Hello all, this is Dr. Shivam Puddar. I'm a third year resident working at SAP Institute of Medical Sciences in Ahmedabad. I'm going to be presenting a paper on role of MRI in intracranial space occupying lesions today. Intracranial space occupying lesions as the all-encompassing of a diverse group of lesions. It could be anything whether neoplastic or vascular inflammatory or infective. Anything which occupies space within the brain and increases intracranial tension tends to be termed as an SOL. With MRI, imaging of intracranial SOLs can be done with cylinder anatomical detail and tissue characterization. It helps in early diagnosis and localization of the space occupying lesions along with helping in early treatment of the same. In my present study, I've taken either patients who have been clinically suspected of having an SOL or have already been diagnosed with an SOL by previous cross-sectional imaging of MRI. Ames and objectives with early detection, localization, and diagnosis of the SOL using MRI to characterize those intracranial SOLs and to evaluate the extent of lesions in patients with the raise intracranial tension. Materials and methods I've taken 60 cases in this study, which all of the patients, as the MRI of all of the patients were done in a SVP hospital between October 2019 and June 2020 on Skylar 3 Tesla Siemens MRI machine. Inclusion criteria included all of the patients who were suspected of having an intracranial space occupying lesions or who had already been diagnosed as having previous SOL or had raised intracranial tension. The all age groups were taken in respect of sex. Exclusion criteria were of any patient who were contracted to have an MRI, such as metallic implant insertion, cardiac pacemakers, or metallic foreign body in situ, or patients having claustrophobia results. Most predominant age of involvement was the fourth decade, followed by the fifth decade. Male to female ratio in prison study was 1.7 is to 1. Headache was the most frequent complaint followed by seizures. Visual speech and smell disturbances followed them and other symptoms of raised intracranial tensions were 8%. Other symptoms like anorexia, weight loss, ear discharge, and pyrerexia were also seen. Pyrerectal lobe was the most commonly involved lobe followed by multi lobe involvement. Edema was the most common MRI finding followed by mass effect. Hemorrhage was seen in very few patients. Aggressive tumor showed all of the findings in the majority of cases, such as astrocytomas. Edema was most commonly seen with astrocytomas and metastases. Mass effect was most common with astrocytoma. Similarly, calcification was commonly seen in oligodendrochloroma, cranial pharyngeomas, and metastases. Necrosis was most common with astrocytomas and hemorrhage was mostly seen only in metastases. As you can see, the predominant age involved was 31 to 40, followed by 41 to 50. Sex distribution was 1.7 is to 1. And the clinical presentation was headache for vestiges and then for other symptoms. Hemispherical involvement says parietal lobe was the most commonly involved lobe followed by multi lobe involvement followed by the frontal lobe. Right-sided cases were the most involving the right side of hemispherical, which is the right hemisphere, followed by bilateral, and then the left hemisphere. Predominant MRI finding in all of these patients was edema, followed by mass effect, and then the calcification. As you can see, aggressive tumors like astrocytoma would cause all of the effects, such as edema, mass effect, calcification, necrosis. Hemorrhage was found to be seen in only metastases in my study. Calcification was predominantly seen with oligo dendrogliaomas, craniopharyngealomas, metastases, tuberculomas. This is different ratio of all the tumors which was found in my study with astrocytoma involved was 28% followed by metastases in 30% patients. The maximum number of patients, as I already told, was seen in four decades, followed by fifth decade. Certain tumors like hydroglyomas and metastases involved later in life, that is fifth and sixth decade. Tumors like craniopharyngealoma, oligo dendrogliaomas, meningiomas, abscesses occurred early in the age, such as second to fourth decade, whereas chloride versus perpillomas were seen in the first 22 decades. The sex ratio was found to be quite comparable with the study conducted by B.SHA et al. Number of male patients were more in both the studies. However, the meningiomas were the only tumors having a definite female preponderance in both the studies. In my study, edema was the most common MRI finding followed by mass effect, whereas in the study conducted by Ms. B.SHA, the mass effect was more predominant as compared to edema. Calcification was seen in all the cases for oligo dendrogliaomas in my study, as well as in the study conducted by Ms. B.SHA. Hemorrhage was seen in 8% of astrocytomas by B.SHA, and whereas none of the astrocytomas showed hemorrhage in my study. In my study, high-grid gliomas was the most common subtypes followed by low-grid gliomas, which was not the case with the other study. In the study conducted by B.SHA, it was low-grid gliomas followed by high-grid gliomas. Direct signs for the diagnosis of endogenous space occupying lesions include the tumor itself, normal intensity, or enhancement in different degree of enhanced scans. Indirect signs include edema, mass effect in retinal bleed, or calcification, or bone changes. In conclusion, MRI is the most sensitive modality in the diagnosis and characterization of endogenous space occupying lesions with accuracy of 98.5%. Most common symptoms is generally headache and edema is the most common associated MRI finding. The most common hemisphere to be involved is parietal lobe. Met's for the single most common group of endogenous space occupying lesions while among primary tumors, gliomas are the most common and among those gliomas, astrocytomas are the commonest. Here are a few examples. This is the case of astrocytomas. This is a post-contracactual and t-val, t-val, with tumor involving the frontal lobe, as you can see. This is the case of freniopharyngeoma involving the cellar and the supracellar region and it's predominantly cystic. This is a t-val, with an image. This is non-contrast flare image as well as post-contrast even coronal image of a case of meningioma with internal non-enhancing necrotic areas. This is the case of a patient with known case of lung cancer, as you can see. The patient has two metastases in all in both the hemispheres. Patient came with seizures and on MRI, post-contrast, few tuberculomas were seen, as you can see. Thank you.


So, the first part of this proof will entail us showing that for this fellow that I have here right it must be identically the 0 map which means what that if it acts on any vector in the vector space it must pulverize it yeah. So, for any V i we have what do we have mu a of a acting on V i a very careful attention to this is equal to mu a V i of a times some q i of a acting on V i check if you agree with this if you agree with this it is done almost this mu a is a common multiple of each of the mu a V i's therefore it must be representable as mu a V i times some quotient q i of course the remainder is 0 right. So, this object I have put an under brace on are identical you agree now that is the case this is equal to of course I can play around with the order as before polynomials of matrix a the order is a material a times V i is equal to q i a on 0 which is nothing but 0. So, what have I now seen ok hang on hang on hang on hang on it is a bit of nasty notation, but let me for a good enough reason let me just call this psi, psi a because we are we cannot up front assume that the LCM is equal to the minimal polynomial right. So, we should use a different notation for the LCM. So, let us define this psi as the LCM of mu a V 1 until mu a V n you realize. So, that is what I am doing here we realize why I made that correction I hope it is not confusing. Because here this is a symbol I have reserved for the minimal polynomial I cannot just say probably use that symbol for minimal polynomial for this right. So, I should I should use a different symbol for the psi which is the LCM. So, then what what can I say about this psi a acting on V i is equal to 0 for all i. So, if I know that the psi a hits every basis and sends it to 0 what does it do to any arbitrary vector this implies that psi a acting on i going from 1 through n alpha i or maybe I should use beta in this case just to distinguish from the alphas we used earlier. This is going to be also 0 because each term individually is 0 right which means that psi x belongs to the annihilating ideal of a of course, it must be identically the 0 operator otherwise it cannot send any arbitrary vector to 0 which means it is sitting inside the annihilating ideal wherein I know the minimal polynomial is also sitting in and it is the smallest degree harmonic polynomial sitting inside the annihilating ideal. Therefore, any object any other object sitting inside the annihilating ideal must be divisible by the minimal polynomial. So, I must have that mu a divides I should not use psi sorry sorry about that confusion yeah I should just write it as psi only when I am passing this because psi is after all a polynomial yeah sorry about that yeah I know a bit of confusion with the notation here, but I hope you get the message yeah because I want the subscript really for the operator and the vector the argument should be the x any questions I realize I messed up the notation a bit. So, if you have any questions please clarify it is ok right I can put a subscript if I want, but I am not putting it for the time being just call it psi it does not matter right I am just saying that you have these that are defined by a and v i's and you take the L same of these fellows just call it psi. So, this is psi of x it is a polynomial inside the polynomial ring we have not yet proven it is mu of a from this we have just shown that mu of a definitely divides psi you can give a subscript a or you may not it is a matter of taste, but you should not give it like the argument a that is only reserved when you are passing on the argument of the a as the argument instead of x. So, it is just a bit of that confusion, but I hope it is cleared up yeah. So, we have at least at least shown that mu of a divides psi now what should we do in the next part to prove that mu of a is equal to psi we should also show that psi divides mu of a ok. So, when this fail to be the case that psi fails to divide mu of a what is psi psi is by definition the least common multiple of these fellows. Now, if each of these fellows divide mu then can psi fail to divide mu it cannot right. So, the only way that psi can fail to divide the minimal polynomial mu is if at least one of these fellows mu a v 1 mu a v 2 or till mu a v n fails to divide mu a. So, let us investigate the possibility that one of these fellows mu a v 1 mu a v 2 till mu a v n fails to divide mu a and if you can rule the possibility out then we would have shown that psi also divides mu a right.  If this is the only way this is the only way in which because in each of these individual fellows divide this yeah if each of these individual fellows divides this then the least common multiple must also divide this because the least common multiple must contain at least those fellows in some factored form or the other just think of numbers whenever you run into such doubts and think of numbers and the LCMs of integers right. So, when can a number be not divisible by the LCM of a bunch of numbers? At least one of the fellows in that factorization in that LCM fails to be a factor of that number that is the only way. So, suppose we are positing that this is true then what will be the case? Let us see the action of mu a x sorry mu a a. So, look at mu a a acting on v i what is this?  What can you say of this? Of course, this fellow vanishes mu a is supposed to be the ideal is 0 operator identically 0 operator. So, this is 0 the 0 vector what about on the right hand side? What about this? You can flip the order and at least mu a v i definitely pulverizes v i that is the way we have cooked up mu a v i haven't we. So, this term is also going to be 0 plus r a v i which means that r of a acting on v i pulverizes it, but is that a contradiction or not? I am saying we already have a contradiction. What do you think I am saying it is a contradiction? Exactly you see the way I have written it out here this is the divisor this is the quotient this is the remainder right. So, this is sorry this is the dividend this is the divisor. So, a degree of this fellow must be less than this which means that this fellow then becomes yeah right. So, this fellow will then pulverize v i right. So, this is the contradiction right. So, the argument is this that if this is true then r a would divide every element inside right. So, the r a would be the generated for the annihilating ideal of v i or annihilating ideal of a with respect to v i, but that cannot be denied because we have already claimed that this fellow mu a v i is that unique monic element which sort of sits as the annihilating ideal and I mean the generator for the annihilating ideal of a with respect to v i. So, it is a contradiction. So, this cannot be true and because this cannot be true. So, we must have the fact that each of these mu a v i's must divide mu a yeah. If they do divide mu a then there is no way around the fact that what what did we prove earlier where yeah mu a divides psi. So, therefore, now psi should also divide mu a and therefore, indeed has claimed mu a can be obtained through this procedure, following procedure. Take a basis look at that polynomial which pulverizes or rather in whose kernel that particular member of the basis is sitting. How do you go about seeking the polynomial raise a to different powers higher powers until you come up with a set that becomes linearly independent linearly dependent.  So, at some point you will find a linear dependence that point find the manner of linear dependence that is the linear combination of those fellows which leads to 0 translate that to a polynomial that becomes the minimal polynomial of the annihilating ideal of a with respect to v i. Once you have obtained these n polynomials corresponding to the n elements in the basis one for each of the elements in the basis take their least common multiple that gives you the minimal polynomial for the linear operator a right. Any questions about the steps I am willing to redo that again if you have any doubts? Yeah, because it is the I have already said the mu a by definition is the unique monic generator for the annihilating ideal of a and we know that the polynomials is a principal ideal domain the ring of polynomials the integral domain of polynomials is a principal ideal domain. In a principal ideal domain every ideal can be generated by a single element. Now, in case of polynomials if you do not restrict the search to just monic polynomials you can have multiple elements that are each serving as a generated for that ideal, but if you restrict it now as we have shown that if you restrict it now to a search over monic polynomials then that generating element becomes a unique element. So, this is all true of any polynomial ideal now we are casting our attention towards the special ideal of polynomials which is the annihilating ideal of a the way we have defined. So, because this is an ideal of the ring of or the ring of polynomials or the integral domain of polynomials it must have a unique monic generator and by definition itself that unique monic generator is nothing but the minimal polynomial yeah. So, it must be unique once you found it and now we have told you a constructive way of finding it. So, if you found it then it is you cannot help but be unique yeah. As for the fact which may not have received too much attention as to why each of these must be the unique generator because you cannot have. So, when you are see it is inherent in the construction maybe I have not highlighted that. If you are fixing up V1 and you are hitting it with a successively, where are we actually stopping? The first instance when we have a linearly dependent set. So, if you take any other polynomial of lower degree than that polynomial and if your polynomial indeed turns out to have Vi in its kernel then that would have been giving you the linearly dependent set right. So, you cannot do with a polynomial of degree smaller than this do you understand? I thought that might have been obvious but maybe now I feel like may not have been clarified the way we constructed it I acting on V, A acting on V, A squared acting on V and at every step when you are augmenting it by one additional action of A you go ahead and check is this linearly independent, is this linearly independent. The point at which it fails to be linearly independent is where you stop. Now, if you are saying no no I have stopped after raising A to fifth power but perhaps the minimal polynomial for the annihilating ideal of A with respect to V was of fourth or degree 4. That means, you should have had some I, A, A squared, A cubed and A to the power 4 acting on V giving you a linearly independent linearly dependent set but clearly that was not possible the way we went about with this construction. So, in the next lecture what I shall do is I shall take a small 3 by 3 example and you will begin to see how with numbers with actual numbers I will take a simple example and we will see how constructively you can actually obtain the minimal polynomial and then there will be absolutely no doubt that the way we have constructed this mu A V i that has to be the smallest degree polynomial sitting inside the annihilating ideal of A with respect to V i and if it is the smallest degree polynomial, smallest degree monic polynomial it is D generator. So, it is the minimal polynomial of A with respect to V i. Any questions? Otherwise we are done for today, thank you.


I'd like to call the meeting to order for the village of extension planning commission, May 6, 2021. This is a work session. So before we get started, there's a couple of things. First of all, Robin, do we have any additions or amendments to the agenda the way it stands as of now? No. Okay. Did any of you receive the minutes from April 1st, the meeting? Yes. Because I was on vacation, either they came here or I can't locate them. But if everybody has them. Dave, they're in the attachment with chapter six and seven. They're the third attachment. Okay. Let me see if I can find them. But we can move on while I'm looking for those. Did anybody have any problems with them? No, they look fine. I was not at the April 1st meeting. So it's kind of a, you know, if you guys are fine with them, we can make a motion to accept them. John, did you have a chance to look at them, Phil? I'm still looking for them. I was also, I did go out of town, but I'm not sure why I don't see those minutes right now. They're in with the chapter six and seven in that email. I see Patrick is on too. Hey, Patrick. Hey guys. Sorry, I got my, some with me at the moment. So I'm kind of a little distracted, but he disappeared in a few minutes. Future planning commission member. That's excellent. Yeah, right. So do we want to tackle the minutes or are we, do we need to look at them still? I didn't see any issues with them either. Yeah, I read through them. I didn't see any issues. Okay. Do I hear a motion to accept the minutes from the regular meeting on April 1st, 2021? So moved. Second. All in favor? Aye. Aye. Aye. All opposed? Okay. If that takes care of that. So before we get into the work session, I see that there may be a guest on. I just want to make sure if anybody has anything that they want to talk about that's not on the agenda, now would be the time. Okay. Going once, going twice. Okay. I don't hear anything. So let's move on to the work session, continued updates for the LDC and discussion on design five corners and design review amendments. So we would like to start. Regina? Sure. Okay. So there's a couple of different topics we're going to end up touching on tonight, but the majority of everything we're talking about is really associated with the design review over play. Is everybody hearing that? Yeah. What are you guys hearing? Clapping, radio sounds. Your name, Dave, is all lit up on the upper screen. That's solved it by you muting, hopefully. You can unmute yourself. Okay. So it's all really around the design review in the village center and then also in the overlay area. And so a few different things that we'll touch on within this are a little bit about the approval process. We talked about how it's a kind of confusing and I can see that in the regs about whether you have to get a PUD or you don't have to get a PUD and when that comes into play. We will also touch on just some of the standards that are in the overlay, particularly buffers between single family homes, multifamily homes within the village center district. Also talk about height. And then ultimately we'll talk about where geographically I'll bring up a map. You want the overlay to where you want it to be. So I'll start off just by going through chapter six and kind of stopping on the comments that I brought up and I can share my screen. If that's the easiest way to do this. And then once I do this, you all just go like poof into no man's land. So just holler out if you have a question or you want to just make sure if if you put your comments in the chat that that we might avoid the reverberation noise. All right. Can folks see what I'm looking at even though I'm on the wrong page? I guess you can see your screen. Okay. All right. Hold on one second. I want to get up to the village center district first. Sorry about this scrolling. So this my first comment here. This is just sort of a technical question. We don't need to we don't need to go into a lot of detail about that. But I am ultimately I will need to know what this fragment of a sentence at the end of 2a is is intending. But the real thing I want to talk about here is this concept about PUD or not PUD. And my biggest thing here is that I can see that this creates some confusion particularly because 3a right here really more explains what I think should happen. If the development in the village center is going to create a subdivision the subdivision process should be what you use as your approval process and you do this design review as a component of that. If it's just a development that would be typical of a site plan review process that's the review process you should use and this design review should be a component of that. And that's really what section 3a describes. I'm not sure if you need this to be here and what that is intended to do. I guess my suggestion would be that you delete that. But maybe I'm missing something. And I could probably zoom in here if this is getting too hard to see. So 2b is what I'm questioning. My first impression Regina is that I think we were trying to ensure that the trunk roads were I guess given some special treatment and I think that's where we were trying to go with that. The guys might have a different perspective on that but that was my initial thought. Anyone else have any other thoughts on this one? Yeah I think we had an initial conversation. It was as Dan says the problems in the trunk roads I think especially Park and Pearl as they seem to be the ones that are attracting retail commercial and it would be you know any properties contiguous with the village right of way to the back of that property. So it wouldn't be a straight line it would sort of go around the properties the property boundaries. And is the planned unit development review giving you giving you a better process to review those developments as they come up for these existing residential structures? I think one of the problems that I've seen is if it's a small lot it's difficult to meet the requirements of the PUD in some respects and they're also in conflict with the fact that you're allowed 100 lot coverage in the Village Centre district. I mean there's other ways to provide those facilities. It can be inside the building doesn't have to be outside the building in terms of some of the recreational things it could be gymnasium or it could be anything it could be something on the roof. So John and I I think both struggle a little bit with some of the requirements of the PUD but John can chime in here I'm sure. You're muted John. Yeah I know. So it is a little strange we have in many of the other sections where PUDs are offered as an option for review. The way this is written it appears to require that projects be reviewed as a PUD and I'm not sure I guess I'm not sure why we would really want to say that unless we were trying to make people responsible for some criteria that are in that PUD section and not that aren't in the make the you know the other option which would be you know review it as a standard project. So I don't recall why that's in there don't don't have any issue with taking it out. I think you know we're still back to the point of determining at the time that a project is submitted for review or during the review to determine whether or not this any project is a PUD and what are we getting for it you know why are we doing that and and I will say that because especially in the Village Center District some of the lots are very strange you know they're they're small they're odd the buildings are out of compliance with the current code and in some cases they're existing non-conformities they're you know garages on somebody else's properties and there's all kinds of weird stuff that happens when you get into the older sections of town and maybe not just specifically with the Village Center but it but certainly the Village Center is part of this so maybe we're trying to provide some flexibility but I don't think it's lost if you allow people to submit as a PUD without requiring them to submit as a PUD so I'm fine taking it out okay and I do think there is a section further down in the Village District that does have that optional PUD yeah most most of the places where we offer the choice it's it's a you know sometimes we'll say if they're more than so many buildings you must submit as a PUD but usually it's a choice and that's where we keep coming back to well if somebody chooses to submit as a PUD it's because they're offering us something that's either not allowed or is in the normal approach or they're showing us why their approach is better and so they need that flexibility and it's a trade-off yeah yeah I just wanted to point out that uh in this section 2b it says our subject of provisions of section 724 I think it's actually 723 if I'm looking at it correctly okay probably just want to make note of that yep okay all right that is helpful so I will just make sure that the flexibility to apply for a PUD if you want to is still in here but I will take out this requirement okay um sorry scrolling so this standard gets at the height um issue that was brought up a little bit at the last meeting um so currently in this district there is a minimum of two stories a maximum of four stories this standard right here this is four sub part four is attempting to keep some proportionality as some buildings come in and existing buildings that are shorter are adjacent to it so that um things don't get sort of crowded out there's a lot of logic behind that but for a place where you're really attempting to for it to evolve um to the sort of densest part and most vibrant part of your village I don't know that this standard makes sense and I'm wondering how folks feel about just clearly going straight to four stories you guys still hear that sound yeah you know you're about to speak it comes yeah I you know I have a bit of a problem with this because it ties us completely the decisions made in the past that we may not have been in favor of looking with our eyes you know if you guys read that book the past is a foreign country but um planning is about deciding for the future you know what are we doing is going to benefit that people haven't been born yet not are we tethered to decisions made in the past that we wouldn't make today have to see them the second came before us Regina I think I think we've outgrown Robin I think we've outgrown that I agree with you we've outgrown this we've gotten beyond it it's time to move on um and perhaps the least four um I think the other requirements we have in there were the architectural elements and things reflected I think that's going to still reflect the the aesthetics that we're looking for in the village center district but I agree with you that was it did have a purpose 10 15 20 years ago it doesn't anymore we've outgrown it I think anybody else I can't see you and I don't know if Dave had to jump off I'm back on can you guys hear yeah yeah I would I'd like to say this is Phil by the way I'd like to say that yeah I think I'm in favor of if we want to say four stories we say four stories I think that can probably lead to a little clearer language especially for developers that they know they know what they're working with when they see that language in the in the ldc they know they can they can build a four-story building didn't wasn't there something that um the trustees uh put in place in terms of what that means when what what the trustees did was they removed the option for someone to get a weaver to build six stories they took that out last time around yeah the only place we have six stories in in our code currently isn't in the industrial area sounds good so I will get that addressed let me scroll down here we might be going to the overlay but just checking um I'm going to scroll uh I'm gonna actually stop sharing because it's gonna be really annoying until I get to my right page and then go back to sharing for Regina the next next piece you had was on page 79 dealing with parking oh yeah I had some just commentary comments that I thought the uh parking was good as is but let me go back up there well I wasn't sure if you were sarcastic or if you liked it oh no I was like I said I wasn't quite sure so I thought it is sorry um any other comments that I put up there that anybody wants to talk about I don't think I needed to talk about those I'm going to share again okay so this is really uh should look very familiar it's based very much off of the exact design review overlay that you have in the village center district um you know in terms of format if these two sections really end up being exactly the same it's possible that we don't have to repeat all the language down here we could just sort of send somebody up to the other section but I thought that it's important enough to really think about this and what it means in these other parts of town um specifically and then we can decide the most um efficient way to put it in the um in the coat so right now sitting here down as its own section um so uh in talking with Robin a little bit clearer just in terms of where it makes sense to put this overlay district we really thought about it on Pearl Street all the way from the village center out to West Street extension um and so that's just where it is right now but we'll get to that in a little bit more detail later on about whether that's the right place or not um this second comment here um the purpose statement up in the village center designation talks about how it's important to think through the role of this area in the regional economy and almost like that's the basis for why you're doing this level of regulation um it just seems sort of like an interesting reason and I don't know if folks feel like when we expand out to these other places if there's a different reason to me it's much more about the unique historic qualities of the existing buildings and the ability for new development to sort of work in with those I don't know that it's as much about the role of the economy but I don't know if folks have any opinion about that um well Regina I'll pitch in and I was thinking that uh I agree with you up to uh Pearl Street up to the West Street extension um I would uh extend if it doesn't already go to two or three blocks on Maple Street from from five corners I forget exactly what the name of the street is that's up there um you mean Elm Street I think it's Elm Street is it Elm Street it's first on your ride to teach you down to public works yes yeah um I was thinking all of Park Street because the way it's developing at the moment um that we may as well just jump in and do all of Park Street all the way down to the bridge um I was thinking Lincoln to at least the intersection with North and Grove um not including the St. James driveway uh I wasn't quite sure about the the commercial building that's in the corner there is that how far to include that but I forget I pitched that one in and I was thinking that on Main Street we should probably go to at least Pleasant Street and I wasn't sure if we should include all the way down to the town office or not um but that could be the next jump but I'll leave that my thoughts on the table here for you guys to I'd go all the way to 81 Main Street okay okay so let me get this you know we may end up saying it's a little bit of a watered down version of what we do in the Village Center but but you know it we we got to control the stuff that's being built along those prime uh entry points to the Village because they are becoming increasingly important and the things that go up that aren't quite up to caliber are going to start to stand out we don't why do we need that you know why I also think have something to say maybe we could um Regina that that sentence the way that reads and your comments about the economy being you know one of the reasons maybe the historical aspect and the economical aspect are both important I mean if it's if the character of the village is not where people want to do business then it could have an effect you know um so I think they're both important points I just think it's poorly worded um I just wanted to ask a quick question I agree with um extending of the boundaries but I was just thinking with the potential idea of Main Street right at Five Corners being uh eventually blocked off um and the new connector road uh coming in how that might change traffic patterns and if if any of this is going to incorporate some of that potential change in traffic patterns so I mean I think that there's still going to be the main corridors but just thinking of some of those you know making sure that if some of those smaller side streets or whatever start to become more cut through is do we want to is do we want to potentially also maybe have some control over what potentially gets put in around there um I don't necessarily know what those new traffic patterns might be but I just wanted to throw that out as a thought railroad streets are already part of the village center district um in fact the side streets with the exception of railroad street will see less traffic once the connector road goes in if Main Street's closed because you know it'll take the last time to stand the trunk roads to get through the village center then it will do to go through the side streets and the idea of the side streets is to save time not to add time yeah no I know I mean I'm just trying to think of you know because a lot of people come through and turn up Main Street to go that way you know now are they going to turn up Lincoln I guess they'll go straight through and pick up the connector road and take a left on the connector through railroad street to get around if they're in a hurry if they're in a new hurry they'll take Lincoln I'm sure okay and then yes if we if we um Patrick if we extend those boundaries uh like we're talking about as those projects come up which we know they will eventually then the impacts to the traffic and then studies will be completed as part of the you know as part of the review process for the projects so that's a good point you bring up yeah I mean it sounds like they're being addressed the way Diane kind of put them out in terms of you know going out to North and Grover whatever that was um up Lincoln Street and going out to 81 Main um but I just wanted to kind of put that thought out there that was running through my mind and where were you saying on on Maple um Elm Street it uh it jumps up one more block I'm trying to remember all the things there there's a bunch of uh commercial buildings that are there now or they're converted homes um and I think that area ends in Elm there used to be a dentist across the think is across the street from Elm but I don't think it goes much farther would you why wouldn't you go all the way out to Maple Street Park just because they're all pretty much isolated homes built there already yeah it's I think it has more of a residential field than because the section I'm talking about is more of a residential office district and I think the residential office district goes to Elm or no it doesn't it's one short one street one property short of Elm um yeah Diane I think you're right um that one property short of Elm is the Village Center District yeah okay well I'm saying extended all the way to Elm I believe that there is or there we had a proposal way back when from a doctor who lived on Elm and Maple and had a carriage house and he wanted to convert into his office and we said no because it was outside the residential office area and to be perfectly honest as I drive by I'm kind of going you know what we're developing everywhere we are moving and expanding to the economics um nowadays I don't think we would say no I think we would probably say yes so I guess I'm saying let's let's open it up to yeah it's on the corner of Elm and Maple but I mean if that's the case um correct me if I'm wrong I should know because I live down here but East Street on the corner of East Street in Maple there's uh businesses are my I thought there were between East Street and and Railroad Street there's a bunch of them in there yeah there's there's a Apple Valley vision yeah yeah hold on let's go to East Street I mean I I think you're right Diane about the residential character and that's kind of that East Street corner I think is where that kind that those businesses kind of end okay I'm available to East Street what is what do you guys think I don't know I kind of feel like we've we're thinking about extending it basically to the entrances on all sides except for this side and I guess I don't know what the downside is would be to extending it to Maple Street Park like is there a I mean I agree it does seem more residential but what's the what's the downside of doing that it definitely adds a layer of historic preservation that is not necessarily required for a lot more homes not saying that's pro or con just is yeah um oh I think a lot of the homes as I'm thinking of my my my travels up and down Maple there there were a lot of historic homes they have been altered um and chopped up that um I don't think they're they would meet the historic piece anymore other than the history that they have but as a representative sample of something historic um it's intrinsic and not and not the aesthetic um because there's been a lot of renovations along especially the the place that's uh the apartment that are next to the park he's uh I think I'm not sure if he's done with the the siding project or not but he was last I was up that way he was still uh still residing um so what are we what are we really saying if we try to extend it that we want to be we want to see all the project uh you know is this enough of a of an issue that we want to see every homeowner's idea for what they're going to do to the their house with the siding from here on out or are we really trying to control new building you know like if you're going to tear something down and build something new we should be able to have more say than we do now if you're painting your front door do I do I care that you change the color you know I I'm not I want us to understand what we're doing here before we go um I think it's new building Sean I mean at the moment in the village not the time but in the village if uh your siding's rotten and you're replacing it we consider maintenance and repair you're uh keeping your property in good shape it makes the neighborhood look good so we let people you know go ahead with that but certainly new building Jen John I I'm don't okay my gut feel is that what we've seen so far we haven't seen the consolidation of two lots um to expand something to you know we haven't seen any lots um get chopped up okay in this neck of the woods even though as I'm looking at this picture there are some that could they're just configured weird um to be able to do that um it's like a very fat spaghetti list um you know but it doesn't really lend itself unless somebody starts putting lots together and and I don't see that people have been doing that more of the commercial chopping up and putting things together has been on some of the other streets not this one um and I'm kind of going do I do I want to encourage that chopping up or do I want to encourage um residential in this area that seems to be residential um I guess my question would be is how many accessory apartments have have gone into this area because it this area would allow those well has there been I'm I'm only saying what I'm saying because if if we're talking about this designer view uh chapter that we have in the village center as the basis for an overlay it says uh that designer view is required by the planning commission for any proposed construction reconstruction demolition or exterior alteration including a change of color so you're you're if you actually go that far with the new chapter you're a lot of people coming in for changes of color I want to take my shutters off or uh you know I have to re-roof and I want to use a different material you're going to get all of that and I don't know that that's our intent it seems that you know excessive if we're generally pretty comfortable with um you know what happens in a neighborhood that's relatively established so maybe there the trick is to rewrite this uh design review piece so that it's not so uh you know invasive and that it sets the rules for what we want to see and why and it's not everything yeah we don't want to discourage people from taking care of their properties basically if it becomes well uh maintenance or repair is is allowed but you know it's like if you're in the Sturridge village you can only use five colors and that's it right and you know so you have to be careful with this stuff because when you write it in there and all of a sudden you get uh you know and you get maybe more than you bargained for so I think we just I would suggest that we um help Regina try to figure out how to tailor the language in this so that when we extend the districts it's not everything can we say that any any proposed project that the code requires approval by the planning commission and or the zoning board um I'm not sure I want to solve it tonight I'm I'm thinking that we we should give direction on what we're trying to achieve and and then we can wordsmith the thing uh you know not at the meeting okay good so what are we trying a maintenance clause or something that you could just put well there's a maintenance clause built into the the base uh piece already and it's pretty standard in any uh you know any anything that even the historic preservation uh sections all have uh you know basically you could you're allowed to repair and maintain things with no questions you know or we're not trying to we're not trying to prevent that but if you change the material like you know if you for example you took all your trim boards off because you're tired of this the fifth time you've replaced them because they keep rotting and you put uh you know borrell or or or azak or pvc up instead because it's not going to rot that's not legal you can't actually do that under uh you know repair and maintenance um you have to use the same material so we we want to go through this and really try and and explain what we what we mean to regulate and and don't touch the rest of it and and I think the burden is higher uh the way it's written now because it's it's supposed to apply to our our historic downtown properties and and so we put in a lot more things the last time we wrote this including the section on historic preservation and the secretary of interior standards and all that that's not really what we're after for some of these uh you know even if it's a gateway street and it's a main spur I don't know that we're really trying to say all of that so yeah we've got a little work I would say we want to soften the what the overlay district means and maybe it doesn't apply to a lot of things is like change of color and stuff but um but it should apply if somebody does a major you know proposes something major we rather have the ability to uh you know you're going to build a whole new front porch on your house we want to see what that looks like you know well I guess that kind of brings up john you you've been to the uh town town planning commission more often than I have and I know that they review what heck of a lot more stuff than we do um a lot of it seems to be uh in their consent agenda uh as opposed to a thorough walkthrough sort of a thing so I guess my question ends up being is you seem more of that how how would you reflect what they do into what we're talking about yeah they they seem to care uh to to see a lot more but they may not necessarily have the uh you know the regulations in place to um do anything other than make you comply with the you know the town standards for you know how steep is your driveway or how how did you handle something I don't think they have the review authority that we've written into our village center yeah and part of it for them john is about fees yeah they they seem things we do not collect fees for and they review things for the purpose of collecting fees well they they they track a lot of stuff yes yeah I'm pretty amazed at how little it cost to you know permit a project in the village I gotta say it's it's um I'm not sure that we our fees are really where they should be but um that's all they're not they're not you're right um so I I guess I I would think that we want to give uh Regina some direction on on what we're trying to do here and I think it's not as much as we're doing in the village center but we want we want to have some some expanded uh ability to um see what these larger projects might be you know maybe it's just new construction which would include additions you know and maybe it's not color but uh you know maybe in some cases it might be color but I don't know what those are yet well what about the size you know the size of the project as well I mean let's talk about uh an example there's a there's an apartment complex right next to maple street park so you know it's it's kind of old it's a larger lot what happens if they decide to do a project I mean I guess that's the question we're we're trying to answer is what what are we trying to encourage and what are we trying to discourage I mean the dovetail on that you know what if they wanted to do an autumn pond you know they are on that line yeah yeah um well we'd want to see what that looks like so we could kind of have some I mean I don't know that we had design control over autumn pond but that they did such a beautiful job in there you know that's a very conscientious developer and the projects you know I would be I would like to look at that wherever they put it you know and unfortunately nobody really gets to see it it's tucked way back in the woods but you know what we're saying is these these major arteries coming into our and and going through our village deserve a little more attention so that they don't just look like a hodgepodge of whoever felt like doing what they wanted to do there we want to uh you know make sure that they're up to some uh you know some overall standard but we also don't want to make the language so vague that it that everybody's confused right right that's why we have experts like Regina yeah yeah I can narrow it down if you've got some ideas I mean the the the the verbiage is in our LDC already it's just in different places and so our our task is to sort through it and figure out how you know what level of of review authority are we trying to uh you know to to settle on for these these spurs and and why and you know when does it ratchet up because it's getting more important and getting closer to five corners or something and you know there may be special districts that don't need any anything because they're already you know pretty pretty obvious and there may be districts where we we're thinking though stuff is happening and it may not really be that cohesive so we want to try and improve that um you know and and that's that's the task I mean that we happy with what we see when we see improvements that we're driving by every day you know and and and if we have a way to to make them better great and if we end up you know not being able to get there then we'll keep trying almost like uh I'm thinking almost sort of like a a graduated I don't know if that's the right word set of requirements the further you get from the center village district yeah but the the comment that you know if you look at the the beginning of your entry into the village where you start to recognize you're there you know we talked about having gateways we talked about having you know other I mean sometimes it's a sign sometimes it's a physical object uh you know like a pillars or something you know how do you know when you know with the street lights show up okay I'm I'm somewhere you know the the decorative ones uh I've gotten here right so um you know we should we should understand you know is it where the speed limit changes down to 25 is it where uh you know you've got kind of ADL and Maple Street Park that are on opposite sides of the street that are pretty you know typical uh entry signals that maybe you say okay well after those things when I'm now I'm slowed down I noticed all the the flashing lights because I went through the school zone or whatever it was but but you're you're now going slow enough that you're paying attention to the the street life that's on both sides and it is very residential in there but uh you know it doesn't take too many funny looking projects to to change that character in a negative way and I you know hopefully whatever they're doing on the siding for that project by Maple Street Park um I don't know if they needed any permits for that but uh you know we're we're happy that they're trying to fix it up but I'd love to know what it looks like yeah definitely something to think about so what would be most helpful um looking at the language for looking at the map and deciding on the areas that we're talking about or um it might be too hard to do that it might be more of a pinging back and forth um to me it seems like the major arteries coming into town are easy to define in terms of um businesses except for Maple Street if you know as extension Maple Street is the only one that's kind of a you know it's residential but you've got a couple doctors offices and it kind of all of a sudden you're at five corners so if there's a challenge anywhere with the major arteries it's that street that artery I believe I don't know if you guys agree or not yeah I mean I think we have to come up with a few triggers now if you're doing a bc or d then yes it needs review yeah if you're listening talk to your top or change your broken window or you know venting your door or rad when it was green not sure that needs a review right yeah on the right track yeah and the other arteries we already know they've already gone undergone some of those changes that we need to monitor if you will to make sure that that when they do come up um that we're we're able to uh get get our um to look at them to look at the projects yeah I think um sorry this is Phil um yeah I think John I think you nailed it with like that feeling of when you get into the village center and I think Maple Street Park like at least for me is like that's when I feel like I've gotten into the center Maple Street Park in the school yeah and I think the same on main like 81 Main Street it feels like you're getting into the center and all the other places we talked about with extending this um this overlay feel like that's when you've gotten into the village center so I would even be I would be in favor of extending to Maple Street Park with like everything that we're talking about making sure that we see what we want to see and not see what we don't care about so uh Regina and um Robin um and for the rest of us if you take the map and you um maybe figure out where that split is on each of the five arteries coming in um I think that's enough for the map and then then we just talk about what the triggers are and and what they're not and I think that would be good but I can't see you having all the stuff in here that we have for our village center um needing to be in there but but certainly some of it uh so that that's where I would go with it and uh and then we can take a look at that uh you know next time or whenever it's ready and and uh and see what we think of it yep agreed agreed okay so I do have some specific comments in the rest of this chapter six that might be helpful to talk through now um let's just go for it but if it's feeling like it's not actually helpful at the moment then we can nope let's go for it from background okay um so we talked about those yep this is the same PUD thing that we talked about before so we would just transfer that in down to the rest of this um that's kind of just a technical comment what else is in here I hate the way new word does these comments I can't see what I'm looking for so you're up to the village center did we have other districts that we wanted to tweak like I'm still in section 608 the transit oriented district we we keep I'm not sure that's still working for us they're getting us what we want uh Robin and I talked about this sometimes and I'm not sure we're still on the I think we're still on opposite sides of the fence on it but I don't know that we need to talk about it tonight I just wanted to point out that that somewhere in there we we still have some work to do to figure out that that section is doing what we want hasn't resulted in any real projects that of uh you know except for the one that it's I don't know if it's finished or half finished or what but it's supposed to be a restaurant attached to a hotel and now it's a smoke shop or something I'm mad I didn't get what's going on there you know it's it's more a couple of times from what got approved and um you know in my opinion it's it's less than uh what we expected yeah a lot less and you know so I don't I want to I mean those are the kind of things that you wish you had control of but somehow you don't even know you did well in that district we have control over metrics square footage height we have no design review so so in keeping with with 608 and we we asked that Regina contemplate having design review or or our design review part two go that way um we have a section in it's a page 84 if you've got the book um it's B2 says the standards when the TOD district in some cases conflict with other standards blah blah blah essentially it says that the standards in 608 would override and in this case we'd have to change that you know if we put design review into the transit district um because essentially it would nullify any design review standards that we imposed um having that wording there I agree I I don't know that the transit oriented district really is doing what we thought it would do and the district designation precedes me being on the planning commission so I don't know why it was done other than the fact that Pearl Street is a major corridor period and it was a reaction to that I reviewed 608 before our meeting today and it talks about short streets and connected pieces and none of the developments that are there right now connect to anything there is no alleyway off of Pearl Street um even though potentially it could have one actually quite a few along there but it would be have to be something we would encourage I don't think anyone developing anything would automatically jump to that because they would say uh there's another road I gotta build so um I guess that's something you know opening that can of worms in 608 and the transit Dorian and um that would be one thing I think we need to look at yeah I think those roads that we're talking about down um more than anything else was for that development parcel was there be roads inside that development parcel are supposed to connections because you're certainly not going to get in your road across the rail line no um it also talks about development being over five acres uh yeah if you start putting some of those lots together so there's some very long lots that go down to the railroad um you could probably get five acres pretty quick there's somebody that parks cars and I'm not sure how many they get in there um next to the uh the good stuff building so you know they might be able to get you know five acres connected up there um so yeah um it it seemed I like I mean it's written in a way that sounds attractive and it sounds like we're trying to encourage some very specific things to happen and so far it hasn't happened and and we we actually the one project that did appear to uh be delivering what we were hoping to get has stalled and and so now we have the front half of it um as a different use uh the building I think as robin points out it meets the letter of the metrics uh in terms of of layout but it's still feels kind of flimsy and um you know less inviting than than I was expecting and I don't know maybe there's landscaping's not finished or colors aren't painted or I don't know what's happening but it looks like it's open we're going to temporary seal yeah then the moving trucks are moving stuff in um every day that's that's the stage you're in right now so is there more happening do we get street trees or or then you know what's the pedestrian benefit there yeah they haven't done landscaping yet and other things that's why they're going to temporary seal all right so can I just ask if you have the design overlay in this area when you were reviewing that do you think it would have given you the tools that you're looking for or do you more think like a fundamental change needs to happen in the underlying TOD um I think the design review would help a lot but um the there's actually quite a bit in here that that's written in a way that tries to direct the design and more than other other development uh you know districts that we have I mean it actually comes right out and tells you a lot but but it didn't result in a quality building I guess is my issue you know it got it got modified for a number of reasons on its way through execution and and it just it's not what it was supposed to be so I just I want us to keep thinking about that whole district um and you know if it's not delivering what we hope then we should be trying to change it and maybe the design uh you know maybe we just got to get a little tougher on the design overlay part and and really stick to some guns you know we've had other projects where we had design control and and you know they got constructed differently and they're still up so uh you know some of it is the wording is there the the uh you know the intent is there for us to be able to improve these buildings and yet it's still not happening so um uh I'm hoping to get better at and follow through I guess okay well certainly in terms of kind of uh order of operations of once we um define where the overlay is going to go get relative level of comfort on what the standard is going to be on the expanded overlay then we do have to go through an exercise of making sure that it works with what's underlying and make sure there's no conflicts and we can certainly add that level of thought to you in terms of whether with the overlay now on top of the TOD is it going to get you to where you think you want to be or should we do some tweaking to the underlying district as well okay where to next um I was just going to go down to the new overlay language unless anybody else wants to talk about any of the other districts along the way okay um okay let me share my screen again here so now we're in the design standards a little bit and partially this is why in the email that I sent you've got some of the underlying zoning district standards just sort of pulled out easily for you but um number three here especially this says basically in the village center district what you're aiming for is basically in no setback you want to pull the buildings um as close as you can to the to the street in these other outlying areas are you generally comfortable with the setback as it exists sort of on the ground and what the zoning districts are called for or do you want to be adjusting that I'm assuming you want to kind of stick with what you have and not go quite as tight to the streets as we would in the village center district this again Dave this is reminding me what my biggest problem is with this new word commenting is you have to hit send or it doesn't accept it and it sends you all around the document and it makes me cry okay so we're gonna roughly well Regina before you leave this page the IV here was with section we already tailored in earlier this meeting about the the 10% average height maybe we want to get rid of that here unless it still applies that's going to be my second question so in addition to the setbacks that exist in these underlying districts I assume you also want to keep the height associated with the underlying districts is that question makes sense it makes perfect sense it it um my opinion is is that we stay with the heights that are in the current districts and not um I don't think we're going to see the 10% because I think we max out at three stories yeah and the TOD also is four stories and so yeah I think that would make sense that we would take out this 10% as well all right let me see if I have any other questions in here okay so this is kind of a big one and this actually might depend on which trunk route we're talking about so in the village center district you have the formula based retail and restaurants section in the design review part do we think we want to keep this I don't have a great sense of how many businesses in the TOD district pearl street would become non conforming they're all non-conforming they'd all be all non-conforming um so what are thoughts generally would we not would we just simply not apply this into the TOD or would we say only for new development that happens in the TOD these these standards would come into play I think it's for new I mean it's that that's one of the issues I've had with that district which is that it's there there's so many exceptions to what we've asked for and the idea is that we we asked for what where we want to be not where we are now so when we have a chance to have a say in what's happening then I think we're going to hold them to the new standards but other than that I don't know that we can yeah I think I mean a basic tenet in the code at the minute is if you have a non-conforming use you can't make it any more non-conforming if you're in violation you can apply for a permit unless the proposal cures the violation so okay and then what about for the other trunk routes do we want this in those districts I assume I assume yes main street maples street Lincoln street park yes for me yeah same same here yeah I guess my question would be is that there's a um how would this affect the the Chinese food place that's on main street near Martones I mean he's in the building but the only thing that that would be different is that his sign is different from the anybody else's god that would assume that this applies to signs too well it wouldn't affect him but wouldn't affect because he's pre-existing if he came in for a change it then he would be okay yeah and I'm not sure I have to I'll double check and look at the definition of formula based formula based means to me a chain um yeah but he's not a chain that's what it does me a chain yeah i'm a donald's or um whatever you know corporation right and typically this what this section is doing is basically saying even if you are a chain you have to not look you have to look more like what our village looks like than what you would typically look like so it's not preventing any of those from coming in but it would just make them you know build their building or put their restaurant in an existing building um that's much more in line with the character in areas okay all right so those are the only specific questions I had in here um as you folks sort of think through this this section is very easily written as historic preservation and design review and so it's it's not too difficult to think in some areas the historic preservation part will hold and in other places it maybe is not as necessary um we can also do it definitely as you folks have described it where at a certain point in development these things would standards would kick in um so yeah we'll think through that but if I could get Diane to tell me her distances one more time that would be helpful to me okay I have Lincoln Street and I have Maple but I missed really I just missed Park Street Park Park Street would be to uh uh Cascade Cascade okay this is helpful let me look at my list here you're saying that I think Diane you brought this up at the last meeting I just wanted to talk through this a little bit um you said it would be helpful if there's a way to incentivize I think this is what you said the older homes to go into more multifamily residential is that what you said well there's there are a lot of homes that are being converted like a lot of the Victorians if they haven't converted already um have the potential to do that there are also some that aren't Victorians they're just larger homes and I don't know the style maybe Robin knows the name of the styles um that are there that have the potential to break up right now they're not um you know for no I guess whatever reasons the owners have or they've broken them up and we don't know you know sort of thing yeah yeah I think yeah I think it's important point sorry Dan that you make because you know the the houses that we're talking about are anachronistic to what uh today's families are looking for and if we don't permit some flexibility then we're blighting those properties and we're going to start to see someone going to disrepair whereas it could be as simple as you know an accessory apartment which is easy to do that's administratively approved or one or two more apartments in it I know if the land holds it you know they can accommodate the cars and so on with the usual metrics I think it's important we give people let people know there's an opportunity to do that there was a building on a pearl street not too same side of the street not too far from the fire station it's struggled for a long time and the owner wanted to sell it and they couldn't really get out from under it and it's a problem you know how can we help them how can we give an opportunity which is also bringing new apartments into the village you know Patrick's talked a bit about you know the mix you know all these new buildings so one story or sorry one unit two unit or one person two person but at the moment I haven't done a survey but I would say I'm going to guess at least 70 percent of the residential buildings in the village are three or four bedroom homes the mix might have changed a bit I think probably 12 years ago there've been more three four family homes in terms of the number of properties has increased but certainly there's beginning to be a bit more equilibrium but a lot of the properties are three four bedrooms most of the efficiencies one bedroom two bedrooms they're in new apartment buildings maybe there's an opportunity to have a former six bedroom house be two three bedroom apartments on a single family lot that gives people a garden not just you know a space to live in and I think there's an opportunity though that we haven't really looked at closely that before I think I think there's actually a I think in some some of the places that I've read it does talk about that if you convert a home that it should still continue to look like a home as opposed to an apartment building which um actually right now I'm on the page dealing with accessory apartments and it talks about you know converting things um you're right Robin it we we need to have the ability to continue to have these older buildings continue to function to continue to have that aesthetics that we're looking for um but it's it it does need to have if you know if there's cars and things they need to be appropriately not parked in the front yard um you know they need to comply with some of the coding that we've got written um and yes I'm all four people having gardens and things and having that that space um which I think quite a few of the places um that that I know about um stop allow that sort of thing um there's uh my my neighbor is is renovating a house and he's his nephew is a real estate agent who told me that he he was bidding on a one-acre property um that would be in the village center district uh and how he he regretted not being able to uh to get that so I actually looked to see you know where that that lot was and I went wow I hadn't realized there was a one-acre lot there with a house on it but lo and behold um so do I foresee now that he's told me about that that there's probably going to get a subdivision going on yeah I anticipate that um Robin's probably going to do something administratively um you know in the future um once the subdivision down to be all you guys yeah right well um it depends on I think well anyhow so however it works out um um you know I anticipate that that that infill is going to happen um but you know will the will the home that's currently there be there I don't know it might be um or it might be how was that development that was off of maple street um that they they tucked um some townhouses behind behind um and I don't think there was anything on there but they managed to tuck like three or four townhouses um yeah off of off of the road so I mean I mean it was done nicely but we looked at it and had they had to present to us because it was a subdivision so um I don't know that Victorian being broken up would come in to do that um am I am I wrong well I was asking because um you know in terms of if the market is there to convert homes the market is there the incentive is there from that side of things the what might be challenging is the at least for the um homes in the village with the historic preservation and design overview is that you do have to keep it looking um like it does now as an existing home but I don't know that you would want to change that so that was just my question like you don't I'm assuming you don't want to go so far where you're um losing the character of these homes you just want to know if there's anything we can do um as an incentive based approach to provide some flexibility for these houses yeah I think the incentive is they keep the character of the of us well that might be I don't know how that's an incentive well they maybe they get an extra unit if from the outside the building looks just the same or something I don't know oh I am I see what you're saying so I go to call here back to second right so as to say that the as long as the exterior the viewscape of it streetscape remains intact we could allow for a second or third interior apartment to be constructed but if there's any sort of renovation or rehab to the building that impacts the exterior that we're probably going to want to take a look at it and then to ensure that it maintains that historic nature of the village that feel of the village that you get when you go through the streets um that's yeah is that kind of the sense I'm getting we had a we had a project like that that came up um you guys probably remember the I can't remember the address but it was um it was on pearl uh where they he he did some work on the siding in the windows and there was already apartments in in that building so you know and the process was pretty painless I think I think everybody knew what was going on and and I think it worked well so if you were going to go even further and say well I'm going to take another building and you know keep the character but but turn it into apartments I think that's perfectly acceptable I think that's something we want to see yeah without Robin Bean or any of us know what the like I think ADU is right they just allow for one additional unit within the property but if somebody came forward um with a large Victorian they might want to do two ADUs if you will interior without doing that you know building like a carriage house off the back like an ADU can still be part of the existing building so maybe that's what that that incentive could be that you could we could allow for that you know two apartments you know a single family home large Victorian be split into three apartments as opposed to two apartments to create that additional flexibility to create more housing or or or for that matter you know and it was some of these Victorians that they actually build a carriage house and it ends up being two apartments because I know that right now I thought there was a rule or bill before this the the legislator about having if Virginia you might know better than I I thought it was going to allow to have the owner of the property be in the ADU and have the house either divided or or rented to the the renter yeah so right now I mean my read of current statute is that you certainly as a municipality could already do this but now you have to do it so that's on on our list when we get to the house when we actually when we get to the state statute changes list this will come up okay that now with accessory dwelling units you have to write your code that the owner of the property can live in either the primary structure or the accessory dwelling unit and then I would say the statute allows you to go beyond that so you could say it doesn't need to be owner occupied at all if you want I don't know how many of you have been to all the housing conferences or heard all the scuttle but but these are exactly the questions that help make communities more flexible and therefore allow more housing options which tends to be what we're all trying to do right now you know if I've got a garage and it doesn't look any different but all of a sudden it's an accessory apartment you know what what what do we really care you know like why are we making restrictions that that aren't really substantive in in a in a visual way you know or you know what do we care if there are three apartments and a big Victorian instead of two you know like that's that shouldn't really know somebody has to chop a whole new door in somewhere and it took out a window you know maybe we care but you know we we need to really be as flexible as we can in allowing these sort of uncommon dwelling situations to evolve if they can evolve naturally and organically without a big deal that is really the secret to what what you know these accessory apartments are all about you know it's not trying to rebuild the whole the whole existing dwelling it's trying to work with what each one's unique and you're trying to work with it and you try and make a somebody have an ability to have an apartment in there and I think we our rules should be as flexible as we can make them the one question that usually comes up that's kind of a sticking point for many people though is the owner occupancy and and that that's you know I expect us to have a fairly robust discussion on that because that's a tricky one you know it's a slippery slope once people don't live there but you know it happens so yeah so yeah I think um I think something we could do I'm like I mentioned it before I'm in favor of the AUDs and providing lots of flexibility for our residents to to change their properties to provide more housing obviously we have a housing shortage um and it provides income for people I think something we could consider as far as owner occupied goes is you know I don't I don't know the specifics it would be but not allowing like a business operation of these of these houses so the business doesn't own all of these properties but they are like individually owned even if even if the the owner does not live at the actual property so we could set like a number of property a limit or something like that somehow so we're not dealing with a mega property corporation and keep it that small uh small town to the actual individual owners hmm yeah I'm not sure there's a you're unable to do that kind of thing in zoning it is possible to think maybe from an ordinance perspective but I'm not sure about that some of this comes into play when you're trying to think about um regulating or putting some handholds on short term rentals so Airbnb, VRBO that kind of thing which also is kind of a non-zoning thing it's in a different ordinance category but in terms of they're still full-time rental units and controlling ownership over those that's a tricky one I'd have to think about that yeah I don't know if it goes back to like commercial versus something else you know there's obviously commercial residential properties and then these owner occupied or individually owned I don't know how I have I own a duplex in Burlington and I still don't understand how the state designates between businesses like that and uh me who owns one one duplex yeah yeah they just want to be able to taxi more so that's why they care but I think the community one of the questions that I get hammered with my husband who says you know so how does it affect the community when you don't have owner occupied buildings you know if you suddenly creep up to 50% rental 50% ownership or 40% owner you know 60% rental you know how does that change the community dynamics and that's something we we have I guess you talk about that and when you talk about your comprehensive plan and not necessarily your land development code but at this point we're in between here it's I mean it's it's kind of like that topic and how do we get that reflective in you know how do we get how do we talk about community dynamics without you know we're talking about legislating community dynamics is what we're talking about about so it's um you know how how how has it changed you know I don't even know I don't even know what our percentage is at the moment um I would guess it's more owner occupied than it used to be if anything I will say that people stayed with me last summer they were in their mid 50s neither of them ever owned a house and they'd always rented and I liked it that way and they'd been living in Brooklyn but they moved up here during you know the worst of the pandemic and they actually ended up buying a house in Charlotte but I was I was amazed they were in the mid 50s they'd never owned a house but um a lot of people I mean some people can't get to the it's not so much they can't afford a mortgage they can't get to the point where they can make the dime payment for a lot of people and there are people who don't want to buy I think it's more common in urban areas I know when I lived in Seattle it wasn't that uncommon for people to not really want to buy you know what what would be the purpose of buying you know I think when I when I moved to Vermont it was definitely people were like oh well if you well why would you not ever buy a house you know it seemed flipped yeah well you know the economic advantages of owning a home versus renting is you know is evident it's sort of like why are you paying somebody else's mortgage for them um but you know it's you know as as more people are retiring um you know they're moving out of their starter home but they still own it and they rent it um sort of a thing it's um or they're splitting their home up okay so then you have that added ad you or or split home or whatever it does we've never really discussed that you know what community dynamics are we talking about when we're planning things you know what what is it that we're yes I know we're under the big push to try to get um everybody in in some kind of housing unit um it seems to be good stewards to get everybody housed uh and uh but on the other hand what how is it you know how is it effect yeah the pandemic yes Robin you're right people are moving here good gosh they're buying houses without on only seeing them through the internet and then they show up um you know and then the question ends up being you know in in conversations is well once the pandemic is gone will the housing free up a bit because people go back to where they used to live or I keep viewing it is that they'll love us and they'll stay um um they'll get accustomed to being here and they'll just stay because they like it um so I don't know that we can legislate that though I don't I really don't know that we have that capability um other than to try to get um our regulations as flexible as possible to allow housing to occur without impacting the quality of life um any more than it does um yeah I think you're right um not only do I not think not knowing that I think we shouldn't do it never mind hard hard could we do it when you try to do stuff like that it ends up having a lot of unintended consequences that you couldn't anticipate at the time okay so where do we um where are we headed for with this do we have more to go over I don't have more to go over um I can certainly um at the next meeting have recommendations suggestions for each of the trunk routes how much of the overlay will come into play there and maybe for various reasons um but if folks over the next couple weeks if you have ideas please just email me and let me know um what you're thinking and what what level of review for what type of development makes sense on each of those five trunk areas yeah and I think the thing that we should all be thinking about because I think it is a big change right and what it's been brought up that we don't you know we we don't want to make things too restrictive but we do want to have some um say and you know what our our um village looks like so always be thinking about the potential consequences as well as what you're trying to encourage uh yeah yeah David I think you know flexibility is the key but also I like the term may when it refers to us we may um and if somebody goes up with a project that you know I like to say that blows our socks off we may say this is fantastic yes please yeah I think before we end I would like everybody to put it in a diary that tonight Diane Clement said I agree Rob and three times which is maybe three times more in the 12 years since we've been working together don't get used to it you must be tired so are we going to uh warn when are we going to meet again and what are we going to be going over obviously we'll be going over what Regina is working on for us are we doing versus uh the nice list of topics that um Diane put together for us uh at the beginning of this effort and as does anybody have other topics they want to add to the list I don't have the list right in front of me that's why I'm edging a little but I thought that was a great summary of the things that we as a group thought we were going to review when we went through the process absolutely oh by the way we will um they weren't here tonight but um I think somebody from the housing committee wanted to come and also the chair of the energy committee uh they missed I didn't know they missed because it's a weak I missed but the chair of the energy committee who's a great guy I would like to come talk to us so Robin this is Deb McAdoo and I am the substitute where do you go Deb McAdoo I'm the substitute and the substitute went to the town instead of the village so our egg on my face and that's why I showed up late and I apologize but it's been a very interesting conversation and I appreciate your um your commitment to being good students in housing where do you where do you live Deb I live in the village okay that's that's even worse yeah sorry yes it is okay great so we will uh Robin will try to include those guests uh at our next meeting absolutely um yeah I was expecting the housing committee tonight I didn't know whether we'd want both one night but it seems to make sense um in terms of the housing committee I have had one meeting with this small grouping of uh I guess a working working group they're trying to put together uh um suggestions and uh around inclusionary zoning so just to kind of give you guys that heads up we're trying to get together I think next week so it's possible that by the next meeting I might be able to share um a little bit more of an update as to what they're looking to propose in terms of the town and village and uh inclusionary zoning sounds good so so are we looking at two weeks are we looking at the first and next month what are we anticipating the first and next month but if you want to do it in two weeks why not okay well are we going to be going over more chapters at the next meeting or are we what's the plan on that my work and schedule is based on the first meeting of every month um that's how I have it planned that's not to say that I couldn't come if I could look at the why don't we stick to that until we get closer to the our end date and then maybe then we realize that we actually need more meetings okay I'm okay yeah I'm okay with that I can't I can't make it on the 20th of this month the next the next Thursday but with enough heads up if I get it into my calendar I could add in the other Thursdays so let's say the first week of June June okay just one day first Thursday so so what when are we having the guests we don't want to have the guests the same time as we're discussing chapters with Regina or do we want our guests the alternative time I mean if we put them on the agenda first and then work on a chapter I don't I don't know what would be next it depends on the size of what we're tackling right yeah okay I'm not just you know it's we would just spend well the you know almost two hours with Regina so um if we're looking at I don't know Regina what is what will be next chapter obviously chapter eight yeah so uh it still would be a lot of this same thing that we talked about tonight um because I think there's a lot of text and decisions that still need to be made about what's what's happening where the overlay is going and what components of the overlay is happening in each of those areas right okay so let's just say that we definitely you know we'll have uh those two guests um if it's possible join us and then if we you know we can we can always put the chapter on the agenda it's unfair I mean we did we did spend a lot of time talking about that one section tonight um which kind of extended things a little bit so I think we can get it done I think maybe that's because it it's it's a bigger change than some of the other things other things may just need tweaking where this is actually a rethinking yep agreed so maybe we can because chapter eight is pretty small so Regina maybe we can go over that the two guests and have some more ideas about around what we talked about tonight yeah that sounds good okay um I just a thought just occurred to me that I'd like to propose to all you guys um and I'll try and do it quickly um and I don't know if it's the next meeting or the meeting after but something to kind of start to think about and I don't even know Robin if you've heard um at the town or village staff level through Evan um what plans might potentially be or if the board of trustees have had conversations but there is a lot of money that's about to be released through um American Rescue Plan and different COVID relief acts that is going to be given to us as a municipality whether it's the town of Essex or the village I don't know it will go to the town initially initially and is there a plan to um allow for the the village to do project I guess my question or my what I'm going for is are there projects in minds and ways for that money to be spent or should us as a planning commission potentially be looking at and prioritizing a couple of things that we think might work well um whether it's beautification yeah trustees will prioritize things sure yeah so I guess that's what I'm first thing will be the transportation okay I think that's great I mean what most of what I'd go for is um to do some type of project transformative thing or something that we could point to and say this is what we did with our money as opposed to try and spend it in 15 20 30 different places um but that's just my opinion but I just wanted to kind of put that out there for um the rest of the commission as well to know that there's money coming in I didn't know if it's worth us as a planning commission helping or um advising or working with the trustees to try and um think about some some things we might want to do here within the village so I'll leave it at that for now and we'll see what ends up coming our way and asked of us and as things roll out Patrick the the uh the trustees always have the option of uh using the brain trust that they have in us uh to bounce things off and discuss stuff it's their option to use our skills and what we know um to the best of the village's behalf and uh I think they they know that um but I think if you've got some um suggestions you might run them by you know and say hey by the way these these are things that I've heard through and I'm not sure if that root is to go through Robin or just send them to Terry and myself okay um and and you know so that they might have that possibility that it's you know something to look at but it's um um what I understood from the Montlinks of cities and towns which I participated in earlier in the week is that the money's supposed to come per capita here in Chittany County um so that the town will probably receive it but they would be distributing it out um and they will be getting not just the monies that go to cities and towns but the county monies are also going to then be distributed because we have um we don't have county government very lax or loose county government system so um you're right there's gonna be a dump truck load and it's just gonna the roads may actually be paid with gold is that that very old rumor um and uh yeah and the other thought that I have around it is that every other town in the state and not just our state but every state across the country is getting this too in every municipality if we're able to help the Board of Trustees potentially prioritize some projects and get some bids out there ahead of other towns we might actually see our projects move forward faster than some other places so I mean I know like you said Dan that the Board of Trustees has you know they can come ask us if they want but what if we preemptively said we think this might be a good way to to spend some of the money based on what we're looking at comprehensive plan and and how we think it fits into our town plan and village plan and how it might work with design five corners um just a thought that's all I get Robin to share your thoughts because I I think it's the way to go okay yeah yeah please send me an email I'll pass the phone I'd like to see that Vermont at the UVM students um design for that train station become a reality that that'd be great it's gonna be a meeting July 19th uh John I've hunted out a few boards from you know five years ago yeah it'd be nice if you and I could meet up to see if there I think there might be one or two missing and then I'll throw under the boss I know Greg Morgan had them for a while and um I'm not sure they all made it back to the village offices but if you had I could meet up we could take a look to see if we need to supplement that okay piece of cake new fire station would be good too just saying yeah there's a somewhat narrow list the structure side of what it can be spent what was spent on all right everyone so um if we don't have any adjourn yeah motion adjourn accepted do I have a second I'll second yeah excellent on favor all right all right everybody have a great night thank you so much thank you