[0:07] Just administrator.
[0:29] Can I make a motion where we have to add
it? If if um
[0:38] » just to clear that up,
[0:43] » if all board members are
believe this topic is done or there's
[0:49] more to discuss
[0:54] hearing none, I will the motion.
>> I'd like to make a motion that we have
[1:01] official measurement from SC
[1:06] on the
[1:13] survey. Thank you.
[1:17] Uh to finally put that matter to rest as
to where the measurement starts, where
[1:23] the measurement ends.
Is there a gap between the right way and
[1:28] the property line?
[1:36] Is that how you like it?
Seconded or is it more appropriate to be
[1:42] very specific and ask for the 37 and 12t
of right away be displayed on the
[1:47] survey?
I'd like them to outline the right way
[1:52] and complete I don't know 37.5
[1:58] the entire
exact
[2:08] to the
to the entire way the
[2:13] » entire roadway
if there's any gap between the rightway
[2:18] the property
[2:30] The motion has been has been entered is
for an official measurement to be placed
[2:35] on the survey to direct the entire
[2:43] to display the entire right of way. And
if there is any gap between the property
[2:48] and the right way. Is that correct?
[2:53] » Is the motion second?
Motion has been seconded. The board will
[2:58] now move into discussion.
[3:06] Clear any ambiguity gray area.
[3:13] Any
[3:17] additional comments from any
>> I have one additional comment but not
[3:22] about that. I'd like to add
clarification on is this on the side or
[3:26] is this in the front yard because we're
reading um
[3:31] from planning that it's in the sideyard
but they're saying it's but some are
[3:35] saying it's in the front yard. So we
need clarification and the zoning
[3:39] ordinance the picture is not clear.
>> So this sounds like you're forming a
[3:44] second motion.
>> Let's focus on the first motion,
[3:48] an official measurement on the survey to
to depict the entire right of way and if
[3:55] there is any gap between property and
the right of way
[4:00] have no additional comments in the
discussion phase of the motion. All
[4:04] those in favor of the motion signify by
saying I. I. All those opposed signify
[4:09] by saying.
The motion passes unanimously
[4:15] and board member Robinson if you'd like
to enter that second motion to do that.
[4:20] » Yes. So the question is what is the
definition of the sidewalk? Where where
[4:26] does it fall? If you look at 69 and 70
um it was only the picture is not clear
[4:35] and then also we got the interpretation
clearly said um that
[4:42] because the fence is contained within
the side yard. It can be higher than 4
[4:46] ft was the interpretation that we got on
September the 26.
[4:51] So I think that's where we have to
interpret because the zone importance
[4:56] does not clarify
when those two overlap when the sideyard
[5:01] the front yard overlap
which one takes precedence and I think
[5:05] that's what we have to come up with an
interpretation with and then we can make
[5:09] a a recommendation
to the plan
[5:14] commission
um to say hey let's clear this.
[5:18] » Yeah it's definitely going to have to be
clear because the Make sure the side lot
[5:22] line is all the way down the side from
the back the front is only across the
[5:27] front.
>> So
[5:31] pending because
normally when you have a house that's
[5:37] sitting right say the house is sitt
public form is is closed. So this is
[5:50] » clearly in the book that says the side
lot line is all the way down from the
[5:55] back corner to the front door
>> there. I think the way I would interpret
[6:03] that is the sideyard is shade area.
You see the shade,
[6:10] » but the shade goes the it's also in the
if you look to the left of that, see the
[6:17] picture on page 69. If you look to the
left of that, the the sideyard set back
[6:22] is still in that liner shade.
>> There is overlap between the sideyard
[6:28] and the front yard and the rear yard. So
you will have the corners basically of
[6:35] that lot that's shown on face page 69.
There is overlap between the front front
[6:40] yard and the side yard on the two front
corners as well as overlap on the side
[6:45] yard and the rear yard and the two back
corners um of that example. So that's
[6:51] where the issue is coming up as far as
that you you know identify.
[6:57] » Yeah, I mean that's just me. It's been
confusing. It's very hard to
[7:01] um clearly defined according to the the
ordinance,
[7:06] » but there's no indication
of any side yard
[7:12] from the front lot line
to the 30 foot setback line.
[7:22] So between the front lot line
and the 30 foot setback line
[7:31] that is clearly front yard. No question.
[7:37] Now the other area where that little
sideyard
[7:43] um
language appears in the sketch. Mhm.
[7:49] » is between
the front yard setback
[7:54] which you see the buildable area
>> and the actual building which is the
[8:00] house.
[8:04] So there's a question as to whether the
see this house is not built quite up to
[8:10] the front setback line. It's back
further than the front setback line.
[8:18] So there may be some question about the
area between
[8:24] the 30 foot front setback and where the
actual porch front porch
[8:31] starts and ends.
But from the front lot line
[8:38] to the 30oot set line there is no
question
[8:44] but that it is front yard.
I would also point you to section 72A
[8:51] and it says the required front side and
rear yards for individual lots shall be
[8:55] measured inward toward the center of the
sid lot from all points along the
[9:00] respective front side and rear property
lines of the lot or road rightway. So
[9:05] that clearly says that the the setbacks
are measured inward from all property
[9:10] lines from all directions which again
shows that overlap within those corners
[9:17] and in regards to the side
fences and walls may extend to the
[9:23] property line. So we're not talking
about moving the fence 30 ft into the
[9:27] property
>> towards the house. I'm talking about
[9:30] just what piece of the fence needs to be
reduced
[9:34] » to 4T to be in line with the correct
[9:53] that you have. It does not show
[10:01] doesn't show where the house is located
in the lot. Would you agree with that?
[10:07] And it doesn't show where the 30 ft from
the front
[10:13] lot line
[10:18] because that line that goes inward
toward the middle of the lot I think is
[10:23] indicating a fence not a measurement
[10:33] as a line with the circles.
>> Not sure what that is because the fence
[10:38] doesn't go in.
It's just spray props according to the
[10:43] picture.
>> What he's saying is when this was made,
[10:47] this isn't made based off of what's
there now. It's made based on
[10:52] » it.
[10:58] The answer was a team was out there.
But it doesn't display the
[11:03] » No, it doesn't display the bill. It
doesn't display the house or where the
[11:07] We think that that three lines is
supposed to indicate maybe where the
[11:10] fence ends, but not sure.
>> There's a the fence continues towards
[11:14] the house.
>> Actually, it says chain leaf.
[11:21] But if you look at the plat that was
done of the lot, starting at the front
[11:27] line, which is on Cherry Lane,
[11:32] 30 ft
backward from that
[11:37] front lot
is front yard according to that sketch
[11:43] in 7.2.
But it doesn't show on this map exactly
[11:48] where that is.
So we take a measure from the point.
[11:54] » We made a motion to add the right away.
Would you like to make a motion to
[11:58] consider adding the house and the 30ft
set measurement on the survey?
[12:08] If you look at the picture, they don't
match.
[12:23] » Is the board interested in the motion to
do that?
[12:25] » Yes.
[12:31] I make a motion
to have the the
[12:37] the house and the fence. Well, special
measure from the setback.
[13:01] Motion has been made to add the house
and the setback measurement.
[13:06] to the survey. Is the motion second?
>> Second.
[13:12] » Discussion of the motion.
[13:20] Any any additional comments?
[13:24] Hearing none. All those in favor of
adding the house and the setback
[13:28] measurement to the surveys, please
signify by saying I.
[13:32] » I. Those signify by saying name.
[13:41] » That's not allowed.
>> You got to make a decision.
[13:47] » So the motion does pass unanimously.
Correct.
[13:49] » Yes. Correct.
>> Okay.
[13:53] Now we are still in the board
discussion. So we can we can consider
[13:56] other other items if you'd like.
[14:02] Do we want to discuss uh maybe coming up
with some clarifying
[14:08] uh
the verdage so we can avoid this in the
[14:12] future that we can provide to the zoning
uh commission.
[14:16] » You're referring to recommending updates
to the zoning ordinance.
[14:21] » Yes.
>> Okay. Uh we can do that. I just want to
[14:25] focus right now on getting the fence
moved
[14:29] » closed and then we can then we can
consider that as well in this board
[14:32] discussion. Um
does anyone want to make any other
[14:38] decision on the fence without seeing
these updates to the survey or prefer to
[14:43] wait for the survey?
We need to talk about anything about
[14:48] reducing the height of defense we can
discuss anything else about the fence.
[14:55] » I don't think we can move any further
except information and We have to define
[15:00] how we look at front versus side. We
discussed that.
[15:06] » Yes.
>> And how we want to define that
[15:10] diagram here.
>> So,
[15:16] » so front rear, this is just a a basic
recreation of what's in there. So, it
[15:20] really comes down to where we want what
we want to do with these gray areas,
[15:26] particularly in front in this situation.
So how do we want to interpret that?
[15:32] » So is the center is center is the center
of the house.
[15:35] » This is the buildable area.
[15:40] » So I can tell you my interpretation
is if it's on the side and it goes all
[15:45] the way to the front, it's part of the
side. That's my interpretation
[15:53] based on the line you drew to the left
extending extending to the north.
[15:58] right there. That's why you said that
was the side based on that line there.
[16:03] » So this is just outline the gray areas
or whatever. So that's the front. So
[16:09] straight both sides I'd say it goes up.
It's part of the sign. I would consider
[16:14] this being the front.
>> I understand that difference.
[16:19] » But I'm trying to get to the to the to
the reasoning.
[16:23] » Is it?
>> Yes. Because it's the that's the side
[16:27] lot line.
>> Yes.
[16:29] » The state is is listed as a side lot.
>> Yes.
[16:32] » Yeah.
>> Because it's the side lot line
[16:36] » because in absence of clarifying
guidance I go with the simplest
[16:42] explanation the most forward
explanation. It's part of the side.
[16:46] Therefore it's the side. Now later on I
said after this we get this resolve we
[16:51] can always clarify that and say what
precedence over what
[16:56] but as of right now that's that's
interpretation
[17:21] Is that interpretation in line with how
the orders are written now
[17:26] based on the pictures?
[17:32] » I think it's okay
[17:38] because we could say, oh, we think they
put the dots on there and we think this
[17:42] gray area is this, but
There's nothing stating this is what X
[17:48] is.
[17:53] 72A
identifies the language of how those are
[17:57] measured.
The
[18:01] illustration shows something a little
bit different. Typically
[18:07] illustrations are not the law. they are
illustrative in nature and therefore if
[18:14] there's typically
um an issue between or ambiguity between
[18:19] the language and an illustration the
actual language is what supersedes the
[18:26] illustration.
So
[18:29] if you
however you feel I think you should
[18:34] should focus more on the language and
then we can modify this picture or other
[18:40] to be more in line with what your the
language you want to have if that makes
[18:45] sense.
[18:54] And would it would it be best to work on
that
[18:57] before the next meeting and come with
everybody come with ideas and
[19:00] suggestions at the next meeting
>> for what we interpret to be a sign?
[19:06] » Yes.
Do you that you want that fine tonight.
[19:11] » Well, if if the other board members need
time and I'm okay with that.
[19:17] » I'm just giving you what what I That's
all.
[19:24] » But if you interpret it that way, you
don't need the measurements.
[19:31] » Well, that's just my interpretation.
>> The whole front yard is the side yard.
[19:38] It doesn't matter
[19:42] where starts and ends
[19:53] for where the house is.
[20:14] My opinion is
the the question is is
[20:19] where to me I I think that it's on the
sideyard as well. But where should it
[20:25] start? Should it start 30 ft back? I
don't think it does.
[20:31] You know, if they if they come in to say
ft is that encroaching on the front yard
[20:38] if it goes past that set back that goes
if it's closer than that set back of the
[20:44] require. So if it you know if you put a
fence if you put a fence here that is
[20:49] your that is your side fence. But if you
come too close, if you don't if you go
[20:54] past that 30 ft from right away, then
you've
[20:59] brought too close and you're approaching
on the front
[21:05] because you can build you could have a
acre lot and you can build your house,
[21:10] the very back of your lot and still have
your setback and there's no way that
[21:16] that you would put a, you know, that you
would put your fish just around your
[21:19] little tiny backyard.
To me, a front fence would be going
[21:23] across the front of your house.
[21:27] » So, the issue that you that you that
you're discussing is a fence parallel to
[21:33] Cherry Lane.
[21:37] » You got the street and you got the
street and you got fence.
[21:40] » You look at his drawing.
>> Look at his drawing.
[21:44] » Yes.
>> Across. If you see where he's got the F
[21:49] for front.
>> Yes. If you put a fence across there,
[21:51] that's the front. That's a front fence.
>> So, your definition, my definition are
[21:56] align.
>> But yeah, but you can't but you can't
[22:00] build that fence, that side fence closer
than 30 ft from the property line.
[22:04] That's a setback.
>> You're talking about if we push too far
[22:06] this way. Yes.
>> So, the only question I believe we're
[22:09] trying to address right now is what is
front versus side.
[22:14] the encroachment thing. I think we've
already tabled
[22:17] » to me. Anything that goes along the side
of your property is your side.
[22:22] » To me, that's how it
>> So, as the fences now,
[22:28] » you see that as being a side yard fence?
>> With its height the way it is,
[22:34] » you see that as a side.
>> I'm not I'm just make sure that it's
[22:38] clear.
>> That is That's how I see it. is a
[22:41] sideyard fence and you know just does is
it too
[22:48] is it too close to the property to the
front property line
[22:53] » I feel like because of the setback
>> setback yeah because the setback is 30
[22:58] ft is that right
>> that's in addition to the right way
[23:04] » so so we're not trying to solve this
without all the information
[23:12] think I can make a motion.
>> Yes, absolutely.
[23:14] » Make a motion that hey, we will all come
back at the next meeting with our
[23:20] individual interpretation of the front
versus side
[23:26] and then we'll be able to take a vote on
it then and we'll have all of the
[23:30] information theoretically uh necessary
to make all the decisions at once.
[23:39] Anything else that we need?
[23:55] Jamie needs to know when she has to call
the surveyor and spend $500 more dollars
[24:03] getting him out there to draw the house
and the
[24:10] line that's 30 ft from the property line
because it's, you know, it's going to
[24:16] cost money to do that project.
So what she doing?
[24:22] » Can you give clarification?
Is this the fence? Is this indicating
[24:27] the fence? And is that a measurement?
I already know there.
[24:38] I'll send an email tomorrow and see if
he can give me the clarification
[24:45] of what
>> that perpendicular line.
[24:52] I can't even.
And then how back how far back the
[24:57] house? No, just how how far back is the
fence? Is this a fence? And what's the
[25:02] measurement between the right way
or the property line and the fence? I
[25:07] think we have the property line fence
for setback
[25:12] » what we asked for.
>> I think the property line
[25:14] » we asked for was not representative of
that. So that's
[25:19] an official measurement just
[25:30] an official measurement on the survey to
depict the entire right away and if
[25:36] there is any gap between the property
and the right
[25:44] that's privacy and it goes down to that
spot
[25:53] And then and then it says here that that
T is that foam box and the power pole.
[25:59] And then that little line right here, it
shows that that is 9.4t
[26:05] of fence that extends into the rideway.
So according to the survey,
[26:11] » that was the surveyor
because I heally
[26:16] about that notation and I asked him if
he could clarify how far he
[26:23] question on the 14th said it was not in
the right way.
[26:27] » Yep.
>> Yeah. But they were wrong. They didn't
[26:30] measure.
>> Oh, they didn't measure it.
[26:32] » Oh, no.
[26:35] » The surveyor went out and found the iron
pin that is on the corner of the lot
[26:42] » and the fence extended 9.4t ft beyond
the iron pent. That is a measure on the
[26:50] ground.
>> My initial question to do was here is
[26:53] your telephone pole. Does that not
represent where your rideway line is?
[26:58] And they said typically, but it differs
from place to place.
[27:02] » And the DK guy said that he runs by.
[27:08] » Okay. So now
[27:11] » now since we did not wait for the
Additional motion that was made to be
[27:16] seconded. We've now moved completely
away from what was originally decided.
[27:21] It was originally decided
that the fence did not extend
[27:27] onto
the right of weight. To confirm that, we
[27:30] asked for the measurement of this rider
weight to be depicted on the survey.
[27:35] So, do all we need to ask is for the 37
1/2 ft be depicted on the survey.
[27:42] » So, you can send it out there. Well,
they may not have to go out there. They
[27:46] may already know.
See, there's they didn't put any
[27:50] measurements on these three lines. And
that's that's the problem.
[27:53] » Yeah. Without going out there, he could
indicate whether that front property
[27:58] line is the edge of the bottom.
>> He can add that to the flat
[28:04] » probably inexpensively.
>> Here's here's the issue. The u
[28:11] the fence does give most of the
Yeah.
[28:16] » Okay. So, clarify for me what I'm
asking. Um,
[28:22] Robert Blackie, who's a surveyor,
clarification on what those three lines
[28:27] mean? Three drops on that line means
what's the measurement? You want to know
[28:32] where the 37 ft go?
>> It would be 37 and 12 ft on each side
[28:36] » depicted on each side onto on the survey
>> from the center line.
[28:46] And I think what we're going to get is
that the 30 based on the dotted line at
[28:49] the top that's the other 37 and 1/2 ft
of the right
[28:54] equal down between the rightway and the
south side.
[29:01] So in that case the the fence can does
extend property line.
[29:09] So looking at that, does the board want
to make a ruling on the a decision on
[29:14] the fence extending beyond the property
line or does the board wish to wait the
[29:18] motions that have already been
submitted?
[29:19] » I don't think it extends past the
property line. I think it the question
[29:22] is it doesn't extend in the property
line. It's the property line.
[29:29] » It extends past the property line
whether it's in the waterway
[29:33] » or in a no man's land or what wherever
it is. It does extend pass
[29:41] you would like to. Okay. So, we'll leave
the motions
[29:44] as as they stood in the decisions that
were made.
[29:48] We're looking for an official
measurement on the survey to depict the
[29:53] entire ride away and if there is any gap
between the property and the rightway
[30:01] that we entered another motion made a
decision on adding the house and the
[30:04] setback measurement
to the survey.
[30:10] So those will those will continue.
Now if we were entertaining a third
[30:15] motion and that motion with board
members return to our next meeting with
[30:20] interpretations of the front versus the
side.
[30:24] » Yes. Is the motion second?
Motion's been seconded. We enter the
[30:30] discussion phase of motion. Are there
any other thoughts?
[30:35] All those in favor of board members
returning to the next meeting with
[30:39] interpretations of the front versus
sideyard signify by saying I. I. Those
[30:45] opposed signify by saying nay.
The motion passes unanimously.
[30:57] Are there any other additional comments
for the board discussion?
[31:05] I do have a question.
>> Yes.
[31:09] » Was the appellent
notified?
[31:16] » Um yes. Um the sign was put out by
fence. It was also put on Facebook and
[31:24] our website and he called me this this
morning and asked him what time the
[31:28] meeting was. So he is well aware.
>> The sign for three weeks. I think
[31:35] » when we set another meeting, I think you
need to mail him a notice of meeting and
[31:42] make sure that he
is aware of the time and place of the
[31:47] meeting.
I just noticed that the is not here
[31:51] tonight.
[31:57] » He showed up late. He came in late.
But he did call me this morning and I
[32:01] did clarify what was on
[32:07] mail.
[32:11] » You have to take away that you didn't
tell me when the meeting
[32:23] not heard any additional discussions.
We've had the board motions during the
[32:27] board discussions.
[32:30] The stated final decision and the
findings of effect have been presented
[32:33] in the review of the motions.
Catch them all.
[32:44] The board will consider a motion to
adjourn.
[32:48] » I will make a motion to this meeting.
Motion to made second.
[32:55] All those in favor of journ say I.
All those in signify by saying nay.
[33:02] Leading is
[33:06] good everybody. You guys
[33:19] » they're still there on both sides of the
fence.
[33:21] » They're still there. Before the metal
leaf, do you want to set up the
[33:25] potentially walk?
>> Yeah.
[33:27] » Yeah.