##VIDEO ID:YICXaA_GZ_I## uh in order um one of the items I'll say at the outset uh Island book the second item doesn't I'm not sure if they're going to appear but we know that the peer review report is not complete we're trying to find out what's going on but um regardless there won't be anything to discuss tonight at I book and the third item which is uh zero Hill Street um a letter today did you note that you got that right yes yeah you sent it to me right and it's been put in Dropbox thanks from uh Dan Campbell uh from Level Design Group requesting they would put on for our January meeting to dat so we'll get to that the first item on the agenda is the continued application for zero Burke Street the applicant representative of attorney rich is here and um attorney Rich provided the case that he was referring to last time um lamb versus Zoning Board of ton for the record it's un the public court decision from April of [Music] 2010 um and I communicated with Town Council uh just today um to ask her a question uh she responded including I think her analysis from last spring and then expanding on that uh to say that she did not believe this was um in line for VAR relief but we can discuss that tonight um so attorney rich I won't be long I just want to repat with5 minutes okay parents own the land to way back there okay y they got it at that time I think they got ownership back in um probably 1972 they had this piece of language in 19 I think 1995 convey this pie out P to the right and that was the lot that they retain was the lot in question I'm not saying that that going they had the right it it not I sorry staple coming through and just I'm lucky today go ahead s so they was back in 19 L then subsequently they conveyed it to uh the husband visits the wife and she passed on just before she pass she passed this lot on to the three children they had nothing to do with the lot it's it's not it doesn't meet the Swift what it's now didn't meet the Swift when they get it didn't meet this fun why they did it I have no idea I can't tell you they did it Mr bacon is to C it's in this Z it's 80,000 but there lot of right near there a lot of lava lots are similar right there they're built way back they're not either because they buil way by own so it doesn't it doesn't derate from the from the area because there's a lot of small Lots small not like the world this lot is doesn't have a lot of f has a lot of De it's like 300 ft all the way back if the house they go to 400 you would even see the the house [Music] through so yes again Town Council happened is she got involved because of the small lot exemption and that that she came back and it does not qualify when she came back I could not was spond in favor that it didn't qualify so the only [Music] uh they they have a lot we the this four years board the highship they have a lot they can't do the issue with that case that I had given you is creating your own G yeah okay and I know like I said there was that La Off Third Street on place she created her own G she subdivided when she sld lot she at the farmhous and she s the behind it who are you talking about the baker's parents no no no sorry you gave a a variance to a lot on Bird Street um excuse me I'll first on tipping PL tipping place the lady created her own be she had a lot she cut the front side out and she got the back of 40 feet I think 40 foot Frontage on different place and you gave her the be she she actually prayed on there the the case I had given you the taon case one of the one issues that came up is that um you case own which say he didn't his c number one that particular takes the guy had creot at he created and he had his sub he sold all the L sub with these two that were not build lot the guy that he sold the two but he couldn't build on these two lot they W buildable so what happens is he St he did not pay taxes anymore the town talk and took them the back boxes and the original guy did everything B them and only this says no you you created way back when then you bought them and F Zone bought case that I gave you just says no that's not one the you can't deny it because that factor alone just because you say so that's why I'm saying the issue one of the meetings we had was he created his own baring for doesn't qualify so number one he didn't create own it was somebody else before him I know it was his parent but now we have a lot we can't do anymore you I I read the case and I mean my take is that what the court said is purchasing a non-conforming lot and it's the first line of the decision with actual knowledge of its non-conformity is standing alone whether that's sufficient standing alone to deny zoning relief as a self created hardship and the said that alone is not you have to because a purchaser of a nonconforming law doesn't get fewer rights than the owner of the lot would get that makes sense neither it says either they get greater RS and that's the that's the conundrum I see um I mean the court decision was based on that it was pretty narrow and said cre I understand so no I agree and so thank for the case it's it's helpful um but there were other issues going on there and that was a pretty narrow holding that that can't be the only basis you know the law as I understand it is um self-created hardship is a factor in deciding variance Rel relief and um I had been looking at it at the last meeting under a small lock section I think I printed it out third time yeah 175 d6.3 that says LPS merge if they're held by the same owner um own has five years after the implementation only to build or they and that's all and so my question was um whether these emerged back when the parents owned them regardless of whether they sold it or left it to the children or not but as Council pointed out this doesn't apply because this wasn't this lot was created after the implementation of zoning I think as rich just said Z in 74 and the special anr was from 94 or maybe 95 in fact the plan the anr plan and I think this was in the file before but uh Council showed to move when she was dealing with this um you know in the spring it's actually dated August 1994 and the lot says on it how would be an ALICE Baker not approve mov as a separate building lot on the lck I I assume you've seen that maybe it was in the app back in the spring very small yeah approv as a separate building lot so the lot was created way after the way after zon and this doesn't apply because this this applies the lots that were informing at one point zoning and then zoning comes in and zaps the owner that's so and thank I think Council for corrected me on that you know I should have seen that but so that doesn't have any application at all so we're back to a various application which this was submitted as to us now because um attorney Rich gave us a CL plan with the house shown on it and um asked for very relief on behalf of these owners the the children of the parents children of the bankers um but Council um also believes variance relief is not appropriate um in this case uh there are three things that have to be shown um special condition affecting that parcel but not generally The District in which it's located two substantial hardship Financial or otherwise to the applicant and desirable Le May gr without substantially derating from the intent and purpose of the B law so those are the things that the factors that we should consider and Council sites the the case that always comes whan versus Zoning Board of norfol that was a case in 2000 that says um I don't want to try to summarize it from memory I read it I didn't I didn't it out um but in part it says deficiency in rock frag in area is not relating to so condition shape or Topography of land so as to qualify for variant um so that the size of the L and Frontage are dimensional and the court carves that out in a separate as separate consideration and there are that's a mass Supreme Court Supreme Judicial Court case for that proposition um where the hardship was created by the land owner and he feels Town Council feels that this was created by the landowner at the time and the 9s um and she finds the we case applicable that it was created by the landowner so who owns it now I'm assuming doesn't factor into that factor and VAR it's Rel at least that's what I'm reading Town Council as suggested um the substantial hardship was created by the landowner in the 9s so the fact I assume that it was sold or left to somebody else um I take that to me doesn't get the applicant out of the quantry that the hardship was owned was created by the landowner uh whatever the intent was at the time and we don't know the intent of course and then the the third factor is of course the bylaw bylaw says small LS or undersiz Lots should be combined where possible because the town watchs build the Lots wherever possible even though 175 6.3 isn't the structure by which we make a decision I think council is saying it does dagate from the purpose of the bylaw that you can't create a small undersized law and um expect that it's going to be a buildable a lot later um the fact that it was left to the children um am was suggesting doesn't get the person applicant out of the laundry I can't the bylaws say what they say they don't speak to what happens if the landowner red the hardship and then someone else takes over the land the B doesn't say that so I don't know that there's a clear answer so we're left with the variance of the three basic principles of the variant gr and that's what we should be operating with it so I'm not suggesting that we should deny or should permit um it's it's our judgment and it's up to somebody that we make the decisions the can appeal maybe this is for the applicant anybody else can appeal I mean by Butters or those affected or the town I suppose if the town feel about it go ahead just real quick there's nobody in the neighborhood that's why I the they have other ones other houses are built like that I don't know how those were created were built I mean they could have been built prior to Z I don't know they probably were I just know there a lot right next to after that after the bylaw she and and using the definition that you said thisly behind me they didn't they didn't me the qualification so I just don't know how they got it that's why I'm saying I think being consistent is we have to well I agree but I know hold certainly but to respond but consistency we made a decision um this has come up a few times what happens to this merger idea when a further owner takes it later and um we've said no before where somebody purchased a lot it's not taking place it's um I remember which one it was one in the neighborhood where there's just a just a driveway going into the center L yeah was over um foretress cemet right I don't remember the street yeah it might have been it might have been was but in any event that we said no the the person came in and said the building inspector time told him he could get it build a you just have to go to the zoning board and we said well there's no evidence of that and you know yeah he so the only thing I would say in his favor is he thought that he purchased that lot yes knowing that issue right um this is an inherited L you know what I mean he didn't purchase it but you know what I mean just came to the in because they're par I agree significant it's a different circumstance that's where our judgment comes in so I just brought it out there I'm sorry Chris yeah I've always lived in I live in my C now and in a body's basement because I have po cancer Lea cancer than poison M and I here had to give that up when I was on the Conservation Commission for five years and often we had to make the new uh situation everything wasn't cut and dry in St and we had to make decisions as the board ask to on this situation and I'm really the one that's just yeah in a bad situation happen I live in a buddy's basement in the C I'm hoping to from back to nor I know a lot of people on First Street including Dan but uh and uh my fiance we' like to just build a house that's a a tiny house and U would this be your house that yeah yeah this is kind of the last leg of the race for me I'm going for my 29th not 29th surgery next month adhesions and insides a rough run and this is this will be another hardship the hardship that the law is talking about is not the hard that you're going for real sorry to hear all that I didn't know that but it's the hardship of I think yeah my main thing was that we had to make decisions on on the conservation know nothing was things were always different we had to end up deciding not going by the wall all the time I know it's not close but I do I do understand this she need with the inheritance you know what I mean I think that makes me look at me anyway iner well actually did you just say it was conveyed before she died mistake I assume mother was dingess Destiny one way or the other I didy sure is there a piece of is there a p Trail yeah that's the right I here but I remember hearing about it the file but it's the file that was in our box like inly back to what we're talking about sit you don't want buy and say I got I I do it but if we can approve this B with some type of backup that you can show hey there was an inheritance this this was not inheritance but you know parents I thought it was an inheritance from early on so I I didn't it maybe I get it from the mother before she died the father and the mother had there was no Purchase made not no that's what I'm trying to convey here that there was no nobody EXA we assum that you know we can't assumed that get that backup approval or some kind of letter or something saying that that's how the land convey but we have the conveyance in the file that's all I'm saying so it's not in the open go it's not but it's I think it's in the other one before it went in the drop box I remember I'm comfortable if we have that that's what I'm trying to say that's my backup to say hey this is a unique situation this isn't a guy to find out you correct so it's different from so if that can be in the file which you say that exist with that it's back in yeah I know I know the and we had thec I was looking here for when I was do talking I looking it's not in I remember seeing it we just but it's in the drop off F I think a strong consideration [Music] that um so the only other you know the only other we can ask if there's anyone else to speak in favor of or against nobody has appeared I don't think any time uh we can ask Council to brief us if you'd like or we can make a decision based on what we we know I don't know I'm not sure I can follow everything that any advis U as far as the reasons why it it doesn't qualify VAR um you can read it I no I I mean I'll save you a little bit of time I I don't need okay I don't think I me personally I don't need black and white data right exactly I I think I'm good with know type into Google yeah I I don't think we have to go back I you is there anybody online my P for um no you're not is there anybody present online to speak in favor of or in opposition to this application Mr G there are a couple people but nobody's uh nobody is speaking up nobody is speaking up on it okay so is there a motion to CL the public hearing I think you've heard what we need but is there a motion to close the public hearing on this application okay Mr Tor yes Mr W Mr Noel votes yes as well supposed to do it verbally orally um then it's a application for variance like discuss and U I don't know that there is a clearcut answer as Mr Baker puts it um I think the circumstances are different than others that we've looked at including the one in the case that Atty Rich you know put in front of us and although I think the skill is doesn't I don't think it helps AC anyway like I don't I I understand but he bought it back again that's a purchase R it's limited to it can't be the only factor that S created hardship right um you know I there are other factors of the neighborhood that it's in the other status of the houses that exists there and the history of of the Ws and Norton you don't have all those answers or all that information so I think it comes out to whether we think this derogates from the bylaw um again the house is placed 200 something feet away from the 20 away from be right we used to I that I that's what I'm saying I didn't my I didn't it out so the the plan was submitted to us with the house proposed house um and the side setbacks are 20.5 and 15.2 uh at the closest points I shown on the plan record 960 ft the tiny house EXC me quick it was so it was go back to yes it was I got the D right here I am so sorry what year was that that the the um when did your mom [Music] die yeah this was this was in 23 but she's own it since What year she she they own it since early before yeah if it was the personal representative of the estate that Al gave it to from so she became the first his mom died pursuant to the will Sheed it out so it was I think that's what you said no I thought it wased but that's why I said it actually I look by the yeah what are you saying I'm looking at it as you know we can treat it as prior only board law as the original owner you know we're we're proposing to approve it for the same family land it's not wasn't purchased well okay the other way ownership but they should have they shouldn't have created a small walk I mean Mom and Dad Baker should not have created a small laot but they did before said before no they did it in 94 that's the problem I think that Council sees that it wasn't wasn't created before zoning um they created it after zoning the question that I get down to is do we hold that against the Next Generation maybe we should maybe it establishes that I could cleave off a part of my lot and leave it to my kids and they can say hey we can apply for a variance you know maybe we don't want to do that that's the public policy concern know that time we that they were subject to the law you know it doesn't matter that you don't know something is not permitted if you do it you're subject to the rules so kind touch the other way um but that's where it comes down to are we are we doing something that derogates from the purpose and intented of bylaw you could look at it that way I think that's what Town Council were saying that they created a l in a we not recent 10 30 years ago now well 30 years ago I 94 30 years ago they stent no moral judgment but they shouldn't quote unquote have done that they created a small lot left it to their children and now the children are coming asking for aians is that self-created hardship I don't think it is but it leaves leaves open the possibility that people could do that intentionally and then leave it to their kids now I don't have a big enough lot that on our great small for my kids you know it wouldn't work for most Lots anyway but that's the way it happened here so that's what we have to discuss does this derate from the enan and purpose of the bylaw such that we say no you can't build on that lot um I think it could go either way but I don't know that I want to be in the position of saying and imposing kind of a almost a moral judgment that aric shouldn't have done that so we can't let the kid reside there now I but that's I'm just talking out loud this is our discussion I I think so do I um the inherited part like I'm thinking it it was me right I had a lot like my whatever and I got it got your stuff can't sell it you could sell it but you don't get a lot who's going to even buy like not many people going buy you're St a lot no one can buy it right let's see honest um but I think I would also feel a little differently if there was a neighborhood in here screaming up and down yeah that feel me a little I mean that's honest just the neighborhood was different if the neighborhood was different or the neighbors were in here and they were G us letters we don't want this and that and that they've all gotten letters um so they all got noce I mean notice they all got notice um I mean my personal my person I'm I'll just say I would be probably in favor of this as it stands right now just me I've wavered on this over the several meetings but I think I'm in line with that as well um it's ironic because you know just been involved in editing the bylaws and I didn't do much of the review and I I just got have time this year but I know they've been going over this this is one thing maybe we should for the future ask Council to address like should we be adding something you know specifically about what self-created hardship is or whether if this goes if the concept goes with the land then the lot would have been merged and doesn't matter what you do after but this was created this lot was created after zoning and I think that's what council is saying that I council's opinion and I and I I understand it I I get it I get you know then I I take yeah I take other factors and I think the other fact is me personally out weigh okay yeah I know two things I mean obviously it's inherit I feel it's inherit lot so you kind of kind of Stack out morally whether they did it knowing I don't know we'll never be able to tell that I in my in my brain I would like to say they didn't do that right so yeah but I got way or we don't have any and it also not for nothing I mean at least for me this is going to be his La well that don't take to the bank either no pardon about mistrusting Chris saying he could sell it in six months 100% he could and I would hope he wouldn't but because I don't think we can't can't do that well we can impose conditions but I'm not comfortable doing only owns it if so right I just for his own he said to us that is for his own use we could put that in the uh the write up so that that's a factor so that would distinguish the next time when somebody purchases trying to I'm few few hundred bucks you know you know I would put that is the decision the app one of the children okay that's why and that's why I put so what I was noting though is the setback what's the St down I yeah with the house what youed just so we can reference on yeah 202 uh 731 2024 yeah that's the final record that was submitted so that's what we're voting for so is there a motion to approve various or was it the frontage SI thank um given the U situation so noting what we have said we would note in the decision itself uh the hardship being that the a lot wased with no apparent intent of the current holders and and the intent of one of the children to occupy the house that's going there according to plan of record with those setbacks which are um permitted under the small lot exemption even though we're not deciding I 13 p is buildable in Norton under the exemption even though this doesn't fall into the exemption we're not we're not lessening the setback from that number so I'd say that's the motion that I'm asking for is there such a motion I'll make that motion if we can put it into we will is there a second is there any further discussion on that motion get the plan of record dated 314 was it 31st U Mr Lucas you how do you vote Mr yes sorry Mr no V yes awesome thank you for putting up with us for the last 10 meetings and well there a lot of issues here I just no no it's not because I've already got but you took time to analyze it the homework you did a very comprehensive analysis of everything how coun sometimes you don't see that so right wrong and different we should know I say I if I would lose I just want a f shot I get that at least IED thanks for walking us through this in the various forms um we'll draw up a decision in the next two week two weeks is Christmas right so I better do it I'll start working I'll get you the draft tomorrow by Friday but I'll get it to you before right the holiday well before but that's ironic that the two weeks is actually Christmas so I don't want to go to that dropping it off in the tax box on Christmas um in any event and then you know there's an appeal period but we'll get it we get it up in the next week and a half or so week hopefully but thank you very much all right good luck to you good luck to you person take care I didn't know all that yeah good Christmas I almost five times just from the mesh three chronic infections I take [Music] really that far back I didn't know that I didn't know that's why oh since I died yeah 197 years right after Boston I was working whole in Boston and went to the [Music] hospital they reopen me up every six months for three years half L half the 50 another [Music] [Music] [Music] [Music] worse the mesh that they all put [Music] in you no I don't do that no not you there cut it went into my bones so I have osteitis I took my quad muscle out here and sewed it into the hole and they had to cut infection off 4 by9 pieces my still works it's good I got to go in back in next [Music] month happy holidays take your so that's what we have for tonight well no wait we should get to them on the agenda right is agenda I'm saying I have it here if you need it next item on the agenda is the continue public for Island Brooks here East Main Street let me just ask is there anybody online Mr [Music] gy we got there's still some people online is there anybody who wishes to be uh attended because of Island Brook we are we are going to uh vote to put that off to our January meeting I'll ask um Mr djy to ask for a note from from um Mr itani to do that but um we inquired recently of the review engineer and they weren't ready uh the office you know R back so uh was there a motion to put off Al in Brook until what is the January date whatever the is yeah we did record that's 15th okay a motion to General I'll about this as well um so I don't work for put jary 15th at 702 and to give somebody an applicant a chance to be first and then the third item we got a letter which is the uh public the for the zero Hill Street which we did open I last meeting Dan cell of level Design Group C letter asking motion to continue that Mr you V yesare yes as well put them for I guess 704 on the 15 please um that's the items of business that we have tonight is there anything else members to come before us just happy to be here one of us is that's good applications for January any more agenda or something just came in right there wasn't I I I didn't review it but there was something that just arrived Brian I guess had some accumulated time that he had to take in December emailed me I just got the email yesterday but he emailed me a few days earlier saying he had to take this week off and next is said and next he had built up leave and and uh through the union contracts if you don't use a certain amount you lose it and we didn't want that really why Christmas week and New Year it was his choice yeah he wanted to find weather I don't know U hurricane conditions out there just about okay is there a motion to adjourn then at 7:48 I'll make motion all in favor all right at 748 thank you uh happy holidays to everybody