May 6, 2015

with the Site Plan Review Advisory Board (“SPRAB”). As necessary, other sections of the ordinance were revised to reflect the changes to the Technical Review Committee. Subsequently, it had been determined there were additional sections of the ordinance that refer to the Technical Review Committee that had not been updated. Mr. Grygiel discussed the sections and his recommendations: Section 25-8-4, Walls and Fences — Mr. Grygiel said the current ordinance stated that an applicant was required to apply to the Planning Board for technical review if the fence exceeded the permitted limit of six feet; Mr. Grygiel recommended the requirement to apply for technical review be stricken. Additionally the section stated an applicant could apply for permission for “barbed and/or razor wire” through technical review; Mr. Grygiel recommended this requirement also be stricken. Mr. Eben said the Board should talk about the measurement of the six-foot fence; he said one side could be twenty feet because of the gradient; from where was the fence to be measured. Mr. Grygiel said the section of the ordinance did not discuss how the fence was measured. Dr. Bagoff opined the same methodology should be used as determining the lowest point of a house. Vice Chairman Weston said the definition was a separate issue from the current discussion; it could be discussed at a future date. Councilwoman McCartney questioned who would be reviewing that type of variance; Mr. Grygiel said it would be either the Zoning Officer or one of the Boards. Section 25-9.9, Home Occupations — Mr. Grygiel described the application as a business run by a homeowner out of their home without employees other than one resident, no signage or designated parking. Mr. Gurland asked if there were any requirements for people who worked out of their homes; did they have to file an application and pay a fee; Mr. Grygiel answered the ordinance defined the requirements; however, it was so prevalent. Vice Chairman Weston stated that issues had come up in the past when residents had complained about intense use by a neighboring property. Mr. Dwyer stated there is was a bill pending at the State level trying to define “home based businesses” but it was difficult to define. Vice Chairman Weston stated the main issue for the current discussion was to remove the wording related to “Technical Review”, the section would be

me based businesses” but it was difficult to define. Vice Chairman Weston stated the main issue for the current discussion was to remove the wording related to “Technical Review”, the section would be revised to have Home Occupations reviewed by the Zoning Officer; the Zoning Board of Adjustment would hear appeals. Section 25-9.9, Home Professional Office — Mr. Grygiel said a home professional office had more stringent requirements; it was actually a conditional use. He recommended it not be reviewed by SPRAB; the Zoning Official should make the determination if the conditions were met; if not, the application would appear before the Zoning Board of Adjustment for a “d(3)” variance. Section 25-11.10, Sidewalk Cafes in the B-1 and B-2 Districts - Mr. Grygiel said the Building Department and/or the Zoning Officer should review the applications. Technical Review should be removed from the current language. Section 32-2 Approving Agency; Administration — Mr. Grygiel said he found mention in the subdivision chapter of the Technical Review Committee allowing approval of minor subdivision without noticing or a full Board hearing; he recommended the provision be stricken; it was his opinion that an application for a minor subdivision be heard by the full Board.