[0:05] It is 7 o'clock and I'd like to make a motion to open the meeting.

[0:09] All >> in favor?

[0:10] » I >> um and the notice is uh that we're going

[0:15] to break it up in two parts. The Tuxedo Club continuation of the public hearing

[0:20] for the Tuxedo Club one West Lake Road, Tuxedo Park, New York. Tax Map 107-1-3-2

[0:29] regarding sound levels and seeking relief from the following sections of

[0:32] the the village of Tuxedo Park zoning code. Zoning code 100-18A

[0:38] fences no fence shall be over 2'6 in in height and shall be erected without the

[0:45] building permit and the approval of the board of architecture review in

[0:49] accordance with article 8 of this chapter. Any fence erected in the front

[0:54] yard shall not exceed 4 feet in height. Any fence erected in the rear or sidey

[0:58] yards may not exceed 6 feet in height. No fence shall be located closer than 5t

[1:04] to any roadway or closer than 2 feet to any property line. Notwithstanding the

[1:10] foregoing, no fence shall be erected, maintained which shall interfere or

[1:14] interferes with the light or air of an adjoining lot or building thereof. where

[1:20] in this application the maximum permitted fence height in the rear and

[1:23] side yard is six feet. Pre-existing fence was 10 feet and four 13 ft high

[1:30] fence sections have been constructed. Um I'd like to um reopen the public hearing

[1:38] and uh and I would then have the uh applicant um present.

[1:47] » Good evening. for not being present with you for your

[1:51] last meeting. Thank you for indulgence in continum.

[1:55] I'm Michael Susman. I represent the club and I have made a written submission

[2:00] through your council which I believe was circulated.

[2:04] Both sides have made I don't want to be redundant. I want to share a few basic

[2:09] points. Maybe you should use the mic. Sure.

[2:18] » Yes. Is that better? >> That's better.

[2:20] » Thank you. >> The experienced building inspector made

[2:23] an informed decision to permit the pedal court knowing the mentions and

[2:29] [clears throat] qualities. The courts were built in broad daylight.

[2:34] No one timely challenged his allowance which of course was the required remedy

[2:39] for anyone offended by his use of discretion afforded him. Any such

[2:45] challenge in my view is now unfinly before its existence.

[2:50] The building specs decision moreover was rational

[2:54] given as you just read that provision. The lack of any adverse externalities

[3:02] associated with the size of the fence. We know where this is located. We know

[3:09] it's located distant from any roadway. You know it's located this many property

[3:15] owners probably >> and the the issues which are implicated

[3:20] by the provision you read relate to such externalities. They don't relate to a

[3:25] situation like this. Moreover,

[3:30] there is no evidence or there's been a lot of discussion about it of a noise

[3:34] disturbance. The noise study we presented this confirms the conclusion.

[3:39] However, in consideration of the concerns you

[3:44] raised and the light of my client's history of fitting in and advancing

[3:49] community values, we are prepared to add sound dead

[3:55] batting and fencing to the existing tennis court fence next to the podel

[4:01] court as well as additional tree planting at a cost of approximately

[4:05] $24,000. We believe this should resolve any

[4:10] perceived issue and offer further aesthetic consideration to those

[4:15] concerned. Mrs. St. John momentarily will provide

[4:19] you some more detail as to that. So you have it.

[4:24] In my view, in light of the statutory purpose as we discussed a few moments

[4:28] ago, the varying slot is minor. It poses no aesthetic harm or otherwise. It is

[4:36] required because a fence of the height saw is an essential element or component

[4:42] of a pedel court which now does exist and creates no issue for anyone.

[4:49] I believe those who oppose this facet on to the magnitude of the variance but in

[4:54] my view understood holistically it is minor and functionally

[4:59] appropriate. Replacing a tennis court on the same

[5:04] profile with a bell court does not find an expansion of use in my view. My

[5:10] esteemed colleague who I've known for many years, Mr. Lynch, suggests

[5:14] otherwise, but I believe cites distinguishable case law. There is no

[5:19] intensification of any non-conforming use here, and the minimal differences

[5:24] between the racket sports makes any such conclusion unsustainable

[5:29] and strain. If one looks at cases cited, you'll see expansions of use which are

[5:35] meant to functionally expand whatever the productive activity then going on

[5:40] was not a replacement of one byl like activity.

[5:45] The statutory factors which apply to area not use varies supply as I've

[5:51] explained in my submission which I won't repeat favor this application.

[5:57] I want to say only one final word and I don't mean it to be preachy but I do

[6:03] believe that it should inform conversation.

[6:07] I recognize from my career it's been 15 years of advocacy

[6:13] and we live in a culture which is characterized at this point by

[6:17] oppositionality and cooperation. Perturbance rather than consiliation is

[6:22] pervasive. Respectfully,

[6:25] this board, I believe, should accept the mitigation we're proposing tonight and a

[6:30] spirit of cooperation to assist those who have raised issue. The club has long

[6:36] been a good neighbor in this community, as evidenced by the withdrawal of the

[6:41] request for lighting of courts so as to minimize any new impact might be

[6:47] experienced by its warer here tonight. Thank you for your opportunity to

[6:52] present. I would, as I mentioned, like to have Mr. St. Sean come up for a

[6:57] moment and [clears throat] explain the mitigation efforts since he's much more

[7:01] familiar with mine.

[7:07] » So uh we've identified a product called acousta block and it is basically from a

[7:15] distance looks like a tennis screen or a wind screen which are currently on all

[7:19] the carts that have courts that happen. Uh it's a much denser heavier material

[7:24] used specifically for uh racket sports pickle ball.

[7:31] It is the entire length of the fence the height of the fence reaches

[7:35] approximately 10 ft. It will go in four sections. a 15 ft section, a 53 ft

[7:43] section, a 60 ft section, and a 15 ft section that are currently on what we

[7:48] call our temp score three, two, and three. Um, we think that

[7:54] this will be as inobtrusive as possible visually and match the current look of

[7:59] the courts as closely as we can, but provide significant uh dampening for any

[8:05] sound that may be escaping from the courts.

[8:08] Do >> you have a cut sheet of it?

[8:10] » Uh, I do. I don't have it with me. J, I have to mail it to you.

[8:15] » Would you spell that? I couldn't understand. What's it called?

[8:18] » A K O U S E I C E L O.

[8:35] » Well, that's a good name. It's what we'll see though.

[8:40] Looks a little more.

[8:44] » So, this would be the product that you intend to use. And this drawing here is

[8:52] is is how you No, I think we should make a copy of this and enter this into the

[8:57] record. >> Absolutely. You might want to give

[9:01] everybody a copy, >> right? Yeah. Could you make copy of

[9:03] that? >> It says in there. The other thing I

[9:04] should say is that it attaches to the existing pens and hangs off it. So

[9:08] there's no other structure that needs to be added to support it.

[9:17] » Can we ask questions? Can we ask questions?

[9:21] » What >> can we ask?

[9:22] » Yeah, sure. as your acitician studied this with

[9:26] regards to the proximity of the Michans and other people who have complained

[9:31] about noise to to determine whether this does indeed

[9:35] mitigate noise coming from the pedel court.

[9:39] » Studies on this product have shown it mitigates noise coming from Padell and

[9:42] pickle ball courts. >> But the acistician that you had hired

[9:46] that they folded it into their review. No,

[9:49] » we did not have the sound study p

[10:01] Thank you.

[10:10] » Attorney speak. >> Does anyone else want to be heard?

[10:15] » Well, I'm sure there are other people want to be heard, but if you raised if

[10:18] you raised your hand first, then you could speak.

[10:32] chairperson and members of the board. Thank you very much. Dennis Lynch for my

[10:36] clients who are present here tonight. Um I always take to heart what Mr. Susman

[10:40] says because he's a fantastic attorney and what he said tonight about

[10:45] collaboration and not being oppositional.

[10:49] That's the first time I've heard that and we welcome that. And if there is

[10:53] going to be some type of mitigation uh whether it's trees or some type of uh

[11:01] material there uh I think it behooves the board to find out what that is. One

[11:08] of the me members of the board raised the question about you know the studies

[11:11] or impact and come back uh between now and the next planning next BCA meeting

[11:16] with a plan. what's the plan on the shrubbery? What's the plan on this?

[11:21] What's the plan on that? You know, we welcome uh mitigating efforts, but to

[11:26] come tonight at the last minute and present something which I would say is

[11:31] somewhat amorphous and especially because a letter was just handed up

[11:35] which we don't have a copy yet, but even if we get a copy tonight, we need time

[11:39] to take a look at it. Uh so I'm not suggesting that you know we just

[11:43] postpone things for the sake of but I think it there are going to be

[11:48] mitigation measures. We should see those in black and white.

[11:52] We should see them in drawing. They should be submitted and certainly uh I

[11:57] think that might go a long way to try to resolve this. I assume everybody here on

[12:01] the board has gotten a copy of the order from last week.

[12:05] » I made sure that we got it early because no one board members was concerned

[12:09] before. So, I'm not going to repeat everything in there. The night is long,

[12:13] but just a few points that Mr. Susman made. Number one, uh, we have never seen

[12:18] a cloak decision by John Ledwick. We foiled the papers. We looked at the

[12:24] documents. We never saw a quote decision. And, um, and certainly if we

[12:29] saw that, we could take action, but we haven't seen that. Now, if there's some

[12:33] decision somewhere that we haven't seen, I would ask that be produced. We can

[12:37] take a look at it. The other points that Mr. Susman raised, um I I think I've

[12:42] addressed them in my letter to the to the board. Um you know,

[12:47] no permit application for the PEL court, no decision on the permit application

[12:54] for the PEL court. Um you know, we raising other issues about the ARB not

[12:59] being involved, the construction that is construction, the disturbance of the

[13:04] soil. I mean, I know this board and this village is very concerned about

[13:08] environmental issues and I think that the construction has brought about

[13:12] issues that have to be looked at. So, not to delay the time, we respect you as

[13:16] volunteers being here. Uh, but I certainly think that um my my letter

[13:22] sets forth our position and again, if there's something that's going to be new

[13:25] that's going to make a difference that may actually resolve it, I think it's

[13:29] comment upon the board to adjourn the meeting tonight, give us a chance to

[13:33] review it. I'm happy to speak with Mr. Susman. He's always a pleasure to speak

[13:37] with and um we can try to resolve it if we can. So, thank you for your time.

[13:41] Appreciate it.

[13:50] » Uh are there any other members of the public that wish to speak at this time?

[14:06] Thank you. My name is Stephanie Brenna. I speak as a private resident, not as

[14:10] not in relation to the B where I work sometimes. Um, I would urge

[14:18] people if something could be found to please

[14:23] consider the wildlife. I've been on the board of New York City's Wild Bird Fund

[14:29] for nine years and I know what glass does to birds. Every broken neck of

[14:35] every daddy cardinal will cause all the nestlings to starve to death. Um would

[14:41] would anyone like to enjoy paddle cord? With that in mind, I already know that

[14:47] dead birds are found within these glass walls that no bird can possibly see. And

[14:54] it's I think it's just so cruel, you know. It's paddle board is or whatever

[14:59] you call it. Paddle board is is to do with enjoying yourself in nature, a

[15:05] sporting activity with your friends and having fun. I think you can have fun in

[15:10] nature without glass walls and without crucifying your neighbors with this

[15:15] sound. I if it was me, I would just take the thing down and play tennis.

[15:22] it, you know, it's like like everyone does. It's it's fun. We don't need

[15:26] another fad. We don't need to kill wildlife for a fad. America used to have

[15:32] a parrot. It's now extinct because women in the 19th century thought it would

[15:39] they looked prettier with a green feather on their head.

[15:43] That's what we're doing here. We're destroying these birds for a for a fed.

[15:49] In one region in Spain where paddle courts have been introduced,

[15:54] 75,000 birds were counted dead in one season.

[16:00] So there are many more than you think. And um I'd really like you I'd beg you

[16:05] to consider it because many of the residents that are paying taxes here

[16:10] come here because of the beauty of the nature that people love listening to the

[16:15] birds and the silence. So thank you so much for listening.

[16:29] » Any other comments?

[16:33] So unwind. >> I'd like I'd like to comment.

[16:38] » Hi Chrissy Corridor 81 Lauraard and um we've been members of the club

[16:44] for eight years. We've been across the street for eight years. Um we're not big

[16:50] brackets people. We're recently introduced to tennis and to pedal. But I

[16:55] will say that in the summer there's no more joyous sound to us than sitting

[17:01] outside on our patio and listening to tennis balls and listening to bell balls

[17:06] and listening to children and listening to people having fun. We actually sit

[17:11] outside at night and we listen to it and we set up our dinner out there and we

[17:16] just love it and it's part of summer for us and part of the noise of summer and

[17:22] also one of the reasons we chose to live across the street from a tennis club and

[17:27] from a pool. There are a lot of different places to live in Tuxedo Park.

[17:32] And if you choose to live across from a club and a tennis club and a pool, those

[17:38] are the noises. We find it joyous. That was our choice. And you know, we're in

[17:43] huge support. Again, we're not big rackets players, but it's just a fun

[17:49] sound. It's just it's it's it's summer for us, and so we're in complete favor

[17:55] and complete support.

[18:07] there else?

[18:15] » Uh, Robert Lopez. Uh, my wife and I are residents at 75 Summit Road uh just

[18:22] above uh the club. Uh residents for 5 years now. um and members also for 5

[18:28] years. I couldn't agree more uh with Miss Crawford and um those residents

[18:34] that the PEL courts since they've been installed have like increased the fabric

[18:39] of the community uh the members of the club. It's been uh an incredible

[18:44] experience uh a great time uh in the summer uh and a great experience overall

[18:49] and bringing more of the residents in the club. And I couldn't agree more that

[18:53] if you do live near the club like you should expect there to be a little bit

[18:57] more traffic there should you should expect there to be a little bit more

[19:00] noise. If you live near a pool uh that's kind of one of the the the aspects of it

[19:05] happening. And so I think that you know we drive by it every single day. Um, and

[19:09] it's been a great addition to the overall community, uh, to the club and,

[19:14] uh, I couldn't I couldn't agree more with, uh, Miss Crawford and and her

[19:18] statement. So, uh, thank you very much and appreciate it.

[19:30] » I guess I have a question for for Randy. this the the the proposal and the

[19:35] estimate for acousta block is is this what you intend to do everything that's

[19:42] in this and and the drawing that shows where you're going to be placing it that

[19:48] that is the intent >> that's the intent and then that's the

[19:51] existing fence for the current port two and three and terms of the tree plan

[19:57] question right along we've had all every plan to replace I think it was five

[20:03] trees been took down, a couple were dead, a couple were drainage issues,

[20:06] whatever it might have been. But we've always had that plan and we're actually

[20:10] working on the species plan right now to do probably late September because

[20:14] obviously we're not >> planting trees right now, but the plan

[20:19] would be to do those in late September. >> Now the this material is this material

[20:24] available? >> Yes.

[20:26] » How how soon could something like this be installed? If if this is process

[20:32] approved, I'll place the order tomorrow. So, I don't know exactly how long it

[20:36] will take, but I can place the order tomorrow.

[20:39] » I have a question. Oh, sorry. >> Yeah, you want everybody to finish

[20:43] first, I guess. >> Oh, sorry.

[20:44] » Okay. I'm sorry. Go ahead. >> Oh, no. I'm just like, it sounds like a

[20:48] good idea, but what if it doesn't prevent the sound that we're getting? We

[20:51] don't get a lovely, you know, little tennis sound. We get a gunshot sound

[20:55] around the clock. [snorts and clears throat] So, what if

[20:57] it doesn't prevent the sound? material does take the decibb down. I mean, I'm

[21:01] familiar with this material. It does take the decibb down. To say how much it

[21:05] comes down, I can't tell. And until you put it up, you're really not going to be

[21:09] able to. But it does lessen the noise. >> Well, no, I'm familiar with the

[21:13] material, too. >> Um, and it is a matter of how it's

[21:17] placed. It's a matter of contours of the land, trees,

[21:21] wind, exposure, lots of things that I'm not an expert to just to make a

[21:28] determination and certainly not on the spot. It requires an acoustician or

[21:33] you're not taking this seriously enough. >> That's just a fact.

[21:39] » You mean to install it and >> just throw it out on the table and ask

[21:43] us to look at it right here and now. >> Oh yeah. and believe what the applicant

[21:48] is saying without hearing an independent scientist at Hustision say yes this will

[21:55] work under these conditions to mitigate the Marshon's sound issue the uh the

[22:01] other person who came last time who said she can hear it

[22:04] » guath >> she's way up a valley

[22:09] » it just doesn't seem fair >> we can we can also profess From the

[22:16] beginning I have said >> from the beginning I have

[22:22] » quiet from the beginning I have said that if we can properly mitigate this

[22:27] that is the way to make everyone happy. I have asked practically beg

[22:33] » that we do a study. Let the experts decide this and you're not. It doesn't

[22:39] sound like anybody wants to if they want to install this tomorrow.

[22:46] » Their hands raised on the on the zoom. Somebody else wants to talk.

[22:52] » Mr. singing quarter.

[23:00] » Who else was >> can you guys hear me?

[23:02] » Okay. >> Hi everyone. Drew Singh, uh 37 Fox Hill.

[23:08] Um you know, I just just want to say that I myself uh been a tennis player

[23:14] for 35 years. Uh, and you know, I've

[23:20] certainly played Padell a few times, uh, but I've probably played tennis 10 times

[23:25] for every time I play Pedell. And just want to add, uh, to some of the

[23:30] sentiments here where, uh, having the life, the energy, watching kids learn to

[23:36] play racket sports. It's so much easier to pick it up. uh bringing so many

[23:40] members of the community that I mean tennis is just it's it's a it's a pretty

[23:44] challenging game and it's something where it doesn't it makes it difficult

[23:48] to get started >> and you know from [clears throat] my

[23:51] perspective I think this just really rounds out our rackage program and uh

[23:56] sports and offerings and you know having such life and such vibrance brought into

[24:01] the community. Um, I thought, uh, Miss Crawford said it so well, uh, that it

[24:08] really brings energy and energy handful of months a year. Uh, and I'm a huge

[24:16] proponent um, of the Padell courts, which by the way, as as

[24:23] described by council, really are a near identical use, right? You're taking one

[24:28] racket sport and putting in another racket sport. Uh and uh uh but I do

[24:34] think at the same time it adds so much to the community uh beyond uh just

[24:40] having yet another tennis court there. And this is just coming from someone who

[24:44] again plays much more tennis than Podell, but I'm a big fan of it.

[24:51] » Can I respond to that? I would like it across from your house, too. Okay. Then

[24:56] I wouldn't have to >> What I would say is that there there was

[24:59] a tennis court already across from your house. is my point, right? So, the

[25:02] reality is that there there were already but this gives you an opportunity to but

[25:07] the reality is that if you could have the other tennis courts replaced, right?

[25:10] Because >> we can't have back and forth going

[25:14] you can't you can't you can't have back and forth please.

[25:17] » Nothing like >> entitled to his opinion.

[25:19] » Yeah, you're entitled to >> years we've never complained about

[25:22] tennis. It's a different sound. It's a gunshot loud popping sound that goes

[25:29] into December round the clock. >> Come hear it.

[25:32] » I'm gonna have to call for order. Really?

[25:35] » I'm going to have to call for order. >> Oh, you said no. Back and forth. Okay.

[25:38] You had your opportunity to speak before >> and someone is waiting to speak.

[25:45] » Hi, Shander Mesler. I live at 15 Clubhouse Road Extension, which puts me

[25:49] almost backtoback with Bisquoffne who I understand spoke at the last meeting.

[25:54] So, I I would just like to add a slightly different angle to this

[25:57] conversation. So, I I'm sympathetic to the neighbors and the noise. I mean, I

[26:00] sit in my Yeah, spend Sundays and I can hear the music in the pool for sure.

[26:04] It's not my favorite music, so I often turn on other music. Um, but what I

[26:08] would add to this conversation in support of the club putting in the

[26:13] chords or having maintaining the chords is that we all benefit as neighbors to

[26:17] the club from having a healthy club. And my understanding is that membership has

[26:22] been on a downtrend and I do see when I tell my friends in New York City that we

[26:28] have Padell there, you know, they're very peaked. I understand that it's it's

[26:32] a fattish trend and it's kind of trendy right now, but I do think it's it's

[26:36] definitely a sport that's here to stay and I think it will attract new members

[26:40] to the club and I think we all benefit from having a healthy, robust club

[26:43] membership. So, I just wanted to add that sentiment, but I I also appreciate

[26:48] the sound concerns because I am neighbors of Miss Guapne and I can hear

[26:52] it, but I there's trade-offs as with everything.

[26:55] » Thank you. >> May I ask Randy something?

[27:01] » Uh Randy, we got a lot of emails the board uh from Lindseay Maxwell about

[27:07] trees. Is that part of your plan or was that his own plan? I didn't quite get

[27:12] it. Uh Mr. Maxwell is on our landscaping committee. He has taken it upon himself.

[27:19] I received those late this afternoon right before this meeting. I haven't

[27:22] looked at >> um we will look at those within the

[27:26] landscape committee as well as our superintendent. There's responsibility

[27:30] for all plantings, but we're still developing the plan at this point. We

[27:33] have a list of species obviously that'll, you know, be within the

[27:39] code of the park, but we have don't we don't have a finalized plan yet. He's

[27:44] just adding and supporting it. >> That's right. And and about um with with

[27:48] that corner in particular near that that intersection, you could reduce in theory

[27:53] uh 5 to seven dB with a careful set of plantings. And so there's an idea that

[27:58] could combine, you know, the the official buffer plus some plantings to

[28:02] achieve a goal. [clears throat]

[28:09] » May I also say we've been at this for two years almost. And why two years

[28:16] later are we getting these suggestions at the last minute?

[28:22] » I can't speak to his timing. I received it today. Okay. But um we have always

[28:28] contended that we would wait till the project was done in the destruction as

[28:31] well as we were doing some other work on the exterior of the tennis building last

[28:35] year, repairs to the roof and so on. So that's why we didn't do them last year.

[28:39] Those are now substantially complete and the plan is to do them at the end of

[28:43] this September. The treatment, >> but I guess the problem we have is we

[28:48] really don't know specifically. All we can really have is a commit from you to

[28:53] provide additional landscaping at this point with but it would be undefined.

[29:00] I >> think Mr. Porter has his hand up.

[29:03] » Great. Thank you. Uh can you guys hear me? Okay.

[29:05] » Yes. >> Great. Well, first of all to the members

[29:07] of the BZA, thank you for for your service, right? Uh I know you're acting

[29:12] in the best interest of our community. So so thank you for that. Um my wife

[29:16] Chrissy spoke. I just want to say one quick thing. You know, it's um padell.

[29:20] It's wildly wildly popular in our community, right? Wildly popular. And

[29:26] it's a gentle sport. It's underhand. People of all ages can play. My my my

[29:32] daughter who's 8 years old plays. Her grandparents play. It's a very gentle

[29:36] sport and it's been around since 1969. So, I agree with Chandra. It's not going

[29:40] anywhere, right? I know for a fact that it's attracting new families to our to

[29:44] our community. So, I would just urge um and and and respectfully request the

[29:49] board to take all this into consideration, right? And again, I want

[29:52] to thank you guys for your service and and um anyway, we're here to to help out

[29:56] in any way we can.

[30:05] » Any other comments from the public? I just I'm hearing that there's uh been

[30:12] communications by the club members or someone from the club about trees to

[30:17] board members. Um those communications have never been um [clears throat]

[30:22] revealed, never been, as of my knowledge, made part of the official

[30:26] record. >> They they they have not been they're

[30:29] only they're only letters that have come in. Okay. But they will be part of

[30:33] » they'll be part of the of the official record

[30:35] » and they just came in and so obviously they'll be part of the record and you

[30:39] would have access to them. They're just we just got

[30:42] » made that what what I'm trying to find out is that you know you've heard many

[30:47] things and what I heard from the chairman kind of concerns me about well

[30:51] we'll build it and then let them build it and see what the impacts are. I don't

[30:54] think the chairman actually said we'll let them build it and then

[30:58] » there was a discussion about by the chairman about only if it's built will

[31:02] we know the impact in words of that substance. So I'm saying that's the

[31:06] » well that that's the the match. >> It's the antithesis of to me proper land

[31:11] use. You know you get all the facts of you know even things like the trees not

[31:16] just the trees and bushes but what's going to be the maintenance plan? I mean

[31:20] that's one of the critical things. How are they going to maintain it? What if

[31:23] it's planted and dies within a couple years? Alls I'm saying is that with all

[31:27] this new information, there's no reason to to rush into it and see.

[31:32] » We've been at this for two years. >> Okay. We've been at this for two years.

[31:36] We're going to move We're going to move forward. We're going to move forward.

[31:38] We're going to move forward. We've been at this for two years. We're going to

[31:41] move forward. >> You may have, but I think it's unfair. I

[31:45] think it's improper. I think it's illegal.

[31:47] » And what if it doesn't do the mitigation that it's supposed to?

[31:50] » We can't have this back and forth. All right. You had your opportunity to

[31:53] speak. All right. >> Well, this is new to us, too. So

[32:04] » I respect what everybody has said here tonight

[32:08] and they're obviously two opposing camps but the solution

[32:15] I mean the problem is not that people want to destroy Padell in this

[32:22] community. That is not the problem. Everybody supports Padell in this

[32:28] community. Everybody wants a Padell court, but it the problem is where it's

[32:34] placed. And it's placed in a neighborhood where

[32:38] there are at least six immediate neighbors who have hired lawyers who've

[32:44] come before this board again and again to object to the noise. It's not just

[32:50] the Marshalss. It's the Chungs across the street. They hired a lawyer. This

[32:54] was a year ago. This has been going on for a long time. The problem is either

[32:59] it gets mitigated or you move it. And the club has plenty of places they can

[33:07] put it. They could put it down near the golf club and people could play pedal

[33:12] before breakfast and then go in the club and have breakfast. They could play

[33:16] Fidel in the morning and go in and have lunch. They could have drinks. They

[33:21] could do whatever they want. years ago, the club put a paddle court over here

[33:27] with these other tennis courts. There was strong objection from the neighbors.

[33:32] Objection to the point where a lawsuit was threatened. The club moved the

[33:37] paddle courts down to where the golf course is now and where the paddle

[33:41] courts are now. That's a perfectly appropriate place to put it. It would be

[33:46] out of the jurisdiction of this board and you could do whatever you wanted.

[34:05] Karen, do you want to say something or you're just joining the meeting?

[34:09] [laughter]

[34:12] » Uh, I'd like to make a motion to close the public hearing. So move

[34:17] in favor. I >> All right. board discussion.

[34:23] Um, so I was very curious about the sound study

[34:29] that showed in effect um, no difference in noise level between tennis and pedel

[34:37] uh, which seemed very at odds with what um, some of folks have said. Uh between

[34:43] the last BZA and this one, I've been over 15 times uh standing at uh where

[34:48] Antio West Lake Stable and West Lake Road basically right below the Marchons.

[34:54] Uh and tried to listen for myself to see what I could hear. Uh on on eight of

[34:59] those occasions, no one was playing Pedell, so it was a very uh so I could

[35:03] hear people playing tennis, but I couldn't hear anyone playing Pedell when

[35:06] I when people were playing both pedal and tennis. And this would be on courts

[35:09] one, two, or three. Uh uh again, it's not scientific, but I you could tell the

[35:14] difference between the two shots, but there seemed to be no difference in

[35:17] terms of actual decibb. Uh cars were much louder, airplanes were much louder,

[35:23] wind was louder. When I was there, when the music was coming from the pool, the

[35:27] music from the coming from the pool was much louder. Um, and uh, to me it it

[35:34] uh, it made it that the switch to Patel seemed to be much less impactful from a

[35:40] noise perspective than what some folks have claimed. Now, uh, if you had very

[35:46] aggressive tennis players playing, the sound is louder. Uh, if you have

[35:50] aggressive padell players, the sound is louder, but I did not see an meaningful

[35:55] difference. Um I also wanted to understand um based on comments around

[36:01] dust to dawn um what the actual usage of uh I think u one or both courts were

[36:07] used in the month of June uh slightly less than average than 3 hours a day.

[36:17] » Are you saying that they were both in use

[36:19] » one or both? In other words, a sound would have been coming from them. Okay.

[36:24] Uh,

[36:27] all right. Well, first off, number one, >> I would like to say something about the

[36:32] noise. [clears throat] This is from Bath,

[36:36] England. Uh, the Padella courts were dropped from Bath Sports Ground Plan

[36:42] after Chinese water torture warning. There is still nowhere to play the sport

[36:47] in Bath. Um, the BA and Northeast Somerset Council turned down its own

[36:53] planning committee over concern about the noise of the four planned pedel

[36:58] courts, which one counselor said would be like Chinese water torture for

[37:02] neighbors. And they also said uh the planning

[37:08] committee said the gunfire like noise of the game would harm neighbors mental

[37:12] health and turn the plan down. One counselor warned that the noise would be

[37:17] close to meeting the World Health Organization definition

[37:22] of seriously annoying. That's sort of British. Seriously

[37:27] annoying. >> Well, first off, I'd like to say that um

[37:30] I'm glad we're not talking about the lights anymore. All right. Um, and we're

[37:35] talking about a zoning issue and we're talking about character of the court

[37:40] itself and the noise that the and the noise and that goes to the character

[37:45] court and we're also talking about the fences which obviously it seems no one

[37:49] really has a big concern about the fences themselves. Uh I as uh Campbell I

[37:57] I've observed multiple times I put myself in the

[38:02] position up on the where where that dirt road comes in by the marons and when

[38:08] tennis is being played at the court which is a closer proximity to the

[38:14] marons and pedell is being played the tennis is noisier than the pedell. All

[38:20] right. And and I've witnessed this three times. Um, another thing is is that if

[38:26] you go you go online, you put in how far should a pedel court be from a

[38:32] residential property. Kind of the criteria is 100 meters. Okay. If you go

[38:37] online, it's 100 meters and the uh Marons property is 157 m away.

[38:45] » Where's that information from? Um well they you go online and there it was I

[38:50] » it's from the Podell magazine >> podell magazine but go on go online go

[38:54] open open my thing open my thing and put in put in that there it's it's from the

[39:00] United from the Dutch from UK and it's the 100 meters is is the goal

[39:05] » I'd like to rely more on professionals who do this for a living that have done

[39:10] research and made models >> and are advising people with science

[39:14] than all of this conjecture But the one sound study we have which

[39:19] » did have a monitoring location that was below the marsh but not that far away

[39:25] » had >> had had uh uh that there was no

[39:29] difference between tennis and the >> well decel sound

[39:33] » says that that interpretation of the data was flawed

[39:40] and constrained to put a different inclusion together that was in favor.

[39:47] That's what if you read this, you could easily make that determination.

[39:53] And I would have liked for the two aciticians. Well, initially

[39:58] I thought it was my understanding and maybe I'm wrong and I'm glad you're here

[40:01] so we can read what was said before, but I thought we decided when you were going

[40:07] to go for a vote, Jake, and then you said, "No, it sounds like everyone is

[40:11] very concerned with the sound. Let's do a study." Did we not say the the club

[40:17] offered right then and there to do the study and I think you Elise was like no

[40:22] I think we should perform the study. We all agreed that we as the independent

[40:28] body here would be performing the study. I asked if we could be involved in what

[40:34] kind of criter criteria is set to make a study. All of that was completely

[40:39] ignored. The next thing we see is a study that was made by the club. Tell me

[40:44] if I'm wrong, but that's how I saw that meeting go down and the subsequent

[40:49] action. So, you know, I'm glad the Marons or, you know, their lawyer,

[40:54] whoever advised them to get another and then now this isn't even being talked

[40:59] about. It's as if there's no other sound study. It's a critique of a sound study.

[41:04] But that is that is useful information here

[41:07] » that the sound study made by the club it looks flawed to another expert in the

[41:14] field. What what am I supposed to think about that if I've got to make a

[41:19] determination cuz I was gung-ho about a sound study saying you can mitigate the

[41:24] sound by doing X Y and Z. I was happy to vote and let everybody be happy about

[41:31] it. That's my goal here still. But I'm again, you don't have a comment.

[41:38] There's no comment you're going to give me that's going to satisfy me enough

[41:42] » to feel like this was done [laughter]

[41:46] completely. Gosh, I I'm I'm grateful that I didn't

[41:51] hear that. I guess I'll read that later. Um,

[41:56] » another thing I want to say, having been on the board of trustees and the BAR and

[42:01] the planning board and spent 20 years here trying to do my civic duty,

[42:06] I know that the club, despite being an entity of many people,

[42:13] is an entity of one with regards to how they are treated on boards.

[42:20] So is a single family residence. It's an entity of one and it's great that there

[42:26] are supporters of this coming here and expressing their opinion. It's it's

[42:31] great to hear it. Um but

[42:36] coming in masses doesn't change the fact that you are an entity of one

[42:42] and I'm not a member of the club. I've enjoyed the fact that the club is here

[42:48] and may or may not add vibrancy to the community. I think nature and peace and

[42:54] quiet adds a value and a vibrancy to the community.

[42:59] But when members stand up and say that we're all happy, you're ignoring

[43:05] people that live here that aren't members of the club. And that's some

[43:09] kind of discrimination. I don't know if it's civil rights or not, but it's some

[43:12] kind of consideration. I'm not finished, but I'll remember you raised your hand.

[43:18] Um, so I'm trying very hard to make the

[43:23] right kind of decision that makes everybody happy. And I'm not there yet

[43:26] because we don't have all the facts yet. That's my opinion. And I think if we

[43:31] make and force a vote right now that it it just doesn't feel like we've turned

[43:37] over every stone to do right by not just the Marchons, but any neighbor that has

[43:43] a valid complaint. And I believe they do because it's not been proven that they

[43:47] don't. And I'm not going to gaslight any resident of Tuxedo Park to say I've

[43:53] stood there and heard it and I don't think it's noisy. That I don't think

[43:57] that's fair.

[44:00] And may I point out that there are five immediate neighbors who have complained.

[44:06] In case you've probably heard of these people, the Hennessies, the Chungs, who

[44:11] came here uh to meetings, the Holams, Pat Goi, and Guthme, and Chris Hansen

[44:20] even complained about the noise of the parties at the padel.

[44:26] Now, these are direct neighbors complaining.

[44:31] » Those complaints were when the lights were going in. Not. They all complained

[44:36] about they all talked about the noise. Jay, I'm sorry. They did. I have these

[44:41] letters from them. >> And yes, they made reference to the

[44:46] fence height. And please someone here tell me if this is not a correct

[44:51] assumption to make but the variance if we're only talking about the fence which

[44:56] is a stretch because it is a wall but the height of it without a variance on

[45:03] the height the pedel court can't exist and you can't play

[45:08] like so that doesn't that bring into play the idea that it's undesirable

[45:16] because of the noise, the nuisance of noise.

[45:20] » Well, is that what we're talking about? >> Yes. So, your comment about everyone's

[45:25] talking about noise but not talking about the fence. I they're intertwined.

[45:31] » Well, the two go I mean the variances on the fence,

[45:35] » but you can't make a decision about the >> because the character of the court goes

[45:39] to to noise, right? Okay,

[45:45] Mark.

[45:49] Well, for starters, uh, and I read all the submissions from both parties, uh,

[45:55] and I've lived in the park for 5 years now, I do not find that the tuxedo club

[46:02] is a nonconforming use. Uh, and even if it was considered a pre-existing

[46:08] non-conforming use, I don't believe the replacement of the lawn tennis with

[46:13] Pedell is a material change in the use. They're both racket sports. Pedell

[46:19] courts were not placed in a different location on the lot.

[46:24] Uh, I've had the opportunity on numerous

[46:28] occasions to walk my dogs uh uh by the Pedell Courts.

[46:34] uh and I did not find uh any difference uh between the any any noise from uh you

[46:43] know hitting tennis balls versus the pedel. Um no competing noise study was

[46:50] uh submitted uh other than uh you know uh to counter the clubs study. I did

[46:58] listen to the video. It was placed on such a high volume that the bird

[47:03] chirping was hurting my eyes when hurting my ears when we were listening

[47:07] to it in the room. Uh uh so uh uh I couldn't give much weight to that uh

[47:14] based on the volume uh that was uh played uh before the board. Uh we're

[47:22] really here um the BCA has the authority to consider the height variance. uh and

[47:28] I don't think it's substantial and I haven't heard anything really uh uh an

[47:33] objection. I think it's it's it's a standard variance and and I don't uh

[47:38] believe any material changes made. Um, I did have the opportunity to research

[47:46] uh the different um case law that was cited. Uh, and I I

[47:52] don't believe um um that they're pertinent to this

[47:57] situation. Um nonconforming us is the cases that were cited. uh they're

[48:03] seeking if it's non-conforming and you make a change to it, they're seeking to

[48:07] get rid of the use and put them back uh to the original approved use. And I

[48:11] don't think anyone is going to be sitting here tonight stating that

[48:15] because there is I don't find that there is a material change. But even if there

[48:20] was a finding of material change, I don't think that anyone is going to say

[48:24] that the tennis pavilion or the tennis courts or pedel court should be turned

[48:27] into a residential home. So, um, you know, if you read the cases that were

[48:32] cited, uh, that was the goal, uh, in mind and challenging the non-conforming

[48:38] uses. So, I think I I made it pretty clear,

[48:43] um, you know, my evaluation of the application

[48:48] uh, before BCA tonight.

[48:53] » Yeah, there's another person in the audience, Jake, if you want to.

[48:56] » The meeting has been closed. Public hearing has been closed.

[48:58] » Public hearing has been closed. >> No, you can't speak.

[49:03] » You can speak, but it will not be considered part of the record. It's

[49:06] completely up to the chief. >> No, at this point. Okay.

[49:08] » No, at least they're moving on. Um, you know, and as I look at it, you know, I

[49:13] know that that Charlotte disagrees, but you know, the acousta block is a

[49:18] material that will cut decibb down. All right. Being placed where it's placed.

[49:24] Now, I don't want to get into like let's put it up. Let's then do a sound study

[49:28] afterwards. Um, you know, I I I I would like to move forward with this.

[49:36] All right. And I think the I think the board is is ready to vote.

[49:39] » You would like to what? >> Move forward. And I think the board is

[49:42] ready to vote. >> So, not ready to vote, but you are the

[49:46] chairman. >> Chairman, you need to go through the

[49:47] five factors. Okay. I know a lot of it has already been discussed, but perhaps

[49:53] for the record, you could >> Well, that's what we're going to do

[49:55] here.

[49:59] » By the way, um >> I think you Yeah.

[50:04] » I mean, you know, there have been um statements that the club was not

[50:10] pre-existing nonconforming because it wasn't deemed pre-existing

[50:15] non-conforming. That's not an accurate statement. This probably existed before

[50:20] zoning and there's specific uh code um 100-24

[50:31] that basically says it's grandfathered, right? Um

[50:37] » the the only way it would not be grandfathered is if the courts were put

[50:42] somewhere else. And I think I haven't heard anybody say the courts that the

[50:50] Padel courts were put somewhere else other than where the tennis court was.

[50:56] Um I think the board needs to also because there have been comments uh that

[51:01] uh Padell is a change of use. I think the court needs to decide whether they

[51:07] believe that Padell is a change of use from tennis. You might want to discuss

[51:12] that. um as well uh when you're going through

[51:17] this the five factors. Okay. >> Well, should we move on those

[51:22] beforehand? >> Um I think that's not a bad idea. So,

[51:27] just to limit the the initial uh questions, we don't have to talk about

[51:34] pre-existing non-conforming because it's it's as a matter of law. Uh but there

[51:40] have been allegations that this is a new use and not a grandfathered use. Uh and

[51:46] I think the board might want to discuss that and vote on that because that's a

[51:50] threshold issue in terms of expansion of a

[51:54] non-conforming use. >> Um

[52:01] I'd like to how you want to move forward. How is it best to move forward

[52:05] with that as a >> I would discuss that as right now as an

[52:08] interpretation of the code. >> I mean clearly a racket sport it you

[52:14] know we have squash, we have tennis, we have rackets. All right. Um

[52:21] to me it's a it's another racket sport. So there's not to me there's there's

[52:25] certainly not um a change in use. >> I I would agree. It's uh in my opinion

[52:34] the replacement of lawn tennis with a pedal is not a material change in use.

[52:38] Both are racket sports and based on the fact that pidel courts were not placed

[52:42] in a different location uh I don't think it should

[52:47] um be an issue. >> Okay.

[52:52] » I agree. >> I agree.

[52:55] » Okay. So why don't we take a quick vote on that? Something we can kind of all

[53:00] agree on. might be a good start. So, you'll call for a motion that it's not

[53:05] » uh call for a motion that the FedEl is not a change of abuse. All

[53:11] » in favor move. I >> I

[53:13] » did. Someone second. >> Second.

[53:16] » Okay. >> All right. Great. Now you [laughter] Now

[53:20] you can get into the lowhanging fruit. >> Exactly.

[53:24] » Now, we should get into the actual variance itself.

[53:28] » Okay. uh whether an undesirable change will be reduced in the character of the

[53:33] neighborhood or a detriment to nearby properties will be

[53:39] created by granting of an area variance. Now we obviously have a lot of different

[53:46] opinions about this. Um

[53:52] the uh the noise is a character, but you know like I as I said before you know

[53:59] the the the distance from the bedel court to the to the marons is 157 m. Uh

[54:11] there are there there are no other homes that are less than 100 mters. Even the

[54:18] Teddy Wings is is less than slightly less than 100 meters. Um [clears throat]

[54:24] Delortch are in the same area. Uh the lights were withdrawn. Um

[54:30] uh the the the height variance on the fence is not really a significant issue.

[54:38] Um

[54:44] and it and personally observation of the sound um by myself personally and I know

[54:53] Mark has that same feeling and and so does Campbell. Uh now I'm sure there uh

[55:00] others that want to chime in on this. Just the other part of the noise that I

[55:06] was, you know, do the courts cause there to be more noise other than just the

[55:10] hitting of the racket, right? Is there more crowd noise? And I think um again,

[55:14] based on my observations, that was not the case. I think the first month the

[55:19] courts were put up, there was a lot of buzz and there was a lot more

[55:21] spectating. I think over the past year uh there uh I believe there's been no

[55:29] more spectator noise or player noise from Pedell than there is from Long

[55:34] Tennis.

[55:44] Is that character? Who else has something to say about detriment to the

[55:50] neighborhood? Um well we've not established to my

[55:56] satisfaction that there is not a noise issue and so made that clear.

[56:03] Um there may also be um an issue with

[56:08] regards to a surface. Is the surface of Pedel different than the tennis court

[56:12] that was there before? The wall is certainly different than the fence that

[56:18] was there before. I've also already stated that the height of it is tied to

[56:25] the function of the game. Um, so therein lies the my objection to the height

[56:32] because we've not gotten to the bottom of whether this will be acceptable

[56:38] for a sound in the neighborhood. Now, the the distances that you're talking

[56:42] about, I I wish an someone that was more expert or that you could cite more

[56:48] expertise behind those um distances, but distance if you knew enough about

[56:54] acoustical science that has is a factor but not the only one.

[57:00] Um so it is a detriment to the

[57:03] neighborhood. So the one entity, the club, is creating a detriment to six

[57:09] entities that are nearby that object to the noise.

[57:17] Yes, I agree with that. As I I told you the names of the people who complained,

[57:22] direct neighbors and some very important people in the olden days like the

[57:28] Hennessies and the Chungs who came twice, the whole slams, Pat Gabby and

[57:35] Guth and Chris Hansen. He complained about the noise of the party. I think

[57:40] mainly parties at Padel, but that's a lot of people

[57:47] and just because >> Well, I disagree with you. I think most

[57:49] of those were not on the basis of noise. They were on the basis of the lights.

[57:53] » No, I don't agree with you. >> Well, then we we have a different

[57:56] opinion. >> Oh, okay.

[57:58] » Yeah. I mean, you could go back into the records and look, but most of them are

[58:01] on the pages that >> the noise is also

[58:07] something that is of a concern, I would think, and this is only my personal

[58:12] opinion on the matter, but if there really is truly a noise nuisance that

[58:18] neighbors feel that have lived here before Pedell was put in, so those who

[58:24] said that, you know, you you have to accept that you're going does hear noise

[58:29] from a tennis court and it's established in lots of

[58:33] conjectural online information but also an acquisition is saying so that it's

[58:40] different the Marons and these other complaintants had no idea that their

[58:46] government would let Padell be built so close to their house and create

[58:50] potentially material damage to the value of their

[58:54] thousands.

[58:58] » The the only noise study that was submitted in the application was

[59:02] submitted by the club. Uh I do live diagonally across the street from the

[59:06] club. Uh, and I did make personal observations and yes, I I hear the pool

[59:13] and and actually Sunday night when I come home, uh, I like listening to the,

[59:18] uh, band uh, or the guitarist uh, playing, but I I purchased a house

[59:22] across the street diagonally from the club uh, and and the pool and the and

[59:26] the tennis courts. But the only uh, study that was submitted uh, in this

[59:31] application uh, was submitted by the club. I do think it's very disrespectful

[59:37] to not read it and understand what the Marons have presented because they paid

[59:43] for an assessment of the study. The data is not necessarily wrong. It's lacking,

[59:51] but there's no reason to throw out data that the the acquistician that the club

[59:56] hired perfectly respectable outfit. I know them. I know Trinity. I know

[59:59] Sarammy. um it's just not sufficient to get to

[1:00:04] the root of the problem.

[1:00:10] » All right, moving on. Whether the benefits sought by the applicant could

[1:00:14] be achieved by some other feasible was other feasible fragment for the purpose

[1:00:20] other than the area variance. I mean only if they had put the court someplace

[1:00:25] else. Okay, that would be >> well they have the luxury of that

[1:00:28] option. Well, that would be after the fact after

[1:00:31] it was already built. So, >> we don't know that that matters, does

[1:00:34] it? How does how much does that matter? >> And it was sort of built in the dark of

[1:00:41] the night. >> Not really. [laughter] That That's That

[1:00:45] is That is >> in the middle of the winter with no

[1:00:49] » Come on. >> With no neighbor,

[1:00:51] » no neighbors were >> told about this, were they? No,

[1:00:56] » there was no No notice of neighbors.

[1:01:02] » I mean, no permit, no nothing. >> That all happened before this came to

[1:01:08] us. Okay. All right. What went on beforehand really? You know, yet it was

[1:01:14] it was but it it it didn't come to us until it was already built.

[1:01:20] » Oh, that's true. >> Okay. Didn't come to us until it was

[1:01:22] already built. But is that a is that an appropriate

[1:01:27] statement to make that we can't move it because it's already here?

[1:01:32] » No, of course not. >> No, it's not.

[1:01:35] » Could not grant the height variance, >> right? We could not you have that

[1:01:39] authority. >> We could not grant varian

[1:01:42] closer to >> right

[1:01:44] » at least being illustrative to the problem here. uh whether the requested

[1:01:50] area variance are substantial. The perimeter fence is 6 ft. The old tennis

[1:01:57] fence was 10 ft. The stealth fence at the high points is 13 ft. So there was a

[1:02:03] 7 foot variance. [snorts] Um but the there really is only a 30% variance from

[1:02:10] what the height of the old uh fences were. So I don't you know yes

[1:02:17] it's substantial but I don't think it's overly substantial where we could not

[1:02:23] grant it. >> Also the area of the fence around the

[1:02:26] pedel is smaller than the area of the fence around a tennis court.

[1:02:29] » Right. And just for the just for the record when they mentioned uh the

[1:02:34] location whether the location of the court could be placed in a different

[1:02:37] location just for the record I would say uh it obviously makes sense to have the

[1:02:43] pedel court with the tennis and uh in the vicinity of the tennis pavilion

[1:02:48] especially since it's placed in the exact location of a pre-existing court.

[1:02:55] Uh and as far as the height of the fence, uh as was just stated, it's it's

[1:03:01] it's uh it's a uh minuscule uh you know, lesser uh you know, there's there's a

[1:03:09] you know, that's what variances are for. And I don't think the variance is is

[1:03:13] very substantial that is being requested on this application.

[1:03:20] whether the proposed variance will have an adverse effect or impact on the

[1:03:24] physical and or environmental conditions in the neighborhood or district. Um,

[1:03:31] » excuse me. Yes. the the you know the combined area of the paddle courts is

[1:03:35] smaller than the tennis court and it you know is it's less on a physical um and

[1:03:42] obviously uh there you know have been noise

[1:03:46] concerns um

[1:03:51] excuse me yeah Stephanie Ren mentioned the bird kills

[1:03:57] the she worries a lot about birds and So I think that's un an adverse

[1:04:03] environmental effect. And the second one is uh that whatever the surface and I

[1:04:09] don't know what it is of the pedell court

[1:04:14] has water running off it much more than a lawn tennis court and apparently it's

[1:04:20] going into pond three and then the weewa and it's because of the composition of

[1:04:26] the court floor. >> Is there evidence of that? Thought I

[1:04:30] would just ask. >> I' I've not heard any evidence of that.

[1:04:34] » Evidence of that. >> We was one one of these wonderful pieces

[1:04:38] of paper we got. >> No one remembers reading that. It's in

[1:04:44] here. >> Yeah. It was mentioned. I don't know if

[1:04:50] it was by Susman

[1:04:54] about the excess water. I don't doubt if it would by suspect

[1:05:02] because >> supplied that information based upon

[1:05:06] experts and we >> well guess that

[1:05:10] » how thorough is >> I mean I've never I've never I've never

[1:05:14] seen >> it's a height variance and whether

[1:05:17] » you know no matter how you >> but he's going on beyond the height

[1:05:21] variance >> well the board is rightly considering

[1:05:26] noise impact As far as character >> using sorry

[1:05:30] » as far as character of the neighborhood that's perfectly within your purview to

[1:05:34] do that and you should do that and you did do that right.

[1:05:38] The allegations that there's going to be storm water runoff and it's going to be

[1:05:45] greater. That has nothing to do with the the fence height and that is something I

[1:05:51] this goes to the bar right to the bar. I think that goes to the bar and and and

[1:05:55] you know the bar can deal with that issue as they should. Um and it's also a

[1:06:00] type two action under seekers. So that's uh by its very nature considered at for

[1:06:08] this board a height variance is a type two action. So that under seeker is

[1:06:13] considered not to have a significant impact on the environment.

[1:06:23] And then last is is whether the alleged

[1:06:27] difficulty is self-created which consideration shall be revalent to the

[1:06:31] decision of the board of appeals but should not necessarily

[1:06:36] uh preclude the granting of the area of every every one basically is

[1:06:42] self-created. All right.

[1:06:47] Um, I would like like to make a motion to

[1:06:55] » the final factor here. I just did I don't mean to interrupt, Mr. chairman,

[1:06:59] but >> it's clearly self-created

[1:07:04] » and without consideration even and and how this has

[1:07:10] been presented in this past year I've been on this board um without a lot of

[1:07:15] respect to the neighbors and I find that shameful.

[1:07:27] I would like to make a motion to

[1:07:32] » Do you wish to

[1:07:36] Okay. >> Yeah.

[1:07:39] » I would like to make a motion to approve the approve the variance.

[1:07:44] » Motion to approve as discuss mitigation because he's

[1:07:47] » right. Well, that that is part of it too and and and with the mitigation

[1:07:55] acoustical [snorts] uh attenuation that is provided in this

[1:08:00] proposal from acousta block uh which will be installed on the fence uh

[1:08:10] laterally to the pedel court um and will make this part of law record.

[1:08:18] » Have you made that motion? >> I would like to make that motion.

[1:08:22] Second. Second. >> All approved.

[1:08:26] » I What about the trees? While you're at

[1:08:30] it, the >> the trees

[1:08:32] there. There isn't anything substantive that they're presenting right now with

[1:08:37] the trees. All we have is we have a commitment from them to review the trees

[1:08:43] and to plant trees in the fall. And will that will be part of the record that

[1:08:47] there will be tree planting in the >> condition and have the trees water

[1:08:54] » right that's the most amorphous condition I've ever heard I don't

[1:08:57] believe it's amorphous at all was made very clear the number of trees would

[1:09:01] been very clear the number where they would be very

[1:09:04] » recommended by whom >> this came tonight

[1:09:07] » without a drawing without any indication how are you going to make sure that you

[1:09:11] may just finish please without a drawing without any indication how it's

[1:09:15] » [clears throat] >> Yeah.

[1:09:16] » Speaker. No, you're done. You're done. Okay. No, you're done.

[1:09:19] » I have the right to speak also. >> No. No.

[1:09:22] » Well, Mr. Sesman should not have Nobody should have spoken.

[1:09:27] » Nobody should have spoken. >> The meeting isn't closed. The public

[1:09:28] meeting isn't closed. Okay. >> What kind of

[1:09:31] » We asked him in the regard on the trees. That's it was it was a specific question

[1:09:36] in regard to the approval. >> So, there's a second condition as to the

[1:09:40] trees, >> right? So,

[1:09:43] » well, we we really we don't have a definitive on the trees. So, we we we

[1:09:48] just really would put in there that that tree planting will occur in the fall.

[1:09:55] » We we we we could be if we say they would replace the equivalent number of

[1:09:59] trees that were taken down to to construct [clears throat] the court. We

[1:10:02] could we could probably >> No, it has to be many more.

[1:10:07] [laughter] >> Does not have to be in touch.

[1:10:10] » Yes. to stop the sound. Isn't the idea >> that that is up to the board if the

[1:10:15] board feels that more trees of a certain caliber should be planted in addition to

[1:10:21] the ones that were replaced. It's completely up to the board

[1:10:26] as long as you just don't go overboard. You know what I'm saying,

[1:10:29] » right? >> So,

[1:10:31] » to me, it would be reasonable to ask the club to replace the trees that they took

[1:10:35] down in the construction of the court. Can that be deferred to the bar who's

[1:10:39] very concerned about trees and tree placement?

[1:10:41] » Absolutely. >> Defer it or you could

[1:10:46] » Yes, you could you could defer it or you could make sure they replace what they

[1:10:50] took down and then the bar has every right to

[1:10:54] set their own conditions, >> right? But would they be going to the

[1:10:58] bar? >> They're going to the bar, right?

[1:11:01] » Yeah, they would have to go to the bar. They would have to go to the bar because

[1:11:05] of the physical change to the property regarding the fence at a minimum.

[1:11:08] » Right. >> Okay.

[1:11:11] » Excuse me. >> You you may grant a variance for the

[1:11:14] height of the fence. In doing that, >> the bar would still have the power to

[1:11:18] review that. If you don't grant a variance for the fence, then the bar

[1:11:23] really has nothing to review. So we can include the acousta block in the

[1:11:27] proposal and let the bar decide on any additional landscaping that may be

[1:11:32] required. Yes. >> And what enforcement mechanism should be

[1:11:36] discussed here? >> What would be a condition of the

[1:11:39] approval? >> Right. If they So are you asking if they

[1:11:44] don't put the sound attenuation up >> if they let the trees die again? Well,

[1:11:49] if you're not going to if you're not going to make them plant trees, if you

[1:11:53] did, then you would also require maintenance bond for the trees, right?

[1:11:57] If you don't and allow that to go to the bar, then the bar can set the conditions

[1:12:02] or the conditions, >> right? And

[1:12:04] » I would I would let it go to the bar and let the bar because then they could give

[1:12:07] a drawing to the bar where they're putting the treats. But excuse me, this

[1:12:11] isn't going to help people like the Chungs who don't live who live directly

[1:12:17] across from the club, the club itself. I mean, there are other people who are

[1:12:23] complaining about the noise. You don't seem to understand that.

[1:12:28] » Well, that should have been here then. Uh so so we would just have the

[1:12:31] condition of the of the fence >> of the of the of the

[1:12:35] » I would I would recommend to have uh evergreen trees uh the number that were

[1:12:42] removed be be placed as a border uh to be um uh the plan of which would be

[1:12:51] subject you know to bar approval. >> Okay.

[1:12:54] » All right. So this way at least we're actually referencing what needs to be

[1:12:58] done that we're saying they need to replace evergreen trees, the number uh

[1:13:03] along the border that they removed, the specifics and obviously uh the specifics

[1:13:08] as far as maintaining them and whether a bond would be required for the

[1:13:12] maintenance we'd leave up to the bar. >> I wouldn't just I wouldn't specify

[1:13:15] evergreen, >> right? I would say whatever

[1:13:17] » whatever trees were removed. >> Yeah.

[1:13:19] » Okay. So the the tree the second condition would

[1:13:24] be replace the trees that were removed with evergreen trees.

[1:13:28] » I would not specify evergreen. >> Okay. With

[1:13:31] » with comparable trees >> I mean

[1:13:34] » but with an intention of mitigating >> noise. Yeah.

[1:13:40] » Okay. Replace the trees that were removed.

[1:13:44] Intend >> to mitigate.

[1:13:46] » Intention is mitigation. found >> and um

[1:13:54] uh at progression of BA >> or maintaining or

[1:14:01] » with a maintenance bond with >> well that would be the B

[1:14:06] I would >> as as approved by the B approved by

[1:14:10] » you couldn't require them to seek acoustical

[1:14:15] acousticians advice to do so or is that their process? That's

[1:14:19] » that would be their process. >> That would be their process. Yeah, they

[1:14:22] they would >> but they so they could if they wanted

[1:14:25] to. >> Well, I'm not their attorney, but I

[1:14:27] assume that they could. Yep.

[1:14:32] » Okay. So, we had a motion. We had a second. We had Did we have a vote?

[1:14:37] » Yeah, we did. >> 32.

[1:14:38] » 32.

[1:14:43] All right. It'll take me a while. a little while to to to draft this which I

[1:14:48] will then circulate for the board to review and if I've left anything out

[1:14:56] » okay we vote on the height

[1:15:01] » yeah granted at a 7 foot variance correct

[1:15:06] » well a seven foot variance was granted if that's what you were voting

[1:15:14] » you'd We did.

[1:15:16] » Yeah.

[1:15:26] » Okay. Oh, okay.

[1:15:38] » I um No, he I was he was here in the last conversation with Farley.

[1:15:43] » No, he has Right. You were here for the last conversation with the for?

[1:15:46] » Yeah. >> Okay. Okay.

[1:15:47] » You don't want me here? >> No. Okay.

[1:15:50] » I don't want to step in if I'm I'm the alter.

[1:15:52] » I mean, whatever you think. >> Here the alternate.

[1:15:54] » Of course, you can stay as the alternate.

[1:15:56] » Okay. >> In case I don't know, somebody decides

[1:16:00] I've had enough and quits before they >> Okay.

[1:16:02] » Which may happen. >> I can't stand.

[1:16:06] » Are we still on this case or a new case? >> No, we're on a new case.

[1:16:10] » We're on a new case. >> Okay. I didn't hear it.

[1:16:14] Okay. Thank you. Give my reporter a second. She'll wrap up and get out.

[1:16:34] » Yes. To the right hand side. >> We're not necessarily going to hear.

[1:16:37] » Well, it's all recorded. >> I understand. But I just don't mind

[1:16:41] taking

[1:16:45] You can you can request a copy. You can request a copy.

[1:16:49] » Okay, perfect. I'll do that >> because the minutes are not

[1:16:57] detail. >> Oh my gosh, I'm dying. Okay.

[1:17:09] » Yeah, we we we had opened and closed the public meeting on part of the

[1:17:14] recollection. >> I don't think we closed the public

[1:17:16] hearing because they were submitting new plans.

[1:17:19] » Correct. >> We adjourned

[1:17:22] recalculate because we submitting new plans.

[1:17:25] » Yeah. The uh the area the variance regarding the

[1:17:29] » right they're probably with new and they no longer require a vantage

[1:17:35] proper fashion.

[1:17:39] Um, okay. Number two, Farley Richard and

[1:17:45] Shelley for Bridge Road, Tuxedo Park, tax map number 106-1-44,

[1:17:54] seeking relief from the following sections of the village tuxedo park

[1:17:58] zoning code. Village code 100-8 lot area where lot size is 66 acre. The

[1:18:07] minimum lot village laws 1 acre village code 100-8 front yard setback for road

[1:18:16] where 19 foot setback is proposed and 75 is required. Village code

[1:18:23] sideyard setback where 34 is proposed 50 is required.

[1:18:29] Village code 108.8 sideyard school 43 is proposed fixing required

[1:18:38] 11 box 25% is maximum permitting and 30%

[1:18:45] proposed I think I think that this was part of the right

[1:18:49] » of what was put in the papers original and that's based on the original thing

[1:18:53] and that a couple of these have changed. >> Yes. Did you change them again this

[1:18:59] week? >> We changed them and we resubmitted, but

[1:19:02] it's for the better >> as as a result of the um

[1:19:06] » the the the last documents you sent us though, it has not changed since those.

[1:19:10] » It's changed slightly because while um was reflexing the plans for the

[1:19:16] architectural plans for the VA, the side porch became reduced in size. So, we're

[1:19:22] requiring less of a sideyard variance and that's the only change from the

[1:19:27] previous set of plans. What are you requesting?

[1:19:32] » 14 ft 6 in. >> 14 ft 6 in.

[1:19:35] » Correct. >> So, do you have a new letter or

[1:19:38] » I had a new letter um and we submitted it to John and also as yet

[1:19:44] » and I >> Yeah, the one I have is June 19th.

[1:19:46] » This is a full new packet. Oh, a full new packet. Okay. I got three packets. I

[1:19:51] know it's just really it's just that simple change.

[1:19:54] » Okay. >> Um but and here's here's that the latest

[1:19:58] letter. >> Okay.

[1:20:03] So, and the as a result of refining the drawings for the barbs, we decided to

[1:20:09] make do a few ch adjustments. Um we um changed the pool to a more narrow pool.

[1:20:17] Instead of um 16x32, it's now at 12x30. We added a circular

[1:20:23] hot tub here. Um it's pulled in from the sideyard u a bit, so we require less of

[1:20:29] variance. It's only um about three or four feet over the the sideyard um

[1:20:35] setback line. Um we also reduced the side parking court back here and just

[1:20:40] made >> Yeah. No, actually that made a lot of

[1:20:42] sense. >> Yeah, it makes a lot of sense. And it

[1:20:43] and and um and it still serves the the right per

[1:20:50] what she wants to accomplish. Um we also did uh we submitted the planting plan in

[1:20:56] this latest package that we submitted to the bar. Um it's everything was more

[1:21:01] refined in the last few weeks um to get ready for the bar and uh

[1:21:08] this plan. This is all for the

[1:21:14] » for the house below. This is all an existing wooden area. We are just taking

[1:21:19] out a few trees for construction. Um saving most of the um other trees there.

[1:21:25] This is an extensive um maxi rodendren um row but and it's all eaten up by the

[1:21:31] deer. But the fence we're putting in is a six foot high that invisible fence

[1:21:36] that helps keep the deer out. So maybe that's going to go down lower, but for

[1:21:40] screening purposes, it's great because they don't need screening down below.

[1:21:44] They need it up a little higher. And it does provide a bit of screening. Um,

[1:21:49] so the big change in in the side um porch, we used to have the side porch go

[1:21:54] like this, but um Kevin went out and measured all the windows and found that

[1:21:59] um instead of high uh covering over a window, we he shortened the uh the porch

[1:22:06] and um it's only 146. And then we just moved the steps a

[1:22:10] little. >> You don't mind? We should have covered

[1:22:12] two of the speakers. Um >> Oh, I'm sorry.

[1:22:16] » Thank you. Okay.

[1:22:22] » Gotcha. So, um Oh, both of them worked

[1:22:29] and uh we I think that's about it on the changes, but like I said, we got more

[1:22:37] refined um on the on the planting and and everything and the pool became much

[1:22:42] much more elegant. Just out of curiosity, why are these two trees

[1:22:47] coming down? I can see this because there's a fence. Why would these come

[1:22:50] down? >> Um, Shell doesn't like them.

[1:22:53] » What? >> Shell doesn't like them. They're a

[1:22:55] little scraw very scrawny. >> They're scrawny.

[1:22:57] » They're scrawny white pines. >> Okay.

[1:23:00] » So, they are really like like Charlie Brown trees. I would use one for my

[1:23:05] Christmas tree because I like that kind of tree. But, um, but she, you know, she

[1:23:10] likes it more more perfect. Like these are all emerald green. um our vetes more

[1:23:15] formal landscape using native plants which I know that barley

[1:23:20] » yeah know the only my only you know somewhat a concern is is that you know

[1:23:24] there are trees being cut down from your the closest neighbor whoever that

[1:23:29] closest neighbor is >> makes you know

[1:23:31] » oh then I don't care [laughter]

[1:23:34] » there are still some trees that we didn't show in here sap a lot of

[1:23:37] saplings this is more of a wooded area I know this is more of a wooded area than

[1:23:42] uh It's a pretty wooded area. Yeah, it is pretty quite steep.

[1:23:46] » It's very steep. Right. Correct. So, they basically see this slope. Actually,

[1:23:50] some of it they have their horn on it a little bit about right here.

[1:23:54] » But, um, >> what's the bump out on a porticochet in

[1:23:58] the top? >> Right here.

[1:23:59] » Yeah. >> So, that

[1:24:09] that's a that's a circular

[1:24:13] the half turret

[1:24:17] half turret that's on the study and that projects up two stories. This would be

[1:24:22] one story. Um let me show you what that looks like on the ocean.

[1:24:28] » So from the side view it's it's basically just a conical um roof to

[1:24:35] complement the conical roof. Oh, so it's kind of reverse perpendicular to the

[1:24:39] house and this one chair just to kind of when you're coming

[1:24:44] around the corner here softness and >> what's that?

[1:24:47] » Are you going to see it? >> I can see it from my property, but

[1:24:50] » this gives it a lot of interest. >> We talked about removing it, but it just

[1:24:56] doesn't >> I agree.

[1:24:59] » And then on the on the front of the house front, if you're

[1:25:02] » Yeah. No, I mean the the front is, you know, right currently it's a front

[1:25:07] that's kind of that's nothing. >> Yeah, it's

[1:25:09] » Well, there is there was a porch here that was ripped off the house. I think a

[1:25:14] lot of, you know, just in in the course of measuring, there was a lot of windows

[1:25:17] were replaced with, you know, um, especially the rear here, the kitchen.

[1:25:22] » But you walk into that house, the outside does not match the inside. It's

[1:25:26] gorgeous. at the end. This this helps make the

[1:25:31] outside complicated

[1:25:38] stuff through architecture. I think we saw this last week. There's a new um

[1:25:43] covered porch there. Right now there's a a 4ft 4 inch by um 11 foot overhang

[1:25:50] that's just can't delivered out into space.

[1:26:05] here. So, it's this this just can't believe is out over nothing, which

[1:26:09] really from an architectural standpoint, it's not really proper, right? I mean,

[1:26:12] it should be anchored. So, I put a couple of um square um chamfered

[1:26:17] columns, which would be just 8 by8 wood post painted the same as the 8 8 in half

[1:26:24] timbering on the house. Um and then that would go down to a um a wooden porch

[1:26:32] lattice underneath, but it's there. Yeah. Backyard.

[1:26:37] » Jetty bays like that are very common to this style of architecture.

[1:26:41] That would then mean you wouldn't need a column. You

[1:26:45] » That's not our purview. You may hear that at the BART.

[1:26:49] » Well, I mean, you could obviously can't deliver out. That's a big can deliver

[1:26:54] with no support underneath for a traditional house, right? Modern houses,

[1:26:57] you see it a lot. >> I mean, maybe in tuxedo park, you do see

[1:27:02] it. I'm not saying it's I'm not saying that it's necessarily a bad thing, but I

[1:27:06] think the, you know, architecture that the anchoring of the column helps going

[1:27:11] to tell you that >> notes for your next review. [laughter]

[1:27:14] » Well, fortunately we don't we don't have to apply enough

[1:27:18] » trying to be >> Thank you though.

[1:27:20] » You're welcome. Um, also speaking of the BAR, I did ask

[1:27:26] John to send me the some the audio of a meeting and then spoke to another bar

[1:27:32] meet um member Christopher Gal this afternoon about what was already said

[1:27:39] about this property. They were specific in their second um review of this that

[1:27:47] they were concerned about the size of the porcare and were willing to consider

[1:27:53] it in with the understanding of the owner's

[1:27:59] requirements that aren't necessarily something they're obliged to accommodate

[1:28:04] but that they wanted the port kosher to be minimal. So that's another thing

[1:28:08] coming your way that may or may not be applicable to how we review this. I

[1:28:12] don't know. But it is something that they're looking at.

[1:28:19] And I, you know, as much as this helps architecturally, aesthetically, this

[1:28:25] might be challenged there, it might be challenged here, too. If we're looking

[1:28:29] at it and thinking we would want to um offer a minimal variance on that

[1:28:35] » setback. Yeah. >> Then in reference to the two cars versus

[1:28:40] one car or >> um I think they were happy to

[1:28:46] accommodate the two cars. >> Um I personally as an architect I would

[1:28:52] be pressing back that it could be a different shape to accommodate two cars,

[1:28:55] but again that's not my board. Um but they did talk about this and I thought

[1:29:01] in the tape that she might have been willing to give that up. I could be

[1:29:06] misremembering it. >> Yeah. I mean, I think visually without

[1:29:08] it, it's just going to look like a big um you know, square box like you would

[1:29:13] see at a catering hall uh entry, which I think you know that that

[1:29:18] » I mean, in my opinion, >> square box,

[1:29:20] » train station has a square box, but this a lot of time. She really likes

[1:29:26] this, but that would >> I mean that there's not a variance

[1:29:30] required for for us. It just makes the set back a little bit more. It's not

[1:29:36] much more, but it's four or five feet more

[1:29:39] » cuz the setback goes, you know, the other drawing the other.

[1:29:45] » Yes. Yes, that's you're right. You know, your drawing better than I do.

[1:29:52] » Yes. So, we're talking here. >> Oh, that's correct. You are.

[1:29:55] » So, it doesn't This does not really make >> change the doesn't change doesn't make

[1:30:05] but as an overall area and

[1:30:11] define minimal

[1:30:16] » minimal to make it look good. >> Um that's subjective though. It is

[1:30:22] subjective but >> but if we grant that variance they

[1:30:25] certainly could go under that >> if

[1:30:28] » right >> yes thank you

[1:30:34] » yeah I think yeah the the problem really is the depth from the house and the

[1:30:38] clearance for two vehicles between the columns and being able to exit the

[1:30:42] vehicles um right now they're going to look like

[1:30:46] » bar number two >> exit and get out of it 19 19 ft column

[1:30:54] to column inside. >> It'll work, you know. Anyhow, I think

[1:30:59] what if they position the door with the doors would be positioned between the

[1:31:02] columns. So, I don't see any reason why that would be

[1:31:05] » Yeah. parking spot >> difficult. They're going to have to be

[1:31:07] very careful even negotiating that, right? Because of the the clearance to

[1:31:11] the columns that have two cars next to two large vehicles next to each other.

[1:31:15] [clears throat] >> They have they both have large. I think

[1:31:17] maybe in this direction it could be, you know, maybe squeezed in a little bit,

[1:31:20] but then it starts to affect the architecture front as well.

[1:31:25] » And there are limitations. We couldn't go any closer to the house because this

[1:31:29] is an old coal she coal cellar. So we make as part of the project, we're going

[1:31:34] to make a green roof um but this is a roof right now with a coal

[1:31:40] storage >> something under there. It's a coal

[1:31:42] storage room. That's what used to be. >> Okay.

[1:31:46] » Good. eliminate that. >> I They don't want to change the history

[1:31:49] of the house. >> It's underground.

[1:31:52] » Yeah. It's just it's a nice history. Why Why wreck it?

[1:31:57] » What What is What's the issue with that? You can't see it.

[1:31:59] » You can't share. >> Yeah. What's the thumb with that? Oh,

[1:32:02] you mean to tuck a Chipole in closer to the house

[1:32:05] » and then that tree would have to >> That tree would have to

[1:32:09] move here, right? No joker. Go back to >> driver.

[1:32:16] So these are very subjective comments and um I don't

[1:32:22] » I don't think that >> I I don't I don't know. I

[1:32:27] » Yeah, I'm not sure that's our >> to just to something a couple feet

[1:32:31] doesn't make to me doesn't make sense to >> I mean as far Yes. As far as for this

[1:32:36] board goes, if we approve the variances and and you and it and you shrink that

[1:32:41] fine doesn't difference. Okay. >> And we did we worked hard to minimize

[1:32:47] everything. We took patio out here. We like totally

[1:32:51] » right. Well, I like this too instead of this.

[1:32:54] But even though that wasn't part of your purview either because we weren't we

[1:32:58] were within setbacks, it just made a lot more sense

[1:33:01] » and it made it more cost effective. Um so the variances are at the full

[1:33:08] bunch of small active sideyard varants and then this front yard variance.

[1:33:14] » Yes. >> And then there's a lot of

[1:33:16] non-conforming. >> Yeah.

[1:33:20] » So in the past we it was required to ask for variances for all the

[1:33:25] non-conforming. The whole house is now >> is that typical?

[1:33:30] Um I think our own council has advised us to at least acknowledge the

[1:33:34] nonformance. >> Right.

[1:33:36] » Even though it's not being any >> but we're not approving the existing.

[1:33:40] » No, you're just acknowledging there is some existing non-conformance. It's not

[1:33:43] being made any more non. >> Right. Right. Okay.

[1:33:49] » And that should be evidence in the site plan table.

[1:33:51] » It is. [clears throat]

[1:33:56] » What about the imperous surfaces? We >> we took out the gravel and um we also

[1:34:01] reduced the number the surfaces. We >> came under it's not it's not a bar

[1:34:09] request anymore. >> Even though the house is so big on the

[1:34:12] lot, we're still under. >> So you're down to three variances,

[1:34:16] right? Just three. >> Let me just double check. I believe it

[1:34:21] is front yard set. the front yard set step

[1:34:26] set step set step set step set step set

[1:34:26] step set step set step set step set step setback the side yard side yard set back

[1:34:30] » which is >> oh no we also have I think I believe oh

[1:34:34] that's non-conforming okay lock coverage no not lock coverage

[1:34:39] that was changed I'm sorry and um the sideyard side be

[1:34:50] » not covered just Let's review something. >> Yeah, it's we have it. We have it um

[1:34:56] cloud that was changing

[1:35:04] well in the last one that I'm citing um regarding building on a lot under a

[1:35:09] certain size. >> Yes.

[1:35:10] » Right. >> But this is under

[1:35:13] everything about this property >> because it's a less than a oneacre lot.

[1:35:17] » Yeah. Apparently the allowance in this area is

[1:35:20] 75 of an acre and our existing condition is 65 66

[1:35:26] » is not being made any more non-conformant. I just cited it because

[1:35:29] it's in the code. >> It's an existing condition.

[1:35:34] » No, I mean I visited the site and it's a problematic site now. I think this will

[1:35:39] improve the entire area substantially.

[1:35:43] » Thank you. That's her object objective.

[1:35:48] » Um, we still we are still meeting is open to the public right now. Still

[1:35:53] » um, >> are you done?

[1:35:58] » Yes. >> Is there anyone from the public who

[1:36:00] would like to speak at this point? I think people are just hanging on from

[1:36:05] the old meeting. >> Christopher G probably listen to the

[1:36:09] » Chris. Do you have anything? >> Maybe not.

[1:36:11] » No one has their hands up, >> right? Peter lives across the street to

[1:36:16] sleep >> watching the uh soccer game. [laughter]

[1:36:20] All right.

[1:36:24] » Nothing. Nothing. >> Yeah. No. No public interest.

[1:36:27] » All right. Uh there's no public hearing. I'd like to make a motion to close the

[1:36:31] public hearing. >> So moved. All in

[1:36:32] » favor? I

[1:36:39] Okay. um board discussion

[1:36:47] actors. >> As I say, I I applaud I think it's a

[1:36:51] it's a problematic site. Obviously, we want to do anything to it. They're going

[1:36:55] to have to ask for some kind of a variance and what they proposed is very

[1:36:59] reasonable. Proves the character. >> Are we going to vote variance by

[1:37:05] variance? >> No.

[1:37:06] » No. We'll vote. We'll vote. We'll vote the the best print dated

[1:37:11] » this date. What's the revision on that plan?

[1:37:14] » 62526.

[1:37:18] » Should we support the bars

[1:37:22] coming and already expressed opinion about port being minimal or this just

[1:37:28] the facts, ma'am, and it's the number? >> That's the bars provided.

[1:37:34] So it doesn't add anything that we said >> deferring to the bar.

[1:37:40] » I'm sure you would. Well, no. I would not suggest doing that. They're an

[1:37:45] independent board just like you are. >> Yeah. So far anyway,

[1:37:56] » um the board ready to vote. Do you want to

[1:38:00] just real quick go through the five factors here?

[1:38:06] I've heard character of the neighborhood so far problematic site will need a

[1:38:10] variance to do anything which kind of goes to all of the factors really

[1:38:15] substantiality etc >> right but it certainly does not change

[1:38:20] it's not an undesirable >> not produce an undesirable

[1:38:24] » narrowing the cochair that's a non-starter it's

[1:38:28] » not our purview really to get that specific we're either going to let them

[1:38:31] have that distance or not >> narrowing the port share

[1:38:35] » to one car is going to be able to opine on how the how it is designed. We're

[1:38:40] just going to allow it to allow a variance if the bar

[1:38:45] » but if and [clears throat] narrowing it does not reduce the variance based on

[1:38:50] the drawings, >> right?

[1:38:53] » Potentially could but that's for the bar as well because they have a right to go

[1:38:58] more strict than the variance we're granting them.

[1:39:03] science standpoint, >> right? They they can't go past the

[1:39:05] variance. They can they can go less than the variance obviously.

[1:39:08] » So they've got a lot of room to >> do their job.

[1:39:16] » Um and um could it be achieved by another method

[1:39:22] other than the variance? Um of course. Okay.

[1:39:28] » It would probably just require a different variant. It would just require

[1:39:31] a different variant because it's not there or not. Um,

[1:39:35] » is the requested variant substantial? >> Uh, I would not consider it substantial

[1:39:43] on a percentage basis. >> Yeah. Anyone else? Great.

[1:39:50] » Um, whether proposed variance will have an adverse effect or impact on the

[1:39:55] physical or environmental conditions in the neighborhood of the district. um

[1:40:01] you know, cutting down a few more trees, but you know, I would have to say that

[1:40:05] it it's minimal. All right. And you're putting a lot of trees back in.

[1:40:09] » You're going to plant more. >> You're going to plant more than it's

[1:40:12] coming out, >> particularly down towards

[1:40:14] » Well, that's cuz Karen likes to put plants.

[1:40:17] » She likes plants. >> Um and whether the ledge difficulty is

[1:40:22] self-created. All right. which considerations shall be relevant to the

[1:40:27] decision of this board but that shall not necessarily preclude the granting of

[1:40:32] the area variance. Um

[1:40:36] I personally am comfortable with anything and I'd like to make a motion

[1:40:39] to approve the application per that dated print. Um what's the date?

[1:40:45] » 625 2026.

[1:40:50] » So move second. All in favor? >> I

[1:40:54] » Thank you very

[1:41:16] » We don't have minutes. But Desire, you sent us the minutes.

[1:41:22] » Yep. I sent them >> that we already approved.

[1:41:26] » Uh the June 3rd one. >> Not

[1:41:29] » the June 3rd. Can you hear me? >> No, that's what we didn't get. We didn't

[1:41:32] get the June 3rd meeting. We got We got an older one. We got one that was

[1:41:36] lethitises. >> Oh, cuz I sent

[1:41:40] » what >> it was. What we got was Lepitis and we

[1:41:44] already had approved that. >> Oh, okay. Gee, I thought I sent

[1:41:47] » No problem. We had enough things to do today.

[1:41:51] » All right. >> I know I sent it to John.

[1:41:53] » Thank you very much everyone. We'll pick it up.

[1:41:55] » Good to see you again. >> You too.

[1:41:58] » We're doing the HVAC engineer cooler outside

[1:42:06] day [clears throat] people.

BZA - July 1, 2026 Meeting

Transcript