Okay.

Good evening.

And welcome to the December 15th, 2025 Newport Zoning Border Review.

I'm going to announce first that our normal chairman, Rick Rudd is absent this evening.

Getting a well deserved break.

So I'm Russ Johnson.

I'm typically the secretary for the board, but I will be the uh acting chairman for tonight's meeting.

So any attorneys or petitioners that want to dash over to see Nick and ask for continuance, do it now.

Okay.

I don't see anybody going, so we're going to move forward.

I want to um do a roll call with uh tonight's board members.

Uh first we have Dave Riley who will be in his normal position of uh vice chairman of the board.

Uh Bart Grimes will be stepping in as secretary uh for the board and voting members tonight will be Nicole Chevrey and uh alternate will step up.

I'm very happy about that.

Uh Richard Balinski will be stepping up as a voting member uh for the board as well.

Um so without further ado, we're gonna jump right into our uh our agenda for this evening.

Um first item is the uh meeting minutes, and I'm gonna ask the board if we have any comments or corrections uh from the uh November meeting minutes.

If not, I'm gonna ask for a um uh recommendation to approve the meeting uh minutes as written.

Uh yes, Mr.

Cam.

Yes.

Yes, Ms.

Damon.

Nope, not yet.

Push the on button.

White one, yep.

Yes, Mr.

Chairman.

Um I move to approve the minutes of the November 24th, 2025 uh zoning board meeting.

Thank you.

Uh do I have a second?

Second.

All in favor say aye.

Aye.

Aye.

Opposed.

Meeting uh minutes are accepted as written.

Um next up, we have um see we have a withdrawal request for 12 Hunter Avenue.

Um request that that uh have requested that be withdrawn without prejudice.

So I'm gonna ask for a motion uh to uh accept that withdrawal request.

Um yes, chairman.

I move to um accept the withdrawal request for 12 hunter.

Second without credit.

Second.

Um take a vote.

All in favor say aye.

Aye.

Opposed.

Okay, the uh withdraw withdrawal request for 1200 is approved.

Uh next up is the annual calendar.

Exception.

Um I'm sorry, thank you, Bart.

Why don't I have that?

I have extension request.

No, thank you.

Okay, we do have an extension request for 104 2nd Street, uh, 12 month uh extension on their uh on their petition or their approval.

Um anyone here for that petition.

Mr.

Jones.

Good evening, Mr.

Chairman.

J.

Russell Jackson Miller Scott Holbrook and Jackson on behalf of the applicant.

Uh I don't know if you recall, but this was approved for um deck structures on the west side of the building.

Um renovations were done.

The property is actually under contract for purchase.

At the moment, the decks have not been built, and the new uh owner would like the opportunity to build those, I think.

So uh we're asking for a one-year extension from the original approval.

Thank you, Mr.

Jackson.

Uh board, any discussion?

Okay.

Uh I'd like to uh request a vote then to um have a uh extension of 12 months for the property on 104 2nd street do a verbal vote.

All in favor say aye.

Aye.

Opposed.

Okay, that uh is carried and uh they have an extension of 12 months, Mr.

Jackson.

Thank you, Mr.

Grimes.

Uh maybe the one one back.

Um next is the calendar, annual calendar.

Did everyone have a chance to uh review the calendar?

I did.

Um have any conflicts or any concerns with uh what they saw?

I know it's 12 months out, but uh look good to me.

Anyone else?

Everyone else good with it?

Okay, then uh I'd like to make a motion to um accept the calendar as dates as written.

Could you do that, please, Mr.

Uh Riley?

Yeah, be happy to.

Um uh I moved that we approve the uh annual calendar for the 2026 uh zoning board meeting uh the next year.

Second, second all in favor say aye.

Aye.

Opposed.

Ayes have it.

So uh the calendar is accepted and uh will go into a force for 2026.

Uh next up is um we have a request to move a full petition for hurricane hut LLC from a full hearing to an abbreviated hearing.

Um so I am going to put that request.

Uh first of all, is there anyone in opposition in the um audience tonight?

I don't see any uh anyone in opposition.

Um so I'm gonna ask the board if there is anyone on the board that has uh any issues with moving this from a full hearing to a uh abbreviated summary meeting.

Seeing none, um we will hear this uh the request of hurricane cut LL Hurricane Hutt LLC as the last summary hearing in tonight's meeting.

Abbreviated summary.

I'm sorry, abbreviated summary, thank you.

Um and then I believe that is all there is for communications.

So we will then move readily to the summary calendar, and uh there is only one uh petition on the summary calendar uh for Joseph T.

Donovan Jr.

And I will ask the secretary to please read his petition in.

Okay, the first summary on calendar would be for uh the petition of Joseph T.

Dunovan Jr., applicant and owner, a nine month for tax accessor plat 07, lot 437 in an R10 zone for dimensional variances to construct a new front porch of the existing front stairs located five feet nine five five point nine feet from the front property line where 11.55 feet is required, increasing the lot coverage from 26% to 26.29% uh where 24.6 percent is allowed.

Thank you, Mr.

Secretary.

Um, as is the movement for uh summary uh petition.

I see that the um applicants are uh present tonight.

Thank you for for being here.

Um but typically uh unless we have again I'll ask you are there any opponents uh anyone opposing this uh petition?

Seeing none, I'm gonna ask the board members if they have any comments or we want to just move to a vote.

Seeing none, uh Mr.

Riley, will you please uh uh put it into uh format?

Uh yes, I will, Mr.

Chairman.

Uh I move to place all the matters called a summary on the consent calendar, and as to all matters on the consent calendar, I further move to adopt the board, adopt as the board's finding of facts, the information, the staff reports, applications, supporting plans, and other documents, 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 new point zoning ordinance entitled Variances and Modifications.

Um 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 recording the decision.

Thank you, Mr.

Riley.

Do I have a second?

Second.

Okay.

Um again, no questions, discussions on that.

So I believe we are all set and moved.

Yeah.

We have to do we'll just do our vote.

Yeah.

So uh we'll do a verbal vote again.

Uh all in favor say aye.

Aye.

Opposed.

Petition passes five to zero.

Um good luck, Mr.

Dunovan, with your with your project.

I know you're capable and we'll uh bang it out quickly.

So uh thank you.

Um we are gonna roll now into abbreviated summaries.

You're welcome to stay, or you can also be have a good evening.

So okay.

Thank you.

Thank you.

That's not a vote of confidence, was it?

Okay.

Uh Mr.

Grimes, would you read our first abbreviated summary?

I will.

Um, so the first abbreviated summary is the petition of Rick and Trisha Arsenal.

Applicants and owner, 51 Marchant Street, tax assessor plat 39, lot 475 and an R10 zone for dimensional variants to construct a 240 square foot second floor deck on a new single family dwelling where 100 square feet is allowed.

Thank you, Mr.

Secretary.

Um may I ask if the petitioners are in um okay.

May I ask if there's any objectors.

Okay, would the petitioners come up to the podium, please?

They can all come up if you want.

Three's a crowd, so uh I'm going to swear whoever's going to speak, or if you're there for a moral support, but uh um please state your name.

Rick Arsenal.

Rick Arsenal.

Uh may you raise your right hand, please.

You swear to tell the truth, the whole truth, and nothing but the truth in these proceedings.

I do.

Okay.

Um please briefly explain what your uh petition is about.

Sure.

We're in uh building new construction.

We have to build outside the floodplain, and that first floor is our main living area, and the amount allowed is just not suitable for seating.

Speaking of the mic, please.

So we're building out out of a floodplain and that first floor that's at that level, um, which is the main living floor.

The suitable or the the current restriction for size isn't suitable for you know the proper seating we need for that location.

That's really why we're asking for the variance.

The rest of the lot is fully conforming.

You're in a flood zone down there, right?

Correct.

Okay.

Okay.

Uh board members, any questions?

I actually have a point of clarification.

So I noticed the application said single family and the staff report said single family, but it's listed on the GIS as a two-family.

Um I was wondering if you could clarify that or maybe the zoning officer.

It's currently listed as a two-family, but that that home will be uh basically removed.

Okay.

And so we're building a single family.

We don't use the two family today.

It's just single family today as well.

Okay.

Even though it's on for two.

Thank you.

Okay, Nicole.

Thank you.

Anyone else?

Uh yeah, Mr.

Chairman.

That the uh the deck is actually built a little bit into the home, too, isn't it?

Correct.

Correct.

So there's even less of uh exposure to sort of the the uh outside of the exterior of the house.

That is correct.

All right, thank you.

Anyone else?

I just had one quick question.

I'm wondering um what stuck uh stood out to me a little bit was the the height of the chimney, and I'm wondering why the chimney has to be that tall.

It's required to be three feet above anyway.

That's not good.

It's got to be a little bit more.

Okay, actually itself, even though there's a lot of things.

Okay, could you just step over once I just want to sway you in so this is all legally?

So you raise your right hand.

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

You state your name, please.

Manual commandled.

Okay.

And you are the architect?

Yes.

Okay.

Um, so go ahead, please, Mr.

Pimattel.

So the reason for the height of the chimney is between because it is required to be three feet above.

It is a wood-burning chimney.

Yeah.

Would burning fireplace.

So it's required to be three feet above any ridge that's ten feet away.

There are some decorative elements to it, but the flue top itself is required to be three feet.

Okay, so that's three feet or or better than above what the three feet to the top of the flu itself.

Then there is some decorative element to it.

Okay.

Okay.

Thank you.

Any other questions?

Okay.

Thank you very much.

We'll proceed to a vote.

Okay, Mr.

Riley, can you uh make a motion, please?

Uh yeah, Mr.

Chairman.

Uh on the petition of uh Rick and Trisha Arsenal.

Uh I move to adopt is the board's finding of fact, the information and staff report, applications, supporting plans and documents, testimony witnesses.

Um together with the comments spread on the record by the board members, adopt the board's conclusion of law.

The petition has met their burden approved under each element under Chapter 17.108 of the Newport Zoning Ordinance entitled Variances and Modifications.

Um the petition be granted on the condition that the project be started substantially complete within 12 months of the decision or the 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.

Second thank you.

Um so uh without any further discussion, we can move uh right to a vote.

If anyone has nothing else to offer, okay.

Then uh we'll do a um do a verbal vote on this as well, right?

Or do we need to go individually?

Does it matter?

I don't think it matters on this one.

Okay.

Thank you.

Then we'll do a uh verbal vote.

All in favor say aye.

Aye.

Opposed.

Petition passes five to zero.

Um it is approved.

Thank you very much.

Good luck.

Mr.

Secretary, if you could read the next application.

The next application will be the petition of Monica Barrett, applicant and owner of 33 Williams Street, tax assessor plant 27 lot 146 in an R3 zone uh with a historic overlay for dimensional variants to expand an existing third floor deck from 103 square feet to 121 square feet, where 30 feet is allowed.

Thank you, Mr.

Secretary.

Um I see Mr.

Hume at the microphone.

I'm assuming you are representing the uh petitioner.

Yeah, they're here.

Okay.

Very good.

Um thank you.

May I ask if there's anyone in opposition to this petition.

Seeing no one, I'm going to ask you uh to raise your right hand and swear that you will tell truth the whole truth and nothing but the truth in these proceedings.

I do.

Please state your name.

Spencer McComb for the sector for the project.

Thank you, Mr.

McComb.

Can you please briefly describe the project?

Uh this is kind of a unique one.

Uh it's been through historic district.

Uh it's a 1980s um vintage home.

It's a gambrel and on the side facing the water is a elevated inset deck uh on the third floor.

It's existing.

We're not increasing the deck size at all.

We are simply just opening it up a little bit more.

It has two cheek walls on either side that sort of bring the view in a little bit.

We're pushing those out, 18 inches, two feet on each side.

And we're taking a railing, which is pressure treated again, 40 something years old, sort of failing, and we're gonna rebuild it just so straight up and down like you would normally find a railing.

Currently, it's built at the angle of the steepness of the gambrel, which is kind of an odd condition.

Uh, because it's pitched in uh Nick's opinion was that that wasn't usable space in the uh angle underneath the railing, and when we're when we rebuild it vertically, it increases the square footage slightly of the usable square footage of the of the uh deck, as well as opening the aperture slightly uh changes a little bit of where the headroom would be because now the it's a little bit wider.

So those two square footage increases, although the footprint isn't increasing, uh added up to a little bit more than we could approve.

Summary and obviously with the new upper level deck issues, we had uh an issue.

We just felt better bringing it before you today.

Okay, thank you.

Board members, any questions?

Mr.

Chair, I just want to point out that we did receive a letter of objection this afternoon.

Um, after reviewing the letter of objection, it um primarily was in regard to an arborvitae planted on uh on on the property.

Uh we determined it was not uh essentially enough of an objection to pull this off of an abbreviated summary into a full hearing.

Um, and as you have already um requested, there is no objectors in the audience.

So I just wanted to point that out for the record.

Solicitor has a comment as well.

Just it's gonna be one of my last chances to be redundant.

Um it's uh it's a non-germane objection, which doesn't actually reflect the standards related to the variance.

So the objection amounts to uh uh complaint, but not one that meets the quasi-judicial threshold for this board to consider.

Thank you both.

Um we did all get the letter and did review it and agree with uh your your views on that and feel we are um going to move forward with that, noting that we did get the letter, but um just that we're noting it.

So um with that, uh again, I'll ask if anyone else on the board has any questions.

If not, we'll move to um I just like to make a remark on one item.

Uh Spencer, this was approved by the historic district commission as well, correct?

It was yeah, okay.

Yeah, and and I would just like to say too, uh I am uh if the board approves that, and uh, I feel that's where we're going with this.

Um I certainly hope that it is uh brings you the view and what you uh what you're seeking because a lot of work for uh uh to get that get that opened up and you know for 21 square feet or whatever it is.

But um, I can appreciate that and uh and and again uh best wishes for that.

So that being said, um Mr.

Riley, can you make a motion, please?

Uh yes, Chairman on the petition of uh Monica Barrett.

Um I move to adopt the board finding of facts, the information and staff report, applications, reporting plans and documents and testimony of the witnesses, uh, together with the comments spread on the record by the board members, and adopt as 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 that the petition be granted on the condition that the project be started and substantially completed within 12 months of the decision, or the extension requested to the zoning officer prior to expiration, and all outstanding invoices related to the cost of public noticing be paid in full, it has a condition of recording the decision.

Thank you, Mr.

Riley.

Uh do I have a second?

Second.

Thank you.

Um we will move to a unless there's any discussion from any board, we will move to a again a verbal vote.

I'll ask all in favor to say aye.

Aye.

Aye.

Uh opposed, nay.

Ayes carry it.

Five two zero.

Your petition is approved.

And um, well wishes for your uh for your project and good luck with it.

Thank you.

Okay, uh, we'll move on to our third uh previated summary.

The next petition is that of Elizabeth P.

Goltra, applicant and owner for 41 Everett Street.

Tax Sessor Plat 22 lot 012 in an R10 zone in a historic overlay for dimensional variances to demolish an existing rear deck and construct in construction of an attached carport located five foot six, five point six feet from the left side or the south property line, and reconstruction of a front entry stair and landing located 5.3 feet from the right side or the north property line, or six and a half feet is required, re-establishing a lot coverage of 34.8 percent, where 27.05% is allowed.

Thank you, Mr.

Grimes.

Um hello again.

Um I don't need to swear him in again or no, right?

He is kind of yep, okay.

I guess just to ask if the uh owners are present.

Yes.

The owner is present.

Hello.

Um I'll also ask if anyone is in objection to this petition.

Seeing no one, I will ask Mr.

McCoom to please uh give his an oversight of the project.

Sure.

This is a uh you know, Victorian era building, turn of the century.

Um actually really nice building on on this uh street.

And uh we're taking down stairs, decks, a lot of things that made this building a two-family uh for many years.

Um back when they were kind of carving up these homes.

We're returning it to a single family, so that alleviates a lot of the stairs decks that were previously allowing for a second entrance.

Uh, but we and then by removing that rear deck and stair, we open up some square footage to put a work or share here.

It's been through historic district just recently.

Um got approved unanimously.

Uh so they're happy with the design of it.

And uh, you know, as far as from a zoning standpoint, it's really the smallest we can go.

If we would have would have built a car garage, it would have been almost unusable this size.

And so a port crochet allows you know, someone to walk around the car a lot easier.

Uh you don't have the walls real close to the door swings.

Um, and it's more how a building of this era would have had carriage uh port crochet of that at that uh size and shape.

Um it is back from the street as far as it can go.

Um, but essentially allowing uh Miss Culture the ability to be undercover on a week like this where she can get into her kitchen without you know uh walking through rain and snow.

So just a little weather break on the car into the kitchen, uh which the building doesn't have and didn't have.

Uh but it's a pretty minor uh zoning request.

You can see it just barely creeps over that line, and we really uh tried to keep it inside that line, but it really would prove so narrow that a car wouldn't be able to get through there.

So we've got it just the absolute minimum we can to allow for this use in this way.

It's open-sided, so it'll feel a little lighter than a garage would.

Um I feel like it's uh you know, a good application.

Thank you.

Uh members of the board, any questions?

I got a couple.

Um it it we discuss about re-establishing the lot coverage.

Was the lot coverage originally almost 35%?

Um I I can look, I'm not sure exactly what it was.

I can uh explain that.

So the existing lot covered includes a rear deck and a rear kind of staircase to the um the top of this image.

That's being removed, and it's going back to the exact same lot coverage as exists today.

Essentially the way we look at it now is kind of their reesta they're removing things, they kind of get a new baseline lot coverage, and now they're increasing it back up to the same number that they're at today, just with different features.

Okay, so we're going back to the numbers, but it's looking different now.

Um, the other the other question I have is uh uh you know, um this went before the HDC as well.

All right, and and uh the carport.

Uh I'm just curious uh how does the HDC feel about car ports and how was that that got approved?

Well, they we debated it, it was a few days ago.

Um of the members said it was their favorite part of the building.

That was you know, grateful to hear.

Uh carports are pretty common up and down the street and in this area.

Um, so very common back when carriages were coming in and out, and then they would actually store the carriage somewhere away, but it was very common to pull in on your carriage and get out uh and it'd be open, not a closed-in garage type building this attached to the house like this.

Okay, thank you.

They were in favor of it, and uh we're hoping to do more things to the exterior over time.

Again, this was a two-family house that is sort of been vinyl sided and shuttered in many ways, and we've we're uh working through the interior now and look to actually bring the the exterior back to its full glory.

Yeah, but but this approval will help uh uh Ms.

Culture use the building uh as you know in a in a better way than having an exterior parking area and having to run in weeks and months like this.

Thank you.

You're welcome.

Anybody else?

Um I just make two comments.

Um first of all, to me, a carport is uh a couple of flour by fours and some plywood hanging off the side of the building.

Uh that is a beautiful structure, Paul Kashir is how you originally uh called it when you came up.

So I would I would stick with that.

I I think it's uh um uh beautiful addition to it uh to the building, which is also uh a beautiful building.

And um you also for me, my questions were is that the minimum size necessary um to accomplish what you're looking to accomplish.

And I I feel that uh you adequately uh very well uh went over that, and I'm comfortable that um the the uh intrusion into the setback uh by a vote or so is uh what was required to make this work.

And uh uh again, uh Mr.

Grimes stated it, but I I I find that having vetted through the historic district commission uh brings great weight for me as well.

So um uh I that's just comments.

I I'm satisfied with your explanation, and uh if anyone else uh has any other questions, we'll move to a vote.

Thank you.

Thank you.

Uh actually to a motion.

And then a vote.

Yes.

Um okay, Mr.

Chairman.

On the petition of Elizabeth uh uh I move to adopt the board's finding of fact, the information staff report, application, supporting plans and documents and testimony of the witnesses, together with comments spread on the on the record by the board members and the doctors the board's conclusion of the law.

The petition has 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 substantially complete within 12 months of the decision or extension requested to the zoning also prior prior to expiration and all outstanding invoices relating to the course to public noticing be paid in full before and as a condition of according the decision.

Thank you, Mr.

Ryan.

May I have a second?

Second.

Thank you.

Chevry.

Um we'll go to a verbal vote once again.

Um all in favor of this petition, please say aye.

Aye.

Opposed.

Nay, the ayes have it.

Um we will uh your petition is granted.

Uh good luck.

Good luck with your renovation.

And um, I don't think there's anything that needs to be written up, right?

That's all good with that.

So we're good.

Thank you.

Um, we are now going to move to the um uh we discussed this earlier.

We're going to take the full hearing.

Uh the petition that was scheduled for full hearing for um the uh where is it right here?

The uh hurricane hot LLC.

Uh we're gonna move that to an abbreviated summary and um ask for the applicant to step up.

We got to read it in first, so uh yes, that would be good.

Thank you, Bart.

Please read the petition.

Okay, the uh next uh abbreviated summary will be the petition of Hurricane Hot LLC, applicant and owner of zero Bowens Wharf, 30 and 31 Bowens Wharf, tax assessor plat 24, lot 246, and a waterfront business zone for dimensional variants to formalize recognize the 1320 square foot seasonal outdoor service area and construction of a new 310 square foot accessory bar structure within the service area without providing the required on-site parking, eight additional spaces required, and elimination of 17 unconstructed spaces.

Thank you, Mr.

Grimes.

Uh ask if the owners uh or the petitioners are present.

Good evening, Mr.

Chairman, members of the board, Jay Russell Jackson, Miller Scott Holbrook, and Jackson on behalf of the applicant.

I do have with me this evening Mr.

Patrick Kilroy, who is a principal of Hurricane uh LLC.

Uh just to give you some background.

This property Mr.

Jackson, one moment, please.

I just want to ask if there's uh any objections to this petition in the audience tonight.

Seeing none, please proceed, Mr.

Jackson.

Thank you.

So this property is um identified as 30 and 31 Bowen Wharf.

I think you're all familiar with the property.

It's the parcel that has the uh landing and lobster bar restaurant complex on it.

Uh, we're here this evening uh essentially for a parking variance.

Um and I think uh some background information would be helpful as you give consideration to this application.

So as you're all as you all know, the the building that um currently contains the lobster bar.

Um if you go back 20 to 25 years, it was it was essentially used as um lobster and and fish wholesaling.

That structure is completely over the water on a on a wharf.

And over time, the uses that took place on that building evolved where the footprint of the fish wholesaling shrunk and other uses were introduced, like standard restaurant.

Um which is the primary use now, the only use on that on that in that structure.

And over time, as the standard restaurant footprint increased went away.

Uh every time that happened, there was uh a zoning application.

The property owner came before the zoning board, and variances were granted to make those changes to the uses, and each time those variances are granted, there was no additional parking available and none required, so parking variance was granted.

So parking variance was granted.

Um at the uh as of the last uh zoning petition, I think 2014, by my calculation, the application, at least the application had indicated there were 17 on-site parking spaces.

I see through the staff report, Nick has done an analysis and he uh interprets the zoning decision as well as the I guess existing conditions to reflect that there are really 11 technically on-site parking spaces.

So that's sort of the background of existing conditions we're working with.

The evolution of this project, or I should say this property is such that parking has never really taken place on site to provide parking spaces for guests, at least for the last 15 years.

Again, being familiar, which I'm sure you all are with the area, that is essentially a pedestrian associated with Bowen's wharf.

And um, given there's been no parking taking place for the prior uses, and also what brings us here this evening is the fact that as of 2020, during the COVID-19 pandemic, um, outdoor seating was um was developed along the southern edge of the wharf.

And this is the area that has been used for outdoor seating since COVID, and the applicant is proposing to have formally recognized, and once we increase the service area associated with the lobster bar restaurant, we're required to provide additional parking.

So there's 1,320 square feet of service area.

And um, what the applicant's proposing to do is is take that service, uh, construct a outdoor bar in that within that service area, which is very consistent to what you see adjacent to 22 Bowens Wharf, that restaurant.

Um, and again, the structure itself doesn't require any zoning relief.

Um, what we're here for is the uh the parking that's associated with it.

So, in sum, um, the applicants here this evening getting formal recognition of the fact that outdoor seating has existed for the last five years.

He wants to continue that, and there really should be a formal parking relief associated with that expansion of the service area, and that's really why we're here.

And in conjunction with the fact that the additional service area requires eight additional spaces, we're also asking essentially for recognition of conditions as they exist, meaning this area adjacent to the service area uh has never really for the last 15 years been used for any guest parking.

And if you're again familiar with the area, that is essentially a pedestrian mall where pedestrians come and go from the lobster bar and the landing over to 22 Bowens and other establishments across Bowens Wharf.

There is a gate which my client controls, which which connects this parcel to vehicle access through Market Square.

So there is a 20-foot easement that is there, which is required so that emergency vehicles can get in.

Uh, but again, my client can so that there's no vehicular access.

And um, I think the reason why we're here as an abbreviated summary, and I appreciate your consideration in doing that, is when you look at the staff report.

I mean, not only um does Nick indicate that the standards are met, he actually, when you look at it, makes comments that it would probably be um contrary to public health and safety to introduce or require any type of parking in this area given that is it is primarily for pedestrian use.

So for those reasons and the fact that there's no objectors, we felt as though um this would be uh an appropriate application for abbreviated summary.

Uh my clients here to answer any questions, should you have any.

And I guess the last comment I make is my client is in continuous communication with other stakeholders in that area, including um Joe Nicholson, who is sort of the general manager of the Bowens Wharf company that handles uh the property down there.

So, and there's no objection from uh, you know, there's a cooperative relationship among stakeholders down on Bowens Wharf.

They're all okay with this as well.

So I'm happy to answer any questions I can.

If if you need uh Mr.

Kilboard to answer questions, he's here too.

Thank you, Mr.

Jackson.

I know that the board um reviewed this as a full hearing and uh spent some time as they do with all petitions on this.

So I want to give you a full opportunity to uh ask any questions that you have, uh, even though this has been uh changed to uh um uh abbreviated summary.

So please um ask your questions of Mr.

Jackson, and if Mr.

Kroy needs to come up, we'll we'll ask him to come up as well.

Yeah, go ahead, Ms.

Riley.

Yeah, thank you, Mr.

Ms.

Jackson.

This on Bowen's Warfare, just just for the record.

There's multiple businesses all along Bowen's Warp that are sort of out right on the pedestrial uh walking mall, right?

So this isn't like a new uh new type of uh use of a business there.

There's there's various bars and uh gift shops and ice cream things and whatever, which is normal.

And the staff report did indicate that there's that the city does not allow driving on Bowen's wharf in the summer season, isn't that correct?

That's what the staff report reflects, correct?

Okay.

So uh uh it really is it and and this petition is strictly about parking.

Uh do you have the proper amount of parking?

And um you haven't and you don't, and that space never will, I don't think.

So uh I'm very happy that this was moved up to an abbreviated hearing.

Thank you.

Thank you, Mr.

Riley.

Anyone else care to comment or questions?

The only comment is that this all makes really good sense.

You know, and I'm glad you basically described this as a pedestrian mall, because I it it is a pedestrian mall, and no car should be anywhere near the place, and it's recognized as such, and it's a very nice place to walk.

And have a beer.

Yep.

Richard, do you have a comment?

Yeah, I'm just I'm curious.

Will the additional bar and seating hinder the access at all to any of the harbor cruise boats or the other boats tied up in there?

And does that affect that at all?

Um, I don't I don't anticipate again.

We're it's the the 1320-foot square area that we've outlined on the site plan is an area where there has already been table service since COVID.

So that's in season served as an extension of the lobster bar service area, and there's been you know, to my knowledge, no interference.

Mr.

Kilroy could maybe come up and answer that, but I think again, it's everyone seems to work pretty cooperatively down there in terms of the businesses that utilize Bowens War.

Good evening.

Uh yes, raise your right hand, the other one, the other right.

Um you swear to tell the truth, the whole truth and nothing but the truth in these proceedings.

Yes.

Please state your name for the record.

Patrick Gilroy.

Thank you.

Please proceed.

I'm I'm with you on that.

Going around.

Uh no, it's not going to interfere with any of that harbor cruises.

Uh two harbor crews actually rent space for me right uh next to those places.

So they're gonna be able to disembark on either side of us and kind of bring it more into the working waterfront, which is what we want down there.

I think you'll get a feel of that.

Okay, great.

I I think it makes a lot of sense.

I just don't want to see one business benefit while it hindered other others.

Well, if anything, they should compliment each other.

Okay, great.

Good.

And I just noted that you were sort of downsizing what you have now to what your proposed plan is, but I'm not gonna question your uh your uh your reasonings and your uh success.

So uh um uh I I have no other questions.

Anyone else?

Nicole?

No, I'll just say it it makes sense.

This is an area of town that is limited in parking, and I think uh parking variants make sense.

Good.

That's it.

Okay.

All right.

If we have no other questions, I because it is an abbreviated summary.

I don't think we need a closing argument unless you feel that something needs to be stated, Mr.

Jackson.

Okay.

All right, then uh Mr.

Vice Chairman, will you please propose a uh motion, please?

Yeah, happy to, Mr.

Chairman.

On a petition of Hurricane Hot Uh LLC.

I move to adopt is the board finding a facts, the information in the staff report, applications, supporting plans and documents, testimony of the witnesses, along with the representations of council, together with the comments spread on the on the record by the board members and adopt the board conclusion of law that the petition has met their burden of proof under each settlement on chapter 17.108 in Newport zoning ordinance and title variances and modifications, and a 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 to the cost of public noticing be paid in full and as a condition of recording the decision.

Thank you.

Do I have a second?

Second.

Okay, as we've been doing, we're gonna just take a verbal vote on this.

So I'm gonna ask uh all in favor of this petition, please indicate by saying aye.

Aye.

Any opposed?

Say nay.

We have no nays.

So uh this petition passes uh five zero.

I don't think that we need do we need a decision written up, uh Nick or uh yes, if Russ could do that.

Okay, please uh write that up was Mr.

Jackson.

Thank you.

Okay.

That will do it for our abbreviated summary petitions.

Um it is quarter of eight, and I think we can just uh keep rolling right along.

Uh if no one needs any kind of a break, we'll just roll right into our uh full hearings.

We now have just two full hearings, and I'll ask the secretary to read the first one, please.

Okay, the first petition is that of William, I believe it's Bjork, uh applicant and owner of three Butler Street, tax assessor plat 09 lot 087 in an R10 zone for a special use permit and dimensional variance to remove a rear deck and to construct a two-story addition located three feet from the north property line where five feet is required, increasing the lot coverage from 28.9 percent to 33.2 percent, where 30 percent is allowed.

Thank you, Mr.

Grimes.

Um we have the petitioners in good evening.

I'm going to ask if there is anyone here in objection to this petition tonight.

Seeing no one, uh, I am going to uh first swear you in.

Ask you to raise your right hand.

Do you swear to tell the truth, the whole truth, and nothing but the truth in these proceedings?

I do.

Thank you.

Please state your name.

William York.

Oh, I got it right.

You did get it right.

Okay.

We're off to a good start.

So uh Mr.

Bjork, please uh uh briefly uh state your uh goal in your petition here.

And uh you have anyone else uh with you uh tonight.

All right, architect Dan will be speaking after me.

Okay, okay.

Thank you.

Please proceed.

Uh excuse me.

Chairman, just uh point of clarification that in the uh um uh staff report, it indicates uh a need for a special use permit.

Uh was that read in yeah, special you uh and I and my understanding is uh that uh no special use permit is required.

That's correct.

Is that correct?

So correct.

We need to read that back in the Nick.

Are we by noting that do we need to do anything else or are we finding a proceed?

Um no, the uh the staff report explained that essentially we advertise it needing a special use permit because we used to use the category six special use permit for altering non-conformities.

That requirement has been removed under the code, so it was essentially over-advertised for the special use permit.

We only need to make variance findings for this application.

Okay, so we are good to proceed.

Thank you.

And uh with no further day, Mr.

Bjork, please proceed.

Good evening, Mr.

Chairman and members of the Newport Zoning Board.

First, let me start out.

Thank you for the work you do on behalf of the city, and we respect board process and the responsibility you carry in balancing individual requests with the character and standards of Newport.

My wife, uh Patty, and I love Newport.

At the moment, we split our time between here and Chicago, but our clear intention is to make Newport our full-time home.

That plan to age in place here in Rhode Island is what drives this proposal.

We are asking for a modest expansion of our home to create a more accessible first floor living space so that we can comfortably and safely spend the rest of our years here.

We believe the plan before you is thoughtful and logical.

We have worked on it carefully and deliberately, looking for compromises at every step.

We recognize, however, that even with these efforts, we remain slightly over on lock coverage and do not fully meet the full five-foot stepback requirement, which is why we're here tonight requesting the relief.

In developing this design, we have worked closely with our local architect Dan.

We've also sought advice and guidance from the city zoning officer Nick to ensure we understood the applicable standards.

In addition, we consulted with my brother Andy on key design elements.

He previously served for a number of years as the chair of Newport's historic district commission, and his perspective helped us shape the plan that is sensitive and surrounding neighbors.

Equally important, we have been in communication with our neighbors throughout this process, most notably our immediate neighbors, Frank and David.

They have been supportive of the overall decision of the plan direction of the plan and of the adjustments we have made specifically to respect their views in the presence of the new addition.

With all this in mind, we respectfully ask the board to approve our plan as presented, understanding that it's been mindfully refined to come as close as possible to meeting the requirements, and recognizing that we still require your approval and waivers on a few remaining points.

At this time, I'd like to turn it over to Dan who can walk you to some design specifications.

Thank you.

Thank you.

Please step up to the microphone.

Or raise your right hand.

You swear to tell the truth, the whole truth, and nothing but the truth in these proceedings.

Yes, I do.

Please state your name for the record.

Daniel Herkenruther, I'm the architect for the project.

Welcome.

I like the fact that he calls you Dan.

I'm going to call you Dan as well because it's a lot easier.

Fine, I guess.

So Dan, please proceed.

Sure.

So we are seeking to do a proposed rear addition.

This is going to house a first floor primary bedroom suite for them to age in place in this house.

And the uh the size of the edition is pretty compact.

It's 18 and a half feet wide, which is probably about the distance from me to you.

So it's a it's a pretty narrow house, and we're just continuing the width of the house back.

So we're just matching the existing gable that lines up and the existing walls, and we're bringing this rear edition back.

Um, the house currently is three feet from the property line, so we're not going any further past that.

But since the house sits over the setback, that's why we're here today because the house is three feet where five feet is required.

So what we made sure to do is since the building is only 18 and a half feet wide, that makes the building height very short.

We're only a 20-foot high building where 30 foot 30 feet is required.

So the massing is much lower than what's required.

Um, and then our lot coverage, we're at 33.2 percent, but that uh only ends as about 10 percent over of what the lock coverage would be would be uh the max allowed.

So I think that's a pretty minor request for the lock coverage uh variance.

Um I think the size of the lot and location existing structures, we feel that uh this would be a reasonable size addition with the minimal relief we have.

We originally submitted this and we came in about 40 percent on lock coverage, and we met with Nick and reduced it.

That was about a 600 square foot addition, so we were able to get it back down to about a 400 square foot size addition, which is pretty much on par with like a primary fleet, like a closet, it's a bedroom, it's a bathroom.

That's pretty much where we ended up at for 400 square feet.

Um we the other consideration was could you put this addition somewhere else on the lot?

And if you look at the center of the site plan, there's that area that says existing patio.

And yes, we could possibly locate it there in the center, which it wouldn't be over on the setbacks, but it would cut off both of the egress doors, the natural light, it would also cut off the dormer windows that face south, and it would also require make the house a big square, which would then push the roof up to be much higher than it would be.

So we felt that that would really change the scale of massing of the house in a much greater way than what the addition that we show now, which is to the rear.

Um, and that addition where we have it now, it's actually not even visible from the public right-of-way.

If we were to add it where the existing patio was, you would be able to see it from the front street because it would be changing the massing of the house.

So I think this will when this is actually built and installed, you wouldn't even notice any difference from when you're on uh the main public right-of-way.

The we also met with the neighbors to the north, and we did uh sun studies for them.

So we ran a sun study for the entire day on June 21st and September 22nd.

Uh their neighbors have a pull in the backyard, and we wanted to make sure that our structure was not going to provide any shade or shadow to their pool during any of the months they use it.

So we were able to run the sun studies, share them with the the uh the the neighbors, and after seeing how the structure was designed to be so low, they were in full support of the projects, and they are the abutting neighbor, they're the ones that are right away from that that property line.

Uh and as I said now, the house already is three feet, so it's not gonna really encroach that much more, and it's only 20 feet tall, so they're pretty happy with with the overall size of that.

Um just to kind of wrap it up.

We made sure to keep the building as low as possible.

Uh this was done to minimize the impact on the neighbors and to also match the scale massing of the existing roof lines.

We feel the size location of this addition is the best possible design outcome that will not alter the general character of the surrounding movement.

All right, any questions?

I had a few questions.

Please I think you answered my questions regarding like the location of the proposed edition, but I did notice on the storm water management plan how there was a rain garden um adjacent to the property line.

I was wondering if you could talk about that location, if conversations with the neighbors were made um just to make sure that their lots aren't flooded.

Uh yeah, we we haven't discussed the rain garden location.

We want to make sure we had it on our property to catch it, and that seemed like the easiest place to catch it because the contours would be sloping towards that direction.

Um as far as the location of the rain garden, we really haven't nailed that down.

We were just wanted to show about the size of the rain garden, but the location is can be moved around to a certain degree.

It has to be kind of located as the contours drain towards it, so we couldn't put it uh anywhere to the south of the house.

Okay, and you'll have dry wells as well, it looks like correct, yes.

And is that just for the new addition part or for all the the downspouts?

That's taking care of just a new addition.

Okay.

That's what's required.

Okay.

Thank you.

Anyone else?

Uh yeah, uh if I may the uh you had mentioned that uh this applicant wants to uh uh age in place here.

So um does that basically mean that the bedrooms will be the living space will be on the first floor?

I know you're putting a two-story here.

Correct.

The the Edward is on the first floor, their bedrooms on the first floor.

Above this is gonna be a guest bedroom for kids and nieces and nephews to stay at.

Got it.

Okay, um I had a couple of questions, Dan.

Um you did go over the fact, and um, I just would like a little more clarity on a couple of things.

So um, you know, one of their one of their variants is we're requesting here is the side setback.

And I'd like you to discuss a little further about um your um ability to uh and I'm looking at your your um calling it your proposed site plan, uh moving the new addition uh south, I believe, um away from the three foot.

If you know how that impacted um if you brought that into uh the five-foot setback, how that impacted the remaining yard and what your what your um reasoning was to keep it at the three-foot setback.

Oh, sure.

So we're trying to make sure that the new south wall of the house aligns with the existing south wall of the house.

So we didn't want to have to bump it in because it would change the roof lines.

We're trying to keep that same roof line that goes back.

So if we if we we kind of have to hold that south wall at what where it is.

So if we brought the north wall further in, that would get us to around a 16 and a half foot wide house.

And it was pretty problematic to lay out a proper master primary suite at a 16-foot.

We thought the 18-foot was already really compact as it was.

So you're um connecting your new addition to the existing one-story structure that's currently in the three-foot set on the in the setback, the five foot setback and your main line.

I I got you.

So you are you're basically extending that line versus the existing house kind of drives where the addition is, and the existing house obviously sits into that set foot line by two feet.

Okay.

The Mark Hoffdrop.

I'm okay.

Okay.

Um the uh the neighbor that you discussed the the sun study with and everything.

I'm assuming they were on the north side.

That's correct, yes.

Okay.

How about the neighbor to the east?

Did there any uh I did go by the property?

Uh it seems to be fairly uh landscaped in, like it wasn't it seemed to be a fairly uh um screened or or shaded uh spot.

Any conversation with them or um obviously they're not objecting, but um I I just didn't know if that was there's a there's a really large tree between ourselves and our neighbors behind us.

I don't think they'll even have any we're not gonna we're not gonna change their view line to like a sunset or repel or or yeah I don't but I honestly um we've not met that which is kind of weird uh but okay I don't I don't believe there's any I don't see any impact okay based on how how we see it's a tree on their property yep yep I did go by that yes okay thank you um I also noted to the south uh we'd actually approved that that um uh owners they're putting a garage in there I saw that the foundation was it may have actually already been poured for a while but um so there is construction in there adding on so um uh so okay that's really I just wanted to see if that conversation had happened all around um and I wanted to discuss again moving that but your point of and reason for doing that um makes sense to me so uh I don't have any further questions anyone else good so okay then we'll close the testimony portion of this and we'll um get a reading uh I mean a uh uh we know what it's called Dave and uh yeah what it's for beautiful great uh thank you Mr.

Chairman uh on the petition of uh will on William Bjog um I move to adopt as the board's finding of facts the information the staff report application supporting documents and testimony of the witnesses um together with uh comments spread on the record by the board members and adopted as 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 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 exploration and all outstanding invoices relating to the cost of public noticing be paid in full and as a condition of recording the decision thank you do I have a second second okay uh I think we will now move to discussion and I'm going to go to my right and ask Bart if he will lead us off.

Okay Mr Chair um I would uh I'm going to vote to approve this application uh seeing that uh they're looking for relief uh uh variances for lot coverage and setbacks um the uh I want to mention first that you know there is hardship there it's only a 5,000 square foot lot and uh uh the reasoning for their um uh uh their addition and and change to the property is you know to age in place and and I think that's a uh a very uh uh noble uh thing um I I I'm pleased and I do clearly see that this uh project would it is pretty very much in character with the rest of the neighborhood they're not doing anything that's outlandish and they the um have uh neighbor support and that was particularly um uh impressed with the uh the uh the shade and the uh sun uh study to show you that they're very very serious about satisfying their their neighbors as well um you know one of the things I was concerned about was you know is there a better is there a better way to redesign it so uh uh and move things around that would uh would would uh might make it more palatable to less relief but I was satisfied uh with the architects uh uh this uh discussion on that matter that uh they they were uh essentially doing what what needed to be done um the the relief I I think is you know relatively modest I like the fact that they're not really changing the the line and they're not going any higher than I think they're going 28 feet on that second story so they're not asking an awful lot so uh anyway with all those with all those things in mind I would vote to support this petition thank you Mr.

So I feel that the applicant has met the burden of proof uh required in R10 zone.

It's uh to reiterate it as minimal uh relief that's requested.

I feel that the project does conform to the neighborhood with no adverse effect on the neighbors.

There are no objectors here, so I will be also supporting this.

Thank you.

Nicole?

Sure.

Um I as well will be supporting this petition.

I feel like the applicants as well have met the burden of proof here.

Uh there's a clear hardship with it being an undersized lot, and the I would say the existing structure is a hardship as well.

Um, I think Dan described eloquently um how other locations on the property aren't suitable.

Um, and if you were to put it there, um it might uh change the scale and the massing that's there now.

Um there's some impacts with the existing dormers and thinking the roof line.

Um potentially uh closing off two existing egresses and the natural light that the property receives now.

Um I was also really impressed that you did this on studies.

I think that's a credit to you of going above and beyond and working with your neighbors.

Um not everyone does that, and so that's definitely a thumbs up in my book.

Um and I just I think a very nice well job well done with the application, and for those reasons, I will be approving it.

Thank you, Mr.

Riley.

Yeah, thank you, Mr.

Chairman.

Uh I'll also be supporting the petition.

Um I believe that the petition has demonstrated that the necessary hardship exists.

Um there's a 5,000 square foot lot in an R10 zone.

Um the existing building is already in the side setback.

Uh the architect uh uh testify that uh leaving that side set back would enable them to keep the house in um a better massing situation for that neighborhood.

Um and um I think that that was a great uh a great idea though.

The request for the side setback and the lot coverage increase are very modest.

Um the driving force behind the addition is aging in place.

Um makes for uh uh um a long-term resident of uh Newport, which is uh uh certainly something that we uh we uh we need in the city.

Um the side sec uh variance at three feet also seems on the northern elevation.

It's not only it's it it was not only well designed, the very little windows when I was looking at the uh at the uh uh drawings on the north side, which enhances privacy for the neighbor.

Uh and I'm sure if I was a neighbor, I would be very happy to see see that level of especially on the second floor with your nieces and nephews and everything coming down to uh visit you in Newport.

Uh this will definitely not alter the character of the neighborhood or impair the intent or the purpose of the zoning ordinances.

Lastly, I believe that the requested variance is the minimum relief sought to provide reasonable enjoyment of the permitted use.

So I'll be supporting the petition.

Thank you.

So it's kind of nice being the chairman and being last because everything's been said basically.

So I'll just be redundant if I'm uh making all the points that have been made.

Um but I I concur with my fellow board members.

I think they uh it was well spoken their reasonings for how they voted, and I concur with their reasonings.

Um I will also note um this originally came in with a uh 40.8% lot coverage, and it was brought down to 33.2.

Um my uh questions regarding um moving the building, the the moving it out of the uh out of the side setback.

I feel those were very adequately answered.

Um and uh and understand that uh um the reasoning behind that, which is which is important, it's not just a willy-nilly kind of well, we want a bigger place kind of thing.

So um uh again, hardships or um the lot size and um location and and that.

So um I'm gonna also vote and make it a unanimous um approval of this petition.

But I will go um through the motion and we will ask uh uh for your vote starting with uh you, Ms.

Chevry.

Nicole Shevri, aye.

Uh Mr.

Riley, aye, Mr.

Johnson aye, Mr.

Grimes, aye, Mr.

Berlinski, aye.

We have a vote of five nothing approving the uh your petition.

Um wish you the best of luck with that, and um good luck.

Uh thank you.

You're writing that decision, right?

Staff will write the decision.

Okay, put it on the list.

All right, and then there were four.

Um second and last uh full hearing uh will now be read into the record by acting secretary grimes.

Okay, the next petition uh for the full hearing is a petition of Boho Industries, LLC, applicant and owner of 604 Thames and Ford Dixon Street, tax accessor plat 35 lot 083 and a limited business zone for a special use permit to convert two dwelling units into a two into a two-bedroom and a three-bedroom guest house and a dimensional variance to not provide the required on-site parking where two additional spaces are required.

Thank you, Mr.

Grimes.

Um good evening, Mr.

Chairman, uh members of the board.

David Martland on behalf of Boho Properties LLC.

Um here this evening with uh the principal of uh Boho Properties, Matthew uh Goldsmith, as well as James Hole, a real estate uh uh consultant and uh appraiser.

May I ask you to stop one second, Mr.

Marlon.

I just want to ask if there are any objectors in the audience this evening.

Seeing none, I ask you to proceed.

Thank you.

Uh so uh this is an existing property that's located at 604 Thames Street.

It also has um it's on a it's on a corner of uh Thames and Dixon, so it's also got an address of four Dixon Street.

It presently has it's a multi-use property.

There are two dwelling units, a two-family or a two-bedroom, and a three-bedroom unit.

And additionally, there's a retail storefront uh facing the street.

My uh client would like to convert uh the property into um essentially a guest house uh facility that contains five bedrooms.

One is a uh two-bedroom unit, one a three-bedroom unit, and then the retail storefront would be converted into the manager space.

When I originally filed this application, I had retained the uh retail space and sought to do just the guest house for the two and three-bedroom unit.

Um the zoning office indicated to me that that was not permissible.

They said uh the use of the guest house in a limited business district requires an on-site manager, presumably because you're located in the limited business district, and uh the zoning code wants you to have that on-site personnel to deal with any any issues and make sure things you know uh remain uh appropriate.

Um general business district, you don't uh uh need the on-site manager, but the limited business district you do.

So I uh advised my client of that.

He said, Okay, um looked at his plans and said, well, let's uh convert the the retail space into a manager space.

So there would be an on-site manager.

So basically the entire property becomes a guest house facility.

I uh filed an application for that, and I uh did not include um uh request for a parking variance.

Um because I didn't think that there was uh the need for any additional parking spaces.

Um the guest house facility requires one space for each bedroom, there are a total of five bedrooms, plus one space for an on-site manager.

In my calculation, that was uh six spaces that was required.

Uh I filed the application.

Um indicated to the zoning office that I thought that uh no additional uh variance was required.

Um the zoning officer indicated to me that the way um his office was calculating it.

Um so I don't think really any variance is necessary with respect to this.

That's my opinion.

The city is taking a different opinion.

Um I'm not sure if uh the solicitor's opinion relative to it.

Uh I I think um the logic of the double count is sound.

Uh I've discussed it with the zoning officer.

Uh I also think that the zoning officer determination is sound based on the way the rules and regulations are written.

It it appears to be an inadvertent double count within the rules and regulations.

It the rules just don't consider the possibility that uh someone would be both in a dwelling unit and be an on-site manager.

Um, you know, somewhat comically, if you consider it, it's almost like just switching which hat and which parking space they have to be in, depending on which role they're playing.

Uh, but there is in effect three parking spaces uh in this particular application committed for the provision of an on-site manager.

Um so I do think that the zoning officer's interpretation that requires a review this evening, makes sense given the code, but I also believe that the code can be correctly stated to double count the on-site manager.

So essentially the on-site managers as one individual is being perceived to be have two cars at all times, which is just not a presumption the zoning code makes generally so uh in the uh staff report, there are two uh uh project descriptions.

One uh requires one additional parking space, and the other uh the advertised project description is two additional spaces, and then you have corrected project description.

Essentially, we we over-advertised.

Um that was just an error on our part after looking through um Mr.

Martlin's calculation and how he got to the existing number of parking spaces required and the proposed number of parking spaces required.

We came to the conclusion that only one additional is technically required under the code.

Uh, this is due to um our code has a standard we oftentimes refer to it as a parking credit, which is we look at the existing total parking calculation based on the uses that exist now.

Then we look at the proposed uses.

And the difference in those two is what the new parking requirement requires here.

So um Mr.

Martin provided actually a great calculation um in this section under the the description here, which is that the existing use requires three spaces for retail and two each for the two dwellings for a total of seven.

The converted use requires eight total, which is six for the guest house, which is five bedrooms plus a manager space, and then it needs two new spaces for the dwelling unit that comes out to eight total, so the difference is one.

Uh, as Mr.

Conley has mentioned, the code states that all guest houses were regardless of the district and require a manager parking space.

But this limited business zone, which triggers a special use permit, requires an on-site manager to live there, which presumably has to occur within a dwelling unit.

The dwelling unit itself has two parking spaces required under the code.

Um, so as Mr.

Connolly mentioned, it it effectively requires two for the manager unit and an additional parking space for the manager parking space for the guest house use.

So that's where there's kind of an overcalculation in the code that I don't think that was contemplated by the city council when they passed that that code um several years back, I believe it was in 2022, um, that they changed the LB zone into a special use permit requirement for this type of use.

So under the code, we stand with there is technically one space required to be waived under this parking variance.

So we will proceed as written into the record that we are looking for uh forgiveness on one parking space and also uh to approve the um use as a guest house conversion for anything.

Yep.

Okay, okay.

That's good, Miss Marlon.

That that's correct.

Okay.

Thank you.

Please proceed.

Yes.

So um in terms of the special use permit, uh the guest house is uh permitted by special use permit.

Uh in the limited business zone, it is a category three special use permit.

And so the standards that uh this board looks at relative to that are number one, uh do you meet the parking and loading standards for the proposed use?

Well, I I do believe that we in fact meet those standards, but because of this um ambiguity in the ordinary uh in the in the ordinance, we're requesting a um uh a variance for the one space.

So then otherwise we meet all the parking and loading standards for this application.

Two um is that uh you need to meet all performance standards uh designated for this use, uh, which uh are clearly met development standards.

Uh there is no really development occurring uh relative to this.

This is a conversion within the existing uh building envelope.

Uh you know, the the two dwelling units really stay the same, and then the retail and internally uh is turned into that uh studio apartment for the manager.

Um for new construction and alterations exceeding 50 percent of uh building dimension.

Uh that is uh not applicable here.

Um number five again for new construction and alterations exceeding 50 percent, uh not applicable.

Number six, no net increase and stormwater runoff from the site.

So there's uh no development taking place, so uh there would be no net increase.

Um it won't uh this won't result in a reduction of the level of service for roadways and intersections within 200 feet of the property lines.

I think given um uh that that it's remaining a uh residential use.

Um you have the same pattern of uh of uh of traffic relative to that type of use.

Um so you're not really gonna see a degradation in that service.

Uh all proposed lighting to be dark sky compliant.

There is no additional lighting being proposed.

Um again uh nine for new construction or renovation resulting in upgrades of service or utilities will be underground.

Uh that that's not applicable in this situation, and number 10 for new construction parking lots would be located to the rear.

So the special use permit criteria are largely either inapplicable or um easily uh achieved uh with the exception of the requirement for uh the one parking space variants.

Um so I I think in terms of the use, it it's clearly permitted uh in the code uh in this district as a special use um with these criteria.

Uh with respect to the the one parking space, um you've uh had the opportunity to hear that discussion um and how there uh is a essentially a double count um in in the ordinance.

So I I certainly think the request that's being sought is really sort of a minimal request um uh relative to uh the variance standard.

Uh in terms of looking at this property, it's you know obviously um the these lots and and properties located down on Dame Street are are confined.

They're generally smaller, undersized.

Um in this case, there really uh is not the opportunity to put any additional on-site parking um on the property.

It does have parking, some parking spots in the garage um that's located off of uh McAllister Street.

Oddly, it's got three streets of uh of frontage.

Um it's not the result of any uh prior action uh of the the applicant.

I don't think the the variance request for the one space will um alter the general character of the area, but I think with Mr.

Poole uh to uh discuss that um and uh I think in in these circumstances um in connection with that internal conflict in the ordinance, it's certainly uh this would amount to more than near inconvenience.

I do have uh Mr.

Goldsmith uh with me this evening, as I indicated, uh, who is the property owner, and I'd like to call him to uh present some testimony uh to the board.

Please do hi uh Matt Goldsmith, I'm uh the property owner.

Good evening.

Would you raise your right hand?

Do you promise to tell the truth, the whole truth and nothing but the truth in these proceedings?

Thank you.

Please state your name again.

Uh Matthew Goldsmith.

Thank you, Mr.

Goldsmith.

Please proceed.

If I can just ask you some preliminary questions.

I was just gonna provide back okay.

It if you could uh indicate uh what when you've uh acquired the property and and how you've used that.

Yeah, so I think we've we've owned the property since uh 2016 or uh late 16, maybe early 17.

We live there uh with with my family, uh, and we operated the retail store um for for many years.

Uh we've since moved that business one block away to 580 themes.

We have two bus.

Uh my wife and I have two businesses there.

Uh one is a cafe uh and one is the the retail store that used to be at 604.

Uh it's now moved to 580, so one block away.

And what are the names of those?

Uh the cafe is Boku Cafe and the uh the home store is uh Maison Boku.

Uh so we have both of those stores.

The the retail store today is really just used for storage for materials for the other two stores that are one block away.

Um and then as David was saying, the building doesn't require any changes whatsoever because it's those three units are distinctly divided already.

They all have separate entrances.

Uh so there's really no construction per se that's associated with this application.

They they are uh distinct separate um units within within the the overall building already.

Um so there's really no change.

The the parking uh is uh is is uh still I I don't understand it.

Um I'm by no means a zoning expert, but I I was many decades ago a member of the Rhode Island Bar, but I still don't it's there's ambiguity in the law, it makes zero sense.

Um, you know, we have we have a studio apartment for one person that requires three parking spaces.

So I'm not sure how one person uses three parking spaces.

So um the three bedroom apartment needs three parking spaces, but the studio apartment needs three parking spaces.

So I don't know how we get there, but but you know, leave that as it is.

Um so you know, I I think um, you know, we um we believe that you know the the application is for um sort of a best use for the property.

Again, it is a mixed-use building.

It is a commercial um, you know, it is a commercial space in the front.

Uh there was when it was opened as a retail store, uh, you know, a fairly sizable amount of traffic, uh foot traffic of people going through there, uh, and cars, by the way.

People would park on the on the sidewalk, unfortunately, but um but uh we we think it actually is a lower intensity use um uh what for what the application is.

So um there's nobody actually there's one person living there today um in in all of the units, uh and it has a generally been used by our business to help house the people that work at the business.

Uh but today there's really one person who's an employee of the uh cafe who lives there, but that's it.

And uh you had resided here for a period of time, is that correct?

Yeah, until uh we resided there until we need lane 23, and we purchased a home in Middletown and we live in Middletown.

And you've got familiarity, obviously, with the area that uh this is located in uh as a result of having lived there.

Of course, from for a long time.

And um and by the way, I lived in this area in uh in the late 80s and early 90s as well, so for a long time.

Um in terms of uh traffic related to the proposal to basically convert this into a guest house over the traffic that has generally been generated by the property.

I mean, I think it's the same because effectively uh when we had employees living there, we had three people in a three-bedroom, two people in the two-bedroom.

Uh, and they were, you know, they had leases, so they were getting parking permits and parking on the street.

So um I don't see any difference there.

Uh and then the retail store again, we had a lot of traffic in the retail store.

I mean, we had you know foot traffic of 50 to 75 visitors per day on the weekend.

So um there's quite a bit.

But the proposal now is to convert the retail into into the studio.

But again, it it's already set up uh and it doesn't need any major.

The the board has any questions for uh Mr.

Goldsmith?

I don't know.

Go ahead, Bart.

Uh Mr.

Goldsmith, um was your intention to keep this as a uh as a guest house year-round, or are you going to do long-term rentals in the winter?

What tell me a little bit about your plans here?

Yeah, I think um I think for the most part, uh we wanted it really optionality of it because the intent right now is um to continue to to allow some of the employees to live there.

Um we we have a bit of a changing employee base all the time because we have a lot of students.

Um obviously they have their winter housing, uh, but when they work there for the summer, they generally don't have housing.

So we you know they're there for the whole summer.

Uh and so it probably would be off season rather than it's probably the opposite of what most people think, because generally in the summertime where we're providing housing for the students who only have winter housing, and then in the winter it's pretty much empty as it is now.

Yeah, which raises my next question.

You know, one of the concerns, I know you've seen letters of objection.

Yes, there were several of them.

And there's a common theme is what I saw.

There was issues about intensification of use, parking, traffic, noise, privacy, uh, and on and on and on.

Uh and so my first question is uh in terms of intensity of the use.

Um do you do you the reason I was asking about your rare round year-round plans is you expect this is just gonna be mostly intensive in the sum is it gonna be intensive just in the summer?

Um, or do you ex I'm just trying to get an idea of the short-term rental is more in the winter than in the summer because in the summer we have the employees have been living there in the summer, so they're there for the whole summer.

So they're not short-term.

Well, I don't know what the definition of short numbers, but they're there for the three three months of the summer that they're not in school.

So they're there under present.

Yeah, they're there, even one of them is still there, but they generally so for this summer, we had all five bedrooms in the two units occupied by students who work at the cafe in the summer.

Uh and in the winter they have their student housing.

So the short-term rentals will be more in the winter, whereas in the summer it's for the whole summer that the students will live there.

I I I think I get you.

Um a lot of the salva students don't have housing in the summer.

Right.

So they work at the cafe, live here in the summer, but then as soon as September comes, they move back to their student housing.

Okay, I guess why why not just make it a short-term, you know, do as a landlord make it a short-term rental in the summer and the long-term in the winter time again.

We use it as a as a means of providing a place for the uh for the students to live in the summer.

But again, those are long-term rentals, those are three-month or at least three month rentals.

All right.

Yes, please.

Can I continue along the similar question?

Um that Mr.

Grimes was having.

So a lot of times we see with the short-term rentals, is someone comes in, they have a great plan in place of how they're gonna use it, and then they sell the building.

Um, particularly with this building, I was walking by it today and saw there's a for sale sign on it.

I was wondering if you can elaborate on that.

Yeah, so we uh we started working on this in June, I think.

Um and we did get a proposal from real estate agents.

I think we listened in October.

So uh it is currently for sale, but it's you know, sort of pending what the outcome of of this hearing is.

So, you know, the intent was literally there's no there's one person living there, they live there for free.

Um, so there's really it's really empty.

So we need to find a use for this property.

And so it's either we're gonna go forward and let employees live there as we have in the past, or we're gonna sell the building.

So you're seeing this as a potential to make it a more viable property for your use.

Right.

Um she was asking that this if you would grant it this, it would make this property more viable to the unit exactly continue ownership of them.

Exactly.

Okay.

It doesn't really work for allowing employees to stay there in the summer, and then winter only rentals are more difficult.

Because you need that flexibility to move employees in and out as needed.

That's what I'm gathering.

But in the winter, at least we could have you know some weekends or weeks where people can want to stay there on a short-term basis.

Okay.

That was the bulk of my questioning.

Okay.

Thanks, Chairman.

Um what's uh what's the use of the garage on the property?

Today it's just empty.

It's not leased out to anyone.

Okay.

So there's two parking spots there.

Yes.

Um but other than that, for that building, there's no parking.

Well, I don't know how you get, I don't know how the sixes counted.

Um forget what the ordinance site is on site.

I mean, we put three cars in the garage, but I know officially it only counts as two.

But that's that's what we mean to put up.

Okay, but other than the garage, is it used by your the uh tenants?

Yeah, but there's no tenants there now, so but at times who uses Oh, yeah, at times it has been absolutely.

But today it's okay.

Um what's uh what's uh what would you characterize the general parking conditions on Dixon Street to be?

Well, it explain to me what the parking conditions on Dixon Street are.

Well, so this is an odd property because you can enter this property from Thames Street, Dixon Street, and McAllister.

Right, right.

We have a very cool to be able to enter from three streets.

So parking is really for this property is McAllister, Dixon, and Thames.

So it's the three streets.

And uh, you know, I find that we mainly park on McAllister.

Uh so mainly the parking town McAllister and McAllister is almost always parking fists.

Okay.

Um but it is on Dixon Street, and Dixon Street is is parking on one side.

One side, yes.

Right.

Parking on one side, and uh it's the narrow street.

Yes, you have to well remember that Dixon was changed, so it used to be one way going up and now it's one way coming down, but on Dixon, you almost have to park on the sidewalk.

Right.

Right.

Yeah, not on McAllister.

So in converting the use to a guest house, there'll be uh five bedrooms available.

Um easily expecting five cars to find parking.

I I don't think that the use changes the parking whatsoever, because you know, if you look right behind us, there's a house that is always rented to Salva students.

They have you know, it's a long-term rental, but they have I don't know, 10 cars.

So, you know, I whether it's long-term or short term, I don't, I mean, even if it's short, even if it's a long-term rental, I still think it's five dunk.

I I don't think the use changes for parking.

Um the the um you mentioned that you mentioned that some of your long-term tenants get parking stickers, sure.

Right.

Uh those do not be available for short-term rentals.

Would that would that be correct?

That's right.

Right.

So where would they park?

Wellington.

Or well, I I think generally if you're you're not allowed to park in the resident only zones, right?

So if you don't have a resident sticker pass, then you have to park in the zones in which you're allowed.

I think that's right.

And so you've got Wellington Avenue that has parking all the way down to the King's Park.

And Thames is all is non, you know, non-residents can park all the way down Thames as well.

Um my last question is they uh the current use uh versus a guest house use would be a more intense use of that property, don't you think?

Well, the current use is almost zero.

So uh what it's permitted.

For what it's permitted, no, I think if this is a retail store, that's that's the most intense traffic for the car and foot traffic in people that you can have.

When this was a store, there were people in and out of there all day, every day.

So I think if there's one person living in the store, you have one car and one person, that's a store.

You've got cars parked all over the sidewalk, both on the banks, right in front of the store, but also right here, which is it is yellow.

Here we are not supposed to park.

That's built with cars when the source.

Yeah, I mean here.

So this is their driveway, but this yellow area, there's cars parked all over the sidewalk stores.

Thank you.

Okay, uh, my turn, I guess, Mr.

Cold Smith.

Um, I'd like to ask you um who and how you're going to manage these short-term rentals.

Uh, the Who will be not me, sure.

It'll be a third party uh on site manager, so somebody who lives there.

Uh it'll likely be one of the people we have working in the cafe in the home store.

We have almost 30 employees there.

So we'll be one of them.

Uh and they'll take on extra responsibilities for extra compensation uh and the ability to live um right next to where they work.

Um but short-term rentals can be a fairly intense uh activity, right?

You have people from all over the country, all over the world that want to come to Newport, be it in summertime, which you're saying is not going to be your primary time for doing short-term rentals, but still um, you know, falls here are beautiful, and and um, so you've got um that whole administration of of doing that.

I don't know that that's a skilled position, uh, that someone who can handle the rentals, handle the problems, handle the loss low, whatever whatever the issue is.

So um I don't think that's necessarily a I don't know, let's I don't know, but I don't think that would be an employee that's hired to do work in your restaurant or in the uh design phase that that's also doing um handling reservations and problem siting and lost my fob and all the other stuff that goes on with uh short-term rentals.

No, I hear you.

We have two types of employees that work in the in the other businesses.

You have students who are there, they work minimal amount of hours during the during the school year, but then we have people who are full-time, uh, who work there full time, uh, who are more professionals and do that as a full-time basis, and it would probably be one of them who transitions out of that the cafe business and into this role, um, but as a full-time role.

So I I don't I don't see that as a problem.

I I'm a landlord, I own commercial buildings as well.

Um so you know, I'm there to help them as well.

Have you ever done short-term rentals for ever had a property where you had short-term rentals before?

Not short-term, no.

Okay.

But I've had several commercial buildings on the island.

Uh, and I have several commercial buildings off the island as well.

So it's uh it's uh I don't think it'll be an issue.

Okay.

So you're pretty well acquainted with uh employee relations and you hire a number of employees in your various businesses.

Yeah, we we have lots of employees, and so deal with those issues all the time.

But I think you know, I think at the end of the day, I think there's there's not that many numbers, but I mean having somebody who's living there full time on site, I think takes care of a lot of the issues that may come with a short-term rental.

So uh without somebody actually living there, uh I can imagine there's lots of issues.

And we and we know them because there's some other places down Thames where there isn't an on-site manager, and those are you know, we see the people coming and going, the noise and all that stuff, but when there's somebody there, um I think it I think it it controls all of those things.

Yeah, and that's the reason for these questions is because of those properties up the street.

So um, and I also want to you just made my next question or my next point, but you know, someone is going to be have to be living in that converted retail space full time as that um as that manager.

Yes.

Okay.

Well, that that's the okay, yeah.

The other thing this is quite quite large.

It's it's a not a small little apartment.

It's it's uh that's that's a fairly sizable apartment.

How big would you say it is?

800.

Chevry had mentioned it as well the false sale sign on the property um and personally for me that's a little bit of a concern because while you're up here representing how you will operate and run this the short term rental uh if you if we approve this and then you sell it we don't have any guarantee we've already approved it and we have no guarantee the next person coming in um won't abide by um or won't be um operating this as you're currently proposing to us so uh that's a concern to me I understand I'm just stating that no I understand the concern because I lived here and I lived here for a long time so I've dealt with you know the salvay students and everything else in this area so I understand the concern of the neighbors because I live there uh so I get it believe me um and I you know I've been woken up many many nights with the students coming back from going out and it it can be a loud area there's no doubt about it especially you know in the summertime and look I I think uh for any short term rental permit there's never a guarantee that whoever's getting the permit isn't gonna sell the property eventually so um you know I I won't guarantee that I'm gonna hold it for a certain amount of time because I don't think anybody should have to do that.

Um but look I I assume that if this property is sold at some point uh you know whoever whoever bought it in the future would have to abide by all the obligations and and uh requirements you're right but but someone could have a much more intense use than you're currently proposing right you're actually you're actually the reverse of what I everybody else is doing so I totally get which is appealing but also I mean our touch is a light touch in in my view our touch is very light touch and I think if you ask the neighbors about the employees that we have living there or have had one left um there's never been an issue or a problem ever um and we know all the so we would have known for sure um and so um I don't see anything different than that really what's been been happening there so in in my view I I think it is a lighter touch it's odd to say that it's almost uh an oxymoron to say that you know to say that short term rental is going to be a lighter touch than what's there but I actually do believe that if for instance we opened another store or lease the store out to somebody who wanted to operate a retail business there the intensity picks up pretty dramatically for this for the neighbors in terms of traffic how about a coffee shop right yeah then people be standing in the sidewalk for uh traffic problem so okay thank you I appreciate it I appreciate your answer thank you thank you um I've been Nicole do you I was just gonna say if the sale of the property is of a concern to other members as well one thing that we've done especially when we waive the parking spot requirement is sunset with the sale of the property we've done that before okay who do you want to propose that I'll put on the table if that would Miss Chevroyd can you repeat that sorry we were um that the the use would sunset with the sale of the property for the short term rentals so we were just discussing that I don't believe that we feel comfortable that it could sunset in that way um because uses do run with um the property and not the owner um we're discussing um the possibility of adding a condition um based on the representation of the time period of which this short term rental would occur about whether we could have essentially a condition of the special use permit that the short term rental occur in that period um and not outside that period but I want to make sure that Dylan is comfortable with that idea and if you were comfortable can you be more specific to when those periods are yeah I so I think um an important principle within zoning is that the the applicant shouldn't matter so on transfer property it's almost as if you're granting an approval to one individual as opposed to so uh granting it with the land I think works granting it for a certain period of time I think works uh requiring that at the point of time of any transfer the new property owner comes in and presents like a short term rental management plan that would be purely a presentation okay you couldn't vote on it you couldn't change what the rights of the land were but if you wanted someone to take it seriously in the same way that they're presenting to you right now they're very clearly taking it seriously you can

So on transfer property, it's almost as if you're granting an approval to one individual as opposed to uh granting it with the land, I think works, granting it for a certain period of time, I think works, uh requiring that at the point of time of any transfer, the new property owner comes in and presents like a short-term rental management plan.

That would be purely a presentation.

Okay.

You couldn't vote on it.

You couldn't change what the rights of the land were, but if you wanted someone to take it seriously in the same way that they're presenting to you right now, they're very clearly taking it seriously.

You could have a subsequent owner come in and you know just present to you.

Um if this board is considering that the parking relief makes sense specifically because the basically basing the increased demand is off seasonal, you could make that finding and make a condition based on that.

I don't know that we have anything that specifically outlines um that the parking is related to the demand for parking in the area.

There may be something in the zoning code somewhere, uh, but not to my knowledge.

Um I I I mean, I think there's a few ways to tailor it.

Uh unfortunately, I don't know we can deliver exactly on um that concept, but we can get close by lining up some of those things.

Okay.

I think my concern personally is um having formerly lived on Simmons Street, which is near this property, is that the rest the months you're suggesting, the winter months, that's when the resident parking ends.

And so the overflow without some kind of concrete plan in place.

I've seen it personally where it doesn't work out well for the residents in the area.

You have a there was a time where we had a lot of short-term rentals, like knocking on our door to say that they could borrow our parking spot because they had nowhere to go.

Um it's a very congested parking area, particularly with Dixon and McAllister.

Uh Jamie and I uh in the past we've also used, and uh we haven't talked about that tonight was the fact that that you are one parking space away from uh um being by right ability to have a short-term rental.

Would you agree with that?

I think Ms.

Martin.

I think we comply with the rules, but no, well, I don't think you want to if you want to litigate that, I'm not gonna do it, but I don't think it's the venue for it.

But I think the according to what's in front of us, the request for the variance is for one parking space.

That's correct.

Is that correct?

And so the way to solve that is to secure one parking space.

Is the other way that we've treated this in the past.

We're happy to do that.

Um the conditions we've well, and and everyone can speak to this too, for sure.

But it would be to secure a parking space within within a half a mile, get a signed lease, and you've um presented uh now satisfied as convoluted as the parking rules have been given to us.

Uh also convoluted is the parking credit system that someday I might understand, but I don't understand it today, uh, of the credits back for this and that.

The fact of the matter is you uh you you'll have a five-bedroom guest house that is gonna require some parking, some significant amount of parking.

And um I don't know how the rest of the board feels about that, but if they that that would be a condition that might be more helpful for me.

So uh if I may uh as I understand sort of the combination of the concern and the stated option, it would be um while the property during the use as a short-term rental a leased parking space um within a half mile, the there should be proof of a leased parking space within a half mile submitted to the zoning officer.

So during the use of the short-term rental, because we understand this to be like seasonal and reverse seasonal, um there shall be a lease parking space within a half mile proof of a lease parking space within a half mile submitted to the zoning officer.

Is that what I understand the condition to be?

I I I would think that would be the condition.

And I would further add that um if through continued discussion here that that space was determined to not be required, then that that condition could be removed.

So Richard, you've been trying to get in there with something, please call it.

I just want to go back to the garage.

We kind of talked about the garage that you said it's currently vacant, not being used.

Had do you ever offer uh that included in the lease, like for the managers unit?

Would you give that a designated lease space to be available?

It won't be second, available to other is in minutes.

Okay.

But you don't live on the site.

No, I don't live there.

So Mac that would help alleviate some of the parking issues if your car will go on and another one was there.

There's nothing like that.

So maybe a month or so ago, maybe two months ago, I did have a conversation with with Nick about uh providing uh you know a lease parking space.

And Nick uh thought that given the you know sort of internal conflicts of the uh the the zoning code, he thought uh this might be uh an appropriate um application to maybe forego that condition.

But um my client actually did go out and procure um a lease space uh just in the event um this condition did come up.

So we have no problem uh meeting that condition of providing a uh space within within a half mile.

Um two notes.

One, I I know Dylan mentioned the um the seasonal versus off-seasonal parking lease.

I think that may be harder to enforce than if we just get a yearly lease, which sounds like maybe what you have I agree with that, yeah.

Yeah, the nine-month or six-month lease.

Who's gonna who's gonna move to that?

We got the phone-mouth lease right across the street from uh the garage.

It's in a commercial parking lot.

Um my second point uh was that in my staff report we indicated that we thought there should be a condition added that the garage space be effectively dedicated to the on-site manager so that it is actually always available for that manager to use that so they because they're the ones that will be there all the time.

I was gonna mention that as Richard.

With their three cars, the three-car garage won't be necessary to bring all three though, yeah.

Okay, are we Dave?

Did you have something else or are we ready to move to Mr.

Hull?

Um we can go to Mr.

Hole.

I think so.

I'd read in what the conditions would be so that you guys can think about them and say, Yeah, that that's uh that's reasonable.

That's a good idea.

Why don't you do that, please?

And then okay, thanks.

Thank you, Mr.

Chairman.

Uh first condition would be a space in the two car garage would be assigned to the on-site manager, one space.

Second condition is one lease parking space within one half mile of the guest house be provided.

Um the annual lease will be provided to the zoning office to secure the variance and be renewed each year, providing a copy of the annual uh providing a copy of the annual lease when the guest house license is renewed.

So you get a lease, renew the lease.

Sorry.

That's good.

Yeah, just please.

Um I want to get out of the parking lot for a minute, okay.

Um I want to talk a little bit about the special use, special use permit again.

Um, you know, when I when I whenever we deal with short-term rentals, uh in a limited business zone, it's a recipe for migraine for this board.

Uh you can you know why?

Uh now one of the things we haven't talked about, and I know that we've seen the board has seen.

I know you were you probably as well seen the letters of objection.

Um tell me how you address the the neighbors and the concerns that they've raised.

And you heard me mention them later earlier, um, such as um safety and turnover and parking and noise and all those things.

Um so so tell me, uh tell me about the relationships and because you know, with the limited business zone, the problem is you got the business and you got the residential, and you get them both right there.

And I know Mr.

Hull remind us about that.

Um, but what what are you done about all that?

Yeah, so we have uh not only next to each other, we have commercial and residential in the same structure.

Yeah, that's structure.

So it is uh you know, it's uh so uh I think look, this is a dwelling where I live in full time, so uh I think many of the neighbors are rent, and some of the you know the objections the objectives also are rent.

Uh so I'm the one I really have very uh limited amount of rental that's been done here.

So um I understand you know some of the objections, uh, and I think I I don't know the coming very late, so I never let we know the neighbors quite well.

Um both who broke the letter.

Uh one of them is again that's a shorter building, uh, which is right next door, uh, and the other is a full-time resident.

We totally appreciate that she wants to avoid uh any more any unlimited behavior, but we felt that having a full-time bond identified uh would alleviate any of those risks that might occur.

So the alternative was in the wintertime we're renting to Salva Regina students, for instance, because they have biggest group of rentings in that area, um, we'd have much less control because we wouldn't have anybody there.

Uh so I think we'll actually have better control, better hand on the pulse mediate any issues if there are any that arise from loud noise or whatever.

So I I think that you know we can control it better.

Um that's just my question.

All right, thank you for your input on that.

Um I've got uh Mr.

Poole uh available to you uh present this testimony.

Um what stole my copy so we do not have a copy of your report.

No, I was gonna say submit it.

David.

All right, in the inadmissible.

So we need an hour to read through it.

Say it again.

Wait a minute, for you may speed read Richard.

Yes.

Please raise your right hand.

Do you promise to tell the truth, the whole truth, and nothing but the truth in this hearing?

I do.

Please state your name for the record.

James Hool, intro ULE.

Thank you.

Thank you, Mr.

Hool.

The board will recognize you as a um phraser and expert in real estate.

Thank you.

Again, we're just seeing uh this report for the for the first time.

So you didn't get it submitted earlier.

I I did just want to make a couple of comments.

That's fine, but as I say, we haven't read it, so if you want to uh walk us through the high points, that would be uh well, I think you can look I've addressed the standards for the variants needed for the parking, and I've addressed which you know, basically because there is a hardship, the lot is very small that you don't have the ability to put any more parking on on site.

So there's no question that there is a hardship for the variants, it's not their making the building has been there since 1918 something.

So you know, in terms of the variance, I think that that it really conforms to all the standards being requested.

If you add in the entire issue of the overlapping need for the manager to have two cars for his parking for his apartment, then one for him to drive to the second floor to manage the property.

Um, you know, it's sort of ludicrous.

So the truth is that the parking is really covered, you know.

So I I look at the variants uh really being sort of almost a red herring in this case because of the way the the hardship is almost the zoning code itself by the way it calculates the the parking for an on-site manager and then for the unit.

So I consider the you know the variance covered in terms of the special use permit, as Mr.

Martlin said, most of the standards really have to do with um construction standards for new um for for new construction, not for uh existing buildings that will have no effective change at all in terms of the room layout of the footprint or expansion of the building at all.

So when I look at it, I believe very firmly that all of the standards for both the special use permit and the variants are covered.

First standards for the special use permit is the variance for the parking.

But I feel overall they're covered.

I really looked at this project though.

There's you know, whenever we talk about parking and traffic, I really sort of go crazy because this is a city.

This is a densely developed city that has been developed for well over a hundred years.

And the idea of favoring residential over the commercial is wrong, in my opinion.

There are a number of cities throughout the country that have totally thrown out parking standards, and especially in historic areas.

So the idea of favoring it, the last time I was standing here, we were talking about Thane Street, and one of the objectives got up and explained that she had a two-car driveway, but had three cars, and that she needed to be able to park on the street.

And I consider that to be sort of excessive in terms of the fact that when those houses were built, they had no parking whatsoever because they had no cars.

You know, it is a macro issue that has to be handled by the city.

It's wrong to put the owners on individual um that is sort of you know well passe to put each business or each person to conform to a standard that is absolutely impossible to me.

And so I have a real issue with that overall.

But when I looked at this particular project, A, I realized the building was for sale, which you know is always of a concern.

So when you look at this property, um, you know, that's been stated that the retail actually would generate a lot more traffic than the the on-site manager would.

And that's absolutely valid.

There are a three-bedroom unit and a two-bedroom unit on this site, and it's just as likely that a per property owner would do short-term rentals through a month-long rental during the summer, and then bring in students or singles to rent in the winter.

And every one of those singles will have a car.

And and if you have an on-site manager who is telling the people that are coming here that they're not going to have a parking spot, the chances are we cannot bring as many cars for the short-term rental than the apartments would generate.

So I think that overall, this is actually a very good for this building.

It's completely consolidated as a short-term rental.

You have the space for an on-site manager, you have the garage parking.

The the owners have already secured an off-site extra parking spot.

So when I look at this, I think this is actually one of the least impactful of all of these petitions for short-term rentals that you've heard.

That's my opinion.

Thank you, Mr.

Hole.

Appreciate your opinion.

Sorry about getting excited.

I like excited.

Okay, good.

Yeah.

Because you know, it's otherwise going to be a very short and boring thing.

No one's ever called you that, uh, Mr.

Hole.

So we have any questions.

Yeah.

Anyone on the board have any uh redirects for Mr.

Hole?

Uh you've done your job then.

Thank you.

Okay.

Thank you.

I have uh nothing further.

Uh would you like to make a closing statement, or you don't have to?

Um, but if you'd like to feel free.

No, I I think I I'll rest without making a closing statement.

Uh just to indicate that um you know, I think I think certainly all the standards have been met.

Um we've really we really ground through uh pretty finely um uh the petition.

Um so I appreciate all of the time uh that the board members had spent um on a December evening uh when you probably want to do some other things.

Um the uh I know that there were uh three conditions that uh were previously suggested by uh by uh member Riley uh and uh I just want to indicate that each of those conditions is is is perfectly acceptable uh to my client.

Thank you, Mr.

Milan.

We appreciate your testimony as well.

Thank you.

Okay.

We will close the uh testimony portion of this petition and ask uh Vice Chair Riley to please make a motion, including uh the um added uh conditions.

Okay.

Uh yes, Chairman.

Um let's see on the petition of uh of Boho Properties LLC.

I move to adopt the board's finding of fact, the information and staff report applications, supporting documents, testimony of the witnesses, along with representations of counsel, uh and uh any mocked exhibits uh together uh with the comments spread on the board on the record by the board members and adopt 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 B 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 three.

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 donors and be paid in full before and as a condition of recording the decision, the following additional conditions.

Uh number one, that one space in the two guard garage be assigned to the on-site manager, and number two, one lease parking space within one half mile of the guest house be provided.

The annual lease will be provided to the zoning officer to secure the variance and uh be renewed each year, providing a copy of the annual lease when the guest house license is renewed.

Thank you, Mr.

Riley.

Mr.

Marlin, you had mentioned three conditions.

Um was there a third condition that we uh failed to mention?

Well, I I I wrote down as number three copy of these to be provided each year, so I had broken it.

Okay, so I believe Mr.

Riley has got included that in a second.

We we typically are um have one other condition on a uh special use permit LB uh type of uh short-term rental, which is a copy of a yearly lease for the manager unit.

Right.

Um so that we can confirm that that unit is being used as it's properly supposed to be used for the manager.

Mr.

Raleigh, can you read that in, please?

Uh I I'd be happy to.

Thank you.

And um the third condition is that a um lease uh agreement uh between the landlord and the uh uh guest house manager be provided uh on an annual basis to the zoning office.

Thank you.

We have that covered, so we will now uh open it up for uh discussion.

Uh anyone like to lead off?

All right, Bart.

Go ahead.

Okay, um, I'll lead off.

Um I'm going to vote to approve this uh this this petition.

Really quickly, Mr.

We get a second on the motion.

Second.

Oh, I'm sorry.

My apologies, yes.

Yes, you did.

Now we do.

Please proceed, Bart.

I vote to deny this now.

Okay.

Um, I I um uh uh agreed to uh that uh that to approve this matter.

Uh this on the regarding the special use, they're allowed to do this by right, and they're going to be using the existing uh uh apartments to do so.

Um and I'm not gonna beat this up, but you know, with the uh the the parking matter, you know, with the conditions that we've uh uh uh addressed today.

I um I think that um uh I I'm I can live with the uh the the parking concerns for the special use permit.

They're allowed to do this by right and they're going to be using the existing uh uh apartments to do so um um and i'm not gonna beat this up but you know with the the uh the the parking matter you know with the conditions that we've uh uh uh uh addressed today i um i think that um uh i i'm i can live with the uh the the the parking concerns for the special use permit and i do think that they were uh the city was um being very um uh uh requiring more than than is necessary uh in their in their uh in their guidelines um you know in a limited business you know this you know what they want to do here is pretty much in character with the limited business uh uh criteria um and and surprisingly the I was convinced um that the use of this here may be less intensive or potentially less intensive than running the uh a a um a retail business uh and um having uh salvaragina students coming in and out of there uh during the winter um I I was originally to be honest with you I was very concerned about the letters of the uh from the objectors and and and they do carry weight but I'm not sure we can change the the tide here now because they do mention several issues that I think are worthy of of just addressing and having on the record.

You know, is there intensification?

Yeah I think there is uh will privacy be affected yeah safety possibly there's gonna be turnover there's parking uh will there be reducing the housing stock yeah we would that's a chronic problem here um and you know being in a limited business zone they're gonna be you know on the cusp of uh re uh of uh residential and you know that could change your character somewhat although I'm convinced based on what Mr.

Who had to say that it that it probably won't.

Um but I do want to keep that keep that in mind and and uh uh um but based on the current standards right now I I would vote to approve the special use and the and the variants uh for the reasons we discussed earlier thank you Mr.

Grimes sure so I I also be voting in favor of yeah um with the two stipulations in place I feel that uh all the criteria necessary have been met uh he's within in his rights in an LB zone the impact can go either way as far as a decrease in in intensity you know this I don't think it's gonna affect the parking whatsoever having short-term rental there as opposed to retail people walk to the businesses that it's not gonna affect the on street parking at all um I was concerned also with the letters of objection but they didn't care enough to be here to present their cases um so I understand their concerns but they're not here to speak to them so I I'm fine with this I'm gonna vote yes thank you Nicole yeah I think whenever we talk about parking it it resonates with me and Mr.

Wool I always quote you about how the other cities are eliminating parking because it's essentially it's a systemic issue across our city we don't have parking especially with these historic properties being so close together and the way folks live back then is not the same as we do right now.

And I think this board does a good job of looking at the properties on a case by case basis and seeing where parking is available and where it's not and in my opinion based on the evidence of the record and the testimony here today I feel like the applicant has met that burn out proof um because there's a clear hardship with this property being undersized um and what you said about the zoning code essentially being a red herring or a hardship in itself really resonated with me as well um I for those reasons I think there is a clear hardship there here and the burden of proof has been met as I I've said already um and for those reasons I'll be approving this application thank you Nicole David yes Mr.

Chairman uh I'll also be uh voting to approve um this petition with the um uh conditions and uh added I I think that um I think that this uh petitioner has a good sense for what it's gonna take to own a piece of property like this I believe that the zoning ordinance uh did it a terrific job at let laying out in a limited business area um this property is in a limited business area the house that he could listen to the TV in is in a residential area so it it it is really a sensitive area now we want to be much more careful and requiring uh um a manager a site manager uh uh on a full time basis was done with great great uh forethought by whoever put the zoning code together because I think that will make a big difference that uh if you give your neighbors the manager's phone number and say you hear something you could he'll be over there or she'll be there to take care of that.

Now we want to be much more careful and requiring uh um a manager, a site manager uh uh on a full-time basis was done with great great uh forethought by whoever put the zoning code together because I think that will make a big difference.

That uh if you give your neighbors the manager's phone number and say you hear something, you could he'll be over there or she'll be there to take care of that.

So I think that that uh that works out great.

Um I don't think it'll alter the character of the neighborhood uh or impair the intent or the purpose of the zoning ordinance.

The uh uh that area is already uh lots and lots of lots of rentals and apartments, and they've squeezed a whole lot in Dixon Street, that's for sure, and Bame Street.

But um in granting the variants, uh, I really believe we'll be providing the minimal relief uh for reasonable enjoyment of an already permitted use in the limited business.

So thank you, Mr.

Riley.

Um I'll cut to the chase as well.

I will uh also be voting to approve this petition.

Um I'm gonna state for the record that I think uh Mr.

Goldsmith uh was a very credible uh witness and spoke very well for his uh his proposal in front of us.

Um he's owned the building for 10 years.

He's tried many things there, and uh um, so he's not just buying this and trying to flip it in something crazy with it.

He's actually has tried several things there and knows what works and what doesn't work.

I was also um uh happy to hear that uh he uses it in the summer for seasonal uh for seasonal employees because uh that is something we really you know we need all kinds of housing, but we most certainly need uh housing for seasonal folks, and that's a big big problem here, as we all know.

Um I think uh uh Mr.

Cullin Collin had uh sort of uh reminded the board that it is the um it's the property, not the person, and appreciate coming back to that uh in the discussion about selling the property and all that.

And and I again I uh appreciate the cadence uh from Mr.

Goldsmith as well as uh attorney Marland and um Mr.

Hole.

Appreciate the appreciate the testimony.

So also um in looking at other uses again, uh retail use.

I look at that coffee shop up the street that people stand in line for a half hour for a cup of coffee.

I've never had that coffee, but it must be something else because I can imagine my makeup next time you're there with um so I mean that could be a much more intense use.

So uh, you know, do we know it'll be more or less for employees for short-term rental?

Uh um, it's a problem anyway.

So, as Mr.

Hole stated.

So just um and then, you know, as far as the parking piece, once that was resolved and we got the got the space.

I mean, everything else for me just uh fell into place.

I would uh in in construction, we have a term belt and suspenders, and I think that this parking solution would fall under that category.

So um for that reason and several others, um, I'm just going to uh uh agree and and go along with my fellow board members and vote to approve uh this petition.

So without further ado, I'd like to take a roll call vote, starting with you, Ms.

Chevroy.

Ms.

Chevry, aye, Mr.

Riley, aye, Mr.

Johnson aye, Mr.

Grimes.

Mr.

Brolinski, aye.

We uh approved your uh petition, five to nothing.

Mr.

Martin, would you please write up the um summary for us?

Yes.

Thank you very much.

All right, we did it.

And uh doing is not bad.

Didn't be Wix We're who back next month.

That's we're who um and uh before I ask for a motion to close.

I want to uh thank you all tonight and for the great job you guys all do all year long and uh wish you a Merry Christmas, happy holidays and uh peace honor and hey, thank you.

Yes, absolutely.

It says city, but we know where it came from.

So don't eat it all in one city.

Dinner tonight.

Umjourn, please.

Yes.

It's a name.

Okay, I guess we heard one.

So with that, uh second and uh meeting is now adjourned.

Thank you very much.