##VIDEO ID:wZ3SmR45MRQ## all righty good evening ladies and gentlemen welcome to New zoning board of appeals it is Thursday December 19th 2024 time is 7:30 we're here at the newbur municipal offices at 12 Kent way we have with us tonight working the computer at the moment is Chrissy gri who's our Administrative Assistant we have Larry who is our liaison from the planning board have Jack Kelly who's a member of the zba we have Michelle weeder who's an associate member and I have myself ER span the chair um Michelle is an associate member we need three members to make uh a quorum and so Michelle will be the voting member tonight so uh with that Jack you want to take the honor of the reading first sure Susan and Thomas Costigan 337 Street the applicants are requesting a special permit slinding for releas from section 97- 4D 5 c01 increase in foot of the new re zoning bylaws and any other permit relief as may be required under the town of new zoning bylaws to allow the proposed use project for renovations to the existing dwelling including debts on the property located at 337 Street Plum Island New Mass 01951 assessor map u4 comma lot 165 this is a continued public hearing from November 21st thank you is the applicant here Mr chairman members of the board good evening uh for the record Douglas Des Shan um from fer and Nicholson representing Thomas and Susan Costigan the owners of the property at 337 um I did provide a um PowerPoint presentation however in the event of a technical glitch I also brought hard copies so everyone would have one no that's neor [Music] I'm sorry no that's quite all right I I'm no better at it um I do actually have two extra copies if somebody might want one there you go well thank you um members of the board good evening as I said uh Douglas desan from fer and Nicholson representing Thomas and Susan costan uh with me this evening uh in addition to the cagans is Scott Brown our architect from Scott and brown Architects and uh the surveyor on the project is um Tim me who is um was unable to be here this evening um I'm just going to read through this presentation so again I do have an extra copy if anyone wants it um my clients are seeking to construct a multistory Edition and deck to the existing single family home at 3:30 7th Street in doing so the proposed construction will not add any new non-conformities but will be changing the footprint of the structure and expanding into the existing front yard setback uh there is no change to the height of the proposed structure uh our existing conditions we do have a pre-existing non-conforming lot although one of the lot lots that I've experienced out on Plum Island it's uh just about 24,000 F feet in size uh however 40,000 is required so we are pre-existing non-conforming uh however our Frontage is uh more than conforming at over 264 ft uh and we're not proposing any changes obviously to the area or the uh Frontage uh the structure itself is pre-existing non-conforming uh only as for the front setback from 3 from 32nd uh 37th excuse me uh we're current ly at 2.8 ft where the uh zoning bylaw requires 10 ft um so what we're proposing to do will uh there will be no changes proposed to the existing lot will not create any new non-conformities the new structure will result in an increased footprint and an extension into the pre-existing front yard um front yard which is a non-conforming setback the new structure will meet all other dimensional requirements including setbacks lot coverage F and again height because we're not proposing any changes to that uh the next picture is just a picture of the um um excuse me assessors map as you can see uh 337th is the large parcel that's um shown in yellow uh Frontage is on 37th street where the Second Street back excuse me second home back from Northern Boulevard but then the property extends all the way to the beach and actually extends over to 39th Street as well um the next picture is an ortho photo which I think gives you a a better understanding of the size of the house we've identified the house with that little location uh marker uh you'll see as I said the house is close to 37th street but uh sets back considerably from the beach and uh and also um over to 39th Street one thing I'd point out in this photo and you'll see pictures again but I think this is a nice aerial view uh shows you the perspective of the homes around us uh but please note the um the green uh tree line along the um the property of budding uh which fronts on the 39th so there's a a um a rather um a thick row of trees there I will give you some uh closer pictures um the next slide shows uh the front of the well it actually shows the side of the house that faces Northern Boulevard the next picture is actually the frontage the front of the home as you can see that dirt dirt gravel roadway which leads to the path that is in fact uh 37th uh and as you can see the front uh porch our roof of the of the front door uh overhangs um and we're about two and a half almost three 2.8 ft back or 2.9 ft back from uh the actual roadway Edge um the other picture shows you the next picture shows you the left side of the home as it faces 39th Street you can see there's an existing deck there uh and we will be um that is where we are proposing uh most of the work and then lastly I I took a picture from the from the beach or not actually from the beach but from the beach side of the home looking back so that you can see the back of the home and to if you look to the right again that's that deck in fact that entire deck is uh where we're proposing to do uh the proposed uh work uh the next picture is actually a picture of our neighbor who sits between this home our home our costan's home and um a Northern Boulevard so they the neighbor sort of directly behind us as you look on to the ocean um the next photo starts to show you the two homes that are but us on 39th uh that that structure that white structure in the middle uh actually fronts on Northern Boulevard it's corn a lot on Northern Boulevard and uh and 39th and then the next uh photo you're looking now through that row of trees that I said exists between our property and the property uh it fronts on 39th Street um and that little blue marker that you can see is actually the edge of the uh newly proposed deck um I I just take a break from the the slides for a minute just mention that my clients have already met with conservation and in fact they held a site walk this morning um uh with the Conservation Commission we invited our neighbors to attend and I think it was a uh a good opportunity for everyone to really see on the ground what is uh proposed uh we had um Mr me stake out the corners of the deck uh so it was clear to everybody what was uh what was there so um again good opportunity I think for everybody to see things and of course the Conservation Commission wanted to make sure that everything was in line with what was presented um so back to my slides uh this is actually a picture looking from um from the back of the house down 37 um obviously uh from the pole there up is really just a a a um walkway to the beach but from that pole down past that red car that's sitting in the driveway that is in fact a c 37th Street and if you and if you look to the left that um so sort of a a garage in questionable uh repair that is uh property also owned uh by my clients and that is sort of their director butter looking out their front door across 37th uh the next picture is just now moving down 37th away from the ocean again in the background you can see the garage from the previous picture and then you're now starting to see the garage that's basically directly across from my client's home um and that next picture is actually a full view of the abutters to the South uh and you can see in the background that there are a couple of larger structures uh which uh AB but behind that garage and and face uh our property uh the cost property is north of of these properties and then that brings me full circle around the home uh and this picture with the the blue automobile is the neighbor directly behind us and again this this neighbor fronts on Northern Boulevard and also uh on 37th um also in this picture you can see uh the wooden walkways that are existing on the property that allows you to come out the front door and essentially walk around uh to the driveway uh without having to walk on gravel last picture and this is um again another Ortho photo and uh what's important to note here is uh you know the cin home in the middle there with the tan roof you can see the deck existing deck which um comes out towards uh our neighbor on um 39th and then if you look to the left that would be the view to the ocean if you look directly over the the costan home uh North uh Excuse excuse me South you can see those two garages uh which are our neighbors and then lastly coming around you see to the right the house that directly behind us and the house that um sort of sits on the corner of Northern and 39 so I I know I've shown you a lot of pictures but I think it's important to be able to to view um really the context in which this home sits relative to our neighbors um we have a standard of showing you that what we're proposing is not going to be significantly detrimental to the neighborhood um and generally while that neighborhood doesn't mean one individual it means the whole grouping so I wanted to make sure you saw um the entire grouping um so that we can talk about the impacts that this will have um in short and I'm going to let um Scott come up in a minute just explain to you the proposed um you know decks and and and and living space that were proposing to build but again what's important to note from this picture is the existing deck it's sort of grayish in color there's a set of stairs that come off uh facing the ocean and then the wider part of the deck uh faces to the north um towards 39th Street so that's where we're proposing uh the work and again in short the the narrower deck that faces the ocean's going to be pushed out out somewhat however the stairway is not going to be um going out forward anymore as we explained to the Conservation Commission the stairway is actually going to be turned parallel with the deck so in essence the deck the new deck will be farther away from the ocean um than uh currently and it's going to allow us to rate a lot of that sand area you see to the rear um the next photo is that of the um site plan um done by Mr me um and I'm sorry I don't have it logger so you're pointing but essentially this this um this plan shows you the Decks that are to be ex uh extended and the area to be made uh a two-story deck so um I'm sure um well actually uh Mr Brown was kind enough to provide me a um an overview plan that highlights things so we don't have to dig into that site plan and that's the plan that's uh proposed site plan AO uh you can see that we have shown in green uh where we're adding on to the um the habitable space on the second floor level which is currently an existing deck um so we're not that habitable space is not part of the expanded footprint but rather it's being done above the existing footprint and that will face uh 30 7th Street and while we're not going any closer than it's currently shown um we are going up with that and then the um to the left you can see it says new Stairway to second floor and then also new footprint at first floor deck level in existing deck location so that would be the that would be facing um our neighbor to the to the side that fronts on Northern Boulevard and then we're proposing to um you know expand the decks um around the sides facing uh 39th and the ocean so I guess with that maybe Scott will just give me a couple minutes to walk through the architectural plant just so uh the board understands you know what we're doing in terms of expanding decks putting some structures on De so I'll do my best without uh quality large iics in front of us but you know uh sheet a z uh is the one drawing where I've tried to sort of condense all the information that is actually in Tim's plan so we can sort of all understand uh you know the scope of work for the project uh this is one of the larger Lots uh probably the largest lot that I've worked on on Plum Island and um you know we Tim does a really excellent job putting a ton of information on his plan but um since it is so large he to decrease the scale of it so um it's very very difficult as Doug mentioned to actually see what we're doing so um what doug had mentioned uh we've got like sort of two areas that are colored in green you know uh that uh are the two spots where we're increasing uh the habitable space and one of those spots is located on the driveway side and an existing deck location and in the Southeast corner is the second spot where we're actually expanding the habitable space and that is also in an existing deck location we are only uh doing that at uh the second floor level uh we are expanding the deck on the Northerly side of the house we're expanding it to the North about 4T uh 3 in and we're also expanding it towards the West uh about 8 ft and we're doing that uh towards the West in order to uh create a second stair to that deck that being said we're we're still comfortably uh outside um the setback requirements uh you know and I believe um the rear yard setback what we're proposing is is 16 ft uh whereas uh 10 is is allowed um towards the east uh or towards the dunes um uh we're doing a combination of uh a deck expansion and also removing some decks uh and the removal of the extensions into the Dune are are what explains uh you know our change in sort of like the setback on that side of the house while we're expanding in some areas we're pulling back and the net result is that we are uh further away from the Doom uh and on the street side uh you know we are carving uh um um you know which is the south side of the lot we are removing a section of the deck which explains why our um our front yard setback is going from uh 2.8 uh to 4.4.3 and also in our our southwest corner um you can see in my site plan I'm noting a new stair and new covered roof uh right now uh you access the uh second and third floor from the ground level and we're proposing uh to move that front entry to the to the second floor level uh so we're making a new stare for that um the next uh sheet A1 uh these are are are our po proposed floor plans and what we're essentially doing here is explaining to the board how we've calculated um you know our our F and um unfortunately I have not uh printed mine in color but um I think if I can remember this correctly all of the blue areas you know on the first second and third floors are um you know what counts against F we have uh included all areas that are under solid cover and in the lower leftand corner of that plan uh shows what we have uh counted towards our uh proposed lot coverage in our next sheet A2 you know these are um you know our proposed you know uh the next four slides we have our uh uh existing elevation on the top uh proposed elevation on the bottom so A2 is showing um you know our project as we view it looking East you know from the driveway and you'll see on the left side here uh these are our proposed deck extensions you know and also immediately to the right of that uh uh that is the area that we're expanding um the habital space again in um the location of an existing deck uh and then the lower right right hand corner there you can see uh you know the the new entry door and you know the Switchback stair uh that we're providing in order to provide uh a new entry point to the second and third floor uh unit uh we are uh planning to reskin the entire building you know this is a location that takes a beating uh the windows are actually in poor shape so those will uh you know be replaced as well as as well as the siding uh our next uh sheet is um A3 and these are proposed this is uh our proposed South elevation on the bottom uh this is how you would view the house uh from uh 337 Street looking north um on the lower leftand corner you can see our um additions in the background again in the um in the location of our uh of an existing porch and uh off to the right you can see sort of our uh our new deck configuration on the Dune side and uh where we're proposing to uh you know expand the uh uh second uh floor level uh that is only uh you know one story um in A4 these are East this is the East Elevation again existing at the top proposed at the bottom uh lower right hand corner you can see where our deck expansion is and um in the lower leftand corner again that uh uh expansion of the habitable space on the second floor and uh finally coming full circle you know we've got sheet A5 you know this is the north elevation of the house again existing on the top proposed in the bottom you know uh it is important to note like our second floor deck um actually what a third floor deck is uh going no further towards the ocean uh than the easterly side of you know of the house and again in the lower right hand corner you can see you know what our expansion looks like on you know on the drive right side and uh finally you got uh you know some existing photographs uh nothing new here that Doug hasn't already talked about you know and finally um our last sheet here is uh you know basically showing the board how we've uh calculated the uh existing F and uh a lot coverage and um with that I'll hand it back to attorney desan thank you y I just have a couple of quick statements and then we're happy to answer any questions the board might have thank you Scott that was great um so um and again this is my conclusory um um statement um the addition of a modest uh amount of living space and some new outdoor decks to the existing dwelling will not be substantially more detrimental to the neighborhood and May actually provide some benefits to the neighborhood um while um the proposed construction will result in a modest extension within the pre-existing front setback uh that will have little or no impact to neighbors uh we're not pushing it out any further and we're not um uh expanding on that nonconformity uh the resulting structure creates no new conformities uh one of the benefits of having one of the larger laws is you can meet lot coverage F setbacks you you have room to move and uh you know my clients have um still nevertheless have still um made sure that we weren't creating any new non-conformities and that we meet all other dimensional requirements um this will undoubtedly uh result in an improved aesthetic of the property um you know the sort of Tiding up the decks and the new siding and windows are really going to um uh make this uh property far more aesthetically pleasing uh and thus we would expect a property value increase which not only will affect us but our neighbors uh and of course given our increase in value um it will mean increased tax revenue to the town so um you know we've seen and observed a lot of these projects and uh you know this one in my opinion is is very modest in the sense that it's really just decks mostly uh and that any inter interior living space we're adding is actually being developed within the existing footprint um so we're not expanding the footprint with living area or twostory structures rather we're expanding the footprint with decks um so uh and I do understand uh that uh while meeting f f we have considered where we have a deck over a deck to be a a roof deck and so we've included that F in in in the calculations and are still uh conforming so uh with that I would uh propose that this is uh not going to be significantly detrimental to the neighborhood in general um which is the standard we need to meet we're happy to answer any questions the board or our neighbors might have and uh thank you very much for your time thank you you guys have some questions I I have a one just point of clarification on the on the uh 37th Street side where uh we had the tight frontting y tight head back where's that measur from is it measur from the foundation or is it measured from that little dog house that we have there okay I would have to small plan was hard to see I know do you guys have the full size I believe up the top of my head I think that's to the corner board that that can oh I'm sorry I may have Spen okay very good so that might actually be hanging over it's more than 2 feet 20 it's uh 20 in deep 20 in and we got 2 okay thank you it's actually a little more than 20 Ines what's the um proposed material for the railings on the desk I see the existing ones is sort of good question so um the existing ones are in really good shape so it's our hope to kind of match what's there and I think that it's a combination of like Cedar and some ipe out there uh with a cable rail system okay so you're you're matching the one that's like along the beach side right cuz some of these other ones have more of like a solid yeah so that's uh the deck uh on the uh Westerly side of the house that is going to be removed yes and any kind of other um uh screening that you see like like that which I think is in a you know a a um kind of an unusual sort of pattern um very very modern looking um all of that is going to be removed okay so matching you're matching the cable yes the ra okay thank you this is an existing two family yes it has one bedroom in the basement yes sir ground floor which is unit one yes and then upstairs there a three-bedroom yes yes yeah and there's no increase in bedrooms no sir um and the Height's not changing at all not at all Frontage is not changing lot size isn't changing and again you've taken into account the decks for the lot coverage and the stairs yes and the F to the extent they have a cover open them anym do anybody have um anybody like to see any larger plans of this or there an extra one of these floating around if you'd like to see that is this so this is new that's what was submitted to the consultation Commission on Tuesday night and consultation commission mentioned that most of the issues raised on the deps in detrimental work for zoning so I just wanted you to see they buts asked that I submit it to zoning so that's why I uh emailed it to the team so this is a Comm I think that's from submission well as I understand it was submitted by a neighbor yeah that's at the consom meeting okay it was requested that I submit it to zo Okay so we've received this do we know who submitted this could you just state your name and address please Alison Pike 122 Northern Boulevard on the neighbor to the west of the property on on the boulevard side on 37th Street so the early questions in those pages um were mostly covered off in the conservation uh meeting in the walkth through this morning um some of the remaining concerns that I have as the ab butter um so the extension on the driveway side of the home where this the new stairwell and one of the bump outs will be looks to be about a foot into the driveway so uh one of the questions is does that impact the parking at all that's been an issue in the past at that um location so I just want to make sure that they're they have adequate parking for the the building with that extension um and then the majority of it is towards the back of that document you'll see the pictures from both my property as well as the other AB budding property and is with the deck so the extension of that first story deck um into the Dune area as well as the substantial increase in the Second Story deck and the place and the change and placement of the Second Story deck and how that impacts for my property the views from my property are completely blocked by that new Second Story death request from the other AB budding property it looks right into their their bedrooms that tree line is there but it's not as um substantial from that Second Story view as it is from standing on the ground and you can see that from the neighbor's property um so you'll see it pictures from the north with an overlay of the um rendering as well as pictures from the west and an current pictures and an overlay of the rendering I will say architecturally it's it's lovely and I do think that that's a positive impact but I wouldn't say that there's no impact to the neighbors or or the value certainly from my home um with the addition of that second in in a change and placement of the Second Story deck I think that will negatively impact the value of my home significantly thank you thank you is there anybody else in the audience that would like to speak against you would state your name and address Nancy Richards 439th Street Newber Mass um I um grew up in 439 straet ever since I was 3 years old and the neighborhood had has been great and I think the plans as far as squaring off the house um seeing the house developed from what it was originally to what it was now to the new plans I think I think it's great my concern is the size of the decks um especially you know the house being rented from time to time the decks especially that size invite large parties and causes a major major parking issue on the island there you know in the past cars have been parked in in the dunes cars have also been parked on 439th street blocking path to the beach so that is my concern as far as you know parking you know it may not be right now now but what happens in the future if they you know rent it more often if you know once those decks are built it invites large parties I as far as I'm improving their house I am all for it I think it I think it's great but the size of those decks just invites you know a lot of you know potentially large parties which means large large parking issues thank there any else in the audience that would like to speak Jim floods number 39 Street number five what Nancy's saying also is the plans have two sets of stairs going on these two decks now is that what he was talking about earlier yes well there it's two level decks it's two level decks but two new entrances does that mean this is going to be turned into a three family next where it has separate entrances versus just going inside the property to get up there and then there going to be additional Lighting on all these Decks that are going to you know light everything up so the there is no three family allowed um it is a pre-existing two family understand your concerns the the way the the way the plans appear is that the Living Spaces are on one level and the bedrooms are on the other so it would seem unlikely that it would be turned into a three family and that would be um that would be enforcable as to not happen by the building inspector yeah it just seems like there's more traffic going on outside with more noise versus the stairs going inside I mean I don't know didn't make a lot of sense why there'd be two sets of stairs going in from the outside uh there must be some kind of reasoning for it I wasn't quite exactly sure what it was other than you know do we rent out you know something I I don't know I mean the first floor deck is wonderful the idea of the second floor deck I mean that just seems a little crazy to me it is a lot of deck oh it is a lot of De and there there going to be a lot of lighting that's going to reflect you know the properties next door and everybody along with the instruction of the view which everybody's going to get with this thing being that high that big I mean they got a pretty good Siz deck there right now I'm appreciate yours thank you any else that like to speak uh against there anybody in the audience that would like to speak in favor none so one of the questions that seems unanswered is the number of parking spaces sure um and let me address that and if if you might if I might Mr chairman I'll I'd like to answer the questions that were asked by the neighbors um as you can see from the the photo that was provided by the neighbor actually um we currently have uh enough space between the home and the and the property line here um that you can put um two rows of cars uh you can also see that that would be a a minimum of two uh rows of two but in discussing it with Scott as you can see from the picture there is literally enough room that you could put three cars in a row if you wanted to and still not encroach on to 37 so so um we have a minimum of four uh and potentially and reasonably six spaces um we're not expanding that front or the side of the home uh about a foot um and while it is if that's got right um so a reduction of one for is not going to um impact our ability to park those two rows of cars in any event um I'd also like to just address the the statement about um the point of clarification counselor so so in the drawing AO the site plan that we're working off the four to six cars are going in the area where it says Drive yes yes I mean I've never seen six cars in there but four cars small car four cars thank you uh plus depending on the size um and if I could um just with respect and um to our neighbors um concern about the blocking of her view of the ocean um first of all I want to say that all of the decks all of the additions that we are proposing here are all within the required setback so we're not pushing anything closer to anyone that allow that's allowed under the law I think as Scott said that that the side deck that's going to be pushed out is being pushed out about 4 feet still will leave us 16 feet to the to the neighbor's property and those trees that are are um are existing um although someone standing on that second deck will have an expanded View and I'll tell you one reason for putting a second story deck on this home if you've been there while it fronts on the ocean from the first floor when you look towards the Dune you you you you really can't see the water um of course on the second floor deck you'll now be able to actually see the water so there are reasons um and also with respect to impacts to our neighbors uh views um this is the picture they submitted and and I just ask you to look at the fact that we're using Cable cable um cable rail EXC me cable rail cable rail thank you a that word for a moment uh and you know it's open between the two decks you know even the picture they provided represents the fact you can still see through these decks they're not going to block The View entirely I going to add a little more structure there but not blocking it and you know as we know um as long as our decks are in the correct height meet the building code or meet the setbacks um there's no law that prevents us from putting a additional structure between the back neighbor and the and the ocean I you know I'm it's just not one of those protected interests um nor is it an interest that's been um determined by the court to be a detriment to the neighborhood I mean we can all agree or disagree that this might have a slight impact on that particular neighbor's view but it's not blocking it by any means and it's certainly not rising to the level of significantly detrimental to the neighbors um I'm a little concerned or I do question the statement that this deck is going to have an impact on anyone else's views um especially where our neighbor to the north which fronts on 39th Street um has indicated it's going to affect their views um if you look at that picture I provided early in my presentation the ortho photo from above um and you look at the light uh sight lines from the rear of our abing neighbor home and even from the side um our deck is not in line with that I mean if you look out the side it might impact but their view is still this our impact is over here they're they're you know as close to the ocean as we are so I I would suggest while you know it may have some minor impact on a view uh it certainly doesn't rise to the level of a significantly detrimental impact to the neighborhood it's just a sort of a subjective uh determination I I my clients have really tried to enlarge these decks in such a way that they would not be intrusive on anyone and I think they've achieved that thank you thank you have all the questions in this packet been answered um I wasn't the conservation need so i' like to ask Alice Allison they didn't they did answer the questions about the size of the deck and those questions that we had that weren't listed in the um renderings that we we received yeah and the parking area is 48 ft long by 20 yeah as long as I mean there's never been six cars in that parking lot that's sometimes the problem when it's rented out but as long as they have still have the space with that expansion for the two rows of cars that answers the parking question for me yes we went to look at the definition I think we're at um 8 by 18 is a parking space so you would be able to um you would be able to get four cars in that area yeah as long as they're confident they can do that that was the question is does it impact it or not um and and to respond while that the overlay of their own drawings some of those railings will be see-through the base that is see through now won't be the stairwells won't be and the furniture and people won't be so there is a big impact that home I've been in that home a number of times I was very friendly with the previous owners it has a spectacular view from the first floor and the inside and on the first floor deck of the ocean um so the the need for the second floor deck I mean I I agree it's you'll have great views from up there who wouldn't you'll Al probably great parties from up there um but it does change will change significantly the view from the property at 122 Northern Boulevard and that will affect my phone valume while that may not seem detrimental to everybody it is detrimental to that property that isn't a butter and that's why I raised the the concern about it thank thank you uh our perview for the zba it's good to know that you went to the conservation Mission and that um that process is moving forward and and they they provide their own review which which we don't on um as far as our status on Plum Island in terms of the piod is looking at proposed U projects that are not more detrimental to the existing uh surrounding neighborhood such that the size uh and scale or that um building lines that are existing are not exacerbated so in terms of meeting the the piod the height um the increase in lot coverage the increase in F in this case there's no increase in height um there's no increase in bedrooms um although the size of the deck and the and the the rental is something that we understand and taken to concern that's that's really not our purview in terms of control um and assessment if someone was adding extra bedrooms then there would seem to be an increase and density which which is our concern um you know parking and if parking is an issue um then there are there are other entities in town in terms of the building department Andor the police department that can handle those requests is if if the space is there then and and it's it's show shown on the plan then that's um that's what we take into consideration so um and we don't have a quote design review but we do take into account um the largess and and excessiveness of what we perceived to be stretching um the height and uh the solidness as to um creating density as a um as a weighing factor to the application in in the proposed and in here um is there anybody else at this time that would like to speak for or against sure I'm hearing as well um excuse me I'm Tom cost again um I own uh 337 with my wife's suit uh we um just little background we from New York uh we have six children nine grandchildren and I guess we will have a party much well with a lot of cost um I I don't know what the history of the house is we've stayed there many times we've been vacationing in Plum Island since uh about 2 2000 uh every year we we've come up and came to love it and that's why we when the opportunity came up we had rented this particular house several times and uh the opportunity came up we bought it um as regards to parking I know the cagans have had six cars in that lot I mean you have to squeeze in but um it's legit it's it's four cors um if parking is a problem you know uh just not to be confrontational but you know 116 Northern Boulevard has no parking and it was just built so I'm not sure how that got through with no parking but we have it legit for area for four cars um uh uh we don't actively really rent the place and Our intention is not to do that we don't we're not doing Airbnb we're not doing vbo there's a local guy I'm not even sure what his name is but um he rents basically to the same people who've been renting it in July and August and anyone else who's there is one of my family members um you know we could argue uh till till the dawn about uh the use of your property everyone could say that you can you're you're you're going overboard or why do you need this why do you need that it's it's it's our business how we try to use our house um or or how we want to expand our house within the limits of um the code as far as the deck um you know honestly we want a second floor deck really to provide shade in the morning uh that's One Good Reason second is it's uh fire axis we got two means of egress out of the second floor one interior one exterior as far as the multitude of uh stairs that are on it you need to get from the second floor if you if you had to exit the house from the second floor you could exit off the deck down to the first floor deck and from the first floor deck down to the to the ground if you didn't have the one down to the ground you'd have to walk around the house which is about 50 ft 30 and 30 and 20 it's just makes sense to have multiple stairs coming out of there um as um as Doug pointed out all the bedrooms are upstairs you know uh so no big deal there uh we're not there's we're not making a three-bedroom house out of it as far as you know looking into someone's bedroom you know if we're keeping Toms for the cops you know you know we're we're quite a quite a bit far away from any their houses um uh so and as far as views go you know you look across to again I bring up 116 and and and Doc Russo's house really got smashed when they put that house there he he lost all of his views as far as on conern big white Lego house we call it um it's we're not really doing that and the Decks that were the railings are are cable you can see through them and we're removing the bottom uh obstructive uh I'm not sure what you call that this is like a wraparound on the bottom to sort of hide or or dress up the deck on the B that's going away as well as the there are storage bins that are like plywood boxes on the Northern side and and we're removing them so it'll be like sort of open through there and quite frankly you can't see the ocean really um from when you're sitting down on the first floor um so s floor seems like a logical place and maybe you get a view of the sunset to boot just bringing that up since we're all here um and thank you it's Prett much thank any other comments or questions um the the decks seem it seems like a lot of deck so I I understand the concern of a lot of people that could gather um I suppose that being said though people can gather on the ground too you know if it was just someone's yard it could be the same um I don't I don't necessarily quite agree with a double stare I think you know that sort of encourages groups to congregate you know all outside on those decks so again I understand that um that concern um but as you said Eric um you know how people in terms of our zoning bylaws um they that this is allowed yeah yeah I feel the same way is there a motion to be had uh can we make a motion to draft the decision is that we're we're motion to okay yeah I will make a motion to draft a decision to uh uh permit the variant for allow variance for special permit as requested by the applicants okay second yep I second okay and so to you ready CHR M so in terms of the special permit finding the zba finds that the proposed um additions are not more detrimental to the existing neighborhood as they are within the lot coverage they were within the S they were within the height they were within the number of bedrooms and uh none of the uh setbacks are exacerbated and are um and the three that are compliant are remain compliant so with that Z vote all those in favor I I so the motion passes we appreciate the neighbors concerns but the dimensional requirements within that are within the bounds that again AR exasperating the piod requirements um are for favorable projects so we appreciate your comments to this Mr T when do you expect to um when's your next meeting uh our next meeting is on the January 16th it is going to be the week after that I'm not here 23rd do that make it it makes it 13d um we haven't decided and if we have a continuance then we have to um we would have to say I think we're uh I may not be on the 23rd which is the fourth Thursday of January for business so I don't know if the room is available if we don't have a continuance that we're continuing to time and a date specific we are drafting a decision for review if the decision is drafted and sent To Us by email separately we can review it um we could send Ed Ed its at um text edits back to Chrissy to to correct the record if there's anything that needs to be added or adjusted we would have to wait to the next meeting and since the next meeting isn't scheduled I'm a little hesitant right this second scheduled the next meeting okay well I I just asked in case I needed to be there I wanted to check with my schedule but we're happy to work with the board in any way you want and you can let us know out of town the week before I'm hoping that we can figure out how to have it the week of the 20th whether it be the 22nd or 23rd right thank you very much at we closing the public did we open that might determine right true I'm going to close the public hearing I don't think we need any more information we put that for the thank you thank you well thank you and have a wonderful holiday I'll see you next year take care thank you all right next up we have uh Gerald fandetti 11 and 15 Sunset dry the applicant is requesting a variant SL reversal of administrative decision and a special permit finding the relief of the lub zoning bylaws section 97- 4d2 and 97-60 regarding allowed uses and dimensional requirements in order to correct the lot configuration allowing for the creation of a legal non-conforming lot to be redeveloped in order to raise the pre-existing non-conforming dwelling and for the construction of a new single family dwelling with Garage on pilings on the properties located at 11 and 15 Sunset Drive Plum Island Newber Mass 01951 assessor map Lots uh excuse me assessor map U2 lot 78 and 80 and this is a continued public hearing from the November 21st 2024 meeting supplemental material was requested on the neighborhood comparison so as we left the last meeting the um the question before us was a variance to reconfigure two lots and make two new different size lots and the question of of what was being put on the lot although not discuss our discussion and our thoughts were that the size of the lot then dictates what you can put on the lot so although we're not reviewing what is proposed we're solely focused on the ability to or the reasoning of a VAR of why a variance would be granted and what that variance would mean and in our typical judging of of Plum Island properties within the piod it is a judgment against the other the existing neighborhood so we would like to know or understand that what you're proposing does not exasperate in either too large or too small a lot for what is existing to what you're proposing to do right and with that you can take it from there okay thank you uh members of the board um when we were here for the last hearing the board requested Ed that we do an analysis of lot sizes in the neighborhood so the first step was to say okay where is the neighborhood and we just use the assessor Maps as a method of determining our neighborhood and there are five sections of assessor Maps you 1 through five on Plum Island and ours is predominantly in section U2 and so that's the area we use to define our neighhood when we looked at the Lots on um that section they vary significantly and um if you look at the plan of the original 1923 subdivision it shows pretty much a uniform character of the Lots they varied between 7 to 8,500 ft generally speaking uh however over time the lot configurations have changed by uh mergers streets not being built changes in the law about how uh they get reconfigured and uh so what we've ended up with this a wide variety of lot sizes and uh our analysis shows that within 2,300 ft of our property there are 19 Lots over 20,000 Square ft our our proposed REM merger of the Lots wants to create one lot that is approximately 8,500 ft and the other lot about 2300 ft 23,000 uh Square F feet and the reason to do that is to get Street Frontage because the the Lots as currently configured uh one lot 11 Sunset has uh Street Frontage uh 15 Sunset has no Street Frontage which uh is technically an illegal lot so uh the reason we came to the board for a variance was to reconfigure the lots and make it uh a legal lot so it turns turn out that the lots that are oversized if you want to call it that there are 19 Lots within 2300 ft of our site that are 20,000 ft or over as a matter of fact there's a lot within 100 ft of our site that's a very large lot of 41,000 Square ft so there's a wide range of different lot configurations uh in the neighborhood so to speak so that's what we tried to address through our analysis as requested by the board so we feel that the the configuration reconfiguration or REM merg of the Lots is consistent with the neighborhood it's not something that's unusual it's not out of line it it sort of fits the pattern that is what Plum Island has become since the 1923 uh subdivision and uh as I said it's Prim primarily because uh streets were not built uh Lots were mured uh because of family ownerships and for a very whole variety of reasons the Lots the lot sizes have changed and and many of the lots that have single level houses on them and this is an interesting fact through our analysis uh where lots that covered more than the required 20% of coverage so you get all kinds of uh configurations and lot sizes with houses on it that don't meet regulations we got a lot there's a large variety of issues that occur on Plum Island because of the way the original Lots were laid out and because the the streets never got built the the merges that occurred through many reasons so that's that's why it seems to us that the uh the lot reconfiguration is not out of line with the overall neighborhood and the overall pattern of lot lot reconfiguration on Plum Island and that that's that's our argument for uh reconfiguring the Lots in in terms of the application the metrics um what is the lot area of 11 proposed lot area of 11 8500 Square ft and and the the the house that is currently on that lot would meet all of the P requirements yard setbacks height coverage F what's the current Square fet Mr P on on the left smaller lot the current square footage I I don't have that right in front of me but I think it's um 85 and 7 maybe 15,000 square ft 17 right 17 103 number 11 yeah that sounds correct and then number 15 is 14871 right was that again 11 is is what ex 11 is 1,13 and 11 is 14871 14 um 871 so is that is that this the smaller lot currently 14871 is that the larger uh yeah number 15 15 is the smaller I according to this whatever this m is the smaller lot's being made bigger and the bigger Lots being made right sorry just I know I wasn't here but I did listen to the video recording so I heard the whole meeting um the the house the structure on 11 is to remain yes that's the yes yes and and there is a um you would be proposing to remove the the deck or pull the deck back yeah we have already done that the the building inspector allowed us to reconfigure the deck it was falling down it was a hazard and he said sure the repair it Justified okay so we're chapter 40 a section 10 governs variances so before we can get to in buildings we're first have to talk about the lots and the side in order to um order to Grant variance I read this last time um soil shape and topography is that what you're going for that's what I'm going for so I'm trying to uh variance from terms of the applicable zoning ordinances which are zoning ordinances or bylaws where such permit granting Authority specifically finds that owing to circumstances rela to the soil conditions the shape or the Topography of such land or structures and especially affecting such land or structures but not affecting the general zoning District in which it is located a little enforcement of the provisions of the ordinance the by laws would involve substantial hardship Financial or otherwise second make sense yes so in terms of any variance that is granted and we've granted very few because few have come before us but they they're always unique because of the site condition um the the roadway which is what is it Dartmouth way is not way is not is not improved it's just it's not there not there it is it is up to these properties but it's not connecting from Sunset back to um Southern Boulevard is that correct right okay yeah so so it stops while at y way yeah so that that doesn't exist that doesn't exist at the moment so that property is is I mean that's where the hardship is there's no access Tech technically no access access unless you go over uh uh 11 property that belongs to 11 and we had discussed that last time too was opposed to granting U Amusement from one property on to the other um and whether that was beneficial or more detrimental we see what we don't we're not avable to encumbering one property to the other um unless it was somehow unique or existing so in terms of soil conditions shape or topography I mean the conditions of the soil are at sanding and it's pretty consistent with the with the the neighborhood um the topography again is is consistent with the surrounding neor the shape of the land for being set against an unimproved Town way would would be a hardship that the town way doesn't exist so the thought um could be that granting a variance due to the shape of the land um that the shape is not provide Frontage and therefore is not accessible um one could Grant the variance to re that hardship the problem with that argument my opinion is that we're almost creating a greater hardship with the splitting up of the two lots and making one tiny lot and one giant lot we have two relatively equal lots right now um and I think there's three path here we have kind of a once in a-lifetime Opportunity there's the the path that the Town Council laid off which Mr fended is is pursuing that's one we talked about that a second path might be uh and I can understand why Mr fed wouldn't do this but it would solve the problem pretty simply lose one house have one big giant lot with one big giant house that would solve the problem also and then I wouldn't be so quick to dismiss the easement thing this is a once- in a-lifetime Opportunity the same owner holds both properties he could Grant an easement to himself not to someone else Grant an easement to himself if he chooses to sell one of the locks later well then the easement goes with it and we don't have to mess with the lock sizes or uh or any of that stuff but it's technically an illegal lot chapter 48 does we we just gave you an easement it's no longer illegal how is it illegal it doesn't it it it specifically as my I understand it easements do not make a lot easements provide access access but they don't make the lot legal and they don't then we have a a non pre-existing non-conforming structure on a lot that is technically illegal so in terms of improving that we've had we could have a special permit for that is that what you're goinging um I think the the sticking with the lot and and and what is being proposed in terms of the lot sizes um the applicant has has shown us on on a map properties that are approximately equal in size to the larger lot that's being created so the argument would be is that I'm not creating any anything any larger than other Lots within the neighborhood that appear sporadically but it's not like it's the only lot that's that big it's not like there's one lot and this is the second lot and that would seem to be more detrimental the same could be said if you do the squint test and you look at the smaller lot at 8,000 sare ft and you look at the neighborhood you can see a lot of other lots that are at that size or even less I was one I I looked at that also I'm also speaking among the board because there's only four of us we're not allowed to talk about otherwise I'm a little concerned about the definition of neighborhood I'd hate to nail it down Mr fed's definition is a half mile I'm not saying that's right or wrong but that's what he said 2500 ft or something 2300 well what I used for neighborhood was the City Assessor Maps there are five districts on Plum Island and I just used the district that we were in right so my my point would be we have three distinct neighborhoods in this town each with a different character old town is different than bfield which is different than Plum Island I wouldn't want to ham Us in into anyone I almost think 2300 ft is is a is kind of big for 4 Mile but might be small for for bfield but yeah but there's a lot 100 ft away that's 41,000 ft that would be the second one that the chairman just referenced well there are many in yeah but there's nothing built on that lot though right it's a huge house on it in go ahead in terms of the piod the the um and Town Council has always said that with the piod we are have the ability to judge the quote neighborhood as it may a itself for that property that we are not limited and and and neighborhood is not defined by 100 ft or 300 ft or 1,000 ft or an excessive map it is defined by our opinion of what is adjacent and approximately what what would make up a neighborhood now that applies that applies to mland but our ability to use that does not apply elsewhere in town to Oldtown or to bfield those do not have an overlay District as such as Plum Island with the same criteria for judgment so the neighborhood here and I didn't last meeting we didn't we didn't Define what the neighborhood was we asked Mr panded to give his assessment make his argument and show show the properties as as he thought now if there was only two large properties on PL Island he might have shown to to trim the neighborhood down just to make his case that way correct um usually when we look at a neighborhood it's on one side it's on the beach side it's on the opposite side it's it's multiple houses in a row and so we're looking at several properties all the properties are up against the road all the properties are slightly overbuilt somebody is proposing proposing to add to their property and we're judging it against the neighbor we are we are trying to protect the density of Plum Island uh and we're also trying to provide the rights equally to everybody and whether somebody build something now or whether there's an NP lot the the Lots still have the same rights whether there's intent or not right um I guess I guess my thing is unequalness of the lot that's what what we can we're not talking about any buildings yet we're just talking lots and I'm still a little hung up on that so and I I guess I'll sum it up as I'm not trying to speak for you but the smaller lot has an existing structure cor right that existing structure as Mr said and is on the drawings meets the piod requirements if that lot was existing today and we looked at that structure and they wanted to add a second floor to it it and we we went through what we typically do and we say okay it has Frontage but it's it's pre-existing nonconforming uh it has a lot size that's pre-existing nonconforming uh it has the setbacks that are conforming the type will be conforming it's it's uh lot coverage is will be conforming the F may be pushing because he's adding a second floor but that's how we would judge that piece property and and in all in in in some cases it's it's no better or no worse than than I don't know than 80% of the properties that exist within this general area as as the 70 as the 177,000 or is the 8500 as the 8500 okay I mean you could go two lots away and there's a lot that would be equal in size to 7,000 um so is the is the too small too small it would seem seem not is the is the too big too big there are several and there's a couple that are actually quite close to each other so you know if the larger Lots wanted to push to do something larger and you're comparing it to the adjacent larger lots and it's in keeping then it's not in keeping with the small lot next to it but is in keeping with the other large Lots um and this our understanding that a smaller lot that has a house that is uh that is um pre-existing that would become pre-existing non-conforming let's say and then there's a a new lot which eventually um if the variance was granted and the plan was submitted to the planning board the planning board accepted it then the applicant would come back with a proposed house on that new larger lot and so at this point although we're not judging the house design for Harry or anything of that we are judging the ability to put a house that would meet the intent of the p on a larger lot created from smaller lot so and and the ability to Grant the variance again section 10 in terms of soil condition shape and topography the shape of the land against an unproved right away um doesn't allow it to be um doesn't allow it to be to be built from the and in essence what happens is what um Town council's letter outlined in terms of the steps is that the property these properties would if the variance was granted these two new properties would lose all pre-existing non-conforming um rights but we with the variance would then be setting a set of of new conditions for that property say that right close enough s um on it's clear on the new house the old house it's it's the one that remains yeah it's a little muddy but so I think the argument is that if the old house on the on the smaller lot meets the intent of the piod there's an exasperate what um what we would consider requirements like setback or F or height and it its new status is that it's a small lot and it's it's got a nonconforming um I mean if it meets the frontage then the only thing it has it will have a non-conforming frontage and it will have a non-conforming lot size that's that's the that's the new non-conformity that we would be putting on that lot and the larger lot would have a variance it would gain some Frontage but it would be um nonon foring and the lot size obviously would be non-conforming and then whatever was supposedly presented would have to be um non exacerbating piod conditions so in a sense the the the existing home on the smaller lot and whatever is proposed for the new would be in keeping and not more detrimental to the surrounding neighborhood for the size of what is on the whether it's existing or New Again compared to the surrounding every understood somebody want to make a motion so is there is there anybody in the audience that would like to speak um against the the project you state your name address please uh Donna finan six BR way I um comment is is not a criticism but it's a comment on the Little House on the little property um and also uh the fact that it is a neighborhood and there are many variations but that's what makes that whole area unique but going back to the um real property I look down on it from my house which is behind and I don't know how anybody who would buy that house would enjoy the outside what you have on one side where where you're getting all that Frontage one side is driveway you can't go out there and do anything on the front side on uh Sunset you can't do anything there it's all um each grass and um and it's not level and in taking down the deck which was the play space for that house my husband was one of those that built it um it has been Cho back so far you can hardly get chairs and table out there now and I don't see how people who buy that house uh as I said going to be side of that house it has made it so small thank you has the has the deck been rebuilt or has the deck just been removed no uh it's been rebuilt it was uh in very poor condition as a matter of fact was structurally unsafe was it is it pulled back to be within 10 ft of the property line yes it has so you got like an emergency from yes and it's um it's actually about 12 ft on one side seven on the other it's a reasonable size deck it's not it's not um and it's very safe it has railings around it where the other deck didn't have any railings it uh it meets cod in all uh in all aspects where is the parking on that uh right in front uh it comes off um benois there a circular Drive yeah the corner so to be clear the deck the new deck is not 10 ft from it's 10 ft from your proposed internal l l that's from the new division from the new subdivision yes this is the new that's a proposed yeah that's the proposed so this is more just a question I guess not really a comment but a question why the the property that has access already that's off BR Mar why not improve that property why why are we making the one that has no access bigger and the one that has access smaller versus the other way around why not work with where you already have access of the um the house that's on 15 straddles the property line so in any event that house would have to be dealt with in some way and it seemed to me that's the easiest way to deal with it and plus the the property on 15 is in far worse condition than the property on uh 11 um it's in very very uh it's in serious disrepair so for those two reasons it made sense to keep the property at 11 and make small improvements in it so it would stand alone as its own property and improve the sight of 15 because the house straddles property line currently and is in serious disrepair so that's why we did it the way we did it in in placing that new property line I think the in the intent please correct me if I'm wrong but was to make a smaller lot that was was um somewhat consistently non-conforming to to other lots and make a larger lot that gives you the frontage yes and the larger lot also even though we're not looking at it is probably um sized in order to try to fit what you're proposing to do on there the try the whole reason for this exercise is to build a one level house and the reason we need a one L house is my wife uh has serious mobility issues and it is it very important for us to have a house that is one level and uh she suffers from the consequences of her life uh as a dependent of a Marine Corp V and and I understand that and appreciate that um and the desire to build one story I think a one story house can be many different sizes you know the footprint of a one story house can can be smaller can be big can right so so I absolutely understand you know you doing a one story dwelling um I guess what I worry about a little bit is this is setting a precedent for other people being able to buy two properties you know next to each other in the future and also then moving the property lines and and and you know now down the block this happens again and we have a large lot and a smaller lot um and you know congratulations to you for getting two together at the same time and being able to buy two right next to each other um but you know is setting a precedent for so the variance again if you buy two lots and and they have houses and they have access what what is the hardship some would need there can I just make an observation without I respect what they're trying to do and which is suppos the very best but I don't want to see it this derailed somewhere down the road if this comes before the planning board on an anr which would be the next step yep what I would be looking for our two variances one associated with number 15 one associated with number 11 um because you you've got to find some hardship that justifies the reduction in in size and already non-conforming law uh if you look at Peter Bennett's letter he talks about variances in the plural he doesn't talk about a single variance so just granting a variance to 15 is going to be a problem understood and I have I have words of or thoughts to that um and I think that was clear in in Le's uh Town council's memo in terms of outlining path and we I think we did ask about the neighborhood about the two lot sizes you clearly identified the larger you haven't identified the the the smaller um the shape of the land of number 15 in terms of not having an improved public way would go with the shape of the land the creation or a variance for 11 to make it smaller um and the fact that you're not improving the structure then gives it a little bit of pause as to what the conditions of the soil for the topography are that that allow that um and I I've taken the stance that it's it's the lot itself with the non-conformities are are somewhat comparable to the adjacent neighbors but haven't addressed that part of the variance okay I but I just I just didn't want to you know find us my my head is my sense was that the board was considering a single variance to cover both uh you know associated with with number 15 well well that would address some of my concerns about making it so small because it's kind of un irritating but the as far as I concerned the 1920 laot lines are completely irrelevant they're no more relevant than the original King's Grant which made it all new GR hisory it doesn't matter why does that have to why does it have to be so small you know and still give you a frontage is that the absolute minimum that we can get the frontage on so so that's where the two variants thing might just thrown it up there and again talking about the neighborhood and the size and sort of justifying an existing structure that's not any more detrimental than others existing but um we don't really quite have the sentence that that that applies to the section 10 of the zoning in order to Grant a erance you know you don't have Frontage on 15 that's the shape of the land and 11 double FR dri right but we're talking about a variance you're talking about soil conditions so what what are the soil conditions that are unique to that property what is the shape of land that's unique to that property what is the um topography that's unique to that property so and if if um if we if we don't have that reasoning in putting that in the variance variances or one variance that has two part you're going to say it um then it it would seem suspect or challengeable I would think you have I think you have a strong case for 15 in terms of the lack of Frontage saying that the shape of the land with an unimproved way um I don't necessarily excuse me necessarily agree because this is a way of satisfying the issues that were created by the doctrine of merger we did the the the original Lots were all had an intention of being individual Lots they never materialized that way then came along the doctrine of merger where the of the four Lots two of two were merged they could have easily have merged three out of the four to one lot which would have made the most sense because of the house on 15 straddles the lck lines but so there was a major error made in that regard so you have a situation where at some point somebody the town some official somebody made an error that is the hardship right there that that doctrine of merger where the Lots were merged incorrectly at some at some point in the past now we have a situation where we're all trying to figure out how to correct it it's it's it's a difficult situation because these Lots were merged incorrectly there's a house that's on two lots after they were merg how does that happen and it had no Frontage why would somebody merge lots to make create that configuration I mean who would do that but that's not one of the the doctor whatever it is is not one of our three causes that were allowed to give Advantage I'm talking about the error that was that that that that the hardship that's the hardship they there was an error made at some point and we're trying to correct them correct it well you you you're you're assuming that all of the both of these Lots all four of those existing Lots were all in common ownership when merger applied I maybe they were maybe they weren't I don't know I don't know either your beef is what the the assess if you have well how do you correct the problem well and now you're saying well we shouldn't do any variances because one law has a variance true variance one one doesn't if it comes before the planning board on an anr we'd be looking for two variances you you issue the variances the appeal period runs that's the law for these Lots so that it's these one two three and four yes those were the original Lots back in 1923 and at some point they were merged two and two that created the problem so 15 has 30 ft of Frontage right now 15 has uh has no Frontage I mean 15 I'm sorry yeah 15 has no Frontage but so 15 so these two lots were these were merged here and then and then this lot was was was merged with this one yes so there's three so there's one two now where makes no sense I agree but yeah I don't see why that's relevant to our conversation right now at all I mean we have to work with where we are today I mean there's a million lot lines and what has happened in the whole town and all of New England over years and years right I I don't see why that's relevant I guess for our conversation today so if if the lot line was put back to where it was originally that makes two that gives 30 30 Fe the frontage to 15 and um makes 11 you mean this here that one yeah Y and I again the the shape of the land of 15 as it is located is a hardship um the variance for 11 is well it does have steep topography there I mean we could make that argument but um so it has steep topography then the only place you could build a house is where it current exist so you're talking about number 11 y so owing to the shape of the topography the variance is granted as if it was a lot and the existing structure would be built it's the only place it could be built in so it's kind of reverse thinking I even know if it's appropriate I don't even know can we make that AR is there Contour do we have Contour that I'm missing or something so we have 129 down don't see I guess I don't know if I call that Ste here yes here I that's not steep SL here [Applause] yes sorry we don't have a quick decision but this is this is a typical and so you need to exactly and we um again we don't have any chance to have any side discussions that help us form a thought unless we're doing it in front of you so if you seem to be mumbling through it a little bit that's fine we're trying to figure out I appreciate your time I took two pages of notes and left them at home so there you go Mr hopefully um out a possible Varan for 15 with the shape of the land and through some reverse thinking um hard that you're going up from 8 to 12 that's 4 the fact that you can't build on a dune or SL um well yeah if they were building new he'd be up anyway so the grade below is sort of like most of our other sites where it changes below and you take the main average but is this in a flood zone do you know I um I think a portion of the lot is yes yeah you probably know if you have flood insurance or not on the property correct yeah I'm a little above I think there's I don't know if we don't we don't have consensus on on a variance for both bar for each one you think aaring could be granted for 15 to the shape of the land the shape as it's proposed yes well prar to move the lot line because of the shape of the land doesn't have because of improved that's question one sounds like he has a better argument for 15 than he does for 11 well that's what we're that's what I'm stating Jack is that I'm trying to say that okay let's just take this one at a time we talk about lot cine and the fact that it doesn't have any Frontage and the fact that Dartmouth way isn't improved is the shape the land a hardship that that granting a variance move the property line would would ease that hardship and give Frontage on that lock understood but won't that tie his hands so we have to change something so just focus on 15 okay is that yes I would say it's a yes okay I agree um for where this line is just looking at 15 just is just just at 15 does that do we need this much for Frontage don't know what that let's take the premise that lot 15 the shape of the land has is a hardship and that moving the lot line and providing Frontage on Sunset Drive would would relieve that hardship and therefore variance could be granted or granted for 15 so so our only reason with the shape is that there's no Frontage that's why that's our beef crack and that's the shape of the the shape of the lot as it's the shape of the lot okay so you say yes to that then you get over to 11 and you're looking for a variance that deals with again the soil condition the shap of the land [Music] topography not finding that one as well and so what um I don't know yeah no I agree I mean I it seems like it's it still seems to be like the the new lot line is kind of arbitrarily placed to go along with a historical you know 1920 lot I mean is I think what Michelle was starting to say earlier and I kind of feel the same way if you tweak it a little isn't there enough room to what's the front to to get some Frontage on there you get have two feet say that that there's non performing Frontage two Frontage um well I mean driver so the the intent for which is the next step the intent is for the house design that is designed to 15 and the way you need to access that house in terms of grading is is what dictated putting the proposed lot line where it is that's not what he said he said it was he used the 1921 things no he his argument was that somebody made mistakes in in doct emerging in the past and he's trying to correct that the the and so where this all um the direction this took last meeting was to understand that two New Lots are proposed and that the two lots have different sizes and the fact that you're making a larger lot and you're making a smaller lot the understanding was are those lot sizes any different than the neighborhood is the lot big lot too big and if the Big Lot is too big or proved to be too big which I think it proved that it's within keeping in terms of size of the neighborhood then then a larger structure could be put on and then the then the question was is the smaller lot too small so I think in terms of what we asked in terms of proving out the size of the lot in the neighborhood it's it is proved out on on the plan here and the lots and the sizes are identified that that being said we understand that if if this was approved then the lot size the larger lot size being somewhat equal to other Lots in the neighborhood would then afford or Grant or provide the rights to build a certain size house on that larger lot that would then be in keeping with the rest of the neighborhood so we haven't created a lot and then Mr fed comes back next month and we say oh no that's that's way too big a house that's and it's like well it's it's the lot it's here's the dyamic CLE the conventional criteri of theot so without looking at the house or understanding the house we are we are in part thinking that is the lot too big or too small was the question and that to me has been proved out on the plan so the lot size to me isn't an issue the either the too small a lot or the too big a lot now we step back and if someone was to to draft the variance you would have to come up with the means in section 10 that state the reasoning for the hardship in the condition of the land is what and the condition of 15 is that the shape of the land has not afforded any Frontage and so it's it's an un you know it's an unbuildable lot or it has a pre-existing nonconformity that doesn't doesn't even conform it's not even non-conforming it just doesn't conform so by providing a variance you would allow lot 15 some condition which again would be equal to the neighborhood of Plum Island for the The Oddities the non-conformities that other properties have this would have similar ones so you could relieve the hardship by by granting 15 now the second variance in terms of 11 being a smaller lot being an existing house the hardship is what and I don't think that's for us to claim what the hardship is on that one right I mean should the applicant be submitting something for us of what what's the claimed hardship for 11 well I mean we're I think we're all trying to figure this out and if we're reasoning it for or against they're coming up with it then we're we're you know we're not trying to make your argument for you but we're trying to reason out and figure it figure it out um and so then to me the question of where the lot line is whether the lot line is [Music] moved um and and makes the 15 a little smaller and makes 11 a little bigger is is an ice to have but again does it does it meet the conditions of providing a variance for I I still don't know what the hard Tri is I understand what you're saying about where the lot line is that still doesn't necessarily create a hardship for 11 correct moving the lot line it makes know somehow it makes 15 feel better but uh you know to even them out more somehow feels better but that's more of a uh that's not a technical thought related to our criteria we're measuring these variances against Mr P can you think of anything in terms of the the soil the shape of the Lambs well the conditions of the portion of the roadways uh bmar goes over uh some of the property um and then there's the topography and then there's the I mean those are the soil conditions are similar throughout Plum Island so we're not talking about the uh soil conditions but we are talking about um the E for hardship I mean I'm not sure I don't I don't understand why you need a hardship or a variance for a lot 11 I don't I don't understand that I mean he's saying that the planning board's going to look at that you need two Varian well you can't subdivide or re remove a piece of land from another piece of land when you do you reset the status of both pieces of property right and you have two pieces of property so nobody's arguing two pieces of property we're just arguing the status of the property and if if if if you had two really large lots and you wanted to move the lot line and both of them met the zoning requirements we wouldn't have any issue you just your engineer would draft the plan you send it to the planning board they look at it and they say yeah sure but what we're giving a variance in an Essence against the soil conditions is that we're resetting the non-conformities of lot uh and we're trying to justify how the noncon conformities meeting they don't comply with the p or the frontage and lot size requirements of the zoning generally in the area what is the non-conformity we're talking about the frontage and the lot size for 11 so an example would be say the variance for both is approved right and then you go and you sell number 11 right the person who owns that now essentially can't really improve their property they they can they they can but only within right but if if it meets so it meets only because yeah if it setback so 10 ft 10 ft 20 ft it has parking it has a lot coverage it has an F if all that is in keeping with the p then the house could be increased upward if it meant all that and some people would come and they'd say look my lck coverage is under but my f is a little over and I'm equal to be look at my neighbors they he's got a lot he's he's five ft and five fet and so I'm know I'm actually way better off than this guy so why can't I do that that's the argument that's made to us all the time yeah so the hangup here is is is stating a hardship that is is meets the intent of you know the the zoning the Massachusetts General Law chapter 40 section 10 on zoning that stand up and I think we've been through why and how this um what is being proposed was how it was all T through and and why it's being proposed like this and again trying to separate the properties I think we're in agreement that we could find uh a variant a plausible variance for 15 due to the shape the current shape of the land as it sits in the neighborhood and then we get to 11 and so now we're we're discussing that so would it be appropriate to propose a motion to approve in in theory the variance for 15th you know subject to a plan for 11 and then the applicant come back and propose something that he thinks will fly in 11 well I don't think we can do one without the other uh because one creates the other and you can't leave you can't have something that's approved and then have something that we put in limbo that's not what we want to do and we we want okay all right and you can just put come back and with a plan for both would that be easier or do you want to try to Hash it out right now it's all right here it's there's there's you can you can move we can ask to move the property line and make 15 a little smaller but it still doesn't the question is what is the hardship for 11 if 11 meets basically the the typical non-conformities of a Plum Island lot and it's it's equal to a lot of its neighbors and it's no more detrimental to its neighbors if we were just talking about if this was done a done deal and 11 came back to us with a second floor in all likelihood we probably pass it because it it meets most of the um conditions of the piod and it doesn't exacerbate conditions of the piod and so it it's I don't know it's just like some of the other applications we had before us but that's not what we're reviewing reviewing what we're trying to get is to a variance of section 10 and and standing behind it that allows this to happen and as much as 15 seems to be totally in order for the variance then you know are we is is is the hardship of hardship could be U that it uh its lot size has been diminished by by the applicant by 15 by the variance on 15 that's the hardship it's like uh got to be creative about it that's one way you're looking at it's like murdering your parents and throwing yourself on the mercery of the court because you're an orphan so again it's it's it's back to this uh Authority specifically finds that owing to circumstances relating to soil conditions shape or Topography of such land or structures and especially affecting such land or structures but not affecting the general zoning District we can't we can't do a variance for use um it does look like Peter's a little ahead of this he did specifically say creates new substandard lots and they'd lose their pre-existing nonconforming and and that's as discussed with Town Council so again that's the whole point is that we are we are taking two non-conforming properties we are changing the size and we are resetting the allowable nonconformities because of a variance which we have the ability to do you're actually you're you're making 15 more conforming and 11 less conforming and that's the problem the the underlying zoning piod is an overlay District it's still subject to the underlying zoning which is the agricultural residential which requires a 40,000 foot lot that's the problem if if if there was a condition of the land that that could make that argument then the smaller lot could could find itself the if you find one we'll be happy to take you know what I'm saying again I'm not trying to Advocate one way or the other I just don't want to see you get to the planning board and get shot down because you know the techn technical glitch at this stage and maybe you want to continue if I can off maybe you want to continue this and talk to the building inspector about it I'm giving you my opinion my thought as a member of the planning board but now when you said that um the the Plum Island overlay District the IOD goes over the uh AR ra uh zoning yeah what takes precedent the okay it it do what what the overlay District doesn't relieve you of any of the requirements of the underlying zoning District it puts on special requirements that you wouldn't have otherwise and in other other areas and town subject to but but why is not Plum Island its own zoning District I mean a doesn't fit Plum Island at all I I wouldn't I wouldn't why is it the way you have to take that town meeting okay you know I mean I'm not being flipped I I just that's the reality that's a hardship out there's no question there's the hardship right there well maybe maybe we at the zoning inconsistencies yeah it makes it very difficult yeah yeah so the permit granting Authority May impose conditions safeguards and limitations both of time in use including the condition continued existence of any particular structures but excluding any condition safs or limitations based on the continued ownership so people making um statements that they're um one going to live there you know that's the reason for the variance doesn't doesn't hold um I mean I think we we always want to be helpful and we want to help residents do what they want to do we just want to make sure that we're we're always weighing against um giving one property owner rights that we couldn't give somebody else and then giving somebody a property owner of Rights even though we Grant you the special permit and you build build it if it is deemed um non-conforming in the future and then you can't sell your property because we granted you something that that you know we're not take we taking exception to that and we're not you know so we're trying to prevent that and I guess the basics of building codes and Zoning is to make things as equal as possible and not let people do something that is a great idea but may not carry weight in in the future um this is a tough nut to crack and I I I think the two Varian is is is the hard part um I might propose a continuance and during that continuance that we have a meeting with Town Council and and the building inspector in order to to get a clarification of technicality so that we can understand rep they can help you um make the argument for the for variance on 11 I think the pathway 15 and maybe I don't know maybe there's some legal EAS that at the effect of of the hardship of of these two different properties one Weighing on the other um somehow the hardship is combined and therefore the variance for one then effective allows a variance for another we don't we don't do this every day Varian I'm glad are very few and far between and usually it's um you know somebody wants to put an addition and they're going to put it closer to than 10 ft to their neighbor and they have a a rock ledge on one side of the house and it it's unbuildable or something like that um now and and it's great that Larry's here from the planning board because we again we don't want to uh be too creative without the the the Le lease and the right thought process to stand behind to get you to the next step only to find that that the next board does and and their purview is an our perview and sometimes people make statements about certain things like the police or the fire department and we're or concom and we're like we appreciate it we understand it take it under consideration but they're the they're the authority that governs that um so I'm I'm I'm kind of saying it both ways but we want to be helpful to you in terms of figuring this out uh would it make sense to talk to the planning board also about this issue informally um you could certainly uh asked to get on our agenda I'd have no problem with that I mean I'm just one out of five members but I I'll tell you what I'd be looking for well I told you what I'd be looking for in terms of anr plan sure if you want to uh if you want to contact Kristen our to plan and see if you can get on the agenda yeah ultimately be up to the chair but I don't think you'd have any problem with it I think shape the smaller lot shape doesn't seem to be an issue the topography you could you can make a stand or an argument for the topography and the fact that the existing house is the only location where you could build a house and therefore the hard the hardship of um the variance in granting actually doesn't create a hardship for 11 and therefore the variance VAR could be granted um soil conditions as you said I I don't think anybody can make an argument that it's not like you got Upland versus sandune and you get something totally different so I I think uh if there's a way with the surveyor or um discussing it with the planning board in terms of topography and and somehow um the fact that variance for 11 could be granted because the hardship is is that you can't build anything else on 11 for the size that you're proposing and so therefore it's it's it's new nonconformities are acceptable that's going to be a tough one to fly I think cuz he created the nonconformities the new ones that's we'll see let's so are you suggesting we make a motion for continuance while the applicant explores these other options yeah I mean unless we can figure it out fairly soon because I think we've been around and around and we don't quite have it um um would it make sense to Grant the variances subject to review with the uh Town Council and building inspector uh I think if we think the path is clear we've we've we've done that or we've we uh said the intent that we would try to draft and the idea of drafting a favorable decision is that we have um um that the decision gets made and that the decision is clear and the decision gets voted on and that we're we're relaying that we believe we'll get to a favorable decision so we want to try to draft that review that and then we would vote on it we don't vote on creating a draft and we vote to create a draft and we tell you it's going to be favorable and that's usually how the outcome is but I don't think we want to get ahead of ourselves and in doing that because I don't I don't think we have the language or the argument to State exactly what we're intending here and again I think we have it I think we have it for 15 I don't think we have it for 11 I do think to me an argument would be that the demography of 11 with the existing structure is no more detrimental to the piod then again your your your neighbors and the size of the house that could be built on 11 with an existing structure would be no more detrimental so the you know the hardship is is that 11 is what it is and and you couldn't do anything else and so therefore the the the revised property lines are acceptable due to topography that sounds good okay um so with that I would propose that we have a motion that continues this um is there anybody to know that this is room is available or there's space available in town on and that you guys could make it on um January 22nd Wednesday I can't check the room I can't check on the room without the network was it Wednesday the 22nd uh Wednesday 2 second y uh yeah I think I can that looks good right now how do I find it is it on the calendar go down and check can you do that for us please I got it so there's a planning board meeting that's virtual on the 22nd there's a recreation committee meeting there actually an open space committee on the 21st we can't just sayet continu needs to be time place specific because everyone who's watching and wants to know has to know that we canate to a certain time F position it later we do it on 29 29th of January where are we here that's a Wednesday correct 30th yes are you available on the 30th of January uh yes for me I'd like to do it on the 23rd but I have a feeling I'm I got a business trip out of town and I'm not going to make it back 30th would be preferable for me okay so we'll get chrisy a moment to get back but the that we'd like to have is the the continuance to jary 30th at 7:30 here at Town Hall there you available 530 yes uh the planning board has a meeting on the 8th and on the 9th G in the 9th should be G in the 22nd G 22nd but I just saying sorry I'm staring at like different days here trying to figure out what's what's up okay so we'll make a motion to keep things is there a motion Contin we need for the motion she'll look yeah so we're going to do it on Thursday the 30th go back and checking no it's open I'm looking at the calendar here I got it I got it up magically so is there a motion for I make a motion for continuance on this hearing until Thursday January 30th 7:30 here in the uh town meeting room whatever it's called is there second second those in favor I I I okay so we're continuing to to the 30th okay which sets our next meeting date for the 30th um I'm out of town from the 9th to the 28th as well if you have that meeting um or if you have the meeting that the I assume you'd try to have the meeting sooner than later um I would say I don't know if there's a a conflict that just I show up or one of us just shows up to that meeting if he has a meeting I I'm sorry I lost the thread so uh Mr F's going to talk to the building inspector right that's where i' start and I'm GNA send an email to Town Council saying we're we need some more guidance your letter is very clear but we have this this one issue of thought um the applicant needs some guidance now the Town Council isn't your Council Town Council is our Council right um but I will I will put an email out there to ask if um if you do have a meeting with the building inspector and one of these two people is available and you think it's helpful for them to listen in the conversation you can invite one of them um if if you guys have the time if you guys think of being in a meeting advances any kind of understanding you can either you know accept or not but I think I'd be willing to do that if I was here okay um because I'd like to get to the bottom of it and get to the the to know that um our questions to Town Council our questions to the building inspector and and other people's opinions on how they weigh in helps give us an understanding so that we can move forward one way or the other right I was big plan too kind plan I'll speak with Krist about it great yeah she may be she meets regularly with Town Council so that okay well I I can copy Kristen um Martha and Town Council on my email and and relay that we're we we're we're needing some guidance so we have some indecision or um and we're looking for a little more information from the applicant and maybe they can shed some light on there I'll try I'll start with the building inspector and talk to uh christe yeah she would be the the the person if you want to get on the planning board agenda but see what the building inspector has to say I'll do that first yeah and he can give give give me some guidance as well whether it makes sense to go to the the planning board or and you you can take my name in vain too if you want I if he wants to uh he wants to talk to me Happ well he would uh not have a problem talking to you if if there were questions that you want to answered from a member of the board I don't think he would no okay I I'll recommend that he talk to you yeah you think we're all again we're all trying to get to the to the same place and with a proper understanding on everybody's side of what's what yes I mean it uh it turned it on the surface it appeared to be a very simple uh problem to solve and when I talk to the building inspector he agreed and then we had several other discussions and Town Council got involved and it became obvious was more complicated than initially for I mean it looked like well you just put this to this and everything makes sense obviously that wasn't simple nothing simp well uh board members thank you for your time app appreciate you you're thinking this through with us yes thank you good luck all right ja uh next up we have a new public hearing Tamar pearlstein and Margaret Wallace did I pronounce that correctly uh eight plumbush Downs the applicants are requesting a special permit slinding for relief from section 97-4543 may be required under the town zoning bylaws to allow the proposed use project in order to construct a second floor on the existing single family dwelling utilizing the existing foundation and walls on the property located at eight plum bush towns Plum Island blue Mass uh 01951 this is the Assessor's map R51 Lot 8 all right that's in here I display excuse he had a display told well let's reopen it good evening evening or should I say good night sometimes they go really quick other time it's not so much so I'm tomari and this is Margaret Wallace we are the owners of the property located at eight push Downs with us we have Scott Wallace Market's father just for moral support and help if needed um again like we uh read we're looking for the upward extension for the relief there the existing property is a first floor dwelling so we're looking to add a second floor um really just to make it habitable for us as we grow our family great all right so um you're unit number eight right yes and the lot size is 9,964 square ft yes all right so the lot size doesn't change at 9,954 s ft the lot coverage doesn't change at 15.4 to 15.4 the F goes from 8.7 to 23.9 uh the height goes up to 30 ft and it's it doesn't really say but it looks like it's it's no more than 14 ft to the mean height of the roof right now um the frontage doesn't change the bedrooms go from 1 to two correct the uh and this the front the front yard is 55 ft the side a is 18 side B looks to be about 39 and I'm I'm plus or minus cuz it's kind of fuzzy on the plan but um and the rear is 57 ft so you're on publish Downs you're you're in the piod some people in the past because you have you're in a condo association right um some people have argued the size of the site is the whole condo site and and we've kind of said that that's nice we understand that that may be a technicality but when we look at it we kind of do look at your individual property and compare it um as we've just been discussing about you know do you meet the setbacks do you meet the F do you meet the height do you meet everything I just read off and you you pretty much do and you're not changing or exacerbating anything um you've answered questions about bedrooms I guess you have an unfinished adct yes you swear take that we have a lot of clothes to store I imagine expand your family we'll have kids Stu go through Prett quickly um is it heated attic or is it unheated it will be unheated oh yeah okay um so you have anything more to add or no I I would just say your family the Wall family has been coming to Plum Island for 30 years and since we started dating it's really been a special place for us the as crazy as it sounds as young as we are this is going to be our forever home so there's no intention ever to rent it out it's really our place that we find solace in and to be able to build a home that we can grow into would really mean the most to us great Bo have any questions are you asking for a variant in any way absolutely not is the unfinish addict square footage factored into the F the F uh it should be yes says your F seems your total square footage seems larger so there are existing decks on either side side um the square footage as listed [Music] on the far checklist we did include the unfinished attic at 650 Square ft so that brings you to the 2382 which then as a calculation does bring you to the 23.9 so existing is 866 ft and the proposed is 2382 that includes the oh I see it's 650 for the attic yeah technically not need to be if it's un it's notable we weren't sure if it should be factored in so we did it just to be safe yeah um just cauti you might you maybe don't have to actually factor that in right so the only thing I'm thinking through is that the the tiod does say two floors you have an unfinished attic um we've had you know if it's unheated I think we just we could just make a stipulation that it's an unfinished unheated ad that's the control good okay is there anybody here that would like to speak against none anybody like to speak in favor me no I don't have anything to say are you a resident town uh no we've been coming down here for 20 years my inlaw place um you guys must be fav you already did favorable okay um want to go home you want to send you so we're going to um I think with that close the public hearing and ask for a motion very good uh is there a motion to wait you ask I you make a motion uh I make a motion to approve the uh special permit for uh upward extension for the project add eight push Downs okay so we're going to draft a favorable um we will have that decision reviewed uh with any last public review on the 30th of January um at that time we will vote to accept that motion and that motion will say what um the Jack had is that it's a favorable motion to Grant the upward extension and we will list the items that I listed in terms of what what you are changing or not changing as the status for for granting that so is there a second to that motion a second I congratulations thank Youk app all right we'll see you on you don't have to show up on the 30th but we'd like to show up thank you um I don't think you're fairly straightforward in terms of what you're presenting and what you're doing terms of reasonableness um good thank you thank you [Music] and drive there but I'll email you okay okay apprciate that was awesome thank you thank you everyone good night the last man standing you heart very good very good done this alphabetical huh uh this is another new public hearing John haret 59 PL Island turnpik the applicant was requesting a special permit slinding for Le from sections 97 40-5 c01 increas in square footage and 02 uput extension of the Newber zoning bylaws and any other per that may be required under the town of new zoning bylaws to allow the proposed use project in order to raise the existing building and the construction of a new single family dwelling with a garage on the property located at 59 from M turn bike Newby Mass assessor map R51 lot two right um I'm deaf so you guys what I've got you can come up and sit in the chair and this is what I I've already been a concom this is what I propos to build um it's going to I'm going to have a I want the garage space but I don't want to lose the residential aspect of the existing blowing so I propos to go 42 by 42 garage yep uh I meet all the setback requirements those are my wet lines yep I'm going to access this garage door from my property right next door right now I I live right next door now so um two lots separate conditions you're going to use this but you're still going to have the house above it right the size of the lot is 2,160 Square ft right the current size of the building I got that all written down over here oh it's just lock coverage if you [Applause] guys there's there's a deck and then there's a small rectangle here which is perpendicular to the road this is this is rotated to the road so the lot coverage for the existing is 6.1 and the lot coverage for the new goes to 8.3 the f is at 5.2 and the F goes to 14.7 the height of the original is 21 ft and height of the new is proposed is 25 ft the frontage is 205 ft Frontage doesn't change uh the front set back right now is 31 that will go to it'll be reduced to 24 uh the side a is 44 and will be reduced to 26 the side B is 69 and it will increase to 77 and the rear is 38 and it goes to you didn't where's the rear this is the rear so looks like it's still 38 is it no yeah it was 38 to the deck and if you draw that that's funny how it works out like that it's 38 it's still the same yeah same that's why you didn't write it in so it's 38 ft okay um there's two floors do you have what's the bedroom count currently two bedrooms and what's the current what's the bedroom count these two bedrooms is going to be too big no stays the same good okay um you don't have any attics or unheated space or anything like that and this this is up right yeah this is up like a line that shows it right um [Applause] [Music] you have a basement the architect did the elevations one way and the engineer did did them another way the architect took it from the um ground level in the engineer took it from the first floor level of the uh the garage level yeah but but you're up on piles right no in the existing or in the new in the new are you in a flood zone are you in the flood zone yeah I've already been in the con do you do you have they they approved the [Music] foundation oh yeah it says right around here flood zone elevation yeah and there's ramps to get up into the garage that's what right and there'll be um yeah there yeah there there's two ramps to get into the garage but it doesn't need you don't need to be up on piles here no Fe doesn't require P first FL just seems to be higher elevation side no I'm going put be flood openings in the in the uh walls in the walls I see okay so that's you're doing alternative you you're right down the street from the last people went down the street from the people that just left oh yeah oh is a Bob Lobster in here somewhere too oh don't bring up Bob Lobster I stra they're kind of next door it to me okay all right I just was trying to place it cuz I didn't have the pl before all right so the height is to the larger Gable Ridge to the mean point of that roofe that is the larger higher Gable R it's slightly higher than than the other one what am I allowed 35 ft 34t 35 35 Med 341 78 um we just get suspect and people up right against it I think my top my elevation the mid mid elevation is going to be like 25 that's what he shows that's that's what you have on your table too is this on your property this little out is this your property I I can't let me see this is that your property it's this little out building that that old building is going that's that's going to be uh that's over here that's getting demolished I see okay that's the shed that's right here okay my house is over here okay you do you go to PL Island at all yeah all the time I live across the street from the pank house this is across the street from the pank house okay okay yeah this looks really this building looks really you're definitely going to improve it well it's you know if you really want to know what the truth is I had a permit to do this 10 years ago and I let it expire before they even got into this Poma overlay district for this area mhm would have been easier then H easier I didn't he you have to jump don't have to jump through so many Hoops you should have kept oh yeah I know but my fault okay so there's only two stories here there's the first floor and the second floor what else is there there should be a floor plan two floor plans no I'm just I'm I'm basically restating the points that we're trying to check off here to understand yeah I I um the only the only I won't I don't use the word tricky but graph Architects made dis cables to sever so slightly taller so and you go to the midpoint it's 25 ft but even if you were up to 35 ft youd still still not 10 ft higher the second now I don't have an issue with that okay [Music] um so you going to pour a foundation fill it in the for lab and go up from there I have any more questions don't no it seems pretty pretty good presentation and definitely an improvement oh yeah like I said I should have done it 10 years ago but okay you get admire a guy who puts a garage this principal thing and then sticks to the house on top like an app that's pretty good that's what I want your wife I want the garage I don't care about I don't want to lose the yeah sure it's it's on two lots that's the problem I mean I I on the one next door and this one will be as nice as the one next door yeah so you you'll have a driveway in in and out and yeah that's a driveway are you going to give yourself an easement or you or you're just uh not until I sell it if I decide to sell this then I'll give my I'll write myself an easement at that point but if I sell this I'm not going to give I'll just close this off y so then you know I'm not going to Sol it right but we want to we want to just make sure again we're not setting up something for oh no no I'm not going to set you up so anybody's you know if if I need to run a Ean I will but I I'm not going to run a Ean because if I I'm if I sell them to separate properties you don't the point is you don't have to have an easement because you already have a driveway right if if you didn't have this and you were totally counting on this then we'd be little and see I'm eliminating this this is a through a driveway now that every minut they goes to BL I'm there a turn around and so I want to eliminate that that explains the plantings then right yeah very good do the turn around we do this um okay I more questions and and this is my setback line right here yep and you got you get the the numbers yeah that are on a well drafted sa plan so I think we're good and I mean the lot's big definitely big enough all right is there a motion I make a motion to uh approve the application for uh upward extension and an increase in the building foot in the in the area of the piod um as for the applicant's application as for Mr Harton's application okay that the lock size does not change that the lck coverage is is um under the uh um zoning ordinance that the f is under the zoning ordinance and the height is under the zoning ordinance uh and the only thing to note on the application is that the rear is 38 ft which is appropriately actually marked on the S so with that is there a second second all right all those in favor I I so we're going to close the public hearing now yeah which is a formality we will draft a favorable motion we will have that uh hopefully reviewed approved and ready for voting on the 30th of January 30th January our next meeting all right now when can I set uh you have an appeals period after that motion of 20 days 20 days how much 20 20 right I have to send out a letter to your abutters so say they sign it the night of the 30th I sent out the letter on the 31st uh by February 21st as long as no appeals or receip the town clerk you can record it or fog can record it eile it and you can the next day just have to pay for the building permit to initiate it and move forward with Peter now I've got all the uh receipts for the the letters I'll take those I'll put them in your project folder could deliver that's awesome y thank John all righty se you can take your plan and if you like I'm going to give you back your plate there now you said the 21st of February no okay is the end of the appeal period is the end okay I'll let you know that they signed and approved on the 30th I'll email you and then I'll nail your Butters and I'll keep you in the loop so you can come on the 20 first and pick it up okay sounds good thank you thank you very much all right thank good job John you want this one take your color plant [Applause] all right is there a motion to close the meeting I make a motion to close the meeting in JN second all in favor