Zoning Board of Appeals - Regular Meeting

I got there. Can I use your agenda, please? Sure.

Uh, good evening. It's 7:20 p.m. We're at the Littleton Zoning Board of Appeals. We're at uh 37 Shadic Street, room 103. And we have uh some some business to go over. And we also have a single meeting tonight. We've been sitting here trying to solve a dilemma. And for the hearing tonight, we seem to have a pretty full room of a butters. Um, and I don't know what uh position anybody's taking yet, but I wanted to make this announcement. We have four people in the room at the zoning board of appeals table. Three of us are members who have been sworn in. The fourth one has been a member for over a decade, but whose uh term of office expired on June 30. Unfortunately, uh Rod was not Rod Stewart, who's the member whose term expired, did not receive the email telling him the term expired. It was misdirected by mistaken inadvertence. And so, he wasn't reappointed by the selectman, nor was he sworn in for this meeting. In addition, we have another alternate member named David Outman who was not able to attend tonight

and John can't attend. John Field's term expired the same way Rods did.

And I don't know if John is seeking reappoint or not, but I have here a person who can listen to the hearing. Now the rules under the ZBA say we can have a meeting with a quorum of three but we cannot hear an appeal or a variance request or a special permit request. I believe in front of us is a variance tonight. We cannot hear that without four members and we need a four out of four vote to pass it or a four out of five vote if we have a fifth member. Now, Cheryl reminded me of the rule of necessity, and I've just looked that up. The rule of necessity only lets us count a conflicted member if the member speaks up and announces the conflict and promises that he's not going to uh use the conflict in any way during the hearing. And we're satisfied with that. So, that doesn't help us here. But what does help us is we have the ability to use the Mullen rule. The Mullen rule says that if a member's not here and we've listened to the whole appeal and that member is agreeable to listening to the whole appeal on the recorded tape, then the Mullen member can come back um into the second or continued hearing and as if he started with us at the beginning and can vote on it. David Alman is the alternate qualifies for that. if everyone is satisfied that I'm bending the rules just a little bit to even hear the appeal at all. And the reason I'm willing to bend those rules a little bit is because with Rod's experience on the board and his presence here tonight, I'm going to regard him as a fourth for the appeal pending the selectman reappointing him and his getting sworn in in front of Diane Croy. So, if all of that happens in due

course, which I hope that it will, I'm willing as the chairman to to select a short continuence after we've heard everything so that he can get sworn in and he can be the voting member and we can all reconvene here not in the usual one month from now, but in a period 2 or 3 weeks from now or 10 days from now. We have to reenounce. Not. We have to repost. You can't officially continue the hearing cuz we don't have four people. We can officially continue the meeting. We can. Yes. We just can't officially vote on the appeal.

And I'm bending the rules just a little to hear the appeal in deference to the those of you who have come out tonight. I don't want to send you all home to come back to have the same result because when I say the same result since Rod is a voting member um two weeks ago and will be a voting member a week from now we're going to have the same result. We're all going to hear the same thing at the same time and I'm going to defer to the applicant and the abutters. If anyone objects I want to hear it but if you're okay with that I like that result better than Mr. Routman mulling mullaning in later because Rod will be here to ask questions in here and see your reaction to the application. Okay. So now

he'll have to mull in later as well or Mullen. Um I don't think Rod will have to mull in. He'll be here to hear it in person which is probably but his vote his vote won't count until after he's been sworn in. Understood. Is everyone okay with that? Does anyone want to object to that? Bruce Ringwall is representative for the applicant. We're fine.

Okay. Any above us, you don't even have to tell me your side of the story or your position. Would you rather wait and have us four uh qualified and sanctioned members or would you like to go forward tonight? Your choice. Anybody who would like to stop going forward raise your hand. You don't want to go forward tonight. Okay. Is there anything I can do to to change that? It just seems overly complicated. There's if there were one variable that you're trying to tweak, that would be fine. But it sounds like there's multiple.

What if What if I What if I took the second variable out? What if I take out the alternate mulling in and I just say to you, can we all act as if this is a qualified board for tonight? You'll be able to hear everything. You'll know and we'll know. everybody's position and then we'll continue the hearing and at the continued hearing we can repeat everything start all over again um but it will be the same four people would that satisfy you okay that's fine with me too we're not going to use David outman at all and we're not going to let him mull in and that variable is off the table for but you I'm sorry

one at a time is that so could Rod listen today and then once he gets sworn back in, you can vote on it at that point.

That's what I'm hoping to do. And my continuation will enable you all to come back and add to or or request or if depending on how it goes, give the applicant time to uh negotiate or barter or whatever they you know, what we at this board like to see the neighbors happy. And so what I'd like to do is let everybody hear it while you're all here and let you hear each other and then um we can continue it and you can speak again in the continuence. It'll give you time to think about it as well.

How about you, Miss? You raised your hand. Um, I would just like to see a fully qualified board at this moment in time without all these things added in that detract from full. Well, the question is if is everybody willing to come back in a couple weeks? Well, that's all all alternative. How soon can we reconvene? Um, let the let the neighbors I'm going forward unless somebody really doesn't want me to and that's their choice, not ours. Go ahead. Hasn't he been on the board for the past 10 years?

More than 10. Yeah. He's been on for more than 10 years. And the only reason he's not fully qualified today is because the email went to the wrong address. His term and mine expired on the same day. I got my email and got sworn in about a week ago. He just didn't receive his email, so he didn't know to go and get sworn in. And his term expired, by the way, June 30, which is 17 days ago.

Yes, Mr. Carter. Yeah. What about the concept of a hold over uh appointment that a member of an appointed board remains until they are replaced or resigned? I'd love to apply that that concept. I am not sure how it applies in this instance. I just did

and I think as chair I know that there are some situations in which when you don't have more than three members because no one applied for the job I think the chair is entitled to appoint members for the hearings with some notice. If if I would have known I would have appointed him as a holdover and I can do that today under an exception to nec rule of necessity. I can and will do that today. What I'd like not to do is to vote it until he's formally sworn in.

Does that make sense to you? Now, do you know Mr. Goddard and you know that he's the town moderator? So, he's got some he's got some knowledge of the boards and the holdover stuff. I don't know.

Oh, okay. Mr. Mr. Goddard is the town moderator for the town of Littleton. He works closely with all the boards and with town council on things like this. And so his suggestion of applying the concept that a member can continue to serve on a board until his successor is duly elected and qualified. In this case, his successor will be himself. I took the ethics training not less than a month ago and I thought sure there was a part in there that if you were short-handed you could not refuse to take a case if there was only three members there was it was not an excuse not to hear a case

okay I'm not I'm not trying to shut down your information I just don't want to overcome this I liked Mr. Goddard's idea of treating Mr. Stewart as a holdover member but will still not vote until he's duly sworn in. Will that be agreeable to your um concern? I I have no choice. I just want to say I've never been to the zoning board of appeal meeting and I didn't expect to see such chaos. Apologies. That's all I'm going to say.

Yeah. Apologies to you and your experience. I ask you to be patient and hear the meeting out because I think as the meeting unfolds, you'll see that this board is very passionate and compassionate about a butter's concerns and the issues. And so I like the idea there are so many of you here. I'm worried that if we continue or postpone this, I won't get all of you back. And I also like the idea that we're not going to vote tonight. So, we'll have everything on the table and out in the open and recorded and we can start all over again if there's a reason to or we can continue at the next uh scheduled meeting. So, I'm going to ask your indulgence and hope that I'm not offending you, but I will note for the record that if when we're done you still have objection, we will continue this hearing and start all over again from scratch. Would that be agreeable?

Okay. Is everyone all right with that result? Sorry, I'm confused about the part where um a member who needs to be sworn in could would then vote later because what's not clear to me is whether that voting will take place, you know, in their office when they review the recording or will it be at a continuation, maybe that's the wrong word, a second meeting where we all will be pressing. It will only be at a second meeting where you will all be present. And pardon me for confusing the issue with the recording with that one's off the table right now. We're going to use we're going to use an abused rod tonight. We're going to put him on the put him on the spot. Whatever.

I'm sure we should eliminate David because four out of five is easier than four out of four. Yeah. But I don't want to I'm hearing from the abutters that we either continue and go forward with with the four out of five or or we um use these four out of four with the applicant's permission. And I think that's what the applicant wants and agrees to do. So David is off the table for this particular hearing. And we're going to have four the vote will have to be four out of four for the applicant to get the variance they've requested or a modification of same after we hear you all and everybody agrees to modify it in some way. But let's hear it out.

She wants to make sure we're going to vote again in an open meeting. I I did I just confirmed that for her and she was satisfied. Right. You heard me say that the vote will happen at a at an open meeting where you're all coming back.

Yeah. I guess I'm confused because um my apologies but uh I thought that there were two voters who wanted to postpone and I wasn't aware that anyone else had said pro or pawn with regard to that and maybe I missed nodding heads or I think maybe that's my fault. So, Tool Butters said they wanted to postpone and we talked it through and I think I I thought I understood that you're more comfortable getting the Mullen uh um alternate out of the picture and using these four. And then I got the impression that you were all right with us at least opening it up for a hearing, not making any decision tonight. and not even closing the hearing tonight. It will get continued and it will get continued for further hearing and a vote. It will not be voted tonight and it will not be closed tonight. And that means if anyone brought wants to bring new information, added information or anything, it will still be available to be done.

Thank you. That clarifies. My question is if it's going to be continued, why don't we just start again at the next meeting? So if we hear the people that are here hear what they have to say, our answer might be, oh, we kind of like what you're saying, but we want some changes. And this would give them a chance to make those changes. And they would have to come back anyway. So if we don't hear it for month and month and then we tell them, oh, we want some changes, then there's another month before they get an answer.

We frequently ask people, you know, sometimes people want a garage that's 28 ft wide, but that puts them within 2 ft of their pro neighbor's property line, and that makes it impossible for them to even really build without stepping on their neighbor's property. And while the current neighbor may be okay with that, we worry about a future neighbor who wouldn't want someone mowing their property so they can mow around their garage, etc. So, we ask them to do things like, can you live with a 26- ft garage? Can you change have the architect change the drawing and come back? That that's the kind of thing we frequently do. We try to listen to neighbors. We try to make sense of things. We're just volunteers. We're just citizen volunteers like you are.

Excuse me. So, but we, you know, we've taken the training and we try to do our best. Also, we haven't really asked the applicant if he felt like extending a couple weeks is an issue or not. We just did.

He did. We asked him and he answered. Let me let me make it a little bit simpler because we're getting way off in the weeds right now. This is an application and the advertisement said it was an application to change lot size. It didn't say how. You don't even know yet and we don't even know yet how they want the lot size changed. We know a little more than you only because we have a full presentation in our packets, but that wasn't noticed to you. My feeling is that when you all see what's being asked for and hear the law relative to what they already have and what's being asked for, it's going to be less objectionable overall because they're not looking to make lot a lot smaller as far as I can tell. So again, what what Miss Collie's Hollinger said is we we like to hear it. This board likes to hear all the neighbors concerns and comments. We like to go back to the applicant and say, "You just heard your neighbors concern. Is there any way you can address that and do better?" And it allows for everybody to um go back to the drawing board and talk about it and negotiate it and and make it better or not or not grant it at all or grant it all the way. We won't know that until we hear the presentation. And I'm pretty sure they came with some large scale photos. And I'd like to see where all the abutters touch their lot and see what the objections are because they're all valid. And my only my only comment is it's not going to be any different whether it's tonight or four weeks from tonight because we're not voting. We're not closing the hearing. And these same four people will be the four people that hear it. I'm just deferring to you guys who all came out tonight to hear this and were

inconvenienced by your schedules and whatever else to be here tonight. I'm sorry we don't have a quorum or a a sworn in member.

We have a quorum. We just don't have a sworn in member. But you have um if when we're all through, you tell me that you're objecting to the way this was all conducted, like I said, we'll continue to the regularly scheduled next meeting and we'll make them start all over again. And at that point, we may have the fifth member hearing it. At that point, it may be a four out of five vote because if we have five people sitting, we only need four out of five votes. So, I think you get the best of both worlds if you let us go forward tonight. Would that be acceptable? I'm not forclosing any of your rights. Okay. Does anyone else want to speak in favor of going forward or against it?

Okay. I'm getting nods if you don't mind. I'm getting nods from up here. You want to stand up and see them? You're welcome to. Um that the rest are are agreeable to going forward. And like I said, I'm not going to foreclose anybody's rights to say it wasn't the way I wanted it. It wasn't just start again. Okay. So, with that, I'm going to ask the applicant to come up, identify, excuse me. I am going to make a couple of comments. The way we operate, the way the board operates is after we open the hearing Did you officially open? I'm going to give him a minute. I'm going to do I'm going to do other business first.

The way we do this is we open the hearing. We have the applicant present first. We have the board ask the applicant clarifying questions. Then we have every member weigh in every every butter who's here weigh into it and ask questions. And the applicant has to answer questions. We can then embellish and ask more questions. We go back and forth till everyone's satisfied. However, I have one thing I want to do first because my agenda says this meeting was not the first thing on the agenda. The first thing on the agenda was funny. Minutes.

No, we'll do the minutes last sitting here. But I want to do the letter of gratitude that came last week. A letter was sent from the um no what? Last month.

No. Well, it was it was a couple weeks ago weeks ago. Last month, a letter was sent by the applicant for a uh variance to a sideline setback, and it was a Littleton resident who'd been in town forever and who wanted to stay and age in their age in place in their home, but they needed a little setback variance in order for them to be able to build on a first floor bedroom so that they could stay in their home. and the letter that was sent afterwards to Diane Corey, the um town clerk. Um, dear zoning board of appeals, as you know, I presented an application for a variance to the zoning board of appeals on June 12th. Uh, this matter was of dire importance to my husband and me given our longevity in Littleton and our hope to remain here for the remainder of our days, which of course we hope will be many. We had never been to a zoning board of appeals hearing, so we did not know what to expect. I am writing to convey to you my deep appreciation for the thoughtfulness with which the hearing was conducted and the degree to which you provided useful information. Littleton is lucky to have such knowledgeable and dedicated volunteer board members. Just wanted to convey our appreciation. Thank you and sincerely. So, I wanted my board members to hear that because it was a heartfelt appreciation for what I said. This board tries to be impartial and to hear everybody's side. Now, I'm going to open the hearing. Cheryl, do you want to read it?

I didn't bring my glasses. Oh, you wanted I can't bring the Littleton Board of Appeals will conduct a public hearing on Tuesday, July 17th, 2025, Littleton Town office, Shadic Street, etc. to hear the following petition case at 7:10 p.m. We're a little late. Case number 25-97716 Elizabeth Street. The petitioner Charlie Ellis seeks a variance pursuant to 173-27 to change lot dimensions and other and such other business as may come properly before the board.

Okay. Having said that, I'm going to ask the applicant to come forward and present the case. Do you have large plans that you can look at? I have 11 by 17. That was the largest they were. Um I've been blowing them up greater than scale. Be happy to pass them around or um the best way to get everybody to see them all at once would be my preference. Yeah. How many sets do you have? One. I'm sorry. I didn't I thought we might have capability of the screen. I didn't give that.

Yeah, I need to um I need to figure out a way. I've got two sets here. Got two sets here that can be passed around. And you've got a set that you can pass around, right? Yes. And I hope that these neighbors know the area well enough to also. Yes.

Sorry. Uh, is that the same as the information that's in piece 2025 977 because there are maps u show the whole assessor's map that's confusing show you have this readily up yeah and pass this out. Can you share? This is This is another one to pass out. There's one window sitting here. I'm going to hang on to mine cuz I haven't seen this before. The people aren't here. Oh, John Fields.

Yeah. And and the one you gave me cuz I already printed myself out. Oh, good. I might have another one here, too. Pass those out to the Butters. Yes. Yeah. I went online 6:00 and printed it all out. Did you just set it or did you take the one I left in front of you?

I have the one who left in front of me and I'm kind of grumpy because no one at all when you told me I went online and got w I think I really think we shouldn't be doing this right now. I really think you should. The minute you those hands went up, you should have stopped. See, I I think I think you should let it go. Yeah. Cler's texting you. She texted me and tell you to look at Thank you.

Ah, I just received a text from town clerk and it was um brought to my attention. And I don't my texts don't aren't audible. And it's from town ad excuse me from town clerk who says Mr. Godard is correct in that Rod Stewart's position is held over legally until he is reworn in because it does not expire until his successor is elected and duly appointed. So that takes away a lot of the concern. She's saying I was appointed but just not. So she says you're still legal. So you can you can you can vote and everything, but I'm just wondering if I was appointed yet. No. No. No.

Still not. Okay. But you're But you can vote in your your legal. Definitely on our radar. So we have four out of four and that's appropriate. Okay. That makes me a lot more and we can stop being concerned and worried. We try really hard folks to do the right thing. Okay. Okay. We're ready. Now, well, I'm just wanting to annotate my map so I know what you're talking about when you're talking. Go ahead.

Okay. Good evening. My name is Bruce Ringwall from Goldsmith Press and Ringwall. Um, I'm here representing uh Charlie and Ann Lee Ellis um who are the owners of 16 um Ellis uh 16 Elizabeth Street 0 Elizabeth Street and 32 Lockley Road. And I'm going to hold this up and and walk around make sure everybody knows this is 32 Lockley. Lockley is here and this is Elizabeth. that end comes down. Uh this they own um this property is is essentially vacant property between the two and this property down here is where their ho home is. And this second sheet that you all have is this plan here which is a a survey plan done by Rose Chalk Survey and it shows that same thing. This is and I'll show you folks this in just a second. Uh this uh 32 Lock Street Road Zero Elizabeth and it has a dotted line in the middle of that and it has parcels or lot 56 and 55 and those are going to be numbers that I'm going to be using throughout this meeting. And the one to the north is 56 adjacent to the Lockley Road property and 55 is the one to the south which is adjacent to 16 Elizabeth which is the property at the end of the culdeac. Okay, does everybody over here? Everybody, you see what I'm talking about? You folks all understand what I'm talking about. You

vacant properties owned by Charlie as well as well. All all four of these properties are owned by Can you do it for us, please? Yes, I would be more than happy to. So again, starting here at the top, Lley Road is here. Elizabeth Street is here. 32 is here. and zero block Elizabeth is this parcel in between. Um, this plan shows a septic system on it in the proposed garage. And then 16 Elizabeth is at the end of the culdeac. And who owns 16 Elizabeth? All four of these par all three of these parcels are owned by

Mr. Ellis. And his and there's houses on two of them. There's houses on the Lockley and on 16 Elizabeth. Okay. Okay, this is a survey done by Rosealk several years ago that shows all of that same thing. Lockley is here 32 Lley with an existing house. The vacant land in between shown as par as lots 55 to the south and 56 to the north. These lots are part of the original subdivision of land way back when? 55.

55 is right there. 56 is right here. And if you right under your finger there. And I got to get you a pair of readers out of my car if you'd like. Oh, that's all right. Yeah. Thank you. I'm not that quite that old yet. Well, my wife is young and she has readers as well. I know. I needed mine. Mine I have to wear all the time. I see it. 55 currently has a septic system on it. 56 currently has a septic system. 56 has a septic system. So, while that works. So, if I can make a if you want to make a little note, if you dash the line across here, so all that digging that's taking place is for a septic system in a garage. The septic system is in. So, this is I'll get to that in just a second. Write 56 there and write 55 there.

Okay. There you years are reversed. And you and they currently own 55 is down here, 56 is up. Where is the septic system for Elizabeth? on the front of the yard is that. Okay. Thank you. Thank you. Here. Mine's a little bit. I got it. I got it. Okay. Yeah.

Okay. The applicants wish to build a garage for storage. Um their property where they reside at 16 Elizabeth Street at the end of the culde-sac where it looks as a very large lot. A good percentage of that lot that which is off the end of the culdeac and to the south is wetlands. Um the drainage from Florence Street and the budding streets to the south actually drain onto that parcel. And there is a drain pipe, a 15-in drain pipe. Um extends about 40 ft into uh their lot which picks up the drainage from Florence Street and those streets to the south and discharges it through that pipe into the drainage system within Elizabeth Street. and then out into the town drainage. So that portion of that lot that you look at that plan and say see all that vacant land and there is not buildable because it is in the wetlands. The goal is for the applicants to build a storage garage, a garage that they can store equipment and and vehicles and materials in. The um the goal is to build that on that southern portion of that land that they own in the middle known as lot 55 from the original subdivision plan and that plan which I just showed you uh the survey plan from um Rose Land Surveying several years ago. there was a um need to upgrade the septic system at 32 Lockxley Road and when they did that there was not the space because the septic system was to the rear of the

house on Lockxley and there was not the space to upgrade there they upgraded on the northern portion of what's known as zero Elizabeth or lot 56 six. If you were to combine those two parcels, zero Elizabeth, which is lot 55 and 56 with 32 Lley as one. It still does not meet the requirement of 40,000 square feet. It's shy of the 40,000 square feet. The reason that we're here before you this evening is because under uh the zoning bylaw and let me get my appropriate section 17327 [Music] that is the wants you to limit and not make a nonconformity more nonconforming. Now the nonconformity is that we have 32 Lockxley as its own lot and it's recently gotten use of the abuing land by the same owners on for their septic system. Now to add more confusion to an already slightly confusing issue and I'm trying to keep it as straight as possible. Elizabeth Street itself in 1968 was before the then town annual town meeting to be accepted under article 10 as a town way. It was voted upon to become a town way, but it was never recorded as a town way.

So, it doesn't count. Now, to make things more interesting, if you notice on those plans that I've handed out, it shows a right of way that goes right to a stone wall and would eventually connect over to Edel Street on a paper street known as Linda Street because that parcel on the other side of the wall also has wetlands. The street was never continued. It was a paper street that was never built and Elizabeth Street was built as a culde-sac, a paved culde-sac for a turnaround, for emergency vehicles, etc. And that layout of that culdesac is outside of and beyond the extents of the original 40ft layout. So, the paved culde-sac and right ofway that the public uses today is on the Ellis's property both north and south of the right ofway.

Is that what the small circle is? You got to wait. You got to write your questions. Um, there's several small circles. So there is no those I have no idea why those were put on this plan but this is the actual pavement edge which is also shown here. This is the actual pavement edge that comes around and then for some reason continue that there everybody see that?

No Bruce I'm going to ask you to please complete your presentation and then the board will go back and ask gladly show you all that momentarily. Y To that end, the Ellis's have offered to deed if necessary the portions of the street which are on their property to the town. To that end, I have met with um the town highway director Steve Jel and reviewed this with him and he has you know he said he'd take it under advisement and he'd take a look at it and he was pleased to know that we could do that. Now under Mass General law when a road is not an accepted way the abuters on either side of the road own technically own to the center line of the road and from that standpoint this parcel zero Elizabeth Street is an immediate abutter to the Ellis's property at 16 um Elizabeth street. What we propose to do is create a right of way that encompasses the full the fullness of the pavement with the necessary shouldering and and space that a right of way typically does, which would allow for a physical ownership of land, not center line of right ofway from connecting from 16 Ellis along the stone wall to the property on the other side of the vote. Our proposal then would be to divide zero Elizabeth into lot 55 and 56 as

shown on the original subdivision land to provide upland connecting to 16 Elizabeth to become space where he could build his uh storage barn/g and the northern portion lot 56 would be annexed to 32 Locker officially because its septic system resides on that. It is our opinion as representatives of the applicant that under the state guidelines for a variance, a variance could only be granted if there is a literal hardship. And that literal hardship does not have to be financial, but could be a hardship. And the hardship here in this case is that they have no space on there we go. They have no space on their property at 16 Elizabeth to construct said storage facility due to the slope topography and soils on those properties. other steps of the hardship requirements under the four items for variance that the because it's the slope and the topography and the soils being hydric soils. We have a a large wetland area there which is part of the town's drainage system for dressing the drainage from the streets to the south to the land area to the north. It is our further understanding of these things that um most of these lots in this immediate neighborhood are all substandard lots. Not all are mostly substandard in size lots being that they're less than 40,000 square ft and many of them less than 150 ft of frontage. and that the um

this board if they agreed the granting of that would not be um a degragation from the intent and purpose of the bylaw and it would not create an impact a negative impact on the surrounding neighborhood. Further, I offer to the board the option that this could be done by way of a special permit. Should we be able to make this connection of the property, um, then it would be this huge parcel of land that is all one parcel by ownership of of uh the same ownership and we would be dividing it in the same manner as proposed to you. And if it pleases the board, I'd like to show the um abutters that are here how the road is crossed the right of way line. So this way so here is 16 and this is Elizabeth right out of this 40ft lane. This is the actual edge of the pavement. It crosses on the northern side outside of the rideway and on the southern side outside of the rideway. This is wetlands that we had a portion of delineated. This is all wetland down here. And there's a 15-in drainage pipe here that connects into the street into the town drainage. And that is all shown here as well on this plan of that. I don't know what those circles were. They're not anything that we're proposing at this point in time. I thought that was existing. Excuse me. Culdeac.

No, the existing culde-sac is this dash line in here. Okay. Right. Which is the same which is shown right here. Does that make sense? This is the same. This line this line right in here is the actual. Okay. Okay. So, sorry I don't have a big plan. Usually I take

So, this is the actual pavement of the culdeac of the rightway this butter onto the center line of the road. And so from here to here, all this land that is is connected as one. And we're trying to divide this land across here, which is this actual division land here. So that you can build they can build a barn garage here and the septic in this can go with this house here. Does that make sense? Does the septic already exist? Yes, it does. It already exists right here. So So aren't looking to put another septic system?

They have a septic system for their house in front of their house. This is a septic system for this house that they own up here. They wish to divide this like this. So this can go here. This can go here. So is it a garage or a barn? If I can, excuse me. I just need to stop you one minute, please. I need you to identify who you are and ask questions through the chair so that the recorder can get everything and write it all down. And so, we sent him around to show you the picture. If you could hold your questions until it goes through the chair and everyone gets to hear them at the same time, including my uh transcriber. Thank you very much. Sorry. I'm You know better. I know better. I apologize. Been doing it a couple days. All right. Would you show us what you just shut then?

Oh, sorry. Thank you. That's a detail.

Um, so this is Elizabeth Street and the pavement comes out to on the north side here and to zero Elizabeth and also on the south side into 16 and it comes back around. And this is some of the wetlands that we delineated cuz we were trying to make certain that this proposed garage would be outside of the um 100 foot buffer cuz we had an issues wanted with conservation. We had no issue. There's a pipe here that connects and drains this these roads from Florence down here from a low spot into here and then into the drainage in Elizabeth Street. And that is all the same which is shown here. And this is the line pardon me. This is the line of the of the road the same as what is shown on the plan by GPI.

Thank you. Okay. Okay. And I do have a copy of the original subdivision plan that was part of the submission and it does show that 15inch drain line on it. if there's any question related to that. So with that, I close my presentation to the board and I await any questions you may have. Okay, we start with the board questions and then we'll go to the butter and uh and interested party questions. So I'm going to start with uh you broad cuz I threw you under the bus and you without a scratch.

Okay. Just to try to understand, you want to split what you're referring to as zero Elizabeth and attach one half of it with the septic system to the Lockxley address and the rest to Charlie Ellis's lot. That's two. That is 100% correct. Yeah. Okay. That's two different lots. Correct. It would it would make out of the currently three lots technically shown on the assessor's map. Now the zero Elizabeth, the bigger piece in the middle is made up of two lots from the original subdivision of the line. 56 and 55. 56 and 55. So we would split along those we would split it along that original line. Okay. Which is the dotted thing,

right? So you essentially bring it in conformance with the original zoning. Correct. Um not I don't think that was an accurate statement. He's not bringing it in conformance with the original plan which was four separate lots. He's going to bring it into a two lot. That is correct. Right. But I mean the one lot's going to be the same as what's shown on the assessor's map. All four lot. Okay. Yeah. All right. Yeah. And and then they'll be combined. That's correct. Now, we haven't talked anything about the garage and the garage setback. Let's address the land first and then we'll do the garage and the setback. If we're going to do the garage. Yeah. Can I go? Yes.

How big is lot 55? Lot 55. Does it fall under the new state guidelines as being able to be separated by right? Um I'm not totally aware of the new state guidelines, but yes, I believe it is because lot 55 is 11,012 square ft. Lot 56 is 15, um, 284 and they both have roughly 100 ft plus of frontage.

So, the new state guidelines that were signed in recently, and I'm aware of this as a real estate broker, allow allow the owner of lots that have been comi forcibly combined by the state to be divided again. Um, allow them to be called separate lots as long as they're 5,000 square feet. Okay. I'm I'm unaware of that. Thank you very much. I We'll have to work that one up. So, I don't think we can say no. No, that's not what they're doing, though. They're They're not here before us to build. They're not here before us to unmmerge the lot to put a building on it. It's a totally different application. 100% correct. Yes, we can say no. Yes, we can say no. Yes, you can say no. And And

but they can go back and put two more houses in between the two. Well, no. No, I can't because you have to get septic permits. You have to do septic and everything else. Yes, we can say no to this application.

The other issue here and the big issue is that the reason would want to combine what's known as 55 the southern half of zero Elizabeth Street 216 is because if I had 55 by itself, just sitting there by itself, I cannot build a garage on it. because a garage is an accessory structure to a primary residence. And so the only way that I can build the garage on it or the applicant can build the garage on it is as if it is a considered part of his property.

I guess my I guess my point you want to merge it to onto 16. Yeah. My point is I guess what I'm trying to say is if he was here saying he was unmerging the properties which he can do by right according to the law the state has put in he was unmerging the properties then if he could get a septic system he could build a house there if all the other offsets etc. He does not have to meet offsets not with a grandfathered lot. That's what we're here for. So, I I want to point out that that's that's that would certainly be a

with the new estate law certainly be a possibility. But what you want to do is you want to take this how many 11 thou 8,000 ft 11,000 square feet and you want to add it to the house. So, house lot so he can build a garage and we're going to have to deal with the issue of a garage being in forward of the main dwelling. Um but and so not not now. But not now, right? So, you want to just take that 8,000 square ft and add it to the house. That's correct. 11 plus 11,000. And you're going to leave the septic system and the other one with the other one.

That's correct. And there'd be no plumbing in the in the garage that we're building. And and the and the numbers may be slightly smaller because I'm going to offer to the town the land to cover the right of way and the and the access the physical paved way that is on their property. I I understand. It's a little But you're turn. Um, no, I I understand exactly what he's saying.

I'm going to ask you to do me one big favor for this group and then I'm going to go to the um people assembled here and ask their questions. Do you have a picture of this plan where in a in a any color pen or highlighter or a crayon where you could just draw what the resulting two lots are going to look like, please? Yes. I think that'll be easier for everyone to take a look at. And while we're doing that, whoever wants to raise your hand and I'll go around the room and call uh people who are here with who would like to speak for or against this or ask any questions. We're going to go around more than once. So, you'll have more more than one chance. Yes.

Is this garage going to be a commercial use or is it just going to be privately used? Could I just ask you to identify yourself for the record? Yeah. Yeah. I'm Mitchell's mom. Mitchell. Mitchell. Who? Your puppy. Oh. And can you tell me your name, please? Robin Karen. Robin Karen. And where do you live? 58 Edel Road. And I just want to ID you on my plan so I have it in my head. 58 Edsil is where? Not on this picture, right? To the west. It's We're on the other side of the wetlands. Yeah. Uh, but I must just be outside. The jungle as we call it the jungle. We've always called it that.

Oh, I see it somewhere. And you are uh Karen on it's croning pro. It's under croning probably. Oh, there it is. Okay. So, this is Karen. Okay. And that's 58. Does anyone else want to see where it is? It's this one. Yeah. Got it. Okay. Now, go ahead and ask the question. I just wanted to know if it was going to be of commercial use or private use. Is it going to be just their cars and storage for themselves personally or is it going to be Can I have Mr. Ellis, please? Identify yourself for the record. Charlie Ellis, you want me to hear the uh

No, no, it's going to be private. I have two very small sports cars that will be in there and I'd like to set up my table saw. I'd like to do some birdhouses. We're going to plant some box gardens, some apple trees, and try to lighten the impact on the on the street. And no water and no sub. Thank you. Next question. You want a question? You want to see the picture? I want to see the picture. Okay. This would be a new lot line. This would become one lot. This would become another lot. Do you have a different color pen? I just want you to do this. I want you to do this outline.

Oh. Oh, I see what you're saying. It's going to look like both of them. Okay. All right. Next, please. I can't see the handout. Any other questions? I'll go. Go ahead. Cather 62 Pzel Road right next to these guys. I just want to know are people going to be able like they walk their dogs through the path, you know, and they come out on Elizabeth. Is that going to Are you guys combining your property with that property? So, or people going to be able to get out? Well, they always have. Yeah, they Yeah. So, that's part stay. We're not ch Yeah, we're not changing any.

So, you just you're losing some of the culde-sac. pushing the culde-sac out like culde-sac will stay as it is. It'll just it's right now not within the right of way, right? That's the thing we're lo the town is losing the right away and we're going to deed it back to them so that they can So, what does this have to do with usually? How does it affect our property? So, I think that's why we're all Can I ask you a question? I just heard you say people walk their dogs through the Ellis's property

whatever is well it's not really yes and no it isn't the Ellis's property something you all need to know about the the law of what is called paper streets if a street is depicted on a plan of land and recorded at the registry of deeds as these streets were in the olden days when this was made up before zoning Linda Street and what looks like the Elizabeth Street continuation all the way up to Locka. Whether or not it's a public way, it's always a way to which the public has a right of access because it's depicted on a plan. And so that's if the town didn't take it over, which Bruce said they didn't. They voted it, but then they didn't take it. It remains as a public way. So the fact that the Ellis's on both sides of Elizabeth at that point still leaves them owning right to the midpoint on both sides, but always subject to the right of way of others to walk across it. Okay? Which means they can't put structures under, on it, over it, or block it. So when you say you've been walking your dogs over there, or somebody has, and you hope that that continues, they can't stop that in whatever they do. Okay, I hope that answered that question. I

was trying to go and show it from um Floren Street. They they cut over Floren Street and cut through right to their propert right to where they live. Right. That's where they get out. They come on. Yeah. Or um so that's walking across their property and not the right of way. And as long as the Ellis's are still willing to let you do it, it's the wetland. It's where the town Yeah, the town the town. I just wanted to know if the exit was still going to be open on I'm not going to close it up. Yeah, it's not up to us. It's up to the town to do that. We uh Okay. As far as we're concerned, we don't care.

Okay. But there is a no trespassing sign there on our side. I know put that up. But but that I mean that answers the question. What Bruce said is accurate. you would still have a right to walk in that paper street. And if you're not doing that now, you're walking a little north or a little south of it and they don't mind. They can continue to let you do that, too. Can I charge money for that? Yes. Yes. You do not have to let people walk on not in the rightway on your property. They've been doing it since since Noah. Since Noah. So there's always going to be a right of way there. So that's that was my

it's a private way to which the public has a right of access. They cannot impede the access over that paper street. They do. Right.

And be because they own to the center line on each side. I'm not really troubled uh as Cheryl said by the the request to merge the lots in this way. What's before us, don't lose sight of the fact, is that by merging these lots, technically they're taking a nonconforming lot and making it more nonconforming. And that is not supposed to be allowed by our bylaw. But in practicality, what they're doing is taking two nonconforming lots and adding a little bit to each to make both lots a little more conforming. So, we've done this before. um in in uh the lake area. So it's not a huge violation or deriggation from the intent of the zoning bylaw. We are getting two better lots out of it. I think

when they merge 55 with 16 Elizabeth that will be conforming because that's going to make it to about 69,000 square feet. That is correct. So that that lot will they'll actually end up with one conforming. Yeah. that one and the other one is close but and since it's got a septic system on it already kind of makes sense. Okay. Now other concerns I would like to speak to the ladies up front because you had some misgivings and I want to know how you are related to the property. Where's your property please? Yes. Go. 35 Florence Street's wrong. What?

The map is incorrect. Two properties. Okay. So, pardon me for interrupting. I mean, the map probably has the parcel number, not the street number. Yeah, those are this map has parameter. [Music]

This is town. This is the one you want to divide. This is actually So if if you look at this this plan, those aren't those aren't street numbers. Those are lot numbers that you find on your property tax bill, but not Yes, that's a lot number. If that's true, the names are still wrong. What is your name? You shifted two lots. No, I don't think those What is What is your name in the program, please? Gorski. G R S A I I'm sorry, two talking at once and I didn't hear you. Gorski. Gorski. And your first name? Irene. And your street number again?

35. Florence.

Number five. Irene, can you come up or I'll go down to you? I want to see which lot is yours for

this a street house here.

Oh, by the way, it's here. where you live relative to Laura Spar or I'm right if you walk straight [Music] you [Music] what what lot number are you at Bruce for her I I 48. And And which one was yours? Um Irene, who was the owner before you? Do you know that name? She right next to you. Who was the owner before us?

Yes. It's been too many years. And do you know the size of your lawn? Are you one of those lots or two lots together? She's just one lot. Okay. So she's she is 48 parcel 48 on Florence. On Florence. Yeah. And that's where to the lot. Where's Where's And this is his his house is right here. Oh, you're backed right up to that. You're backed right up to this lot in question, right? Yes. Okay. And I'm sorry, I didn't catch your name. Tomlinson. Tomlinson. She was here. Parcel 47. And you're backed up on the ro the uh Rose map or whatever it is. It says parcel 30 on the Rose map.

Roseand survey map. And Miss Jonson, what's your first name? Christine. Okay, just don't move too fast for me. I'm going to annotate this because I have to write the decision and I want to be sure I have everybody right. So Christine Tomlinson. So again, the name shown shifted to house which is now for and this is Irene here. That's correct. Could you show her this one and double check that? I I will right now. Please go do that because I think that makes me happy that I see where they have bought this property and it also enables me to say to them, [Music]

let me let me double check. Double check that you're right. So here did you change? This is where we decided that you live. Correct. Okay. This is where we decided that you live. Okay. And I'm going to show you that same thing on a different plan. Now, this is the Boston survey plan. And this would be where you live. And this would be where you live. Yes. That has been confirmed. Keep keep that in front of them for a minute. And I just want to show them that this is the house of Ellis. This is right here, their house.

And that picture that you're seeing right now is not going to change at all. The house stays where it is. He's not putting anything closer to your lot lines in any way. He's not putting any structures in that backyard that will impede your view or create uh um drainage issues. No excavation is going on there. Where the garage is being proposed is way up here. And what I heard Bruce say in the beginning is that the drainage runs from Lawrence down to Elizabeth. um northerly the drainage. So even that garage excavation should not be as far as I can see should not be sending you into a worry that drainage is going to come in an opposite direction and flow uphill to you.

That's correct. Is that correct? That is correct. Except that I have one niece that was able to make water flow uphill at the beach one day. As I understand it and it's probably not my turn, so I'll shut up if No, I'm going to let I'm going let Miss Gorski finish and then I'll call on you. Thank you. Thank you. No, I was concerned about drainage as was Christine. And we can we can talk more about that wetland situation. So if if you're aware when you're at your property, if you were to go to the north to towards here, it's essentially going downhill. Okay.

All right. when you go to the end of your street, you're like up high and you can see off the stuff you're up. It's it's it's misleading when you look at it on in two-dimensional, but it is it's it's downhill. The the water's drainage is flowing to the north. Are you satisfied with your questions right now? We'll come back if you want. Yes. Okay. Now, Miss Thomas,

thank you. Um, a couple of things and one is yes, I am here because of the drainage concerns. My property was uh originally a cow pond. So that parcel that you see there in the center uh of the forms screenshot there snapshot um is the lowest elevation in that particular area as I understand it. There is a stream and we've talked about the culvert um and the pipe 15-inch pipe that goes back there. if the town does not keep it clear, it backs up into my property and I do get water and sometimes coming into my house. So, I know we've talked about and and it was very nice. I had an opportunity to speak with Charlie uh this afternoon at the property. So, I have an understanding of I think what um is being discussed for the baronets. But um when I talk to highway department folks or whatever if if they're dredging or what my understanding is that the water table is rising. So while we might have this idea that things run from high to low if the water table itself is rising that changes the dynamic a bit. So my question I think from the engineering standpoint um and it's unclear to me whether we're just talking about the land swap which I think I understand but yes I have concerns because a 24x4t slab uh how does that change drainage when the corner of that slab I'm going to say it's probably the southwest corner is also part of the wetlands and the drainage and there's a septic tank that's to the north of it for the the property zero watchley area wizard

whatever we're calling that so how does that all work together what I did not see in the document that was anything addressing those concerns there is just that was my final comment is the talk about deeding the land to the town which uh Charlie I believe you explained to me would provide access for that dredging, but that hasn't happened yet. So, how does someone such as me who's would be impacted probably the most should there be water issues. So, you know, know that that's not going to happen or that we can prevent it. So, the applicant uh presented as if we're talking about two different uh applications here. The first being the lot uh split. your concerns are very very valid and interesting to all of us. One of the ways that you can be protected is that we can condition our variances and if the condition of the variance has something to do with making sure that the drainage features and structures are conveyed to the town as a condition of this allowance, we can do that. I'm not saying we will. I'm saying we can. wanted to mention I've also had problems

with water. I have a subp pump. Yeah. And used intermittently. But I do have water in my yard at times of heavy rains. I got to say there's nothing worse than standing water in your home. I know dad and diesel engines starting in the morning too early. But he is going to have water in that building. So he will not be adding any any I just want to add on to Christian's concern.

I I think that I heard and we're not up to that yet. What I heard is the displacement of the land from the excavation of a garage and then covering what now is permeable surface with impermeable surface. It has nothing to do with what whether or not there's plumbing in the building. And I heard that.

Okay. Um may I address that? Um we have several different things we can do with that. Um one is is that as you come down Elizabeth from Lockere, you're going uphill. So it drains towards Lockere. There's also a catch basin within the road right about where we're going to run this property line out to. Um, also what we can do and the board can condition it is is that we create a a drip edge um on the eve sides of the building. So as the the roof comes down and the water drips in, if we put a stone drip edge essentially 18 in wide and about 8 to 12 in deep of crushed stone or pea stone that'll absorb the typical rainstorm to have that go into the ground and then overland flow would go from that would go overland to that catch basin which would go in the opposite direction. the wetland issue. We've delineated the wetlands and we're over 100 feet I think we're 120 feet if memory serves me right away from that. We've put the erosion control at that 100 foot level. Um so that even during construction there would be no erosion or any sediment going

back towards the culdeac or towards that low portion of the Ellis's lot that you Thank you. Um, your mention of the drip basin, I believe, um, drip edge. Yeah, drip edge. Thank you. Um, brought to mind I was reading something in one of the maps about like doesn't mean you could build the right name spelled differently. But it it looks like one of those um straw. No, that's a straw waddle. Yes. And again, an issue of maintenance. The idea of that, as I understood, was to prevent erosion and maybe water as well. Um, but those need to be maintained. They don't last very long. Madam Chair, may I address the straw?

Yes, please do.

Um, the straw waddle is a temporary use that only is there while they're constructing the building. Um, when you to put in a building, you have to have a 4ft frost wall and they have to dig for that foundation. So, they have to expose earth. And so the straw wall's purpose is to prevent any sediment from a heavy rainstorm heading towards the wetlands or towards the culdeac. So that just stops it from that standpoint once once the foundation is in and backfilled and the land is graded off again and stabilized with grass or I think he's planning to plant some trees. Um then the straw waddle disappears. It's only a temporary use.

Thank you. Okay. I and I think I'm done with my questions with one clarification. I think I'm still hearing that there might be some water flowing in the opposite direction of the landscape which would be from the garage side of the property to that catch basin which the catch basin which is towards Lock Street. Okay. Then we're I'm thinking there's the thing in the center of the culdeac. No no that that is a drain manhole. It has a solid cover. Yeah, that's a drain manhole. Catch basin is typically square and it has a number of holes within it and that allows water to go into it. That's further downstream.

That's further downstream. The the drain manhole is where the culvert pipe that 15-in pipe goes into and that allows that water to flow into the system. Thank you for Bruce. Thank you for your explanations. And I noticed that even people who have a little more experience with this than you are giving him wrapped attention because they're learning something from him as well. So, thank you for your questions. I just want to clarify one thing. You said this waddle does not disappear. It gets taken out and eliminated. That's correct. By the contract here. That's right. The waddle the waddle is removed. It's a temporary temporary question. Please identifying for the record first. Bruce Lambert from 52 Edel.

Thank you. And while we're on the subject of water flow, um I know a few of the neighbors along Edel Road recently never had water in their basement started that have water in their basement. We don't know if it was from a house that was built on the street or how, but it seems like if anything happens over there as far as groundwater, we're worried about it mitigating over affecting our property. Whether it's a 4ft crosswall that you dig in the ground, will that stop the flow of groundwater underneath? It's more of a We're just trying to be sure that the groundwater mitigation works because I don't want water in my basement. I don't blame you.

But we got people I lived in an 1800's house for a long time. I totally can relate. People on the street that have never had water in 40 years. All of a sudden we've had it.

As this lady has mentioned, groundwater in many areas. We're finding groundwater higher today than we did in past. Correct. Um the installation of the frost wall um shouldn't have any impact on groundwater flow. Uh water seeks its own level um even in soil. So if we put a frost wall out in the ground and if it's in that groundwater area, the water's still going to flow around it and do what it does. And the soils in that neighborhood, as you probably know, are fairly dense. They're more of a glacial till than a gravel and sand. And so the water flows very slowly. So on one of the maps, it does delineate a wetland area which goes right through my backyard, her backyard.

Um we're concerned about displacement of that water coming in. No, shouldn't be any displacement from that. Can you guarantee that? Um there are not too many guarantees except for taxes and death in my book. Um but uh from a scientific standpoint from what we're doing um and especially if we put in the infiltration ch uh trenches the drip edge on either side of the eve um the surface water the or the runoff water from rain will still have the same ability of getting into the ground and um the water still has the ability to flow to the low areas. I mean,

is there going to be any type of grade changes, elevation changes, stay as is? They're going to be building accurate. Mhm. Madam Chair, managers question. Yeah. One one moment, please. Miss Scott, I would gently point out that Littleton is getting wetter. I live over on Hadawan and there's what used to be a beautiful forest right on the corn. There's a where Brown's woods are, there's a corner and across the street from it, what used to be a wonderful forest that I ran through and played in as a child is now a swamp.

I grew up I live in the house I grew up in. My parents never once had water in their basement. I have had as much as 4 in of water in my basement. It is you may the water table may in continue to rise in your area and have absolutely nothing to do with this garage at all. I can't imagine how this garage would if having had the explanation how this garage could possibly impact in a negative way your water table. But that I we also can't guarantee that the water table's not continuing to rise there because it is continuing to rise in my neighborhood. Mhm.

Without someone else building anything. So it it is unfortunate and there has you know town sewage could help with that. All kinds of things could help with that. um a double-edged sword in the wake area because it will make a lot of lots more buildable, but it would also help alleviate a lot of the wetland problems. Okay. Thank you, Miss Scott. I just wanted to ask um are you cutting any more trees down? I know you said you wanted to plant some trees. The cutting the trees down is what scares me back there because that and they're not drinking the water. So,

no, we the water goes a lot. Um, but a lot of that was scrub uh from when the canes were there. We had three maples that came down simply because maples end of time, end of cycle. So, we actually bought apple trees and we'll start with three and we're going to try to bring because that whole area at one time was orchard as you know. So, we're going to try to bring some of the some of that back. We actually have one apple tree that's probably 100 years old on the property now. So, we're going to try and do that. might even try gauges, but we'll see.

A couple of questions from me, please. Um, I'm trying to envision how we document that we will end up with two separate lots that are no longer further subdividable. We're not merging by law. We're merging by decision today if we allow this. And I want to be sure that I have two separate buildable lots and not one parcel with two lots and one parcel with two lots. And maybe that means that you have to file an 81L when we're all done. I was going to say we probably we have to file an 81P. 81P is what I lose my

That's all right. Um it gets late. um an 81 P and A&R plan approval not required would be necessary to be filed with the planning board for endorsement upon having this decision allowing for that to occur and you are the owner of all four now theis but I understand a relative or a family member lives in the northerly lot our son your son no daughter lives in oh Lia Street is who your daughter

yeah so would you be all right with that. If the decision was conditioned on there being an 81P plan filed where this results in two lots and we eliminate any possibility that the state new statute is implemented to further subdivide anything into another buildable lot.

So recently when we put the septic system in uh the engineers decided where it was going to go. We we had no say in that. the board of health. And so what transpired with that is that we had to do a deed restriction that that's set for that house. And we also had to co-mingle those two lots legally so that uh they couldn't be divided because the septic system has to go with that house. So that that's kind of already been done with the the lot with the septic system in it. the other lot. I mean, I I don't have a problem doing that, Sherry. I mean, but there's no way you could could build a house with so much wetland. You just couldn't do it.

I hear you. But I think Cheryl's point is well taken. the new statute that was enacted by the uh governor is that lots that would otherwise have merged due to the doctrine of merger, right? Um can be uh unattached if you will and as long as you I think it's 7500 square ft on that on that particular statute. Five is the old fat is the very old one and that requires that they never have merged. So 7500 square foot lot it wouldn't be a deed restriction. And what I'd have Bruce do is zoning

is create a lot and and file it on record so that when and if you go to sell, you're selling to the next owner as one lot and not a lot that can be unmmerged later and somebody take the grudge down and put a house on it. You do you do lose value that way because right now that lot could be divided and someday if septic ever goes down there then that a house could be built there. I understand that, but never have been our intentions. I'm fine putting the restriction on it for the variance. That's fine.

The next thing I want to ask you about is the construction of the garage because in this hearing, I heard a couple members comment that it looks like the garage is too close to the lot line. So, is that before us tonight or can we make it before us? Um the the garage being too close to the lot line. I think it meets all the setbacks. I didn't said it was too close. I was talking about past decisions.

No, you were saying you were saying somebody said this proposed garage was too close. Maybe it was a little plan I was looking at. And the other person said the garage can't be front of the house, but it's not really front of the forward of the house. Well, if this is if Huh. Because what he just did for me is he drew me the new lot. Well, this is this is this is this one and this would be the other one. Yeah. So, this is now the lot, right? So, goes back here.

You don't think we need to give him a special permit or a variance to build that? I mean, it's all the setbacks to build that there. I looked at it as from the road being in front of the house. I mean anyway you come down this road it's in front of this house it's not behind it's set before it be if you took this and and stretched the road out and this came over typical of the reason we give a variance or a special permit for this because the lot shape and typography of this doesn't allow for it to be anywhere else I'm not but I am saying I have no problem having that added on as a

binding but on the other hand I do believe while it meets all the setbacks if we make this one lot any way you look at it coming down that road it is in front of the house you come to it before the house on the road along the road yeah but that's so I mean I have no I I I just want to make sure that we cover the bases if we're going to give permission for this then we need to cover that base and give that permission I I'm have no problem with that being added into a decision except I need you to find it for me in the bylaw because I need I need to run out car and get my glasses for you and make me read that. One second. I don't want you to read. Do you want me to run on grandma?

No, I don't want you to read it. I want you accessory use. Is there an article? No. Where we're talking when it's not accessory use. It's a set. It's part of the setbacks where accessory building cannot you know a garage cannot be in front of a house. cannot the front of the garage cannot be in forward of the house. Yeah, last time I went looking for it, I couldn't find it. So, I think that's if it's close to the house or attached to the house. Well, no, that's a different set that it's not supposed to be forward, but that would be forward of the house potentially. This is so far is actually removed from the house. I wouldn't even think it applies.

And they're talking about along the frontage and the frontage on this one is here. I see what you're saying about you thinking that it looks like it's forward and it probably wouldn't hurt. You know what we could do is we could add it in the conditions because we don't really I can get my glasses and find it. Um I can scan it while you run get your glasses too. Sorry. I can get it to come up in here. I want to also ask about that would be great if you got sunglasses to look at that. I want to find that. Um, do you just need readers? These are readers. What are they? I think I'm used to doing 75.

200. 200 gives you a little bit clear. Was that magnifying glass? Everywhere. Wait till you hit 70. I just hit 65. I'm not looking forward to anything else. Well, there's only one other option. But the good thing about 65 made it to Medicare while we No, I I my memory says there's your accessory building and it does not say it can't be folded at the house. But my memory is that you're thinking of the time that we had somebody whose home occupation was going to be in that accessory building. No, that couldn't be for

No, it's the um

Excuse me one second. Um, don't be there. These work great dimensional setbacks in the back under the footnotes. It might be there.

Oh, okay. Cuz yeah, cuz I just didn't find it here. I know we you addressed it before. I went looking for it for business and 25 recently. I don't know if it's in or if we're thinking you're looking at table you're talking about 20 table 28 the dimension stuff it's in that question [Music] Is it important?

In any event, you're only here before us on the lot separation, right? Yeah. The building needs to go the the lot separation to allow for the portion to be conveyed or conveyed and connected with combined with thank you 16 Elizabeth so that this structure can be an accessory structure to the dwelling.

Okay. Miss Gorski to um close the loop with where I started with you because town clerk has weighed in and told me that it's perfectly legal and legitimate for Mr. Stewart to have continued in his seat as a legal member of the board as a holdover until he gets sworn in. There's no further need for me to say that we're going to have another hearing and we can't vote tonight. And I just want to be sure that you're clear with that.

Okay. Is that all right with you? And so I'm going to ask everyone around the room if you have any further input, I'm going to ask for it. And um one thing we can do to satisfy your concern is saying that the garage can be constructed approximately as shown on the plans presented. Sure. Okay. I just I just know that there's something in here that says it can't be forward can have an accessory forward of the front of the house. I know we've done it. Okay. Anyone else want to weigh in on anything? Does anybody else have any questions? Do Yes, please. Just as far as the structure, I know we're not supposed to talk. Is it going to be wooden structure? It's not going to be like a steel building or

something. Thank you, chair. Uh, it will be a wooden structure. It will be clad in the same green vinyl that my house is. The roof will be the same color. The trim will be white composite. The doors will be white. The windows will be white. So it'll look So it might be steel build. No, it'll be part I wouldn't do that in my neighbors. How tall is it? Just two story or just a single story? A single story. Right. The board can condition it on not on it not being habitable, but I'm not sure I want to do that. If they wanted or needed to convert it later into a um into a um I I just wouldn't go there.

There's just no reason to go there. They'd have to put a septic. It would have to just Yeah. Okay. Um, anybody else? Yes. Uh, I don't think I met you yet. Did you identify yourself yet for the board? My name is Brian Scaling. I'm here representing my parents who live on 48 road. Okay. Where are you in relation to these young ladies? He's on around the corner. Uh, the town property, the public property,

right? And I just want to uh clarify in regards to the paper road which on the plan appears to connect with Elizabeth Street. Um when the new proposed lot lines if they are accepted I just want to reiterate what Miss Thomas said the importance that the town had access to that uh cover to clean it up because um my my folks have water issues also and I want to make sure the town has access to clean that culvert because it may impact that

may I may address that matter I'm going to ask Bruce to answer to where the cover is first uh the culvert is on the Ellis's property approximately here [Music] and it is shown right here as a 15inch pipe coming across. So this is Ellis's property. These are the two we're talking about dividing. This is the house on the corner. So that this will actually give because you're deeding this land to the town. We need a sliver here and a sliver here. This is still going to be on their property. Going to be on those and they I think the town has a um inferred easement. Yeah. But it's not a dated ement.

They actually come in they actually come in once a year from uh Florence. Florence Street path. So this path, they actually can backho and there's usually two of them. It's a concrete structure that the town built and uh it actually has a well in it so that it traps sediment before it goes in across my property into the under the culdeac and they usually go in once a year with a backho clean it out. But Mr. Scan's point is well taken. If there's no deed right of access on behalf of the town to get to that culvert, they're not coming across his property. They're coming across they have to go across street.

There's an opening there that they come in with a backhoe and that land is town land. So they don't go across your property to get to it. So then nothing you're doing would impede anything that's happening currently, right? Get back over the stone wall. It's just a small opening that for people to walk through, but they still walk through it onto your property and touch the cover that's on your property. They parked the truck there and they'll walk in my property to get there. There's no problem with that because it's the paper road. The cover is on the paper road. Negative. That's what I heard you say. That's why the paper road runs through there and that's where the opening is and everybody walks right through there when they walk through.

We're talking two different things. When they walk through there, they're walking on the paper road. When they get to the culvert that's on your property, Bruce is saying, they have to exit the paper road. Concrete culver is not on my property. That's on town land. Oh, so there's two things. There's a concrete culvert on the town property that they're taking care of. There's also a pipe on your property. The pipe on your property is only serving your property. No. No. It's it's served by this whole trench that comes from Florence and then it goes into that pipe. I think it's really important that if there's a pipe on your property that is doing anything with water for the benefit of others,

well, I'm fine with that. It needs to be documented or at least listed in our decision that we didn't overlook it. That's what I think Mr. Scandlin wants us to do. And they come in and from the from the culde-sac they clean down the embankments where the stream runs under the culde-sac. I know they do that because I've seen them do that. So I don't have a problem with the town coming in and doing that. That could be part of the restriction and and that's what I wanted to concur because when I've seen them uh looking out my back window, they've been actually cleaning the stream. So, this is separate from the coffford, but behind my property, and I'm sure it's on yours, uh, is a stream that needs to be dredged in order to prevent the water. You have a difficult property with that,

Mr. Skin, still get his hand up. Just give me a minute, please. The concern would be sometimes the access point from Florence, a a piece of equipment. It may be so much water in there that a piece of equipment won't be able to get in there, but it could get in from the other side uh from Elizabeth Street.

I think if I tell me if this works, if the decision contains a condition that says the town will be the town will continue to have access to the pipe on the Ellis property for cleanout and maintenance. I think that will handle it because it's only the town. It's not anybody else and it's for cleanout and maintenance limited limited. And I'm not worried about you being good neighbors. You've been town long enough for me to trust you. But if you ever sell or move along or something, I I want to make sure it's on the it's on our decision. Thank you.

You're welcome. Thank you for bringing it up. Anybody else? Anyone else have any other concerns that we haven't addressed? I asked that with trepidation. I do have one question. When these Ask you you're you're in purgatory. Go ahead. Go ahead. When these two lots are attached, that means it's going to be part of that paper road. Is that going to be deed to the you when you deed part of the circle to the town? He already owns and the rightway of course was if I could answer that when he attaches them he still has to depict the paper street running through it.

Yeah, I know the uh access would still be granted to the town probably. No, he still has the ownership still. The ownership is the Ellis's subject to the right of passage and repass by anyone who's taken a deed off that plan. Does that answer the question? The ownership is Ellis's if if Okay. Okay. That that's my concern. We become part of his property. Yeah. The ownership will be Ellis's for everything but the color sack that they to proposing to deed to the town. Okay. And it's part of that proposal to widen Elizabeth or to deed to

Yeah. around the culde-sac. Yes. the culde-sac and Elizabeth because it looks like the edge of pave pavement is outside of the paper street limits. So they you you would still propose that Ellis give up they give up some land here and some land here. Oh, but not on Well, see this is the paper street. This is the paper street. This is too. You said it was a real street. Well, it it was accepted and then it was never recorded. Does the town maintain it? Town's maintaining it. Okay. Okay. All right. I'm not going to address it then. Yeah, I'm just not going to address it. Okay. All right. Anybody? I'm going to I'm going to say, you know, going once, going twice. I think I hand Oh, there was a hand. I'm sorry.

No, please do. It's It's fine. Make sure I understand. I thought I heard it when it said that Elizabeth was going to be widened. No. Okay. Apologies. I You did hear it. There's no asphalt changes. What there are is they're going to widen the right of way to so all the asphalt is on Elizabeth Street. Right now some of the asphalt in the rotary it's outside. It's on private property. Okay, I think I got that. So in other words, no drainage. That's correct. No, no facial work and all new pavement. The pavement edges when you drive down and you turn around at the end,

you're outside of the rightway. It's that that pavement is more than 40 feet wide and that's what the right of way is. So we're trying to incorporate that into the right of way. Thank you. You got it. I'm surprised you got it. I didn't get that. Is everyone satisfied? Any other questions? Okay. Um going to ask the board if there are any other questions. that I'm going to accept a motion to close the hearing. And make a motion to close the hearing. Second, please. I'll second it.

I know. All those in favor signify by saying I. I. I. Okay. Now, the board's going to discuss for a minute. Uh, no further input will be accepted from you guys. and board.

Um, he could have broken this off and just sold it to himself and then we wouldn't have all have been hadn't able to have all the neighbor input and all the discussion and been able to allay all these people's concerns and worries. Um, it's nice that it happened the way it did so that we could do that, but technically I I see no reason not to allow this the way it's been laid out and the way it's been presented. Okay. Right. Yeah. I'm kind of surprised we're dealing with lines. That sounds to me like it's a planning board in our no situation.

No, it really isn't. But uh I it this is the first time I've seen us talk about changing lot lines and so on, but I don't have a problem with that otherwise. When you're here another 10 years, you'll be able to say yeah, we did that once usually set site, you know, coverage and setbacks and so on. No, I have no no issue at all with it. I was very straightforward to me. I do think it's and to leave anybody. I see no reason why this would cause any additional water issues anywhere in the area.

I do think it's important that we state that the that the garage is allowed to be built as presented, but I know the zoning bylaw somewhere there says it can't be fored. Yeah, I think we might as well kill all the birds on here. I am going to because I've written it all down. I'm not going to make the motion, but I'm going to word the motion and then someone else will have to make it. Um I think that the motion is granting

due to I think we want to grant a variance pursuant to section Bruce. Do you want to help me there? 17327. 27. Yes. 17327 to allow the applicant to um combine lots in the following fashion. Zero Elizabeth will be combined with lot 15. Split first. Yes. You have to split zero Elizabeth into 55 and 56.

Zero Elizabeth will will be split into lots 55 and 56 as shown on the rose landscape plan and then the applicant will combine zero. No, no. 56 with 32 Lockier. Okay. Lot 56 with 32 Lockate and 55 with 16 Elizabeth

and record an 81P plan at the Registry of Deeds to document that configuration subject to the following conditions. Uh the resulting two lots I think um with the following conditions uh one lot will equal or exceed 40,000 square ft. Correct. 16 16 Elizabeth 16 Elizabeth will equal or exceed

40,000 square ft and 32 stock will be um uh will be remain a non-conforming law will remain a non very good will remain a non-conforming of roughly 28,000. We don't need to say it. Yeah, I think it's good to say it because we're showing that we're not really making it substantially smaller. I had the wrong number 28,000 32 lots will remain a nonconforming lot. 600. Okay, we don't want to.

So, that's one condition. A second condition is that um I got the 81P. No further subdivision, right? Well, that's with the 81P. That's it. Well, we'll just say no further subdivision of those lots. And then we're going to say um condition that the town will retain or the uh uh the 16 second the access to the drainage ditch on 16. Okay. Access to the drainage structure, right? The structure.

It's not is it a structure drainage? It's a 15-in pipe according to the pipe. That's a structure. The town will continue to have access to the pipe on what's the number? 16 Elizabeth. Elizabeth. The pipe on 16 Elizabeth to clean out and maintain. Okay. Just maintain. Yeah. Just say maintain. Keep it simple. All right. For maintenance and then um

you want to address drainage concerns. Yeah, I'm going to do that all together with the wooden structure allowance. Um then we're going to say uh and the applicant uh will be permitted to construct the garage on lot 5 five substantially as shown on the plan lot known as we put known as cuz it's no longer be on the area known as okay it's no longer going to be the lot

the lot garage on area is shown as lot 55 on the plan. I'll word it better when I'm writing it, but it'll be very similar. Um, I'll smith it for you. Okay. Thanks. I designed it anyway. With um he's our clerk. Grudge allowed to be built as shown on the approximately as shown on the plan provided that the grudge um have drip edge on the eve sides. Eve sides with infiltration trenches with uh stone drip edge.

Stone. That does it. The stone drip edge on the eve side. I think that's it. That's it. That's all you need to say. We've taken care of drainage. You've taken care of access to the pipe. We've taken care of making sure it won't be divided again. We've given permission to build the barn. Thank you. And or garage. Garage. Not a barn. Okay. What? An access for the for the pipe for cleaning. Covered everything we're worried about. Okay. So, can I have somebody? No, I'm moving right out of my mouth.

Rod moved it. I'm sorry. John moved it. And who's going to second it? Second it. Second. We won't let purgatory boy. Yeah. Just play it safe and just fine. All in favor? I I I opposed. None. Congratulations. Congratulations. Thank you. We thank you very much for your time. Thank you for your explanations and your time. You always do an excellent job of making everyone understand everything. Thank you everyone. Thank you all for coming for your patience and your help. You were all very helpful to me.

Nice to see all of you.

Thank you. Thank you so much for the use of glass. I just wanted to know I love that dog so much. I can't stand it. That's so happy. Did you end up with one of her dogs? He's 2 years old now. He's two. Is he a Labradoodle? Yes. And he's I know. Full of health. Oh, I'm so glad. Everyone tells me that. They're just a wonderful breed. He's just going to say that's Jesse. Two years old. That was your brother. That was my brother Mitchell. He just took in fact his birthday is Sunday. That's funny. My he's deceased but his birthday. So his daughter took one from the same road at the run

and a straightaired run. Yeah. Isn't that funny? Well, we're very well. She's doing her job. Nice to see you again. It's been many years. You're always delightful. Thanks for not closed yet. Yeah, we haven't closed yet. Um, we're supposed to do minutes tonight, but I'm sorry. Can we put those up? Let's postpone the minutes. Okay. And I'll take a motion to uh adjourn. I make a motion to adjourn. Second that. He's going to second it. He seconded it. Yay. All those in favor. I rejourned. Hit the switch.