Castine Preservation Commission approves shed rebuild, tables meter enclosure

[0:00] Speaker A (unidentified): We hear you were just sudden started. Yeah, okay, thank you. This side of the word, and you two should be good. Yeah, good at any time. Okay. [4:07] Chair: Let's call this meeting to order. This is the Presentation Commission, October 13th. We have some old business from last week that we will continue to discuss after we have two applications. The first one by Director Gary on 206 Perkins Street. Sorry about that, I didn't mean to make sure it was working. Okay, second is from Scott. And the first thing we do is the minutes from last meeting. We had a long work session of the key and minutes from a work session into a person's work session, a public meeting. So let's get right to the two applications, and then we can go to our other business. So I do have the sheet here, Brooke, for our commissioners present. We have everyone here. I think we have a full commission here, all five. Hope is here, Larry is here, George is here, Brooke is here, and Jeff is here. So all five commissioners present. So for the first application, we're going to do the DRE application first, and hopefully Scott can come for his application. It's back in time from Blue Hill. No. So the Deer 206 Perkins Street, I see on map 21, it's like 94 on the Historic Preservation District. So it is included in the district. Does anyone agree with that? Contributing. Contributing property, correct. And then for submission information, we have all the information here. Thank you very much. So it's not the main house at 206, is the small building that's set off from the road and to the right from the main building. I'll read the description of the activity environment sport preservation certificate. Here it says there is a small building that was an addition to a building that has been taken down. The addition remains. We want to tear it down and rebuild an identical structure in its place. This is due to the unsafe and rotting structural support beams. Okay, there's photographs attached. Let's go through these. It's all signed the applicant of the date. There are pictures here. Did everyone see the pictures? Yeah, you can see the kind of rotting bean, though it still is rotting. [7:31] Speaker C (unidentified): Do you guys want to, I did quickly copy, do you want to see? Oh, there you go. Oh, it's beautiful. [7:38] Speaker A (unidentified): Sometimes,, George, you're going to get the extras. Since I'm looking at it, I figure it out. [7:48] Speaker D (unidentified): Is it used just as a no it was attached or bigger? Oh yeah, I just wonder how old is the structure. [7:58] Chair: It looks like separated does. Let's see if it has that date on here. There we go. Yeah, that's better. [8:11] Applicant: I do not know the exact date that the structure was built, but it is fairly old and resembles the same timeline as the garage, which says it was. [8:23] Chair: An old unused kitchen and they want to make it in shed. The homeowner currently [8:31] Applicant: uses it as a storage area, but when we got up there to repaint it, the building was pretty wobbly as standing, and then we opened it up a little bit. It's some pretty bad rotting wood on the support beams in there, and it's not super safe [8:44] Chair: to even to use, really. Okay, I don't see it in the application, but I don't know how I know this or how I heard it from, but is that true that you're not going to put the chimney back into the building? Correct. No, yeah, since it's not going to be an outdoor kitchen anymore, you don't [9:06] Applicant: really need a chimney, working chimney. Nope. There's also running, there's sewer lines in there for like a sink, but that's also not going to be used anyway either. It's just going to be identical structured so that the landscaping looks the same, and when you look at it from an outside, it doesn't look any different, but it's just a safer version of a storage shed basically. [9:28] Chair: And will it continue to have windows in the same place? Yeah. And will it be wood? Yeah, exactly. We'll do wood siding, wood windows, wood frames. [9:44] Applicant: Yes sir. Yep, we [9:47] Speaker C (unidentified): have [9:51] Chair: to get two or two windows, do the same thing, two over two windows. Yeah, we're [9:59] Applicant: gonna put the same exact layouts. The door and the windows are all going to be in the same spot, and it's gonna have the same dimensions at height and same structure style. All right, that's great. So the [10:11] Chair: materials are listed there. So submission information is there, visual compatibility. I don't know how it could not be visually compatible if it's the exact same thing, minus the chimney. Materials, good. Placement, same. Style, same. There's a little bit of research, but we don't need a lot more research because nothing is going to change the property and surrounding area. Professional assistance, we have the professional on the phone right now on zoom. Building permit, do you have a building permit for this? [10:47] Applicant: Currently working on it right now. [10:51] Chair: Working on the building from it right now. Okay, we can note that complete their down and rebuild. Yes, yeah, I would say it goes over the ten thousand dollar minimum. It's true. So the only last question is if there is any language in the ordinance that might lead us to not certifying anyone. Have any thoughts or ideas or anything from the ordinance you think of that might cause us not to confirm this? No, it's a great project which I can rebuild again. Yeah, well this is your [11:41] Speaker C (unidentified): neighbor. Yeah, that's true, down the street. That's great. There was a question about whether or not [11:46] Applicant: we could turn the windows, keep them looking wooden, but have the windows themselves be aluminum on the outside, keep the frames wooden, have them have the same white color, but just make the windows themselves aluminum. That way they last longer and it's less upkeep on them, but it would look like wood from the road. Correct, yes, you wouldn't really be able to tell the difference. [12:10] Speaker C (unidentified): The finished framing is good. Yes, me, yeah, yes. [12:25] Applicant: So the framing, the siding, the structure is all gonna be wood, but just the actual window that slides up and down having that be aluminum, so there's less upkeep on painting it every so often, and having it being so close to the waterfront, it just adds more longevity to it, but it will look the same on the outside and the insides will be wooden. Are [12:50] Speaker D (unidentified): we good with that? Yeah, they're [12:52] Speaker C (unidentified): not, it's not keeping the same historical building, right, as long as it's a new hill, right? [13:00] Speaker D (unidentified): Okay. [13:03] Speaker A (unidentified): Do a motion. You do have one person online, another person online, I don't know if they want to comment. [13:12] Chair: Does anyone on the zoom call have any comments? This [13:20] Michelle Robinson: is Michelle Robinson. I guess I'm wondering, does the building really need to be torn down, or can it just be restored from the inside out? [13:28] Applicant: We thought about that process, but when we started opening up some of the wood, I can update another picture that we found, but some of those support beams on the outside side are completely rotten through, just black wood that's squishy, and it's unsafe, and we put a ladder up there on the on the gable peaks of it, the building shifted a little bit, like the top half of it swayed slightly, which we then took back down and stopped touching the building because it was a bit worrisome, and it's not the Best, so it's not super safe, so that corner there on the left side, if when we take that clapboard off the very edge of it, I can update another picture and you can see that it's completely rotten through, just black wood, and nearly 80 of it is just not even there, so it's, it in my opinion it should be taken down rather than trying to open up the outside and the inside and then add a new support structure being there. This would just make more sense in the long term. Thank [14:30] Speaker D (unidentified): you. Move to accept. Second. [14:36] Chair: Second. Vote. All in favor of approval? Aye. Unanimous 5-0? Yes. [14:48] Speaker D (unidentified): Okay. Let's move. Yeah. What's that? [15:38] Speaker C (unidentified): He's out and he's on his way back, so he could probably reach him by phone, but I don't know how you guys can handle it, but he was tied up with blood for the test [15:54] Chair: and stuff. Oh gosh. Okay, well, I guess we can discuss it, and if we have any specific questions for Scotty, we can ask them and see if you can respond to those questions. If you can't respond now, I guess we can delay until, I guess we would have to be delayed until the next meeting in November. I would hate to delay it anymore if he wants to do it before things start freezing up. But why don't we start and get as far as we can and see if we have any questions. [16:33] Applicant: I'll also send an updated picture of it to an email if that makes sense for you guys. You can see a picture of the rotten wood on the exterior if you guys would like that map. Yeah, thank you. Is there a preferred – I have a – what's Sean's email if I can send it to Sean. That'd be perfect. [16:53] Chair: Yeah. Okay. I think regardless, John, we approve the application. [17:00] Speaker C (unidentified): Okay. Yep, you're welcome. Okay, can you stop right there on the video? Oh, I see there's that, but then the one with the drive [17:15] Chair: with the door over the [17:17] Speaker C (unidentified): that thing, so I was struggling to understand what that would ultimately look like if you're walking up and down the street, how's it grounded, what's happening on the sides, [17:32] Speaker D (unidentified): what's happening with the [17:33] Speaker C (unidentified): loose structure over it. Maybe there isn't any. It looks like you took a sticker on my [17:39] Chair: screen. Yeah, you definitely, it's a drawing over the Xerox. So I couldn't really understand [17:48] Speaker C (unidentified): what was going to happen. If you're facing the building, this is the driveway going up the side, and from there it looks like there's there's no side structure on the front your face in the building looks like there's no structure, right, I walked down [18:08] Chair: there and took a look at it, does kind of wrap around the two things into your point, there would need to be some sort of loop on there or angle you need that [18:19] Speaker C (unidentified): I know because I'm trying to do the exact same thing on my bar, so you do want that so the ice doesn't fall down on the inside. And see on the left side of this drawing and all those wires. Yeah, that's what you're going to see from the front, from the street. And I would assume that is going to be covered somehow. Yeah, it looks to me like the intent is to box the entire thing, but I just want to make sure it's boxed. Are you talking about going the whole length of underneath the window? We're kind of going around [18:58] Chair: it, so this is, this is the alley kind of facing side, and then there's the front street, the main street side, so we need to be boxed in sort of, you know, three sides here. Yeah, the fourth side would be the building itself, but there would need to be a front. This would be the side looks like the doors, and there'd be back to us. And on top of that, there would need to be some sort of roofing mechanism. I'm sure the frame ought to be on the top of it. You don't want it flat, so it's going to need to be at an angle, and then it's going to be kind of built into the building there. [19:28] Speaker C (unidentified): And how far is it going to overlap the... Can you bring it down there? Sure. Yeah, I mean, I'm not sure. Yeah. You know, he's a problem solver. Right. But I think the whole intent is to build cabinet, if you will, to enclose it, to not protect it from the elements but also hide that business. So what's the siding on the existing building? Is it wood or is it tile? It's wood. So would it also have matching wood siding? Yeah, I mean, I think at some point in the future, I think his ultimate goal if he [Speaker A (unidentified): plans] whatever in the future to have vinyl on it someday, but no, it's work right now, so he would match whatever plan. That's his intent. [20:42] Chair: I'm assuming Scott's going to build it himself. He's going to do the work. [20:46] Speaker C (unidentified): He would build it. [20:48] Chair: Right, he would build himself. Yeah, so there's no contractor to ask or no sort of more detailed drawing or plans or elevations or details. I wonder, since, Scotty's not here, that maybe we take this chance to kind of ask him to get a little bit more information about sort of three dimensions of this. If not written, or drawing, or just a little bit more clear understanding of how this is going to be built, what the materials is going to be made of. Usually we want to use the materials used in the project, how they match, use this in structure. It's not in here. [Speaker C (unidentified): here so] Right now it just says close-in meters. That's the description of the activity requirement certificate. So put it out to the other commissioners. I think I would like to see a little bit more detail or a little bit better description of what exactly he's building. One of [21:58] Speaker C (unidentified): the reasons I'm concerned is one of our business. Yeah, but my understanding is that the building, the building down below is going to have an outdoor patio area facing that building, sort of for people to have coffee. [22:14] Chair: The Mary Mercantile building? [22:17] Speaker C (unidentified): It's becoming the bookstore that has a... [22:20] Chair: The kind of low area there is going to become a patio? [22:23] Speaker C (unidentified): I think on what would be the north-northwest side of the building, but facing this structure. So I love that Scotty's wanting to make that more attractive, but I'd like to say, let's do a really good job of it. And he's had conversations with Sarah. [22:44] Chair: Yeah, I would imagine this is kind of where it's coming from, this importance conversation. [22:48] Speaker C (unidentified): Well, he's been wanting to do this before that's even been in the works, but since that's been in the works, he's had conversations with Sarah. [23:07] Chair: I think the project is a good one. I think it adds value to the building, the value of the downtown. It's, it's, it's good for the district in the town. So I'm all for the nature of the project. I just think if we approve this, we don't really know what we're gonna get. [23:26] Speaker C (unidentified): Right, yeah, I feel like arguments we're not, we don't know, right, but I really like to see [23:34] Chair: what happens, right, yeah. I think, I think just more detail, especially because I feel like those doors need to access that front face as well. There's another meter over the right that needs to be access and there's no, there's no sense from these drawings how we're going to get to those. [23:52] Speaker C (unidentified): okay as well okay so derek could you put that picture sure will do you want me to try him on the phone or is this something that you'd rather i think he needs to do a little more yeah i think [24:05] Chair: something amended to the application to show a little bit more detail or something in writing of detail because, okay, an explanation on the phone is one thing, but that's not going to be part of the application. So I think just like an amendment to the application that shows more detail or explain more detail how this is going to be completely enclosed, attached to the building, what's underneath, how is it, how is it supported from underneath, what's the sort of roofing mechanism that's gonna, you know, keep water off of this or getting behind it or [24:40] Speaker C (unidentified): And I think it looked like in the application that the horizontal electrical lines going up to another transfer box, that those were possibly going to be covered up by plantings. And that's what the fencing that's, we have a picture of fencing, now the fencing is trying to sort out what that was for. [25:00] Chair: The fencing is to keep my dog out of his gutter. That's nice. [25:06] Speaker C (unidentified): But that's why I wanted to look at it. I think the wires go from the box, yeah, to that other smaller box, yeah, and those could be, yeah, exactly, yeah, that would, I think that right really complete the project, yeah, and is that what that sensing picture of fencing is for? [25:33] Chair: yeah i think i think okay i don't know if you want to move to that but as i look at that i don't think the fencing needs are approval like it's short it's removable it's like pressed into the ground you can pull out like that 's not a permanent structure it's landscaping it's not [25:53] Speaker C (unidentified): 18 inches ever, yeah, so can we give opinions on it? I really like it, yeah. [26:01] Speaker D (unidentified): Can we just say that we're approving the covering of the electrical in principle and would appreciate seeing the final design? I think we can say that we're. [26:20] Chair: We are in favor of it, but I don't think we can approve it. We either approve the application or we don't. There's no sort of approving it with these sort of caveats. [26:30] Speaker A (unidentified): You're going to want to table it? [26:32] Chair: Yeah, I think we're going to want to table it until next month. [26:38] Speaker C (unidentified): I don't know what Scotty's time is, but I'm open to a meeting before next month. [26:46] Chair: For sure, yeah. If he gets the new updated application in tomorrow, and we can, I don't know how quickly we can post a new meeting, I'm happy to convene again to talk to you about this, look at the details, and improve it before the frost, yeah, before the frost. [27:01] Speaker A (unidentified): Which you can see. [27:05] Speaker C (unidentified): So where is the retaining wall, my. [27:09] Speaker A (unidentified): Assumption is it's in front of this whole area, replace the wood, but I don't know, okay. [27:15] Speaker C (unidentified): Do we, you know, do you like that? I don't, that's part of what we're asking. [27:20] Speaker A (unidentified): Because on the description back here, it says, Quest Pronto and so 18 inch high retaining wall along the driveway, construct an enclosure and utility meters and so that's on the sidewalk. [27:36] Chair: So that's the, yeah,. [27:38] Speaker A (unidentified): That's gonna be a lot of driveway. No, the fence is different. Yeah. [27:46] Speaker D (unidentified): I don't know. [27:50] Chair: Based on those flowers. [27:54] Speaker C (unidentified): Yeah. Is the fence already there, Sue? No. No. Okay. No, there's some temporary netting up there right now. Yeah. Because he put some grass out there and he took them all. Oh, I remember that. The rocks. Yeah. Okay. The rocks around there. Yeah. You've had to put grass. Yeah. And there was literally, yeah, it was not only dogs but people. Yeah. So we've got some temporary stuff out there just to let the grass come up, and this will, yeah. So I'd love to hear what [28:32] Chair: you think, but I think we can vote to table this until we get more information, but I'd love more information about the enclosure of the meters, but also about the retaining walls. It doesn't say what it's made of or what it looks like or what the thickness or anything like that. So more detail on the retaining walls, more detail on the enclosure, how it's supported, what are the, you know, the doors, how is it connected to the building, what's on the top of it. Just more detail about both those things, and then again, it gives us those information we can get as soon as possible to try to prove this. Yeah, do you want to see if there are any other comments [29:16] Speaker A (unidentified): on the public? Yeah, that could be answered rather than later. Yep, Michelle, do you have any comments? [29:24] Michelle Robinson: I do. Thank you, Derek. So the application seems incomplete as it's missing items outlined in 10.2.6, 10.2.7, and 10.2.8, and also does not seem to respond to 12.3.1. That said, I have comments on the three things. So the retaining wall, there's nothing in the drawings that actually tells you where the retaining wall is located, and for example, a site plan and the road, the driveway to Scotty's house is actually an easement with the neighbor, so I don't know that this wall is actually on his property versus the neighbor's property. And I'm not sure why it's being asked for, because if you walk by the site, it's grass and it doesn't appear to have any sort of a retaining issue. It's not, there doesn't seem to be any erosion happening here. In this image, it looks like he's proposing to replace all the grass with gravel and add fill. And I'm not sure why. With respect to the meter cover, I agree with your comments about how big and materials, but it also needs to be in conformance with CMP requirements and the National Electric Code. There's rules about what you can place in front of and how close to meter banks and with and with respect to the fence. There's actually nothing in the documents that tell us how tall it is. I know the image is showing like I don't know impatience or some sort of annual that's low, but that doesn't actually mean that's what's proposed. It's just an image of what the fence, it's an image, it's not, this fence could be four feet tall. There's nothing in here that tells you how tall it is. [31:45] Chair: I didn't see anything. She's right, there's, I thought it said the 18 inches, but the 18 inches are retaining a wall and it says it just says fence, so I don't want to cut you off Michelle. It's like the end of your comments? Yes. Okay, good, thank you for that. Thank you for the CMP requirement note, we'll add that to our questions for Scotty for clarification for the tabled application. So we need more information about the fence. We need more information about the retaining wall. And we need a little more detail and information about the enclosement of the meters and that with regard to the CMP requirements as well. [32:31] Michelle Robinson: I'm sorry, I have one more thing. So Scotty keeps adding impervious areas to his site, and although this is a very small area that he's adding impervious to, in the totality, his site has probably gone from being, I don't know, mostly pervious to now it's probably well in excess of 60% impervious. Impervious, and as a downhill neighbor, I'm sure everyone in this room knows that I have, I take very personally this idea that we all need to control our water flow, and every time he adds impervious he's he's he's hurting his neighbors because he's not controlling his water fill water flow, and I don't understand why, like that's a part of the equation here, it needs to be, and it may not be in your purview, but presumably it's in the planning boards purview. Okay. [33:34] Chair: Well, thank you for your comments. Yeah, like you said, I think that's that's outside of our purview, but you know this goes right along with the application for the certificate is a preamble to the planning board certificate, so I think that's noted and that's in the comments, the notes for the meeting. So I think that'll get to the point. So thank you for that. Okay. I think, does anyone else have anything to say on this application before we table or put [34:06] Speaker D (unidentified): it to a vote for table? I don't know if this is helpful, but I did just Google this product and [34:12] Speaker C (unidentified): says it's 18 inches high. That's 18 inches high as well. Okay. So I don't know. [34:17] Michelle Robinson: Well, I think Scotty's done this before, guys, like a year or two ago. He presented a fence, and it was like, is this the fence? And he was like, well, it's kind of the fence, but I'm not sure it's the fence. I strongly suggest you find out what the fence is and make sure he locks in on it. Yeah, there's no plan that shows you where it goes, just the description that it's along the sidewalk. [34:44] Chair: But it doesn't even say that. I don't think it even says that. So I think we're going to run even more information on those. So, I'm sorry. Okay, any other comments before we close the vote? [35:02] Speaker D (unidentified): What's the vote? I mean, aren't we just kind of putting it on? [35:06] Chair: We get a vote to table it. Oh, alright. [35:09] Speaker D (unidentified): My phone was for the fence, not the box. Right. I'm going to agree with everyone else. I moved the table. Second. [35:19] Chair: All in favor of tabling this application? I think that's it for all the other applications for this week. So there are a few other items that we discussed last week and we have updates for last week but last month and we have updates on those. A few other things came out, one being we asked Julie Gray for her review of the different districts and properties, historic districts and properties on neck and off neck, and so I thought that was, that was good. We wanted to maybe improve that into our design guide, so I thank you for that. So I don't know if you guys have any comments. We read through that, but it was nice to produce that underwear. [36:16] Speaker C (unidentified): I found it helpful, I just don't remember why. [36:20] Chair: Well, I think people are looking for more information about their properties and what they can do and what their limitations are. They don't apply to a lot of properties, but they apply to enough that people can maybe find their property in one of these lists and whatever their ramifications are. It might just be helpful for them, or it might help them when they're buying, you know, if you want to put that in the design guide and looking to buy and cast even something in the district or outside the district into a different historic property, that'll give them a good guide. So I think that's good information. What else? So the other one is we were reviewed by the main historic preservation commission and they had some recommendations for us and I think these recommendations kind of fall under all overarching conversations. So they're just kind of more information, more fuel for us to consider as we look to update our ordinance and bring it to the modern era. Any comments about that? And then, so there was a question proposed by Mr. Rosen last month about, he asked me, does our ordinance have a minimum maintenance? So we looked it up and it does. Article 13, maintenance and repair. I don't know if everyone read this, but I'm going to read it out a little bit. It establishes a requirement to prevent deteriorate, prevent deterioration by the glass. It applies to individual historic property structures within a historic district and historic landmarks, historic preservation ordinance that reads out the new ordinance. It specifically addresses deteriorating exterior walls and structural supports, deteriorating roofs, ineffective waterproofing of walls, roofs, and foundations, and broken windows and doors, deteriorating chimneys, exterior plaster and mortar, deterioration that creates or permits hazardous or unsafe conditions. The requirement focuses on preventing serious deterioration rather than prescribing a detailed routine maintenance standard. I think that's an important point there. Article 13 describes deterioration severe enough to irreparably harm the structure's life and historic character and potentially lead to demolition for public safety. It does not specifically specify maintenance schedules for clear deadlines or detailed standards for everyday upkeep. So it's about preventing. Most of it is about preventing. Don't let your home, don't let your property get to this state. If it is in this state, that's where it gets a little gray. And that's maybe we look to our ordinance update for updating the language. So enforcement. Enforcement is provided in Article 13. It directs the commission, us, to notify the code enforcement officer, Mr. Blodgett, of evidence of legal acts. Section 17.3 and 17.6 authorize investigation, written correction orders, and enforcement through legal action or fines. Also, Section 9.1 allows ordinary exterior maintenance and repairs without a historic preservation certificate when they do not change design or appearance, and we know that. So, there's some important language there. Any comments on that, Brooke? [39:58] Speaker C (unidentified): No, I just wonder when it would ever be used. [40:04] Speaker D (unidentified): Yeah. How does it come to our attention? We can go spying on our neighbors, we can send somebody from your house to inspect things. [40:16] Chair: It doesn't stipulate. [40:17] Speaker C (unidentified): I mean, the building that we just authorized to be reconstructed would have fit into that category. [40:25] Chair: Right. And they're doing it. And they're doing it. Right. We didn't do anything. [40:30] Speaker C (unidentified): Did you know that building was coming, was deteriorating? No. No. [40:34] Speaker D (unidentified): So, well, without making it sound threatening, we could promulgate this to the folks with houses in the historic district. So they're aware that this is at least on the books. [Chair: That's true. Yeah.] But I would like it to be done in a very non-threatening way. [40:54] Chair: Right. Right. And it doesn't say that we need to confirm that it's unsafe for us to bring it to the code enforcement officer. [41:03] Speaker D (unidentified): Yeah. Well, unsafe, presumably, would lie more within their jurisdiction. [41:08] Chair: Right. He would have to investigate that to find out if it was. [41:11] Speaker D (unidentified): I'd like to see them investigating if it's really a question of unsafe. But since the idea is to prevent, you know, the carrot that could go with this small stick, I suppose would be wouldn't you like to consult with us about what help we might be able to suggest? [41:33] Chair: Or be notified by the code enforcement officer before it becomes unsafe. [41:38] Speaker D (unidentified): Yeah, but that starts to sound touch-threatening. I'd like to keep it as unthreatening as we could make it, but make people aware that there is a minimum maintenance requirement and [41:53] Speaker A (unidentified): that we're here to help. Right. I'd love to discuss this more with the code enforcement officer. [42:00] Chair: I think he plays a pivotal role in this discussion and his sort of understanding of this and his faith on it. [42:09] Speaker D (unidentified): When we make certain revisions, as we're thinking about, is there a period of public comment that would go with it? Yes. So that would be a good moment. And make sure it gets in the local newspapers and the like for making people aware that this [42:28] Chair: provision right exists right so there's a there's us then there's the ordinance revision committee and then there's the auditor who we'll go to next with our recommendations and then we'll go to town so there's there's four steps before actually we have an updated ordinance [42:46] Speaker C (unidentified): At least if someone's coming into town they want to buy one of these homes that is in the district and they go to buy their home is there any document that has to happen that they get to understand that this falsely exists like [43:10] Chair: Are they given an ordinance are they like pointed [43:13] Speaker C (unidentified): It to the ordinance or right, what was the legal responsibility to the town to inform someone that is trying to follow the story? I think he had that you can ask the town manager didn't Mark make the post over there when I'm not paying attention to something else? I mean when Marcus is still here I remember he made one it was specific to new home buyers and I think it was the flyer it was given to the real estate people would there be [43:44] Speaker D (unidentified): Is it an actual easement that would be on the deed? I don't think that it would be. I mean this is an easement it's a restriction on a property. I mean I wouldn't buy, I mean I did buy a house it was in a historic district it was in the beach okay it was in the beach sure it's an easement it's a limitation on my ownership right so the realtor is should be you know putting this as something that runs with the should be but do they have to say if I hire me yeah [44:39] Speaker C (unidentified): It just makes me wonder if it has teeth then it needs to also have structure needs to also [44:51] Chair: So someone is buying a house coming from out of town to buy a house within the district are they are notified that it is within the district? I'm certain I don't know when the how we probably [45:02] Speaker A (unidentified): Wouldn't know until it was closed on anyways because we don't necessarily know so it's really up for the Realtors because it's kind of like when people move in on a private road and then they realize oh you're not gonna get trash pickup or we're not going to grade your road for you or follow your road like what do you mean well you should have asked the question you know before you bought it that's I won't even get into it, but I've had some problems like when I was in Levant and everything was Selling left and right we had a lot of people moving in from the city that were in for a rude awakening they said yeah that's not the way we do it whatever [45:51] Speaker D (unidentified): This is an actual [45:53] Speaker A (unidentified): Right so that's That should be something that's really right to put into the deed itself, your enclosure. And I don't know if there's a law or anything else on the books that talk about that, like if it's in a historic district or not. [46:12] Speaker D (unidentified): Probably not, again, from my previous experience. But it is something that runs in the deed. [Speaker A (unidentified): Yeah, definitely.] Somebody else asked him just to project. In my case, I was told by my lawyer that my driveway, I had a permanent easement on it, and it was owned by the university. It turned out when we got to the closing and I read the small print that it was a revocable easement, and they could take it back at any time they wanted it, leaving me with nowhere to put my car where I couldn't even put her on the street. So obviously I was a little bit annoyed with life, but it's right in the deep, yeah, and when you're in this historic district that runs with the beach like any other, yeah, so we might remind the viewers [47:18] Chair: sounds like they've been reminded [47:21] Speaker C (unidentified): whatever it is, but you know this is also a kind of [47:35] Speaker D (unidentified): public relations thing, I mean, I was wondering if once a year we might have a sort of newsletter letter to the good folks of the historic district. Here's what's going on. Here we're available to you. We'd love to help you. And oh, by the way, you have a minimum maintenance requirement. I mean, just a letter once a year that reminds folks we're not the enemy. [48:01] Speaker C (unidentified): I think that's a great idea. I think it's good. [48:03] Speaker D (unidentified): We can use a pink Wamego as our logo. [48:09] Speaker C (unidentified): When we vote on the budget. [48:12] Speaker A (unidentified): everybody's in attendance, yeah, or anybody even cares, so this says sellers are generally expected to reveal whether a property is located in designated historic district on a standard real estate because sellers disclosure forms as it materially impacts how the buyer can use repair or alter the home, omitting or falsely stating that a home is outside historic district. It can lead to contract disputes, legal action, or allow a buyer to walk away with their earnest money. [48:45] Speaker D (unidentified): I would bet that the realtors are using that language in their disclosure form to people. Whether people notice it or not, or know what the implications of it are, is their problem. Where's your deed, George? Where's what? Where's your deed? Your deed? It's registered, but you may not physically have it in hand. I don't. I asked my real read them why no not the answer is it's somewhere they count, but yeah, that's interesting, i didn't even look at that, and the realtor who doesn't do that is it, yeah, i would imagine the local realtors that benefits them too, we could ask them right [49:55] Chair: Okay any more comments on that? Yeah other business. The last thing was that we were, I forwarded the email that I sent to Carter Jackson so he does ordinance drafting, he does one that's right, and he offered us his services so we now know that he knows that we know that and then we can sort of keep them on the board. Do you want to use him for any sort of ordinance drafting coming up because we know that's in the near future and I think that is the last item I had. Is there any other new [50:37] Speaker D (unidentified): business? Animals. Any progress on finding some alternates to join us? I have a note here to ask [50:44] Chair: Sean Blanchett if he got any comments back from his email. We're still short too aren't we? Are short alternates, we have two orders. Yes did you make any leeway with your [50:56] Speaker D (unidentified): neighbors? Seem to be as busy as I am. Yeah trying to bake off [51:01] Chair: but well keep it in mind if you meet someone and say hey ask you something [51:19] Speaker D (unidentified): maybe somebody from the Academy and we talked about having something I'd have somebody up there Jeff [51:32] Speaker C (unidentified): we keep talking about I mean for years this commission has been talking about updating as a matter of fact we did some work on it which has sort of gone by so do we [51:47] Chair: have a timeline for our process? There's no timeline right now. I know that some sections of the ordinance are a little bit more of a priority to the ordinance review committee right now. Housing is a big one, water is a big one so those are those are there's some heated lots of discussions on all of those and so we are kind of the de facto sub commission for the historic preservation coordinates there's you know for the other ones they have different committees that discuss that and report, but we are that committee for importance review. So we are having some of those conversations. I think it's difficult to do it in the time that we have per month. I thought the working session last month was great. So if we wanted to do another working session to discuss specifically that and then bring some comments or some ideas to the review commission, I think that would kind of push us more towards the trying to get that it's years. Okay, well, let's see when Scotty can get Amended application to us and maybe continue the conversation. Yep, it is a time for George or just be home in two minutes, so [53:23] Speaker C (unidentified): Oh no, we have one of our houseguests coming for dinner. I move to adjourn. We all adjourn. Adjourn. Thank you all.