MINUTES OF MEETING OF THE ARCHITECTURAL AND HISTORIC REVIEW BOARD OF THE VILLAGE OF SAGAPONACK IN THE TOWN OF SOUTHAMPTON, COUNTY OF SUFFOLK AND STATE OF NEW YORK A regular monthly meeting of the Architectural and Historic Review Board of the Village of Sagaponack was held at 3:30 p.m. on Friday, November 16, 2012 at 3175 Montauk Highway, Sagaponack, N.Y. The meeting was called to order by Chairperson Sandford with a flag salute. Present were Board Members Vice Chairperson Tom White, Barbara Slifka and Robert Barandes. Also present was Pat Arancio-Remkus, secretary and Village Building Inspector John Woudsma. Absent were Gideon Mendelson, alternate member Nick Martin, and Village Attorney Anthony Tohill. I. APPROVAL OF MINUTES MONTHLY MEETING Chairperson Sandford asked for a motion to approve the minutes from the September 21, 2012 and October 22, 2012 AHRB meetings. A motion was offered by Tom White and seconded by Barbara Slifka. II. III. SOLAR PANELS/GATES/SIGNS OLD BUSINESS There was no old business. IV. NEW BUSINESS A. Signs B. Amendments 1. Cassia Meiguo Properties 791 Daniels Lane 908-10-2-11 Applicant proposes changes of siding of new wing of residence 1
Edward Papazian of Nick Martin Architects and Brianna Tovson of 4MA Builders presented the application. Mr. Papazian explained that they are proposing a horizontal cedar batten siding system which will clad the addition with a horizontal louver screen that will cover the windows The change is of an ornamental nature. He noted that originally the siding was flat against the house and they are now angling it 90 degrees away from the house. Ms. Tovson added that the originally approved siding was tongue and groove and they are now proposing louvers. She noted that the window locations will remain the same. Mr. Papazian stated that solar gain will be mitigated in the interior and at night less light will project out from the house. Robert Barandes asked if the louvers were movable to which Mr. Papazian responded no. Tom White noted that at night it will look like light bulb with stripes to which Ms. Tovson responded no, it will look more like a lantern effect. Robert Barandes asked if the house is facing Daniels Lane to which Mr. Papazian responded yes. Tom White asked if the fence will be a solid fence to which Mr. Papazian responded no, perhaps they can use a similar expression as the siding on the fence if it is approved. Chairperson Sandford asked if they will have gates to which Mr. Papazian responded no. Chairperson Sandford asked for a motion to approve the proposed changes to the siding of the new wing of the residence. A motion was offered by Robert Barandes and seconded by Barbara Slifka. It was unanimously approved. C. Additions/Renovations D. Demolitions E. New Construction 1. Daniels Hedges LLC 233 Hedges Lane 908-10-1-23 Applicant proposes construction of a two story, single family residence with an attached 3 car garage, finished basement, covered porch, pool house and trellis 2
Val Florio, architect, presented the application. Chairperson Sandford asked if this property is a flag lot to which Mr. Florio responded yes and noted that it is the last vacant lot of the Daniel Hedges Subdivision and it is the fifth lot in. Mr. Florio stated that the proposed house will have a similar configuration to the house on lot #6. It will be a 6,000 sq. ft. house with a wrap around covered porch. They added living space on top of the garage. It is actually a 5,000 sq. ft. home with living space above the 2 nd Fl of the wing that goes to the three car garage. It is a traditional shingle styled house with two peaked roofs, one of which sweeps down to coat the covered porch. He noted that the rear of the house faces the reserve and noted that the scale is spread out. He explained that the chimney will be a soft brick with a simple look and architecturally when the house weathers, it will all blend in noting that it is very fluid in its look. Tom White asked if the covered porch will be shingled right to the ground to which Mr. Florio responded yes. There will be plantings that wrap the porch and rather than have the columns go right to the deck, they will sit on a shingled knee wall. Tom White asked if there was brick around the window on the lower level or basement to which Mr. Florio responded yes. Mr. Florio noted that the house will not be visible from Daniels Lane and that they pushed the house closer to the flag so that there will be plenty of room for the pool and tennis court, which will overlook the reserve. Mr. Florio stated that part of the Village code makes it difficult to have a porch. There is so much give and take you are left with approximately 15% of your potential. He made the house smaller in order to develop the porch so that it will feel less ominous when bringing the roof to a one story element. The roof edge will be at a 10 height. Tom White asked what the depth of the overhang is to which Mr. Florio responded that it will be no more than a 2 overhang on the roof. Mr. Florio stated that the pool house is 166 sq. ft. and has relationship to the tennis. It will act as a cabana for the pool and a place to get a cold drink from tennis. Tom White asked if there are two 2 nd Fl porches to which Mr. Florio responded yes and added that there is also a Juliet balcony for the center room. Tom White asked what the trim color was to which Mr. Florio responded that it is bone white. There will be no bright white trim. 3
Chairperson Sandford asked for a motion to approve the construction of a two story, single family residence with an attached 3 car garage, finished basement, covered porch, pool house and trellis. A motion was offered by Robert Barandes and seconded by Barbara Slifka. It was unanimously approved. 2. Topping Farm LP 58 Daniels Lane 908-9-41-7 & 8 Applicant proposes the demolition of a portion of the existing stable and renovate the remaining portion Bill Kelly of Morton Buildings presented the application. Tinka Topping was also present. He noted that currently there is an existing indoor riding arena with an attached stable. The stable is in disrepair and they are proposing to remove a section of the stable. Chairperson Sandford asked when the stable was built to which Mr. Kelly responded that he was not sure. He explained that the indoor riding arena was constructed and connected to the stable in 1961. He also noted that there is a flat roof section that he does not know when it was constructed, but stated that it is being proposed to be removed. He stated that they are proposing to remove 26 length section of the flat roof section, which was originally 60 long and will be made to 34 long overall. There will be no change to the riding arena and the stabling facility will be reconfigured because they do not need so many stalls. He noted that the appearance from Gibson will remain the same. He stated that they will have cedar siding and white metal dutch doors as currently exists. Chairperson Sandford asked why they can not do cedar to which Mr. Kelly responded that they do not hold up well as the horses flavor cedar. Chairperson Sandford asked what color the dutch doors will be to which Mr. Kelly responded that they will be white as currently exists. Mr. Kelly stated that they will be removing the alleyway between the arena and the stalls and a row of stalls. They will construct new stalls. He noted that the existing office and bathroom will remain in their current locations. Robert Barandes noted that there is no overhang to which Mr. Kelly agreed. He noted that they will continue to have a flat roof. Robert Barandes clarified that they do not want to visually change the look of the structures, but that they were just changing the setback to which Mr. Kelly responded yes. 4
Chairperson Sandford asked for a motion to approve the demolition of a portion of the existing stable and renovate the remaining portion. A motion was offered by Barbara Slifka and seconded by Robert Barandes. It was unanimously approved. 3. 3FPL LLC 3 Fairfield Pond Lane 908-9-2-49 Applicant proposes construction of a two story, single family residence with covered porch, unroofed deck and driveway gates Viola Rouhani of Stelle Architects presented the application. John Bennett, Esq. and Ian Hanbeck of Chris LaGuardia Designs were also present. Barbara Slifka asked how big the lot was to which Ms. Rouhani responded that it is 1.4 acres. She noted that the house is between the pond and the ocean. Ms. Rouhani stated that the new house will be within the footprint of the existing house except the new house will be 1,000 sq. ft smaller and it does not encroach any further in any direction. They are proposing a 2 story residence that will be raised up to meet the FEMA requirements and does not go above the height restrictions. The lower level is buried on both sides and there is no extra fill being brought in to do that because it was quite landscaped to begin with. It has been built up with ornamental landscaping on the pond side. That will all be taken away and will be re-vegetated. Ms. Rouhani stated that they have both the Coastal Erosion Permit and the Wetlands Permit and we are doing a lot more native vegetations than existing. When you come up to the house you are moving up through a series of landscaped steps that makes it look like they are part of the environment. They are not too constructed looking. They will bring you up to the main level. Essentially it will look like a two story house and not a three story house. She continued that the same thing happens on the dune side. She stated that they have received a permit from Southampton Town to bring the dune further towards the house so that it will also be level on that back side. From the ocean side you will see a two story house. Robert Barandes asked if there is a basement to which Ms. Rouhani responded that there is an unfinished crawl space on the lower level. Chairperson Sandford asked if the linear length of the structure was the same as existing to which Ms. Rouhani responded yes, the same if not less. Ms. Rouhani explained that there will be a breakaway retaining wall at lower level. There is a retaining wall that the dune can come up against and there will be piles and columns under the house. It is intended to be a storage space. There will be no 5
access to the lower level from the interior. The access would be from the utility entryway. Ms. Rouhani presented a rendering showing the view from the neighbors to the west. Chairperson Sandford asked if the rendering shows how it is now to which Ms. Rouhani responded no. She stated that there is currently sand without beach grass and they are proposing to add beach grass and bring the beach grass and the dune right up to the house. Chairperson Sandford stated that she would prefer that the public see one story instead of two to which Mr. Bennett stated that there is a dune re-nourishment in place and Ms. Rouhani stated that there is an existing two story house currently on the property that is also elevated. The existing view and the proposed view will not be much different. The current house has a basement also. John Bennett stated that the intention of the Coastal Erosion Regulations was to try to minimize the coverage. The goal here is to minimize the coverage which is why it has both a Coastal Erosion Permit and a Wetlands Permit. They are also pushed up against Fairfield Pond. It is a bit of a challenge. In conjunction with a meeting with Marty Shea, the idea was to minimize coverage, which is where the Coastal Erosion Hazard Area Regulations send you. The only way to achieve that is with two stories. They are actually reducing the amount of coverage from the existing. Barbara Slifka noted that this is such a sensitive area that they are trying to build on. Ms. Rouhani noted that the height is similar to the existing structure and in volume it is taking up the same or less space. Ms. Rouhani presented renderings showing east vs. west and a view of the façade facing the ocean. Chairperson Sandford asked if there is any way to soften the angles given the height so that it seems to integrate more with vegetation and dunes to which Mr. Bennett responded that he thought based on what you normally see on the dune, there is quite a texture added to this house as opposed to what is there. Also it is not a glass and steel box. Ms. Rouhani stated that they tried to give it as much texture as possible to soften it and not make it very stark. They have tried to soften the angles and work with pulling pieces in and out, but by the way they have to calculate the FAR there are some limitations that they had to work with. Barbara Slifka asked what materials will be used to which Ms. Rouhani responded that they will use horizontal wood siding that will be allowed to gray out and they 6
will use a weathering stain to help it along. It will always be maintained, but the idea is for it to be a very natural gray color. Chairperson Sandford asked what material the chimney will be to which Ms. Rouhani responded that it will either be stucco or poured cement. It will probably be plastered stucco finish. Chairperson Sandford asked if it will be white to which Ms. Rouhani responded no. It will be a darker bluestone color. She noted that all of the plaster will be darker to match the chimneys. She also noted that the windows will be darker anodized aluminum. There will be no white on the building. Mr. Bennett stated that the project just received Site Plan Approval from the Planning Board for the fill over the septic. Lisa Duryea Thayer stated that they received Site Plan Approval for the septic because of their location on the ocean. Ms. Rouhani stated that their intent is for it to look as natural as possible. They will use lime stone or concrete pavers to match the beach sand. They will also use weathered wood trim around the windows Tom White noted that Ms. Rouhani had previously stated that the new house would be smaller, but the actual size of the house is approximately 400 sq. ft. larger to which John Bennett responded that is the habitable area, but the coverage is similar to what exists. Tom White stated that he understands that the deck is much smaller. Mr. Bennett stated that it is actually a bit of a game. The house is bigger, but the decks are smaller. He stated that in terms of the positioning of the house, in terms of any migration landward, they are pushed up against the wetland setback. As it is, our improvements do not even meet the wetland setback. Chairperson Sandford stated that the motion will reflect the changes discussed as the renderings do not reflect what is intended. Ms. Rouhani asked if it was necessary for her to submit revised renderings to which Chairperson Sandford responded no as long as the motion reflects what is intended because that is what the Village Building Inspector will go by. Tom White asked if the non disturbance/non fertilization buffer runs through the parking area to which Ian Hanbeck of Chris LaGuardia Design responded no. He stated that the buffer comes up to a small track of lawn that leads to a side path that wraps around the structure and the rest is native buffer. 7
Robert Barandes asked where the access to the beach was to which Mr. Hanbeck responded that the proposed beach access will be from the boardwalk. Tom White noted that there is a proposed access to the beach just off of the firepit/chimney extending seaward. Mr. Bennett noted that it is shown on the plan but not on the rendering. Chairperson Sandford asked if the material for the staircase will be the same material and color as the siding on the house to which Ms. Rouhani responded that they will use ThruFlow material, which is the same material that is used on docks, which will allow them to be 2 above the dune. It will be grey and will be framed in wood that will gray out. Chairperson Sandford asked for a motion to approve construction of a two story, single family residence with covered porch, unroofed deck and driveway gates. Tom White and Barbara Slifka stated that they were not in agreement with this plan. Tom White and Barbara Slifka stated that they do not approve of building there. They think it is crazy for the applicants to construct a home that close to the ocean. Barbara Slifka stated that she feels that having just been through Super Storm Sandy it is madness. John Bennett stated that we are not talking about whether or not to build a house there; we are talking about if this house is appropriate under your architectural guidelines. He noted that if there was a place to migrate this house, they would. Chairperson Sandford asked if the façade of this house is the same on a line with its neighbors or back from its neighbors to which Mr. Bennett responded that it is further towards ocean. The footprint exists there now and it is in exactly the same place as it was. Barbara Slifka asked if even with the footprint there, no one required you to change the footprint to which Mr. Bennett responded no. He noted that the house is smaller in coverage and there is literally no other place for the house to go. Chairperson Sandford stated that it is legal to which Mr. Bennett stated that Southampton Town has granted a Freshwater Wetlands Permit and a Coastal Erosion Permit. Chairperson Sandford asked about the setbacks to which Village Building Inspector John Woudsma stated that it meets the side yard setbacks. Village Building Inspector John Woudsma stated that the biggest concern was for the freshwater wetlands where they were forced to move closer and closer into the Coastal Erosion Hazard area to give more protection to the freshwater wetlands. He stated that the Town figures that it is better to protect the pond. 8
Robert Barandes stated that it is not our choice. Our choice is the house they want to build in a danger zone and fulfills our requirements. Chairperson Sandford stated that this house is to the east of Gibson Beach to which Ms. Rouhani responded yes, it is approximately 1 mile. Chairperson Sandford asked for a motion to approve the construction of a two story, single family residence with covered porch, unroofed deck and driveway gates subject to horizontal wood siding with weathering stain, weathered wood window trim, a dark bluestone colored stucco chimney, limestone or concrete pavers. A motion was offered by Robert Barandes and seconded by Barbara Slifka. The vote was approved with three ayes and Tom White abstaining. V. DISCUSSION 1. Bruce Sherman 212 & 214 Town Line Road 908-10-4-34.1 & 35.1 Applicant filing for variance for the addition to a single family dwelling Nilay Oza represented the applicant. He stated that they are proposing an addition to the existing residence that is located one property south of Daniels Lane on Town Line Road. He was advised that they will need variances and that they should meet with the AHRB for their recommendations prior to meeting with the Zoning Board. He presented the site plan and photos of the existing house and explained that the lot was originally two lots that have now been merged. The lot size is now.4 acres. It is very small less than a ½ acre. Mr. Oza noted that the existing house is along the long length of the property and they are proposing the new construction to the north side of the residence in order to maintain the view along the length of the property. Chairperson Sandford asked when the building was constructed to which Mr. Oza responded that it was built in the 1940 s, Mr. Oza stated that they will be adding a corridor, a den, a family room and a master bedroom. Chairperson Sandford asked if the addition is two stories to which Mr. Oza responded yes. Chairperson Sandford asked if the existing structure is only one story to which Mr. Oza responded yes. They will be adding a Master Bedroom on the upper level. 9
Robert Barandes asked what variances will be needed to which Mr. Oza responded that they will need a setback variance, a side yard variance for the deck and a pyramid variance. Robert Barandes asked to clarify what Mr. Oza is seeking today because we are not even looking at the design other than what the view looks like, without us commenting on siding, glass, etc. is with this vision from Town Line Road all of this is blocked would we as a board consider this addition at two stories obtrusive or in variance with what we see as protecting our architectural heritage to which Mr. Oza responded yes and he also stated that he was hoping that they could discuss the finishes. Robert Barandes stated that conceptually setting the house back that far from the street, leaving that open view of the roadway, which has been there for some time, is in keeping with our hope to continue the architectural heritage that we have and the agrarian nature of where we are. He stated that from his perspective what they are attempting to do is better than moving this house right in the middle and putting it in our face. Chairperson Sandford asked if Mr. Oza had a computer version of the Town Line Road view with the addition to which Mr. Oza responded no. Chairperson Sandford stated that is what we are being asked to evaluate. We would have to create that in our own minds. Mr. Oza stated that in some sense that is the view that you are looking at in the photograph he presented. Chairperson Sandford asked how tall the peak of the extension is to which Mr. Oza responded that it is 21. Chairperson Sandford noted that the roof of the existing is a gable and the extension will have a flat roof to which Mr. Oza responded yes. Chairperson Sandford asked if the existing fence will remain to which Mr. Oza responded yes. Mr. Oza stated that currently there is an asphalt roof and board and batten siding. He stated that he wanted to marry the two structures together with aesthetic siding which is more like a rain screening that has a decorative horizontal wood exterior finish. Chairperson Sandford asked if that is for both the siding and the roof to which Mr. Oza responded yes. He noted that the roof is so shallow that you will not see much of it. Chairperson Sandford asked if there is glass below the master bedroom to which Mr. Oza responded that there is nothing, it is just an overhang below the master bedroom addition that will be completely open. We wanted to leave the lower level as free as possible. 10
Chairperson Sandford asked what material the chimney will be to which Mr. Oza responded that the existing chimney is red brick. Chairperson Sandford asked what material the rain screen will be to which Mr. Oza responded that it is epai wood which will silver over time. Tom White noted that he is not thrilled with the overhang. Chairperson Sandford asked how wide the overhang is to which Mr. Oza responded that it is 8. Robert Barandes asked how high above the existing structure is the addition to which Mr. Oza responded that it is 5 above the existing 16 ridge. Robert Barandes noted that the construction looks massive in terms of what it is. However, it is very difficult for me to ascertain what it is going to look like from the street. He noted that conceptually, putting it that far back is an attractive vision. He asked if there is living space in that box to which Mr. Oza responded that there is a bedroom and a small living corner. Robert Barandes asked if the box is full height all of the way across to which Mr. Oza responded yes. He stated that it is not even that high up. The ceiling there is 8. Robert Barandes stated that the issue is the blockage of it. He stated that if you approached our Chairperson with something that was softer on the edge and somewhat paralleling the existing structure she would have had less concerns to look at. It is the fact that this thing just sort of sits there is a concern. Chairperson Sandford noted that it was not obvious in the presentation that that was what was happening. Mr. Oza stated that one of the aspects of a pitched roof, which he did propose to his clients, is that the ridge line is higher because they need clearance in the rooms of the addition. If you want clearance on the other end to match, you will be at 25. Robert Barandes stated that this Board is the Architectural & Historic Review Board and our job is to determine if this fits within our community or does the higher look fit within our community standards. He would like to a see a rendering showing something that is more parallel and fitting to our community standards. Robert Barandes asked Chairperson Sandford if she saw something that looked more parallel to the other ridge, would you be more comfortable with it to which Chairperson Sandford responded yes. She stated if the gable could be duplicated it would be better. Mr. Oza stated that he did propose a gabled roof to his clients, but they did not want a gabled roof, but in that proposal the ridge line was higher 25. He noted that it should also be considered that this elevation is slightly misleading because it is a flat image. If perspective were added you recognize that this extension is so far back. The lot is 200 11
deep and the house will be 100 from the property line. You are looking at a 21 elevation that is 100 away. Chairperson Sandford suggested that Mr. Oza bring the perspectives requested to the next meeting. Barabara Slifka asked if there was a possibility to do this extension on the ground to which Mr. Oza responded there is, but you lose a lot of the area down below and one of the desires was to keep as much open on the lower level as possible. He noted that there are numerous modern two story additions on Town Line Road, but that is not what his client wanted. Robert Barandes stated that he has difficulty visualizing things but we will still see a flat side. This is totally square, it is a big box. Chairperson Sandford noted that she feels this is the right solution because it distinguishes it from the original house. Chairperson Sandford asked if the gap in the siding was an element added for interest to which Mr. Oza responded yes. Robert Barandes stated that in terms of the variance, the ARHB can support the context of what they are doing. As a board we would like to see final renderings of the front and the back before we give you approvals for what you have done. Village Building Inspector John Woudsma stated that changing roofline may alter the amount of pyramid encroachment which is part of his variance application. If they are going to build less it does not have to be re-advertised and they can keep moving forward. You will not be submitting the variance until next month. If you are going to ask for more because the ridge line is coming up, you have to have that worked out so that the turn down letter will be accurate. Robert Barandes stated that Chairperson Sandford s position seems to be that she is willing to accept looking at this box because of the architectural integrity. Nilay Oza asked if he would be able to get a letter of support from AHRB before he goes to the ZBA with his variance application. Chairperson Sandford stated that she would prefer to have a view of the rendering from the street including the details around the landscaping and fencing. She asked Mr. Oza to come back next month with a perspective from the neighbor to the north. Mr. Oza noted that there are tall existing cedars on the property which will shield the addition from the neighbor to the north. He also noted that they have already discussed this presentation with the neighbor to the north and he has no objection to their plan. 12
Chairperson Sandford asked Mr. Oza to return next month with renderings showing the view from Town Line Road and from the neighbor on the north side. 2. Curb Cut Proposal Chairperson Sandford noted that she had previously sent an email to all Board members concerning whether or not the Board wanted to again pursue a code change to allow only one curb cut per property. Chairperson Sandford reminded the Board that she previously went before the Board of Trustees two years ago with this proposal and did not get support. The Board was concerned with whether or not this would apply to farmers or if a property owner had a very wide lot. Because of this discussion, I would like to present a revised proposal to the Board of Trustees by requiring at least 200 between curb cuts. Robert Barandes stated that he is very supportive of not having two curb cuts, but he does not like the idea of another rule. We have become a rule filled Village. He did not like the rule on the tennis courts that went through recently. He feels that we have lost our way in this and the AHRB is being cornered. He feels that our war with the architects is truly that. We have not instilled in them a feeling that they should be committed to preserving this community for the benefit of their clients and for all of our residents. Their desire to do cookie cutters or artistic rendering has overwhelmed our needs He has listened to people coming before us stating that for safety s sake they need gates. Gates that are 4 high are not going to provide immense amounts of safety. They are something that they have sold as an architectural element to the people they are representing. Rules do not seem to be doing that. One of the examples that you gave us showed that we as a Board would probably approve in very short cut. This may be a very narrow property, but may be the only way for this person to access their home. I hated the other example which was so suburban that it has to be in violation of everything that we as a Village really want. The artificiality of the rule struck me as something that I do not know that we would want to be enforcing. He was thinking is it not how far apart the two cuts are, but how deep the central view is that they would create. If someone came in only 60 apart, but was going back 200 to their house, but it made it much easier for them to come back out, would we have less of an objection. Chairperson Sandford stated that curb cuts on smaller lots are something new. They are all over Bridgehampton and only on new houses. They are not traditional to Bridgehampton and certainly not to Sagaponack. She noted that we are getting away from our rural heritage by allowing this to go forward. She stated that another point is that you get more parking with the second curb cut. Robert Barandes stated that he would be more supportive if Chairperson Sandford said that in principal we as a Board only believe in one curb cut. Forget about other land issues and if they have an application, we will look at it. The reality is that the starting 13
point is that as a rural community we do not want two curb cuts. It has nothing to do with us trying to fit it in and if someone wants to make an application, we will look at it. Robert Barandes continued that if the rule was just a single curb cut, then that is the way it starts. In effect you are not asking for a variance, you do not want to do it for all of history, but if they want to do a modification that would allow it for just this particular instance, then he thinks it would probably be that. Chairperson Sandford stated that she does feel strongly about this, but will not go forward unless she has the support of all of the Board. Robert Barandes stated that using a definition that does not apply is a backward movement for us as a Board. He stated that Chairperson Sandford stated specifically that there are not any lots that are 200 apart, we do not have any left in the Village. Chairperson Sandford responded that is a minor point and we can drop that. She stated that she was merely responding to a comment that was made two years ago.what would you do with three acre lots. There was also mention of service road access, and some people do not think we should do service roads, but we do not want to get into that. Chairperson Sandford asked for a motion to table the discussion regarding a restriction on two curb cuts. A motion was offered by Tom White and seconded by Barbara Slifka. It was unanimously approved. VI. MOTION TO ADJOURN MEETING Chairperson Sandford asked for a motion to adjourn the meeting. A motion was offered by Tom White and Barbara Slifka seconded it. It was unanimously approved. Time noted: 5:20 PM PATRICIA ARANCIO-REMKUS Secretary to Board 14