good all right everybody
ready okay uh welcome everyone this is
the call to order of the chesap board of
appeals 7M uh May 1st 2024 uh we begin
as always with a roll call I will
announce name please announce if you're
present uh Mr Rich Richard Burch pres Mr
Paul dhy present Miss Amy Everett
present Mr Steven sharp pres and I am Mr
jod honstar we have a quorum we are also
joined by uh town clerk Sharon hum and
legal council Fred susman uh we have a
couple uh housekeeping items on the
agenda first this morning this evening
um first is to accept some documents
into the record um the board of appeals
is to accept into the record rebuttal
comments from parties of record for case
20233 from rodal Incorporated Donavan
Estates LLC uh for that case um I guess
I will pass it to Sharon for entering
these doc documents into the record is
that how we're doing this okay should
just he need to do we do need to do a
motion to do that Mr do we need to do a
motion to accept those into the record I
think for this one you probably should
okay I will entertain a motion to enter
the uh document submitted to town hall
into the record for case
20233 I will make that motion I have a
second second verification the documents
consist of
a cover memorandum dated May 1st 2024 to
the board of appeals identifying six
sets of rebuttal comments uh from Daniel
dval Goron black welder Kathleen Baro
Eric Bliss on behalf of rod reel hoe
wall and mayor Patrick
Mahone all of those rebuttal comments
are attached to
memorandum you um I believe we had a
second uh all in favor of entering these
documents into the record I right the
motion passes um share we have a copy
and I believe a copy will also be posted
for the public okay uh that done next on
the agenda is the approval of a minutes
from the April 8 2024 case 20241 of
puxin property purchases
LLC um any concerns with the minutes
that anyone
noted heing none uh I'll entertain a
motion to approve these meeting minutes
I will make 10 motion second second in
favor right uh the last bit is to is the
written decision for that same case uh
to review the written interpretation
decision for board of appeals case 2022
or
20241 Tu and property purchasers l C and
if uh my summary is correct the bo uh
the board of appeals denied relief that
would allow two gravel off street
parking spaces the front setback for uh
40111 14th Street I think that was the
gist of that um does anybody have
issues written decision for that
case right hearing none I will entertain
a motion to vote on the written
decision make that motion second I'll
second that all right all in
favor right uh so we are going to vote
on the uh approval of the written
decision that we have in our packets
today and we're sent out via email
earlier I'll just go around the room
answer if uh you vote uh to approve this
um this document uh Mr Richard Burch I
approve PA dhy I approve Miss Amy
Everett I approve
even sharp
approve the um the vote passes we will
sign that document and get it wherever
it needs to go uh okay that is it for me
um at this point in time I will pass it
off to Vice chair Mr Paul dhy to listen
to case
20242 Mr chairman are you recusing
yourself from participation in this case
I am indeed recusing myself thank you
all right our last agenda item is toh
hear um board of appeals case
2024-25 27th
Street um or owners of real property
known as 395 27th Street for variance to
Article 5 section
29-19
a uh dimensional requirements for the um
front
yard
reduction uh and permitted projections
in the required
yards we have done a roll call um so the
order of the uh this presentation will
be
uh incorporation uh into the file and
record provided by staff
which we can I guess we formally we
formally do
that inate the memo from
staff well staff will make a
presentation before before we get there
I think uh the CLK need to advise the
board of compliance with the notice
requirements in the matter of the
application from Michael and Beverly
former 3905 27th Street chese Beach
Maryland Board of Appeals case 202
24-02 I cause to be published in the
southern Maryland News newspaper a
notice of this may 1 2024 public
hearing on April 19th and April 26
2024 notice was provided to the Planning
Commission on April 3rd
2024 on March 28th 2024 notice was
provided by registered mail to the
applicant and adjoining property owners
and the property was posted by the
public works department on April 12th
2024 are there any
comments written comments Madam
clerk yes we have one from Susan Webster
page uh she uh speaks in favor of the
very
all right the uh the next several steps
we will hear from the
partitioner uh then I have testimony of
Staff uh and then public uh testimony if
there is
any uh summary statements
cross-examination summary statements and
the closing of the meeting public
hearing and then deliberations
so the case
summary not sure how much this we need
to
read again the summary I believe is as
we as I uh described it earlier 20
20242 consider an application for
Michael and Beverly Fulmer owners of
real property at 3905 27th Street in
ches big beach for a variance to Article
5 section
into well required yards including side
yards at this point um we will hear from
the
petitioner and do we need to swearing in
yes you can set just raise your right
hand you Solly affirm under the penalty
of perjury that the testimony you're
about to give will be the truth the
whole truth and nothing but the
truth thank
you I let the record reflect that both
Mr and Mrs Fulmer were sworn
in my wife Beverly and I are here to
request a variance to replaced our
existing porch and steps with a new
front porch and steps I've remodeled our
home except for the front porch we
submitted our plans with our original
permit request which was denied due to
encroachment in the required yard areas
we thought that width was the problem at
the time so we had modified our request
for a smaller width front porch um but
we were denied then due to the font
front yard requirements specifically the
side requirements are 8 feet from the
neighbor's property and 15 fet from the
sidewalk our front door our home is 15
feet from the sidewalk um we cannot
replace the porch under these
circumstances because we're not required
we're
not allowed to build in the 15 ft to the
sidewalk so we are requesting a variance
um to increase the lot area for our
front porch and steps um originally we
had
requested um a front porch 21 feet by
six feet that would extend to the width
of the house so very similar to our
neighbors to our left and our right um
but then that was rejected we thought
because of the 15 because of the side
requirements um so then we had uh
submitted a uh I guess a another uh
option uh which was 15 feet width with a
six foot uh coming out from the house um
uh we weren't sure then we were denied
that because of the 15ot requirement um
so then we just re went to if at all
possible just replace the porch that we
had which is quite smaller than the ones
that we're requesting we would like to
have the first option which is to the
width of the house um option um so we're
going to leave it up to the board to I
guess decide what we can do with our
property at this point um our property
our lot is going to be 30 by 100 and it
seems that majority of the houses maybe
not a majority but about 30% of the
houses in the neighborhood have this 15
feet problem um not sure if you
had seen that in the past um or are
thinking about having problems in the
future
um but I'm sure we're not the only ones
who have a problem with this um
requirement do we have any questions
from the
board after the board has questions if
they do I
have I don't have a question at this
time I I have one I have one question um
there there there were several options
that were
proposed and the the depth that you're
proposing in one option I think was six
feet Yes the other option was I believe
it was four and A2 feet yeah but that
did not include the step so I apologize
for putting that air or having that
error in our write up um the front porch
presently is four feet uh and then the
steps come out to about six foot well
six foot total
okay so you say the present porch is
four feet yes and then another and then
the four feet
wide I see the picture and then four
feet in depth the front porch and then
the steps come at the Landing I'd say
and how far out does the do the steps go
to a full six foot yeah you include the
steps include the steps in the landing
it's six
foot so I guess it would leave
approximately 9 ft from the porch
landing and that's the dimensions of
present our present is 4 and a half uh
by six foot with the
steps all right that's that's the only
question presently we do not have any
rails on the porch either so you know we
want to have it safe yeah okay ask a
follow on then so with the two proposals
that you did make six feet and 4 and 1/2
ft they would actually extend what two
more feet out or three more how much the
one with the four put Dimension the 15
by4 that would be actually 15
by6 six being the the step part
including the step that was an error in
our part we should have said I don't
know if we included pictures or not okay
and then the six by 21 foot did that
incorporate steps into that six feet
already
okay so so the only difference between
the two options then is just the width
the the length of the porch exactly you
know if if you have a problem with us
encroaching on the sides because our
house is 3 feet on one side presently
and maybe four or five feet on the other
side um it would come to the edge of the
house it wouldn't encroach past the
house we had a similar situation with a
back porch that we had constructed last
year where we had to ask for a variance
for the width
okay and Council has a
question in reading your materials I saw
something about railings railing part of
this proposal are railings included
within the uh width or depth yes because
they would be uh the porsch and then the
railings would be along the porsch you
know to help to be there for stepping
down off the porch
or or being on the
porch
and the whole width of the uh the of the
uh deck
caller is that four feet deep along the
uh width of the house yeah four feet
deep plus uh landing and steps that go
six
yes thank you for the clarification oh
sure but if we um you know whichever
option that you all approve of course we
would prefer the wider one um but it's
you know whatever you approve for us
we're willing to accept we just we want
to get going finish this it's been a
long
process are there any other questions
from from the panel from the uh board or
the
council uh at this time we'll hear from
uh uh
staff thank you um so Michael and
Beverly Fulmer requested the permit um
as they described
um and
initially there is a there is a
provision in the code that allows an
encroachment into the front yard setback
if your neighbors are encroached into
the front yard I'm not loud
enough if you can speak into the Bic yes
so there's a there's a provision in the
code that allows you to encroach into
your front yard setback if either of
your side neighbors are encroaching into
the front yard setback um and we did try
to apply that but but we're unable to so
that just so you understand why there's
the two option how the two options got
generated um the property is at 3905
27th Street it's a pre-existing
non-conforming lot um and the lot is
about 3,000 square feet where your
minimum lot size is 7500 square feet um
this means that it is very narrow about
30t wide and 100t deep so either
proposed deck can be
constructed in a way that still meets
minimum or is still underneath the
maximum lot coverage and creates
impervious
surfaces in looking at this there's a
few relevant sections of the zoning
ordinance
20290 d9a sets lot size and setbacks and
this is where we get into the first
piece which is the encroachment into the
front and side yards um in option number
one they would need a variance of six
feet into the front yard set
back and the side setbacks of 6 inches
on the west side and two feet on the
East Side in option
two it would just need a variance for
the front yard setback which is 4 feet 6
in in the front yard set back and this
is the difference between the
deck going along the full edge of the
house versus the deck being slightly
narrower section 29
299d is the part I was talking about
that allows exceptions for
non-conforming Lots if their neighboring
houses have
um or sorry it allows for the
construction of single family dwellings
so we can't apply that because it's not
a single family dwelling it's a deck um
and so the setbacks still apply so it's
2909 e that allows to reduce the front
yard setbacks for buildings based on the
average of the properties on either side
although the two lots to the east of the
fer lot encroach into the front setback
the one lot to the West does not and
because the way the code is written you
have to average either side of them um
they weren't able to encroach under that
regulation so and
2919 f it limits the size of a deck in
the front yard setback to 35 square ft
or less um because the requested porch
is larger than that it would need a
variance if it was to be allowed so they
can there's a couple of different
numbers there's a couple of different
options and I don't want to confuse
Everyone by reading them all
off um so in 29019 G that allows um the
deck to encroach into side yard setbacks
as long as you maintain a five foot side
yard setback so those are all the
relevant
pieces of the um code so to look at them
in um consideration of variance
standards we see that this
variance it has extenuating
circumstances there's pre-existing the
pre-existing front setback of the house
there's the condition that three out of
four houses on the Block have a smaller
setback than for their porches than this
one so they're encroaching into the 15
ft so those are unusual conditions then
when we go under to conditions um with
the granting of the variants being in
harmony with the general purpose and
intent of the chapter and not injures to
the neighborhood or detrimental to
Public
Welfare um in this case the porch would
really be detrimental if it was coming
right up to the street or if it was
impacting storm water runoff because it
can be um installed with spaces in
between the boards or other mitigations
and because it's very small it won't
have a negative impact on storm water
runoff um additionally because this is a
front yard deck and because the filmers
are asking for enough space to sit on
their front yard deck it actually
improves the neighborhood by allowing
them to sit on their deck and interact
with their neighbors uh which is
something that is supported in the
code the granting of the variants does
not permit anything that's not generally
allowed in the
district with regard to special
circumstances or conditions fully
described um I'm going to come to the
end of this that say that the strict
interpretation and the provisions of
this chapter would deprive the applicant
of reasonable use of such land or
buildings um the strict interpretations
don't deprive the applicant of
reasonable use of land or buildings but
they do deny the residents the
opportunity for social interaction and
Community
Connection
um in the next question is is there an
unnecessary hardship and the proximity
of non-conforming house to the front of
the property has eliminated that
possibility of the front year porch the
neighborhood around their home contains
similar non-conforming front setbacks
so they are exper experiencing a
hardship compared to their neighbors
because their decks were there first
before the
Cod is the granting the granting of the
variance necessary for Reon use of land
or the building granted with the board
is the minimum variance that will
accomplish this
purpose um and this is where we get into
the different options so option
one is going into your both your front
and your side yard back so it's a little
more option two is a smaller more
minimum variance um because it's not
going into the side
setbacks so option one is larger than
option
two I'm going to say some more about
that after we evaluate the critical area
um because if you think about the visual
character of the
neighborhood
um the the width
matters so with regard to critical area
because this is in the critical area we
have to consider um a few other factors
uh which is is there an unwarranted
hardship that the applicant would be
deprived of reasonable or significant
use of the parcel or lot without this
request um so we you the applicant would
still have reasonable use of the
property but they lose that Community
Connection and
because this deck isn't impacting the
critical area elements through storm
water because it can be considered
pervious surface through slots in the
deck um it doesn't this section doesn't
have to apply to
it um the Lal interpretation of the
critical area
program dep would deprive the applicants
of the rights commonly enjoyed by other
properties in similar areas within the
critical area district and this would
because even their neighbors have this
ability to be on their front porch um um
that the granting of the variance
doesn't confer any special privileges it
does not confer any special privileges
and that the granting of the variance
doesn't adversely affect water quality
um even if the porch was impervious
surface it is a very small porch and it
can be easily mitigated storm water but
it it can also be constructed with gaps
and not be considered impervious
surface all of that is to say that this variance request meets all of your
variance standards
in in
conclusion we staff recommends that you
provide a variance to the property owner
um what we were recommending is that or
what I'm recommending is that you not
give option one or option two but a
third option which is to allow the porch
to enter into the side setbacks and Go
the whole length of the front build of
the building but not come out quite as
far as their initial
request is my understanding now that
they needed to come out a little further
for the
steps um so I can I can try and do some
quick math and phrase that for y'all I
can do do some quick math as to how that
would look but I think one of the
questions for yall to consider is are
the steps going to be the full length or
are they going to be a small small
entrance um as to how you're going to
grant that variance because when we go
to option
number hold on a
second option
number one we're encroaching
into the side setback I got to go back
and find
it I don't is she allowed I don't know
she's allowed sorry um in option number
one we're going six feet into the front
setback and in option number two we're
only going four and a half feet into the
front setback the board can
choose to allow can choose to allow
option number one or it can choose to
allow this option number three that I
provided
you and additionally allow the stairs to
encroach 3 feet you know we can say how
wide would we want the stairs you would
we allow the stairs to be they can go
three foot feet in and this wide you
guys can add that to your
decision
um have I covered every there's a couple
of other sections they requesting
variances to but if you provide it to
the front um if you just provide the
variance to 29019 that will cover
everything and you don't need to provide
the other
variances all right thank you okay uh
any questions Miss
Franklin the from the
board and the applicant had a question
Sor we just want to let you know it is
going to be a small entrance that was
the original attent the steps are not
going to com out the door and
down and and how wide do you anticipate
the steps will be I I guess pretty
much on the
[Music]
plans look up
would
be where we presently have was it four
and a half fet out the door we have
presently have that Landing it wouldn't
extend it's not going to extend it's
just going to come out the door probably
about a 4 foot width and come down to
the sidewalk so we're not we're not
planning on steps out of the whole
farewell steps yeah sorry how high is
this front porch going to to be like I'm
just wondering how many steps does it
require because each step is an extra
foot correct I think presently we have
two steps and then the landing that's
what we're gonna do and it's gonna be at
the exact same height yes okay so this
is kind of like a ground level yes front
porch not a
de porch we call it a porch okay that
makes a difference with how much it
would then but out
so so you were saying when you can I ask
a question now so in this back and forth
so the first ask was the length of the
house 6 feet out including the steps
correct and then the second one was
shorter or was was shorter but the steps
buted out and it didn't include the
steps okay so do the
steps are you walking up two steps and
on the side it's graduating up to the or
a sidewalk comes up you would walk up
two steps then you're on the landing and
that's our front door we've always had a
small entrance no matter the length of
the house was going to be it's always
going to be the same small entrance yeah
we were never going to have the the
steps go across the
side also extend
the the porch out yeah I'm just trying
to figure out how it comes out six
feet anybody else confused by
that right we should have worded it that
way on both of the thank you documents
right but to the left and right of the
steps the first one asks for six feet
out you see we were asking for the full
length of the house and the other one
was the half length and then but she's
talking about the sorry I'm just trying
to actually picture I'm confusing just
making sure it's not six and eight you I
don't know I guess that's included I'll
just take it as six so
okay I believe if I understand correctly
the steps and both options would be the
same yes same width same yes same
length did I understand you mentioned
another option was to have the side
steps that I I Envision in that no so um
so because what we were trying to do
was make the codes exception for front
yards work for them so they didn't have
to go through the lengthy
process we tried say what happens if we
reduce the sidey yards rate um but
because of that one neighbor with the
big front setback we couldn't apply that
I think for their use and for the look
of the street and how the other porches
are that it makes sense to allow the
encroachment into the side yard
setbacks in your scenario
the porch itself the for the width or
length of the house would be four
feet and then the steps would be another
two feet yeah four and a half feet four
and a half feet um and so I think if I
mean I can read in what option three is
for you all but just if you accept
option three and then also allow you
know 3 feet by four feet for the
stairs I I think rather than talking
about options the board should consider
what does it feel is reasonable in terms
of a width and in terms of a depth right
seems like uh in options one and three
the width of the uh porch is the same as
4
feet the depth so the the depth the
depth is is it sounds like um the
intention of option one was also 4 and a
half foot so that the the porch deck is
always a depth of four and a half feet
it's actually steps that are encroaching
that extra little bit I don't know if
that's correct but I think okay oh see
that makes more sense to me then I
was so yeah option number one is
probably fine because it's smaller than
I measured it to
be are there any other comments um I
might have a question hang on one
second
so you actually brought up the option
three but now it sounds like option
three is actually option one yes so
we're really just choosing between two
if we want to choose either or whatever
right
okay thank you
[Laughter]
sorry Franklin you have a written staff
report don't you I do and I have it's
got all the different options all the
different numbers I realize that all I'm
saying is let's make sure that's made
part of the record
as well as the entire application
package yes because when I calculated
everything in option one I was counting
the whole area as being the deck but
what we're hearing is that it's actually
only this the the stairs in that Beyond
four and a half feet so I think option
three is really what the applicant was
asking for an option
one all right at this point uh we would
open it to public comment um I see no
one in the audience and no one has Comm
in to sign in uh to uh provide comment
we do have one written comment should I
read that into the
record I believe it's been accepted into
the record
okay all right hearing no more public
comments uh we will close the public
comment section of this uh
hearing
um now at this point
um I guess we will go into
deliberation comments from the board
like there's actually agreement between
the parties I don't think there's that
much to discuss well unless we have
disagreements with that but I mean my
person my personal feeling is that
um a deck of the full length of the
house was
reasonable
and as far as the depth as you
described six feet total including the
steps which would make the deck itself
approximately four four and a half fet
in depth I think that's reasonable as
well yeah from the paperwork it seems
like it'll truly be six and a half with
the steps from what you have now that's
what an exhibit in there three so is
currently like six by six and a half or
something like that I just want to make
sure that there's that
like buffer in case those stairs come
out like we I think we should decide is
it six is it six and a half what not if we do that does that make any sense I
can show you
which like we're saying 6 feet but if
you look at in the middle of the packet
exhibit
three was to replace current landan
steps with same footprint six feet wide
and 6 feet 3 in in length which includes
the steps I think it's only 3 in I don't
want this to come back to us them if we
agree to this at six feet
just I'm throwing that out there for
getting
specific the terminology is a little
confusing when you talk about length and
width so when I think of w the width I
think of
the facing the the the
U length along the side of the
house and depth I call it
depth okay which is from the front door
out to the bottom of the steps yes
according to exhibit three that length
currently is 6' 3
in just thrown out there for technical
reasons is that
correct the six fo3 including steps yes
so if they're talking about doing that
same kind of Landing with okay you know
decking on either side or whatever
ultimately that's the reality I think of
what the ask is whether that makes a
difference or not I don't know well
three inches is not not a lot in my
mind but I don't want it to like become
an issue so I I would be willing to uh
allow 6 fo3
in any other uh comments deliberations
from the board
I guess I add one question are we would
we have to do two variances one for the
front and then one for the
sides if we go with option one SL option
three yeah because all of those are in
the same section there's you can just
say it's it's
2909 tables requirements exception a
tables of dimensional requirements in
the rv2 zone and I think you can do it
all in one motion I'm not talking enough
into it I think you can do it all in one
variance because it's all one table do
you agree Mr
sesman because they're the table they're
adding variance to the table so do they
need a separate variance for side and a
separate variance for front but I'm
saying I think because it's all in the
same section they can do one variance
for both side and
front you agree with
that
one is that is that the agreement with
you that we would just do one variance
for 219 in general yeah I think
so there was also something in the staff
report about landscaping or whatever
else so you intend to put Landscaping in
front of this
two
okay all right um at this point I'll uh
entertain a motion to
vote and uh direct Mr susman to draft a
document
resolution motion
should be clear as to exactly what it
is prove the varas has
discussed not sure everybody is
fully if we this is part of the the
public record so if we
say decide on which exhibit would that
be all right if if I can summarize what
I
believe um we are in agreement
with a uh variance to
allow a a deck which
is all the full um the full width of the house full width
of the house which I believe was
21t and as far as depth a depth of 6' 3
in which includes the steps include the
steps all right so at this point I will
entertain a motion for a
vote talk
about width of the house being 21
ft depth of
the P not including the
steps four
feet four and a half believe would be
four feet four feet and
then to come
out 2 foot 3
are we going to stipulate the width of
the steps with it because I know I heard
steps mentioned about going the width of
it we're going to say a certain portion
for the
steps so should we say like up to six
feet roughly like
four four feet or
so right so I'm just going to reference
that exhibit three in in or yeah exhibit
three in what we were provided it states
it's 6 by six and 3 in so I think
that standard stairs that they'll
probably be using could be up to six
feet so that is what I would recommend
being able to otherwise if we say four
feet they're going to have to go try and
find some specialty
stairs I don't I think that if six feet
is a normal width or whatever else I
think that that's justifiable especially
for
safety they don't have to go six feet
I'm just saying that's what it said it
waset seems a
little more than necessary to me so if
you look at the picture does it I mean I
don't know does it to me it doesn't look
extreme and according to the these
exhibits that's what if they were to
replace exactly what they have now it's
6 feet wide
already um I fear that if it's narrow
well you'll have the the porch
itself but I
that's it allows for
ample walking steps currently
are look to be about four feet
wide six feet
wide right no yeah
with the steps on your exhibit three you
do you have one there six feet wide
so I think that's keep it six feet wide
the steps being six feet
wide and if you find that they're only
four and a half and that's what you're
getting then you're still within the
variance you don't I don't right don't
have to go 6t wide we're allowing up to
6t wide to accommodate the steps is what
I'm
proposing
okay all right six feet wide First
Steps
okay all right that being said I will
now entertain a
vote
Bo
um to um Mr sesman write a
memo
um
approving the description of the
variants which we have uh
summarized I make a motion to have the
vote we have a second second all in
favor
okay all right um
[Music]
so Mr Burch how do you
vote why don't we say what we're voting
on just clarify that we're voting on
something can we to make sure we are
saying the same
thing believe we're voting on allowing a
variance to allow or granting a variance
to allow
the applicant to in to
build a deck which is 21
feet
wide 6 and a half or 6 6 feet 3 in in
depth which
includes 4 foot
deck a deck in depth a 4 feet
depth stairs which extend further out
another 2' 3
in and stairs which are 6 feet
wide I I think oh go ahead think we
should it should be 21 by4 and to allow
the 2.3 for the steps think that
probably four two 2.3 by four feet wide
for the steps six foot wide
yeah I thought that's what six foot yes
I'm sorry six foot yes it's just the the
way in which it's phrased to to indicate
that there is the actual porch and then
there's a step portion how much that
step portion can
extrude 23 inches correct six feet
wide wide
yes remaining porch being 21 ft long 4T
deep
correct let's go through motion one
time Grant the variance to allow 21 fet
width of the
PS 4 feet depth across the entire width
of the
PCH 2 feet 3
in steps extending further 2 feet 3 in
out
those steps being six feet wide up to
six feet wide six feet
wide and also if we need to that this
would include
railings are included within this
variance in railings would be included
in those
dimensions in the 4 feet by 21 ft
dimension
all right with that being said I will
entertain a
vote I move to
vote another
motion another
motion all right I'll entertain a motion
to vote and ask Mr susman to uh draft a
uh
resolution I will make that motion right
is there second second all in favor
I all
right Mr bur how do you
vote I vote in
favor um Miss Everett in favor Mr Sharp
in favor and I Paul Dy will also vote in
favor no motion passes the motion
passes all right so Mr susman would you
draft a document for the
board I'm going to be out of town
overseas for two and a half
weeks all right is there any other
business
I will entertain a motion to
adjourn I move to
adjourn for a second all in favor I right hearing is
closed thank
you through it
where are you going