[Speaker 1] (0:06 - 0:09)
into the July 21st meeting of the small public board of appeals.

[Speaker 1] (0:10 - 0:14)
First item on our agenda is to do the meeting minutes.

[Speaker 1] (0:14 - 0:15)
Can I get to the picture?

[Speaker 2] (0:19 - 0:20)
Motion for three minutes.

[Speaker 1] (0:22 - 0:23)
I'll be right back.

[Speaker 1] (0:23 - 0:24)
On your meeting you're wrong.

[Speaker 1] (0:26 - 0:27)
So Tony.

[Speaker 2] (0:27 - 0:28)
Yep.

[Speaker 2] (0:28 - 0:29)
Hi,

[Speaker 2] (0:29 - 0:29)
can you hear me?

[Speaker 1] (0:30 - 0:31)
Sunday,

[Speaker 1] (0:31 - 0:31)
June

[Speaker 2] (0:31 - 0:31)
Well

[Speaker 1] (0:31 - 0:33)
4th, here,

[Speaker 1] (0:33 - 0:35)
hi,

[Speaker 1] (0:35 - 0:36)
we're

[Speaker 1] (0:41 - 0:44)
just getting on our 26

[Speaker 1] (0:45 - 0:50)
07, which is to

[Speaker 1] (0:52 - 0:57)
appeal the determination of the building commissioner and we have Mr.

[Speaker 1] (0:57 - 0:58)
Bogatz.

[Speaker 1] (0:59 - 1:18)
So I think everyone here has read everything you put together and I'll ask the rest of the board as well but we'd like to hear your presentation but we'd also like to just focus on where our jurisdiction is and our jurisdiction isn't to really go back to the

[Speaker 1] (1:19 - 1:23)
the original site plan review that was done by the planning board.

[Speaker 1] (1:24 - 1:26)
Those plans have already been approved.

[Speaker 1] (1:26 - 1:29)
The appeal period for that has passed.

[Speaker 1] (1:29 - 1:43)
So this is strictly where the as-built somehow differs from what was approved by the planning board because that was the request of the building inspector was to determine if the as-built...

[Speaker 1] (1:45 - 1:51)
you know, deter it from the original plans and our building commissioner said no.

[Speaker 1] (1:51 - 1:53)
So I just want to make sure we're ultra focused.

[Speaker 1] (1:54 - 1:55)
That's all right. Okay,

[Speaker 1] (1:55 - 1:56)
great.

[Speaker 1] (1:56 - 1:57)
You can begin.

[Speaker 1] (2:01 - 2:06)
Does anybody else have anything to add to that?

[Speaker 2] (2:06 - 2:08)
I think you summed it up perfectly.

[Speaker 2] (2:42 - 2:43)
Can you hear me?

[Speaker 1] (2:43 - 2:44)
You can state your name.

[Speaker 2] (2:46 - 2:48)
My name is Tom Rogatz.

[Speaker 2] (2:48 - 2:53)
I live, I'm a homeowner of 25 in Saras.

[Speaker 2] (2:54 - 3:00)
Our property is in Butter to 24 to 28 people's cars.

[Speaker 2] (3:03 - 3:04)
I grew up in Pittsburgh,

[Speaker 2] (3:04 - 3:04)
Pennsylvania.

[Speaker 2] (3:05 - 3:07)
It's where I grew up.

[Speaker 2] (3:07 - 3:10)
Within two minutes of my house we had Target,

[Speaker 2] (3:10 - 3:10)
Walmart,

[Speaker 2] (3:11 - 3:12)
McDonald's, Burger King,

[Speaker 2] (3:12 - 3:16)
you know the point is where I grew up we didn't have a public scene.

[Speaker 2] (3:16 - 3:18)
We didn't have a public scene close by.

[Speaker 2] (3:19 - 3:24)
And I was lucky because my parents almost every weekend took us to enjoy the outdoors,

[Speaker 2] (3:24 - 3:31)
used public goods outdoors. And so...

[Speaker 2] (3:35 - 3:43)
A lot of what we're going to talk about today is really related to that because I think there's a lot of people who have seen abuse,

[Speaker 2] (3:44 - 3:45)
public seen abuse,

[Speaker 2] (3:45 - 3:48)
or so the public's very good.

[Speaker 2] (3:56 - 3:59)
So just to focus really quickly on what was approved,

[Speaker 2] (3:59 - 4:00)
what's being built,

[Speaker 2] (4:00 - 4:04)
and what the building commissioners' determination should be done.

[Speaker 2] (4:06 - 4:07)
So this is the application,

[Speaker 2] (4:08 - 4:11)
and this is really just to level set on what was approved.

[Speaker 2] (4:12 - 4:18)
This project was presented with a sympathetic expansion consisting of an addition of payment to the side of the existing red structure.

[Speaker 2] (4:19 - 4:24)
Designed to maintain the historic appearance of the statue's new structure and to maintain the integrity of the landscape.

[Speaker 2] (4:25 - 4:34)
The applicant further represented that no demolition of the structure was proposed and that work was limited to the advantage of the expansion with the product possible.

[Speaker 1] (4:39 - 4:41)
And I can hear almost no problem, okay?

[Speaker 1] (4:42 - 4:46)
Sorry, I was just starting to put up a hearing as well. Is that better?

[Speaker 2] (4:46 - 4:47)
Yeah, yes.

[Speaker 1] (4:47 - 4:48)
Is that better?

[Speaker 1] (4:48 - 4:49)
Thank you.

[Speaker 2] (4:49 - 5:04)
And this is two's work for context to keep in mind, like the height of the building in question here is 33.8 centimeters as stated when it used to be and that's what it is today.

[Speaker 2] (5:06 - 5:07)
Okay.

[Speaker 2] (5:10 - 5:14)
So this is the original structure,

[Speaker 2] (5:14 - 5:16)
the building in red here.

[Speaker 2] (5:17 - 5:20)
This is from the slope document that was previously presented.

[Speaker 2] (5:21 - 5:22)
And on the right,

[Speaker 2] (5:22 - 5:30)
this is an actual photograph from the fifth landing of 30 steps of the stairway.

[Speaker 2] (5:31 - 5:31)
As

[Speaker 2] (5:33 - 5:36)
you can see this at this point,

[Speaker 2] (5:36 - 5:52)
the right side is not considered to be obstructed and the left side had no blockage. You can see where the triangles are here.

[Speaker 2] (5:52 - 5:56)
They kind of look like there's the

[Speaker 2] (5:57 - 5:58)
And the years here,

[Speaker 2] (5:59 - 6:01)
if you were to compare it to the legacy structure,

[Speaker 2] (6:01 - 6:03)
you'll notice that it's no longer a triangle,

[Speaker 2] (6:03 - 6:05)
it starts to be built out like a horizontal ridge.

[Speaker 2] (6:07 - 6:08)
So that's really,

[Speaker 2] (6:08 - 6:10)
I think, a big,

[Speaker 2] (6:10 - 6:16)
really the big issue in terms of blocking.

[Speaker 2] (6:19 - 6:28)
So this one cites a legal and clearly states that construction needs to minimize the obstruction of seating using public accessibility locations.

[Speaker 2] (6:29 - 6:34)
The bylaw is not something that is going to be checked in terms of the box and it's done.

[Speaker 2] (6:35 - 6:43)
The bylaw is meant to live with the permit and it's just like any other condition where

[Speaker 2] (6:45 - 6:50)
We're going to probably get these to the meeting commission and

[Speaker 2] (6:55 - 7:05)
ask the building commissioner specifically to look at his question and there was really I guess four main

[Speaker 2] (7:06 - 7:10)
on the deficiencies that we're concluding is rejection.

[Speaker 2] (7:11 - 7:19)
So the very first we've just been compliance with Section 5433, which is the immunization of the instruction of snake use,

[Speaker 2] (7:20 - 7:21)
which is what we're evaluating.

[Speaker 2] (7:23 - 7:27)
So that was going to be the first thing there.

[Speaker 2] (7:30 - 7:54)
minimize and really any front data process and informative design obligation and when it says it shall be done shall be designed so as to minimize instructions to the use of public accessibility patients that means that as it as instructions actually built with respect to this senior benchmark and if you say it's meant to comply with this byline

[Speaker 2] (7:56 - 8:03)
Minimize, one thing you should remind is that minimize doesn't require projects to avoid paying instruction,

[Speaker 2] (8:03 - 8:08)
it's really about obstruction is not reasonably necessary.

[Speaker 2] (8:11 - 8:14)
Also the pre-construction condition prevents the baseline,

[Speaker 2] (8:14 - 8:20)
the legacy structure is established to pre-existing building mass and envelope including its stairwell and noise level reductions.

[Speaker 2] (8:21 - 8:37)
I'm going to be a big thing to keep in mind today is I'm going to ask you to give a question to Simon and simply ask him to evaluate this project against the actual feedback that he should justify what I love.

[Speaker 1] (8:39 - 8:41)
As far as I should keep your voice up a little bit more,

[Speaker 1] (8:41 - 8:41)
I'm still talking.

[Speaker 2] (8:42 - 8:43)
Sure thing,

[Speaker 2] (8:43 - 8:43)
sir.

[Speaker 2] (8:47 - 9:10)
so I think one one challenging thing is to understand where the mass actually comes from and I mentioned before the height of legacy structure is the same as the height of the beauty structure but you end up with a lot of mass with the new structure and for a while I couldn't understand it because I

[Speaker 2] (9:11 - 9:20)
So many of the plants where we eventually notice is the chute gets knocked off and is effectively replaced with that horizontal ridge across both sides.

[Speaker 2] (9:21 - 9:23)
That's really where the destruction comes from.

[Speaker 2] (9:24 - 9:29)
And I think in terms of historic features,

[Speaker 2] (9:30 - 9:39)
it enables terrace, they have a right and actually rounding, there's actually much changes in homes as a result of the change.

[Speaker 2] (9:39 - 9:39)
When

[Speaker 1] (9:39 - 9:40)
Okay.

[Speaker 2] (9:40 - 9:44)
she is specifically targeting to add a bunch of paths here,

[Speaker 2] (9:44 - 9:45)
it's not an accident,

[Speaker 2] (9:45 - 9:47)
it's a specific design decision.

[Speaker 2] (9:48 - 9:58)
And so that sort of brings about the question like when is necessary to allow that design and isn't truly necessary.

[Speaker 1] (10:06 - 10:15)
Another issue with the building commissioner's determination was that it was being found terrifying many veterans and so

[Speaker 1] (10:19 - 10:29)
I think it's kind of hard to confirm a project is actually complying with actually complying with it if it's not actually being measured.

[Speaker 1] (10:31 - 10:32)
I think the...

[Speaker 1] (10:33 - 10:37)
The builder was specifically asked to provide an as-built survey,

[Speaker 1] (10:37 - 10:41)
certifying the location of the foundation to certify the height measurement of the ridge,

[Speaker 1] (10:42 - 10:45)
as well as the height of the building in accordance with zoning definition.

[Speaker 1] (10:46 - 10:57)
I think all has been provided thus far as this one, I think, one step measured and is not with the public and mainstream.

[Speaker 1] (10:58 - 11:06)
So today I was hoping to ask you a survey about consumer temperature and how it regulates temperature distribution.

[Speaker 1] (11:10 - 11:21)
Another issue with the electric stress determination is the question I'm asking is not just about height. It really requires sense-specific gene analysis.

[Speaker 1] (11:22 - 11:28)
The elevation is not like you get the two unique eventually,

[Speaker 1] (11:28 - 11:35)
you don't get to see the background and how that background is being impacted by the project.

[Speaker 1] (11:37 - 11:53)
The project also can really evaluate the criteria and you go to public accessibility to snatch and take a look because that's really the standard that a lot wants to see in real life.

[Speaker 1] (12:04 - 12:09)
Another issue I have with the determination was the actual construction,

[Speaker 1] (12:09 - 12:10)
it doesn't always make sense.

[Speaker 1] (12:12 - 12:28)
And this is kind of an example here where I'm trying to show us and drawing the distance between the top of the ridge and the top of the top of that triangle is the same and bottom on both appears to be in practice.

[Speaker 1] (12:29 - 12:31)
The left side has a much,

[Speaker 1] (12:31 - 12:36)
much greater risk of developing a branch on the right side.

[Speaker 1] (12:38 - 12:40)
The endocrine system is called a condition,

[Speaker 1] (12:40 - 12:43)
it is a condition of mixing with it.

[Speaker 1] (12:44 - 12:47)
Drawing shows two windows and another one inside,

[Speaker 1] (12:47 - 12:49)
you know, section one.

[Speaker 1] (12:49 - 12:52)
And not usually the condition during to the condition.

[Speaker 1] (12:53 - 12:56)
so just

[Speaker 1] (12:58 - 13:18)
actually show some terrible changes in what it says these this is from the second landing as you're going down the stairs historically what you'd see in the picture time see rain come to the beach in the summertime it's really overgrown and very green it was a lot of greenery and you can see

[Speaker 1] (13:19 - 13:28)
Now for the mass of that really really all starts even from the top of the stairs or the second we start such kind of these views.

[Speaker 1] (13:29 - 13:33)
This is a big landing I can make for a step C directly.

[Speaker 1] (13:35 - 13:45)
It's the most critical landing in terms of doing some stuff where it's the longest landing and when you're taking a look at the scene views from that spot.

[Speaker 1] (13:46 - 13:52)
And this is kind of the biggest devastating third change in space,

[Speaker 1] (13:52 - 13:54)
thanks to zero impact.

[Speaker 1] (13:54 - 13:56)
There's a lot of space.

[Speaker 1] (14:01 - 14:03)
Another important book.

[Speaker 1] (14:04 - 14:08)
Like to keep in mind about the application of the same.

[Speaker 1] (14:08 - 14:28)
It said that in addition to signing the existing registration and maintaining integrity of the case, you can see right here in this shot that the biggest reason for that being that the top stories repeatedly get shoved in the snow and added lots of bass.

[Speaker 1] (14:31 - 14:36)
So that's a significant amount of mass being added on top of the structure.

[Speaker 1] (14:36 - 14:39)
That's not in addition to the side.

[Speaker 1] (14:40 - 14:42)
Is this a fresh question or just a fresh question?

[Speaker 1] (14:45 - 14:48)
We start to ask why do we have all this mass?

[Speaker 1] (14:49 - 14:56)
And you actually look at the planes with really frustrating as you find them, it's doing 70,000.

[Speaker 1] (15:00 - 15:03)
You're probably going to see, get back to the policy and be used.

[Speaker 1] (15:03 - 15:05)
This is really your time to listen,

[Speaker 1] (15:05 - 15:07)
should be, is coming.

[Speaker 1] (15:11 - 15:15)
You have to ask yourself how necessary is it to have them.

[Speaker 1] (15:19 - 15:25)
Functionally, I mean, to me it doesn't justify the figure who is a really rich,

[Speaker 1] (15:25 - 15:26)
interesting man.

[Speaker 1] (15:38 - 15:44)
So the conditions of the segregation was side and line 558 and crediting instruction is not a good place.

[Speaker 1] (15:47 - 15:52)
His school doctor didn't talk a lot about being taking and interpreting like a style.

[Speaker 1] (15:53 - 16:00)
And so I thought it would be interesting to see what would it look like if you took their existence and they tried to make it look like the oldest line.

[Speaker 1] (16:01 - 16:02)
I'm not an architect,

[Speaker 1] (16:02 - 16:03)
but the oldest line was a triangle.

[Speaker 1] (16:04 - 16:07)
If you take that same triangle and put it inside the inside,

[Speaker 1] (16:07 - 16:12)
it's going to look something like this. There might be limitations in an engineer plan,

[Speaker 1] (16:12 - 16:15)
but it's just a really, really simple thought.

[Speaker 1] (16:15 - 16:19)
You can see how if you take little shapes like that,

[Speaker 1] (16:19 - 16:24)
you can preserve some of the legacy views that are beginning.

[Speaker 1] (16:29 - 16:29)
In this paper,

[Speaker 1] (16:29 - 16:35)
there's a few unresolved questions, and I'm honestly

[Speaker 1] (16:37 - 16:41)
not sure what to make of them, and how to proceed with them.

[Speaker 1] (16:41 - 16:46)
And I think in certain cases, actually, they may warrant a separate post-production.

[Speaker 1] (16:46 - 16:52)
But the first is just there's a discrepancy with the minimum global space.

[Speaker 1] (16:54 - 16:56)
Do you know that's providing an absolute coverage?

[Speaker 1] (16:58 - 17:09)
The plot plan on the proposed space is indicating a seven-acre space and the application is representing the 66-foot floor.

[Speaker 1] (17:12 - 17:14)
So the script is going to be patient.

[Speaker 1] (17:20 - 17:22)
Initially, when I'm asking you on the cover,

[Speaker 1] (17:22 - 17:23)
as you can see in the movie,

[Speaker 1] (17:23 - 17:25)
it's dispersed to one of your patients.

[Speaker 1] (17:26 - 17:30)
And now the patient is listening to the test very carefully,

[Speaker 1] (17:31 - 17:35)
which is right at the end of the nurse's mouth. So not many of them have been through that.

[Speaker 1] (17:45 - 17:46)
So I think...

[Speaker 1] (17:48 - 17:55)
From here, I think it's important to actually do some confirmation about which measuring is actually measuring for the project.

[Speaker 1] (18:06 - 18:13)
Thank you again for contributing to the auction for your high grades for your first character.

[Speaker 1] (18:13 - 18:14)
So it's pretty big.

[Speaker 1] (18:15 - 18:18)
Depending on which is the accurate number is pretty

[Speaker 2] (18:18 - 18:19)
Can you say that? Sorry,

[Speaker 2] (18:19 - 18:20)
we're having a little trouble here.

[Speaker 1] (18:21 - 18:21)
I'm sorry.

[Speaker 1] (18:23 - 18:28)
If you do the calculation with a difference of square footage with the open space,

[Speaker 1] (18:28 - 18:37)
it's about 444 square feet versus a three-sided chunk to knowing which is the accurate.

[Speaker 1] (18:47 - 18:49)
Another concern I have is just about the front setback.

[Speaker 1] (18:50 - 18:58)
The application being an existing setback is 80 and the proposed setback is 21.

[Speaker 1] (18:59 - 19:04)
You can actually see in the updated notice that there are marks on the inside,

[Speaker 1] (19:05 - 19:12)
there's a total of six inches and so notably then that would actually be

[Speaker 1] (19:13 - 19:38)
up to your your own setback it took about six inches not it says there's approach this this project is considered like a continuous spot and you can tell that by the square area second length 3900 represents so that's how you know this data is so the cases where

[Speaker 1] (19:39 - 19:45)
The cases where the new structure is further from,

[Speaker 1] (19:45 - 19:49)
or has a larger front-end center,

[Speaker 1] (19:49 - 19:54)
you actually have to go to the legacy number as the actual number that's the same.

[Speaker 2] (19:59 - 20:07)
Just so you know, when we're determining if an addition is compliant to setback, we go by the setback of the addition,

[Speaker 2] (20:07 - 20:09)
which is why that information is valuable,

[Speaker 2] (20:09 - 20:11)
which is probably why that information was put on the permit.

[Speaker 2] (20:12 - 20:20)
And then it's understood by the planning board as well what the different things meant.

[Speaker 1] (20:21 - 20:21)
See you around.

[Speaker 1] (20:24 - 20:27)
So even though, like, even though, so

[Speaker 1] (20:28 - 20:37)
even though like the whole truth of the legacy structure that that's not considered part of the condition,

[Speaker 1] (20:37 - 20:40)
it's just that we missed that.

[Speaker 2] (20:42 - 20:43)
Yeah,

[Speaker 2] (20:43 - 20:48)
the existing first floor that's remained in state that that distance.

[Speaker 2] (20:50 - 20:53)
I'm confident the bike were understood what it's meant, I guess.

[Speaker 2] (20:53 - 20:55)
I just wanted to let you know, but continue on.

[Speaker 1] (21:03 - 21:10)
Another question I have too is just about the number of stories on the application and the number of stories.

[Speaker 1] (21:12 - 21:18)
So I'm just curious how this project is actually captioned, so we just give the last 15 stories,

[Speaker 1] (21:18 - 21:34)
and I didn't find anything about materials that calculation that shows this story or whether your number four satisfies the first and second. If the third floor is the first and third floor,

[Speaker 1] (21:34 - 21:37)
on the second floor, that would be the first story.

[Speaker 1] (21:38 - 21:39)
This one is

[Speaker 1] (21:45 - 21:49)
kind of going back which I'm trying to understand.

[Speaker 1] (21:52 - 22:01)
I'm not sure if there's any documentation rights since the beginning that there's a lot of stories that I've been...

[Speaker 1] (22:02 - 22:04)
Okay, got the form,

[Speaker 1] (22:04 - 22:05)
so it's okay,

[Speaker 1] (22:05 - 22:08)
and the case that's been confirmed today,

[Speaker 1] (22:09 - 22:14)
and it doesn't have a certain lesson of the story.

[Speaker 2] (22:28 - 22:32)
Was your intention not to dormer it frequently and decided to?

[Speaker 2] (22:34 - 22:37)
My plate screw was exactly as was with the dormer,

[Speaker 1] (22:37 - 22:38)
The dormer.

[Speaker 2] (22:38 - 22:38)
the ridge.

[Speaker 1] (22:42 - 22:42)
Yeah,

[Speaker 1] (22:43 - 22:49)
I think that, you know, that the dormer's ridge was on the plans.

[Speaker 1] (22:50 - 22:51)
I mean,

[Speaker 1] (22:51 - 22:53)
it works, and now I'm used to seeing a backdrop,

[Speaker 1] (22:53 - 22:56)
you know, you're only looking at individual plants,

[Speaker 1] (22:56 - 23:08)
you don't know what's actually behind it, so it's not possible to tell if a CPU is blocked or not, if it's being blocked, so that's kind of a limitation,

[Speaker 1] (23:08 - 23:09)
things like that,

[Speaker 1] (23:09 - 23:11)
even though they're ready to be handled by a server,

[Speaker 1] (23:11 - 23:14)
it's almost building on philosophy.

[Speaker 1] (23:15 - 23:23)
That doesn't answer the question of is it odd that I love wires of the human project is actually constructed.

[Speaker 1] (23:29 - 23:37)
This slide relates to just asking what the verification of what those basic calculations already do because the story that's based on the action.

[Speaker 1] (23:38 - 23:44)
And they're sitting there and she just couldn't hear you and make you out,

[Speaker 1] (23:44 - 23:47)
you know, deep enough to not disturb.

[Speaker 1] (23:49 - 23:51)
So I think that would be a great opportunity to understand it.

[Speaker 1] (23:51 - 23:53)
Not enough to hear your cats.

[Speaker 2] (23:53 - 23:53)
Yeah,

[Speaker 1] (23:53 - 23:53)
You

[Speaker 2] (23:53 - 23:54)
I feel that it's

[Speaker 1] (23:54 - 23:54)
not know,

[Speaker 2] (23:54 - 23:54)
like,

[Speaker 1] (23:54 - 23:56)
because when you get a smell,

[Speaker 1] (23:57 - 23:58)
we can hear you.

[Speaker 2] (23:58 - 23:58)
Okay, maybe we can smell,

[Speaker 1] (23:58 - 23:59)
there's

[Speaker 2] (23:59 - 23:59)
but I'm

[Speaker 1] (23:59 - 24:00)
like an echo

[Speaker 2] (24:00 - 24:00)
sure.

[Speaker 1] (24:00 - 24:01)
from the microphone.

[Speaker 1] (24:01 - 24:02)
It's like a mumble.

[Speaker 1] (24:03 - 24:03)
Yeah.

[Speaker 2] (24:03 - 24:03)
Okay.

[Speaker 2] (24:04 - 24:07)
Do you want to try without it or do you need to get it over there?

[Speaker 1] (24:07 - 24:08)
Loose chill.

[Speaker 1] (24:19 - 24:20)
It's a conversation.

[Speaker 1] (24:21 - 24:21)
I don't really.

[Speaker 2] (24:25 - 24:28)
See for if you can hear just a little bit.

[Speaker 1] (24:28 - 24:31)
Sure. Yeah, actually maybe I'm holding it too close.

[Speaker 2] (24:33 - 24:34)
There's no feedback.

[Speaker 1] (24:37 - 24:38)
Project.

[Speaker 1] (24:40 - 24:44)
So the plans depict basically an eight-foot, eight-foot,

[Speaker 1] (24:44 - 24:46)
ten-inch basement level.

[Speaker 1] (24:47 - 24:51)
The front elevation shows most of that level of luxury.

[Speaker 1] (24:51 - 24:54)
The rear elevation shows nearly the entire basement exposed,

[Speaker 1] (24:54 - 24:56)
including a basement exterior door.

[Speaker 1] (24:57 - 25:00)
The side elevation shows the ground sloping between front and rear,

[Speaker 1] (25:00 - 25:03)
so below grade varies around the building,

[Speaker 1] (25:03 - 25:08)
which is why an average finish grade not any single elevation would be at risk.

[Speaker 1] (25:11 - 25:16)
Here's kind of the calculations that should appear in the records so we actually know the answer to this question.

[Speaker 1] (25:18 - 25:23)
Really, it's an important question because if there's not enough basement there,

[Speaker 1] (25:23 - 25:25)
that's a story that needs to be investigated.

[Speaker 1] (25:38 - 25:51)
2273A3 states that a structure that encroaches upon one or more required yard or setbacks may be altered as a right only where the alteration would apply if altered setbacks, yards,

[Speaker 1] (25:51 - 25:53)
building coverage and building requirements.

[Speaker 1] (25:54 - 26:03)
So as the site plan special permit under Section 4.5.4.2.2 is triggered by an addition exceeding 500 square feet,

[Speaker 1] (26:03 - 26:13)
it does not itself supply the determination required by 2273B. If the alteration fails to satisfy the aspect of grade criteria in 2273A.

[Speaker 3] (26:23 - 26:28)
But this was reviewed by site plan or by the planning board,

[Speaker 3] (26:28 - 26:28)
correct?

[Speaker 2] (26:29 - 26:30)
Right, yes.

[Speaker 3] (26:31 - 26:32)
So that's been met.

[Speaker 1] (26:36 - 26:41)
So 2273B doesn't apply here.

[Speaker 3] (26:46 - 26:50)
Well, it wasn't as of right so it wasn't like a rubber stamp permit so then it had to go to

[Speaker 3] (26:51 - 26:52)
planning review

[Speaker 3] (26:53 - 26:54)
Which then they reviewed?

[Speaker 2] (26:56 - 26:57)
Correct, yes.

[Speaker 3] (26:57 - 26:57)
Yeah

[Speaker 1] (27:07 - 27:11)
So the addition of the mass that.

[Speaker 1] (27:12 - 27:14)
That doesn't make sense.

[Speaker 2] (27:19 - 27:26)
Exactly. So there was a point at which if you had a nonconforming structure,

[Speaker 2] (27:27 - 27:29)
no matter what you did to it, you had to come before zoning.

[Speaker 2] (27:29 - 27:43)
But then there were several cases that, you know, appeals that went up through state law that then determined that you no longer need, if your addition is conforming and meets all your setback requirements,

[Speaker 2] (27:44 - 27:47)
you no longer need to go before your local ZBA.

[Speaker 2] (27:47 - 27:53)
And in this case, we have an additional requirement for the site. Not every city has that,

[Speaker 2] (27:53 - 27:54)
but for the site plan special permit.

[Speaker 2] (27:55 - 28:01)
with the 500 square foot so that's why the two planning rather than zoning right

[Speaker 1] (28:01 - 28:05)
So in this case, like increasing all that mass over the legacy structure,

[Speaker 1] (28:05 - 28:09)
that's not considered going to be on that non-conforming risk, I guess.

[Speaker 2] (28:10 - 28:16)
because the increase um the increase square footage of the um of that

[Speaker 2] (28:16 - 28:30)
Third story did not increase on and encroach on any of the setbacks any more than the existing structure already did and therefore they do not require a zoning relief.

[Speaker 1] (28:31 - 28:33)
Well, I've been given

[Speaker 1] (28:35 - 28:41)
a lot of understanding is the primary setback is like 12 and a half.

[Speaker 1] (28:42 - 28:47)
And that building mass starts like 12 feet behind that and 12,

[Speaker 1] (28:47 - 28:47)
13,

[Speaker 1] (28:47 - 28:47)
14,

[Speaker 1] (28:48 - 28:48)
15.

[Speaker 1] (28:48 - 28:53)
That means that mass is starting like 15 feet within that 20 feet required setback.

[Speaker 1] (28:54 - 28:56)
So like, that's what I was thinking of that.

[Speaker 2] (28:56 - 28:59)
Yeah, I completely understand what you're thinking.

[Speaker 2] (28:59 - 29:07)
So this is the case even if like let's say a structure has a two-foot left yard setback.

[Speaker 2] (29:08 - 29:21)
And they want to add to the rear of the building and they don't encroach any closer to that two feet they stay along that two feet that's considered conforming whereas if they start to encroach more than and that is something that the

[Speaker 1] (29:23 - 29:28)
They still need a finding from us, like for that three foot.

[Speaker 1] (29:29 - 29:29)
It's a tradition

[Speaker 2] (29:29 - 29:30)
Yeah.

[Speaker 1] (29:30 - 29:32)
that would be defining that it's no more non-conforming than

[Speaker 2] (29:32 - 29:33)
And existing so,

[Speaker 1] (29:33 - 29:33)
non-conforming

[Speaker 2] (29:33 - 29:34)
sorry

[Speaker 1] (29:34 - 29:34)
starting

[Speaker 2] (29:34 - 29:35)
to like rephrase that.

[Speaker 1] (29:35 - 29:38)
back to July 1st

[Speaker 2] (29:38 - 29:38)
So,

[Speaker 1] (29:38 - 29:38)
right.

[Speaker 2] (29:38 - 29:40)
yeah,

[Speaker 2] (29:41 - 29:47)
the mass state laws is really,

[Speaker 2] (29:47 - 29:47)
if anything,

[Speaker 2] (29:47 - 29:49)
making it much easier to.

[Speaker 2] (29:54 - 29:55)
Definitely.

[Speaker 2] (29:55 - 30:01)
And I would add too that like my appeal here, it's really not anti-development.

[Speaker 2] (30:02 - 30:05)
You know, they have a right to build two townhouses here.

[Speaker 2] (30:06 - 30:08)
My issue is just more with how that performs.

[Speaker 2] (30:10 - 30:11)
being attracted to what it's doing

[Speaker 2] (30:13 - 30:14)
so much

[Speaker 1] (30:26 - 30:28)
Is there anything else you wanted to?

[Speaker 2] (30:28 - 30:30)
No, that was that was really it

[Speaker 1] (30:36 - 30:40)
So, I have a couple questions for Rich.

[Speaker 1] (30:40 - 30:41)
Just wondering,

[Speaker 1] (30:41 - 30:45)
do you, I assume once all the plans are submitted,

[Speaker 1] (30:45 - 30:53)
you're able to make that to an asset information and that do you have, do you have calculations made to be in the plan submitted?

[Speaker 2] (30:54 - 30:56)
Ask that question again.

[Speaker 1] (30:56 - 30:56)
Sorry,

[Speaker 2] (30:56 - 30:57)
What

[Speaker 1] (30:57 - 30:57)
the calculation

[Speaker 2] (30:57 - 30:57)
calculations

[Speaker 1] (30:57 - 30:59)
for the two and a half stories.

[Speaker 2] (30:59 - 31:00)
whether it's the third floor.

[Speaker 1] (31:00 - 31:05)
Yeah, so they did not require any relief for that third floor.

[Speaker 1] (31:05 - 31:07)
It encompassed only for it.

[Speaker 1] (31:09 - 31:09)
Um, so.

[Speaker 2] (31:09 - 31:13)
So I haven't done the framing inspection yet.

[Speaker 2] (31:13 - 31:29)
The framing inspection happens after the roof and the siding and windows is on and then building code requires plumbing inspection and electrical inspection to be finished,

[Speaker 2] (31:29 - 31:31)
the rough plumbing and electric.

[Speaker 1] (31:34 - 31:35)
But the plan submitted to planning,

[Speaker 1] (31:36 - 31:38)
not that two and a half story calculation.

[Speaker 2] (31:39 - 31:41)
I believe

[Speaker 2] (31:45 - 31:46)
it did.

[Speaker 2] (32:12 - 32:15)
with basement floor plans this

[Speaker 2] (32:17 - 32:18)
page because

[Speaker 2] (32:27 - 32:30)
they give the dimensions and it doesn't give a count at all

[Speaker 2] (32:32 - 32:32)
okay

[Speaker 2] (32:41 - 32:42)
I have three or four plans.

[Speaker 2] (32:55 - 32:56)
Yeah,

[Speaker 2] (32:56 - 33:01)
it doesn't even ask you to come to CVDA if it's not compliant with the report.

[Speaker 2] (33:12 - 33:14)
There may be other ways to get there.

[Speaker 1] (33:17 - 33:18)
No,

[Speaker 2] (33:18 - 33:20)
I don't think we can make a determination that it's

[Speaker 1] (33:20 - 33:20)
a section, if

[Speaker 2] (33:20 - 33:21)
that it's a house for you,

[Speaker 1] (33:21 - 33:21)
the

[Speaker 2] (33:21 - 33:22)
if it's

[Speaker 1] (33:22 - 33:22)
assortment,

[Speaker 2] (33:22 - 33:22)
a section.

[Speaker 1] (33:22 - 33:24)
if it's fine and if it isn't fine,

[Speaker 1] (33:24 - 33:24)
it's a...

[Speaker 1] (33:25 - 33:27)
Yeah, that will happen during the inspection.

[Speaker 1] (33:29 - 33:31)
Does anybody else have any questions?

[Speaker 1] (33:33 - 33:35)
Or actually,

[Speaker 1] (33:35 - 33:36)
since we have the luxury of having a chair,

[Speaker 1] (33:37 - 33:37)
does anybody have any questions?

[Speaker 1] (33:44 - 33:50)
Anybody want to share any thoughts people who open up about the politics or you don't spend a lot of time on things that we need?

[Speaker 1] (33:57 - 33:58)
What's that?

[Speaker 2] (33:58 - 34:04)
Let's see what we want to hear first from the

[Speaker 1] (34:04 - 34:04)
Okay.

[Speaker 2] (34:04 - 34:05)
development.

[Speaker 1] (34:05 - 34:05)
Yeah,

[Speaker 1] (34:05 - 34:08)
I'd like to hear first come talk to the owner and the developers.

[Speaker 2] (34:11 - 34:11)
I'm here,

[Speaker 2] (34:11 - 34:15)
but I think handedly the ability to inspect and read the determination.

[Speaker 2] (34:16 - 34:19)
You know, we're here to support the ability to support this determination.

[Speaker 2] (34:20 - 34:22)
He doesn't expect his letters to be right.

[Speaker 3] (34:22 - 34:22)
I smell your

[Speaker 2] (34:22 - 34:22)
We

[Speaker 3] (34:22 - 34:23)
burr and you don't have

[Speaker 2] (34:23 - 34:23)
don't

[Speaker 3] (34:23 - 34:23)
to

[Speaker 2] (34:23 - 34:24)
have to go ahead

[Speaker 1] (34:24 - 34:24)
but

[Speaker 2] (34:24 - 34:24)
and reiterate,

[Speaker 1] (34:24 - 34:28)
if you want to just come here so I thought if you want to speak I would give you the first note

[Speaker 2] (34:28 - 34:29)
but I do think that we always have to you

[Speaker 3] (34:29 - 34:30)
you don't have to we'll

[Speaker 2] (34:30 - 34:30)
know,

[Speaker 3] (34:30 - 34:37)
see maybe we'll wait till after we hear from the public and then if you have others just so you know it's

[Speaker 3] (34:38 - 34:49)
Doug Dubin and McNulty Eastman LLC we're the owner we're the builders of this I built it just like to the jar I'm just so they know who we are that's

[Speaker 1] (34:49 - 34:49)
Yeah, that's great.

[Speaker 1] (34:49 - 34:49)
Thank you.

[Speaker 3] (34:49 - 34:50)
all

[Speaker 1] (34:52 - 34:56)
All right, so we will open to public comment.

[Speaker 1] (34:56 - 34:58)
We're going to ask everybody to,

[Speaker 1] (34:58 - 35:00)
if you just are in support,

[Speaker 1] (35:00 - 35:01)
you can just say I'm in support.

[Speaker 1] (35:01 - 35:03)
You don't have to restate everything that we've just heard.

[Speaker 1] (35:04 - 35:08)
And if you just when you raise your hand, just state your name and address for the record,

[Speaker 1] (35:08 - 35:14)
if anybody has anything to say, or if you have specific questions for the board, feel free to ask that as well.

[Speaker 1] (35:15 - 35:18)
Keeping in mind that really the only things we're considering.

[Speaker 1] (35:18 - 35:37)
in this situation is have the is the construction different than the approved plans from the planning board you're not going back to the beginning of the planning board the appeal period for that has lapsed if anybody has any questions please just raise their hand and

[Speaker 1] (35:41 - 35:41)
stress test

[Speaker 2] (35:43 - 35:46)
I am the drainage of Sixth Street.

[Speaker 2] (35:46 - 35:49)
I am in support of this.

[Speaker 2] (35:57 - 36:09)
I'm going to show a little of the nearby sculptures and my address is 60 King Street in New Address.

[Speaker 2] (36:09 - 36:09)
easy

[Speaker 1] (36:09 - 36:10)
I'm

[Speaker 2] (36:10 - 36:14)
to find the streets so i'm familiar with the link and call me on the camera

[Speaker 1] (36:16 - 36:17)
sorry I didn't hear your comment,

[Speaker 1] (36:17 - 36:18)
I just heard you had a peer address.

[Speaker 2] (36:18 - 36:22)
i guess i said this is part of the question

[Speaker 2] (36:31 - 36:33)
i'm not on the 39 rock and tree

[Speaker 2] (36:34 - 36:34)
Good question.

[Speaker 2] (36:35 - 36:38)
Let's go back to the third floor calculation.

[Speaker 2] (36:38 - 36:42)
Can anyone tell me what that calculation is?

[Speaker 2] (36:42 - 36:45)
So if it's the lowest part of your property,

[Speaker 2] (36:45 - 36:50)
you can only go up two and a half stories from that lowest point of the property,

[Speaker 2] (36:50 - 36:51)
right?

[Speaker 1] (36:52 - 36:59)
No, it's the average grade is where you begin to measure from the for feet directly average grade

[Speaker 3] (37:01 - 37:01)
Correct.

[Speaker 2] (37:01 - 37:04)
But the physical level is at grade,

[Speaker 2] (37:04 - 37:07)
and then it drops down 10 feet.

[Speaker 2] (37:10 - 37:14)
It does, but you don't measure it from where it drops down away from the foundation.

[Speaker 2] (37:14 - 37:16)
That's at the foundation. So

[Speaker 2] (37:16 - 37:23)
It's the measurement at the foundation, where the grade is at the foundation.

[Speaker 2] (37:24 - 37:26)
So say you go to 0 to 10.

[Speaker 3] (37:26 - 37:28)
So the iron can be five like you have.

[Speaker 2] (37:28 - 37:29)
Yeah,

[Speaker 2] (37:29 - 37:30)
I would say average

[Speaker 3] (37:30 - 37:36)
So if they went up too much, they would sign a five and how high could they go for five feet to break?

[Speaker 2] (37:37 - 37:48)
grade is 35 feet and we don't measure to the top of the ridge we measure halfway from the ridge to the sill where it supports the roof rafters

[Speaker 2] (37:53 - 37:59)
One point I think that calculation was misguiding to myself.

[Speaker 2] (37:59 - 38:00)
That's why I'm curious.

[Speaker 2] (38:01 - 38:04)
I'm a supporter of the John's family and women.

[Speaker 2] (38:05 - 38:08)
Anybody else? Does that calculation exist anywhere?

[Speaker 2] (38:08 - 38:12)
Because that was something I was trying to confirm that I just wasn't able to do.

[Speaker 3] (38:13 - 38:16)
It doesn't have to be built yet or a measurement that's been done at all of that,

[Speaker 3] (38:16 - 38:17)
but if it's not in compliance,

[Speaker 3] (38:18 - 38:19)
there would need to be someone relieved.

[Speaker 2] (38:24 - 38:36)
I couldn't go further with my idea because my architect said they don't have a two higher rate and I can pretty much have the same configuration when we're talking about new things.

[Speaker 2] (38:36 - 38:37)
Just saying.

[Speaker 2] (38:39 - 38:40)
It comes at the board.

[Speaker 2] (38:40 - 38:44)
I come to the board because my architect said that's

[Speaker 1] (38:44 - 38:44)
We

[Speaker 2] (38:44 - 38:44)
too high.

[Speaker 1] (38:44 - 38:45)
asked you to.

[Speaker 2] (38:45 - 38:46)
No, no, that's a different story.

[Speaker 1] (38:50 - 38:50)
All right.

[Speaker 1] (38:50 - 38:51)
There are any other comments?

[Speaker 1] (38:52 - 38:56)
And if you have anybody who's watching remotely,

[Speaker 1] (38:57 - 38:58)
if they have a comment,

[Speaker 1] (38:58 - 38:59)
they can raise their hand.

[Speaker 1] (39:08 - 39:08)
Same.

[Speaker 1] (39:12 - 39:13)
That sounds great.

[Speaker 1] (39:13 - 39:16)
You guys are doing a wonderful job.

[Speaker 1] (39:16 - 39:24)
The one thing that I beg you to put back is that scrumble to the ground.

[Speaker 1] (39:27 - 39:44)
This house has been deteriorating for so long and it was such a sad like oh it's crumbling to the ground so it's nice to see it brought back up but I'm having the same problem with this that I did with the Concordia.

[Speaker 1] (39:46 - 39:54)
no more views between the moxics, and at the top of our hill,

[Speaker 1] (39:54 - 39:55)
57,

[Speaker 1] (39:55 - 39:59)
the Wartenhorst did a beautiful job without hooks,

[Speaker 1] (39:59 - 40:00)
it's gorgeous,

[Speaker 1] (40:01 - 40:04)
you can't stand at the top of the street and see.

[Speaker 1] (40:05 - 40:05)
at the end.

[Speaker 1] (40:06 - 40:12)
So when you get to the topic of stuff and it's gone,

[Speaker 1] (40:13 - 40:14)
it's going to be for good.

[Speaker 1] (40:15 - 40:16)
It's not for death.

[Speaker 1] (40:17 - 40:29)
What's the point of us having these parameters to guide us to keep what makes Swamp Shack special different?

[Speaker 2] (40:31 - 40:31)
Well,

[Speaker 1] (40:31 - 40:31)
She's

[Speaker 2] (40:31 - 40:31)
I believe

[Speaker 1] (40:31 - 40:32)
not going to hear

[Speaker 2] (40:32 - 40:33)
you understand that

[Speaker 1] (40:33 - 40:33)
it's

[Speaker 2] (40:33 - 40:34)
that's

[Speaker 1] (40:34 - 40:34)
not a cap.

[Speaker 1] (40:34 - 40:35)
The view is gone.

[Speaker 2] (40:37 - 40:44)
not, I don't believe we have jurisdiction under that section of the bylaw to enforce seating to that was playing board.

[Speaker 1] (40:44 - 40:45)
But it's

[Speaker 2] (40:45 - 40:45)
They

[Speaker 1] (40:45 - 40:45)
a view.

[Speaker 2] (40:45 - 40:46)
had to make a finding.

[Speaker 2] (40:48 - 40:50)
We sometimes,

[Speaker 2] (40:50 - 40:52)
our board has jurisdiction over projects,

[Speaker 2] (40:52 - 40:54)
this one we didn't have jurisdiction over.

[Speaker 1] (40:54 - 40:59)
If you can stand in your box and say it's not my problem,

[Speaker 1] (40:59 - 41:00)
then...

[Speaker 1] (41:01 - 41:02)
This problem isn't

[Speaker 2] (41:02 - 41:06)
It's been mine. I've been doing it for over 20 years as a volunteer on the sport.

[Speaker 1] (41:06 - 41:07)
No,

[Speaker 2] (41:07 - 41:07)
I

[Speaker 1] (41:07 - 41:08)
it's not yours either,

[Speaker 1] (41:08 - 41:14)
but you know, I'm saying you guys have to understand that as a neighborhood,

[Speaker 1] (41:14 - 41:16)
we're losing our community.

[Speaker 2] (41:16 - 41:25)
don't know what happened at the planning board. I don't know if any of the abutters came and objected. I don't know if you couldn't help from the plan that there was this ridge.

[Speaker 2] (41:26 - 41:29)
I don't like the way,

[Speaker 1] (41:29 - 41:34)
The legacy, it looks like it's probably on here,

[Speaker 1] (41:34 - 41:35)
that overlay,

[Speaker 1] (41:35 - 41:36)
it's like peak,

[Speaker 1] (41:36 - 41:36)
peak,

[Speaker 2] (41:36 - 41:36)
I

[Speaker 1] (41:36 - 41:37)
so,

[Speaker 2] (41:37 - 41:42)
agree with you on that 100% as it looks far for something

[Speaker 1] (41:42 - 41:42)
something

[Speaker 2] (41:42 - 41:43)
beyond city.

[Speaker 1] (41:43 - 41:44)
that, no,

[Speaker 1] (41:44 - 41:45)
that's wonderful,

[Speaker 1] (41:45 - 41:46)
great,

[Speaker 1] (41:46 - 41:47)
good job.

[Speaker 1] (41:48 - 41:48)
Perfect.

[Speaker 1] (41:49 - 41:51)
You're making the most use of the space.

[Speaker 1] (41:51 - 41:53)
People are going to want to live there.

[Speaker 1] (41:53 - 41:54)
That's so good.

[Speaker 1] (41:55 - 41:57)
And then you get there and you're like,

[Speaker 1] (41:57 - 41:58)
what's with the shift?

[Speaker 2] (42:00 - 42:03)
Yeah, that one is obviously the one that you're confused on.

[Speaker 1] (42:03 - 42:05)
But it looks like, yeah,

[Speaker 3] (42:05 - 42:10)
but that's why there are lots of drawings. There's lots of elevations. There's lots of drawings.

[Speaker 1] (42:10 - 42:11)
it all looks like.

[Speaker 3] (42:12 - 42:12)
Or, well,

[Speaker 3] (42:12 - 42:13)
there's still,

[Speaker 3] (42:13 - 42:14)
please continue.

[Speaker 3] (42:14 - 42:14)
So,

[Speaker 2] (42:14 - 42:14)
One

[Speaker 3] (42:14 - 42:14)
hold

[Speaker 2] (42:14 - 42:16)
page does.

[Speaker 2] (42:16 - 42:24)
There's an elevation that shows the view of their structure from an elevation similar to the stairs.

[Speaker 2] (42:24 - 42:24)
There's not one.

[Speaker 2] (42:25 - 42:26)
And on the one...

[Speaker 3] (42:26 - 42:34)
on just a second because we have to just make sure we're all saying our names and where we live and if you have, are you all, are you, do you have anything else?

[Speaker 3] (42:36 - 42:36)
Okay,

[Speaker 1] (42:36 - 42:36)
Yeah.

[Speaker 3] (42:36 - 42:43)
if you could just say your name and just like I said, we're keeping this to there were approved plans by the planning board.

[Speaker 3] (42:43 - 42:49)
Those plans were not there was the time to appeal those plans have lapsed. So this is not what this is.

[Speaker 3] (42:49 - 42:53)
This is simply is what's still different than the plans that were submitted.

[Speaker 4] (42:54 - 43:02)
I think that I should definitely tell you, remember, please support also Tom Sassman, the CEO of 25 Angels Terrace.

[Speaker 4] (43:02 - 43:04)
One thing I need to say, I wanted this about this,

[Speaker 4] (43:04 - 43:11)
but we weren't notified to that meeting at any board because the GIS database was not updated yet.

[Speaker 4] (43:12 - 43:13)
So that's a separate issue.

[Speaker 4] (43:14 - 43:20)
But I think one of the things we want to mention about just the view itself.

[Speaker 4] (43:21 - 43:29)
and the motion of the meeting was that there's only there's a couple documents that kind of you you're not

[Speaker 4] (43:29 - 43:54)
well-versed in the documents you look at it and you go okay I can see maybe there's a ridge behind it but one of the documents where we showed legacy structure the ridge isn't even connected on it so you really are feigning trying to understand if you were even notified to be able to go that original meeting at the planning board that that's what was going on because the ridge itself is not even connected on that document.

[Speaker 2] (43:55 - 43:57)
I think that's the first page of the scope.

[Speaker 4] (43:57 - 44:03)
You would advise construction is out, which is what was promised, because of the lack of structure that would look exactly like it had been before,

[Speaker 4] (44:03 - 44:03)
quotes,

[Speaker 4] (44:03 - 44:06)
and I'll be done doing this.

[Speaker 2] (44:11 - 44:14)
Yeah, I think this is the page that might be confusing for folks.

[Speaker 2] (44:14 - 44:16)
It's the scope document page.

[Speaker 2] (44:16 - 44:17)
It doesn't show the letters.

[Speaker 2] (44:19 - 44:21)
But it shows I've got that page here.

[Speaker 2] (44:22 - 44:24)
On closer inspection,

[Speaker 2] (44:24 - 44:26)
it shows the top of the ridge.

[Speaker 2] (44:26 - 44:30)
You don't have the line over the cross measuring the height.

[Speaker 2] (44:30 - 44:36)
I see how I got confused the first time I looked at it, but then when I went through it and I paid more attention.

[Speaker 2] (44:36 - 44:38)
So I don't know what the planning board found,

[Speaker 2] (44:38 - 44:40)
but that appeal,

[Speaker 2] (44:40 - 44:42)
that period is past.

[Speaker 2] (44:44 - 44:48)
So I sympathize that if you did get notice,

[Speaker 2] (44:48 - 44:51)
if you weren't aware,

[Speaker 2] (44:51 - 44:54)
wouldn't have been aware of that bridge,

[Speaker 2] (44:54 - 44:57)
it's unfortunate,

[Speaker 2] (44:57 - 44:59)
but the planning board,

[Speaker 2] (44:59 - 45:01)
they consider the plans.

[Speaker 2] (45:02 - 45:06)
And we're not in a position to second guess the planning board.

[Speaker 2] (45:06 - 45:10)
We're only in a position to see if there's been compliance with the approved plans.

[Speaker 4] (45:11 - 45:15)
So it doesn't work that like those conditions follow that

[Speaker 2] (45:15 - 45:16)
special Those,

[Speaker 4] (45:16 - 45:16)
agreement.

[Speaker 2] (45:16 - 45:28)
the standard in the bylaw about preserving scenic views is part of the jurisdiction of the particular board that's deciding whether to grant the permit or not,

[Speaker 2] (45:28 - 45:32)
either a site plan special permit or a dimensional special permit.

[Speaker 2] (45:33 - 45:35)
And that's one of the factors to take in.

[Speaker 2] (45:36 - 45:40)
So there's jurisdiction over public views by a board,

[Speaker 2] (45:40 - 45:42)
but there's not one for private views.

[Speaker 2] (45:43 - 45:44)
Here you literally have a public view.

[Speaker 2] (45:45 - 45:53)
And I don't know whether the planning board considered it or not. That was something they were supposed to consider if the appeal period has expired.

[Speaker 3] (45:53 - 45:56)
And it is just one factor that they would consider.

[Speaker 3] (45:56 - 45:59)
It's not preserved scenic views at all costs.

[Speaker 3] (45:59 - 46:06)
And in a situation like this where there was no dimensional relief asked for, which,

[Speaker 3] (46:06 - 46:08)
like we said, is why it didn't come before our board,

[Speaker 3] (46:08 - 46:10)
there's usually...

[Speaker 3] (46:12 - 46:16)
Probably more lenience given to someone who's building a completely compliant structure.

[Speaker 3] (46:16 - 46:25)
Most people who are having site plan review also are asking for a lot of setback relief as well.

[Speaker 3] (46:25 - 46:31)
And so because this project is very conforming, I think that it's very difficult to say.

[Speaker 3] (46:32 - 46:36)
Okay, you're building more housing, which is something we need. You're building a conforming structure,

[Speaker 3] (46:36 - 46:37)
which is something we appreciate.

[Speaker 3] (46:38 - 46:40)
The fact that some scenic views,

[Speaker 3] (46:41 - 46:42)
you know, might be compromised,

[Speaker 3] (46:43 - 46:46)
that would be, those would all be factors.

[Speaker 3] (46:46 - 46:47)
It wouldn't just be,

[Speaker 3] (46:47 - 46:48)
you can't block a view,

[Speaker 3] (46:48 - 46:49)
never.

[Speaker 3] (46:50 - 46:50)
you know no

[Speaker 2] (46:50 - 46:51)
Mm-hmm.

[Speaker 3] (46:51 - 47:09)
matter what so it just would be one of the factors that the planning board would have considered like Mark said we are not the planning board so our here I think we can only try to determine is this structure is this are they building what they submitted that they were going to build and

[Speaker 3] (47:09 - 47:14)
So far, to me, there seems to be no evidence that they're building something different than what they submitted,

[Speaker 3] (47:14 - 47:18)
and then with our building commissioner doing the final framing inspection,

[Speaker 3] (47:18 - 47:30)
that is his job to then make sure that everything is built according to the plan and that will happen at that time. It's a little early for that now.

[Speaker 2] (47:31 - 47:36)
How is it possible to determine that it's being built in compliance with the plan and measurements?

[Speaker 3] (47:38 - 47:48)
So that would be what the building commissioner will do when the inspection of the framing happens.

[Speaker 2] (47:48 - 47:51)
initially and then there's probably going to be an as-built

[Speaker 3] (47:51 - 47:51)
There

[Speaker 2] (47:51 - 47:51)
audit.

[Speaker 3] (47:51 - 47:54)
will be an as-built plan once it's completed as well.

[Speaker 3] (47:54 - 47:57)
And that's usually you don't have an as-built plan in the middle of construction.

[Speaker 3] (47:58 - 47:59)
That usually happens at the end.

[Speaker 2] (47:59 - 48:00)
So in terms of this

[Speaker 4] (48:01 - 48:03)
Public city view bylaw,

[Speaker 4] (48:03 - 48:05)
it's just not something that gets enforced,

[Speaker 4] (48:05 - 48:08)
it's on some of the special department for me,

[Speaker 4] (48:08 - 48:12)
it's a special area, you know, that's actually seen.

[Speaker 3] (48:12 - 48:18)
It is one of the factors when determining if something under site plan review,

[Speaker 3] (48:19 - 48:20)
it would be one of the factors.

[Speaker 3] (48:20 - 48:23)
There's lots of factors in site plan review,

[Speaker 3] (48:23 - 48:28)
but preserving useful public ways, not private views would be one of the factors.

[Speaker 4] (48:29 - 48:34)
I just didn't see in the record where they did any sort of analysis against ACQ.

[Speaker 3] (48:37 - 48:45)
Yeah, and I understand that's frustrating and I apologize that you didn't get the notification that was required and I'm not sure where that

[Speaker 3] (48:46 - 49:13)
how that gets rectified but with this board we're we're here we have a very narrow scope of what we have authority over and at this point that's what results whether or not this the bullet speech builds is what plans were submitted and I mean I'm not only one vote but I'm seeing that it does seem to be what the plans were submitted and then we have you know our building commissioner to continue to follow up and make sure that compliance is consistent with it so

[Speaker 4] (49:16 - 49:16)
Yeah,

[Speaker 2] (49:16 - 49:17)
Okay.

[Speaker 4] (49:17 - 49:20)
but like, is there a reason why like, like to me that third floor,

[Speaker 4] (49:21 - 49:24)
it looks questionable if it's a full story or half story.

[Speaker 4] (49:25 - 49:26)
So why,

[Speaker 4] (49:26 - 49:28)
what's the benefit of waiting to do measurement?

[Speaker 4] (49:29 - 49:30)
Like why not measure it now?

[Speaker 4] (49:31 - 49:34)
I think that measurement could be done now the same story extensively.

[Speaker 4] (49:35 - 49:39)
So I would think if you know that it's actually a full story.

[Speaker 2] (49:39 - 49:41)
then it does help.

[Speaker 2] (49:41 - 49:45)
It does sort of shade this public scene of the news case.

[Speaker 2] (49:45 - 49:54)
And the full story, half stories determined by the location of the wall from the inside, it has nothing to do with the outside shell.

[Speaker 2] (49:54 - 50:00)
So until the walls are framed up, you can't determine if it's a half story or a full story, which is 50% of the story.

[Speaker 2] (49:59 - 50:13)
kind of the floor so and if it's determined to be a full story because the walls are in too much they can change the walls and make it compliant so it is still a white hat

[Speaker 3] (50:13 - 50:14)
So, you know,

[Speaker 3] (50:14 - 50:21)
inspection might be from the bottom of, so yeah, it has to be built to do it.

[Speaker 3] (50:21 - 50:25)
And so that's why the inspections are all set for specific times for all these things to happen.

[Speaker 2] (50:27 - 50:28)
But if they don't comply,

[Speaker 3] (50:28 - 50:28)
Right.

[Speaker 2] (50:28 - 50:30)
and it's a third story,

[Speaker 2] (50:30 - 50:34)
I would expect that the building inspector would issue an order,

[Speaker 2] (50:34 - 50:35)
enforcement order for that.

[Speaker 2] (50:36 - 50:41)
Meaning a third story meaning there's more than 50% of that being used.

[Speaker 3] (50:45 - 50:46)
Mr.

[Speaker 3] (50:46 - 50:46)
Jensen?

[Speaker 2] (50:46 - 50:51)
Have all of those that wish to speak in favor before we start those in opposition?

[Speaker 2] (50:52 - 50:55)
I mean, I have a lot to say because there's a lot being said in the last hour.

[Speaker 2] (50:55 - 50:57)
I think the record needs to reflect,

[Speaker 2] (50:57 - 51:04)
record needs to reflect the correct explanations that the applicant is observing here.

[Speaker 2] (51:04 - 51:07)
And so if I can be given an opportunity,

[Speaker 2] (51:07 - 51:07)
I'd love

[Speaker 3] (51:07 - 51:07)
Yes,

[Speaker 2] (51:07 - 51:07)
to be.

[Speaker 3] (51:07 - 51:11)
you can, but let's try to keep it, oh yes,

[Speaker 2] (51:11 - 51:11)
Keep

[Speaker 3] (51:11 - 51:13)
short. speaking of the record,

[Speaker 2] (51:13 - 51:14)
I think

[Speaker 3] (51:14 - 51:16)
I think

[Speaker 2] (51:16 - 51:18)
if you're able to finish your report,

[Speaker 2] (51:18 - 51:19)
the rest of you, you want it.

[Speaker 2] (51:19 - 51:20)
In figure,

[Speaker 2] (51:20 - 51:24)
this is just a petition against the people sign.

[Speaker 2] (51:24 - 51:26)
I think we've got 56 or 57 signatures.

[Speaker 2] (51:27 - 51:31)
People who believe this project does not combine with the Biden.

[Speaker 2] (51:40 - 51:42)
You may want to take your own pictures,

[Speaker 2] (51:42 - 51:44)
but we can't. You don't have to look at them.

[Speaker 3] (51:44 - 51:44)
Yeah,

[Speaker 3] (51:44 - 51:44)
you don't have

[Speaker 2] (51:44 - 51:44)
It's

[Speaker 3] (51:44 - 51:45)
to.

[Speaker 2] (51:45 - 51:46)
skivings of the paint,

[Speaker 2] (51:46 - 51:48)
or it's misdeeds of the people. Oh no,

[Speaker 2] (51:48 - 51:48)
to the contrary.

[Speaker 2] (51:49 - 51:50)
That's not what I'm doing right now.

[Speaker 2] (51:51 - 51:53)
Assuming that you know who it is, it's the artist's

[Speaker 3] (51:53 - 51:54)
Let's be straight.

[Speaker 2] (51:54 - 51:54)
name.

[Speaker 3] (51:54 - 51:54)
Let's be straight.

[Speaker 3] (51:55 - 51:56)
Yeah, already kind

[Speaker 2] (51:56 - 51:56)
I'm

[Speaker 3] (51:56 - 51:56)
of, right?

[Speaker 2] (51:56 - 51:58)
not going to be looking at these pictures.

[Speaker 3] (51:58 - 52:02)
That's sort of a little bit of where we stand already.

[Speaker 2] (52:02 - 52:03)
That's why I was reading the record.

[Speaker 2] (52:04 - 52:07)
This matter may be appealed, I don't know.

[Speaker 2] (52:07 - 52:08)
It needs to be read.

[Speaker 2] (52:09 - 52:12)
Record can't be established unless there's evidence and facts being presented.

[Speaker 2] (52:13 - 52:17)
I think the board has a very clear understanding as to what its role is,

[Speaker 2] (52:17 - 52:19)
the role of the planning board,

[Speaker 2] (52:19 - 52:21)
the role of the building commissioner,

[Speaker 2] (52:21 - 52:24)
but I just want to establish some dates, some criteria,

[Speaker 2] (52:24 - 52:25)
some context.

[Speaker 2] (52:26 - 52:27)
And as you are aware,

[Speaker 2] (52:28 - 52:30)
there was an application filed by my clients.

[Speaker 2] (52:31 - 52:32)
in December of 2025.

[Speaker 2] (52:33 - 52:41)
It was a hearing on that before the planning board on January the 12th. The planning board unanimously granted the site plan special permit.

[Speaker 2] (52:42 - 52:49)
The decision was filed on January the 29th. As you clearly indicated, there was an appeal period that expired on March the 9th.

[Speaker 2] (52:50 - 52:54)
The decision was recorded on March the 10th at the registry of deeds.

[Speaker 2] (52:54 - 53:00)
Based upon recording the decision and providing a copy of that recorded decision to the building commissioner,

[Speaker 2] (53:00 - 53:07)
an application for a building permit was signed and was granted on March 17th.

[Speaker 2] (53:07 - 53:13)
It was an expiration period of the building commissioner's determination to issue a building permit,

[Speaker 2] (53:13 - 53:16)
and that expired on April 17th.

[Speaker 2] (53:16 - 53:19)
This gentleman made inquiry of the building department.

[Speaker 2] (53:20 - 53:23)
From my discussion with the building department and the planning commission,

[Speaker 2] (53:23 - 53:24)
planning board,

[Speaker 2] (53:24 - 53:31)
on May the 27th, saw something is being built and he was questioning what was going on.

[Speaker 2] (53:32 - 53:33)
Every opportunity was there.

[Speaker 2] (53:34 - 53:43)
There was another issue that was raised that needs an answer as well. And the question that was, was there any discussion amongst the planning board members with regard to the issue of use?

[Speaker 2] (53:43 - 53:44)
And if you read the decision,

[Speaker 2] (53:45 - 53:46)
it indicates that they did.

[Speaker 2] (53:47 - 53:47)
Similarly,

[Speaker 2] (53:47 - 53:52)
it indicates that he received notice,

[Speaker 2] (53:52 - 53:56)
meaning the property address received proper notice.

[Speaker 2] (53:56 - 53:59)
I checked with Kristen McCall.

[Speaker 2] (53:59 - 54:06)
It went out timely as by statute it goes to the named owner as assessed as of January the 1st of that year.

[Speaker 2] (54:07 - 54:08)
And it did,

[Speaker 2] (54:08 - 54:11)
in fact, go to that address and there's confirmation of that.

[Speaker 2] (54:11 - 54:13)
So there are no procedural defects.

[Speaker 2] (54:14 - 54:15)
It was hurried.

[Speaker 2] (54:15 - 54:22)
The time has elapsed. Both rather planning board on their appeal to building commissioner on the appeal of the building permit.

[Speaker 2] (54:22 - 54:39)
The building commissioner though was then tasked with responsibility of answering another question which is the subject matter of the discussion this evening which was was this built according to the construction plans that were submitted and approved by the planning board and his answer to that was yes.

[Speaker 2] (54:40 - 54:43)
Just for your information, as a result of these queries,

[Speaker 2] (54:43 - 54:45)
my client went out and hired,

[Speaker 2] (54:46 - 54:48)
at his expense,

[Speaker 2] (54:48 - 54:49)
and the burden isn't on him,

[Speaker 2] (54:49 - 54:52)
but at his expense to find out what the actual height was.

[Speaker 2] (54:52 - 54:58)
It turned out the height was 33.3 feet, and in the record, and I think it was submitted to Kristen,

[Speaker 2] (54:58 - 55:04)
I think the building commissioner, in fact, submitted that to the board.

[Speaker 2] (55:05 - 55:07)
The finding of Mr.

[Speaker 2] (55:07 - 55:07)
Fair,

[Speaker 2] (55:07 - 55:09)
which was that a 33.3,

[Speaker 2] (55:09 - 55:12)
which is in fact lower than the relief that was granted.

[Speaker 2] (55:13 - 55:15)
Now, we understand.

[Speaker 2] (55:16 - 55:18)
We understand that there are concerns.

[Speaker 2] (55:19 - 55:21)
Those concerns could have been addressed,

[Speaker 2] (55:21 - 55:22)
but they're not being addressed by this board.

[Speaker 2] (55:23 - 55:24)
And as Mr.

[Speaker 2] (55:24 - 55:25)
Grudysky indicated correctly,

[Speaker 2] (55:26 - 55:28)
it's outside the jurisdiction of this board.

[Speaker 2] (55:28 - 55:34)
But the board is very gracious and allowed the applicant the opportunity to express his concern.

[Speaker 2] (55:36 - 55:41)
I don't believe that I wasn't the applicant's attorney at the time of the hearing before the planning board,

[Speaker 2] (55:41 - 55:43)
but it does, and I read the decision,

[Speaker 2] (55:43 - 55:44)
I reviewed the tape,

[Speaker 2] (55:45 - 55:47)
there were questions with regard to the view,

[Speaker 2] (55:47 - 55:48)
they were considered,

[Speaker 2] (55:48 - 55:50)
there were findings made,

[Speaker 2] (55:50 - 55:54)
and a determination unanimously to grant the site plan special permit.

[Speaker 2] (55:54 - 55:56)
So that issue is over.

[Speaker 2] (55:57 - 56:01)
It doesn't mean that we don't understand and appreciate the concerns of the applicant.

[Speaker 2] (56:01 - 56:03)
And we're not here to dismiss that.

[Speaker 2] (56:04 - 56:15)
But on the other hand, we're not able to create another avenue for which the applicant has an opportunity to review and theoretically to get relief, which he is not entitled to.

[Speaker 2] (56:16 - 56:18)
You know, that may seem pretty black and white,

[Speaker 2] (56:18 - 56:19)
but in this case it is.

[Speaker 2] (56:23 - 56:25)
You know what your obligations are.

[Speaker 2] (56:25 - 56:41)
If you had read something from the building commissioner or had the building commissioner indicated that the applicant's drawings and the construction that was done either exceeded the authority that was granted by the site plan or a dimensional special program was required,

[Speaker 2] (56:41 - 56:44)
then theoretically by granting a building permit,

[Speaker 2] (56:44 - 56:48)
it would have been against the authority of the building commissioner.

[Speaker 2] (56:48 - 56:53)
As I said, I think that would have been addressed at the time of the appeal of the building commissioner's building permit,

[Speaker 2] (56:54 - 56:55)
but that wasn't done either.

[Speaker 2] (56:55 - 56:57)
So there's nothing before the board.

[Speaker 2] (56:57 - 57:02)
As a matter of fact, I've heard so many suppositional aspects of the applicant's discussion,

[Speaker 2] (57:02 - 57:03)
but I believe,

[Speaker 2] (57:03 - 57:07)
I think, it looks like, you know, there's nothing.

[Speaker 2] (57:07 - 57:11)
He could have done something, I'm not sure what it would have changed the board's opinion,

[Speaker 2] (57:11 - 57:12)
and gone and hired an engineer.

[Speaker 2] (57:13 - 57:21)
If he had thought for a moment that his suppositional aspects of what was being built was being built outside of the parameters of the permit,

[Speaker 2] (57:22 - 57:23)
that's his burden.

[Speaker 2] (57:23 - 57:24)
The burden is on him.

[Speaker 2] (57:24 - 57:25)
It's not on us.

[Speaker 2] (57:25 - 57:27)
But the record has to be set straight.

[Speaker 2] (57:27 - 57:29)
I'd ask you to look into the decision.

[Speaker 2] (57:29 - 57:34)
It reviews the issue of views and it indicates that despite that,

[Speaker 2] (57:35 - 57:38)
they were granting the same special permit application.

[Speaker 2] (57:38 - 57:40)
And that's what we're going by.

[Speaker 2] (57:40 - 57:44)
And unless you hear anything to the contrary from the building commissioner, which you have not,

[Speaker 2] (57:44 - 57:47)
which said it either exceeded the building,

[Speaker 2] (57:47 - 58:01)
exceeded the building plans or, in fact, created a new dimensional requirement that doesn't have the authority to do anything other than to adopt the building commission termination.

[Speaker 2] (58:02 - 58:03)
It always challenged me.

[Speaker 2] (58:03 - 58:07)
And whatever challenges I may have heard, they're suppositional.

[Speaker 2] (58:07 - 58:15)
So for those reasons, I'd ask the board to vote in the negative against the applicant's request to overrule the determination of the commission.

[Speaker 2] (58:16 - 58:16)
Thank you.

[Speaker 2] (58:18 - 58:20)
Are there any questions?

[Speaker 2] (58:22 - 58:24)
Something promised they would do it.

[Speaker 3] (58:27 - 58:27)
Yeah, okay.

[Speaker 2] (58:29 - 58:32)
Can I have your spondee back as well?

[Speaker 3] (58:34 - 58:43)
You're welcome to speak again if you have something to add to how this property is being built different from the plan submitted.

[Speaker 3] (58:44 - 58:45)
If something that...

[Speaker 2] (58:45 - 58:50)
I was just going to explain what the issue was with the notice and why we didn't get,

[Speaker 2] (58:50 - 58:54)
I didn't even come here to talk about this because it's really not an issue.

[Speaker 2] (58:54 - 59:06)
he's going to submit to record what we got the letter that's in the Nigerian family kind of pretty sure I'm starting to believe that we're actually not the only ones who didn't get that notice but that's not what I'm here to tell you so

[Speaker 3] (59:06 - 59:10)
So I will clarify that the notice was mailed to your address.

[Speaker 3] (59:10 - 59:15)
It just didn't come to our name. But the notice did go to your address.

[Speaker 2] (59:15 - 59:20)
and so so we moved into our address in August of 2025

[Speaker 2] (59:22 - 59:32)
The Swamp Scott Assessor updated our records on December 18th, which is four days before this application hearing.

[Speaker 2] (59:32 - 59:34)
So our address was correct in the Swamp.

[Speaker 1] (59:40 - 59:45)
The GIS data does not follow the assessor database like it's required to,

[Speaker 1] (59:45 - 59:50)
and that's how the notice went to the previous owner and then the post office.

[Speaker 1] (59:50 - 59:57)
We didn't receive notice until January the 1st of the following year,

[Speaker 1] (59:57 - 59:59)
whatever the assessed value is that date.

[Speaker 2] (59:59 - 1:00:05)
I'm wondering if we can have our, if there's a way to say, does it ever say or current?

[Speaker 2] (1:00:06 - 1:00:09)
president as opposed to would you say that already

[Speaker 1] (1:00:09 - 1:00:09)
Yeah,

[Speaker 2] (1:00:09 - 1:00:10)
yeah

[Speaker 1] (1:00:10 - 1:00:13)
they can't admit it's not even accurate right now. It's totally like that.

[Speaker 2] (1:00:14 - 1:00:22)
we've been discussing that okay yeah that would be that would help thank you thank

[Speaker 2] (1:00:24 - 1:00:26)
anybody on the board have any questions

[Speaker 2] (1:00:33 - 1:00:41)
Mark, as far as when it is a appeal of the decision of the building commissioner,

[Speaker 2] (1:00:41 - 1:00:44)
do you just affirm the,

[Speaker 2] (1:00:44 - 1:00:46)
how is that done as a board?

[Speaker 2] (1:00:46 - 1:00:47)
I'm not sure.

[Speaker 1] (1:00:47 - 1:00:58)
So it's it's a de novo review so we need to find that access the burden is on the applicant here there need for votes

[Speaker 1] (1:00:59 - 1:01:02)
To overturn the building inspector's determination,

[Speaker 1] (1:01:03 - 1:01:11)
we could, there's different things that we could have in the motion,

[Speaker 1] (1:01:11 - 1:01:20)
which would be finding of standing that the petitioner has standing to bring the...

[Speaker 1] (1:01:21 - 1:01:23)
You know if you want me to make a motion I'll be happy to make the

[Speaker 2] (1:01:23 - 1:01:23)
Yeah,

[Speaker 1] (1:01:23 - 1:01:24)
motion you

[Speaker 2] (1:01:24 - 1:01:24)
yeah,

[Speaker 2] (1:01:24 - 1:01:31)
I would and I want to be explanation as well because I think that's all to the rest of the board But I think there's no question of standing that was established

[Speaker 1] (1:01:31 - 1:01:33)
know I think so too

[Speaker 1] (1:01:35 - 1:01:38)
So should we close public hearing

[Speaker 2] (1:01:38 - 1:01:38)
Yep

[Speaker 1] (1:01:38 - 1:01:39)
sick

[Speaker 2] (1:01:40 - 1:01:40)
Motion to close public hearing

[Speaker 2] (1:01:46 - 1:01:47)
fix it before I sell it.

[Speaker 1] (1:01:47 - 1:01:53)
Okay, so I'll make a motion to deny

[Speaker 1] (1:01:55 - 1:02:04)
the application based upon the following findings that

[Speaker 1] (1:02:06 - 1:02:09)
the appeal arises under 48 Section 8,

[Speaker 1] (1:02:09 - 1:02:12)
which allows an appeal to the permit granting authority by any person agreed.

[Speaker 1] (1:02:13 - 1:02:37)
our recent inability to obtain a permit or enforcement action from any administrative officer that we have a de novo review we stand in the commissioner's shoes and view the evidence and facts that are presented and as we find can make orders and decisions reverse or affirm in whole or in part modify any order or decision

[Speaker 1] (1:02:39 - 1:02:41)
that it

[Speaker 1] (1:02:43 - 1:02:51)
is not an abusive discretion standard. It's merely looking at the facts and determining and having our independent determination of compliance.

[Speaker 1] (1:02:57 - 1:03:01)
Section 5.4.8.3.

[Speaker 1] (1:03:02 - 1:03:06)
The scenic view is not within our jurisdiction on this appeal.

[Speaker 1] (1:03:06 - 1:03:12)
That was something that the planning board needed to consider,

[Speaker 1] (1:03:12 - 1:03:15)
and it's outside of our purview on this appeal.

[Speaker 1] (1:03:16 - 1:03:21)
I also move that there be a finding that

[Speaker 1] (1:03:28 - 1:03:33)
That they're standing by the petitioner, as the person to grieve, that

[Speaker 1] (1:03:36 - 1:03:37)
it

[Speaker 1] (1:03:44 - 1:03:49)
appears from the evidence that has been presented.

[Speaker 1] (1:03:51 - 1:04:01)
Or lack of evidence that there is an inconsistency from the approved plans to the as-built as of this time, not an as-built plan that's not has been presented,

[Speaker 1] (1:04:02 - 1:04:14)
that there is not, there are not facts or evidence to show that there's a deviation from those plans that were approved by the planning board.

[Speaker 1] (1:04:21 - 1:04:23)
and we

[Speaker 1] (1:04:25 - 1:04:37)
are not making any findings on whether there's a third floor or anything above the pew because those are all outside of our purview at this time.

[Speaker 1] (1:04:38 - 1:04:42)
The appeal appears to have been kindly to this board.

[Speaker 1] (1:04:48 - 1:05:04)
After applying the de novo standard and reviewing all of the materials that were submitted to us that the application will return the building inspector should be denied.

[Speaker 2] (1:05:09 - 1:05:10)
Do you have a second to that?

[Speaker 2] (1:05:12 - 1:05:15)
Do a roll call and I'll start with the city of County.

[Speaker 3] (1:05:16 - 1:05:16)
Yes.

[Speaker 2] (1:05:16 - 1:05:18)
Is that yes vote?

[Speaker 3] (1:05:18 - 1:05:18)
Yes.

[Speaker 2] (1:05:18 - 1:05:21)
We're agreeing to deny.

[Speaker 2] (1:05:21 - 1:05:24)
So a yes vote is in favor of the motion that Mark has.

[Speaker 2] (1:05:25 - 1:05:27)
So Tony,

[Speaker 2] (1:05:28 - 1:05:28)
is

[Speaker 3] (1:05:28 - 1:05:29)
Yes.

[Speaker 2] (1:05:31 - 1:05:34)
that understood that a yes vote is in favor of the motion that Mark has made?

[Speaker 3] (1:05:35 - 1:05:35)
Yes.

[Speaker 3] (1:05:35 - 1:05:36)
Yeah.

[Speaker 3] (1:05:36 - 1:05:36)
Understood.

[Speaker 2] (1:05:37 - 1:05:38)
If we lose John.

[Speaker 2] (1:05:39 - 1:05:39)
Okay.

[Speaker 3] (1:05:39 - 1:05:40)
Can you not hear me?

[Speaker 2] (1:05:41 - 1:05:42)
Now we can.

[Speaker 3] (1:05:42 - 1:05:43)
Okay.

[Speaker 3] (1:05:43 - 1:05:47)
I said yes, and I'm aware of what that means.

[Speaker 2] (1:05:48 - 1:05:49)
Thank you, Susan.

[Speaker 2] (1:05:50 - 1:05:51)
Yes. Yes, Mark.

[Speaker 1] (1:05:52 - 1:05:52)
Aye.

[Speaker 1] (1:05:52 - 1:05:52)
Yes.

[Speaker 2] (1:05:52 - 1:05:53)
All right.

[Speaker 1] (1:05:53 - 1:05:54)
Yes.

[Speaker 2] (1:05:55 - 1:06:01)
So the application has been denied and that will be.

[Speaker 2] (1:06:02 - 1:06:03)
They're not been filed

[Speaker 1] (1:06:04 - 1:06:07)
Right, so there's a decision that will be written,

[Speaker 1] (1:06:07 - 1:06:09)
filed with the town clerk,

[Speaker 1] (1:06:09 - 1:06:15)
and then there's a further appellate right to court that you have once it's filed.

[Speaker 1] (1:06:16 - 1:06:25)
So I'm sure the person has your email address and can provide you with a copy of the decision when I file it. It'll probably be pretty soon.

[Speaker 1] (1:06:29 - 1:06:30)
Thank you.

[Speaker 1] (1:06:30 - 1:06:31)
Okay.

[Speaker 1] (1:06:31 - 1:06:31)
Can you hear me?

[Speaker 1] (1:06:32 - 1:06:33)
So we'll begin.

[Speaker 2] (1:06:35 - 1:06:36)
all in favor