Mr.

Chair, we're on the record.

Okay.

Yeah.

Okay.

Okay, ladies and gentlemen.

This is the uh September 22nd, 2025, uh Newport Zoning Board of Review, uh regular monthly meeting.

Uh we're gonna get going.

We've got a couple things uh tonight to get through.

Uh so the first call is a roll call of officers.

Uh today we have four um permanent members uh sitting and one our first alternate.

So um Nicole Chevry is a permanent member, Dave Ryler, our vice chairman, um uh Russ Johnson is our secretary, myself, Wick Rudd Chairman, and we have Miss Melissa Padovina, who is our first alternate.

Um, will be uh will be reviewing and voting tonight on the uh petitions in front of us.

Um and moving on now to the minutes of the August 25th, 2025 meeting, um the draft minutes as written.

I will accept a motion to accept them as written.

I make a motion to accept the minutes of August 25th, 2025 as read.

Uh and is there a second?

Second.

All those in favor, please signify by saying aye.

Aye.

Any opposed?

Hearing none, that's a unanimous vote on the minutes.

Um moving on now to communications.

Uh, we have two withdrawal requests.

Uh we'll take these on one at a time.

Uh and both of these are requests to withdraw their petitions without prejudice.

Uh first, I would like to entertain a motion on 34 Sherman Street uh to withdraw that petition.

I'd like to make a motion to uh withdraw without prejudice the petition of 34th Sherman Street.

Do I have a second?

Second.

All favor, please signify by saying aye.

Aye.

Any opposed?

Hearing none, that passes.

Uh the next withdrawal request is 57 Gould Street.

Can I have a motion on 57 Gould Street, please?

I make a motion to uh withdraw without prejudice the petition at 57 Gould Street.

Do I have a second?

Second.

Very good.

Thank you.

Uh all in favor, please signify by saying aye.

Aye.

Any opposed?

Hearing none, that passes as well.

Uh and we do have one extension request, um, which has been in the zoning news lately in the last meeting or two.

So these people did it right.

They're asking for a uh third, it looks like 12-month extension.

Uh I will entertain a motion on 34 South Baptist Street for a uh an extension, 12 month extension.

I make a motion to approve a request for a third 12-month extension at 34 South Baptist Street.

Do I have a second?

Second.

All favor, please signify by saying aye.

Aye.

Any opposed?

Hearing none, that's uh unanimous vote as well.

Okay, so we have one summary uh hearing.

It looks like we have about six abbreviated, five abbreviated, and we moved an abbreviated summary to uh to a full hearing because uh we identified an objector.

Um so uh if you would, Mr.

Secretary, why don't we start with the one summary calendar that we have?

The one petition on the summary calendar.

Yes, Mr.

Chairman.

This is the petition of Kevin La Frenzier, applicant and owner, 16 Mount Vernon Street, tax assessors plat 21, lot 81 in an R3 zone for dimensional variances to demolish an existing non-conforming one-story garage and construct a two-story garage located three feet from the left side property line, 10 feet required, and five feet from the rear property line, 10 feet required.

Uh thank you, Mr.

Johnson.

Uh are the petitioners here tonight.

You were here right over there.

Okay, very good.

Um we don't have any objectors.

Are there any objectors to this petition in the audience tonight?

There are no written objections.

They're not okay.

Um very good.

Uh, this being the only summary, uh, we're just gonna move right on.

I think Mr.

Vice Chairman and put together a motion on this, if we could.

Uh yes, Mr.

Chairman.

I move that all uh to place all matters called as summary on the consent calendar and as formatted on the consent calendar.

I further move to adopt the board finding a fact and information staff reports, applications, supporting plans and documents, and adopt the board's conclusion of the law that the petition has met their burden approved under each element under chapter 17.108 of the new bud zoning ordinance entitled Varian is and modifications.

Each petition be granted on the condition that the project be started and substantially completed within 12 months of the decision or extension requested to the zoning officer prior to expiration and all outstanding invoices relating to the cost of public noticing be paid in full and as a condition of according the decision.

Great.

Thanks, Mr.

Riley.

Do I have a second?

Second.

Very good.

Thanks, Ms.

Chevry.

I think what I'll do is just poll everybody on this and on the summary calendar.

There's just one one item.

Starting with you, Miss Chevry, how do you vote?

Ms.

Chevry, aye.

Mr.

Riley.

Ms.

Riley, aye.

Mr.

Johnson.

Mr.

Johnson, aye.

Mr.

Rudd is an aye.

Ms.

Padavina, thank you very much.

That's five ayes and uh no nays.

That's a unanimous uh approval.

You're all set.

Um you're welcome to stay.

Uh you can hang around and watch all the fun we're about to have.

Okay, very good.

Thank you.

Good luck to you guys.

Um to the abbreviated schedule.

I said we have six uh five items on the abbreviated schedule, one being moved to the uh the full hearing schedule.

Uh if we could start with number one, Mr.

Johnson, that would be great.

Yes, this is the petition of Corey McCoy, applicant and owner, 35 Elm Street, Unit 2, tax assessors plat 16, lot 31-b in an R 10 zone for dimensional variants to construct a new two-car parking area on a multifamily property and a 10-foot wide driveway requiring reversing onto the right of way, 24 feet required for two-way traffic.

Very good.

Thank you, Mr.

Johnson.

Is anybody here representing other petitioners here tonight?

Very good.

Um, why don't you come on up, sir?

Mr.

Chair, just as a uh point of clarification, the staff report corrected this, but the petition language that was sent to neighbors said it was a two-car parking area based on our determination of the um the dimensions of the parking area, it could only fit one legal space under Newport's standard.

So uh it doesn't change the relief being requested, but I just wanted to clarify that for the record.

Okay.

Thank you.

Um you're not represented by counsel, sir.

No, just yourself.

Yeah, please.

That's okay.

Can you please rate your raise your right hand?

Do you swear to tell the truth, the whole truth, and nothing but the truth in this uh uh in this petition?

I do.

State your name for the record, please.

Corey McCoy.

Corey McCoy.

Okay.

Okay.

Um if you can give us just a brief explanation of what what it is you're trying to achieve here, and then I will open up to any questions that we may have.

And before I do that, I wanted to ask if there are any objectors in the audience on this petition.

Seeing none, carry on, sir.

Thank you for your time.

Um I'd like to um ask for permission for um uh curb cut for the side of unit two.

Um in this plot here, um, unit two is deeded on the left side of the building.

Um, and that's all owned by um unit two in the multi um house and the in the multifamily unit.

Um so in my view is that because it's deeded to the second unit, um it could one can make the argument where it's a single family home, and those um rules could could apply.

Um, and additionally, um being able to um park off street would would relieve um um on street parking.

Um recently actually had uh the police swing swung by work from home, so my car is always parked.

And they swung swung by and was like, hey, is that our abandonance?

Like, no, I just don't don't drive much.

So I think getting an opportunity call um help help and aid in uh the point neighborhood.

So okay.

Um board members, any questions of uh Mr.

McCoy?

Yeah, Ms.

Chairman, I have a question.

Uh Ms.

McCoy, the um is a condo association, correct?

Yes.

Um have you gotten any written approval from the condo association?

Um I I have not um not official written approval, just um uh for informal conversations.

Okay.

Uh Ms.

Chairman, my suggestion would be we make a condition of him supplying to the uh the zoning office uh some sort of approval from the condo association, which uh we which we've done regularly in the past uh as they as they're requesting changes to the the property which is owned by the condo association as a whole.

Correct.

No, that's fine.

Um any comments, board members?

Are we okay with that?

No, I was thinking along the same lines as well as Mr.

Riley with the condo association.

No, I think it makes good sense.

So why don't we why don't we add that in, Dave?

Okay.

Any other questions, Mr.

Mr.

McCoy?

Okay.

Hearing none, um, whenever you're ready, uh Dave.

Uh yes, Chairman.

Um the petition of um Claury McCoy.

Um I move to adopt the board's finding of facts, uh, the information and staff report, applications, supporting plans, documents, testimony of the witnesses.

Uh together with the uh comments spread on the record by the board members adopted as the board's conclusion of law that the petitioner has or have met their burden of proof under each element under chapter 17.108 of the new board zoning ordinance entitled Variances and Modifications.

The petition be granted on the condition that the project be started and substantially completed within 12 months of the decision or extension requested to the zoning officer prior to expiration and all outstanding invoices related related to the cost of public noticing be paid in full and as a condition of according the decision and an additional condition that the petitioner um uh get from his uh condo association written approval to uh to proceed with the changes he's uh outlined in this petition and uh get that uh written approval to the zoning office.

Okay, great.

Thank you.

Uh do I have a second?

Second.

Thank you, Ms.

Chevry.

Uh unless anybody's dying to have some discussion, I'm gonna go straight to a vote.

Um not hearing anybody.

Why don't we start with you, Ms.

Badavina?

How do you vote on this petition?

I'm an aye.

Uh yes, Mr.

Rudd is aye.

Mr.

Johnson, aye.

Mr.

Riley, aye.

Ms.

Chevery, aye.

That's unanimous five zip.

Uh you're all set, Mr.

McCoy.

Thank you very much.

Thank you for your time.

Good luck.

Okay, Rush.

Yes.

The next petition is petition of John D'Aharty and Lisa Falzo D'Aharty, applicants and owners, three Bush Street, tax assessors plat 21, lot 156 in an R 10 zone for dimensional variances to demolish an existing non-conforming rear deck and construct a new rear deck located 2.5 feet from the rear property line, 4.94 feet required, and decreasing the lock coverage from 52% to 50.5%, where 35% is allowed.

Okay.

Very good.

Yes, sir.

How are you?

Good.

Yourself?

Good, Mr.

Jackson.

Good.

Tanner Jackson and Miller Scott Holbrook and Jackson on behalf of the applicants, uh, John Doherty and Lisa Falsoderty.

I'm happy to walk through the application or uh or to answer any uh questions as the board sees fit.

Um I'm gonna say why don't we, you know, I'm always looking to shave minutes off the meeting.

Why don't we give just a brief overview of the the thing?

You don't have to get in too much detail.

You can assume that everybody's read through the uh the proposal.

Before you do so, I just want to be sure.

Are there any objectors in the audience?

Not you?

Okay.

All right.

Just saying hi.

Okay.

Hi, how are you?

Um so okay, not seeing any objectors.

Um, please carry on, Mr.

Jackson.

Uh so this lot is uh is very substandard.

It's located in the R 10, but it's only 2,468 square feet.

There's an existing single family home, and there's an existing 255 square foot deck at the rear of the property.

The purpose of this application is to alter the dimensions of the deck to move it out of the side setback.

So it's actually going to be reducing in size.

It's going to be slightly elevated.

Right now, the deck is just above grade level, and it's going to be slightly elevated, so it's two feet and a couple inches, so that way it's a little bit more flush with the first floor.

So there's less steps so the homeowners can just walk directly onto the rear deck as opposed to having to go down several steps onto the rear deck.

Uh the relief requested as a result is there's a rear setback invasion, but as mentioned, the side setback invasion is removed.

And then there's dimensional relief because we're altering the lot coverage.

And as mentioned, this is a very substandard lot.

It's really not possible to do anything on this lot without impacting lot coverage.

Okay.

In addition, and I apologize, one final note.

In addition, there's a 20 square foot bump out.

As you can see, that's what's uh shaded in pink on the application, but that's going over what is pre-existing deck space.

So that's not going to be increasing lot coverage at all.

Right.

And again, as you said, overall, it's the lot coverage is decreasing actually.

That's correct.

So this proposed application actually renders the property into greater conformance with the zoning code because it eliminates one of the side sec side setback invasions and reduces the lot coverage.

Great.

Questions, board members for Mr.

Jackson.

Yeah, I'm uh I have a question, Mr.

Chairman.

Sure.

Um I wonder if you could give us the height of because you're going to move the deck up.

Uh the height of the deck once it's been moved up off the ground level.

It's going to be two feet two inches.

Okay.

Thank you.

Hearing no more questions, uh, I would love to entertain a motion, Mr.

Riley.

Yeah.

Good.

Okay.

Uh Ms.

Chairman, on the petition of uh John Doherty and Lisa Falso Doherty.

Um I move to adopt the board's finding of fact, the information staff report, applications, supporting plans and documents, testimony of witnesses, uh representations of council, together with the comments spread on the record by the board members adopt the board's conclusion of law that the petition has met their burden approved under each element under chapter 17.108 of the newport zoning audience entitled Variances and Modifications.

The petition be granted on the condition that the project be started and substantially completed within 12 months of the decision while extension requested to the zoning officer prior to expiration and all outstanding invoices relating to the cost of public notice and be paid in full before and as a condition of recording the decision.

Great.

Thank you.

Um do I have a second?

Second.

Thank you, Ms.

Chevry.

Uh again, um, I'll entertain discussion if we want a little bit, not much.

Not hearing any.

Let's go to a vote.

Let's start with you this time, Miss Chevrolet.

How do you vote on this particular Chevry?

Aye.

Mr.

Riley.

Mr.

Riley, I.

Russ.

Mr.

Johnson, I.

Mr.

Rudd is aye.

Ms.

Panavina, I.

Very good.

Um, that looks like five zip, Mr.

Jackson.

Thank you very much.

Thank you.

All righty.

Okay, moving right along.

Yes, the next petition is the petition of two church street LLC applicants and owners, 212 Fame Street, unit second floor, tax assessors, plat 24, lot 159, and a general business zone for dimensional variants to add a new front balcony, increasing the service area of this standard restaurant event space by 134 square feet without providing the required parking, one additional space required.

Okay, thank you very much.

Appreciate it, Russ.

And yes, Mr.

Jackson again.

Very good.

Good evening.

Tanner Jackson of Miller Scott Holbrook and Jackson on behalf of the applicant to Church Street LLC.

Uh so I think we're familiar with the.

Yeah, excuse me.

Uh yeah.

Any objectors here on this petition?

Thanks, Russ.

I almost forget that.

Uh there are any objectors.

Okay.

Seeing none, please carry on.

Okay, thank you.

Uh, I think we're familiar with this property.

It's at the corner of Thame Street and Church Street.

It's where stock Starbucks is on the first floor.

Uh, the applicant owns Queen Anne's Loft, which operates an event space on the second floor.

Uh, when you walk by at ground level, I'm sure you're familiar that there's a bit of a space right above the Starbucks sign where the second floor setbacks a little bit.

Um, and that space is about 134 square feet where the applicant proposes to construct an outdoor deck.

The applicant doesn't propose increasing the footprint of the property, but just utilizing this, what is presently unused space right now, which is essentially the roof of the first floor.

Uh, because there's an increase in the service area of 134 square feet, there is an increase in the parking demand, even though there's no other dimensional relief that's required for this application.

So it goes from nine parking spots required to an increase of 10 parking spots.

Right.

However, um, as I mentioned, there's going to be no change in the lot coverage.

Uh there isn't going to be any change in the business structure.

There's not going to be any additional events that are going on at the property or any change in the business hours.

It's just going to add the opportunity for guests to be outside in an outdoor area to have a drink or chat, whatnot while they uh are at the event space.

This lot itself is very substandard.

It's under 2500 square feet where 5,000 is required.

And as a result, there really isn't any space to add additional parking on the subject property.

In fact, the building takes up almost 80% of the lot.

There is a little bit of pavement in the back of church street, but there's an easement there for the abutter to get access.

Jackson yeah Mr.

Jackson uh good evening I was curious um always uh look at these uh decks that are overlooking Thame Street uh and uh in this case queen Anne Square um if you would just describe uh I've been to events here before but just describe the management I mean a concern would be if this was a a uh nightly um watering hole that it would be a different use but the fact is this is an event uh use correct and and uh how often is it used and and how is that managed uh just to uh allay that concern about um people uh having interactions with people on the street on Thame Street right well the owner is on site frequently all the time um and it's there's only a few employees there's only five employees total and so it's a very tightly controlled uh management of the space it's not a it's not a bar it's an event space so there's a tight schedule that has to be kept by the by the owner um I have the owner with me here tonight um Amanda Roderick if you'd like to speak with her and ask her questions directly about the management um but it's a very tightly controlled uh event space it's not a free for all watering hole bar I think as you mentioned in addition as far as limiting interaction between people on the proposed deck and on thame street there's no proposed music that's going to be on that deck there's no proposed seating or increased uh a bar area out there there's gonna be no live music and there's going to be a proposed 60 inch uh glass wall to prevent any sort of spills or um anything dropping over the side in order to minimize that interaction and to keep the 134 square feet contained to the 134 square feet and not to spill over onto Thames Stream.

So that was my other question.

The uh the barrier or the balcony um will be you're saying uh be how tall of a glass wall 60 inches okay okay oh I I'm satisfied with that you know but anybody else but other questions board members Mr.

Jackson how how uh I mean obviously in the summertime it's probably pretty busy um for those three four months how many events that do you know do you average is does the uh uh does the business average it can only do one at a time um no i'm gonna say like on a weekly basis on a weekly basis I do not know but if I can I'll have Amanda the line coming up who might be able to uh more accurately answer the question as to how many events oh great you get to get sworn in please raise your right hand do you swear to tell the truth the whole truth and nothing but the truth in this proceeding please state your name for the record or okay very good so how many about how many events a week do you do there in season off season?

Usually about three maximum oh okay mostly around surrounding the weekends then I would imagine like Thursday through Sunday.

Oh okay um and they would generally start like it's let's say five o'clock or something like that and late in the afternoon.

Usually five to ten and most are ending by 10 p.m.

We also do daytime events as well.

Right like a Sunday afternoon brunch or something like that.

Yeah which makes sense.

And you're not looking to extend the hours of the stack correct correct okay good any questions from the board thank you.

Okay I think we're all set here Dave if you could uh put together a motion for us that would be okay Mr.

Chairman on the petition of two church street LLC I move to adopt the board's finding of fact the information staff report application supporting plans and documents testimony of the witnesses along with the representations of council together with comments spread on the record by the board members and adopt the board's conclusion of the law that the petition has met their burden of proof under each of the elements under chapter 17.108 of the Newport zoning ordinance and the petition be granted on the condition that the project be started and substantially completed within 12 months of the decision or extension requested to the zoning officer prior to expiration and all outstanding invoices relating to the cost of public noticing be paid in full and as a condition of recording the decision.

Great thank you do I have a second second thank you Ms.

Chevry uh why don't we start with you Ms.

Patavine how do you vote on this petition?

I am an I.

Uh yes Mr.

Rudd is aye.

Ms.

Chevri.

That's five to nothing.

Thank you.

Good luck to you.

Okay.

Looks like the next one is the one that got moved, right?

Correct.

So, Mr.

Chairman, I understand that's going to move to a full petition that'll be heard after the last abbreviated summary.

Yes.

Correct.

So then we will move to the petition of William Dennis and Danielle Chictati.

Apologize for the uh pronunciations.

Applicants and owners, 142s court, tax assessors plat 26, lot 47 in an R10 zone for dimensional variances to construct an in-ground pool and hot tub located five feet from the Chapel Street front property line, 20 feet required, and increasing the lock coverage from 32.8% to 36.8%, where 29.6% is allowed.

Thank you, Russ.

Mr.

Jackson, yes.

Good evening, Mr.

Chairman.

Member Ford, J.

Russell Jackson, Miller Scott Holbert Ben Jackson on behalf of the applicant.

Very good.

Once again, just like your son, if you could just give us a brief um you know, look at what you're trying to do here and why, and then I'll uh maybe we'll lead to some questions.

Absolutely.

So this is a uh a small substandard parcel measuring four uh five thousand four hundred and sixty-eight square feet of land in the R10 zone.

Uh it's unique in that it's got uh it's a pass-through lot, so it's got frontage on two's court as well as Chapel Street, therefore it's subject to two front setbacks.

Uh the way the property is orientated, uh, this I believe originally was a carriage house for the larger uh residence, which is uh which it is the butts and faces Ole Beach Road.

And so the front door of this carriage house faces to the north, facing the uh, you know, the larger parcel, which it formerly was part of.

Um this was subdivided off a number of years ago.

Uh and prior to my clients purchasing it, these this parcel actually was slightly large, so it was even smaller in the past.

Um didn't change change the essential shape of the lot much.

Uh added some square footage actually in the area where the where the pool is proposed.

So it's a parcel that's again subject to two front setbacks uh based on the sighting and orientation of the existing residence, which is an old carriage house.

Um there's not a lot of room left uh to do any type of amenities.

Um this property was before you recently uh as the clients are uh in the process of renovating this property and upgrading it.

Um this was before you to add uh some um livable square footage on the second floor.

However, it didn't require uh any lock coverage variances.

Uh it required a minor front setback variance facing tooth court, and that was again just because the existing footprint already sits within that front setback.

Um the proposal is to build a small um 180 foot square 180 square foot pool in the northeast corner of the parcel close to Chapel Street as an accessory structure, it's subject to a 20-foot setback, but uh based on the shape of the lot, the location of the existing residents uh meeting that setback is virtually impossible.

Um again, it adds it adds to the lot coverage, uh a few points of the lot coverage and it encroaches into the setback.

Just so we're just so you understand too that property line adjacent to Chapel Street has traditionally had fencing with a gate.

I think my client indicated that the fencing has been reconstructed already.

There was an old driveway and a gate to Chapel Street.

Um that gate's being replaced with solid fencing, so there will be there is and will uh be solid fencing along that whole property line.

And their intention is also to do some plantings adjacent to the pool area to provide some additional privacy in the uh the little bit of space they have between the pool and the fence.

Okay, and uh once again I forgot.

Um are there are there any objectors in the audience to this petition?

Anyone objecting?

Okay, very good.

Anything else, Mr.

Jackson?

Or I think that's it.

Okay.

Any questions for Mr.

Jackson?

Board members.

Wow, okay.

We're moving right along.

Um, hearing none, uh, we'll entertain a motion then for this.

It would, Mr.

Rod.

Yeah.

I I will note for the record that uh I know two's court is not all residential.

There are some businesses there at the end at the end of that street.

Correct.

Yeah.

No.

Um it's a mixed neighborhood.

Yes, sir, Mr.

Riley.

Okay.

Um yeah, chairman.

On the petition of uh William Denise and Danielle Chody.

Um I move to adopt the board's finding of facts and the information staff report, application, supporting plans and documents, testimony of the witnesses, along with the representations of council, together with the comments spread on the record by the board members, adopt the board's conclusion of law that the petitioner has met the burden of proof under uh the elements under Chapter 17.108 of the Newport Zoning Ordinance entitled Variances and Modifications.

The petition be granted on the condition that the project be started and substantially completed within 12 months of the decision or extension requested to the zoning officer prior to expiration and all outstanding invoices relating to the cost of public noticing be paid in full and as a condition of recording the decision.

All right, may I quickly uh Mr.

Jackson is 12 months going to be sufficient for this?

You're not going to start a pool now.

Um you'd be starting.

No, I think I think 12 months is yeah, thank you.

Yeah, okay, good.

Thank you, Russ.

And we have had some issues, obviously, with that.

Uh, do I have a second on this with this motion?

Second.

Very good.

Um, I don't think there's any discussion on it because there weren't any questions.

So why don't we start with you, Ms.

Chevry?

How do you vote on this petition?

Ms.

Chevry I.

Mr.

Riley, aye.

Mr.

Johnson, aye.

Mr.

Rudd is an aye.

Ms.

Patavina, aye.

Again, five-nothing from uh in your favor, uh, Mr.

Jackson.

Thank you.

You have an approval.

Thanks very much.

Okay, we have uh one more abbreviated uh summary, and then we have two two full hearings that we're gonna get through tonight for sure.

So if you would, Russ.

Sure.

This is the application of Costello, Michael Gaetano, and Costello, Mary Beth McMacNamara, applicants and owners, 12 Hunter Avenue, tax assessors plat 20, lot 155, and an R 10A zone for dimensional variances to remove an existing rear deck and construct a new single story rear edition located 2.8 feet from the south side setback by point one two feet required, and increasing law coverage from 33.6% to 34%, where 29.76% is allowed.

Great.

Thank you, uh Mr.

Johnson.

Uh hi, Mr.

Monty.

How are you?

I'm doing well.

How are you, Mr.

Chairman?

Good, thank you very much.

Before we get started, just again, um, while remembering, do we have any objectors in the audience for this petition?

No objectors for this petition and no written objectors.

Uh again, if you would, Mr.

Monty, just give us a little bright right uh, you know, brush brush stroke on this.

Uh certainly uh so this is a relatively small petition to increase lot coverage.

It's a single family home located at 1200 Avec, which is about five blocks west of Bragg Park.

Um the increase in lot coverage is from 33.6% to 34%.

Um to transform an existing rear deck into uh living space.

So it's a single, a single story additional rear.

I believe the plans you were looking at on the board there showed an outdoor deck on top of the living space.

That is not presently in the plan.

That that was an older um version of the plan.

The the whole home is also located about two and a half feet from the setback with 14 Hunter.

Uh the owner of 14 Hunter has provided the level uh a letter of support for this application, is aware of it, um, agrees with it, thinks it's a good idea.

Um the property is just five thousand one hundred square feet or so, and so really anything you do on this property requires relief.

Um it's a small three-bedroom.

Uh the owners both work from home at times, and their adult daughter also lives at the property and works from home.

Um, and so this is just to allow more interior living space.

Happy to answer any questions you may have.

Sure.

Thank you.

Um board members, any questions from Mr.

Monty.

No.

No.

Okay.

Moving right along.

Mr.

Riley, if you could make a motion for us, please.

Uh Mr.

Chairman, on the petition of um uh Costello, Michael, Gaetano, and Costello, Mary, Beth, MacNamara.

I move to adopt as the board's finding of fact, the information and staff reports, applications, supporting plans and documents and testimony of the witnesses, along with the representations of counsel, together with the comments spread on the record by the board members and adopt the board's conclusion of law that the petition has met their burden of proof under each element under chapter 17.108 of the Newport Zoning Ordinance entitled Variances and Modifications.

And the petition be granted on uh the condition that the project be started and substantially completed within 12 months of the decision, or extension requested to the zoning officer prior to that expiration.

And all outstanding invoices relating to the cost of public noticing be paid in full before and as a condition of according the decision.

Great.

Thank you.

Do I have a second?

Second.

Thank you, Ms.

Chevry.

Um discussion at all.

Hearing none, how do you vote, Ms.

Batavina?

I'm an aye.

Uh Ms.

Batterina's an aye, Mr.

Rudd is an aye.

Mr.

Johnson, aye.

Mr.

Riley, I.

Ms.

Chevri.

Great.

That's five-nothing, Mr.

Monty.

Thank you very much.

Good luck.

Good luck to your clients.

Disgusting.

Um, yeah, we we should.

I mean, because it's going to be continued.

So is anybody here on that appeal uh for the uh Barney Street?

Is anybody here for that?

Okay, so we're fine on that.

Then that's going to be continued.

Is that correct?

Yeah, we should just make a motion to continue it to the next meeting.

Okay, good.

I'll entertain a motion to continue that then.

The barn, the uh the appeal.

I make a motion to continue the appeal on the petition of Annette T.

Pelletier uh eight Barney Street and three and four Barney Court uh to be continued.

Great.

Do I have a second?

Second.

All in favor, please signify by saying aye.

Aye.

Any opposed?

Okay.

We're all set on that.

Um, we're moving right along here.

Uh why don't we we're uh so there's a question here from uh Russ, um Nick on 76 Van Zand Street since a this is a reapplication uh because the um it was not completed in the 12 month time frame that we gave them and they didn't ask for a uh an extension.

Um so the question is who who is the applicant now?

I mean, I mean the property was sold, right?

That is correct.

We have uh Michael Monty on behalf of the new owners uh representing the new ownership of this property.

So is is are the new owners the Dunfeys?

Is that correct?

That is the old that's the old owners, okay.

All right.

Come on up, Mr.

Monty.

That's fine.

Um why don't we read this in first and then so this is in effect a new application, correct?

If it's a new owner, uh it's still the way it was applied for was under the old owner.

Uh we've had a notice of appearance by Mr.

Monty on behalf of the new owners kind of taking over the application.

Um we couldn't re-advertise it at that point.

So it's still in our record as as this application.

Okay.

Um, so we're gonna read it in as James Dunfey then.

So we're reading this in as James Dunfey then?

Correct.

As it's written.

Okay.

Great.

Mr.

Johnson, if you all right.

Then this is the petition of James Dunfey, applicant and owner, 76 Van Zand Avenue, taxes, uh, tax assessors plat nine, lot 67 in an R10 zone for reapproval of a dimensional variance to construct an attached two-car, two-story garage, increasing the lot coverage from 15.3% to 27%, where 20% is allowed.

Okay, thank you, uh, Mr.

Johnson.

And I I know we've got an objector.

Um, are they here?

Is there an objector here?

We have two of them.

Okay, very good.

Uh just it's just you, okay.

And your name is, ma'am.

Kelsey Morrison?

Kirsty Morrison, okay.

Okay, we'll you'll get your say in a little bit.

We'll we'll let the uh um the applicants uh argue their case first.

Uh Mr.

Monty, if you would.

Excellent.

Just uh I'll state for the record.

Michael Monte of Sarah read it there on behalf of the new owner of the property, uh, which is D V O Z L C.

So as the board is aware, this is a petition for reapproval of a dimensional variance with respect to lot coverage to allow for the completion of the construction of an attached two-story garage at this property, which is located on the corner of Van Zant and Butler.

Because it's a petition for reapproval, I'd like to briefly provide some context around that.

Um, after I provide that context, I have with me here uh here tonight, Jamie Dilla Boltbe, who is uh one of the new owners of the property.

She owns it with her husband, and Jim Cool is also here.

Uh Jamie's gonna be providing testimony about how she and her family intend to use the property, and Jim is gonna speak to a report that he's prepared, um, which is an updated report on the original report he submitted to this board uh in 2020 when this application was first approved.

Um so he's also got a lot of helpful context because he's been attached to the project for a long time.

So I think the the first question on everyone's mind is why is this a reapproval?

So in 2020, the owner of the property at the time was Mr.

Durpe and his wife, Phyllis Hawthorne, and they sought approval to construct a second-story addition above a portion of the property that was right up against Butler uh street, and also to create this three-car two-story garage.

That was heard by this board in February of 2020, and I believe uh Mr.

Rudd, you were on the board at that time, but but no one else sitting here was on that application.

Um Attorney Jackson presented that application and it was approved unanimously.

Uh since that approval in 2020, the second story addition was built.

Uh Nick, would you mind uh bringing up that image so we can look at what the property looked like prior to its initial renovation?

So you'll see here and um on the screen, this is what the property looked like prior to any of the renovations taking place, and there was an addition uh over where that that roof slope is and the three windows right on Butler Street.

There was an addition constructed right there, which was part of the original application, and then behind the property, um, further back is where the garage is intended to be located.

Now, if anyone is driven by this property recently, you'll see that the foundation for the garage was was laid.

So that that is currently an existing condition, but unfortunately, the garage was never constructed because one of the owners of the property uh had a significant medical issue.

Um, and so the garage and the construction ceased to be a priority.

Um they put the property on the market uh in 2025, and my clients uh closed on it about four weeks ago.

Um, and we're here to to request that the petition that was made by the prior owners um be approved.

And and just to be clear, it's reapproval with respect to only the the garage, that other component of the application, the second story addition on that piece of the property that's right on Butler, that's already been built out.

So all we're looking at is the lot coverage relative to the new garage, the foundation for which has already been poured.

Um it certainly wasn't you know, my applicants uh my clients that that own the property and and failed to request the extension.

Again, it's just the result of you know that family had a medical issue and it ceased to become a priority, but then when they went to sell it, I guess they wanted this to be sort of a part of the package.

So Mr.

Monte, excuse me, just to close the loop.

So um the Dundees had applied to uh to uh repet get this petition reapproved prior to selling the property.

Correct.

Okay, that's absolutely correct.

So um that's the context about why it's a reapproval.

If there are questions about that, I'm happy to answer them.

Otherwise, I can move to the testimony.

Yep.

Yeah, that's fine.

Um, before you do that, um, I'm just gonna adjourn for just a minute.

Quick bathroom break, guys.

That was much of a moment.

Sounds fun.

I know we're next though.

Right next to us like the tower.

Yeah, the little bubble looks like that.

It looks like a solar.

That's like somebody bought a bunch of new stuff now.

It's impressive to have these long.

That's not great.

Just possible.

Okay.

All good.

Back to the game.

Okay, we're back in action.

Um yes, if you could please raise your right hand and repeat after me.

Do you swear to tell the truth, the whole truth, and nothing but the truth in this proceeding?

Can you speak into the mic, please?

Speak into the microphone, please.

So you do?

Yes.

Please state your name.

Jamie Delivolpe.

Okay, very good.

Jamie, can you please tell the board a little bit about your dog?

Sure.

Um, so my name's Jamie, and I married my husband, Mark.

Uh we have two kids, a six-year-old and a seven-year-old, and we've been here for at least six years.

Um, and we're very active in the community, like uh sports-wise, in fact, I actually know Nicole from that.

Um and basically since COVID hit, we ended up deciding which parents' house to go to, and my in-laws live here in Newport, and when we were dating, I like fell in love with Newport and don't know why anyone would ever leave here.

But um uh basically we ended up deciding to move here permanently and have been looking to buy a house for the last five years and put in offers, but like we kept getting, I guess, out and it was like really disappointing.

We finally finally found the house that we were like so excited about.

And we just closed on it this last month.

So we're excited, my kids are dying to move in there, but we have um a lease that we need to get out of since we've been renting.

So that's pretty much this.

Okay, so you intend to move into this home with your husband and your teenage, is that correct?

Yes.

And you've been uh renting in Newport for approximately the past five years.

Yeah.

Okay.

And you said your husband's family.

Um they live here in Newport.

Yeah, so his family's been here for 30 years, sir lives here too.

Um, and obviously, like his whole side of the family is all locally around here.

So that's why you chose to move here six years ago to raise your family here, correct?

Right.

Okay.

Um can you tell us a little bit about what your understanding was when you purchased this home?

Because obviously you look at it, you see a foundation with nothing built.

What was your understanding of that?

Um, so I'm from South Jersey, like the Philadelphia area, and I'm very close to my family too.

And um basically it was what we were looking for in a house was somewhere that my mom could stay for a long long period of time when she comes to visit from New Jersey.

So when we saw that this was what we thought was approved to continue building on, it was going to be a space garage, but space my mom to stay long long visits or however long um and have her own private.

So seemed like a great fit.

Uh um and are you aware that uh an objection has been made to your petition?

Yeah.

Okay.

And um are you aware that as part of that concern is that this property will be a second home and be used as a short-term rental?

Are you aware of that?

Very aware of that.

What is your response to that?

I mean, I like read the newspaper every day and you see about like the housing market and how we're all struggling as young families to like find a house.

So it is certainly not being used for anyone else but us.

Okay.

Um that's all I have uh for Jamie, unless the board has particular questions for her.

Okay, this is where I take over again.

Um any of the board members have questions of Mr.

Ovo Volpe.

Is the uh is the current residence is that livable?

Are you are you living there now or is it still under construction?

Um we're still stuck in our lease, unfortunately.

So okay.

Okay.

So the the current residence is livable, correct?

Yeah, but you currently have it um listed to rent because you're stuck in your lease at your other property.

Yeah, I mean, we prefer to be living in our house first, but unfortunately, and we don't even have a lawn where we are.

So as you can imagine, when you have little league and soccer players, they'd rather have in the yard, but we can't move out of our lease yet.

When is your lease when is your lease up on the other place?

September 31st, 30th, 31st, whatever the end of the year?

Like no.

Oh, next year.

Yeah.

Oh, okay.

So you're planning on renting out your property that Van Zant for until next year, basically.

Okay.

So um will you have green space and Vance Ave uh if you build this uh garage as well?

It's is yeah.

Like a dream situation for us.

Could you just explain the the layout of the property?

Because most of the yard is uh in the rear of the property, is that correct?

Yes.

So there's obviously the house itself, and then the structure, which we thought was all the permits were up to date and an easy, you know, next step would be filling it.

And then we have this nice yards to play soccer and whatever activities in the back.

And so if we're looking here, is this uh sort of an accurate representation of the property that we see on the screen?

Yeah.

Okay, can you actually see the foundation there that's already been laid?

Yeah.

So does it the board able to see that the foundation is what looks like that paved area?

So um the um the this is gonna be a three-car garage, correct?

Two-story, three-car garage.

Um is and I don't recall, I believe I was on this case, but it was 20, 25 years ago.

I don't remember two months ago cases.

So uh I wouldn't remember this one, but uh I actually I do remember, but I don't remember you know the the particulars to it.

Um and why the person needed a three-car garage was it may have been a uh contract or something, was he?

Or jeez.

I I can provide some product since I I read the decision of the board at the time that Mr.

Poole was involved in the application.

I believe uh he was going to use the garage in his contracting business and he would have room for personal vehicles, and then maybe also the vehicle that's used in association with his work.

Right.

So I mean I uh I'm just trying to put the pieces back together again.

Why we would have because I mean typically for a single family home, two-car garage is more of a standard um approval.

Um it's what's required, you know, three cars is actually an extra car, not required.

Um so uh my going where I'm trying to go with this is you know because we have an objection and there is a um uh uh a uh obstruction or a blockage of uh his sight lines and views.

We we try to see if there are any um uh compromises or anything that can be done to uh uh improve a situation.

So long way of saying, I mean, do you need a three-car garage?

Do you need a do you need this this size structure now that I think that one of the reasons that it was approved was because there was a contractor and he he vetted out that he needed that space because of tools and storage and all the other things.

So uh your situation is strictly residential.

You have plenty of stuff to fill a three-car garage up, I'm sure.

But uh my way of asking, do you do you need a uh do you need that size garage?

Um I mean, I definitely want space for my mother to come visit.

So well, you know, I guess for that structure, we were told it's gonna be where it was approved for the three-car garage with the space above.

So do I have three cars?

No, we have two cars, and then we have a ton of its bicycles and gear.

So if you ask my husband, I probably could fill up that three-car garage with just their stuff, but it's a space above it, it's also that's the part that's important to me.

Yeah, right.

I have no doubt you can fill to whatever you what if you build so we've been there.

So the space above is is how many bedrooms?

Um it's it's um present.

The way it was um approved is just says loft space at present.

Okay.

So then the owner will have have to apply if they want to make it an ADU, right?

For example, or go through an additional process.

Okay.

Uh my dad has to wait to summarize about since I've been here.

And um, my mom is very nervous about coming here.

So, like she my husband had to go pick her up and trick her into thinking at a business meeting in her town, which makes no sense because it would never be a meeting there.

But I want to make sure that I have somewhere for her to say that will make her like actually come visit, knowing she can stay as long as she wants by herself and old and so the plans for the build out of that area are not established yet, but the intent is to use it as a space that Jamie's mother can come and say for extended periods.

Okay.

Great.

Other questions of uh Mr.

Volpe?

Yep.

Yeah.

I'm sorry, this is uh Richard Berlinzer.

He's our our first alternate tonight, but he is allowed to ask questions, of course.

So please.

Is there any access uh going to be from the main structure into the addition above the garage, or is it separate?

The way it appears, it looks like it's internal from the garage.

Will you be able to access from access from the dwelling?

Or it'll be separate.

I want to make sure I understand your question.

I believe, and I'll let Jimmy correct me if I'm wrong, but so this is gonna be attached to the main house.

Correct.

There's not going to be a separate entrance to get up to that space above the garage from outside.

Is that correct?

So the internal from the main structure.

Correct, or from the garage itself.

Okay, no, no others.

My my question is uh for rentals down the road.

If there's no other access from the outside of the garage, it'd make it more conducive as a single family.

That's correct.

And I the present plans I don't believe include uh separate outdoor access, but it is in the R10 zone where two families are on fire.

Questions?

I just I just wanted to um clarify one thing on the short-term rentals issue.

There wouldn't be a possibility that this could have short-term rentals.

No, uh short-term rentals, uh otherwise known as guest houses are not permitted in the R10 zoning district.

The only way to guest rent a house is up to two bedrooms of an owner-occupied house could be guest rented, but it has to be part of the kind of existing house.

Um, so it could be two of the bedrooms could be guess rented, but they would have to apply to the city to do that.

Um that's so under neither of those would there be an opportunity for that.

Okay, thank you.

Great.

Thank you, Melissa.

Anyone else?

Uh Ms.

Chairman, um, what's the height of the uh garage?

I'm gonna have to pull the dimension from the uh from the plans.

Twenty-three feet six inches.

23 feet six inches, Ms.

Lati.

Thank you.

Brilliant.

That's it, Dave.

Yeah, that's okay.

Great.

Uh I'll have um test fine next.

Okay.

Great.

And yes, of course, if you would, Mr.

We'll raise your right hand.

Do you swear to tell the truth, the whole truth and nothing but the truth in this uh proceeding?

I do.

Please state your name.

James Wool.

You Hell Lee.

Very good.

Thank you, sir.

Mr.

Wool, uh, did you prepare a report that couldn't sound the page in a my request?

I did.

Um I would uh ask if I may approach and pass out copies to more.

Sure.

If I may.

Yes, you may indeed.

And while you're doing that, we'll just stipulate for the record that Mr.

Wool has been admitted as an expert in real estate uh many times in our proceedings, and we won't do so again.

And uh maybe we could mark this one of the applications.

Unfortunately, I was only able to buy this today.

It's uh the change from abbreviated summary to hearing.

Um that said, um, did were you involved with the original approval for this uh property back in 2020?

I was and what was the project on your recollection?

Well, the project was multi-lared at that point because as you had pointed out earlier, they were adding the the Dumpy um uh Hawthorne combination who had owned the property were adding what is on the screen, the gray dark gray area to the butler's side of the house over what had been an existing greenhouse and a dormer.

So they went up pretty far and added significantly to the space on the inside of the house.

That was part of the petition as well as the garage, okay.

And so uh at the time they needed variances for uh building on the butler side of the building because the main house is uh the they're too close to both the front and the sideline setback, but that work was done.

Um that done that work was done first.

They poured the foundation about the same time, quite frankly.

They they were intending to do it, but they were spending most of the time working on the inside, actually know the history of the of their work progress on this house.

And so they were working on the inside of the house, and when they went to frame it, um Phyllis Hawthorne, who was the wife of uh Seamus Dumpy, ended up um becoming very ill, and it froze all the work that they were doing on the property because they needed treatment.

They they were sort of on their own, they're Irish, so they don't really have a lot of they have no extended here, so they were their own care people, and they ended up um their priorities shifted, and so they ended up not getting the work done on the garage.

And in the back of 2020, when did you prepare a report at that time?

I did.

And and do you recall what your conclusions were back in 2020?

Well, they it they conform to the standards.

The house um there's a cemetery on Butler, and there's a cemetery actually across the street on Van Zan.

So there's two sides of this property really that have no impact on anything.

And the um you can see in that aerial that along Van Zan, um going all the way back to the the back of the lot, yeah, irrespective of where the garage would go.

Uh that's a very large lot.

That's probably um well, obviously there's 80 percent, 70 some odd percent of the lot that would be open even with a garage, and it's a 10,000 square foot lot, so that's a very large area, and and it buffers the houses that are further down's an the only house that's close at all is the house on three butler, but in point of fact, the dump fees first bought that house, and they renovated that house, and they knew the people who um live lived there, and there's been no problem with them because they've actually shared the driveway.

And Jim, was part of your original report you performed a lot of challenge.

Yeah, that correct that's right.

And did you have an opportunity to revisit that and refine it earlier today?

I I looked at it again.

I I know for a fact that there's been a couple of additions.

Um, I didn't change the original.

Um I didn't change the original.

I I have to be honest.

Um it was your conclusion at the time, correct, that the average lot of bridge in the immediately surrounding area for these properties is 28.25 percent.

Is that correct?

That's right.

But this would actually be among, you know, this is a very normal and average, it's lightly below average for the neighborhood.

Because the lot a bridge that we're requesting is 27%, right?

That's right.

And that's 1.5% less than the average in the immediately surrounding neighborhood.

Is that fair to say?

Yes, but that was the average in 2025.

Since then, I know several of the houses, including one uh the ones in the back have been had.

So in point of fact, the actual lot coverage has increased.

I just don't have a real figure for it.

Okay.

But fair to say that the lot of a bridge or seeing if this is allowed would be very well consistent with the average in the neighborhood.

Yes.

Yes.

Um I don't have anything else for Jim.

Uh is any board members have a question?

He does have a lot of context on the history of the past five years.

I I do have a question.

Just looking at the timeline when the last petition was um approved.

I know we talked about the previous owners um became sick, um, but that's February 2020, a month before the pandemic.

I was wondering if you could speak to maybe like what role that played in delaying the project.

I am so sorry.

I heard about half of that at all.

Uh yeah.

I was just wondering what role the pandemic may have played in delaying the project.

Well, I don't really know um how much the pandemic I do, you know they were uh consistently working on the project.

Um, but I I think that the bigger issue really was their personal circumstances that it had been impacted.

Um yeah, I think it was just simply I I I'm not sure how much the it wouldn't be it wouldn't be fair to say that the pandemic probably had that much.

I I would like to address one thing that Mr.

Johnson asked, though, which was about the size, whether or not reducing the size would have much of an impact.

I think that the problem is that it's the height uh that is really the complaint of the abutters.

Uh it has to do with with visual blocking.

I think that even a small reduction in the size of the garage isn't going to impact um the issue.

I I think that the hype is going to stay the height because it's well within the um understanding that there is a foundation that's been poured in place.

There's been money invested to do that.

Um if we were uh at a clean slate here, would there be a a um another location that might be appropriate for this garage um than the current proposed location?

Well, Mr.

Johnson, I don't really want to get into speculating as to the layout or or what um the the truth is that they s they do have they've are you know one of the things that uh hasn't been mentioned is that there's a driveway between uh Butler and where the garage is now so in you know you need at least that much space on the butler side to be able to get cars in and out without creating any otherwise you'd be hanging, you'd be driving directly into the garage from Butler, you wouldn't even be able to do it.

So I think that moving the garage back, they're accessing the cars directly in from Butler, so I don't really see that as an outrageous location for it.

It's attached to the house, so you couldn't get much closer terms of of that position.

I I think it's actually in a very good position on the lot.

Thank you.

And again, because there's so much open area, you know, to the east side of it.

Thank you.

I appreciate you not speculating.

Okay.

Any other questions?

Carried on, thank you, Mr.

Hole.

Uh if I could just reserve some closing comments for after the uh the objector's testimony.

Sure, absolutely.

We'll give you a chance for a closing argument indeed.

Okay.

That's the end of the uh petitioner's presentation.

Yes, ma'am.

Please come join us.

And yes, please raise your right hand.

Repeat after me.

Do you swear to tell the truth, the whole truth, and nothing but the truth in this proceeding?

I do.

And please again state your name for the record.

Kirsty Morrison.

Kirsten Morrison, okay, Ms.

Morrison.

Um so apparently uh as I understand it, uh, you've you uh feel like you got blindsided because you didn't get noticed the first time around.

Is that uh correct, yes.

I did not receive the any notice the first time, so I only found I obviously saw the development occurring um of the house, which was extended a lot, so there's a lot of old historic trees were cut down.

Okay.

Um there was only another neighbor that told me about the garage application.

This was way back when they would do right, and you live on Butler?

No, I live on Prescott Hall, so my property backs on the so that's you right there.

So you you back up to the rear of their property?

Yes.

Okay.

So if you just want to elucidate a little bit for us on your objection, that would be helpful.

Um yeah, so I mean, my main objection is it being over the allowed density on the lot, um, the lot coverage, and I think you know what these gentlemen were talking about, how the out the average has increased in the neighborhood, which I think really proves my point.

This is setting a precedent, and the more this gets allowed, you know, the more it's already a dense neighborhood with not much space between the houses and um their neighbors on three butler street have also applied for something which is over their allowed lot cover.

Um and the size of this garage, I mean it's almost like doubles their coverage.

Garage garage um is you know almost the size, I would say, you know, it's not five, but it almost is.

Um so yeah, my prime objection is that it's over the allowed lot coverage, and if we're just going by what the average is now, then that totally proves my point that every time someone's allowed to go over, then people are just gonna sight the average, and it's just gonna go up and up and up and just destroy the neighborhood, which is a very, you know, it's a very close-knit kind of working class neighborhood, people work there, that it's not really a vacation neighborhood, and you know, should be kept that way.

Um my other issue is the whole apartment in the roof that has not actually been applied for as an apartment.

So I feel like they got they're gonna get permission to build a space that then they're gonna have to get permission to build, you know, to fit out.

But once the space is there, of course, it'll be a lot easier for them to say, oh well, we've got this space, so of course we can build in it.

So it seems weird to me that you're allowed to build a space without having approval of what that space is when you're asking about whether there was entrance from the outside.

Of course, no one could answer that question because no one's designed that space yet.

Um, you know, there's three windows on each side, those three windows clearly overlook the yards behind.

Um, and that view I have from my kitchen and my back deck of this uh all the way through to the cemetery on the other side in the winter, I can see the sunset.

So, first of all, they remove the trees, but doubled the size of the existing house, and remove the trees, and now they're proposing to block that whole view.

Um so that will have a substantial effect on my property and potentially the value of my property and definitely my quality of life.

It will be overlooking, it will it will reduce light, it will reduce you know, or block that view.

Um who knows what's gonna happen in that apartment above at this stage, nobody knows.

And also to your point of a three-car garage, which there's no precedent of anything of this type in the neighborhood.

Um there's barely any garages.

There's only really one car garages in the neighborhood.

So three-car garage seems excessive, and it seems to me that potentially the whole building might be used as a residence eventually, and certainly you know, the three-car garage was probably designed so that the space above could be larger and more usable, would be my thought as to why that happens.

So yeah, I think it's just over scale, it's not in keeping with the neighborhood, and just sets a dangerous precedent.

Okay.

Um questions for Ms.

Morrison on the board.

Any questions?

Uh yeah, Ms.

Chairman, if I could.

Mr.

Ryan.

Um is that picture taken from?

That is taken.

Um I have a uh a sliding glass door out of my back kitchen, and uh have a deck that comes off that, and that is taken from the door of my kitchen.

So that's that's taken from you that could most of your house really lines up with the existing structure.

Isn't that correct?

Well, for they your house it it is sort of is right there.

And it's sort of in back of a lot of what what is already built.

But the residence.

Is that correct?

Or am I not seeing that?

I don't really know what you're asking.

So uh uh your house, which the pointer is on there, is um directly or mostly in back of the existing house.

That's behind the garage.

Yeah.

The proposed garage.

Or is it going to be directly behind the proposed garage?

Well, the back of my house look out over towards the proposed garage.

Okay, the back of my house is where my kitchen is and my deck where I spend a lot of time.

Okay.

If you go back to that other view with the uh sunset.

It's really my only open view.

The house is on the other side.

So your house is essentially in the northeast corner of your property, and and the proposed house is in the southwest corner of their property.

Is that fair to say?

Right.

Okay.

So they're they're quarter, they're sort of caddy corner.

Yeah, you can see.

That's that's that's what I'm seeing.

Yeah, is that correct?

Mr.

Riley, the where my pointer is right now is the foundation of the proposed garage.

Okay, which lines up to kind of wear her house.

Okay, got it.

Much the same size as the house.

Oh it's huge.

Okay.

Other questions of Ms.

Morrison on the board.

How long have you uh lived your property?

Uh 10 years.

10 years, so 2015.

Yeah.

Okay.

And you mentioned you're uh um merch marine or sea capital.

I'm a yacht captain.

Yeah, captain, okay.

So you're not not um home a lot, and that's why you may have missed the uh or you may have been away on.

Right, right.

Okay.

Yeah.

Um as soon as I found out about it, I did do some inquiries, but basically told it was a dull deal.

So yeah.

So I I don't have a question for you, but I just a couple of responses to your statements.

Um you mentioned about the averaging in that, and this actually is at 27%, which uh which is actually uh and I know you haven't had a chance to see Mr.

Hul's report.

We're just seeing it right now, but the average is 28, so it's actually below um what the average is for the neighborhood, and so it wouldn't have that increase effect that you were you were describing.

Um and uh again, I think we've all we've all meant because the current yeah, the current 15% goes towards the current average.

If they can now go up to 27%, then bug that into all the averages, the average will go up.

Yeah.

Um and then I think there's also discussion.

I mean, the the uh new owner describe what the use of that um what the use of that space is going to be above the garages for a mother and their young family coming in.

And so I I uh you know, we hear a lot of um petitions, and we have a lot of people come up and some are looking to you know do do rentals and do things like that, but I think that the petitioner has indicated their intention is to live there and and have the mother live there.

So uh I don't think your concern of it being uh a short-term rental or some other um uh uh noise or disturbance in the neighborhood.

Um it seems like you know, we can only go by what is testified here, but I I don't feel in this particular case that that's gonna be an issue.

Right, but at the moment they're not even applying for an apartment up there, it's just a space.

Oh, application.

So it's the that it is that's what it's going to be.

Yes, it's indicated that, yes.

So a three-car garage and a pump is that's all overlooking my property.

So that right?

Yes.

Just I may just dovetail on that thought.

You mentioned about the my question about the ingress.

That's the reason I asked that question is for future proposed development as a separate unit.

That was actually kind of in your favor, because if it is from the interior of the house over the garage, if they do come back for another bite at the apple, they'll have to add another entrance.

Right.

So that's just a perfect.

Yeah, I uh understood that um yeah, the reason they can't answer that is because there are no plans for that instead of the case.

Well, they can answer where it is currently proposed.

Well, it's not proposed, it's just the space.

I believe it was data that's for the mother to use.

So they have to get there somehow.

Yes, but they haven't applied for that yet.

The finished area is not part of this at all.

It's just a three-car garage, my misunderstanding that a loft, I believe.

So the loft is not going to be finished at all.

It's just that's what the current application is.

Based on how I'm reading the plans, there's no internal connection between the garage and the main house right now.

I think it's because there's different levels essentially based on the property characteristics.

Um the loft is only accessible through a staircase internal to the garage, which has an exterior door, it looks like to the north.

Gotcha.

That's that was my question.

Okay.

Thank you.

Other questions of Ms.

Morrison?

Dave?

Nicole?

Mr.

Mani, do you have any questions?

Oh, no, I don't have any questions if I can just have a moment to close.

Of course.

Thank you, Mr.

Yes.

So um just want to close briefly by by touching on the standards uh of review for this application.

But before I do, I I did want to direct your attention to page 11 of the land use report, and you'll see that the property at four Prescott Hall Road uh has a 36.7% lot coverage currently.

And I think that's important for the board to know and recognize as well.

So uh as this board is well aware here, there are really four standards by which you need to evaluate this application.

Um, that the hardship from which the applicant seeks relief is due to the unique characteristics of the land or structure and not due to the general characteristics of the surrounding area.

Um with respect to that standard, we feel like we've put adequate evidence on the record to support the fact there's really two partships.

One uh, and that's more obvious to me and stands out, is that an existing condition of this property is now uh a very big paved area uh of a foundation that's already been laid.

Um so I do think that is a very unique aspect of this particular application, um, and goes to the fact that this is a request for reapproval for a project that that was previously unfinished.

Uh in 2020, um, and as you'll also see detailed in the land use report, uh another unique characteristic of this property is the fact that the existing structure, if we look at the GIS again, is um is really built into the side setbacks um on the corner there of Van Zant and Butler.

Uh and so that's also a unique aspect of this property.

Uh when we talk about the hardship not being the result of a prior act of the applicant, I don't think that's um at issue here.

The the present owners, you know, only came into the property about four weeks ago.

The general character of the neighborhood will not be altered if this application is approved.

And and Mr.

Hole's report and lot coverage analysis um substantiates that and um with respect to the hardship suffered by the owner um amounting to more than a mere inconvenience.

I I think that's well supported here as a result of the fact that the owner um will suffer a substantial hardship if they're forced to you know readjust these plans or or design elsewhere uh as a result of of this uh existing condition of the foundation having already been laid.

Uh and really the use proposed um as has been testified to is to make uh a home for some folks who live in Newport want to raise a young family in Newport uh compatible for modern family living where you've got you know a grandparent out out of state.

Um so I think we we do meet the standard in this particular case, which is an unusual type of case for this board to hear.

And lastly, just with respect to the view shed uh of the objector, you know, we see this very commonly in this board in Newport.

If someone's building on the water, for example, you always get someone behind them saying, Well, well, my view is impacted.

And with respect to zoning issues, you know, that's not really where that type of issue is appropriately addressed.

You know, it's it's no one has a right to any particular view shed.

Um, that's a view easement, uh not really a zoning issue.

So we are sensitive that there will be an impact there.

Um, but respectfully don't think it's one that's appropriate for this board to consider.

And again, do you feel that the uh the standards were were well met.

So thank you for your time.

Okay.

Thank you, Mr.

Monty.

Uh, we're gonna close the testimony part of this uh petition and uh move on to a motion, a second, and some discussion.

Mr.

Riley.

Yeah.

Yeah, thank you, Mr.

Ms.

Chairman.

Um the petition of James Dumpy.

Uh I move uh to adopt the board's finding of facts, the information and staff report, application, supporting documents, testimony of the witnesses, along with representations of counsel and exhibits marked uh with the comments spread on the record by the board and adopt as a board's conclusion of law that the petitioner has met their burden of proof under each element under chapter 17.108 of the newport zoning ordinance entitled Variances and Modifications, and that the petition be granted on con the petition be granted on the condition that the project be started and substantially completed within 12 months of the decision or extension requested to the zoning officer prior to expiration and all outstanding invoices relating to the cost of public noticing be paid in full uh before and as a condition of recording the decision.

Great.

Thank you, Mr.

Riley.

Do I have a second?

Second.

Thank you, Ms.

Chevry.

Okay, we're gonna begin the discussion portion of the uh this petition.

Um who wants to lead off here?

anybody I'm happy to go, Mr.

Chairman.

Okay.

Um this is a um sort of uh unusual petition that we're looking at here this evening.

Um very legitimate reasons why this uh um uh this work was not completed that was put on the record um by the petitioner of uh for the previous owner and and and uh a sickness that they had that precluded them from finishing the the project as started.

This was prior approval five years ago uh uh of the zoning board.

Um I believe that where the garage is placed, uh a garage is a reasonable um amenity to have.

Um uh a three-car garage is a little bit larger, obviously, than most people are gonna have, but uh whether it was a three-car garage or a two-car garage, uh I think the pri uh the primary complaint of the uh uh the neighbor is that is going to block their view.

And I think Mr.

Monty made a good mention is that really is beyond uh purview.

I think it's a a uh reasonable request to build a garage.

It's unfortunate that that that part of that view is gonna affect the neighbor, but uh it's within the height limit of the zoning ordinance.

Um so um I think there's a hodge the hardship of foundations already in, not due to any prior actions of this applicant, that's for sure.

Um I really don't see this altering the general character uh of the neighborhood.

There's lots of houses, although not many three three stall garages.

Um, but certainly lots of residences that cover 27 square feet of the lot.

Um it provides a petition a reasonable use of of their property.

And um so uh I'm gonna be uh supporting the petition.

Great.

Thank you, Dave.

Ms.

Chevry, would you like to go?

Of course.

Um I will be supporting this petition as well.

I want to echo the sentiments of my fellow board member, Mr.

Riley, as well as the sentiments that Mr.

Monty and Mr.

Hole shared as well.

I think there is a clear hardship here uh regards with the foundations already in place.

Uh and that was not the fault of the current applicant.

It was a pre-existing condition that when they purchased the property four weeks ago.

Additionally the sitting of the primary house is a hardship.

Uh, even though this is a conforming lot, because of the existing primary residence and its location, it makes it challenging to put a garage uh elsewhere on the property.

Um and I agree, this is a unique proposal.

Um, it's not every day we have uh a new petition from five years ago coming in.

Uh, but I think the sentiments of that previous board decision ring true still today.

Um, and that is why I'll be supporting this uh decision.

Okay, great.

Thank you very much.

Russ.

Thank you, Mr.

Chairman.

I too will be supporting this petition.

Um it's one of those ones you look back five years ago and say, why don't you just build it?

We wouldn't be here right now.

But uh uh we're here.

And uh um I think you know, and going back uh really uh remembering you know what happened five years ago, trying to remember what happened five years ago and and recalling the contractor and the different scenarios and why that was uh met favorably by this board five years ago.

Um I don't see enough evidence to overturn that decision uh that was made uh five vetted and made five years ago.

I think that um it's unfortunate what happened to the the owners at that time.

Um and uh uh the fact that the work on the house was completed, uh the foundation is poured, the slabs poured, this is ready to go.

Um, and the owners are coming in, the new owners are coming in with that that understanding that that's what they'd like to do with it.

Um it's unfortunate uh that it it will uh interfere with uh with some of the uh uh view view corridors and the uh enjoyment of the last part of the sunset, but uh hopefully there'll still be some some good sunsets uh uh to be enjoyed uh there.

But uh that I don't find is um is necessarily as we said, our purview or uh something this board can vote on.

Um and I'm confident that the property will be used as a single family for the family.

And uh for those reasons I'm comfortable um approving this petition.

Great.

Thank you, Rush.

Katarina.

Thanks, Mr.

Chairman.

Um I have everything the same to say as my fellow board members.

Um I am supportive of this petition because hardships existed.

Um that's in the record of the previous decision in placing this garage, three-car garage, um, mind you.

Um I think the difficult part for me is uh the fact that it's going to block um your view.

But as the other board members and Mr.

Monte have stated before, that is just not part of our decision making process, but that is in supporting this application.

That is the part that is the most difficult for me.

Um I do think that the lot coverage issue is answered by the general averages that have been uh developing over plenty of time before this application.

Uh it's happening all throughout the city.

Um, in some cases, it's a result of changes in state legislation that we can take up more coverage.

So it's not really an unusual thing.

I have a great appreciation that the applicants want to live here year-round and that there is um an idea that part of this development would be supportive of um housing an older person.

Um so for all of the aforementioned reasons, I'm supportive of this application.

Great.

Thank you, Melissa.

I appreciate that.

Um, yes, I'll be supporting this petition as well.

Obviously, I voted for it the first time around uh back in 2020.

Um my reasoning hasn't changed.

However, um, a couple of things have been added to this.

If we deny this petition, there would be an undue hardship that would be we would be imposing upon the current owners due to no fault of their own.

Having bought this house, I understand you probably were aware that uh the you know that this petition needed to be redone.

Um, but you know, we had approved that garage, you know, back in 2020.

And as Mr.

Johnson said, we wouldn't be here had that been completed.

Um, because there you wouldn't have been over your 12 months.

So I think it would be an undue hardship uh to to have that uh to you know have that slab of concrete there that you can't do anything with.

Um I think it's a reasonable request in that regard.

Uh I do agree that um uh to the extent that Ms.

Morrison is is um saying that her property value might be affected by the by the lack of you.

I think that's something that we we could address, but um I I'm gonna just add that um particularly the picture that I'm looking at on the cover of Mr.

Hoole's report.

It looks and and also the uh the aerial view.

Looks like there's a fair amount of space between um your house, Miss Morrison, and uh and where the garage is going to be, some open space.

So I think that that I think that mitigates that that concern somewhat, um, not completely, but um I think it meets all my findings of fact as well.

So for those reasons I'll be supporting the petition too.

Um so I'm gonna poll everybody uh in terms of their vote on on this petition.

Um why don't we start with you, Ms.

Padavina?

I am an aye.

Yes, Mr.

Rudd is an aye.

Mr.

Johnson, aye.

Mr.

Riley, I miss Chevry I.

Great.

Um, and there are obviously no nays, so that's a five uh nothing um decision in your favor, Ms.

Delavope.

Um good luck to you.

Um I hope you eventually get there with some yard for the kids to play in.

Very important stuff.

And if you could, Mr.

Monty, uh, write up the decision for this, that would be great.

Thank you.

Appreciate that.

Okay, you bet.

I don't know.

What do you guys want to do?

You want to take a quick break?

Yeah.

Yeah, okay.

We're gonna take about a five to ten minute break.

Um, let's see what what time is it?

Yeah, we'll we'll reconvene just after uh uh 7 40.

Okay.

Drink of water, bathroom, whatever.

Next and final petition.

Certainly, Mr.

Chairman.

This is the petition of eight Peckhamav LLC, applicant and owner, eight Peckham Avenue, tax assistance plat seven, lot 131, and an R 10 zone for special use permits and dimensional variances to construct dormer additions reaching 35 feet in height, 30 foot limit, located 2.7 feet from the right side setback, five feet required, adding a third dwelling unit to a two-family dwelling without meeting the minimum lot size for multifamily property, 6,077 square feet existing, where 10,000 square feet is required, and over the allowable density, one unit per 200 2500 square feet permitted, where 2,025 square feet per dwelling is proposed without providing the 24-foot two-way drive aisle for multifamily property.

Very good.

Yes, Mr.

Marlin, how are you tonight?

Uh very well, Chairman.

Uh for the record, uh, David Martin on behalf of LLC representing uh this matter this evening.

Uh, with me uh tonight, I have Tucker Holmes, who is a principal with 8 Pegamav LLC, as well as uh James Who, uh real estate expert.

Uh so this involves an existing um uh home.

Excuse me for one second.

Do we have objectors here tonight?

Just one there, uh, you sir, or are you as an objector as well?

You know, okay.

Okay, so we do have one objector present, and um there are letters of support and also um a number of letters of objection as well um that were sent in and they're in the record.

And uh you could assume that we've read them all.

So okay.

Very good.

And we will get to you, sir.

Thank you.

Uh so this involves a home located on Eight Peckham Avenue.

Um, it's an existing uh two-family home uh that my client purchased.

Uh it had essentially one four-bedroom unit and one two-bedroom unit.

Uh what my client would uh like to do is convert it to uh uh uh three unit multifamily, each unit containing two bedrooms.

Um so you end up with the same number of bedrooms that you uh have under current uh conditions.

Uh in order to do that, uh he wants to add some living space in the third floor.

So he's proposing uh dormers on on each side of the structure.

The existing roof line, the ridge is at 35 feet.

So anything you do um with the roof requires a uh a variance with uh being over 30 feet.

Additionally, the the home located um 2.7 feet uh from the uh right side yard setback.

Um so the the dormer on the right side would also require a uh a variance for that location going straight up, it's not going any further uh to the right.

Um as the advertisement indicated that this lot is a non-conforming lot of record, it's got a little bit over 6,000 square feet.

Um in this zone in the R10 zone, you need uh a minimum a lot area of uh 10,000 square feet.

So uh our position is that there are unique characteristics.

One is the the non-conforming lot and the lot size, the location of the the home being 2.7 feet off of the right side yard setback, and the the existing height being 35 feet.

All those are existing conditions uh in which to work uh those are unique characteristics and present uh hardships to my client.

Finally, um in terms of a multifamily use, you do need to provide two units uh or two parking spaces per unit.

Uh there is sufficient area on this property to provide for for six spaces.

Um the they would be located in the rear, the dry aisle would be 18 feet feet wide, which is the existing width between the edge of the building and the left side yard.

The 18 feet uh doesn't meet the 24 foot standard, but is certainly wide enough to accommodate two vehicles uh passing in in opposite directions.

Uh and the the parking area um otherwise meets all the requirements.

It was uh designed by Mike Russell, um special engineer needs all stormwater requirements, uh infiltration system uh located um with this.

It would all the storm water would flow to the set would be the west, northwest, uh and would be captured and uh infiltrated into the ground.

Uh so my client uh really looked at a number of different options and how to uh rehabilitate in this property.

Um and we came to the conclusion that we thought creating the two bedroom units would be uh most advantageous for the area um uh and be less impactful than than other potential additions to this.

So with that, I would like to call uh Tucker Holmes up to testify.

Yes, Mr.

Holmes, yes, thank you.

Um raising your right hand.

Um please repeat after me.

Do you s uh swear to tell the truth, the whole truth, and nothing but the truth in this proceeding?

I do.

And please say your name for the record.

Thank you, sir.

Uh Tucker, um can you just uh explain your your personal background support so we understand who you want?

Yeah, um, so I've lived on been on the island my entire life with the middle town.

Um resident for um when I was little with the bedlow uh bedlow Ave um and um and then uh Hull Ab uh later, um but now I live back in Middletown.

Um and um so been on the island for my entire life.

Uh I own a couple uh two families and uh three family on the island.

Um and um I don't know.

Um so you so you're pretty familiar with the with this area?

Yeah, so Bedloe is right near Peckham.

Um back when uh her and um uh grandfather lived there.

Um so very familiar with that.

My godfather lives uh right around the block, maybe Peckham.

So I'm very familiar with that area.

I used to write a bike around there that get um yeah.

And um how did you come to purchase um this property?

Um so I uh I reached out to uh the seller um and um me and my wife were looking at um trying to add more yearly rentals, um uh and talked to the owner about how that was in our plans.

Our goal is to you know rent out for uh convert it from what it was, the RBO uh to uh yearly rentals.

Um if it's you know um and so then me, uh my wife and my father-in-law uh purchased a pack of money.

Um my wife was pregnant at the time, and we were kind of thinking that this was gonna be hopefully pay for this education throughout the years.

Um so it made a sizable investment into you know in the neighborhood.

Right.

And um in terms of this property, uh what was its existing situation, zoning perspective?

What was the use of the deep purpose?

Yeah, so my understanding uh the owner of the on the third floor.

Um there's two bedrooms on the third floor.

It's a little uh uh with the dorm the way that it's currently the ridge line.

You really don't have that much headroom up there.

I mean, like the center line is plenty of headroom, but your ends or your beds are gonna be stuffed against the wall.

Um, and um you know it's Airbnb, the um the four bedroom.

And the four bedroom occupied the the first and second floor, yes.

Uh just that's how that's how I understand it.

Yeah.

Um so did you uh investigate possibilities of what you would do with this property?

Yeah, um, I talked to a number of neighbors, uh, asked them about you know talked to them about how I wanted to make this an investment and that it's gonna be a rental.

You know, some of the neighbors didn't love that, you know, there's gonna be another rental property uh in the area.

Uh, but after talking to them about you know my desire, my plans, uh some of them uh understood my vision uh with with the land.

Um one of the big requirements was off-street parking.

And so that was the first thing you know that I was uh I was willing to show before I even got the approval that I was going to do.

I wanted to provide that off-street parking, make sure it converted from a two uh off-streets to six off-streets, uh, come up with a uh safe water erosion plan that you know um does not impact any other of the other neighbors with a proper drainage system.

Um another concern was um was uh trash um and uh noise.

And so one of the conversions that we did was or in this request is to convert the second floor deck to a landing that you know that can reduce noise.

Um this house was not insulated.

Our goal is to insulate it, you know, put uh HVACs in every single unit so that you know they're not putting ACs in the windows or bands in the windows during the summertime.

So that hopefully will uh um uh reduce the noise.

Um I also think that um four bedrooms uh clientele that I don't particularly want to rent to.

I would prefer to rent to uh two-bedroom uh young professionals, uh young families that are living there, um, and raise their kids there.

Um I've got a number of friends that have had to move off island uh because they either can't afford the rent here or um they uh um um they're expanding their family and they're looking for spaces to live.

Um so um we took all that into consideration uh when building um coming up with a proposal.

Now when you have a four or five-bedroom unit, um that tend to be a lot of times college united.

Yes, um, from my experience and what my I've talked to my real estate agent about the most of the four bedroom units that you're going to find is either uh people that just recently graduated college, uh, who you know would all cram in there.

Um and you'd have especially with a ridge line the way it is now, and you have those two beds kind of you know being pushed up against the wall that's gonna bring um I would say a uh um college kids actually to the neighborhood.

And you'd have especially with the ridge line the way it is now and you have those two beds kind of you know being pushed up against the wall that's going to bring um I would say a uh college kids actually to the neighborhood I don't think that's what the neighborhood wanted uh or would want um but it it also tends to lean towards you know the the salva summers right and so then you've got the summer people coming in that are during the three months going to be um also you know loud and you know and whatnot.

So that was part of the the plan um you know one aspect that we looked at was we have the ability to um you know as as it currently sits uh expand our footprint of the land from the 21% to 28% by right um given the current zoning which would allow us to probably put a five bedroom uh two five bedrooms or a five bedroom four bedroom into the property as long as we didn't build above the 30 feet and when we you know took that under consideration we really felt like the pushback from the neighborhood was parking and I thought that the four to five bedroom would uh increase the amount of cars uh on the street versus reduce the amount of cars um and then uh it would also cause a lot of noise complaints that we um uh um that you know the reason why we don't have second floor decks anymore allowed right and before is party deck issue right so you're eliminating those decks your construction they're just providing for access and landings precisely um now the the the home in itself it it's 35 feet tall right correct there's no way to create a dormer uh dish one head room on the third floor without requesting a bike guards I mean I guess technically I could take out the entire basement put my house on stilts knock down the the knee wall of the basement reduced basement size to throw space I don't think I'd get underneath 35 feet I think I'd still be above but you would be talking about like a 2000 dollar you know purely just to shrink the house to get it and then I would you have to also move it to it's very now 2.7 you'd have to move it make it conforming on the right hand side as well uh that's a very expensive you know uh engineering effort to get that done yeah and so if you indicated it's 2.57 five feet required so we see that 2.3 variance on the right hand side is that right correct um and with respect to the to the uh driver yep is is that something that you've seen the involvement be able to use being pass in that space yes uh so um all my uh all the people that uh i've had uh for construction have been able to you know utilize that we've been able to put you know dumpster space on on those have also took two SUVs and put them right next to each other showing that they can pass I own a house on Ann Street and I think it's bigger than Ann Street's you know road um uh uh which is a you know public town um area but um or city area but um I could be wrong about that that's just from the you know eye view of what I was able to pass and what I normally had to do on Ann Street which is hop on the curb in order to get up there.

Um so my experience I feel like it was I know it's not into Newport's you know codes of 24 feet but I felt like it was sufficient where I was not going to get the traffic that you know someone I would have to back up and everything like that.

I have enough space where someone can turn in someone else can you know pull out all the way through and they can pass each other reducing hopefully traffic on the street that would be impacted by the previous design of the um the driveway.

And what was the previous design of the driveway?

You can kind of see on this area where it um yeah there thank you for the pointer that so that little etching is the previous design of the driveway you can see that I expanded it so that we do have those two lanes of passing and then also added space in the back and you can see the there are nine feet by 18 feet or whatever the standard is lines on the top there indicating parking spaces.

Also underneath my porch um that's currently there that's going to be converted into a landing.

I plan to put um uh bike racks there so that there is the ability to commute downtown without having to utilize um uh their car.

Um I've got the house on Hall Av that I have.

Uh I put the bike racks in, it's used uh by the tenants uh quite frequently.

Um and it's nice because it's out of obstruction of the um of the road.

So you don't see a whole bunch of bikes on the road have a nice spot for you to put your bikes.

I don't have any further questions for uh currently the uh the board has yes, sir.

Um any questions of uh strong from the board?

Is there sufficient room?

Uh could you pull that site plan up again, please, Nick?

Yeah, is there sufficient room if you're pulled in uh front of your car towards the uh property line to back out and and and turn so you're able to drive straight out the driveway versus backing out onto Packham.

Yeah, so you can do a K turn.

So you can pull into your spot, right?

And then you can back out going the other direction and then pull forward doing a K-turn with your spot that you would own, right?

Or maybe right.

So there's sufficient room to do that.

Yes, okay.

I have tested that out plenty of times.

Okay.

Other questions?

Board members.

Yep.

Thank you.

Um there's no yard space.

No, left once you put the uh the uh parking areas is completely takes up the whole backyard, right?

It does.

Yes.

Um, I mean, uh we are still underneath our percentage of lot coverage of um the you know um brain space according to Newport's laws.

Um but yes, um the complication, right, of anything that you ever do is that when you try to do, you know, you there's um you know you can't have the entire world, right?

Especially not being at a 10,000 square foot lot of uh like currently, you know, I don't have the flexibility of having what you're desiring there.

Um but um you know, as a kid, uh we were always on the road on bikes.

Um and um the only when we were playing in yards was really you know, uh like um on the football fields at uh god A or something along those lines.

I always found out they found our areas to play in um Cock Shell School with another area, you know.

You find the areas to play um in the yard space, you know, for the young families.

One other thing that's not really part of the zoning, um, but you know, a big part of the reason why we put such a big investment into this.

We took it all the way down to the studs for uh because there's a lot of lead paint.

I've got an eight-month-old, I have I don't want any lead paint for any you know young family living there.

So all of this is gonna become a lead-free house, you know.

So that's gonna be that's important to me.

I don't know why I said that, but that's a big thing in Rhode Island right now with them actually moving towards an enforcing the lead and rental.

So that's laudable.

So you don't um you you're not planning on living here.

This is gonna be rental.

You have another house where you're gonna raise your family.

Yes.

Uh we currently live in uh um two-family in middle town.

Um rent out portion of it to pay for my mortgage.

Um, and then um the goal here is to rent yearly.

My goal here is to do yearly rentals and monthly rents would be what like 2500 or something like that, to three thousand.

So yeah, currently I've got a couple two bedrooms that I rent for uh 1200.

I know them in town.

I don't really you know charge top market rent because I know them.

JP is a bartender at the uh Black Pearl, kind of green, his mom's uh um um works at Salvay.

Um so I don't charge them um like you know top market rent.

Um it's they can only afford what they can afford and so we work on it together.

Um I don't know they're people that you know and you know, yeah.

So there are people that I know that you know want to live on the island and you know it works out, it will work out.

Um so I mean my point being that they should be good stable tenants and not you know JP's lived at my house for seven years, you know.

Um uh CJ and uh Joe in the back, they looked there for uh they're they just renewed for another third year.

Uh and then uh Connor is just actually texting me today about renewing for January at the cheap price point.

So I find a good tenant, keep that tenant because you know they don't cost plants that don't cause issues, don't you know?

I don't want to get a call saying that you know someone's you know paying from the roof deck, something like that, right?

Like I want some of them I want uh we're causing noise, right?

Or parting on the roof, I want people that are gonna be providing back to the neighborhood.

That's like of course, yep.

Understood.

Um little stability is worth a little, you know, less and red, maybe less, less uh, you know, uh heavy uh red, you know, hikes, if you will, over time.

Yeah, so again, uh JP moved in seven years ago.

I haven't raised one one time by saying, Hey, you're gonna pay for much bill.

So, like some of my people I don't raise it at all.

Um the questions for Mr.

Holmes from the board.

Okay, thank you.

You sir have already been sworn in, so we can just carry on.

Uh yes.

Uh did the board receive copies of the schools report.

No, no, I don't think I ever received so it did not get sent out to the board.

It's I don't think it's in the materials, is it?

No, thank you.

I didn't see it.

Need a copier.

Yes, sir, of course.

We'll mock this as uh exhibit one.

Thank you.

Thank you.

You, Mr.

Who, of course, are going to highlight some of these things for us.

I saw yeah, I mean, I'm gonna I I think that Mr.

Holmes did a really good job of explaining exactly what's going on.

Um, but I'll highlight really a couple of the major things.

There's a a quite a laundry list of variances and a special use permit that are being requested, but I I when I viewed the property and viewed the petition and looked overall, I think that every single one of these are related to the building as it exists.

Okay, I don't think there's any um really major change that's gonna be it's gonna be affected in this um overall application.

Um I looked at the the hardship specifically to the to the variances.

You have uh uh 6,000 square foot lot or 10,000 square feet is required.

You already have two small a lot, the height of the building is already 35 feet, the setback on the west side is 2.7.

The driveway is wider than most driveways that I've seen on lots in the area.

Um, but it exists in its in its size.

And the unit configuration, I think it's really kind of an issue because I think that Mr.

Holmes really hit on it rather than having one really large unit, four bedrooms in it.

I think it's infinitely preferable for the quality of life in the neighborhood to have three two bedroom units.

You know, my experience when I go into properties and for my own previous iteration as a landlord.

When you have four bedrooms, you tend to attract singles, singles tend to make more noise.

They tend to have more cars.

When you have two bedrooms, they tend to be a closer nuclear family unit of whatever type it is.

They they tend to be quieter, they tend to have less automobiles.

I just think that the use of the property already exists for the two bedrooms to make it really functionally better.

Um petitioner is asking to lift up the dormers on the side.

I've I found on that street that I found several properties that actually have roof dormers, not to the same extent necessarily, but some of them are number one, number five, number seven, number nine, number 10, and number 14 all have roof dormers of one sort of another on the third floor, not on a second floor.

So I don't I see that building out to the 2.7 is not going to really be a major impact.

I don't think it's going to block anybody's lighter air.

I don't think it's going to create any lack of privacy in the neighborhood.

I think that they provided ample parking.

They've improved the drainage.

It's been completely gutted, completely rebuilt all the way through.

I think that the petition really is a very beneficial petition, actually, for the neighborhood.

When I look at the special use criteria, none of these hardships, the existence of the building or the driveway, were created by Mr.

Holmes.

I don't again, I don't think it's going to create any change to the character of the neighborhood.

There are 19 lots on Peckham from Broadway to Caliph Court.

Most of them are not conforming by size.

But five or three to four family houses.

The units range in size from 700 to 1,300 square feet.

All of them have constraints.

Even some of the single families have constraints.

I think that that's true, considering the fact that so many of these dimensional irregularities already exist.

I said there won't be any lighter air.

When I get to the special use, when I was looking at the special use, all the um number one, the alteration will not increase, or the variance will be obtained.

They are applying for the variances that are necessary.

They've done a great job in stormwater runoff change.

And if there is any lighting, I think it'll be dark sky compliant.

So all in all, I see this is actually a much improved use of this property.

I think it's very much in conformance with the neighborhood.

This is an area where there are tremendous amount of multifamily houses.

The 2,000 square feet per unit is a very typical size in the area.

In fact, with six bedrooms on 6,000 square feet, that's a thousand square feet per bedroom.

And in point of fact, those are going to be a thousand square feet per bedroom.

And what I found in the neighborhood, right in that very neighborhood, that the bedroom ratio to land area ranges between 600 and 1,300.

So at a thousand, um, I think that I think that totally in conformance with the neighborhood.

Question?

Questions from the board?

Yeah, I have a question.

Um, really centralized on the intensification from the two-family to the three-family.

Can you talk about what the neighborhood looks like in terms of multifamilies?

Yeah, that well, there are five.

What I found, there were five three to four family houses on that stretch of 19.

So there's a lot of single family, it's a mixed uh use neighborhood in terms of single and multi-family.

Uh, that's very typical of all the streets off Broadway.

I've owned several properties over there in the past, multi-families, so I'm very familiar with it.

Um they range in size.

Uh, some of the multifamilies are very small, some are some are large.

Um single families, rather.

Uh the multifamilies are very similar to this.

Sort of typical three-decker.

Um number one is and number three are very, very similar properties that have had dormers lifted to put the third unit on the third floor.

Um but in terms of dwelling units, you know, I've stood here many times and talked about the need to add dwelling autonomous dwelling units.

And that if you look at the comprehensive land use plan, it states that from 2001 to 2017, the city actually lost close to 800 dwelling units.

And when Guy was still alive, he asked me where I got that statistic.

And I told him it was in the in the comprehensive land use plan.

He checked with with Trish who found that in fact the number of the deficiency or the the loss of dwelling units had actually increased from 2010 to 2000, like 15 when I had, well, I mean 19 when I had quoted that statistic.

Um and so I found it we we really desperately need dwelling units.

The idea of adding a third dwelling unit separate from just a large overflow single dwelling unit of four bedrooms, I think is infinitely preferable, and I think it's really necessary.

The comprehensive land use plant calls for development of as many dwelling units.

The state has changed the enabling act to really encourage uh with both ADU and adaptive um, you know, uh adaptive reuse of commercial properties.

There's all kinds of of uh understanding that we need to increase units.

So I think the change from two to three is actually very beneficial.

Okay.

So the hardship for uh increasing it to a three is really based on the comprehensive plan and the guidance that we are receiving from the city to increase dwelling units.

I think that's a good way to put it, yes.

Um thing I wanted to touch on too was um there's a large amount of testimony about the type of renters you get uh with the four bedrooms in this two family layout.

Um wanted to because I think there's a distinction you can make in this newport market between the seasonal um salvey rentals and the annual renters.

Um and I know um the prior testimony said emphasized annual renters.

Do you think that demographic in terms of renters changes a little bit?

Oh well, no question about it.

Um I do think that there are a lot of single um and then the college, of course, is a natural place.

I mean, um, you know, they had asked to build dormitories, which would have freed up a lot of units, which was denied.

So now they're getting one.

But I I do think that yes, the the singles from the college.

I specifically, even on year-round lease that are in large units that have three and four five bedrooms.

It's very typical to find multi-singles who are just day laborers and that type of thing that are working that that kind of cram into these units.

So it is a different demographic, and and there's a need, certainly, but for housing for everyone, but in terms of like I said, when you have a number of singles, they tend to bring cars, they tend to bring significant others that also have cars.

You know, with a two-bedroom, you're reducing, you tend to reduce it, they tend to have just two bed, two cars.

Um, the chances of noise, as I said earlier, greatly increased when you have a number of singles living in a unit just by logic that would dictate that, as opposed to uh sort of a small and nuclear unit.

So I'm just figuring with that logic, wouldn't you think families would be more geared towards that four-bedroom unit than if it's on an annual basis?

Well, I think look, I think that there are a couple of issues when you're trying to rent a family, uh two, you know, a very large unit.

I I is it wait a minute.

Is that what repeat what your question was for me?

So I'm I'm saying I think the based on what you're saying, the four-bedroom unit in this two-family arrangement that we have now, it's if it's rented on an annual basis, it will be much more likely to gear towards families versus individuals renting one bedroom each in that the unit.

No, no, as it is now, if it were to remain as a multi-bedroom, I think you're going to attract single.

Okay.

I I think that that typically is what I find when I go into units.

The lack of, you know, the lack of green space tends not to bother smaller uh, you know, singles, and and it would impact families.

I think they'd be looking for a different uh type of uh four bedroom units.

Okay.

Okay, thank you.

Um Mr.

The Um neighborhood uh bedlow, green, thurston.

Wouldn't you categorize that as a one and two family neighborhood?

Well, since I've owned a six family on Bedloe, I I would tend to say that in point of fact that there are a lot of multifamily houses scattered throughout that area.

You know, that's why it's the that's why I look to see of the 19 that are just in that stretch from Caleb Court back to Broadway, there are five, three to four family houses right here on the street.

So there are only 19 lots, um 19 improved lots, and you have um you have five of those are multifamilies, so you know that's 25 27 percent.

Yeah, okay, and I think that's a fairly consistent ratio through the neighborhood.

I don't think that there are a lot of singles.

There's no question about it.

I'm not saying that this is all a multifamily neighborhood, but I do think that the mix is clear and fairly obvious.

The the um the zoning code um uh makes a distinction, uh, puts one and two family homes in the same bucket, but but then uh um makes a big distinction when you go to that third unit.

What why do you think that is?

You know, I really don't know why that would necessarily be.

Um probably because most of the lots are substandard in Newport, and one of the problems that you have is parking uh and traffic flow, and I think that that probably is creates a lot of that distinction because it's that's not to this street or to this area, it's fully on an R10 base.

So I think that the R10 was overlaid on zones, I mean, on neighborhoods where typically the lots are very small, you know.

Uh I I have a lot of experience on lower things because I used to live there and I owned a bunch of houses down there, and you know, the lots, my lots were 3,000 square feet or less.

Okay.

So they're trying to put larger multifamilies on those lots, they didn't even have driveways, let alone the ability to park cars.

So I I think that that probably has more to do with the historical development of the neighborhood rather than um sort of just trying to try and just keep three families from being built, if you would.

Would you would you uh the the zoning code also says that it falls into a different category, but in that different category, you have to have a larger lot size in this particular petition.

You have two thousand um square feet per unit.

The code says you need to have 2500 square feet.

Yes.

Now they probably did that for a reason, right?

Well, if they again, I I want to say two things about that.

One is that I am sure that it relates to parking uh on site as a major criteria.

Um we're at 6,000 square feet because the house is positioned very close to the front and the corner of the of the lot, there's a significant amount of open space on this lot that allows parking.

So it actually is uh sort of mitigates uh any because remember, uh, if you're starting from scratch with a with a um new construction of any sort, you also have dimensional issues that you'd be dealing with, which would cut into your ability to have driveways and parking on a lot.

This fortune it's it's actually fortunate because the lot the house is shifted to the front and the corner of the lot, which opens up a lot of a lot, so that in point of fact you have ample parking to meet the criteria of the code for parking, which is two space.

And so in truth, the overlap of what you'd be looking for is exactly the same in this particular case.

But the configuration of two bedroom units, I think is superior to having one large four-bedroom unit.

And I would point out that the zoning code was approved in 197.

And that we are a different world today than we were in 1977.

So I think some of these things have to be adapted to the cultural and social changes that we have, as well as simply trying to hold feet to the fire on an exact code that was developed 50 years ago.

And one last question.

In your long time of looking at these things, a three-family or a four-family is much more likely to be a rental property than say a two-family.

Two family very commonly will be the owner lives in one and a tenant lives in the other side.

Is that correct?

That is that is the typical um that is sort of an accepted norm.

Okay.

Thank you.

Yeah.

I I'm not sure that that applies necessarily in Newport at the moment, but it it it typically has been historically.

Right.

You know, financing is different, that kind of thing.

Thank you.

Just pick up on the some of the questions here.

Yes, because we're we're under lot, right?

So if this were to remain a two, you'd be able to go over three hundred square foot.

Two stories, basically, six hundred square feet.

Two family can remain within all dimensional planets.

Four parkings.

Well, my my gut reaction would be that in addition to or as an alternative expanding, it's very possible to convert it to an EDU, which would also create your third unit, only you'd be bigger, and you'd be even more intense.

So with in those terms, when looking at the possibilities, the two five bedrooms units to the post is three two bedding.

But we're gonna have a more significant impact in the neighborhood that would have a more significant impact relative to parking issues.

I mean, there's no question that having two very large multi-bedroom units would have a negative impact, more of a negative impact than three two-bedroom units.

Um and in point of fact, that's why the variance concept exists to fit uh situations that don't conform exactly, but make sense to change to alter the strict requirements of the code.

Other questions?

Anybody could you just say again, Mr.

Wool, how many other multifamilies there are on this road?

Did you say there were five?

Five other five, three to four basically twenty-five percent.

Yeah, well at twenty-six, but yeah, twenty-seven.

Yeah, but two finer and just the clarified terminology when we say multifamily, it's three units or more.

Three or four.

Okay.

Yeah, it's just uh I often hear when it's three, three or four, it's multifamily when it's a two-family, it's called a two-family, yeah.

Um, if I could just ask uh Tucker to come up uh one moment, sure.

I just uh wanted to address the again the the driveway issue.

Uh neglected to uh bring something up.

Um there should be a photograph in the portal.

Doctor, can you just explain uh this is the this is the smallest portion or like the tightest area of my driveway with that bot that pump uh pop out right there?

I wanted to highlight that two large SCBs can fit by driving by them in the image that yeah, I just wanted to highlight an image of two SEVs that can pull through pull past each other in different directions.

Right at the smallest, too.

Correct.

Pop-out is about two feet out and five feet wide.

So the majority portion that you'd be driving through would not be at that pop-out area.

Um that's the only area in which I'd only reach my 24 people.

Um you heard some of the renter for four-bedroom.

Would it be single people or would it be more likely a family?

Given your experience only yeah.

Um, my experience is that if you're renting a four-bedroom as a single family house, that you're going to attract families.

You're renting a four-bedroom as a two-family house or as an apartment in a in a house, you're gonna attract singles.

So you're gonna attract a lot of singles coming to the area.

That's my experience.

That would be more and especially because the the four bedroom is on the second floor, those tight peaks.

Tight peaks are gonna lead towards people that are just gonna cram in there and try to get, you know, a whole bunch of people in there, in my opinion.

So I misstated something.

Okay, so the first floor is a two-bedroom.

Correct.

And the second and third correct.

Okay, thank you.

Thank you.

Are you all set, Mr.

Marlin?

Yes.

Okay.

Yes, sir.

Step on up.

Yes.

Of course.

We don't want it to be repetitive.

Please uh raise your right hand.

You swear to tell the truth, the whole truth, and nothing but the truth in this proceeding.

So help me go.

And your name, sir.

Terrence Horrin.

I live at six Beckham Avenue.

Okay.

Very good.

Um did you said did you send a letter in as well?

I sure did.

Yes, you did.

Okay.

I'm asking this board tonight.

Please don't approve this renovation.

Peckham Avenue is a short street.

It runs into Peckhamport.

Peckham Avenue has maybe 20 houses.

Peckham Port has two.

In the past three or four years, we have seen the developers buy five homes.

Right, and they've all said the same thing.

They've all said the same thing as number six.

We're gonna bring in good tenants, we're gonna provide plenty of parking, we're gonna bring in good people, we're gonna pick up all the trash.

What we've seen, what reality is the exact opposite of what the developer had to say.

The exact opposite.

I pick up trash on the street every week.

My truck has been hit twice by their tenants.

Two other tenants, two other owners on the street have been hit twice by their tenants.

There's a lot of owners on Peckham Avenue that have been here 30 years or more.

We've raised our kids here.

Our homes are a big part of our retirement.

This is my main concern.

This is what all of our owners on Peckham Avenue are concerned about.

Our property values.

That's what this is all about.

Several owners have expressed opposition to you about this in writing already.

And the sole purpose for property is to make money.

By the way, the expert is wrong.

There is one three-family home on Peckham Avenue.

There is four two-family homes on Peckham Avenue, and the rest are one family home.

Sure, Nick to verify that for you as well.

So don't let them snow you.

Don't let them be S.

Please don't approve of this.

You have any questions for me.

Board, any questions for Durant.

Did you have anything, Mr.

Marlon?

No, I don't have any questions.

Thank you, sir.

Yes, sir.

Yes, sir, please.

Raise your right hand.

Swear to tell the truth, the whole truth, and nothing but the truth in his proceeding.

I do.

And please state your name for the record.

You're James Sullivan, Jim Sullivan.

Yes, sir.

So I didn't really plan on speaking, but uh I just wanted to also ask Terry did uh refute what Mr.

Poole uh stated about the number of multifamilies on the street.

There is one on Peckham.

There's one free family.

There are four toothes.

So that's all I have to say.

I just we want to be accurate here, and that needed to be clarified.

And I think the zoning officials can clarify that accurately if it's in question.

Thank you.

Yeah, oh thank you.

Excuse me, Ms.

Selling.

Where do you live?

Uh oh, 16 Peck MF.

16 Peckham.

Okay.

Thank you.

Thank you.

Thank you.

No questions, Mr.

Marl.

Can we clear this issue up?

Yes, sir.

Yeah, please.

Um come up and I'm gonna have to swear you in real quick.

And please raise your right hand.

You swear to tell the truth, the whole truth, and nothing but the truth in this proceeding.

I do please say your name.

Jerry DeCotis.

I live behind Dave Peckham.

I sold the house to Mr.

Home.

Oh, right.

And I commissioned you wrote a letter of support.

I did.

Yep.

And uh I can't talk as an expert, but what I can talk is about someone that's you know, my family's lived here since 1893.

We've all had rental property.

Uh I took a long time.

I took a long time before I sold this house to the homestead.

And I probably uh sacrificed maybe 30, 40,000 uh to sell it to them, and it's because of what they told me they were gonna do with it.

Okay.

If there was a course at CCRI on how to develop a home in a neighborhood with respect to the neighborhood, this house would be the film strip that the class would watch.

This has been done better than I ever would have thought.

I would have done this if I was his age and had the resources, but I don't.

The other thing is when I did sell it to the homes family, I wasn't selling it and going somewhere.

I share a backyard with them.

I abut them.

This is the best plan that I've seen in a long time.

It's actually gonna be the nicest house on the street.

Uh, to think that a third unit in that house would change the neighborhood is quite silly.

I lived on the third floor almost the whole 30 years I lived there.

So it's always been a domicile.

My children lived there.

Uh I lived there with one of my children who was a Newport school teacher.

I did uh seasonal rental the last two years I owned it because I couldn't afford to, you know, rent it the way I had.

And I was like Mr.

Holmes.

I had one tenant for 12 years.

$1100 a month.

I never raised his rent.

I just wanted to have a family home.

But today you can't do that because you can't have this home.

He's I don't know what he's putting into it.

It's a few hundred thousand dollars, but you have to have that income, and he's doing it in a responsible manner, not in an irresponsible manner.

Um, I think that with a five thousand dollar insurance bill a month, uh uh close to a five thousand dollar tax bill, and all the improvements that he's done, you have to do this.

You know, I mean, there's no other really way to own a piece of property.

I could have sold it to somebody that was just gonna put, you know, maybe undesirable tenants in there.

But I went and I went on the porches of almost all my neighbors, and I sat and talked to them before I met the homes, and I said, I'm gonna be selling the house.

I've owned it for 30 years, I watched their children grow up, and now they have grandchildren.

And I told each one that I talked to, I'm gonna do the right thing.

I'm gonna make sure that this neighborhood is gonna stay like it is because of who I sell to.

This is before I met them.

So I had several people that wanted to buy the house, and I told my realtor no.

This is the person I chose.

Newport has a very serious housing crunch crisis.

There are no places to rent.

And you have someone here that's saying, I'm gonna spend my money so it can be affordable.

You got this NOAA center that's coming.

I mean, I read the articles in the paper, they're gonna need 70 or 80 apartments.

Where are they gonna go?

You have to do what you talk about.

If you say that we have a housing shortage, and then you have someone that's gonna make a responsible effort to uh lessen that, you have to take that into consideration.

And I appreciate what you all do.

It's a very important job.

You know, it shouldn't be taken lightly, especially for the huge salary that you get.

We we'd love to talk about that, but no, that's okay.

Thank you, Mr.

Nicotish.

Um, so that still leaves the question of how many multifamily units are on the street.

Someone answer that for us, please.

I have not evaluated that from a zoning perspective.

I would essentially have to do a zoning research project on the entire street.

I know that there has been um at least questions about the legality of certain third units of a couple of the properties across the street as a different owner that owns those, and I believe potentially has created units that were not legal through the city.

Um, but I I cannot verify how many total multifamilies are on the street.

Okay.

So we have a difference of opinion there.

Okay.

Very good.

So when I made that statement, I mean just look, I didn't look, I didn't stupidly didn't write them down, but I know for a fact that I when I was just looking um Nick is right because I've been through number one, number five, and number seven, uh, which are owned by the same owner.

And yeah, they have three units.

So even though it's a de facto a situation, they they excuse me, sir.

Yeah, I okay.

That's fair enough.

We we understand that there's a disagreement here.

Go ahead.

And of course, I was including the one on Broadway that is actually a four-family, that's right, before you come in.

I hadn't gone through the rest of the list, but that gives us four right there, and I'm only at number eight.

Okay.

Fair enough.

Thank you.

Did you want to make a closing statement, Mr.

Marlon?

Uh yes, thank you.

Uh first, I appreciate uh all your time this evening.

Um, I again I believe this request uh for the variances, various variances, you know, especially permitted believe we've met our burden of proof respect to each and every one of them.

I believe that there are unique characteristics, hardships uh with respect to this property that exists that weren't created by my client, the existing lot size, where the house is placed, how big the uh driveway can be given those parameters and the height of the structure.

Um the lot size, you know, ends up uh creating the density variance.

I the use itself, the use itself, the multifamily is permitted in the district.

It's it's permitted by special use permit.

Um so it's a conditionally permitted use.

So it's it's not a prohibited use of the district.

And so it's up to this board to use its discretion and common sense based on the testimony before you tonight to sort of determine um the uh whether we've met our burden of proof, which I think we certainly have with respect to the variances, as well as that special use permit.

I think with when you end up with the same number of beds, and you've got two bedrooms per unit, and you provide six off-street parking spaces, six in an area where there are hardly any off-street parking spaces, you are really helping that parking condition.

I think you're gonna be looking at young professionals who would be the typical uh type of of renter, or even uh folks uh later in the years looking at the downsides.

Um so I I think you're gonna get you know, people that will be in this neighborhood, be welcome in the neighborhood, uh, contribute to the neighborhood, and you're not gonna have noise and other issues associated with units with lots of additional bedrooms.

I think it does a couple of things.

It really helps with the number of housing units uh by by adding an additional one, and also will be less impactful uh upon the neighborhood.

I appreciate all your time this evening.

Uh and thank you for your consideration.

Great.

Thank you, Mr.

Marlowe.

Uh okay, folks, we're going to close the testimonial phase of this uh petition and move on to a motion and uh some discussion and a vote.

So if you wouldn't, Mr.

Riley.

Okay.

Thank you, Mr.

Chairman.

On the petition of uh Eight Peckham Avenue LLC.

Uh I move to adopt as a board finding a fact, the information and staff reports, the applications, supporting documents, and testimony of witnesses, along with the representations of council, along with the exhibits that have been marked together um with the comments spread on the record by the board members, and adopt as the board's conclusion of law that the petitioner has met their burden of proof under each element under chapter 17.108 of the Newport Zoning Ordinance entitled Variances and Modifications, and um that the petition has met their burden of proof under each element under chapter 17.109 of the Newport Zoning Ordinance entitled Special Use Permits, specifically category six.

Uh the petition we granted on the condition that the project be started and completed within 12 months of the decision or extension requested to the zoning officer to the uh uh prior to expiration and all outstanding invoices relating to the cost of public noticing be paid in full and as a condition of according the decision.

Very good.

Uh Mr.

Chair, just a quick point of clarification.

It's uh category one, not category six.

Oh, okay.

Um let the record state there's category one, then very good.

Um okay, thank you, Mr.

Riley.

Do I have a second on the motion?

Second.

Thank you, uh Nicole.

Um, who would like to begin uh the discussion on this?

Anybody.

I'll tell you, we miss uh um Bart.

I know he's use he's he's usually our leadoff man, you know.

Exactly.

It's like uh, you know, Roman Anthony's on the IR.

So um okay.

Um I'm happy to go first on this one.

That's fine.

Um so um a couple of things.

I think there is a hardship here, uh, clearly in terms of the lot size.

Um it's it is under undersized.

So that part's that part's there.

Um couple other things, just conceptually to start with.

Um, and I thought it was well said on the part of uh of of the petitioners and Mr.

Marlin, particularly and Mr.

Mr.

Wool, particularly.

Um we we all know that there is a housing shortage in in Newport, um, and really statewide.

So there is that there has been specific state guidance that has been given to to local communities um most recently, and so that's why the zoning code in Newport is changing.

That's why we have the accessory dwelling units and other things.

And so um there is a push um for more housing.

Uh and Newport certainly uh you know can use more housing conceptually, okay.

Uh, you know, from uh from the 5,000 foot view.

Um and as well, um actually our current comp plan.

Um I'm actually pretty familiar with that because I co-author it, okay.

And uh the part that I was involved with actually was housing, believe it or not.

Um so you know, with our partners, our consulting partners, I think we put together a pretty good plan.

Um, I hear actually that people actually use this plan so um for guidance.

And so that guidance is there that a lot of the things that we talked about were uh ways to to develop housing in in in our city.

So with that being said, you know, you don't just want to do this willy-nilly um I I was struck by Mr.

Holmes' testimony uh on a couple of on a couple of points uh number one he's got other houses um he has a record around town of uh of of doing these things and uh I was I was um uh touched by the fact that um he's got long term tenants um that he's been trying to take care of and that's an understanding of a good landlord where you're willing to give up a little bit of income on a month to month year to year basis to have a good solid long term tenant that's going to take care of the property so that came through pretty clear to me in your testimony and I appreciate that.

So I'm gonna give Mr.

Holmes the benefit of the doubt that he's going to be a good landlord.

So a couple other things um uh I think it's important and it was stressed by you folks um that uh there are now six spots um that there are that are on that property that are not going to be on the street so I know Mr.

Rand you said you know your car got hit and I think there was a letter where somebody uh the somebody said their car had been hit a couple of times that's street parking so hopefully maybe if there's six spots they're gonna be off the street.

And I know somebody said in their letter well you can't guarantee that they're gonna you know they're gonna use those six spots well it looks like those six spots are pretty good spots and I would tell you if I was living there I'd be using them so are they going to park on the street?

Maybe occasionally but I would think that they would go in there and it looks to me like they can get in and out.

So that's an important thing to me as well.

The other thing interesting small point but you know if you're gonna have Central AC that means windows aren't going to be open in the summertime I think that's going to be helpful.

And then of course in the winter time it's cold so the windows will be shut anyway.

So I think um for those reasons and as well um I I am moved by the by the fact that uh they're going to be using two bedrooms um three uh three two bedroom units as opposed to you know larger units and um I I think that that was compelling for me as well I do believe that you're gonna get more families or working couples you know with an extra bedroom for them uh as well so um it does meet all my requirements um again um as the co-author of the comprehensive plan which I know um it says that we need to do things to find more housing for this city um so for all those reasons um and it does meet all of my findings of fact there is a hardship it's I I don't think ultimately it's going to be injurious to the neighborhood um I think it um it it it is that it is a mixed neighborhood and um uh so for all those reasons uh I'll be voting in favor of this petition so we'd like to go those happy go ahead uh I did yes I did just have um one quick question of my fellow board members have we ever um done anything where we create a condition um for the the rent amount um so if Mr.

Holmes say was willing this is all theoretical at the moment um if Mr.

Holmes's mission is to make these essentially attainable units um for locals or whether they're they've been here a long time or whether they're new have we ever done any conditions for that I'm always doing that like a rent control condition?

Yeah basically no like a workhorse you're gonna help me out Dylan uh so I think conditions always need to be reasonably related to the relief being granted um I'm unaware of a scenario in which rent is curtailed with the exception of comp permits uh comp permits are uh comprehensive uh permits are a special area in Rhode Island law where if you have at least 25% affordability on a property you get these guaranteed bonuses and the standards for national relief changes very significantly um so uh they generally are used in more suburban communities because there's less affordable housing and there's less rental housing in suburban and rural communities uh the density bonus is also based on acreage in a place like Newport the density bonus guaranteed by the state is probably less than market uh by right density in the same neighborhood so I I cannot say I have any experience with imposing uh rent restrictions and related to dimensional variance um other than that very special statutorily created comprehensive permit process okay thank you Paul very much no no um I I only ask because I appreciate your mission Mr.

Um I only ask because I appreciate your mission, Mr.

Holmes.

Um I've actually been uh beneficiary of a relationship like that with my landlord when my children were young.

Um I was able to stay in Newport and experience uh um that kind of help really.

Um I think also as uh co-author of our current land use uh comprehensive land use plan that the weight of the importance of creating new housing units that are going to be year-round and that could potentially be attainable um based on your current business model.

Um is the stronger factor for me in um balancing out what fits um your burden of proof and what doesn't.

Um I think one of the other hardships in this case that uh exists is the actual height of the property, and the only real way to go is out a bit, um, creating that massing.

So that said, uh in contrast to my previous comments, I think the potential for increased housing, um attainable housing, uh just sort of it it doesn't sort of it outweighs that issue and some of the other um criteria that don't quite fit meets my burden of proof or my needs.

I will be supporting this application.

Okay, very good.

Thank you.

Thank you, Melissa.

Russ, would you like to go?

Yes, thank you, Mr.

Chairman.

Just to cover some of the basics, um, the dimensional variants uh being sought.

I I think they have shown a hardship uh due to the lot size.

Uh I don't have an issue that uh the house is 35 feet tall existing.

Uh that's the hardship.

So to increase add the dormers on and bring up to that existing height.

Um I think that uh is an acceptable um uh uh thing to do with the with the property.

Um the other hardship, and I don't think it'll be uh detrimental to the uh the surrounding areas or the neighborhoods.

Um the other issue uh with the two-way uh drive aisle.

I think Mr.

Holmes sufficiently demonstrated that um that that uh can be while it doesn't meet the 24 foot uh requirement, it does uh work.

And it showed that one pinch point, which uh a lot of the houses have that bay built out on the first floor, and um uh uh but it it it seems to work.

So I uh I think that uh uh that hardship's been overcome and that that um uh uh that site the the size of the uh of the land uh is what's constricting that and therefore they've they've been able to work around that 24 foot uh wide drive aisle.

Um so I I think a couple of uh points in addition to the fine points that have been previously made already by uh my fellow board members.

Um yeah, we're creating a new housing unit.

Uh and the fact that we're not increasing bedrooms, we're getting six bedrooms to six bedrooms.

I mean, it's just um you know, it it is it is uh I just think that's a a win, and I think that that's uh uh that been demonstrated that there is a market for two bedrooms.

Um perhaps that four bedroom is is not something that um desirable necessarily in the neighborhood and can be a little more um uh noisy or intrusive.

Um so I think the the objectors uh made their point regarding um but the uh noise issues and and the perhaps previous um new owners to the to the site or to uh Peckham Peckham Avenue uh maybe made promises they didn't live up to, but you can't project what's happened onto uh onto this particular application.

We treat every application individually, and um uh I I was very struck by Mr.

Coat, Mr.

Decotis's uh testimony, the fact that um he vetted um he vetted his buyer here, he lives right behind that.

So he's gonna he may have sold it, but he's still living with it.

So um the fact that uh he vouched for Mr.

Holmes um uh carried uh carried weight for for me as well.

So uh all those reasons, you know, additional housing units, no increase in bedroom size, uh the parking works get six six parking spaces is unique.

Uh uh so for all those reasons, uh I'm gonna vote to approve this petition.

Okay, thank you, Mr.

Johnson.

Dave?

Yeah, yep.

Uh thank thank you, Ms.

Chairman.

Um the petitioner, your application uh requested seven dimensional and or uh special use permits, a couple of them were eliminated by a recent change uh in the city's ordinance.

So we're down to five.

And I have to say that, you know, um I was convinced that the first three of the variants that were outlined had to do with parking uh and so forth and the height of it and the and the uh dormers extended into the setbacks.

Um I think you all positively address the lots of parking there, the 24 foot thing had would it's it's um with I'm waiting to see the first real 24 foot driveway.

Um but but that is not a busy street to get in and out of.

Um my reason for not supporting uh the application tonight is that it doesn't meet the density uh requirements of the 2500 uh feet per unit.

Uh I don't believe that there's a clear hardship has been demonstrated to grant that particular variance.

I believe they put these things in for reasons.

Um and um I think it's a very small lot to have a uh a three family on.

But my most the biggest concern was uh in granting the variance.

I don't believe it would, in fact um that that it would in fact in granting it alter the character of this neighborhood.

This is a uh a really residential neighborhood, mostly one and two family homes.

Um and unfortunately the variance is up forever.

If we could count on uh uh sensitive landlord who's gonna be uh very careful about renting, um but uh once that becomes a three-family, it will always be a three-family, it will always be a rental property, almost always be a rental property.

So um, and uh, you know, when you get these multiple rental properties in a neighborhood, it does it does change the fabric and the character of a neighborhood.

So the fact that it would have such an impact uh uh on the neighborhood, uh, I wouldn't be able to support uh the petition at this time.

Okay, thank you, Mr.

Riley.

Ms.

Sherry.

All right.

So there are obviously clear hardships with this lot and this dwelling.

Uh it's an undersized lot.

Um the positioning of it.

Uh what really gets me is the intensification from a two-family to a three-family.

And going into this discussion period, I was conflicted and when and didn't know necessarily which way I wanted the the sway.

Um, and when that happens, I generally like to sit in the wings and hear what my other board members say.

I like to draw on their their seasoned experience.

Um everyone's right, there is a housing crisis in Newport.

Uh we need more housing.

Um, but we also have a divide diverse community and a diverse workforce, and there are a variety of different needs, and necessarily because you're targeting towards one tenant or the other, it doesn't necessarily, in my opinion, amount to a hardship in itself.

Um you do have hospitality workers, for example, that need those larger dwelling units.

Um, but what I was particularly struck by, um, and I think Wick educatedly described this is you have a landlord that is willing to um rent out significantly below market value.

You have a previous owner that had so much faith in your vision and what you wanted to achieve that he took a a a lesser um sale amount than he could have otherwise.

And so I think that put speaks volumes when someone puts their money where their mouth is.

Um and not we may have had bad experiences with other free families in this neighborhood.

Um, but I think when someone's willing to invest that, um that is of note and significant the take a value of.

Um so I'm willing the the kind of say that you've met the burden of proof here and what you're trying to achieve um by the narrowest margins in my opinions, but um that's why I'll be supporting this petition.

Okay.

Um some interesting comments.

Thank you all.

Um I am now going to poll each member of uh uh the board for their votes, starting with you, Ms.

Padilla.

I am an aye.

Uh Mr.

Rudd is an aye.

Mr.

Johnson, aye.

Mr.

Riley, no.

Ms.

Chevry, aye.

Okay, very good.

So um that uh your petition passes on a four to one vote.

It's a supermajority, as we know the new rules are three to two.

So I had a little bit of uh um a little bit of a cushion there.

Um if you could, Mr.

Marlin, write up the opinion for us, that would be great.

Okay, good luck, Mr.

Holmes.

Thank you.

Good luck, Mr.

Holmes.

Good luck to you.

Motion to adjourn.

Yes, is there a second?

Second all in favor, aye.

Opposed.

We are out of here.

Thank you all.

Okay, Danny Don.

Uh no.

I'm sorry.