
you,
it
might
say
that
it
has
to
involve
some
sort
of
construction
or
some
sort
of
landscaping
or
whatever
I'm,
not
sure,
but
it
you
know.
If
we're
concerned,
with
the
actual
proper
phrase
of
land
banking,
we
could
condition
it
on
the
ability
to
provide
and
the
necessity
to
provide
upon
the
building
performance
determination.
The
three
additional
spaces.
C
J
A
I
think
that's
the
discussion
right
and
I
think
that
speaks
to
factor
two,
which
is
an
awesome
segue
into
whether
the
benefit
the
applicant
seeks
can
be
achieved
through
another
method
feasible
for
the
applicant
to
pursue,
and
so
you
know,
I
would
say
that
that
the
other
you
know
the
other
method
would
be
to
turn
the
decide
into
a
driveway.
And
so
the
question
you
know
we
have
to
weigh
is:
is
the
detriment
to
turning
that
into
a
driveway,
greater
or
less
than
the
benefit
of
taking
three
cars
off.
A
Yeah,
you
know,
I
I,
think
you
know
after
fleshing
it
out
I
think
that
it
is
simpler
to
just
require
the
parking
spaces
based
on
the
fact
that
they
have
the
Land
There
to
provide
the
parking
spaces.
I.
Think
that
while
we
do
want
to
be,
you
know
ecologically
conscious
the
Green
Space
that
is
there
is
you
know
it's
grass
I
mean
you
know
we're
not
asking
them
to
cut
down
100
year
old,
trees
or
or
any
trees
other
than
a
bush.
I.
A
Bruce's
already
hectic
right
and
there's
a
benefit
to
getting.
You
know
we,
as
we
all
know
you
know,
there's
always
complaints
about
parking,
so
I
think
you
know
taking
three
cars
off
off
the
street.
Potentially
three
cars
off
the
street
outweighs
the
the
keeping
of
the
green
space
that
so
anyway.
I
think
that
there
is
another
method,
feasible,
I
think
that
that's
proven
by
what
we've
just
fleshed
out
just.
D
J
So
that
yeah
and
to
that
extent,
if
if
this
is
the
the
way
the
board
would
like
to
proceed
because
there
is
a
lot
of
discussion,
there
are
a
lot
of
variances,
it
might
make
sense
to
have
the
I
know
another
month.
You
know
time
time
is
money
and
time
it
takes
time.
It
might
be
cleaner
to
come
back
with
the
drawing
depicting
the
changes,
and
then
you
know
if
there's
public
comment
at
that
point.
J
A
C
F
A
A
L
A
A
J
D
A
J
That
point:
if
there
was
no
actual
provision
of
the
three
spaces,
then
Bruce
could
step
in.
If
there
is
a
provision
of
the
three
spaces,
you
are
compliant
with
the
the
zoning
code.
So
there's
no
need
for
Bruce
to
step
in.
There's
no
need
for
you
to
be
before
the
board
for
a
variance
for
those
parking
spaces,
because
you
are
providing
them.
D
J
D
Yeah
I
mean
I,
I,
think
those
those
items
you
know
the
window
in
in
the
stair.
We
know
that
can
be
removed
cleanly.
So
you
know
that
that's
really
not
an
issue
that
we
would
need
to
come
back
for
and
and
the
parking
you
know
the
applicants
find
putting
the
six
spaces
in
so
you
know,
I
think
I.
Think
that
cleans
up
those
two
concerns.
A
J
A
B
F
A
F
J
J
C
J
A
G
A
F
G
A
E
A
G
G
F
K
Here,
for
my
name
is
Jason
the
architect
for
the
project,
we're
here
simply
for
a
area
variants,
because
we
have
a
pre-existing
non-conforming
setback
of
4.8
feet.
We're
the
current
house
is
a
Cape
Cod
style
house.
So
it's
one
and
a
half
stories
which
anybody
familiar
with
the
Cape
Cod
knows.
The
second
story
is
very
low
and
the
sidewalls
come
in
we're
just
looking
to
take
the
back
of
the
house
and
add
a
full
shed
Dormer
to
increase
that
ceiling
height
and
there's
a
little
bump.
F
K
K
J
I
should
State
for
the
record
before
we
proceed
with
any
questions
from
the
board.
The
for
clarification
on
the
agenda.
There
are
two
sections
for
Relief,
223-10,
Point,
D
and
223-17
point
D,
17
point:
D
is
the
schedule
of
dimensional
regulations.
That's
the
you
know
for
the
setback,
223-10
Point
D.
It
becomes
really
a
nullity.
A
A
G
F
A
So
here
the
applicant
is
seeking
relief,
they're
asking
for
a
4.8
cigarette
setback
where
a
10-foot
setback
is
required
and
we'll
go
through
the
factors
again
as
to
whether
an
undesirable
change
will
be
reducing
the
character
of
the
neighborhood
or
a
detriment.
Nearby
properties
we
created
by
the
granting
of
the
variance.
G
A
I
think
this
is
one
where
we
said
you
know
many
times
in
the
past
mathematically.
It
may
be
substantial,
but
in
you
in
practicality,
it's
not
based
on
the
fact
that
the
footprint
is
there
for
as
to
whether
the
proposed
variance
will
have
an
adverse
impact,
I'm,
sorry
adverse
effect
or
impact
on
the
physical
or
environmental
condition
of
the
neighborhood
or
District.
G
G
A
A
A
Work
we'll
get
one
eventually
Judy
for
you.
I
just
want
to
want
to
ask
the
applicant.
We
normally,
which
is
our
general
conditions,
is
that
all
fees
to
the
city
are
paid
prior
to
the
issuance
and
then
also
will
you
be
able
to
obtain
a
building
permit
within
the
next
six
months
and
then
and
then
also
commence
construction
within
the
next
six
months
and
then
complete
and
obtain
a
CFO
within
two
years
of
tonight.
Is
that.