 applicant and anybody else who wants to participate would give Scott their address and contact information for party status and certain follow-up. Communications, there were no communications, right? Other than what's posted. That is correct. And minutes, we do have minutes from the last meeting, I believe. Yep, they're both online. Like I think we'll just hop right into this. First, we have our consent agenda. The first item is 56 Howard Street is the applicant here. The applicant, Amy Maggar is here and Amy, you can speak now if you'd like. Thanks for having me. Hopefully you can hear me OK. Yeah, we can hear you fine. So I would say this is recommended for consent. And do you have any issues with this being treated as a consent agenda item? Not at all. I guess I'm going to, I'm going to ask to take this off the consent just because I'd like to be able to talk about a little bit and stuff. So I guess we're going to do that. So Amy, I'm going to swear you in if I may. Absolutely. I guess before I do, I have to ask, is there anybody from the public to speak on 56 Howard Street? Like to weigh in, raise your hand if you're on the phone. You can do that by star nine. One of them is raising their hand, Brad. OK, so Amy, I'll swear you in. Do you swear to tell the truth and whole truth of the pain and penalty of perjury? I do. OK, and I will say since I'm the one who has to take this off, I know the staff recommended this for consent, so it's but I just I'm trying to understand something here and just to help me. One thing I think this is your project, Scott, right? Yeah. And so the single family house with an ADU just requires two parking spaces, right? When it's a B and B, doesn't isn't there a requirement for one more space? No. But if if Amy was the primary single family home was to remain a primary single family home, there would be two spaces and the Airbnb could require parking on top of that. In this case, the owner lives in the ADU on site, which is perfectly legit, which has no parking requirement. And the primary residence would be the short term rental. Then I have one other question to Amy, just so I understand this, your intention is to rent this out when you're not there. Is that right? My intention is to rent it out. There may be if I decide to run, for example, the marathon the same weekend as I may be renting it out or I may use the excuse to get the heck out of town so that I cannot run it because that's a great excuse to not run it. So there may be some nights that I am in the accessory dwelling unit, but there may be nights where I am not. And the unit you're renting here is in the house. It is the house. Yes. OK. That was really I just was trying to get clear on that. And I wanted to ask Scott, so I had to bring it off. So unless there's anything else, any anybody, any of the board members want to ask or add to this? OK, to zero. Who was saying that? I think that was just my computer. So unless there's anything else you want to add, Amy, we will close the hearing. Thank you. And we deliberate at the end of this meeting so you can listen to that if you want. And the next item is also on the Consent Agenda. That's 136 Birch Court is the applicant here for that. I don't see the applicant's name in the attendees list. If you are the applicant, raise your hand, please. The applicant on the phone, raise your hand, please. I do see one caller. Take up Monroe Street and come back to this. Yeah, I don't see one raising their hand, Brad. OK, so we'll we'll hold that and come back to it. And we'll do 1921 Monroe Street is the applicant here for that. The applicant is here. Is there anybody else who wants to speak on 1921 Monroe Street? No one's raising their hand, Brad. OK, so Abbott, you're am I right? No. Hi, there. It's Henry Abbott Stark. So some, you know, I usually go by my middle name, but on the paperwork, I'm Henry. OK, but here you're Abbott. OK, well, you can go with that. And I'll sorry, when do you swear to tell the truth and hold truth on the pain of penalty of perjury? I do. OK, so this is. Um. You're stabbing short term rental and you're asking for a parking waiver on this, right? Yes, correct. And I think the staff. Said you needed to ask for more of a parking waiver than you had thought. Yes. And that's correct. And you're also asking to convert this three bedroom to a four bedroom, which it has been used as a four bedroom for. Ten years. Four units, Brad. Pardon? Four units, Brad. Four units. Oh, did I say bedrooms? Yeah. Sorry. Four units. Four units. Yeah, it's been it. It's been four units for a long time, potentially as far back as nineteen, like eighty three. But and we it seems like, though, because there's space on the lot for four, we would just go through the. Zoning process that way and apply for the fourth unit, because it seems like it might be simpler and allowable. And it's been rented as four units, not true. It's been rented as four. Yes. And really, the parking is. Tandem on both sides of the house, right? Correct. Um, Brad, if I may jump in, it's actually stacked on both sides. Oh, sorry. So Tandem is two on behind the other stacked is three in a row. So this property has a permit from the eighties. And Ryan, correct me if I'm wrong, from the eighties to be a triplex. And it had a site plan, a pretty basic one, but a site plan that showed two dryways on either side with three spaces each. That got approved. It wouldn't be approved today, but it got approved then. So they're recognized for six spaces. Then fast forward today, we have an extra dwelling unit with no way to stack it for deep, hence the requested waiver. And then we have these, I don't know what the proper label is for them. The the stack spaces, the third stack spaces wouldn't be recognized today. They got a permit for it. It's not so much a waiver. It's just something the board needs to be aware of. So we can we can work with the fact that they have six spaces. Yes, I think it's a short answer. Right. Before I keep going, is there any. Is anybody on the board having any questions for Abbott? I just have a couple of questions. So in your rental or not rental, in your agreements with your Airbnb guests, you make clear that there's not that there's no parking available, that they shouldn't expect to be parking on the street or anything like that. Yes. And that because we have the space in the driveway. And then in your. So you said, I think it's somewhere in your paperwork, you said that you make clear to tenants that they that they don't have parking spaces or that you try to discourage parking spaces. Is there is that included in the lease? Or do you like make clear to folks? Like, how do you make clear to tenants that there's limited parking? And is it on a first come, first serve basis? Or is it built into specific leases for specific apartments? Well, there are some special circumstances. We have some long term tenants who don't don't have a vehicle and don't plan on getting one just because they're, you know, half the building is rented out to elderly and low income or disabled people. So for those leases, they just naturally do not have vehicles, but it is also in their lease that they do are not granted any parking with their unit. It is written into the lease questions from the board on this. I guess I'll ask a question to have it up. You're planning to rent out your unit as a B and B. Right. Yeah, just just mine, exactly. And and that's when you're away. Yes. I mean, is this something that happens regularly? I mean, well, it depends if we're in a global pandemic or not. It, you know, under normal circumstances, I do travel for work on a somewhat regular basis. But, you know, it's been much lighter under these circumstances. Which unit is it that you're renting out? This is a 21. Apartment B. So is that second floor, first floor? It's first floor, first floor rear. OK, good. I know you have the numbers on the plan. And if you're asking the second floor rear, does that have its own stairs on the back? Is that how it's accessed? Yeah, they have their own stairs. Questions right now. Anybody else have any questions for the applicant? This is where you live full time. Yes. Brad. Yeah, based on the staff comments about going from a two unit waiver to a four unit waiver, I was wondering if the applicant or I could as the applicant, if he had any objection to just updating the parking management plan to reflect the four unit waiver, not the two unit waiver, as a condition of approval, just so that the records are clear and there's no discrepancy later on as to why we went with four and not two. That's fine with me. Scott and Ryan, does that match what you were thinking, too? Yeah, sure. I mean, the two the two non-conforming spaces, again, are kind of wonky, right? They got approved in 82, wouldn't be approved today, and we don't really even recognize them. But I think that's I think for the punchline and the management plan, it makes sense to refer to four. I mean, yeah, honestly, it's a little weird to have, I mean, to the point of the zoning, it's a little weird to have three cars stacked in a row. It just makes it complicated, especially if they're from different units. So the way that we're kind of operating, I mean, not the way that we're operating right now is that one side, you really can get three. I mean, you can get three cars on both sides, but one side is reserved for one unit. They have two bedrooms and sometimes they do have a third car there. So it's because that's that's sort of what they've always that's just the way it's been done. So going down to five, so you'd have two on one side, three on the other would be more ideal. You know, if we split the difference, that would just be better for the people who live there and who have enjoyed that third parking space when they need it. But I'd, you know, that would be a three parking space waiver. That would be a three parking space waiver, but it would be good for the tenants who are there now. And if you want less waiver, that's always good. Would you I just I just want to make sure that what's submitted and what we approve line up because it'll be a mess later. I think that's a good point when you go to sell it. What if what if we rewrote the what if I rewrote the parking management plan to accommodate five spaces, but presuming that on one side, it would only be for one unit. There wouldn't be a blending of units on that side where there is the additional waiver space granted if that were to work. Yeah, Scott and Ryan, I'm fine with that. I think I follow that. I mean, again, we're talking about standards from 82 and how they line up with today's standard. You can have tandem per unit. So if you only want to have two per unit, right, that makes sense in tandem arrangement. I think we want to over complicate it. I mean, your parking management plan really needs to get to how you're managing actual parking demand with this arrangement and how the spaces are divvied up and managed. What we're saying is we're going to look at this thing and saying where the parking management plan says it has six spaces. We're going to say it has five spaces. That's what we're talking about now. So three parking waiver. And we could write it in a way that it was for the, the one two-bedroom unit that's enjoyed, you know, that it's, that there isn't blending of the two of multiple units on that one side where there is that extra waiver space granted. I don't think you assign spaces in your current description of your request for parking waiver. And I'm not sure that we want to get into that of how you divvy up the spaces. Yeah, there was a note that we put in there just about how we, you know, I do know that parking is such a hot potato issue at every level. So we do, I do manage it very carefully to minimize any additional parking that would be either in the driveway or, you know, a consideration on the street to really try and get people who do not have, who are not relying on their own personal vehicle for transportation. Because the fewer the first, the better. So just to be clear, are you asking for a three parking waiver or a four parking waiver? That's a question to you, Abbott. That is a question to me. I actually, Ryan, what were you, what was the, what did we end up agreeing on? Cause I know we went back and forth. What were we in the? I thought it was, well, two original and then with the confusion about the three, the six originally that were permitted in 82 and how we don't recognize two of those six that kind of threw up the red flag for us to bring that concern to the board tonight. So if it's a two space waiver or a four space waiver or three space waiver, I think it's whatever the board's comfortable. It sounds like they're comfortable with three. So if you've got three on one of the driveways and two in the other driveway, you meet your required number. I think that sounds totally fair. That's fine. And I guess my view is that since it was recognized by permit as six spaces, I'm okay sort of recognizing that the three on one side and two on the other. Any other comments from the board? Yeah, I'm going to close up a book hearing and Abbott. We will probably deliberate in a few minutes at the end of this hearing at the end of our meeting. Okay, thanks everybody. Okay, thanks. So we have one other item, 136 Birch Court. Scott, can you see what the applicant is here? The applicant is here. Okay. Oh, good grief. Hold the version of Zoom. I'm going to have to press a couple of buttons. I see. All right. Hello, Irvina, is that how you say your name? Yes, sir. Good. So this is a request for one bedroom bed and breakfast. This is on the consent agenda, which means the staff has recommended approval. Have you seen the staff's recommendation? Yes, I did. And are you okay with that? Yes, I am. Okay. Does the board, anybody on the board object to treating this as consent? Scott, is there anybody here from the public on Birch Court? No one is raising their hand, Brad. Okay. So does somebody want to make a motion on 136 Birch Court? I'll make a motion on 21-060CU 136 Birch Court. I move that we accept staff recommendations and what does this approve the application? Is here a second? Keenan seconds. Any discussion on this? Okay, all in favor? Brooks? Brooks, are you? Okay. And it passes unanimously. Thank you. Okay, you're approved. Thank you. Thank you. Am I all done? You're all done. Thank you folks, appreciate it. Have a good day. You've got the official approval from the staff sometime soon. Okay, sounds good. Thank you. Thank you. So we have two items to deliberate on. I never realized quite how this was working on Zoom that we're going to close the hearing. The Development Review Board meeting is officially closed and we'll continue as a deliberative session where people can watch and listen in but people don't participate. So we're all here for that. So first item is 56 Howard Street. That was recommended for consent. And I just was curious about how the parking was working on this because it seemed a little odd. So that's why I asked them to take it off. So I guess maybe unless people object, I'll make a motion on this since I took it off. Okay, so on 56 Howard Street, I move that we approve the application, adopt staff's findings and recommendations. Is there a second? Second. Who wants to second this? I'll second it. Who is that? Is your computer slow, Brad? I wonder if I'm having a couple with my... Yeah. Yeah, I second it. I'm getting the appraisal in a second of it. AJ left for a while and came back. I've been here. Yeah, I'm not quite sure. I think I missed, well, so anyways, Brooke second, all in favor? Aye. Aye. Opposed? Okay. So that one passed. And the next one is 1921 Monroe Street. I will chime in that I'm uncomfortable with the tendency that we're finding that people are asking for BNBs to rent out when they're not there. And to me, even though I don't think, when it says owner occupied, to me that means owner occupied. They're not there. But I know I raised this on another one, previous channels, somebody else. I kind of, I interpret owner occupied as, they don't have to be there when it's rented, but they come back to it. So that creates a significant amount of investment in keeping the property up and so... What's the ministry just renting out when they're not renting out a property that they don't live in? They don't live there. I mean, if I rented my house out for the weekend, I come back to it and I live there. Yeah, I mean, I guess the difference is, and I kind of agree with Brooks on a policy level. You know, if I did like a VRBO, I'd be pretty judicious about who stays at my place when I go away because I'm like, this is actually my place. It's not just above the garage apartment that I built specifically for an Airbnb or it's a four unit building that I specifically just rent out. I mean, I have a real stake in what it looks like because I'm there most of the time. Right, not only what it looks like, but if something goes wrong or it becomes dilapidated or there's an incident, well, you're back there and you still have to answer to your neighbors. You still have an investment in the community. It's just not something you can ignore. And that's kind of how I view owner-occupied. I don't think they have to be there when somebody rents it, but I think they have to have that sufficient level of investment. Yeah, I mean, I tend to agree too. I mean, there are definitely duplexes and triplexes in this community that are exclusively run as hotels. We know this to be the case and they're not the same as if somebody's renting out their own unit that they have to come back to. My concern is do we start seeing people that may not actually be living in these units and say that they are? There's no evidence and we have to take everything as truthful. It's under oath, but that's my concern is that you start to see people finding ways to claim residency and something that they're not actually coming back to. I think that doesn't seem to be the case here. No. I think that'd be more of an issue for code enforcement. I mean, for me, I think that, for these owner-occupied apartments that they're renting out, I mean, they're going to have their own furniture there. It's going to be their own beds. They're going to have an incentive to maintain it and make sure that they're getting quality people coming in because, I mean, you've got someone coming into your home that has all your stuff in it. You really want to make sure that they're not going to take off with it or that they're not going to destroy it. Persuades me, I guess. So does everyone want to make a motion on 1921 Monroe Street? I can make a motion. So on 1921 Monroe Street, 21-0589CU, I move that we adopt staff findings and accept amend the parking waiver to three spaces and ask that the, as a condition of approval that the applicant submit a revised parking plan that includes the three unit parking waiver or the three space parking waiver and otherwise approve the application. Is there a second? Second. And so we're approving in this sort of, I like the after the fact approval, right? That's sort of, you know, but anyways, it seems legitimate at this point. Any other discussion on this motion? All in favor? Opposed? Okay. With that, we're done. Happy St. Patrick's Day. No one. See you later.