Good evening and welcome to the June 23rd, 2026 planning board meeting of the city of Neurishelle.

There'll be two portions of the meeting.

The first portion of the meeting is open to public comment where we'll hear applications from applicants.

And if any members of the public would like to comment on those applications, you can come up to the podium.

You'll have three minutes to make your comments and just fill out a state your name and address for the record, and you can fill out a card with your name and address as well and provide it to Benito.

The second portion of the meeting is items for uh referral or administrative purposes.

You're welcome to stay, but there won't be a public uh comment portion for that part of the meeting.

Um so with that, we'll start with uh the roll call.

Yes.

Uh Jim Brown.

Here.

Isabella Kuala Marquez is out.

Sylvia Hamer.

Here.

Doug Housen.

Yes, sir.

Doug Lance, uh sorry, John Lancer.

Here.

Kate Mercado?

Here.

Christine O'Connell.

Here.

And staff members with the CIA, Jeff Bream, Deputy Corporation Council, Paul Vaca, Commissioner Buildings, Kevin Kane, Director of Planning and Sustainability, and myself, Benito Seja, Senior Project Manager.

Okay.

And we did have minutes that were approved at the technical meeting.

So we'll move on to item two.

And we have a few applications that are adjourned.

Um application 2.2, application PB 3-2026 by Clayton Mattis for site plan approval to convert an existing non-conforming office building to a place of worship with a ground floor sanctuary for 191 occupants at 3 the Boulevard Block 815 lot 9 in an R1 HIST zone district is adjourned to the July meeting.

And an item 3 3.1 was uh approved at the technical meeting.

Administrative amendment regarding PB 1-2026 by Ona Preparatory School for a previously approved site plan to construct bleachers with a press box, bathrooms, concession, and a ticketing stand at an existing athletic field at 255 Wilmot Road, Black 3001 Lot 1, and R1 20 zone district.

So with that, we will sorry, we should note that also uh item 2.1.

Oh, and 2.1.

Okay.

Yeah.

Yeah, 17 2025.

Uh the board voted to dismiss this application.

This is the application that Congress place.

Uh so the board uh voted to dismiss this application at the technical meeting.

Right.

Okay, thank you.

Uh so we'll move to item 2.3, application PB7-2026 by Darlin Alvarez for a site plan approval for a proposed gaming and drinking establishment for 113 occupants at 355 Huguenot Street, block 437 lot nine in a DB Vanguard overlay zone district Hi.

Um good evening, members of the boards.

Uh my name is Dallin Arvarez.

I'm the engineer applicant record for the proposed gaming and gaming and drink and drinking establishment for 355 Hogan Street.

I'm here with the owner, um, Sebastian Pagan.

Um in the in our last meeting, we have some questions from you.

I prepare a small sheet with the questions and answers.

So we mentioning some changes.

So one of the comments was location of the ref the refused area.

As it was uh showing before the refused area was support was um uh supposed to be located in the front yard.

That location was changed now.

So we allocate a space for the refuse area.

Um the premises.

So um right here.

So as of now, there is no dumpster to be outside on the front yard.

That was one of the comments.

Going back to the questions and answers.

The hours of operations um Monday through Thursday will be from 11 a.m.

to 11 p.m.

Friday um and Saturday will be from 10 a.m.

to to 2 a.m.

And Sunday will be from 10 a.m.

to 10 p.m.

Um also there was a concern about the security plan.

Um so private security will be on duty during operations hours to ensure to ensure patron safety, maintain order and if and enforce establishment rules, including the following.

Um monitoring crowd, patron will be required to show ID for alcoholic beverages.

Um patrons do not take alcoholic drinks to gaming areas, ensure patrons do not take alcoholic drinks outside of establishments, uh and coordinate with local authorities.

Also, there was a question about deliveries.

Uh the deliveries will be a schedule of hours with a small drop off.

Uh front front yard parking.

Uh front yard parking for general public will be not allowed.

However, we would like to keep the parking space for deliveries.

Um and the new storefront.

Details for the new storefront are provided in the revised print.

Um I just wanted to mention that the we're gonna have clear grass, but there will be some advertisement sticker for what the business offer.

So the changes, as you can see, this is a render of how the new storefront is gonna look at the look like the inside is the inside of the establishment.

Um the layout is different, but here you can see how it's gonna look from the outside.

Of course, we're gonna have some, as I said, we're gonna have some advertisement stickers on the windows just to show um what the business offers.

Um I miss um uh as before the occupant lewis and 113 building will be fully sprinkler.

Um we will be providing RK seating seating and uh in bar areas.

Um they refuse to be located inside the premises, say for every 72 hour uh peak up period.

Um as mentioned as the last time, we will be serving pre-cooked car cuts, alcoholic and non-alcoholic beverages.

There will be no minimum age restriction to break games.

The new FESAS as mentioned before.

And um and pretty much that that's that's all the changes.

Great, thank you.

Um I believe we talked about uh having some kind of no parking um note if notices out front so people know they can't pull in and then leave their vehicle there.

Um do you have anything planned for that or is that on the on the plans?

Yes, on the brands it shows there will be a no parking right here.

That was um on the revised in the revised set.

It's we'll be at no parking.

On the ground, like spray painted on the ground?

It will be on the assigned.

Assigned, okay.

All right.

But we would like to keep the card cut for delivery.

Yes.

Kevin, you were gonna check with DPW about the curb.

What was their report back to us?

Their report back was uh the drafted condition three, the applicant shall replace the curb and sidewalk in accordance with city standards prior to the issuance of a temporary certificate of occupancy and will require DPW permits.

So, you know, based on based on what the applicant has just said, I think we'll have to look at the specifics of that and determine if a minor I don't even know if it would need to come back to this board, but if a minor tweak may have to come back to the board just in case things need to be adjusted from what's on the plans.

Because my understanding they're asked is to eliminate the curb, but we're looking for deliveries.

So we would need something to get the truck up there.

Exactly.

Sorry.

No, I was saying there's a lot of traffic.

Oh, I'm sorry, could you state your name for the record, please?

Thank you.

I'm the owner.

There's a lot of traffic, so I want to keep the parking to obstruct all the traffic and I'll be in nobody's way also.

So you say that again?

There's a lot of traffic on that road because there's a whole bunch of high risers and storage on the corner.

So if we delete the sidewalk, I mean well, the driveway, we will cause a lot a lot of backup traffic.

Backed up traffic.

Yeah, I think the spirit of what you're trying to do is get the truck off of the roadway into your front rider is right.

Um, but I think there's just a conflict.

Uh a conflict of what DPW wants you to do, and I think what we all want you to do.

And so I think that just has to get worked out about you'll need a curb cut to get that truck up there and what size uh would that be.

Um to determine that.

Exactly.

On your rendering um, the nice colorful one, um, there appears to be two steps up.

Uh if you go to that colorful rendering.

I have a little bit larger of an extent on mine.

Um is that uh material that's in the front?

What is that material?

No, right now it's asphalt.

We're gonna keep as asphalt.

It's asphalt now.

Right.

Uh right, you're just showing us for uh for clear?

Because uh if I will put the the asphalt I want to show.

Yeah, it wouldn't really be clear.

But yeah.

So we we we have to vote on what we see.

Uh so that that's a beautiful stone that you have in front of your VIP store, but uh that's not what you're proposing, so I get that.

Um there will be no um secondary curb uh other than the the city's curb.

Uh so you brought the the trash inside.

There's a tr a refuse room inside.

Um can you walk me through the types of containers or that trash will be stored if there's recycling and trash in that room and then walk me through how that trash comes outside, what kind of containers it is to come outside and and what is it sitting in outside?

Just walk me through the sequence of how you've planned for that.

I'm mostly concerned about the containers that you're using.

So um I don't have the description of the containers, but uh we will use um the CD approved containers.

Um before the the peak up for the uh refuse will be every 72 hours.

So we will need large containers and there will be a schedule during off you know off of hours.

So there will be no disruption with the with the um during the operations of the of the of the establishment.

Are there a certain type of city approved trash containers for commercial or shell?

Uh that's it's kind of governed by the property maintenance code.

Um you look into that code, it talks about um the HJ having the authority to pick whatever kind of containers we want out there.

Um plastic containers or the metal containers.

We are going to amend our local code.

Uh we just haven't finalized that yet as to a specific type of container.

Okay.

So it's not a big cubic container that the truck's lifting up, something smaller that's gonna fit in that room, get through that door.

Right.

And it's not gonna be a big container sitting out on the sidewalk.

It'll be maybe a few smaller containers there.

Correct.

Okay.

Your uh food service um you you mentioned previously was going to be um, you know, just heating up.

Are you are you concerned about the smell uh of anything that's gonna be coming out of that room and is it is it gonna be properly ventilated to make sure that you know things aren't kind of festering in that room for three days.

Um technically the pickup hours from the garbage is it could be 28 24 hours to 72 hours.

Because I have a store right now on Main Street and they pick it up almost every other day, so they pick it up Monday, Wednesday, and Friday and Sundays frequently.

So that's a service that we could set up.

So as I go and the business starts to pick up it, the more garbage I get, the more days I tell them to pick up on the I could tell them to pick up every day, even twice a day if I want to, depending on the traffic of the store.

And I'm and I'm assuming the health department would probably have something to add to the uh to the way you're setting this up.

Correct.

Okay.

Well, some folks um to alleviate the the concerns, some folks condition those rooms so that there's air conditioning in that room.

So it's exactly what you said, so it doesn't become smelly and nasty.

Hi, good evening.

I wasn't here at the last meeting.

So I just wanted a couple of questions that might have been addressed at the last meeting, and I apologize.

Um but I see from the responses that there's an intent to separate alcohol from the gaming areas.

And I I think you mentioned that there's allowance, there's no age limitation or um minimum age to play the games, is that right?

So basically there is and there isn't.

So basically every game is on a different level depending on the age.

So and there will be a conductor supervising all the ages, and there will also be residential added going for further once we open up.

So is the bar component, the alcohol component completely separate from the gaming component?

Yeah.

Okay.

Separate, yeah.

Great.

And then with the hours, are there um age restrictions or limitations if, say, after you get to 10 o'clock, those that are under 18 have to exit the premises, or is it open for all ages?

Open for all ages.

During the entire time.

Correct.

Okay.

Thank you.

Yes.

Can I one more question?

Is it intent, is the intent for it to be a bar, or is the intent for it to be a gaming facility?

Is there one that's tipping more of the other?

Basically, there's something just similar like this called David Buster's Mamarinick.

Yes.

Yes, so they have a bar and and a food area, and then they have the gaming.

So while the adults are eating and drinking, the kids are playing.

So it's just like that.

Uh the back and forth, yeah.

Okay.

Thank you.

Okay.

Um, are you going to say some something?

I I just have one question.

I know last time we talked about underage drinking and making sure that uh those who are under the drinking age would not have access to alcohol.

So you talked about possibly putting other measures in place.

So I wanted to know how you you if you've thought about addressing it and what measures you would put in place so that there would be no underage drinking.

Of course.

So I just mentioned previously it would be um about um wristbands for the ages.

So bands means something different when you purchase it.

And when you come in, you have to show your ID.

So once you show the ID, then we know if you're not over at 21, you're gonna get a wristband showcasing that you're under each.

So that way we're gonna have our security walk in, making sure everything is correct.

Uh and you will have security making sure that thank you for explaining.

I appreciate it.

Is there anyone from the public who would like to make a comment on this application?

Okay.

So we'll close the public comment on this particular application.

Um other questions from members of the board.

I I think I just want to say that I I think thank you for responding to our concerns last time, making some of the facade changes, uh, the transparency to see that facade is nice.

Um the signage, I I know there's probably still some more compliance issues that you guys have to work out with the city, but it's nice to see the signage on there, uh, the trash uh refuge.

So just thank you for uh responding to all of our concerns.

Appreciate that great.

Okay.

And we have um a few conditions of approval.

Benito, would you be able to rip review those for us, please?

Uh sure.

Number one, any damage to the city right of way during construction shall be remedied to the satisfaction of the Department of Public Works.

In addition, any temporary right-of-way obstruction that may occur during construction will require DPW permits.

Number two, the applicant shall install fire sprinklers throughout the building prior to the issuance of a temporary certificate of occupancy.

I'll just jump in here on the third one.

I think we'll wordsmith this this a little bit more.

Um but the third condition will be that you know, based on the conversation that we have had this evening and the understanding and the need for the loading, uh it will be something to the effect of the applicant shall review the curb cut as needed uh with the Department of Public Works to accommodate deliveries.

Uh any work done in the right way will require DPW permits as necessary.

The applicant shall return to the planning board for an administrative amendment.

Is that satisfactory?

Okay.

Are those conditions acceptable to the applicant?

Correct.

Yes.

Okay, great.

Um so we have one vote for site plan and uh approval.

Can I have a motion to approve the site plan?

So moved.

Is there a second?

I'll second it.

All in favor?

Aye.

Aye.

Any opposed?

Okay.

Motion passes.

Good luck.

Thank you.

Thank you.

Okay, we'll move on to item 2.4, application PB 9-2026 by Robert Stanziali for site plan approval to combine two existing commercial spaces to create a new restaurant with an occupancy load of 85 at 72 Center Avenue, Block 415 lot 4, in a DB Vanguard overlay zone district.

Good evening, Madam Chair, members of the board and staff.

Uh for the record, Robert Sansy, all architect in Euroshell.

I'm here tonight uh representing uh Matt Dechizo, who is uh proposing to open a restaurant at 72 Center Avenue near a shell, uh which is located between Main Street and Huguenot Street in Euroshell.

Uh the property is located in a DB zone and also in the uh Vanguard district.

Uh some of you may know Matt or may not have seen him, but Matt uh owns and operates the Pizzeria La Rosa in our shell on uh Russell Avenue.

They have been there, but anyway.

So I'm sure you have.

Um 72 Center Avenue is a uh two-story building, uh, older building built in 1920s, actually.

Uh supports uh commercial space on the ground floor and four residential apartments uh on the second floor.

Uh it sits sort of on a larger parcel of land that has a uh sort of a uh sort of vacant parcel in the back, and then is an old uh storage building in the back.

Stupatching, uh, if you remember Stu, he owned this property, had it for his moving company years ago.

Uh and that's what uh the property was used for primarily.

The um property in front, the storefront in front on the right hand side was once a pizzeria, then it was a Tuckeria.

And uh the space on the left, um more recently was an office for uh Stu's business, but years ago was the famous uh Crazy Horse Saloon.

I don't know if anybody remembers that, but anyway, I do.

Maybe we're going back too far, but anyway.

Dating myself, I guess.

Here we go again.

Yes.

Anyway, uh and also on the right hand side is a is an opening which gives access to the driveway to to the backspace, uh, which also uh provides uh egress, emergency egress and uh refuse pickup for three commercial businesses that front main street, the townhouse restaurant and two other businesses that are adjoining it as well.

So um again, Matt is uh seeking to um uh put the restaurant in there's there's sort of gonna be two halves to this restaurant.

The right hand side is pretty much gonna be a breakfast and lunch operation.

The left hand side uh is primarily gonna be a nighttime operation with the bar and uh more of a formal uh dining area.

Uh the rear area uh in the back is a uh is the one story portion.

Actually, there are no apartments above that, and that space will pretty much um provide the kitchen area, uh the support prep area, and I sp a uh walk-in box and everything for the uh for the restaurant itself for food services for both sides whenever they're whenever they're operating.

Um we had to um we were let me bring up another, I'm sorry, another plan here.

Oh, anyway.

Oh, anyway, these some photographs.

Uh that's the existing space.

Uh both space spaces have been vacant for a while.

On the the lower right hand corner is the interior of the uh of the right-hand space that the former Tuckeria that was there, and then some spaces from the back of the building itself.

Uh and you can see to the left, there's the sort of the back of the townhouse restaurant over there.

Um noted on this plan uh because I'm gonna get into some building code issues that we uh dealt with with the building department.

Um restaurant area, calling on a right hand side is some for code purposes is fire area A on the left hand side is fire area B.

Now that's important because uh what we've done and we've worked out with the building department and fire department is we've separated these two spaces into two fire areas uh purposely in order to uh not have to install a sprinkler system in the space because that would make it not financially feasible for Matt uh to create this this restaurant.

Uh but along that comes with some other other conditions.

Um besides the fire area uh between the two spaces, which is basically a two-hour fire wall.

Um there are only two openings between the two spaces.

Uh those two openings will be uh fitted with a fire door that'll have a fusible link.

Uh if the if an alarm there's a the fire alarm sets it off, there's a uh a fire noted, the alarm will close those doors automatically, and their exits in both of those spaces in front and back for people to get out in case it's an emergency, but will not allow people to go from side to side.

Um along with that, however, uh where we're asking the um planning board to do is in fire area A, again, the the sort of the nighttime area on the left-hand side, is to limit the occupancy to 49 people in that space, and that would keep it a B occupancy, which is a business occupancy and not an assembly space, uh, which is important to um keeping this as a um non-sprinklered space, and this is again something we discussed with the building department, the building department consultants, and uh Captain Mike Patron of the uh fire department, something that he was he was agreeable to in this particular case.

But the other caveat that um Captain Patron wanted, uh, which Matt is agreed to, is that um the two spaces cannot be occupied at the same time.

In other words, it can't operate the right hand side, fire area A, while B is being occupied.

He can only have one side operating.

The other side has to be closed.

So it's definitely a daytime and a nighttime use, let's say.

Um we're not really proposing at this point much on the uh exterior of the building on the lower right-hand side.

We're just looking to replace the existing storefront.

On the left hand side, uh it's pretty much what what is there now.

Again, we're gonna replace the storefront.

Right hand side, we're gonna bring up the stucco panel so they align on top for a future for a future sign.

We don't have a name yet, I don't think, Matt, right?

No.

I think we do.

Okay.

Well anyway.

We have a name.

We don't have a sign.

Might not be assigned.

Okay.

Might just be something in the window.

Um but anyway, everything uh is going to be cleaned up there.

It's in need of a uh the the nice ornate uh precast, uh precast concrete uh features on there, which will be power washed and cleaned up.

So it will make this building look uh very nice and hopefully a uh successful uh restaurant for downtown.

So thank you.

Thank you.

Um is there a door, like a fireproof door in between area A and B then?

Two fireproof doors, yeah.

Okay.

Yes, three foot doors, that's all.

There's also a question that came up about um refuse, which is going to be right here in the back of the building.

And again, a um a um pickup truck of garbage shall can get through that area as they do now to pick up the refuse for a townhouse restaurant and two other businesses that are back there.

So it will be in the back of the uh back of the building outside.

Okay.

Um is there anybody from the public who would like to make a comment on this application?

We'll open it up for public comment at this time.

Okay.

So we'll close the public comment and see if the board has other questions or comments.

Yeah, I just I'm just curious about um noise being generated in a bar environment.

And what kind of accommodations you have made other than the two-hour rating of the ceiling to mitigate noise traveling to the uh occupants above you?

Yeah, when we have well, everything has to be the the right hand side, the ceilings all open up there now.

The left-hand side we have to open that up, Doug.

So we'll be you know, sound insulating that whole ceiling.

Um probably spray foaming it, I would imagine be the best way to to get that in.

And the um the fire rated ceiling, of course, has you know resilient channels too to provide separation of vibration uh with the uh with the two layers of uh the fire rate of Chirock.

Um so hopefully that'll meet the STC requirement and beyond what we're needed to uh what we need to have in there soon.

Does um have a any kind of noise code related to building tenants uh used to use?

Well, there's something in the code about unreasonable noise that can be enforced by the police department.

Um we have mechanical noise limitations.

Umplaint basis.

Okay.

And then the STC is probably in the the building code that's it is that.

Okay.

Um condition two says the applicant shall revise the plans to indicate where the refuse is to be stored.

Have you already done that?

And it's gonna be in the back or is that still pendant?

Okay.

Yes, right.

And it's gonna be stored outside outside.

Picked up outside, not on the sidewalk at all.

Correct.

Okay.

Yes.

Do we need to change condition two, or do you want to leave that in there then?

Uh we can remove it.

Okay.

If it if you yeah, I'm satisfied with the refuse being stored off the sidewalk off the street and picked up from the rear of the building is ideal, actually.

So Kevin, we're approving a place of public assembly.

But the fact that 49 occupants are satisfying a fire code provision isn't what we're approving, right?

We're just approving it as a place of public assembly.

Correct.

Okay.

Okay.

So it looks like we have um two conditions of approval.

Would you mind reading those in detail, please?

Yes.

Uh, number one, any damage to the city right of white during construction shall be remedied to the satisfaction of the Department of Public Works.

In addition, any temporary right-of-way obstruction that may occur during construction will require DPW permits.

Number two, the applicant shall ensure that fire area A and B are not occupied concurrently.

And are those conditions acceptable to the applicant?

Yes, ma'am.

Great.

So we have one vote for site plan.

Can I have a motion uh for site plan approval?

So moved.

Second.

All in favor?

Aye.

Any opposed?

Motion passes.

Thank you.

Good luck.

Thank you very much.

Appreciate it.

We'll move to item 2.5, application PB 8-2026 by Tom Avalama Abayama for site plan and special permit approval to demolish the existing abandoned building and construct three attached dwelling units at 516 Pelham Road, block 463, lot 14 in an RMF-0.5 zoned district.

Good evening.

Good evening to the board to the city staff.

My name is Mark Blanchard.

I'm the project attorney on the project as we went through the zoning board.

Um here with so I was with the project through the zoning board, so I have a little bit of a cold, so I'm gonna try my best to sort of keep it even keeled.

And I also sat on my glasses today, so I'm gonna try my best to keep them even.

But uh so I'm here with Project Architect Tom Ambalama, and also the owner has joined us.

We're here obviously to answer any specific questions.

We did go through the Board of Appeals on zoning.

Uh two townhouse units were allowed on site.

We had requested four.

We worked with the town with the zoning board with the BAZ, and we have we have approval for three units and some other deficiencies in the side yard and such.

But I think what was attractive to the Board of Appeals on zoning was that there's an existing abandoned motor vehicle repair business use non-conforming into the neighborhood, and we're coming forward with a residential project that does conform into what's uh what's typical in that area.

There are single single-family homes, but there are many condominium and multifamily units.

It's right on 516 Pelham Roads, a little bit of a busier section of the city, but uh the beautiful design as set forth by Mr.

Abalama here is that you can see the amenity on the rooftop.

We actually will be providing a rooftop view to the sound.

So I think it's a really a beautiful building uh that's being proposed.

Um really we're here to um answer any specific questions.

I will say, even as recently as this afternoon, Tom and the New Rochelle Building Department and Engineering Department were working feverishly going back and forth.

A late question had arisen about the sufficiency of the sewer and our sewer connection that has been resolved this afternoon.

So we excuse me, thought I would make it through.

We have the um we think we've arrived at a very good place in the project application, and um are we here for any questions?

So would you be able to walk us through the plans um first and then we'll move on from there?

Thank you.

Good evening.

My name is Tom Abilama, architect for the owner.

Uh Sir Lucky Okudowe here with us.

Uh this project here is a three-story building uh for uh three townhouses.

Uh I would like to show you first that uh uh the location of the building here is uh is an existing abandoned autorepair building and uh uh around the lot uh is is we providing we we we already looked uh in the uh uh uh go going down on the street to uh Pelham.

We have four uh apartment buildings, and then as we go down on uh Drake Avenue, there is uh uh maybe several uh apartment uh several uh uh one family dwellings going down all the way to uh the uh uh the piers uh to uh uh uh to the sound.

Um as uh Mark has just mentioned that uh we we got it to approved from the Board of Appeals uh a few months, and then we uh we're ready to get going for this project in here.

I'd like to show you what the building is all about.

It's a four-story buildings, including the basement.

peers uh to uh uh uh to to the sound uh as uh mark has just mentioned that uh we we got it uh approved from the board of appeals uh uh a few months and then we uh we're ready to get going for this project in here I'd like to show you what the building is all about it's a four-story buildings including the basement uh there's a a playroom and there's mechanical room uh and a storage room on the first floor we have a two-car garage uh and uh a rec room as well as uh uh an elevator going from the basement all the way through the roof and we have a stair uh going also from the front of the building to go also straight from the basement all the way to the roof and we we're hoping to provide attention thread rods uh system in it on the uh second floor we have a living room a dining room a kitchen and a library and a bath uh on the third floor we're providing a master bedroom two bedrooms and two bath oops this is the roof in here uh we're this is important because as you can see uh we're looking down from there uh down to the to the Long Island Sound uh we're providing uh a couple of items uh such as a pergola and uh uh green roof uh and uh obviously we're providing some solar panels and uh providing condensers on the roof as far as the site plan in here we're providing uh uh a driveway in the front allowing to uh parking uh into the two-car garage uh and the rear we have uh uh a nice area that has a fence all around uh and then and the and the in the front we have uh sidewalk going straight from one end to the other uh as well as as you see you can see we're providing uh uh three curb cuts and uh uh and then as a fence and uh uh uh for the project in here for as far as the landscaping uh mostly uh we we had to remove three existing trees uh and so that we we like to replace it with uh uh uh equal species uh as uh providing some hollys spruces and cherries as far as the utilities we we just uh sat down with uh uh with the engineer uh even as of this morning and we revise the uh the the sewer to provide along uh the uh the uh grade uh the Drake uh to reach all the way to the sewer uh on Pellham and so they accept it and uh they're happy to to allow it uh as far as the storm water we're providing four rechargers per townhouse uh as well as providing a trench train uh and uh and as far as going up on the roof we're providing uh roof drain and uh uh and secondary scuppers going down to the storm water uh as far as the uh lighting we're providing some photometric design uh uh as as you can uh see we're providing all the candle requirements uh as per uh as we have provided so we'd like to you know we we we we believe that this is a very strong and we are in a very strong position to to see if we can be able to allow uh uh the the planning board to approve this project if you have any questions let us know thank you um it looks like there you'll be re-establishing a full curb all the way along Pelham Road and the only curb cuts are on Drake Avenue yes right yeah that'll be an improvement from the existing conditions of a kind of a driveway and it's fully sprinkled correct I saw that in the as a condition because that's per the per the code is required okay city department of buildings had caught that already that's part that's all over the place.

Great that's a requirement in fact we we were able to see sorry if you wouldn't mind talking to the microphone for people at home thank you sorry about that the sprinkler issue was caught was required out of the code and it's part of the conditions that we had reviewed prior to this meeting.

Were there any drawing edits since the technical meeting on Thursday and what you're presenting today?

Is what you're presenting today, what has been submitted to the city?

Yes.

So the drawing the only edits were occurring, I believe, on a technical level as it occurred to the utilities, unless I'm incorrect.

Okay.

The sewer chain.

Right.

Just the sewer chain.

Those were the amendments to the to the that that technical utility drawings, but not to what you saw this evening.

And are these going to be for sale or rental units?

Has that been decided?

I believe for sale.

Yeah, it's a four-sale building.

Great.

Yes.

Good.

Good to hear.

That was also attractive to the BAs, the four sale nature of the building.

Great.

Go ahead.

Okay, guys.

Generally I'm supportive of the redevelopment of this long abandoned piece of property.

I think it's a substantial improvement of what's there.

I just have a few things I wanted to clarify for the record.

Can you just clarify the variance that was given?

You had mentioned you were given a variance for three units.

As I'm reading it, I I can clearly see you were given a variance on the uh density, the lot density per dwelling unit.

Were you also given a variance for three dwelling units, or was the density resulting in the ability to put three dwelling units in that building?

That's a good question.

It's both.

Okay.

We had the we we started out at the the counting to four.

We came down to three.

So the initial the the first variance, if you will, was for three units, because the code specifically calls out only two dwelling units on this lot would have been allowed.

So we did get sort of a global three-unit variance.

Then we drilled down for FAR calculations and now though what you're talking about, and we also received those variances as well.

So it's it was both of those things.

Okay.

Yes.

Great.

Um in the technical meeting, I had noted that um I don't see a building height on any of your facade elevations.

Uh that would be grade, calculated grade to the highest roof level.

Um the only dimension I see is 39 feet.

Uh and I think that's one of the things that uh from the site plan approval um just being more clear on how tall the building actually is for our approval.

So could you just tell us what the actual building height is?

So as far as the uh the roof itself, uh uh for the three-story building, it allows to have 35 stories, and this is what we provided.

35 feet.

35 feet.

We'll be back.

Yeah, right.

No, absolutely not.

So then we we provided uh uh an elevator and a stair beyond that allows us to go another 10 story uh to 10 feet above the the last roof.

So that's this is what the code uh allows it, and then that's what we provide.

I think what I'm looking for for the record is how tall is your building?

I know you can go up to 35 feet.

And we're going 35 feet.

So your building is 35 feet tall.

Okay.

All right.

Um of the things that we are looking for is compatibility and form, massing and exterior facade.

And I do think that the form and flat roofed multifamily character of this building does fit in the Pelham Drake uh road area.

Um my concern is a little narrower, again, mentioned in the technical meeting.

Your garage doors appear to be carriage house doors on a very modern looking building.

Um those garage doors seem out of character to me.

Uh if you look at any of the other modern facade buildings, they are not sitting with carriage doors.

They usually have a solid door or some other.

Um would you guys consider um replacing those garage doors with something more in line with the character of the building, the more modern facade of the building?

Sure.

Absolutely, yeah.

Okay.

Thank you.

I got a few more.

Uh right.

So the um the elevators, I appreciate you introducing elevators, uh, and the county noted it was a move towards universal design.

And it's not our job to figure out if they need to be accessible, type A's, type Bs.

But so my comments are not code enforcement determination, but you are already getting relief from the number of dwelling units on there.

So these dwelling units are smaller than would have been size-wise on this on this property if we didn't get any variances.

So we're already kind of squeezing the unit square footage.

Then you're adding this elevator, which is taking up a lot of square face square footage, which means there is even less livable spaces there.

And as I looked through your plans, I noticed that the bathrooms are really tight, there was no accessibility in the bathrooms, there was no adaptability in the bathrooms.

Someone in a wheelchair is going to have a hard time navigating that bathroom.

So I'm just wondering if this is the right move from a quality housing standpoint.

The county started to commend you on this universal design, but it doesn't really follow itself through.

And I think one of the reasons why is if you look dimensionally at your floor plan, everything is pinched.

So I don't think you can actually get a bathroom without sacrificing bedroom size or kitchen size according to those plans.

How important is the elevator to you?

So we started with the idea of the elevator as to because we are providing uh a basement and a roof.

That allows us to reach from one level to another four-story building.

So an elevator that works.

And we sat down with the owner.

The idea is a good idea for an elevator to go up from the basement through the roof.

So this is one item.

On the other idea also that we provided for uh for the elevator, even though it's taken away uh uh the small elevator plus small uh area around it from it, it doesn't take away that much of uh of any uh uh bedroom bathrooms or uh or as much as that we have.

Number three that we we're provided.

This is uh this is a residential house.

Each one.

There are three townhouses there are based on one and two family zone requirement.

So it you know, so uh obviously we're providing an elevator for somebody to be able to reach from the first floor all the way to the street, uh the floor roof uh to the to the through the third story.

Uh so then we uh we we allowed all that uh situation uh for uh for an elevator if if you think that's uh that's what you believe, that's what you are thinking about.

So we believe that this is how the idea that we are uh in this situation.

Yeah, I mean, as I look through your plan, um I'm seeing things that concern me.

Um I'm seeing closets that are 18 inches deep, closed hanging closets.

Um I'm seeing um, you know, two lavatories in a less than four foot wide vanity.

Um I just I think it's um it's contradictory to the effort you're making by putting in the elevator.

And I'm seeing this as sort of substandard housing for our residents because that closet is not going to be usable to hang something.

And I'm seeing a lot of pressure on that dimension across the units because again, I think you are trying to squeeze a lot into uh a little there.

Um so I I just I'm generally uncomfortable with the floor plan layout from a from a planning uh concept.

Uh and this this elevator, I love the idea, but it's just it's not followed through.

Do you think that you could work the plan with the city so that those spaces continue the spirit of an accessible uh unit?

Uh maybe not fully accessible, maybe it's adaptable, but if you're trying to put an elevator in for all of the reasons that the county commented on there, I think it would be good to permeate that throughout the rest of the unit.

And and if that's difficult, you know, again, I commend the idea of being able to age in place and have universal design.

Do all three of them need it, or can you benefit from one out of the three having an elevator or two out of the three having an elevator and recapturing some of that space for more usable living space?

I think the answer lies really within the next step that we take after this board, right?

In working with taking these plans and then developing our construction ready plans to go to Paul's department for permits.

I think you're right.

I think the answer to that to your question is absolutely.

Can the floor plans be tweaked and everything extracted out to make no one wants to come forward with this substandard housing uh product.

That's not where intended.

We were we're we're sitting here sort of patting ourselves on the back that we have the opposite of that.

So we certainly would work with the building department, stay within code, of course, obviously that's the baseline.

But then making sure that we exquee and extract out of the the best floor plan possible.

We don't want to come forward with a substandard product in any way, stretch, or form.

I think generally the answer to your question is, of course.

Okay.

The suggestions are good.

And we definitely continue to work with Paul as we developed.

Because these remember, these plans now undergo a much more detailed iteration, right?

Site planning is one thing, but then building permit plans or and construction ready plans are another thing.

So I appreciate that suggestion.

Mr.

Blandard, I think they sit in front of Paul.

But I don't want to I don't want to speak for Mr.

Houston, but I think what he's trying to get at is we're taking a lot of effort to make these units accessible vertically.

But not a lot of thought has gone into making them accessible to get from one space to another.

Are the kitchens accessible?

Um these are considered single-family homes, right?

They're townhomes, so we have to view them as a single family home.

There really is no requirement in the code to make them uh ANSI compliant.

Right.

But if we're going to put in uh vertical accessibility to get from floor to floor, we may want to consider uh making them or making one of them fully accessible, you might have a very good selling point there.

Well, that's a good point.

I mean, there is and this is all kind of that all kind of comes back to that.

That's really the driver is the what the market is dictating.

And I think the word accessibility here is uh we don't want to present something that we're not truly trying to do.

The accessibility aspect is more of we're seeing a huge trend in Westchester County now, downsizing from single family homes into these types of units.

And the accessibility was really to and I hate to use that word, I'm not trying to take credit where it isn't due here, but it's really for easing the burden on perhaps an aging homeowner who's downsizing into this, helping them get up to the roof to the three stories.

So that that's I think that that's the initial goal.

But I again this the theory.

No, I told I I under I totally understand, but if we do it during the planning phase before we issue those permits, and we can can we can construct it like that.

To try to do this after it's built, when somebody comes in and says, you know, I'd really like to buy this unit, but you know, my my loved one is challenged, um and then you have to retrofit, that's um that's really tough to do.

No, we don't uh that we're not we wouldn't want to retrofit, especially as a selling owner.

Maybe if a an owner down the road has to retrofit, that's a whole separate story.

And I know that's not what you're suggesting.

What I'm suggesting is that from this moment forward with the plan, the next iteration of plans coming to your department for review, that's I think in that that's where the discussion can take place, not a retrofitting situation.

Thank you.

Yep.

Yeah, I think uh I'm trying to find the right there's a whole variety of accessibility, right?

Type A, type B.

I think an adaptable type design that allows aging in place.

Uh I don't think we need full type A, you know, huge spaces, because it's going to even put further pressure on the living spaces there.

But I think given the relief that you're getting for me as a condition of my approval, I would like to see that adaptability integrated into that design.

So again, this is not a full type A handicap apartment, but I think it if if aging in place is kind of part of this universal design thought, let's get that horizontal.

Let's make sure that the bathrooms can have grab bars installed in there.

Let's make sure there's enough clearance between two elements that you can go through with a walker or you can go through with a cane.

It's just an adaptable aging in place design that it's an extension of that elevator.

Staying on the topic of um relief, um, I love the green loof.

I love the solar array.

Um Rochelle has a huge sustainability initiative uh here.

Uh here.

Um I love what you're hearing about.

Uh I love what I'm hearing about, elevator to get to the rooftop.

Um, these are meaningful parts of this proposal.

And and given the relief that we're granting uh to have the three units here and the density, um, for me, these are really important parts that make its way to the end of the project.

Uh and so as a condition of of my approval here, I want to make sure that the sustainability features and the rooftop terrace remain part of this project until the end.

Um obviously, if if they need to be amended or modified, you'd come back to us for that amendment, but I I'd like to include that as a condition of approval.

We have no objection to that.

Okay.

Again, it kind of goes back to the marketability.

It's a huge amenity for us thinking about, you know, when we come to market with the project.

It's a landscaping, you had a good 3D view, the landscaping on the ground level and the green on the roof lever.

It really just blends into the canopy in that area.

So I I wish I could take credit for that.

Yeah.

But we appreciate that comment.

Thank you.

Okay.

Okay.

Um at this point, we'll open this application up for comments from the public.

Is there anybody from the public who would like to comment on this application?

Just um state your name uh and address for the record, please.

Thank you.

Uh Anthony Marciano, Century 21 Marciano Newer Show.

Um, as a broker in the in the town and city, um, I've seen a a lot of issues with being able to move people from a bigger home into a townhouse because we don't have any to show.

This is a great idea.

I understand what you're trying to say with closet space and making things a little bit more accessible.

That is all a great selling point.

So I'm in favor of putting townhouses anywhere you can allow it along Neurochell's shoreline in the West End of Neuro Shell, wherever you can allow it to so that people can stay.

They love Neuroshell.

They want to stay here.

We have nowhere to put them.

So this I'm 100% in favor of this.

I think it's wonderful.

So thank you.

Thank you very much for your comments.

Is there anyone else from the public who would like to comment on this application?

Okay, we'll close the public comment for this application and invite the applicant back up.

Um it looks like we have a couple of new conditions um of approval that we can maybe sort out a little bit.

But it sounded like um uh maybe having a condition for improving accessibility with the approval from the building department on the floor plans of the of the individual units and a condition to keep the rooftop green space as part of the plan.

Um Madam Chairwoman, I would just say for that first proposed condition, could we add in there uh to the greatest extent practicable or some some kind of language of that nature so that we can there's flexibility embedded in that new condition so we can work with the building department?

Yeah, but I think uh yes, I think so.

But but I think we would just want to add that as necessary, the applicant shall return to the board for an administrative uh review and approval.

Yeah, I think that would be helpful, yeah.

Yeah.

And then I think right, and that might include garage doors as well for an administrative approval on that or part of the design.

I wish I could rattle off what that lowest level of accessible adaptability is.

Um, but I think that's kind of where my head is at the lowest bar, and it's it's more adaptable than space clearance.

Um if if I can get that quickly to Kevin, I can convey that to you guys while you're revising the design.

We appreciate that.

And it's now it's a part of the record and it'll I think influence the the next iteration of the plans before we go to Mr.

Bach's department.

Okay, and we do have other conditions of approval.

If you could go through, Benito, please.

Sure.

Number one, all work within the city of Nerd Shell right of way, shall confirm conform to the Department of Public Works standard detail and will require DPW permits, DBW permits may include but are not limited to curb cuts, concrete sidewalks, drop curbs, and driveway aprons, street openings, entry removals.

Number two, any damage to the city right away during construction shall be remedied to the satisfaction of the Department of Public Works.

Number three, I'm gonna um just summarize it.

Uh and inflow and infiltration infiltration condition.

Uh number four, the applicant shall satisfy the code requirement for recreation open space as set forth in section 331-118G of the code.

A payment of 236 dollars per additional dwelling unit on site shall be paid prior to the issuance of a building permit.

Number five permits approval from the Westchester County Department of Health will be required for the construction of the proposed eight-foot sanitary sewer main applicant eight in eight inch, sorry.

The applicant shall maintain and protect traffic signal equipment and ADA sidewalk ramps at the intersection of Pelham Road and Drake Avenue.

Number seven, the applicant shall maintain and protect parking signs on Drake Avenue.

And if any sign locations conflict with the proposed driveways and the applicant, sorry, if any signed locations conflict with the proposed driveway, the applicant shall obtain a DPW permit to relocate them.

Number eight, the applicant shall comply with the city affordable housing regulations as set forth in section 331-152 of the municipal code.

And number nine is a landscaping maintenance bond condition.

Number 10, the applicant shall retain the address 516 pound road and designate dwelling units as unit one, unit two, and unit three to ensure proper identification for emergency services prior to the issuance of a temporary certificate of occupancy.

Number 11, the applicant shall provide a fire sprinkler system on all floors of the building prior to the issuance of a temporary certificate of occupancy.

Number 12, the applicant, the applicant's engineers shall submit the existing and proposed sanitary sewer flows for inflow and infiltration removal.

And number 13 and 14, we reviewed as the improving accessibility and uh keeping the sustainability features.

And in number four, I just want to clarify it was 263 dollars per additional dwelling.

I think just the numbers were reversed as you're ready.

Sorry, yeah.

Uh just for the record.

Um, those conditions acceptable to the applicant.

Yes, madam chair, we have no objections.

Okay.

Um so we have one vote uh for our site plan approval.

Can I have a motion uh to approve this site plan?

Approve it.

Okay, is there a second?

Second.

All in favor?

Aye.

Any opposed?

Okay, motion passes.

Thank you.

Thank you so much.

Thank you.

Thank you very much.

Thank you.

Um so as mentioned early, item 3.1 was approved at the technical meeting.

So we'll move on to item 3.2 administrative amendment regarding application PB 15-2024 by Joshua Goldberg for previously approved subdivision to reapportion to existing lots at 99 Wilmot Road and 97 Beverly Road, block 2963 lot 12 and 80 in an R1-20 zone district.

Oh, I think what's hi board.

Um this is a previously approved plan.

And if you could just give your name and address it.

Oh, sorry, Josh Goldberg, 66 Lord Kitchener, New Orchell.

The applicant, um the approved plans didn't include drainage for the common driveway.

So working with Paul and the building department, we revised the common driveway to include uh for runoff rain and stormwater.

And can you just describe uh how that's gonna be managed, like what what sort of systems are in place?

Is it catch basins?

Is it cold tech systems?

Yeah, there's rain gardens on each.

There are four rain gardens, one here, here, here, and here.

Originally it was all 100% forest concrete.

Okay.

And that proved to be a little bit too difficult to account for all of the drainage on stormwater.

So this was the plan that the engineer came up with uh working with the building department.

And is as gardens, let's say, who's gonna be responsible for maintaining those um so the actual property is owned by 97 Beverly, which is the middle lot, which is this lot right here.

But the maintenance and upkeep is shared by the three properties through the um the um the deeds and the restrictions.

Okay.

I'm just trying to understand what I'm seeing here.

I'm seeing a circle, that's the extent of the rain gardens, and then I'm seeing basically a an intersection of driveways, an X-shaped intersection.

And so people that are coming into any of these three properties will come through the call of the sack, enter into a shared common driveway, and then at the middle of the X, that's where they start to go into their own separate directions.

Correct.

And the rain gardens are a result of the runoff of the impervious surface.

Uh and why did it end up having just out of curiosity?

Why did it end up having to be a shared solution versus on-site solution?

Is it the grade, the topography?

So what ended up happening was originally there's a existing cul-de-sac here, and based on feedback and uh neighbor concerns, we got variances to keep the current cul-de-sac and create, you know, what I've been referring to as a phantom cul-de-sac, which is actually owned by the middle property.

And and just to be clear, that that's what was approved previously approved as part of the prior subdivision that that configuration.

Okay.

That circle.

Yeah, that is correct.

That's and that belongs to the corner property, like that that bottom bulbous thing.

This circle belongs to the middle property right here.

Yeah.

Existing cul-de-sac is right here, the curve is right here.

So originally we were going to move the cul de sac to here, and then there was massive public outcry.

Yeah.

And give the the uh the land to the city.

And we decided not to.

But this isn't a cold.

This is just a rain garden shaped in a circle.

There's there's no secondary cold destack here.

No.

Well, it's it's there'll be some there was that circle is delineated for the access driveways.

Yeah.

And the rain gardens are there just for that section of the driveway.

I believe each house will have its own drainage system.

We'll have the own drywall systems.

But for that lot, or that portion of the lot where the driveways are, they chose to do it in in rain gardens, which you know, we've taken a lot of time and care to develop criteria to install rain gardens on properties.

And I wouldn't say this will be the first one, but it's close to the first one.

We have we don't have a lot of these.

It's clever.

Um I don't know much about rain gardens or their maintenance, but is there any kind of maintenance agreements that we need to have to preserve this and longevity so that it functions the way it's supposed to?

There will be maintenance required for this.

You know, because there's media at the bottom.

And it's when I say media, it's a it's a mix of different materials which has to be replenished from time to time.

Okay.

So how are we ensuring that the function of this, which is helping us with our stormwater management will be maintained?

Well, it's owned by 97 Beverly.

So they will have the ultimate responsibility of maintaining it.

Okay.

Um and again, there's an agreement uh between the other two properties that have been signed off by the owners.

This would be no different than if the dry well was installed and the property owner has to maintain their dry well, right?

Yeah.

Well, so if we were if we had a swip here, right?

If we did an area of disturbance more than an acre, then there'd be a swip and there'd be maintenance requirements for each element of that swip.

Um so it'll be similar to that.

How do the maintenance requirements get conveyed to the Beverly owner?

We don't have a SWIP.

I don't think so.

Okay.

I retract that question then.

Because it was it was multiple lots.

So it wasn't an you know what I mean, it was different lots.

Okay.

Can I have uh we have an administrative amendment?

Um can I have a vote to approve this administrative amendment?

So moved?

Is there a second?

Second?

Second.

All in favor?

Aye.

Any opposed?

Okay.

Administrative amendment passes.

Thank you.

Thank you.

And lastly, we have item 3.3 administrative amendment regarding application PB 16-2025 by Eric Wilson, AIA for a previously approved site plan for construction of a new two-family dwelling at 122 Pershing Avenue, Black 1517.

I'm sorry, block 1517 lot 101 and an R2-7 zone district.

Hello again.

Long time no see.

It's been about seven months since we met before you before you.

That was November of last year.

Happy to be in front of you again.

Um fortunately we're actually asking for an extension this time.

Thank you for putting us on the agenda.

Um when we last we met Eric, if you could just uh give your name and address for the record.

My name is Eric Wilson, my home address.

Business or whatever.

105 Ashbury Way, Brewster, New York.

So thank you.

About 45 minutes right about now, maybe 50.

Um the um application you're seeing tonight is very similar to what we saw the last time.

Um there were four administrative comments which were to be incorporated in the approved building set, and they were fairly minor in scope, but the overall application was approved with those comments to be incorporated into the set.

So what we're gonna see tonight is very similar to what you saw last time.

I'd like to repose an argument for um one of the comments, which I'm interested in your opinion.

So I'll just go through it and stop me any point if you have any questions.

So the address again is 120 um and 122 Pershing Avenue in New Rochelle.

The footprint of the building is still the same, uh unchanged from the last time.

It is pretty well maxed out for the site and the site conditions, including the patio and the walkway spaces, which are generally unchanged from what you saw.

Um in our previous um time here, we had discussed um how the facade was too monolithic and too similar, too flat.

So the solution which were proposed and approved was to push the left side of the building back the four feet and then to uh adjust the roof forms to make it an attractive and interesting um front facade, maintaining the symmetry and the the nature of the rest of the building.

So we did that at the ground at the basement level, pushing back the garage.

Um the basement is accessible from the back.

It since there's a slope site, um pitching down from Pershing Avenue.

Um the backyard is lower, and the the basement actually is a walkout basement through a window level, but it's it's can you can access out that level.

The um main building first floor level is just a few feet above grade, so you access it pretty right pretty easily from the front, and the back side in blue, you see the stairs down to the patio level.

Um this is the second floor, which has four small bedrooms around central um vestibules at each floor level, and there's two dwellings, so the left and the right are very similar, almost identical for plans.

The roof massing is simple and sort of classical with a general overall gable and one uniform mass, and then a front gable uh that's larger and a smaller gable that's secondary on the left.

So you have a larger and smaller gable on both the front and the rear facades.

The front facade comments were the focus of most of our discussion last time.

And um here you see what I hope I can do this right.

Yes, very similar um to what was done last time.

So one of the comments last time was um why the large gable on the right and why the delineation in the middle.

Um we still see the line here.

Unfortunately, I didn't I didn't remove that from the plan, but the the new design has a flat front on the second floor.

So one of the comments is why is there a jog on the second floor elevation?

That jog is gone.

Um I apologize.

I wasn't expecting to be here tonight.

I'm glad we're on the agenda, but that line would be gone.

So you'd feed a front facade, symmetrical windows above the roof plane.

Um the other comment was to minimize the roof at only the porch, and that's the one I'd like to propose to you tonight that we keep the extended roof over the garage element.

In this view, the right hand side is forward and the left hand side is back.

And I find the symmetry and connection between the gable and the roof is a nice element that matches the two sides, even while they're different.

And it brings the front of the gable even further, further differentiating the volume of the massing from the back on the right to the front on the left.

So from my perspective, I think the aesthetic of the roof is pleasing.

Um the concern that was expressed last time was there's no support on the end.

So what we did is we added two brackets and the brackets support that roof classically over the garage.

The other comment was we didn't think that the garage doors were high end enough.

These garage doors have been replaced with the a nicer level wood garage door with the with the panels and so forth.

So this is a higher end garage door which we think meets the quality of the neighborhood and is what you guys were looking for in the last round of comments.

There's a slight jog on the left to make the gable over the entrance more pronounced and then the porch is underneath that gable on the left hand side.

There's a little bit of a of a shed roof right at that point to to accentuate the porch.

The porch on the right is a little bit larger than the one on the left and it corresponds with a slightly larger um roof volume.

So that's what we're proposing as the main view of the building we believe it correspond responds to the concerns of the planning board and we think it's still affordable and attractive for its its site location.

This is this the north elevation on the side and then the rear elevation again there's windows to provide access to the lower level and then there is a stairwell down to the patio level on both sides.

So both of the dwellings have access to grade at front and back of the house.

And then you see again the the massing of the back is pushed out so that gable on the right is the full width and it extends slightly out from the back facade.

So the back facade also has some differentiation resulting from the decision that was made to shift the two and then the other side elevation that's essentially it I did some color drawings to help show things but it's a basically the same thing just with colors there's roof massing and there's a section.

So here were the comments again um the concern about the jog we eliminated the jog and create a flat facade at the right we I argue I'd like to keep the extended roof over the two if that's acceptable and then we needed a higher end garage doors.

All of these things we did to try to to create um not doesn't look like a cook cookie cutter building you know they're both dwelling units are very small and very tightly fit on the site it's a very economical pair of units that um we feel are attractive and in addition to the neighborhood so we've done our best to try to make that work out and we humbly ask for an extension at time so we can get this application finalized before we lose our our permit.

Thank you very much so two suggestive votes administrative amendment and extension I guess I'll just say yeah thank you for responding to the comments I I actually pulled up the original facade that we had looked at and I think we're we're much improved we've broken the scale down a lot more and so I think the the original context of this was making sure that it fit into the form mass and exterior facade of the neighborhood and while it's a two family amongst a bunch of one families it this is a a much more successful attempt.

So thank you.

Thank you I appreciate the collaboration I think keeping that kind of extended roof the that matches the length of the gable on the right and then a shorter kind of roof outcropping over the the door looks looks attractive.

And does the garage door on the unit on the right is that um pushed forward or it's the same plane as the entrance the garage door is slightly further back than the porch just by a foot underneath that that's another reason why I like the roof because it you hides that transition but it's it is four feet ahead of the garage on the left so there is a the difference between the two.

Not that it would affect my approval of the amendment did you consider a a column on like a stone base on the left side of the garage instead of brackets logistically to do it.

Okay.

And I'm just concerned that cars would have a hard time I mean it's a tight tight little zone.

Okay.

Okay.

Are we okay to vote together for those two or should we do separate for the anyone objects to voting together it's totally fine to do it.

It'll be two separate resolutions.

Okay.

Oh so we can vote together for um an administrative can I have a motion to approve the administrative amendment and also extend the application.

So moved is there a second second all in favor aye any opposed motions pass.

Thank you so much.

Thank you very much.

Great have a great night and can I have a motion to adjourn?

Motion to adjourn.

Second.

All in favor aye thank you