City of Portsmouth, New Hampshire Planning Board, 17 Jun 2021

Previous Meeting

⏯

youtube image

►

From YouTube: Planning Board 6.17.2021

Description

Planning Board 6.17.2021

A

Oh good evening, everyone and welcome to the june 17th 2021 city of portsmouth planning.

B

Board meeting I'd like to welcome everyone to uh city chambers and I have to say I've, never.

B

Seen this board so happy to be here as they are tonight, we've all been led out of prison.

C

Welcome so first narrative business is approved of minutes. If I could have a.

B

Motion to approve the board minutes from the may 20th meeting so moved. Second discussion.

B

All in favor aye, aye aye opposed motion passes god. I love that.

B

Okay uh item two public care: no business. I just read this into the record: the board's action.

B

In these matters has been dreamed of quasi-jiu-jitsu in nature.

B

If any person believes any member of the board has a conflict of interest.

B

That issues should be raised at this point or it will be deemed.

B

B

Okay: item item two public area: no business item; a request of stone, creek, realty, llc, owner and cpi.

B

Management llc applicant for property located at 53 green street. If I could have a motion to.

B

Postpone this application to the july planning board meeting some moved. Second, all in favor.

B

All right close motion passes thank you item b, acosta, bora, bharara, llc, owner and 210 commerce,.

B

Way, llc applicant for property located at sherwood drive at the intersection of portsmouth boulevard.

B

And market street, if I could have a motion to postpone this application.

B

July planning board meeting some move; second, all in favor, aye, aye, aye, aye aye for pastor. Thank you.

B

Item two public hearing new business item, a request of city of portsmouth, new hampshire owner.

B

For property located at 99, pierce island road for site plan review approval for the demolition.

B

Of the existing bathhouse and pump house buildings and construction of a new bathhouse.

B

And a new chemical storage building said property is shown in assessors map 208 lot. One.

B

And lies within the municipal district, who is here to speak for this application.

D

Good evening, chairman leg, members of the board very nice to see you all in person.

D

My name is joseph almeida: I'm the facilities manager for the city of portsmouth joining me.

D

Tonight, peter rice, the director of public works, todd henley, the director of the rec department.

D

And from oak point and associates uh ken weston and wade lippert, I'm going to make a very quick.

D

Introduction and very promptly turn it over to oak point, but we're here tonight presenting.

D

um A very important uh project to the city: we consider this a legacy project. It's a.

D

It's a huge asset to the city to have such an amazing facility on pierce island. We have a.

D

Almost a million gallon public pool and it's um it is truly a very rare asset for us to have so.

D

We're looking to construct a new pool house, which will you know last us well into 50 75 year range.

D

The facility- that's there now is obviously served us very well, but um it is a very tired facility.

D

And the the aquatic system and how we treat the water um must be must be improved. So.

D

And keep in mind that the the uh the goal of the of the project um is to keep the pool um remaining.

D

Open throughout the duration of construction- and that's that's not a that's! No small task.

D

We we have a full presentation for you tonight and I will leave all of the technical presentation.

D

To um to oak point, but um know that we have presented this project to.

D

We were just trying to remember the date, but we did have a public presentation.

D

I believe it was a zoom meeting. If you remember those, and then we just recently, we presented to.

D

The rec board and the pierce island committee, so this we're gradually rolling this out. It's a.

D

Very exciting project, and thus far we've been uh great enthusiasm, has been, has met the project so.

D

With that I'll turn it over immediately to oak point, thank you very much. Thank you. Thank you.

E

Good evening my name is ken weston, I'm an architect and project manager with oak point.

E

I'll just give you a quick summary of the project and um wade. Is here he's a civil engineer to.

E

Fill you in on the technical details, so we are proposing to demolish the existing bath house.

E

That's approximately 2 700 square feet and the existing pump house, which is about 544 square feet.

E

And replace those with a new facility, a combined facility, the new bathhouse is approximately 33.

E

1440 square feet: there is a portion of that, then underground equipment, room or a pump. Well, if you.

E

Will that's approximately 775 square feet? The new facility will have uh staff space.

E

Toilet rooms, changing changing area and storage, it's located on the eastern side of the pool.

E

uh It will also have a filter room with equipment, uh aquatics equipment to.

E

Operate the pool and, as I said, a pump well.

E

To for the pumps uh adjacent to the facility is a chemical storage building. That's approximately.

E

280 square feet uh as far as the pool goes, we are doing some pool repair where we're repairing the.

E

Entire gutter uh we're repairing the main drains um we're replacing the pool liner.

E

And we're improving the accessibility with a small section of zero depth entry uh in.

E

Order to accomplish that work we do have to replace the pool deck in its entirety.

E

Any questions, questions for the applicant.

F

When one of those construction scheduled.

B

Know our our policy on this award is to be recognized by the board before asking.

B

Excuse me the reason I asked that too used to zoom. I'm sorry, I know I know so we're all.

B

Learning we're all learning again, um but it just makes the uh the media more efficient.

B

And effective so go ahead and ask your question: what's the proposed schedule for construction.

E

uh We are targeting september for our bid documents to be available to contractors.

E

So right around the time that the pool closes um start construction, uh it.

E

That's that's the point, mr clark, you have a question. Yes, thank you. um A couple questions.

G

um I see on the plans that you guys um on uh sheet cs 101 uh the site plan. You guys call out the use.

G

Of uh you know topsoil seed and fertilizer, given the presence of um you know, kids, and I know myself.

G

I guess and others laying on the grass around the pool. um Did you guys look into any organic um or.

G

Organic or basically not using the fertilizer out there, I didn't know if that was considered at all.

G

uh We we didn't, uh but it's a great suggestion. I will definitely do that.

G

Okay, thank you and then uh follow-up question. um I see the the sidewalk um on that same plan looks.

G

Like it's you're kind of your generic either, I believe it's a six foot sidewalk it's hard.

G

To tell um was there any consideration to bikes coming into the facility? I know that the current.

G

Pool house gets a lot of bike traffic, um both children and adults so curious to see. You know.

G

What you guys thought about basically pedestrian and bike traffic coming into the site. I know you.

G

Know particularly when everything's up and running people coming down pierce island road going down.

G

To the dog park and stuff that s turn can get um pretty tight, so just curious. Any thoughts on.

G

Widening that sidewalk to allow more um bike and pedestrian access. um I will let wade speak to that.

E

We we are tying into an existing sidewalk system. So that's why it's a pretty standard sidewalk.

E

And we do indicate a bike rack. It's keynote 18 on cs101, so we did talk a little bit about.

E

The bikes I had not considered widening the sidewalk in that area to for sidewalks and for.

E

Pedestrians and bicycles, uh but that's also a good suggestion wade. Do you want to elaborate on that.

H

Yes, I'm wade, lippert the project civil engineer and as far as the bike lane, it's it's something.

H

That you know, ideally with a bike lane, we don't want to have it separated from a walkway that you.

H

Know would want to have a like a striped bike lane you know coming onto the island and coming that.

H

Entire length of the roadway up to the pool that would be in the same direction as the direction of.

H

Travel for the vehicles as far as a widened sidewalk, we we haven't looked at the entire.

H

Island comprehensively, as part of this project, we're really looking at just the improvements.

H

Right in the vicinity of the pool, we are providing an improvement right now that existing walkway.

H

Ends just prior to the existing pool house and at that point pedestrian traffic really is just.

H

Dumped out into the road, if anybody wants to continue walking down pierce island road.

H

They're in the traffic lane so we're providing that that sidewalk to to protect that pedestrian.

H

Traffic, you know going down the rest of the you know to the to the new pool house and.

H

Further down to the rest of the island, the other challenge where we're sort of looking at is we're.

H

Trying to minimize our disturbance out there on the site, we're redeveloping the existing.

H

Site we're trying not to create any additional impervious surfaces, we're actually reducing the.

H

Impervious surfaces within the tidal buffer zone on both the north and the south end of the island.

H

By approximately 3 800 feet square feet, we're reducing that square footage so.

H

By widening that that sidewalk or widening the road, we would actually be increasing, you know the.

H

Impervious surfaces in that area and potentially would have other stormwater and permitting.

H

Ramifications: okay, mr chairman yeah peter uh peter rice, director of public works. um In addition,.

C

The removal of the building will help with the site, site, um distance or or the visibility of.

C

Bicyclists the speeds along this roadway are appropriate for sharrows.

C

So you know we would plan on putting sharrows in this area as well and additional signage to.

C

Be you know, make people aware of bicycle traffic. So it's a really good point, because you're right.

C

There is quite a bit of bicycle activity, but for the reasons that wade had indicated.

C

It really, we feel the accommodations are going to be significantly improved.

C

As well as the sidewalk, access is going to be a much safer pedestrian way to get there. Okay.

G

Thanks because I think this is peter question, I know it's not related to the pool itself, but the.

F

Bridge, I know you guys been looking at bridge improvements, the uh chain and pillars that have.

F

Narrowed the sidewalk over the bridge is that going to be changed as a part of any of this.

F

uh No at this point, the plan is um to to leave the chain along that section.

C

We feel that it's, it's significantly improved pedestrian safety, because it keeps pedestrians.

C

In the sidewalk there's a there's, a tendency historically for people to spill out onto.

C

The street um as they're walking over the bridge- uh and we feel that this is a safer.

C

Accommodation for the pedestrians- yes, it's it is a relatively narrow, sidewalk.

C

But what we anticipate when we have the new bridge built, which is going to be a number of years out.

C

We will address that and make it a wider sidewalk at that time. That would help a lot.

C

Because, right now it's very constrained, it is. It is if you have a double stroller and.

C

Somebody walking through it becomes a challenge or a wheelchair yep or a wheelchair yep. Thank you.

C

Thank you peter. I have a question regarding the fact that, and I love the project, don't don't.

I

Get me wrong, but you are taking away several parking spots, so I'm just curious if you're.

I

Able to fit those in other way or they're just gone, and whether or not that will be an issue.

H

Correct yeah, where we're siting the building, it is on the west side of that existing parking lot.

H

And there's going to be 10 10 parking spaces that are being removed as part of this project.

H

However, as part of the wastewater treatment project, the parking lot for tree island was.

H

Actually expanded by by 30 30 parking spaces. So when you take that into account, there's actually.

H

It would be a net increase of 20 spaces versus the last time. This parking lot was completely.

H

Available for for use with the pool great, thank you other questions for the applicant.

B

Cinco, um I have a question about um the the concrete apron around the pool.

J

Will that be white or something that you know? I know, and it's been many years since I took my.

J

Kids, that pool, but it used to get piping, hot and then they'd run and then they're not allowed to.

J

Run and it was, I don't know what your choice of material is, but if you could bear that in mind.

J

That's something that we're definitely still evaluating. We would definitely like to have.

H

Something that's more attractive than just that white white, concrete surface that there's there's.

H

Other other surfaces that that are possible that we might be able to put out not attractive but.

H

For the feet, just yeah and you know, and it's sort of budget- you know it's budget. You know.

H

Pending to do those other type of surfaces, but it's something we definitely as we.

H

Finalize those details of construction, that's something that we would definitely.

H

Want to evaluate for tonight, okay, thank you. Other questions.

B

Thank you, gentlemen. I see none I'll open it up to public hearing anyone.

B

Wishing to speak too, for against this application.

B

Please come to the podium or, if you're, on zoom raise your virtual hands. Second time, speakers.

B

Third time speakers.

B

See no one rise and no virtual hands. I will close the public hearing if I could have a.

B

Motion to grant site plan review approval, as presented mr chair I'd, make a motion that we.

I

Vote to grant the site plan approval as presented uh I'll. Second, that and add an amendment ms morov.

C

To the switch to the organic fertilizer, I agree discussion.

B

Miss mariano's quickly speak to your motion, um I'd like to say that this is a great project. Sorry, I.

I

Was writing something down? I don't know. I think this is a really great project. I um was really.

I

Looking at all the details of the setup inside and I think it makes a really a lot of logical sense.

I

Not that I myself have ever used the facility, but I know that many people here in portsmouth do.

I

And I think that this will be a great addition and make it much more comfortable. The outdoor.

I

Showers, just everything is going to be expanded and love her, and I was.

I

Happy to see it there's more toilets in the women's bathroom than the men.

B

Other comments, I'll call the motion all in favor, aye, aye, aye aye opposed motion passage unanimously.

B

Thank you looking forward to it item b, request of andrew m harvey owner for property located at 710.

B

Middle road, the conditional use permanent approved in accordance with section 10.814.

B

Of the zoning ordinance, the construction of a detached accessory dwelling unit of 749 square.

B

Feet gross floor area be located above a newly constructed, detached garage and utility room.

B

Said property is shown in assessors map, 232 lot 46 and lies within the single residence b district.

B

Who is here to speak for this application good evening? Mr chairman, members of the board, bernie.

K

Pelich attorney uh from bozeman associates, I'm here on behalf of the applicant andrew.

K

Harvey who is here, along with his parents and the project engineer eric poolen from jones and beach.

K

uh Before the meeting began, I I passed out a little biography that andrew did.

K

Documenting his long history in portsmouth and the fact that he didn't mention but.

K

He's the third generation harvey dentist uh down on islington street. In any event,.

K

uh Andrew purchased, 710 middle road back in 2019. He presently lives there. It is a.

K

Single family residence, it's on 20, 409 square feet, just short of a half an acre, and there is.

K

About 120 year old home, that's a two and a half story: single family residence, beautiful.

K

Nice old home, what andrew proposes to do is to construct behind this home.

K

A four car garage with an adu above it also having a first floor utility.

K

And laundry room he also would have on the second floor, a workshop. He likes to.

K

Do things in in a workshop would be a big benefit to him. uh The proposed adu would be a kitchen.

K

Bath one bedroom living room and it would be 749 square feet as andrew relates in the handout. I.

K

Gave you this entire structure was, was designed to be in complete compliance with the provisions of.

K

The a uh the zoning ordinance as to a detached accessory dwelling unit it meets all.

K

The requirements of the zoning ordinance meets the block coverage and open space requirements.

K

All the parking requirements and obviously the single-family residence on the lot is also one of.

K

The criteria it will meet the height requirements going through the criteria which I've done in the.

K

The applicant's narrative, 10.8 14.10 says that you can only have a detached adu.

K

On a lot that has a single family dwelling, so we comply in that respect.

K

814.20 says you have to conform to all zoning regulations, which this does.

K

It complies with lot area setbacks, open space, lot coverage, off-street parking and building height.

K

That's 21. 23 says it has to meet all setbacks, which it does.

K

31 says have to be owned by the same person who is andrew and will be owned by the same person.

K

32 says has to be occupied. One of the units has to be occupied by the owner, which he.

K

Intends to occupy one of the units forever more. He doesn't intend to use the structure.

K

For any business purposes, the dadu complies with the minimum watt area required for the srb.

K

Zone, it has only one bedroom, which is required in less than 750 square feet, which is a requirement.

K

The facade of the dadu is less than 40 percent of the combined facade of the accessory dwelling unit.

K

In the single family resonance, the height is less than the single family, residence.

K

As you can see from the plans and evidence, great plans submitted architectural elevations floor.

K

Plans as well as a site plan, the two structures are intended to be architecturally, consistent.

K

There is more than 20 feet between the single family, residence and the proposed.

K

Accessory dwelling in it and the front wall of the accessory dwelling unit is set back behind.

K

The entire single family dwelling, so it will be hardly noticeable at all from the street and.

K

Obviously, no part of the proposed accessory dwelling in it is within the front yard setback so.

K

uh With foresight this, this structure was designed to comply with all the requirements of section.

K

10.814 and and does which I think, makes my job easy and hopefully makes your job easy. Also.

K

The board has to make a finding, which has set forth at 814.60, that this does meet all of.

K

The requirements, I don't think that there's any question if you do have any technical questions.

K

Regarding the plans uh eric poolen from jones and beach is here, and if you have any questions.

K

From andrew harvey he's here and he'd be happy to answer them for you. Thank you very much. Thank you.

B

Questions for mr pulitzer, the applicant, mr clark, thank you. I have a technical question regarding.

G

The response lever letter and uh building coverage table that's shown regarding what.

G

The uh I'm sorry the response letter, the june 3rd response letter from jones beach and my question.

G

Is on the the building coverage table, it shows existing condition, main structure, 1 875 square.

G

Feet proposed condition: 1 680 square feet, so I'm I couldn't see on the plan where that 200.

G

Square feet is going, I didn't see anything being demoed, but I could be wrong on that. There we go.

L

Good evening eric pooler from jones and beach engineers so.

L

The one structure that is being removed, which is depicted on the boundary plan that was supplied to.

L

Us by jim vera, there is a small shed currently on the property that is located.

L

In close proximity to, if we're looking at the page, the bottom left corner of the proposed structure.

L

That structure is being posed to be removed, so looking at the table, main structure shows.

L

The existing footprint of the existing building, the proposed footprint of the proposed building.

L

The attached, decks and sheds are also noted and the the one part of building footprint.

L

That is being removed. Is that shed, which is a credit we take with that footprint of.

L

Building no longer being there, which brings us to a building coverage percentage of 19.9.

G

Okay, because on the table, it's you, you include that shed being removed.

G

But it's not being taken into account um as part of the main structure. The way I tally it up.

G

It just doesn't seem to equate to me because in that same table under existing conditions, you have.

G

That main structure of 1875 square feet, then you also include the shed to be removed in that table.

G

254 square feet, but then under the proposed condition, you're not including the shed but.

G

You're also taking off roughly 200 square feet from the main structure.

G

So I didn't do all the math to tally everything up, but it seems like something's being double.

G

Counted yeah so just to walk through this, um so we're looking at the main structure.

L

That's existing there's an enclosed porch, which I also add on to the footprint of the existing.

L

Conditions the shed is removed, and then we have a total existing to remain of 2107, including the.

L

Enclosed porch and the main structure that gets us to 2107 and the proposed condition of the main.

L

Structure being 1680 and then the deck and stairs on the back of the proposed structure is 266.

L

So that then gets us to 1946., 1946 and 2107 will then comprise the total footprint for.

L

The proposed condition, including the existing building of 4053., okay, I'm sorry, so the proposal.

G

The proposed condition is the new structure yep. Not yes, not the total. Okay, it's a bit.

L

Confusing yeah, my apologies, my attempt on this was to well no, I just figured it out.

G

Yeah, as soon as you said, the new building, that's when it clicked okay,.

C

Thank you, you're welcome it's the new math. Are there questions for the athlete ms moreau.

I

uh Back on that same plan, if I could just out of sure curiosity, it says that the barn.

I

Is being removed, that's on the adjacent property. That's going to be very close to this building is.

I

That barn, currently standing or has it been removed. It's currently standing it's on.

M

um You should get up to the podium. If you could just we can't hear you, we can't hear if you could.

B

Come back to the podium and introduce yourself and um just respond, please so I I did not add.

H

That that was put in by jim vera. uh I believe that the the hewitts had a meeting several years ago.

H

Andrew, can you just introduce yourself? Sorry, that's right. My name is andrew harvey. I'm the.

H

Property owner of 710 middle boat. Thank you, the one applying for the permit. um I believe that.

M

Jim and liza applied in the past to try to have that barn rebuilt. um And I believe that that.

D

Permit was denied, I don't have the access to those or I don't remember the exact dates of those, but.

D

um It's on there as being removed. For that reason, I I didn't put it there and it's by jim vera who.

H

Who put that and I believe he surveyed the neighboring properties, so that might be from.

M

His old records. Thank you. Thank you. Other questions for the applicants. uh Mr pizzulo.

N

Yeah, I have a lot of several questions or comments on the uh utilities. They're gonna be.

N

Serving the the new building, um the first one would be the the sewer connection, um lateral.

N

um Just to um requirements for this, for the city would be a six inch minimum six inch diameter pvc.

N

Pipe, you show a four inch. I believe: okay yep. um That was one comment. um The other comment is the.

N

To serve that building for water, um we only allow the the water pump and.

N

The city only allows one needed water service, so the water service would have to come off the.

N

Existing house, okay, and if you wanted to sub-meter it that's you know your decision. We don't.

N

We don't allow two meters on the same lot: yep for the same property ownership.

L

Yeah as um as a part of our process for for the construction, um I wanted to.

L

Definitely reiterate that we would definitely be coordinating with all municipal departments on.

L

Each one of those utilities prior to construction and as well as coordinating for the proposed.

L

We always have the contractor as one of our notes. It's note 24.. We always have our contractors.

L

Verify all the existing utilities uh that we're tying into on-site as well as coordinating with.

L

All the municipal departments, so we make sure we get the design right. So I did a preliminary layout.

L

Of the utilities up that uh easterly side of the existing house uh to see if we had the appropriate.

L

Room to get those in um but it's definitely can you know uh the condition would be a.

L

Coordination yeah just a heads up to that on the water service, the um the minimum right now.

N

Is a one one inch media one inch diameter pipe, um so I don't know what the existing house I might.

N

Guess is that it doesn't have that size, pipe service line yep, um so you may have to upgrade.

N

That so I just want to give you a heads up on a couple of those things yep. Absolutely. We would.

L

Be we'd be more than willing to to upgrade to the the city requirement for the one inch.

L

Okay and- and one other comment I did have- um I don't know- that's something we can look at is the.

N

Was there any thought to do any um mitigation for for additional runoff or stormwater for drainage.

N

For the structure since there's a quite a lot of structure, an impervious surface.

N

From the roof runoff uh even simple foundation drain along the perimeter of the.

N

Of the building, um I don't believe, there's a there's, a there's a basement here either so.

L

Yeah um we did consider for for the scope of this project, given it given its size.

L

We felt that, given this being an adu unit on on a single residential property, that.

L

We we didn't go down that that avenue. One reason for for not doing that is the the.

L

Lack of proximity to wetlands, we did have go of environmental services go out and do a survey.

L

Of the of the potential of wetlands in this area, uh there weren't found to be any. I know on the.

L

City's gis system, the nearest wetlands that are logged on there are six to seven hundred feet away.

L

So the slopes in this area are pretty gradual, so there's a long long buffer of wood, woodland area.

L

To the rear of this property that that water would be flowing through at a very comfortable slope,.

L

Which would help mitigate some of that additional impervious prior to hitting the wetland, but that.

L

Is something we can look into? I know we've done uh infiltration, gravel drip edges uh in the past.

L

That's really what I'm talking about! That's something that we can do. It's not it's not a major.

L

Change and it's something that can be integrated pretty quickly. You know you do a couple: foot drip.

L

Edge a couple feet of gravel with a perforated pipe on the bottom and that those do a lot for.

L

For something of this size right because we have had some issues where you know even single family.

N

Residences have caused issues with runoff going on to neighboring properties, so you're supposed.

N

To really contain it on your property, I think that would go a long way to contain it on this.

N

Property, if you did something like that, yep yep, that's definitely something that that we can do.

L

Another thing I'd like to point out is um the the small driveway that we're proposing to connect.

L

It's designed in a way to to tip back tip back into itself for a short while and then drain.

L

South um we didn't want to sheet flow water across the existing driveway, um so so that was.

L

One thing that we tried to do to make sure that that uh rainwater storm water wouldn't wouldn't.

L

Leave the site and stayed on on our property and and head south. um But I think that the gravel.

L

Drip edge is a great idea and I think that's something that we can definitely do. Okay, great.

L

Thanks. Thank you. Thank you very much. Thank you other questions, mr chairman. I've got I'm not sure.

F

If it's a question for you, but for juliet um just kind of curious, the plan that jim vera stamped is.

F

Called a monumentation sketch- and he says it's not for submittal to regulatory agency um yeah. It's.

L

It is a boundary sketch our field survey, our our survey department did did go out here.

L

And, and do some asvil information, um we did do some checks and we know jim vera. uh We felt I.

L

Spoke with jim and uh we felt very confident in in the boundary footprint that he's provided for us.

L

um Following our survey department going out there and confirming it um all those all those.

L

uh Monuments uh have been located, um so we felt very confident in in the footprint that we've come.

L

Before the board, with I get the distances between the monuments and all that being good, I'm just.

F

Curious where he called it a sketch or if you've, if you've done what you consider to be adequate.

F

For a survey um I know this is an engineering stamp on the final plan, not a survey stamp.

F

Is that that fine is that nice yeah we, so we don't? Actually uh we don't actually require.

J

Surveyed plans as part of our submissions- it's, um this is actually much higher level than.

J

We typically would receive so we're actually thankful that they made that attempt to to be.

J

As okay, you know that answers the question. Thank you absolutely other questions for the applicant.

B

Thank you, gentlemen, I'll open it up to a public hearing. Anyone wishing to speak too far.

B

Against this application, please come to the podium or on zoom, raise virtual hand.

B

Is please state your name and address please for the record.

A

Yes, chairman leg and members of the planning board, my name is liza hewitt and I live at 726.

A

Middle road in portsmouth and I'm the next door neighbor of the applicant andrew harvey. I have.

A

A letter here I apologize that I did not get it to you ahead of time, but the applicant did not choose.

A

To share his plan with us ahead, and I only saw it friday night as we were unfortunately heading out.

A

Of town on vacation, so can I sure, just give it to mr harris and he'll pass it along. Thank you.

A

The request before you is for a detached accessory dwelling unit. I would argue this is a request for.

A

A four thousand square foot two and a half story warehouse that also has a 750 foot.

A

Square foot one bedroom apartment. This proposal is too big too offensive too. Contrary to the spirit.

A

Of the adu ordinance and two out of character with the neighborhood and therefore should be denied.

A

I have concerns about this adu, for which andrew is seeking a cup first, the size of the structure.

A

Adu criteria states that the dadu shall be clearly subordinate to the principal single-family home in.

A

Scale, height and appearance, this adu does not meet that requirement criteria. I would argue.

A

That this proposal is totally contrary to the spirit of the adu ordinance, which was to.

A

Provide in-law apartments and additional apartment housing stock for portsmouth.

A

In this case, they have taken the rules and created the maximum size. Structural structure allowed that.

A

Will be used primarily for storage. The applicant is maxing out the size of this structure to fit.

A

Within the zoning, but consequently it is not subordinate to the existing house. The building.

A

Meets lot coverage requirement within point. One percent obviously not clearly subordinate.

A

The height of this structure is five inches shorter than the home, obviously not clearly.

A

Subordinate the footprint of the adu structure is sixteen hundred eighty square feet. The footprint.

A

Of the main home is eighteen hundred seventy five square feet obviously not clearly subordinate, as.

A

Can be seen on the plans, the structure is as big as most homes in the neighborhood.

A

The second floor alone of this 2.5 story: adu, is 1460 square feet, my home next door on two.

A

Floors three bedrooms and two and a half baths is only 1649 square feet total further. Why would an.

A

Adu need 1629 square feet of storage space. On the third floor, the addition of the three-car garage.

A

They're calling a four-car garage, I only saw three and another room on the first floor.

A

For a total of five garages, plus plus maybe another one on this property speaks to the massive.

A

Size, the current two-car garage is not used by the applicant or his roommates for parking, except in.

A

A winter parking ban, otherwise most of the cars are parked on the street. A three-car garage for.

A

A one-bedroom adu is excessive. Only 19 of this structure will be used for the adu. The other 81.

A

Will be used for warehouse and other uses? The last page of your planning board packet is a listing of.

A

Currently approved aadus and dadus, I challenge you to find a single approved dadu of this size.

A

My second concern relates to the adu criteria, which states that the two structures are intended.

A

To be architecturally consistent, this adu in size and design is not consistent with the neighborhood.

A

I would argue that a three-car garage with a warehouse on top is not architecturally consistent.

A

With the 1900s new englander home, no homes in this neighborhood have a second structure of this size.

A

On their property, there are only a couple of homes with even a single story, one or two car detached.

A

Garage on this end of middle road, I would also remind you that in 2019, mr j mcsherry applied.

A

To the zba for approval of a building this size in the back of his home at 871 middle road, which.

A

Was denied and found to be not in keeping with the neighborhood. It should be noted that in the.

A

Planning department's comments packet, they said that, and I quote, the size of the garage is not.

A

Typical for the neighborhood end quote the third concern the adu criteria states that the proposed.

A

Dadu has one bedroom and is less than 750 square feet. This adu has a 367 square foot laundry room.

A

This laundry room will need to be heated and is attached to the unit by a staircase heated.

A

Space is living space in any home. Your laundry room is counted in your home's square footage.

A

Thus, when this space is added, the total adu square footage is 1100 square feet, not 750 square feet.

A

Finally, impact on a budding property. Unfortunately, the way this building has been planned will both.

A

Negatively impact our property values as next-door neighbors, as well as affect our quality of life, as.

A

Next-Door neighbors, its overwhelming size, suggests possible future expansion. The additional large.

A

Room on the second floor is of concern because it is, as it is described in one place as a workshop.

A

In another, the same room is described, as quote to be used for the benefit of the property as a whole.

A

It has a bathroom and could thus be used for a number of purposes, including parties, while.

A

The applicant states that it will not be used for business. How will the city know if storage space.

A

Is being rented and used by those other than the owner, since there is 4 000 square feet of storage.

A

Space in this adu, I would like to clear up an error on the plans which were presented to you.

A

And which mr harvey spoke on, these plans show an existing barn on our property, which does not exist.

A

Does not exist, there is an old stone foundation in the back of the property which is below grade and.

A

Cannot be seen from either of the properties in closing, there is nothing accessory about.

A

This project, this adu request, is the shell for an apparent warehouse, an apartment with four thousand.

A

Square feet of storage space, this building is not subordinate to the fam single family dwelling.

A

In any way, and its overwhelming size suggests possible future expansion, the applicant has.

A

Maxed out the size of this monstrosity to within inches of the adu zoning regulations, the size of.

A

The adu unit itself, when it includes the laundry room, is questionable, since it increases the adu to.

A

1116 square feet this building, as proposed in no way fits the neighborhood in size or.

A

Architectural integrity, I would support an adu in the spirit in which the ordinance was intended.

A

But this is not it. This proposal is too big too offensive too. Contrary to the spirit.

A

Of the adu ordinance and two out of character with the neighborhood and therefore should be.

A

Denied thank you for hearing me. Thank you other first time. Speakers. Could you do three minutes.

B

I just remind people that the first time speakers are three minutes and um we let you go over.

B

But we're going to hold the three minutes and we have second third rounds.

M

Good evening, chairman lake, my name is jim hewitt and I live at 726 middle road and, like my wife,.

M

Said a little bit discombobulated here, we just saw the plans on friday had to drive home from.

M

Vacation, so I don't have some handouts. I'd like to present that's okay, mr harris will pass them down.

B

No I'd rather not because your three minutes is ticking.

B

It's just that they're they're overlaid.

B

Ms walker will help. Thank you.

M

M

I'll explain the handouts in that I've, coordinated them with uh one two and three.

M

On the covers here and that corresponds to the plan, you'll see that it's.

M

One two on the front plane here.

M

Does everyone have that information? Okay,.

M

We do all right so to start with on uh issue number one.

M

Is the applicant's narrative if you turn to page two you'll see section, uh I've highlighted it.

M

10 814.55 the proposed dadu front wall will be entirely behind the single family dwelling.

M

So if you go to the plan, I have cross hatched the area where that's allowed.

M

And you'll see the proposed building is not entirely behind the front of the house.

M

So it appears that that location is not compliance with the dadu regulations.

M

Item number two on the handout which is keyed to issue number two on the plan relates to.

M

The right-of-way easement and whether this use is allowed.

M

Under the easement that was granted from ellen ham to fret ham back in 1912.

M

If you go to page three of handout number two I've highlighted the language.

M

Is that three? It is three but stay there, because there's no other first-round speakers.

B

Then you can just keep continue. Okay, so just a second any other, first-time speakers.

B

Anyone on zoom no, mr hewitt, this is your lucky day now you have 10 minutes in the second round.

M

Okay, great okay, so uh back to page three on handout number two I've highlighted the key issue.

M

About fred, hamm and ellen hamm's responsibilities with the driveway and the easement.

M

And it states right there that fred ham, which is now me.

M

Is responsible to keep and maintain the right-of-way 50 feet south of that area? I've.

M

Marked on the plant, so I'm responsible for all the pavement and the maintenance on the driveway.

M

50 feet south, so I did not authorize any new pavement which I cross hatched in that.

M

Area number two: I also didn't authorize the new wear and tear on the driveway from this project.

M

So those are two issues that I believe need to be resolved on this project.

M

And uh lastly, I've shown I've, given you some pictures that show how this.

M

Will affect our property from our backyard and they are arranged in the same order.

M

That I have on the plan so picture number. One is the first view picture number two is facing.

M

The applicant's yard and picture number three is from our back steps and you can see how.

M

It's quite uh impactful to our property.

M

And is uh like my wife said in her summary too much too big, too out of character should be denied.

M

So I'm available for questions.

B

Questions aren't part of the public hearing process.

B

Thank you other second time speakers.

K

Thank you, mr chairman. I would point out that mr hewitt has misconstrued and misquoted you.

K

Section 10.814 .55 says and I'm reading directly from the ordinance.

K

The d-a-d-u or the front wall of the d-a-d-u shall be set back at least 10 feet further.

K

From the front lot line than the existing front wall of the single family dwelling.

K

All that says is that the front wall of the detached accessory dwelling and it has to be.

K

10 feet further back from the front lot line or the street in this case than the front wall of.

K

The single family dwelling and, as I stated in the applicant's narrative, the proposed.

K

Accessory dwelling in the front wall is set back behind the entire single family dwelling.

K

It's not only ten feet further back than the front wall of the accessory, drawing it of the single.

K

Family door, it's behind the entire more than 20 feet behind the entire accessory door, so it.

K

Clearly complies with 10.814.55; it complies with all of the requirements of the zoning ordinance.

K

The and intent as cited by mrs hewitt is set forth in the zoning ordinance and in.

K

The requirements of the zoning ordinance, this structure complies with each and every requirement.

K

Of the zoning ordinance, this structure complies with all of the requirements.

K

Of the detached accessory dwelling unit portion of the zoning ordinance.

K

They may not like what it contains, for he may be an anti-car collector, but for a four-car.

K

Garage is allowed, it meets the requirements of the zoning ordinance, it meets all the setbacks.

K

Who is this board to say that he can't have a four car garage.

K

Likewise, with regard to the shared right of way- and I emphasize the word shared.

K

Both mr harvey and the hewitts have a right to use that, even though mr hewitt is to maintain it.

K

That goes back to the early 1900 deeds and that's not within the purview of this.

K

Board as to whether or not it is a violation or an overuse of the shared right-of-way.

K

That is for the courts to decide so, although they may not like the way, it looks, although.

K

They may think it's out of character with a neighborhood. It complies with.

K

The zoning ordinance and it complies with the criteria for a detached accessory dwelling unit.

K

10.814.60 says that you have to determine whether or not it meets the criteria.

K

I haven't heard anything from anybody that it doesn't meet the criteria. Thank you.

B

Thank you other second time. Speakers, third time, speakers.

B

See no one rise and seeing no hands on zoom. I will close the public hearing.

B

So what is the wish of the board.

B

Yes, yes, you can um playing director, juliet walker, if you could remind me.

I

I know it's been a while, since we've looked at one of these uh and it's listed on the.

I

Plan as common space for the laundry room- and I don't believe we count common space.

I

Because that means it's common to both units, so both units can use it. Is that correct, correct.

J

But this is kind of unique because it's not it's common space, that's not connected to another.

B

But you're on but you're on to something. So it's a little it's a little unusual. I certainly.

J

Would recommend the word think hard about that yeah right, because it is only attached to that.

B

So um if you want to make a motion beth, then we can have a discussion sure I would be happy to.

I

Make a motion that we vote to find the application meets the requirements of.

I

Section 10.814.60 and grant the conditional use permit is presented with the included.

I

Stipulation and adding that a gravel drippage would be installed for drainage along the driveway.

B

Second discussion: yes, ms moreau, um I might as well start since I was the one that had all.

I

The questions uh technically, I agree that this property meets or this project meets all of our.

I

Requirements um looking back on when we wrote this, you know our intention of some of the things.

I

We write into the zoning sometimes because we we get things that kind of uh push our limits.

I

Shall we say um having the one, I guess the biggest issue I have about this is the true.

I

The it's far enough back, it's it's the overall size of the building being subordinate to, because.

I

We always say that the structures need to be subordinate, so like a two-car garage which would.

I

Be a smaller structure where the apartment over it would probably have those requirements that, in.

I

Our minds when we thought of somebody building something like this when we drafted all this.

I

And enacted it was what we were intending so this being just inches lower. I guess you know we didn't.

I

Put any verbage into it to say how much lower the structure had to be. We just wanted it to be lower.

I

um So you can see I'm internally frustrated. I don't have any answers. These are the the.

I

Things that are in my head going around as far as I'm glad it's 749 square feet, I do have a.

I

Concern and I don't think we have any ability to actually stop them from at least not today,.

I

From doing any further expansion and making this like a whole nother residence that takes over the.

I

Whole second floor: that would be a concern in the future. For me uh where the adu law was not.

I

Put in place for that kind of a structure, so I am a little bit torn and I would be.

I

Interested in hearing what other board members concerns or things are about, are the comments.

B

So I guess I'm it's, it is shoehorning things in and.

F

I went back and looked at the jim vera's plan and that just seems like.

F

Where you're so close to the 20 coverage, um maybe this is a time where you do need a survey.

F

You know a slight shift could make a difference one way or the other. You might be paid.

B

No, no comments are over.

F

It's I mean the plan, it's not called a survey, it's called a monumentation sketch. I believe.

F

um And it says it's not even.

F

It is what it is, you know, and you guys.

F

The engineers looked at it, they accepted it and it for all. I know it's fine, but it's really close and.

F

I don't see an area on the on jim's plan, so maybe I missed it. um I mean, mr chairman, what we could do.

B

uh To address your concern is make that a stipulation that that's what I'm leading up.

F

To that's what I'm like, if it hits the mark, it hits the mark. If it doesn't it doesn't so that's.

F

A possibility to address your concern, that's what I'm leading up to okay! Other other comments.

B

So um I I actually didn't pick this up until the harvey's mentioned this, but um and beth.

B

You mentioned this as well, um I'm having trouble with the common utility laundry.

B

um It's 40 feet away from the main structure. There's we can, you can call it common, but.

B

There's nothing common to it. If it were, if it were attached to the main building, then I would say yep.

B

That's common so in my mind, this is in fact part of the um the adu, because it also has a direct.

B

Stairway to this, and so um I would, I would be interested in potentially having a.

B

Stipulation that that uh remain vacant space, not a utility space, if we were to go forward.

B

I'm sorry, you can't no.

B

um And I I wish I had brought it up before and I didn't but given where we're at.

B

All I'm doing is interpreting the what what the documents that have been submitted and so.

B

This is a tough one for me too, ms morrow, because it is on the edge, but the reality is. It is below.

B

uh Every um specification of our ordinance, so I can't point to anything in the adu.

B

Ordinance deny it, but what I can do is um in my mind that in fact is part of the adu.

B

And um we could easily um take that away to be clear that the adu is less than 750 square feet.

B

Mr chairman, I got a question and this goes to just the level of my inexperience. um How do you measure.

F

The square footage of the adu itself: it's not the overall building, it's just the residential portion.

J

Yeah, the interior, primarily the interior space. It is the interior space, it has to be.

J

Living space, so if somebody proposed a 500 square foot apartment with a 50, 000 square foot,.

F

Addition attached to it that, theoretically, would be a I mean, I I realized crazy example. No, I mean.

J

Can I respond, I mean I think this is just you know. It's part, it's the ordinance as written.

J

Does not um really provide additional guidance for a situation like this, where you have an accessory.

J

Building being constructed, that has a small portion of it as.

J

As the adu, um and so we did try when we crafted the ordinance originally, I think.

J

We did look at you know, trying to limit the overall size of the adu, but not necessarily.

J

Overall size of the building that contained that edu because okay gross floor area.

F

As that's defined as I understand gross flora, it's a building's gross floor area.

F

Not it doesn't say the adu's gross floor area. It says, reverse floor area, so.

F

Again, what are you referring to I'm looking in.

F

um In the ordinance yeah, okay, let me look at that section: um 8 4, 10, 8, 14, 52.

F

It's page 8 5, which is around about 184.

J

Right and then we define the gross floor area.

J

In the ordinance as well- and let me look that up- I think it's looking space.

J

Well, I look that up. I don't know if other people have questions ms walker's looking at that other.

B

Other questions or comments, mr uh gamester, mr chair, uh thank you. I.

C

I think that they've met almost everything and I think that it's.

C

My gut feeling is is that it's a little, it's not subordinate enough. It's close, but.

C

And I probably could be swayed to vote for it if it was just based on the subordination and that.

C

Argument but I I don't like the common utility room, I I think it's very clever. um I think it's.

C

A fantastic idea, but it's the separation to the main, uh to the main structure. That's.

C

Really getting it to me and the fact that the entrance to the unit is the utility.

C

The laundry room or the common laundry or whatever it may be if it was separated, if it was done, the.

C

Workshop end, I think you know I would probably have a tough time uh saying everything I just said.

C

So I think if they were, you know if they wanted to stick with 749 square feet, but and then they were.

C

Thinking of you know, eliminating the common area, that's a laundry laundry room. I think that maybe.

C

They there'd be a little more opportunity to shrink the building just a teeny bit.

C

In which case, I think it would fly with the passing colors, at least from my perspective,.

J

Yeah I mean um at my quick glance of the ordinance um and I I need to keep looking, but um I think.

J

You're right, mr chalman, that um we don't just in that section. We don't distinguish living area.

J

From growth floor area, meaning that the 750 square feet is actually the gross floor area.

F

Right right, so this is another question right. Go ahead, just a question: if you wanted to propose a.

F

Garage no residential component to it. How would that be construed? What's what's allowed? Is.

F

There a footprint- oh no, we don't have, we don't have maximum footprints on accessory buildings.

F

I didn't think so yeah so so it is, I mean really that's. This gross flare area is supposed to be the.

J

Actual part, that is the dadu- it's just that in this case and we've had this situation in other.

J

Cases it's hard to actually distinguish where that boundary ends and we've had several where.

B

Something similar where they've created a building- that's bigger, not not quite like this, but bigger.

B

And some it was for storage, but it was very clear that they were within the 750 square feet of.

B

What we've interpreted as living space for the adu? Well, I think the way it's worded the way I read it.

F

Now I'm new compared to everybody else, pretty much on the board. I think you've got a 750 square foot.

F

Limitation for gross floor area, which is the size of a building if it has a residential component.

C

So yeah! Okay! So if it's, if it didn't, then that criteria wouldn't pertain because it could be.

F

Like a garage, I understand what you're saying I think the planning department staff has always.

J

Felt that this is and and we've had discussions on the board previously that this is specific.

J

To the portion of the building, that is the dadu, that's the gross floor area that we're referencing.

J

And not the entire building? Okay! Well, that's and that's what you're saying I don't. I don't.

F

Think it's worded that way but yeah, and it may be that the the wording needs to be tightened.

B

In that ordinance, but but from the get-go of the 33 um edu's, and uh that this board has reviewed.

B

In the last three years, at 750 square feet in in the board's mind has been associated with.

B

The living area of the agency is there not the building area. Is there an example, uh dexter of.

F

Something like this one that had a a small residential yeah. um There is.

J

One that comes to mind is art will have which, where there was a garage constructed and the the.

J

Adu was a portion of that and the board restricted the adu just to that 750 square feet um by in the.

J

Approval as well, they reiterated that it couldn't expand anywhere else in the building. It had to be.

J

Limited to that, just as something like this, I mean the square footage. I mean the footprint.

F

How was the footprint a lot larger than that yeah? It was significantly larger. It was a two two three.

B

Yeah, it was a two. It was a three car three bay garage. It was. It was a big big structure, so.

F

There's one or two possibilities here: I've read it wrong, or maybe there was a bad precedent set.

F

And I'm happy to it does. It does seem like it does seem like it's. It's a lot for the property.

F

um It may just make it depending again back on the actual size of the lot. Other other comments.

B

uh Mr clark yeah excuse me, thank you. um I would just kind of echo the the common space as well.

G

um But the other thing I kind of wrestled with with this one was.

G

Just the uh the whole clearly subordinate um that the architecturally consistent you know.

G

That's a beautiful house there on middle road and I congratulate you on that. One um beautiful.

G

New englander, I think, if this pla, if this building had more of that architectural character or even.

G

A barn feel um I think it would really. You know, there's plenty of examples in portsmouth where.

G

There's giant barns behind the house, but that's you know that is and and this it is a modern barn.

G

If you will, but I think it it does, take a take away from that 1900s character. So I'm kind of.

G

Wrestling a little bit with some of those um some of those stipulations or requirements, rather so.

B

Are there questions or other comments.

I

How about mr chair, I amend our emotion. If I might ask the second: they will go along.

I

With me uh that we, um on top of adding the gravel drip edge, that we also require.

I

A full detailed survey with confirmation building coverage for the planning department.

I

And that we also require that the laundry room remain empty storage space and not actual.

I

Heated space and the only other stipulations ms murray add to that is what mr pizzula pointed.

B

Out is the sewer pipe of six inches yeah, but I think that's already built into our six inches.

N

And also the water line, do we need stipulations on that, or is that I think it would be good to add.

I

Okay- and I would be happy to add that and the last one since the plan didn't show this.

B

Is um one metered uh water service because right now the plan does not show that okay, so those are.

B

The other stipulations so, there's um so add all of the utilities meet. Yes, mr priscilla's comments. Dpw.

B

Okay, I think you have a total of five stipulations.

B

Right sewer, pipe of six inches drip edge, one meter water service, the elimination of.

B

The common utility laundry space that should be left vacant and a formal survey to verify.

B

um Coverage and the gravel through edge yeah, the traveling bridge, I think that's five, so uh mr.

B

Gamester, you were the seconder, so so we have a revised motion on the floor.

B

Further discussion, yes, ms morrell, I will be voting for it, but I'm still unhappy with.

I

The overall size, but unfortunately there's not much- I can do about that yeah meet you.

B

I just want to support miss monroe morel, that yeah, it says subordinate and it's it's.

C

Clearly, the same about the same subordinate.

C

There's no specification as to what subordinate is size-wise. It's unfortunate.

B

Yeah, in my mind, the only the only I I wish they hadn't pushed the edge, but but right or within.

B

Within the ordinance, I think the saving grace is that um it's behind the property and separated.

B

I I wish we were. I wish our ordinance was a little bit stronger because mr clark was spot on.

B

We have a lot of of uh residents in portsmouth with barns that are bigger than the property.

B

And if this in fact read like a barn, um I think it would be a heck of a lot easier.

B

In my mind, to support it, but I I have to support it because of our ordinances written. So any final.

B

Comments before I call the call the motion I'm just going to explain, I want to explain.

F

My I'm not going to support it. I I feel me I'm a strict constructionist. I don't feel if it's the.

F

The ordinance or instant written- and I think there are some opportunities to.

F

Make some modifications, but I feel I know I know I'm in the minority so go ahead and call, though.

B

I'll call the motion all in favor aye.

C

This isn't new juliet this, isn't you.

J

All right, I'm sorry um vice chairman, yes, okay, counselor whalen, no.

J

uh Mr clark, no.

J

Mr chelman, no.

J

uh Yes and mr harris no.

J

uh City manager connor yes, mr basula and mr pizzulo. uh Yes,.

J

And chairman knight, yes, the motion pass is five to four.

B

Thanks everybody thank you board, for uh I think I'll. Add that to our list, your insightful.

B

B

I am seeing request of the fritz family revocable living trust owner for property.

B

Located at zero, patricia drive and also item d, uh the applicant has uh requested a.

B

Experiment for their next meeting, if I could have a motion to postpone.

B

Second, paul in favor opposed the motion passes unanimously.

B

Item four public hearings, city council referrals item, a request of david higgins and julian higgins,.

B

Julia hagin's owners for the restoration of involuntary merge lots at 344.

B

Aldridge road, the applicant, has requested a postponement. If I could have a motion.

B

To postpone to the july meeting, second, all in favor aye aye motion passes unanimously.

B

Item b, the request of marcy sherman owner for the restoration of involuntary merged lots at 635.

B

Lincoln avenue this applicant has withdrawn her request, so no vote is needed.

J

Sorry that was a late file late filing, not our late discovery.

B

And item c, the requestants of vincent zigarelio and monica abruzzier owners for the station of.

B

Involuntary merge lots at 135 baxter road to the free pre-merger status pursuant to new hampshire.

B

Rsa 674, colon, nine dash, double a say, property shown in assessors map one six, six lot: fifteen and.

B

Lies within the single residence b district, um we have the city assessor here that she, I think, is.

J

There might there might be people um who want to present for this. I don't know.

B

Oh yeah, I'm sorry do we have, mr chairman, I'm sorry accused okay, uh let's let the record.

B

Show, mr gamester, I'm sorry I resent it do we have anyone here to uh on on to present this request.

J

um Hold on see, if there's anyone.

J

I don't see anyone on zoom for this okay, so there's no one here. So uh the city assessor.

B

Can come up and uh give us her summary and wisdom? Well, it's nice to finally meet everybody.

B

Yes, it is, it actually feels very good to be in person. I did receive a last minute, a very.

J

Late uh email from mr zingariello requesting to postpone to the next meeting. So it's the court's.

J

Decision if they would like to this one effort to be here, I'm sorry roseanne, I just literally just.

J

Got the email at six o'clock, so the board can proceed or they can decide if they wanna yeah.

B

The good news is, it's only eight fifteen and not right now, not eleven fifteen. That's true. I mean.

I

I'd be inclined, given the request that came in that we um we postponed nope. That's fine, not a.

F

Problem all right, so if I give a motion to a move to post a bone. Second, second, uh all in favor, aye.

B

Opposed motion passes. Sorry rosanna. Thank you um item five. Other business.

B

Item a notification, separation, continuous lots at 67 and 69 purpose way.

B

um Juliet do you have something for us on that? This is just an information item. That's in your.

J

Pocket, I'm required to notify you when we on merge lots in porpoiseway in atlantic heights.

J

So it's just a notification for your information right and item b, a report on accessory dwelling.

B

Unit approvals, uh ms walker yeah- and this was a previous request, um I believe from the chair.

J

um To provide a summary, and I'm happy to do this on an annual basis, it just gives you an idea of.

J

The number of accessory dwelling units that we have processed since we adopted the ordnance.

J

Many of them have been approved, a few of them have not actually proceeded.

J

We have made some revisions to the zoning ordinance over time, um including adding a.

J

Limitation on how long it lasts, so the few of these are sort of going to be there forever.

J

Unfortunately, um until somebody decides to act on them, but the rest of you know have an expiration.

J

Date if they're not acted on- and I think tonight we heard a few more potential revisions, so.

B

But but overall I think um you know in terms of its original intent, which was to provide this.

J

Option for property owners and also to make it reasonable for the neighborhood context. I think.

J

In my eyes, I think we've been fairly successful on that fund, any comments and.

B

Yeah, I I'd agree and I think it's important that we update this annually.

B

um I I think it it tells a mixed picture. There was very, there was real concern. I.

B

Think when the board originally looked at this since 2016 that there would be an overwhelming.

B

Number of adus coming before us, which is why um I think we were pretty aggressive in how we.

B

uh I thought had had fairly robust ordinance and and with with strict requirements. I think.

B

I think it has served its purpose well, although I think it's always open for revisions. um Pardon me.

B

Since this was intended by the state uh to increase the number of housing units, I wish.

B

This was a longer list, but I'm happy that we've um we've pretty much been um consistent with how.

B

We've interpreted the ordinance and- and you look at this and you can, you can see that demonstrated.

B

So um I think overall, I've been happy with how this board and prior boards have dealt with this.

B

And city staff, thank you guys. uh I just like to make a comment because for those that are newer,.

I

Being part of that group that actually looked at the state law and actually had to draft.

I

This ordinance, we looked really hard at everything and we knew that there were going to need to be.

I

Changes, which is why we, we actually had the option to take the approval of these and give them to a.

I

Different board and not take them ourselves, we personally kept it so that we could keep an eye.

I

On things like this, so when something doesn't come in that, wasn't what maybe we mentally intended it.

I

To be, we could then act pretty quickly and try to make adjustments so that it didn't go forward.

I

We've already done that several times, but I think we're still sort of in those infancy years where.

I

We really truly learn when somebody's going to push something so any comments. I say that anyone.

I

Has that they see in the ordinance should bring those to ms walker and she'd be happy, I'm sure to.

I

Keep helping us draft that so that we perfect it to a point that makes us all really happy.

B

Yeah and what will be interesting to see if these, particularly ones that were approved in um 2019.

B

Actually get built out or not I mean this is more of the story. Mr gentlemen, oh yeah, the idea of.

F

Accessory dwelling units is a fabulous idea. uh It's it's a it's a very definite, positive and.

F

uh It's been a part of many ordinance. I've worked on. I think one of the problems that I saw tonight.

F

Is when you combine that concept with perhaps a different concept and.

F

That maybe shows the idea of maybe having a conversation about the ordinance and how.

F

Maybe the ordinance you know the wording can be fine-tuned a little bit because.

F

If you're proposing a barn, historically, some barns did in some barns didn't have.

F

Residential components to them, but it's easily enough defined much more explicitly so that.

F

I'll use the same term, strict constructionist such as myself could look at it and say.

F

Yep, it conforms and you know, go go forward with it, but in terms of the general concept.

F

Accessory dylan and it's a very good idea, agreed anything anything else, anything else to come.

B

Before the board this evening and one final item yep it's the extension request for the 32 monta.

J

Street there's no presentation as part of that I don't know, and although I did see someone stand up.

J

If you want to, you can address the board, seeing as you came tonight, which is great. Thank you.

L

Everybody, my name is chuck dudes, I'm the homeowner at 32 month street and.

E

We are requesting a one-year extension on the wetlands crp due to.

E

Cost increases and contractor availability really great. Okay! Thank you. So if I get an emotion, looks.

B

Extend for one year so much! Second, uh all in favor all right, oppose motion passage unanimously.

C

Okay, now is there anything else before I ask for a motion? Furniture, oh so moved.

G

Second, all in favor, aye, aye aye. I suppose thank you all. Welcome back, we'll see you in july.

B

Back in action where it's so much easier.

B