►
From YouTube: Board of Adjustment Meeting - 12-10-2020
Description
Board of Adjustment Meeting - 12-10-2020
A
C
D
D
A
G
B
H
A
A
B
B
They
are
anticipating
making
interior
inside
improvements
to
the
property
the
bar
tavern
is
bertarvin
is
defined
as
any
establishment,
including
restaurants
and
gaming
establishments,
licensed
to
sell
alcoholic
beverages
for
consumption
upon
the
premises
were
sold
or
provided.
The
term
bar
tavern
shall
also
include
establishments
licensed
to
sell
alcoholic
beverages
for
consumption
off
the
premises
square
sold,
and
with
that
I'd,
be
happy
to
answer
any
questions.
A
B
F
B
B
So
I'm
going
to
let
that
applicant
speak
to
to
that,
because
it's
not
exactly
changing
the
use,
because
the
bar
tavern
and
our
ns
gaming
establishment
is
covered
under
that
definition.
We
haven't.
You
know,
pressed
the
parking
issue
at
this
point
in
time,
but
that
is
something
that
I'm
going
to
turn
over
to
the
applicants.
D
D
First
thing,
we
did
is
remove
that
big
canopy
from
the
old
gas
station,
which
basically
sat
right
in
the
middle
and
made
it
more
difficult
to
keep
the
parking
organized.
So
we
think
that'll
make
a
difference,
and
then
we
will
stripe
the
parking
lot
to
accommodate
the
maximum
parking
that
we
can
fit
on
a
lot.
E
F
B
E
D
I
Wait
to
see
it
so
the
requirement
the
parking
requirement
for
their
use,
which
would
be
it
falls
into
the
restaurant
lounges
arenas.
Theaters
assembly
halls
would
be
one
per
three
seats
so
when
they
submit
their
building
permit
plans
for
are
there
plans
for
their
building.
Permit
application,
then
we'll
review
that
make
sure
that
it's
sufficient.
A
So
what
we're
looking
at
today
isn't
necessarily
do
they
have
enough
parking
that'll
become
when
the
building
plans
come
to
you
guys
right
now.
What
we're
looking
at
as
this
board
is,
is
this
ground
suitable
for
the
conditional
use
that's
being
requested,
which
is
a
bar
and
a
tavern
assuming
no
variances
are
needed,
then.
B
A
J
J
Is
there
anything
problematic
with
issuing
the
conditional
use
permit
for
a
bar
and
tavern
to
the
property,
therefore,
making
it
transferable
to
subsequent
owners
of
the
property
as
long
as
they
you
know,
get
their
city
liquor
or
beer
license,
it
would
be
just
one.
We've
made
the
determination
that
it's
okay
to
sell
beer
and
wine
or
whatever
at
this
location.
J
Why
do
we
need
to
revisit
it
every
three
five,
seven,
ten
years
down
the
road
when
it's
only
a
change
of
ownership,
it's
no
different
than
once.
We've
determined
that
this
one
location
is
adequate
for
a
gas
station,
and
I
sell
the
gas
station
as
long
as
I'm
complying
with
all
the
rules
and
regulations
for
a
gas
station.
You
know
I
don't
need
to
come
in
and
and
have
it's
more
of.
J
K
Yeah,
mr
chairman,
I
mean
going
back
and
I
apologize
commissioner
case.
I'm
not
sure
if
you
caught
some
of
stacy's
preliminary
comments
there,
but
she
did
go
back
in
the
research
and
there
was
never
a
conditional
use
permitted
or
issued
for
this
particular
location.
But
what
you're
describing
is
is,
from
a
staff's
perspective,
exactly
how
we
would
expect
this
to
move
forward
in
the
future
once
a
conditional
use
permit
is
issued
if
it
were
to
pass
tonight.
K
J
A
A
A
You
know
I'll
just
you
know,
usually
when
we
look
at
conditional
uses
we've
we
look
at
you
know.
This
type
of
use
is
generally
applicable
for
this
type
of
property.
I
mean
so
it's
just
if
there's
any
conditions
that
that
should
need
to
be
made,
you
know
like
updating,
parking
and
stuff
in
which
which
they
are,
which
is
kind
of
what
would
lead
me
in
favor
of
being
in
favor
of
this
application.
J
Mr
chair,
yes,
the
only
the
this
is
case
again.
The
only
other
question
that
that
came
to
my
mind
was
that
one
of
the
other
things
that
we
do
look
at
when
we
issue
cups
is
access,
and
the
only
question
is
I
don't
know.
I
can't
tell
from
this
drawing-
and
I
can't
it's
been
a
while,
since
I've
driven
by
foxy's
there
is
that
is
that
completely
I
can
access
the
whole.
I
mean,
that's
not.
E
J
Yeah,
I
I
assume
that
was
the
case.
That
was
just
the
one
thing
I
was
wondering
about,
because
I
couldn't
remember
how
that
access
point.
For
some
odd
reason.
I
thought
you
know
you
could
drive
off
and
on
and
several
spots
on
the
highway
and
if,
if
we
can
reduce
those
conflict
points
that
would
be
welcome.
D
B
B
D
J
A
A
B
B
B
The
property
does
have
sufficient
space
to
park
up
to
two
additional
vehicles
in
the
driveway,
and
there
is
a
list
of
criteria
associated
with
the
home
occupation.
It's
up
on
the
screen,
but
I'm
not
going
to
go
through
all
of
it.
I
did
go
through
this
with
the
applicant
and
she
does
not
sense
that
there
would
be
any
issues
meeting
all
of
these
requirements
and
then
also
our
regular
conditional
use
requirements
as
well.
So
with
that
I'd
be
happy
to
answer
any
questions.
E
A
L
D
B
L
L
A
L
L
L
J
L
D
D
A
B
B
Okay,
here's
the
site
plan
and
here's
an
aerial
map
that
shows
what
is
existing
today.
The
proposed
attached
garage
will
be
located
in
the
same
location
as
this
current
detached
garage
with
an
estimated
side
yard
set
back
here,
showing
from
5.3
to
7.5
feet
and
the
r1
district
does
require
a
9
foot
side
yard
setback.
B
In
this
case,
the
degree
of
non-conformity
will
essentially
remain
the
same.
The
property
does
have
a
slight
irregularity
in
the
shape
and
other
properties
in
the
lake
vicinity
have
been
granted.
Some
variance,
variances
such
as
this,
when
non-conforming
structures
are
placed
within
the
same
location.
A
E
B
B
I
D
J
Hello,
hi,
steve
yeah.
This
is
todd
case.
I
have
a
question.
Have
you
have
you
had
any
problems
with
your
neighbor
regarding
the
encroachment
of
your
existing
garage
on
close
to
their
property?
Does
he
have
any
concerns,
or
does
she
have
any
concerns
with
you
replacing
it
in
the
same
location?
Have
you
had
that
conversation.
J
J
E
H
A
D
A
D
F
F
C
F
H
H
F
H
F
Well,
I
I
understand
that,
but
part
of
the
granting
of
variants
talks
about
if
you
have
reasonable
use
of
your
property
grinding,
of
variance,
comes
into
play
when
you
don't
have
reasonable
use.
So
that's
the
balancing
act,
I'm
I'm
talking
about
right
here.
We
could
get
the
nine
foot
set
back.
You
could
have
a
garage.
It
may
not
just
be
exactly
the
garage
that
you
desire
to
have
you'd
still
have
a
reasonable.
H
E
B
I
think
from
a
staff
standpoint
we
figured
they
could
go
close
to
24
feet
without
a
variance,
and
I
did
just
pull
up
this
site
plan
again
and
you
can
see
it's
not
the
exact
location
perhaps,
but
you
can
see
the
dashed
line
was
the
existing
and
then
the
bold
line
here
is
the
new.
So
it's
very
very
close
from
what
from
what
we
received.
J
J
H
A
M
They've
they've
had
the
same
property
line
for
some
years.
Obviously
they
they're
fine
with
it
by
today's
standards.
This
may
may
have
been
a
cabin
at
one
point,
but
the
lake
has
gotten
very
popular.
So
more
of
these
cabins
are
going
to
turn
into
full-time
housing,
so
I'm
sure
steve
doesn't
want
to
build
a
basically
a
single
stall
garage
when
everybody
in
town
is
wanting
three
or
four
I
kind
of
feel
like.
A
You
and
I,
I
would
kind
of
agree
with
how
what
what
stacy
said
at
the
beginning,
where
sometimes
this
board
has
felt
that
if,
if
the
addition
or
the
the
the
new
building
is
going
over
the
old,
you
know
it's,
it's
already
got
the
cement
in
place.
The
concrete's
already
there.
So
we've
been
a
little
bit
more,
have
the
tendency
of
granting
those-
and
it
looks
like
you
know,
the
the
outer
wall
or
the
eastern
wall
will
be
going
in
the
same
spot
and
the
encroachment
will
be
the
same.
E
C
I
This
is
brandy.
I
just
wanted
to
reiterate
that
a
kind
it's
been
our
practice
or
the
past
few
applications
we've
had
for
variances
at
the
lake
if
they
have
not
been
encroaching
further
into
the
setback.
We
have
been
granting
those,
and
I
think
that
is
something
to
look
forward
as
the
plan
commission
to
maybe
just
get
that
in
ordinance
and
as
we
always
talk
about
creating
the
lake
residential
district.
H
I
So
that
actually,
and
especially
it
looks
like
it's
cantilevered,
and
so
he
will
have
sufficient
space
for
his
front
yard
setback
to
the
lake
with
lake
front
property.
You
have
30
feet
from
the
ordinary
high
water
mark,
and
so
he
just
I
don't
have
the
contours
in
front
of
me,
but
I
would
imagine
just
from
taking
measurements
around
lake
properties
that
about
the
middle
of
the
sand.
A
G
G
A
lot
of
these
regulations
are
designed
for
our
residential
areas
in
town
and
we're
kind
of
trying
to
shoehorn
them
into
these
lake.
This
this
entire
lake
district
and
obviously
these
lake
properties
by
their
very
nature,
are
different
because
the
way
they
came
about
you
know
they
were
built
originally
outside
a
lot
of
them
outside
of
the
city
than
annex
later.
They
just
have
they've
got
different
size,
lots,
it's
goofy,
so
to
hold
strict
standards
to
them
that
we
use
for
our
you
know:
residentially
planted
lots
inside
of
the
city.
G
F
F
I
I
I'm
frustrated
with
the
situation
that
I
find
myself
in
I'm,
as
you
guys,
probably
know,
a
relatively
black
and
white
person,
and
it's
very
difficult
for
me
to
say
this
is
the
way
I
wish
it
were,
which
is
in
fact
the
case
when
I
don't
see
anything
in
the
ordinance
except
what
it
says
in
in
black
and
white.
So
let's
get
a
residential
lake
ordinance
going.
I
Yes,
since
staff
agrees
with
that
too,
and
we
we
have
been
working
on
it,
we
will
try
to
focus
more
time
more
time
to
it.
What
does
make
it?
Nice
is
looking
back
at
past
variances
to
kind
of
get
an
idea
of
what
what
we
think
is
acceptable
for
a
baseline
of
creating
that
district,
because
it
will
be
time
consuming
and
difficult.
We'll
want
plan
commission
input
developers,
lake
resident,
you
know
whoever
we
can
get
on
a
a
committee,
a
subcommittee
looking
into
it
like
we
did
for
the
lake
commercial
district.
B
B
K
A
Yeah
and
I
I
think
I
think
the
board
would
really
appreciate
that
tool
as
well.
I
mean
you
know.
Like
commissioner
culhane
said,
I
mean
a
lot
of
these
properties
were
built
before
they
came
into
the
city,
and
we
have
a
lot
of
properties
in
the
middle
of
our
town
that
were
built
before
ordinances
as
well,
so
that
we're
hard
to
have
a
lot
of
variances.
So
I
think
that
would
be
a
a
very
useful
tool.
J
A
G
A
B
B
B
I
J
B
B
I
J
J
J
J
J
Guess
the
question
is,
is
that
you
know
and
and
I'm
not
having
a
big
problem,
but
I
know
we
have
restricted
certain
you
know:
does
it
have
to
be
a
bar
tavern
license
to
be
able
to
sell,
to
sell
off
sale
license,
or
do
you
can
just?
Can
I
just
get
an
off
sale
use
permit
through
the
to
the
zoning
ordinance.
J
C
C
Yes,
okay,
so
so,
similarly,
I
I
think
in
fact
I
think
that
just
came
up
the
other
day
and
but
I
think
that's
how
we've
administered
in
the
past.
So
I
know
that,
prior
to
my
time
here,
target
requested
a
license
and
I
believe
that
was
declined
by
the
by
the
city
council,
but
I
presume
prior
to
that
the
board
had
granted
a
bar
tavern
or
targets
property
or
unless
the
the
council
actually
was
contingent
on
board
action
and
that
action
failed.
C
I
I
think
thank
you
typically,
when
just
from
when
I've
been
here,
how
it's
happened
is
the
board.
They
come
forward
to
the
board
of
adjustment
for
the
bar
tavern
conditional
use,
but
then
the
conditions
are
usually
that
there's
a
separate
entrance
and
so
a
lot
of
the
times
that
doesn't
end
up
working
out
for
the
businesses,
because
it's
having
that
extra
employee
and
having
to
segregate
it
from
their
their
business.
A
When
I
look
at
the
definition
for
for
bar
or
tavern,
it
also
kind
of
includes
the
consumption
on
the
premises
where
it's
sold
as
well
as
the
off
sale.
So
I
mean
it,
I
feel,
like
that's
kind
of
what
also
might
restrict
you
know
some
businesses
from
from
becoming
bars
or
taverns.
Is
they
don't
want
the
consumption
you
know
on
the
business?
C
C
B
C
A
A
J
Mr
chair,
that's
kind
of
where
I
was
just
wondering
I
mean
that's
why
I
started
coming
into
it,
because
I
thought
it's
something
unique.
I
understand
the
the
need
to
have
alcohol
sales
on
the
premises,
for
you
know
when
people
are
staying
there
and-
and
I
looked
at
that
from
more
of
an
on-site
consumption
standpoint
and
and
that's
why
I
asked
the
question
I
think
randy
explaining
it-
that
you
have
to
have
a
separate
entrance
and
and
and
you
know
how
many
other
businesses
are
going
to
open
themselves
up
to
it.
K
K
C
Yeah
and
that's
that's
right-
that's
happened
since
I've
been
here
at
least
one.
I
believe
two
actually
in
the
example
you
gave,
one
was
a
barber
shot.
One
was
a
hair
salon,
one
was
a
nail
salon
and
the
board
granted
his
conditional
use.
So
yeah,
I
don't
think
anything
you're
doing
here
today
is-
is
breaking
any
new
ground.
You'll
still
have
the
go
ahead
anytime.
Somebody
wants
to
sell
on
or
off
sale
anywhere
in
town.
C
A
A
A
B
B
The
shopping
center
right
now
includes
a
mix
of
commercial
uses,
including
a
clothing,
boutique,
hair
salon
and
some
office
space
and
the
property
has
a
total
of
59
parking
spaces.
So
I
did
do
a
little
bit
more
research
on
this
one
from
a
parking
perspective
which
that
does
equate
to
one
space
per
165
square
feet
and
the
building
is
about
9
750
square
feet.
B
The
ordinance
requires
one
space
per
200
square
feet
and
one
space
per
three
seats
for
a
restaurant,
so
once
a
floor
plan
is
received
which
we
have
not
received
that
yet
staff
will
complete
the
the
final
parking
review.
However,
based
on
this
information,
the
existing
parking
does
seem
to
be
sufficient
and
with
that
I'd
be
happy
to
answer
any
questions.
B
N
N
K
M
N
D
A
I
I
B
H
This
is
jim
steiger.
I
have
a
comment.
Go
ahead,
jim
yeah.
I
just
wanted
to
mention
too,
that
you
know
the
the
parking
there
has
never
been
a
problem
for
us
in
the
past,
and
I
and
like
you
just
mentioned
in
the
evenings,
is
more
likely
to
be
the
busier
time.
Also,
if
you
notice
there's
a
entrance
and
exit
both
off
of
14th
and
off
of
212.,
and
my
understanding
is
that
when
212
comes
through
that
the
stoplight
that's
currently
in
front
of
the
mall
is
going
to
be
moved
up
to
14.
H
K
K
K
It
looks
like
there's
still
plenty
adequate
space
there
for
a
backing
aisle
that
they
would
still
retain
the
same
number
of
parking
stalls
as
they
have
right
now.
If
the
d.o.t
is
in
fact
acquiring
additional
right
of
way,
but
I
just
wanted
to
point
that
out
and
maybe
pose
the
question
of
whether
we
know
it's
going
to
be
additional
right
away
acquired
through
there.
E
M
I
believe
the
state
will
be
taking
an
additional
foot
and
a
half
and
they're
going
to
want
to
put
a
sidewalk
on
there
as
well,
but
it'll
it'll
crowd
the
parking
a
little,
but
they'll
still
be
able
to
have
cars
parked
against
212
and
they're
building
comfortably.
I
would
say
it
does
tighten
it
up
a
little
bit
because
I
face
the
same
thing
on
my
property,
so
it.
H
D
B
H
A
A
B
Okay,
here
we
are
so
the
property
owner
workers
properties
are
workers,
opportunity
properties,
rather
llc
they've
submitted
an
application
for
some
exterior,
remodel
components
for
three
buildings,
and
it
is
located
within
the
downtown
overlay
district
that
downtown
overlay
district
was
approved
back
on
november
1st
of
2019
so
fairly.
Recently,
the
applicant
would
like
to
do
a
design
that
staff
found
was
inconsistent
with
the
the
ordinance
overlay
requirements.
B
It
does
have
all
of
the
materials
that
are
listed
over
here
in
the
percentage
of
the
facades,
and
this
is
a
graphic
showing
how
the
buildings
currently
exist.
I
believe
this
is
number
nine
and
then
11
and
13.
I
believe-
and
this
is
the
property
here
that
is
considered
contributing,
but
all
three
properties
are
within
the
historic
district.
B
As
you
can
see,
the
buildings
will
be
elevated
to
all
one
level,
whereas
it's
more
characteristic
for
downtown
to
have
varying
building
heights.
Some
single
story,
some
two-story,
so
elevating
those
to
the
same
height
is
atypical
for
the
district
and
it
may
affect
the
overall
massing
and
scale
number
two
covering
or
rebuilding
the
facade
for
all
buildings,
with
drivet,
antique
siding,
which
removes
and
or
covers
historic
materials.
It
may
not
be
compatible
with
the
overall
use
of
brick
and
stone
materials
within
the
district,
so
you
can
see
some
of
that
here.
B
B
The
building
permit
application
was
denied
based
on
local
ordinance
and
state
statutes.
So
what
we're
looking
at
tonight
is
a
variance
from
chapter
21.5611
building
materials.
The
criteria
listed
there
is
retain
existing
facades
in
the
downtown
district
and
number
two
is
maintain
and
restore
existing
facades,
trim,
cornices
or
replaced
with
similar
replications.
B
A
I
I
Well-
and
this
isn't
so,
the
board
isn't
granting
the
variance
to
shippo's
requirements
that
will
be
worked
with
through
their
review
process
and
the
only
re.
The
reason
why
it's
in
front
of
the
board
of
adjustment
is
because
it
doesn't
meet
our
downtown
overlay
district.
So
that's
the
only
thing
that
we're
actually
granting
the
variances
to
and
just
for
those
two
components
that
state
stacy
had
stated
about
retaining
the
existing.
So
when
we
created
the
downtown
overlay
district,
we
had
included
to
that.
I
B
Topics
yeah,
that
particular
criteria
is
exactly
thank
you
brandi
for
further
describing
that
for
the
board
and
for
the
audience
as
well.
Tonight
we
would
like
the
board
to
take
a
look
at
that
criteria.
It
is
in
2156
11,
retaining
the
existing
facades
in
the
downtown
district
and
maintain
and
restore
existing
facades,
trim,
cornices
and
replace
with
similar
replications,
and
that
is
essentially
what's
in
front
of
you
tonight.
E
B
No,
it's
basically
the
varying
heights
of
the
buildings,
as
you
can,
and
I
wish
that
we
could
maybe
get
to
a
better
graphic
here,
but
it'll.
Take
me
a
minute
to
do
that.
You
can
see
downtown
districts
typically
have
varying
heights,
so
that
is
one
of
the
things.
As
you
can
see
here,
this
particular
building
could
affect
the
massing
in
the
scale
of
the
entire
block.
B
So
that's
just
something
we're
posing
that
to
the
board,
but
that's
one
of
the
things
that
staff
noticed.
So
that's
one
of
the
things.
The
other
thing
is,
as
you
can
see,
that
there's
a
lot
of
brick
here
and
there's
brick
here,
that's
been
painted,
there's
this
cornice
here.
That
has
some
historical
significance
as
well
as
all
of
this
decorative
masonry
work
here
so
trying
to
we're
not
even
really
talking
about
the
windows
in
this.
E
B
Yes,
it's
the
brick,
it's
keeping
the
existing
storefronts
to
some
degree.
Now
some
of
them
can
be
combined,
but
it's
just
it.
This
is
where
it's
difficult
to
quantify
things
exactly,
but
we
felt
that
this
was
not
retaining
the
existing
facades
in
the
downtown
due
to
the
modern
design,
and
we
felt
that
it
was
not
maintaining
or
restoring
existing
facades
trim,
cornices
or
replacing
with
similar
replicas.
B
K
And
mr
chairman,
if
I
may,
if
I
could
expand
on
commissioner
leski's
question,
I
I
would
like
to
just
point
out
that-
and
I
only
point
this
out
because
of
the
way
the
question
was
paul
was
miss
alaska.
I
don't
mean
it
any
offense
towards
you,
but
it's
definitely
not
a
a
staff's
opinion
here.
It's
tip
it's
generally
a
straightforward
interpretation
of
the
ordinance
on
how
we've
gotten
to
the
board
of
adjustment,
because
of
the
ordinance
we
adopted
a
year
ago
does
require
the
preservation
of
the
historic
nature
of
the
downtown.
K
We
felt
that
the
project
didn't
meet
the
terms
of
the
ordinance
as
written.
So
that's
why
we
then
bring
it
forward
direct
the
applicant
to
bring
it
forward
to
the
boa
for
the
board
of
adjustments.
Determination,
if
you
feel
as
a
board
that
it
does
in
fact
meet
the
terms
of
the
ordinance
and,
and
so
as
staff
has
tried
to
do,
is
explain
the
points
that
we
as
staff,
felt
that
it
didn't
meet
the
intent
of
the
ordinance
and
then
it
would
be
up
to
you
as
a
board
to
decide.
K
You
know
whether
you
feel
it
does
or
not,
and
then
act
appropriately,
whether
a
variance
is
grant
is
warranted,
and
in
this
particular
case
and
then
one
other
point
of
clarity.
I
wanted
to
make
too
in
regards
to
chippo.
That
process
is
still
undergoing
and,
as
brandy
pointed
out,
the
board's
not
acting
on
giving
any
variance
from
the
shipping
requirements.
K
That's
not
part
of
the
decision
tonight
either.
I
just
wanted
to
make
sure
that
was
a
point
of
clarity.
How
that
will
unfold
is
the
case
report
that
ship
was
requested
will
be
compiled
by
the
city
staff
and
the
applicant
to
provide
ship
shipping
what
they
need
now
there.
There
is
a
situation
where,
if
this
variants
were
granted
tonight
by
this
board,
schiphol
may
have
other
requirements
of
the
applicant
that
they
would
want
to
make
and
would
make
according
to
their
reviews.
K
If
that
were
to
happen,
you
know
it
would
be
up
to
the
the
applicant
how
to
respond
whether
they
would
make
those
adjustments
or
not,
and
then,
if
not,
it
would
become
a
more
pressing
matter,
and
that's
where
I
believe
the
city
attorney
would
have
to
chime
in
on
what
would
happen
from
there.
But
I
believe
that
would
go
directly
to
the
city
council
to
overturn
any
requirements
of
chippo.
D
A
O
I
think
this
is
one
of
the
instances
where
you
run
into
what
the
paper
says
and
what
reality
sometimes
is,
and
I
think
that's
why
it's
here
to
figure
out
where
we're
going.
So
as
you
look
at
things
that
have
transpired
in
downtown
I'd
say
up
until
probably
the
last
year
and
a
half,
there
probably
was
nobody
looking
to
do
anything,
and
that
was
part
of
the
problem
and
what
we
found
out
when
we
tried
to
recruit
people
to
open
up
downtown.
Is
it's
too
expensive?
O
We're
not
sure
what
we're
getting
into?
What's
really
going
to
happen,
so
the
development
company
took
on
buying
some
buildings
and
and
renovating
them
and
leasing
them
out
to
kind
of
get
people
over
their
fears.
Well,
at
the
same
time,
of
course,
we've
recruited
high-density
projects
downtown
that
have
fouled
the
overlay
district.
O
So,
but
during
this
time
you
know,
mindy
has
had
that
building
for
sale
they
employ
20
people
there,
part
of
a
vibrant,
downtown
or
thriving
downtown
is
have
people
working
there
that
that
live
work
and
play
downtown.
So
from
just
a
perspective
of
some
of
the
things
that
it
might
go
against
the
ordinance
I
mean
just
from
high
level
reading,
it
does
meet
a
lot
of
them,
but
I
think
when
you,
when
you
look
at
what
are
we
really
after
as
a
community,
you
know
what
do
we
want
to
see?
O
O
Different
things,
so
I
think
going
this
route
is,
is
the
correct
route
to
have
this
discussion
of
you
know?
Do
I
wish
that
everybody
could
brick
their
building?
So
it
looks
like
town
players,
yeah
town
players
is
a
beautiful
building.
The
gas
is
beautiful,
but
there's
some
reality
in
in
pricing
and
construction,
and
also
feasibility
of
doing
that.
What
you
find
out
sometimes
isn't
isn't
feasible
either
just
because
it
won't
last
or
cost
effective.
So
from
our
perspective
in
developing
downtown
and
being
kind
of
spearheading.
O
Some
of
that
we
think
this
would
be
a
good
project
to
obviously
update
broadway.
A
lot
of
focus
has
been
on
camp,
but
there's
been
some
now
broadway
activity
with
the
lofts,
and
now
this
potentially
happening,
I'm
not
sure.
If
there's
been
any
feedback
from
existing
property
owners.
I
know
it's
copied
on
an
email
from
one
of
them.
O
So
that's
where
I
think
I'm
at
on
it
I'll
be
around
for
any
questions,
but
just
want
to
know
that
the
support
of
downtown
and
what,
as
a
community
that
we've
been
trying
to
do,
be
really
a
shame.
If
we
can't
get
this
across
the
finish
line
for
what
I
think
variances
are
good,
but
I
think
there's
also
some
reality
to
what
we're
trying
to
do
in
in
real
life
and
people
trying
to
invest
in
in
buildings
and
make
them
better.
I
think
this
project
makes
that
street
better
at
the
end
of
the
day.
E
B
Don't
believe
so
they're
all
within
the
district
and
the
district
was
established.
I
believe
it
was
back
in
1989.,
so
it's
been
established
for
quite
some
time
and
that
11.1
review
process
has
been
established
for
quite
some
time
as
well.
I
think
it
was
in
1988
was
when
that
came
on.
However,
our
overlay
district.
B
A
A
B
B
F
B
B
But
here
again
I'm
going
to
let
brandi
weigh
in
she's
a
little
bit
more
familiar
with
the
requirements
of
the
district,
but
the
teak
definitely
is
it's
not
characteristic
of
the
district
in
terms
of
maintaining
and
restoring
existing
facades.
So
I
would
consider
this
project
to
be
modern,
using
modern
materials
rather
than
looking
to
restore
existing.
I
B
It's
definitely
interesting
to
look
at
these
designs,
and
that
is
another
reason
why
we
are
here.
So
the
board
can
weigh
in
on
that,
in
terms
of
if
this
project
is
meeting
the
existing
to
retain
existing
facades
in
the
downtown
district.
Does
this
project
maintain
existing
facades
in
the
downtown
district,
and
does
this
project
maintain
and
restore
existing
facades,
trim,
cornices
or
or
replace
with
similar
replications?
E
B
They're
they
have
more
flexibility
in
the
way
that
they
look
at
the
other
two,
because
they're
considered
non-contributing
resources.
So
when
something
is
non-contributing
they're,
not
looking
so
much
at
the
structure
itself,
with
improvements
they're
looking
more
at
the
nature
of
how
those
improvements
would
affect
the
overall
district.
B
E
B
P
All
right,
I
am
melinda
werkus,
I
am
the
owner
of
the
building
and
we
are
proposing
that
we
would
take
those
three
buildings
and
combine
them
into
one
and
so
in
the
process
when
we
were
when
we
obtained
our
our
structural
and
our
code
review
for
the
building.
One
of
the
recommendations
that
we
got
was
to
have
the
properties
surveyed
and
made
into
one
legal
description
so
no
longer
going
forward.
P
Would
they
be
three
separate
buildings
in
the
back
of
the
buildings
which
we
already
have
approval,
for
we
are
building
a
garage
that
will
connect
all
three
of
the
properties
in
the
back
and
you
will
exit
from
all
three
of
these
structures
into
one
garage
so
in
the
future.
Separating
these
back
into
three
buildings
would
be
really
tough
to
be
able
to
do
that,
and
I
also
wanted
you
all
to
know
it's
like.
P
P
Not
even
wanting
to
give
us
a
quote,
because
we
would
have
to
dig
up
the
sidewalks
poor
footings,
then
our
front
of
our
building
would
be
in
the
sidewalk,
so
our
building
would
be
eight
feet
thicker
than
it
normally
is,
and
so
we
had
three
contractors
come
out
and
work
with
us
on
that.
None
of
them
would
even
give
us
a
quote
for
that
large
amount
of
brick,
and
we
also
ran
into
the
trouble
of
when
we
try
to
combine
the
three
into
one
with
our
brick
being
painted.
P
It
just
makes
it
really
hard
to
do
that,
and
so,
if
we
were
to
put
all
new
brick
on
11
and
13,
it
would
cost
a
lot
of
money
and
the
only
way
to
make
them
really
look.
The
same
would
be
to
paint
all
that
brick
or
have
the
two
new
buildings
that
we
purchased
look
way
newer
and
way
nicer
than
our
building
and
our
whole
design
is
that
people
would
enter
9
south
broadway
and
there
is
no
front
door
on
11
or
13.
P
E
E
P
The
wall
between
11
and
13,
south
broadway-
we
just
did
the
the
raw
openings
on
the
inside.
We
have
the
permit
for
the
interior
work
and
it
was
20
inches
between
those
two
buildings
of
solid,
concrete,
yeah
so
and
the
other
thing,
and
it's
not
relevant
to
the
front
but
the
third
building.
So
the
13
south
broadway
back
in
the
day
that
building
was
a
federal
reserve
safety,
deposit
box
location
and
we're
going
to
make
it
back
into
that.
So
there
is
an
actual
vault
in
that
room.
P
P
Definitely
definitely,
in
fact,
we've
kind
of
worked
on
some
ways
on
the
interior
of
each
building
too.
We've
gotten
some
like
photos
from
christine
at
the
historical
society
to
tie
into
each
one
of
those
rooms,
and
we
actually
thought
we
would
maybe
have
the
public
opinion.
Building
the
safety
deposit
box
building
and
our
building
was
a
shoe
store.
P
A
A
G
J
This
is
this,
is
you
know
it's
a
very
difficult
situation?
We've
got
somebody
that
wants
to
improve
their
property
and
you
know
and
try
and
enhance
the
city
downtown
area
on
the
flip
side.
You
know
we
do
have
this
rule,
that's
less
than
a
year
old
that
talks
about
the
specific
historical
aspects
and
trying
to
protect
and
preserve
them.
J
I
the
issue
for
me
really
comes
down
to
is
even
if
we
say
yes
to
the
variance
of
our
two
sections
of
our
ordinance.
You
know
there's
still
the
shippo
review
process
which
in
this
instance,
I
think,
if
you
take
a
look
at
the
the
flowchart,
it's
gonna
get
down
to
the
bottom
box.
I'm
in
my
professional
life.
J
I
know
where
shippo
is
on
all
these
things
and
the
city
is
going
to
have
to
make
a
final
determination
that
there
are
no
feasible
and
prudent
alternatives
available,
at
which
time
the
city
council
is
going
to
have
to
make
that
determination
since
their
decision
body,
and
so
the
question
becomes,
you
know,
are
they
would
the
city
council
want
to
rely
on
us,
as
the
planning
commission
is
from
a
recommendation
standpoint
to
give
them
direction
as
well?
So
that
complicates
what
we're
doing
here.
J
While
it's
not
completely
germane
to
the
various
requests
in
front
of
us,
it
does
it
does.
You
know,
make
me
pause
for
a
moment
to
figure
out
we
we
say
yes
to
this
and
then
subsequently
30
60
90
days
from
now
the
city
council
is
going
to
have
to
be
making.
You
know
a
determination
on
feasibility
and
prudent
alternatives
and
they're
going
to
be
looking
for
us
for
guidance
in
that
regard
as
well.
I'm
guessing,
and
so
that's
kind
of
where
I
think
in
my
mind,
the
discussions
at
in
my
head.
J
If
we
move
forward
and
saying
that
we're
okay
with
this,
we
think
it's
an
improvement
for.
What's
there
and
and
and
while
it's
it's
not
consistent
with
the
section
of
the
ordinance,
we
should
probably
somehow
caution
that,
with
you
know,
provisions
of
advice
to
the
city
council
because
they're
the
ones
that's
going
to
ultimately
have
to
make
that
determination.
I
F
This
is,
this
is
ford.
I
have
a
question
for
matt,
since
this
is
a
board
of
adjustment
action.
If
the
board
should
approve
this
or
deny
it
either
way
and
the
applicant
wanted
our
decision
changed,
would
not
the
applicant
have
to
go
through
the
court
system
and
the
city
council
would
not
have
any
say
in
our
decision.
F
C
C
Yeah,
yes,
that's
correct,
thank
you,
but
but
I
think
that
there's
two
different
there's
two
kind
of
simultaneous
paths
being
required
to
be
pursued
here.
So
first,
it
has
to
pass
muster
with
our
own
ordinances
or
receivable
variants,
and
it
also
needs
to
go
through
the
shipping
process.
The
shipping
process
is
what
is
the
process
in
which
the
city
council
has
an
explicit
role
laid
out
by
statute,
so
there's
kind
of
two
parallel
processes,
but
you're
correct
if
they
disagree
with
this
decision.
Appeal
from
this
decision
goes
to
the
circuit
code,.
J
J
But
wouldn't
it
be
important
to
know
that
if
we
have
an
ordinance
that
specifies
we
were
wanting
to
preserve
cornishes
and
things
like
that,
and
if
the
local,
historic
preservation
commission
would
be
supportive
of
that
prior
to
us?
Wouldn't
that
be
valuable
information
for
us
as
a
board
of
adjustment
to
determine
whether
or
not
you
know
if,
if
our
local
historic
preservation,
people
are
saying,
we
don't
want
you
to
do
this.
I
I
agree
and
that's
almost
something
that
you
know
when
we
were
creating
this
ordinance.
It
was
a
community
decision
and
it
would
have
been
nice
to
specifically
have
their
input,
but
then
just
going
back
to
it's,
it's
kind
of
you
know
it's
a
any
ordinance.
That's
created
is
a
work
in
progress,
and
so,
if
there's
things
that
need
to
change
along
the
way,
if
if
we
do
get
their
input
or
what's
determined
with
this
application,
we
there's
always
amendments
that
can
be
made.
B
K
Yeah
and
to
that
point,
commissioner
case
simply
because
it's
not
part
of
the
laid
out
process
right
now,
we
didn't
bring
a
formal
recommendation
from
that
committee.
So
to
brandy's
point
I
I
think
if
that
is
something
that
this
board
would
like
to
have,
it
can
easily
be
incorporated
via
an
amendment
to
this
ordinance
and
then
that
way
staff
has
clearer
direction
to
get
a
formal
recommendation
from
another
body
before
bringing
it
forward
to
you.
E
E
D
G
Thanks,
I
want
to
talk
real
briefly
about
sort
of
my
thoughts
generally
on
the
overlay
district
and
this
particular
application
for
variants.
You
know
my
recollection
and
we
I
sat
through
all
the
overlay
discussions
on
the
plan.
Commission
side
you
know
was
generally
obviously
we
want
to
retain
the
historic
aspect
where
we
can
and
it's
certainly
sad
to
lose
cornice's
natural
brick.
It's
I
don't.
G
I'm
not
really
excited
about
that
or
moving
that
forward,
and
I'm
also
not
excited
about
issuing
a
variance
so
close
to
issuing
or
to
creating
this
overlay
district.
But
that
being
said,
my
recollection,
the
overall
purpose
was
so
we
didn't
have
any
pole
sheds
downtown
right.
I
mean
we
had
it.
There
was
an
issue
a
while
back.
G
G
G
Personally,
it
doesn't
bother
me
the
height
differential,
doesn't
bother
me.
I'm
certainly
saddened
by
the
loss
of
the
brick
on
the
you
know
the
the
nine
broadway
building,
but
I
think
overall,
it's
a
better
improvement
or
it's
overall,
it's
a
net
improvement.
Absolutely
and
more
importantly,
we
as
a
city-
perhaps
maybe
not
specifically
this
commission,
but
as
a
city
we're
working
very
hard
to
promote
development
redevelopment
downtown
the
watertown
development
company
does
an
incredible
job.
You
know,
and
as
a
strategy
generally,
that's
been
our
strategy
to
push
folks
downtown
right.
G
G
A
Thank
you
for
that
and,
to
kind
of
add
on
that
I
know
this
is
our
first
variance
request
in
this
particular
overlay
district,
but
we've
had
we
have
other
overlay
districts
with
building
standards
and
it
kind
of
follows
the
same
where
we
we
have
building
standards.
I
know
in
the
gateway
overlay
district
and
one
of
our
first
few
applications
came
through
on
that.
A
We
we
kind
of
had
that
same
approach
that
liam
just
said,
whereas
you
know
the
the
purpose
of
this
is
to
ensure
that
we
get
something
that
looks
good
and
it's
not
a
pull
bar
and
type
of
thing,
and
I
know
a
variance
was
granted
in
that
district.
So,
although
it's
the
first
one
in
this
district,
we
have
similar
instances
in
other
overlay
districts
to
kind
of
compare
it
to.
B
One
thing
that
I
just
wanted
to
add
as
staff-
and
this
is
definitely
in
front
of
the
board
for
for
your
decision.
I
just
want
to
bring
up
the
fact
of
looking
at
a
short-term
improvement
to
improve
a
building
versus
looking
at
the
long-term
community
impact
of.
Is
this
the
best
design
for
the
building
within
this
particular
district
in
this
particular
location?
So
I
just
wanted
to
pose
that
to
the
board.
B
F
We
could
have
a
building
that
does
exactly
what
what
wants
to
be
accomplished.
That
doesn't
look
this
modern.
That
fits
a
little
bit
more
in
with
the
overall
theme
of
what
the
buildings
that
are
governed
by
this
downtown
overlay
district
are
are
under.
This
building
is
very
modern.
The
outside
look
is
very
modern
compared
to
its
neighbors.
E
A
F
A
O
Thanks,
mr
chairman,
appreciate
the
opportunity
to
come
back
so
just
a
couple
of
quick
follow-ups
from
some
discussion
referencing.
Commissioner
kayes,
I
think
you
know,
I
think,
there's
a
process
laid
out
and
you
know
the
variance
request.
I
mean
it
doesn't
do
any
good
to
go
through
all
the
other
steps
if
the
board
isn't
interested
in
granting
the
variance,
because
there
are
some
still
hoops
that
have
to
be
jumped
through.
So
I
think,
coming
out.
O
O
You've
had
five
projects
are
gonna
have
five
projects
that
are
gonna
meet
this
one
had
to
change
what
they
were
doing
to
meet
the
ordinance
on
kemp
avenue.
They
had
stucco
all
the
way
down
and
they
had
to
go
replace
that
with
brick,
so
I
think,
jumping
to
conclusions
that
we're
already
requesting
variants
on
a
new
ordinance.
O
I
think
we've
had
success
with
that
ordinance
and
I
also
want
to
talk
about
two
commissioner,
ford
kind
of
brought
up
a
good
point,
but
my
counter
argument
to
that
is
the
two
buildings
that
are
sitting
there
and
I'm
not
in
any
disrespect
to
any
building
owner.
But
that's
what
people
see
when
they're
on
camp
or
broad
broadway
right
now
is
two
old
buildings
with
some
broken
windows.
Some
wood,
I
don't
think
that's
relatively
pleasing
when
we
bring
people
to
come
and
want
to
invest
in
downtown
either.
O
So
I
think
when
you
have
people
investing
money,
other
investment
happens
and
that's
what's
happened.
I
think
over
the
last
five
years
before
this
there
was
no
activity.
So
I
think
this
is
a
slippery
slope
to
require
people
to,
and
it's
not
like
we're
taking
down
the
goss
or
town
players
or
another
building.
That
has
some
things
I
mean
if
you
look
at
a
per
square
footage
of
what's
really
changing
other
than
the
upper
level
of
the
ledger's
building.
O
99
of
it's
gonna
look
better
than
it
does
right
now
and
that
that's
not
to
be
a
disrespectful
way.
That's
just
in
a
redevelopment
situation,
so
just
want
to
be
careful
that,
from
an
overall
standpoint,
the
work
that's
been
done,
the
money
that's
been
invested
and
trying
to
keep
and
get
people
to
invest
this.
O
M
G
Just
really
want
to
reiterate
that
we've
tried
really
hard
now
ever
since
we
had
the
charrette,
whatever
it
was
15
10
12
years
ago,
to
promote
development,
downtown
and
there's
been
well.
You
know
you
name
it
h2o
2020
the
charrette
now
with
the
watertown
development
company
carrying
the
torch.
It
would
be
a
grave
mistake.
B
I
think
one
of
the
things
too,
I
wanted
to
point
out
one
of
the
things
that's
different
about
this
particular
project
in
relation
to
some
of
the
others
that
have
recently
gone
up.
They
do
meet
the
standards,
but
we're
not
looking
at
something
that
has
historic
value
already
and
replacing
that
those
elements
on
those
buildings.
So
in
the
case
of
parkside
and
the
lofts,
they
were
in
the
downtown
overlay
district
as
well,
but
they
basically
they
weren't
in
the
same
review
category
because
they
didn't
have
a
resist
or
an
existing
facade
to
be
maintained.