all right uh good evening ladies and gentlemen uh today is Wednesday February 19th 2025 the time is 7:30 we are here at the Newbury municipal offices at 12 campway by Field Mass we're in the second floor hearing room and this is
the zoning board of appeals public hearing we have um here tonight uh Chrissy bothe who is our excellent Administrative Assistant we have Michelle weeler who is our associate member we have Jack Kelly onire Wright
who is a member and we have Mario carali who is a member I am Eric San I'm the chair so with that Mario sure uh General fandetti 11 and 15 Sunset Drive the applicant was requesting a variant SL reversal of administrative decision and
a special permit finding for release of Newber zoning section 9742 B and 97-63 regarding allowed use and dimensional requirements in order to correct the lot configuration allowing for the creation of a legal
nonperforming lot to be redeveloped in order to raise the pre-existing nonconforming dwelling and for the construction of a new single family dwelling with Garage on pilings on the property located at 115 Sunset Drive from Island Newberry 0951 assessor M U2
78 and 80 continued public heing 1219 and 13025 applicant to submit variance request letters for each lot rece 2625 right can here right here you're right
there all right so um we're on our third continuance here and we've asked you to submit your letters of um statement or the two lots since there're two lots they two variances lot is is separate um
so these are new and received so Mario would you like to read uh the first one I would start with U 11's on top uh it says in guards and then on the sign page it says 11 can I use your copy sure I have have two of me
that's okay uh dear chair F the zoning board of appeals has requested me to submit this letter in connection with the application for a zoning variance for the lot at 11 Sunset Boulevard the lot at 11 Sunset Boulevard ad joins the lot at 15 Sunset bouard both lots are
located in the residential AG zoning District where the zoning code allows lots to be used for the purpose of a single family structure the lot at 11 Sunset Boulevard and the lot at 15 Sunset Boulevard are each con currently improved by a single
family structure approximately onethird of the existing single family structure on the lot at 15 Sunset Boulevard however currently intrudes over the property boundary that the lot at 15 Sunset Boulevard shares with the
lot at 11 Sunset Boulevard the fact that approximately onethird of the one family structure on the lot at 15 Sunset Boulevard intrudes over the property boundary line prevents me the owner of the L 11 Suns of Bart from being able to
reasonably exercise my right to alienate my land and use it for the purpose that the zoning code allows which is as a one family structure consequently this commission has created a substantial hardship on me as the owner of the lot at 11 Sunset Boulevard the remedy for of
which is the grant of a dimensional variance from the literal enforcement of the building code as a landowner has requested if granting the requested zoning variants would allow a portion of lot 11 Sunset bouevard to be comined combined with a lot at 15 Sunset Boulevard so
that the entire one family structure currently existing on the lot at 15 sunet Boulevard would be contained within the property line boundary of the lot at 15 Sunset Boulevard and no longer intrude on the portion of the lot at 11 Sunset Boulevard although if granted the
complemented complemented variance would result in a further reduction in the lot size in the lot size of lot 11 Sunset Boulevard any such reduction in lot size would be diminished in circumstances as it minimal diminishment practically
available to me as the owner of a lot 11 in the circumstances and the minimal variance that is needed to lessen the substantial hardship imposed on lot at lot 11 Sunset Boulevard by this particular condition the lot at 11
Sunset Boulevard is now will be after the grant of variance in Conformity with all dimensional requirements of the piod zoning code including far lock coverage height front rear and side yard setbacks and Street Frontage requirements the lot at 11 Sunset bevart
consists of lots 1 and 39 while the lotted 15 Sunset Lots 38 and 37 all is shown on the plan PL land of the pl Island beach
standards to serve as Street Frontage for a single family structure is cost prohibitive and impossible to store permits given the current D guidelines for pal Island lot 15 Sunset Boulevard is currently improved by a single family structure a substantial portion of the
existing single family structure intrudes over the property boundary line that the lot at 15 Sunset Boulevard shares with the lot at 11 sunset bouar this condition presents an additional practical difficulty and substantial hardship to me as the owner of lot 15
in which it prevents me from Reily being to alienate the lot in a manner that is allowed by the zoning law consequently because of this additional pecular condition inherent to the land I've sought the requested zoning variance at the hearing our team provided some information to the zoning board of
appeals that demonstrate that the newly created lot would not be too large or too small in comparison to the other Lots in the neighborhood in addition I presented information upon which the zoning board of appeals can reasonably conclude that I cannot reasonably make use of the lot of 15 Sunset Boulevard
for the purpose for of or in the manner that is allowed by the zoning zoning law which is that of a one family structure and for that substantial hardship zoning board of appeals should Grant the requested variance Red Wing trust owner 15 Sunset B Gerald
trustee so in understanding the um the zoning bylaw typically we don't deal with two properties at one time so in terms of having one that was and then we have the other in terms of board's
understanding of how to apply the criteria to one lot and then apply the criteria to the other lot um it seems that we would focus on one first and then the other second to go back and forth back and forth that
make sense so in the argument for what we what you had submitted in terms of reasoning the um the
state um the section of the state law that governs variances which is chapter 48 section and uh chapter 48 section yes 10 talks about um the conditions of the
land so in in the statement in terms of the property um what is it about that property that is the hardship which is not in relation to the structure or the
structure being over the property line but in relation to the physical characteris of the land well my reading of of 48 it it states it also mentions as one of the conditions
structures so that's why I think it makes sense is that stated in the order I don't meaning structure what do you mean by that well my understanding that chapter 48 also includes not only issues with the land but structure rures any
unusual structures that are relative to the land and that's why chap uh 11 Sunset is entitled to a variance it has a structure that imposes on its property yeah if if when I when I read
the the law it says a owning to circumstance related to soil condition shape and topography are the one of the three main such as land or structures especially affecting such as land or structur not affecting the gener zoning District in which land or structures are
located so it's more about the land a land or structures that's the way I understand it you guys that out on [Music] wall um somewhere
[Music] hang yeah that is that is a a case case study not section as as printed I hear you the only issue of mention of
structure that I see hey the good thing about section 40 chapter 10 is it short it's one page and three paragraphs um regrettably there's hundreds and hundreds of cases defining it further but you know we can all read it pretty
simply the only mention of structure that I see is a sentence where it says uh um except where local ordinances or bylaws shall expressly permit variances for use no variance May authorize a use
or activity not otherwise permitted in The District in which the land are structure located so if you were trying to use this instead of a single family home uh as a you know I don't know a bar or nightclub or yes anything else but that's I don't see structure anywhere
else in this well that was my understanding happy to have a structure and not call it a VAR not need a variance of some else houses on your property it's just logical um read open them section 10 permitting
granting Authority shall have the power after public hearing for which the notice has been given by the publication and the posting as provided in section 11 and by mailing to all parties in N to Grant on appeal or on petition with respect to particular land or
structures a variance from the terms of the applicable zoning ordinance or bylaw where such Grant per permit granting Authority specifically finds that owning to circumstances relating to soil conditions shape or
Topography of such land or structures and especially affecting such land or structures but not affecting generally the zoning District in which is located a literal enforcement of the provisions of the ordinance or the bylaw would involve substantial hardship Financial or otherwise to the petitioner or
applicant that and that the desirable relief may be granted without substantial detriment to the good to public good and without nullifying or inent or purpose of such ordinance or bylaw so I think in understanding the
word um structure um my my apologies for not having um Town Council clarify that of of such land or structures of the land
um and I think what we what we understand and what we've always said is that there's something unique to the property so in our previous discussions we have discussed that 15 Sunset full has um currently no
Frontage um for the two Parcels that were put together to create the parcel which is called 15 Sunset actually 15 Sunset Drive um and that there is a Dartmouth way which is an
unimproved way Town way and so that understanding that the shape of the land set against the unimproved public w um may cause you a hardship that the
um in terms of financial that you haven't uh you or the town or the town is not willing to improve of um a a way that is that is documented but not but not improved so I think that that point we
have discussed and understanding if everyone's in agreement or has understand would like to talk about that that the shape of the land for 15 as it exists with an unimproved way that is Town Town owned land um the
burden would be on you to improve it in order to um provide the frontage for the Lots as they exist so we've talked about that um I think the the harder question and discussion for us tonight is that
the effect of 11 Sunset Boulevard in which an argument separately from 15 is made in order to State the case for why that lot should received a variance and
from um experience and from understanding and looking at precedent it is again the um unusual hardship of unique conditions of the subject property that is not
generally found um on other Lots in the zoning District or surrounding neighborhood or what is unique to that piece of property that it should be allowed to have special circumstances different from the zoning District or
from the surrounding neighborhood um and that those characteristics of the land uh shape or size um would also cause um development with in
in according to our current zoning bylaws extremely um difficult and unusual uh or prevents you the land owner from making reasonable use of the property so in addition Financial loss
is is not a hardship self-created issues are not a hardship previous owners doing things are not a a hardship um and so in thinking through
what is you know what is special and the reason for asking you to write the letters is you know we're not here to we're here to be helpful we're here to figure out we're here to guide through and make sure that the town bylaws but we're not here to make the argument for
athletics so what is special about 11 in terms of the property that that it should get variance I think you did state that in in doing what you're proposing
um that it would meet all criteria of the piod except for the lot size and for the frontage there's only 100 there's 50 and 50 is 100
110 would have 110 ft of Frontage so also understanding variances that um variances should not be granted for just creating a lot
without knowing the intent of what's going on it because we're not here to um we don't want to Grant or perceive any um just because we Grant variant doesn't mean that you can just do anything on
the lot you still have to submit for the project that you want to do on the lot and because you got a variance doesn't mean that can do whatever on the lot like we're not they're two separate things and so that was clear from town council's memo on the process of what
had to unfold in order to to um to have the variance hearings and then should this go forward then um and but my understanding is that in terms of of just granting um a variance
to a property we should know or assume what the effect would have on um on that newly created lot and what what that would allow and so in that process we asked you to show us the context of the
neighborhood um in terms of lot sizes to show us both the smallest and the largest lot and to present whether the newly created lot sizes would be in keeping with the neighborhood because we didn't want to go granting variances and then come back
and say well you're lots too small you're lots too big and um we have issue with that and then you look at us and just say you just gave me a variance and now you won't now you're telling me lots of the wrong sides so without judging what's coming next we're trying to understand what would be allowed next if
that makes sense to you everybody okay um and again just trying to figure out from section 10 in the letter of what what is what is the condition of the land that is is is unique what is different
about the property for each property that sets the variance and in the discussion that you have currently a landlock piece of property because there's an unimproved town right of way um creates hardship for you that if the
RightWay was there then you would have a um pre-existing nonconforming laot and you could put a house on it just like everybody else comes with a street that has a nonconforming lot it just so happens that you don't have the street to put it there uh so one question to
you is you know do you want to improve darou way to create the frontage and he said that would be a hardship so that is the reasoning that was discussed for 15 so again now we're back on 11 trying
to understand the condition of the land would be to allow the variance and basically in the essence of the variance for a nonconforming lot you we are taking that nonconforming lot and its
previous condition and putting it aside and basically granting the current conditions of the new proposed lot so you now have a new pre-existing non-conforming lot via a variance s also yeah um does anybody else have any
questions this here for what I'm what I'm saying how many people are here for um Sunset Drive m one two nobody over there okay um you guys have any questions while
we're discussing this what does that look like for the 11 what's that Vari that's what I'm saying that's what I'm just trying to the understanding or the argument I'm still not sure I think what the hardship is for that based on
Section 10 you can't create section 10 we're not creating a hardship it existed we didn't subdivide the land that way so it was subdivided by the town through the doctrine of merger we didn't do that
it created this mess so if there is a mess to be solved you're proposing to move the property line which makes one site bigger one site smaller so the site that's smaller has a house on it and any future development would have to be within
keeping with that smaller lot and you're making a larger lot from you're proposing to create a larger lot in order to put a bigger house on so although the two don't go hand in hand
we're trying to to to make sure that separately they stand together separately they separately they stand for a variance for each one of them understanding of you know what what kind of lot 11 is going to be at a
smaller lot and and what is going to happen to 15 if it becomes a larger L can we look at the hardship on the 11 a little bit more I'm still kind of stuck on that yeah that's what we're on that's exactly what we're we let me ask this one of the things that that I saw
when I read the statue was that it should be unique and specific to the property not common to the zoning District I think is the exact quote um this a common problem on the island there's nothing unique and specific
about having your house a structure on an adjacent property line that of fact the next hearing we had this evening has a structure on adjacent property line we've seen lots of them in I would say excuse me I think it's unique I'm sorry just Plum Island is unique let's face it
it has structures that order the property line of the adjacent line it's a unique situation this one this is this is this has a third of the house on another property I'm sorry that's a unique situation okay may I answer Mr chairman
so let's look at it from because I've been in this situation so let's look at this from the other yeah it's an unique situation and it's a hardship but it's a hardship for 15 it's an asset for 11 you're lucky that you're on good terms with the owners of 15 because the owners
of 11 could leverage you and say hey move your house get off my property or offering you money to buy or there's all kinds of options all kinds of options yes but that's not the option where asking for okay all right it makes a hard if I wanted to sell lot 11 right
now it would be very difficult with a house on it an additional house on it a third of a house on Excuse me yes you have the need that's a hardship I would say that's a hardship so in moving the lot line you
have essentially created a much smaller lot for 11 it would it you know it would be a smaller lot with an existing structure on it one of the things we also try to make sure of is that the bylaws are consistent for the person that owns the
property and for the neighbors and for the neighborhood and for anybody in the future that might own the property so that one person's great idea isn't um becomes the next person's bad idea right and just because somebody has a good idea doesn't mean the next person so we
we try to weigh it against that and then with piod it always comes back to um the neighborhood because everything in Plum Island is mostly non-conforming and so instead of saying you have to specifically meet the exact regulations
you you have to meet the intent of the neighborhood and our leeway in the piod has always been the definition of the neighborhood has been a little flexible depending on where exactly the site is because it's all you need
so question yeah yeah my question have you investigated the possibility of an easement voluntarily giving yourself an easement on on 11 I don't think that's real realistic uh option I have investig it but I don't think it's a realistic
option because well if you did that you would keep the Lots the same size as they are now and You' just be granting but I didn't I wouldn't have Frontage but you would have access over property to access that that second but
that doesn't comply with the state Rags you have to have Frontage to have a onot you have an pre-existing nonconforming lot that you would be you would um access by an easement like we suggested at the first qu but you didn't
like that right you're access by an easement now anyway whether it's granted or not you you the property the property of 11 has been burdened with the driveway which sits on the on improved
town right away and sits on property 11 as it currently exists now so I guess you're just you know we're looking for you to really really give the argument and I think would have helped you with
15 and we're looking at 11 is there something about the the site and the doom and the grading and the position of the structure on a 11 that makes it unique and special in that
um in that the only place to put a structure is where the structure currently is um the oneir of the house that's my argument is the onethird of a house sits on 11 yeah and and that's the that's the
that's the structur issue and that's the hardship right there somebody else's bad idea isn't isn't a hardship for you we could tell you simply to tear down 15 and rebuild it in the center of the lot and well that's a financial hardship
right there why why would I do that you're you're going to tear it down anyway and now you're making a bigger lot to tear it down so it doesn't seem like it's that valuable could you move the we also asked you which we haven't got any trash on but could you move the property line so that it's not as it
doesn't make 11 as small that's an option sure my my issue with that is and I look at this expensively and it said and Mr car brought it up there's tons of case
law where it says you know the appc say can't self-create it and they all cover this situation not necessarily with another house on one but subdividing it in a way that's beneficial to them and asking uh you know okay I need variances now and the answer almost in every case
I don't think I can find a single one was no you can't self-create and so the issue here where am I self excuse me where am I self creating an issue you did not book because you have a pre-existing non-con two pre-existing non-conforming Lots we I agree that you
did not place the 15's house on 11's property but by moving the property line that creates the need for the variances how can that not be self-created no no I don't I don't see that at all I I'm looking for Frontage
how do I get Frontage to make it comply with state law that particular line how do you do that how do I get Frontage on that line that's the question so we discussed that in terms of there is Frontage of an unimproved Town way
and that improving that is going to be that the town's not going to do it um and so that goes to you and you would claim that as a financial hardship and so I've stated that in my opinion that your argument for variance for 15 is you
know we hope walk you through that and we discussed that previously it's not only the town State PP won't allow so not the town it's the state that won't allow you to touch that road so that's that's so we're talking about 15 and then that's what I'm talking about 15 right so I guess what I'm trying to say
is in in my mind without everyone else weighing in at the moment that you have an argument for 15 as to why you might move the property line in order to create a bigger lot for 15 so yes yes okay so now let's put 15 aside let's
talk about 11 what is special or unique about the condition of the land at 11 that would warrant a variance for 11 on its own merits of the conditions of the site and the
soil that would um the unique conditions of the subject property that is not generally found in other Lots within the zoning District or surrounding neighborhood or what is the hardship of of moving the
property line making the prop smaller that that in aord of zoning bylaws would be extremely or unusually difficult or prevents you from otherwise really reasonably using the property within the
zoning by has the house on it that's that's the hardship right there I mean that's the uh that's the number one issue it has a house on it okay and it
you know and it's it's a balancing I mean this is not these conditions were made at some point in the past that had nothing to do with us you any who knows who did it but that house was there for
I don't know it was built in 1890 I heard and you know they subdivided the property and uh the house got subdivided in a way where it was on uh on another partial and then when they merged the Lots they merged them in a way that
didn't make any sense so because of that I'm paying the price and enduring the hardship of having a house on another property that is easily rectified by just subdividing it so the land is easy
equ we're not we're not doing anything unuseful just and this is done all with any other city or town most other cities and towns you can subdivide land and join join property
together this is an unus very unusual situation being on PL Island very unusual and and it's just to me it's just we're I I own a piece of property that uh it's on 424m W and the landowner
next door bought a parcel of that lot before I I bought it and just a sliver of land and I asked him why didn't you buy that sliver of land oh I bought it because the woman that was living there needed some money
and I needed some compensation for the money I was going to give her and that's and that's how that's that's been there for years now there was never a problem with that now here we have a problem but but we have historical fact of this
happening all over town part being subdivided and there's no issue so well why is this becoming 's major issue now because there's a little bit more control and understanding about being
um uh careful and and following the regulations I understand that but there's precedent there also that should be taking into account what happened in the past and if if you're trying to correct it I guess the question is is why have lots more equal because the
next the next if if you get two Varian for both lots and but we can make them both equal could we do that I I think you does that make sense as long I'm looking for Frontage that's what I'm looking for for 15 understand maybe it is a way to make them more equal and Jog the line so it's
it's not just the straight line and then the two properties are more balanced and then whatever happens in the future the two lots are balanced within the neighborhood would seem to make a lot of sense I don't have a problem with that it would require a substantial redesign
of what we were planning there but and and by making the lots more equal then both Lots would have the right to have the same size house in the future as being pre-existing non-conforming lots that have a variance that reset the size
of the lot so in the future when somebody comes along you know you're you're not building a really really big house on one lot and then leaving a smaller smaller house on another lot because of the the newly
reset non-conforming Lots because the variances and just just to say that the two lots are equally balanced and the fact that we've got 15 that doesn't have um Frontage but you've you
haven't totally to the detriment 11 reduced it size only to benefit 15 and the two lots are balanced would seem like a they Argent me I guess I'm just not understanding well just going back again to those three items that present
the hardship so even in that condition out of those three items what is me the soil the typography or the um the shape shape of the land for 15 is obvious because 15 yeah we the shape it has no Frontage so the
shape is creating Frontage doting the frontage to 15 even if it's minimal Frontage of non-conform uh another 20 ft of Frontage would give the frontage uh would be
conforming for the frontage of 11 so that in terms of how this house is cited in terms of the only thing not conforming them would be the would be the size of the property if the existing structure is set back as it is the deck
has been removed so that the side yard set back to the new property line would be in keeping um and if if um if with the size of the lot it was we walked through the application and confirmed that the only
non-conforming was the size of the lot how would that be any different than anything else in the neighborhood of did you see anything did said or the reasoning behind what I just said yeah um and I don't think two I think two equal
lots is not favoring one or the other it's not providing an advantage to one or the other it is solving a problem it's it's giving you Frontage and even if the frontage was less than 77 ft for 15 you still would have Frontage and yes
you you probably couldn't um do exactly what you proposed but in terms of what were the reasoning why the board were accepted is that the the shape of both the lenss are equal and they're consistent to themselves within the
neighborhood and the only reason I did the subdivision the way I did it made reference to the original subdivision plan I understand that's the only reason and yeah and that that I thought that made sense I mean wouldn't wouldn't you
think it made sense it does but then you're adding a whole another half of property to one side and you're taking half the property away from the other side and so therefore in terms of we're always trying to improve and we like to see all the improvements that we can and when
people have non-conforming lots and they can show Improvement on all fronts it it's a it's a hard to argue against that yes when somebody is presenting something to us and it seems like they're trying to get extra or take
advantage of something then it's not as favorable to us because we're giving something to them that the next person wouldn't have right and so by taking away from 11 and giving to 15 it seems like we're setting ourselves up for something less
favorable for 11 in the future if they were equal they could both support the same size structure and you sell a property to somebody else then your neighbor is going to have just as many rights as you have yeah that seems pretty straightforward to me so roughly how
many square feet can can you I all right Mr how much will the each be I'm sorry how what are we going to end up with roughly square foot I don't have the numbers I'm sorry I only see one of them here it looks like it says that uh we
got 14,800 on number 15 is that right so in order to get the frontage the line's going to be a little it's not going to be a straight line it's probably going to be a little bit
skewed it doesn't have to be 100% exact but it has to be the effort has to be shown to try to balance the lots and with that however you draw the line and if that line favors one or the other so be it but if the lots are balanced then the area again provides we're talking
relatively speaking here yeah I mean if one's a few feet bigger than the other yeah yeah yes and and you're obviously going to have to deal with Sunset Boulevard and how you come off of that as the step one and right I think that's your path forward
so with that at the moment I'd like to ask there are others in the audience that would like to speak for or against if you would state your name and speak I'm not really speaking for or against I'm just asking for some clarification just for my own self to
know what sure your name Donna finnean I'm behind the property um first of all um I don't understand and many of my neighbors have said the same thing how you call Frontage uh two different
streets do don't the frontage is the totally old linear line of of how the property meets in public way so on a corner lot the frontage is from this corner all the way
around okay and the lot owner does get to decide which even if you have an address that says Sunset Boulevard they may pick that the front of the yard is actually renmore way so we we've had that in terms of people positioning
their house on Plum Island that they may position their house because the front set back is 20 ft and the side and the rear are 10 so if you have public way you can position your house house and and if you're on a corner lot um that
has been the standard to let the person decide which they want does that make sense yes okay there are many different versions of streets uh I have would be the last house on my street although the street keeps on going right so if that happens I was
just curious as how that would happen and the other one is um as far as uh number 15 um I'm curious to know how it's not considered having access when it always
did have access to the house it doesn't have conforming um as by definition access it it has physical access but the access is as I stated is driving over the unimproved
town way and driving over parcel 11's property in order to access 15 if for some reason we had two separate owners parel 11 may be standing here saying I I I want you to remove that access in which that that property on 15
would be totally landlocked so in an effort um Mr fed here is trying to improve both 15 and for what we just discussed keep uh 11 uh within keeping of the neighborhood so that he can have
uh a legal non-conforming because of a variance but still have legal Frontage that allows then and to develop 15 in the future okay thank you y and if you want to see it on the plan the lines are all
here we could point it out if that's all right I'm familiar with the okay is there anybody else here that would like to speak for okay so Mr Fen this has been been um
extremely unique in my 13 years as I said I think I've had one experience come before us and that wasn't even on PL Plum Island so to to work through this and to make sure that we're we're following the
state not only the not we're following the state by uh zoning regulations but we're also following the town bylaw zoning regulations this this has been um quite a lengthy hearing and we
appreciate your your understanding and effort as we all try to make sure that we're we're doing the right thing for you and for all the other residents and for the future of property yes so we would appreciate if you would um look at the lot and redraw the lot line so that
the properties are approximately balanced in that the the splitting of the Lots is is somewhat balanced is balanced and I think in in terms of that the shape of 15 uh as we
discussed um and then would be that 11 in terms of the shape of its land uh being on a corner lot being of um meeting all the piod except for the
non-conforming square footage of the lot um is unique and also at the same time not more detrimental to the rest of the neighborhood are you suggesting that Mr banded the applicant try to uh it sounds like you're tearing the
house down on 15 there's no reason to try to sneak and give him the 10t that side Lot line well I'm you this I don't know what I'm doing right now and this is a new uh Avenue to explore at this point
so you know made on 15 correct we did see the plans right yes but we're not that we're not doing that's we're we're following it according to Chairman we're following it slightly different path now okay so okay
so just make them balanced yeah if they are close in proximity to being balanced then both lots have equal rights very good if if if by taking a whole another lot and half a lot and adding it to one and taking it away from the other you are a detriment to one and you are over
improving the other um and then when that happens however that lot line is drawn and it comes before us then you know if both Lots were to be roped so it still requires two variances it still requires is two variances and I think there's a a a pathway to to word
that in which um the the lot the lots are unique but they are in keeping and they're not inate um yeah so I guess with this we're going to have to continue to next month and we'd appreciate
um anything that you can to get us sooner if you send something through and you'd um like some um comments from one of us because we can't we can't discuss it uh we can't all discuss it until the next meeting when we're in public but if
you would like to send it to Chrissy Chrissy sends it to me I'll give you my my U feedback and guidance as to the reasonability of the the equalness of the Lo sure uh and then then you can present it to everybody and everybody
can weigh yeah for okay we'll try again it together yep thank you than uh even if you would like to have um if you'd like to mark up a plan and or have the surveyor just give you the
areas um without going through the expense of of having it totally redrafted but yeah I can figure it out you can figure it out then we can we can find a way to have an understanding and then figure out how it goes forward because with all any and all decisions any changes to anything that gets
approved here must come back before us so some checks there okay can we have yeah a motion um I'll make a motion to continue the meeting for March 20th here at Town Hall uh so that gives the uh applicant additional time to resize the
lots to make the lots more equivalent to each other second second all in favor I I thank you thank you Mr members of the board 20
okay okay um Al Ward ad Northern Boulevard the applicant of requesting special permit Bing for reliefing Section 97- 4g5 c01 increasing square footage and 02 upward extension the newb zoning bylaws and any other permanent
relief as may be required under the account of Newbury zoning walls to allow the proposed Ed project in order to raise the existing dwelling on the lot while keeping the garage and the construction of a new C family dwelling on pilings on the property located at Northern Boulevard Plum Island Newberry
Mass uh assessor M new3 lot1 come here power I believe Chris's uploading so she suggest what I sit over here control sure that work for you guys that would be great okay all right change of plan I'll stand
over here Chrissy will control the slots see if you go TOS yeah that's mine you may be able to go to view I think and put it into on the bottom there's that on the bottom right there you go on the bottom
right this little guy yeah just click on that just going to be hard to see anyway thank you all right full screen no question all set all right for uh my name is David gret of D fold I'm here on behalf
of Al Ward um of 0 Northern Boulevard the applicant um we're here to request a special permit for the demolition of the existing um four family or four bedroom single family structure on the property
and Rec construction of a new uh four bedroom single family home um the proposed project will be on pilings and um will be has been designed um and carefully crafted to address the goals
of of the piod as laid out in your bylaw um including flood resilience neighborhood compa compatibility and Public Safety um the applicant um intends to live at the property full time after the construction of this project um will not be renting the
property which I I think is a change of use for the applicant um from the past I I'm aware that um I think previously the board the board is aware of uh some some history of this property um and for which my firm was not uh involved but um
we have addressed I believe all the concerns of the board and the requirements of the board from uh pre previous um appearances here before you so um Chrissy do you want to flip to the next slide so this is just an overview of Plum Island which I know you all are
very familiar with so we can uh move on in a second but you can see 80 Northern Boulevard located there it's on the beach side of um Northern Boulevard next slide please so this is the house
um just another overview um but this is the house and we'll get into some detail on the uh the um the Dune in between the the the house and the house below it on that picture but it's a very important Dune and something that you know we want to address with you and we've had
discussions with the uh with one of the abutters the abutter at 76 um with respect to that Dune because it's it's very important so next slide please um just another overview you can see the really see the Dune in in the picture there you can see that large
Dune that looks to be you know almost a story tall in between the two houses um next slide please this is street view um just you can see so part of our um our application as you
as you all have seen I'm sure uh the garage structure there is currently attached to the house via a Breezeway um our plan is to demolish the entire house and the Breezeway and rebuild but to leave the existing Garage in place um
next slide please so this is just a shot um I believe this is we're heading off here to show you the the location of the other houses on the street and how close they are to to the street um just to give an idea of what is uh normal in the
in the neighborhood next slide will be a similar shot a similar but heading north um you can also see right there that that large Dune again next slide please so this is just a snapshot of our existing and proposed
conditions and we'll get into why there's an alternate there and and that's something the board has not seen in the materials we presented so existing conditions there uh coverage is 13.18% proposed is a little bit more at 16.53% in The Plum Island over overlay
District far is 13.3 existing proposed is 15.65% uh for the Plum Island overlay District um front setback is currently 8.1 our original proposal that the board has before them we were increasing in an
attempt to make the the new building as conforming as possible we were trying to increase the setback to the 21.7 which is greater than the 20% or the 20 ft required in the in the piod um the side setback is zero that is because I think
as all all of you are probably aware the garage is built on or actually over the lot line so that's why the side set back comes up at zero and in the prop and in our alternate it will the because because the garage will stay that that that side set back Remains the Same the
side set back of the house um is also remaining depending on the the design uh remaining essentially the same um rear setback wait you mean the the opposite side yes the opposite side the side between us and 76 so that one's staying the same too
it's it's it's very close and it depends I'm going to get into why there's an alternate proposal in in just a minute and that's that changes it a little bit but um the rear set back is to the ocean so it's very large well over the required in any scenario uh bedrooms
Remains the Same at four and the height increases from 21 to 33 ft but within the 35 ft allowed in the piod so why there's an alternate we proposed our original we came up with our original proposal submitted it to the board um
notice this went out to it Butters we had discuss with one of the abuts the butter at 76 on the other side of the Dune um and we've had considerable discussions with them and they expressed a a a very strong concern for the for
the res for the stability and the health of that Dune between the two houses um and so in in the discussions with them they were looking for us to get the house as far away from the Dune as possible our our original plan there was
a pylon that was in about in the I think a few feet into the Dune um the house would have been raised up above the Dune but the Pyon was just a little bit into the dun and they they had concerns with that they had concerns with the construction impact of that and
that it might deteriorate the Z the Dune and so in an effort to come to an agreement that that you know to S satisfy their concerns we also are very concerned with the Doom because it's provides incredible protection for the house um so so we worked with them and
came up with a new plan to slide the house forward thereby reducing the front setback to 12.6 um it still an improvement over the existing 8.1 so we're we're reducing the
N the extent of non-conformity but it allows the corner of the house to come out of the Dune entirely um and so we think that that's we think that's a reasonable solution and and a
good alternative but we wanted to present both to the board to get your thoughts on you know on this compromise that we came up with it with the um with the abutter um I would also point out that the 12.6 is still well within the
norm of the existing houses on the street um okay so next [Applause] slide um these are just the the sections of the bylaw that we're looking for uh relas refunder uh the first section there is allows the board to Grant
special permits for the alteration reconstruction extension or change of such structures and the second section there is catastrophe or demolition allows the board to Grant special permits uh for a non-conforming single or two family residential structure may
be demolished and rebuilt or rebuilt after after destroyed or damaged so we were looking at the first section there demolished and and rebuilt um so those are the two sections whichever the board chooses to proceed under we are of the opinion that you could proceed under
either for this project um but that's that's where we're at on that uh next slide please and the rest of the slides are just showing um a lot of what you already have the existing conditions map you already have and you can probably see better on the one in front of you so
we'll move to the next one this is our original proposal so you can see here that the house the front of the house is 21.7 Ft from the street but uh I'll come over here and just point out to you so right here this pylon you can see is
built into the Dune this 18t line I think Jeff is what we determined is the edge of the Dune yeah I mean the 17t so maybe yeah maybe even the 17t line here but so now if we click on to the oh I no I don't
want to mess anything up here but um on the next picture let's see so we've now moved that so it's at 12.6 and this pylon comes completely out of the Dune even outside the 17t line so that's the reason for the move for the
change in the plan excuse me and what's the U side clearance there now this is 14.4 okay so it's more than the 10 required well it says 13.8 on this one but that's the old one so I got understand
um so uh unless anyone's still looking at that this one you don't have in front of you so please take all the time you need to look at it I apologize uh you may have a I don't know Chrissy did you print out the I print out there so you you may have a smaller size you don't have it in large print but we we can get
that here yeah we have one we have one that says 15.4 from the side is that the old yeah so that's not right this is the new plan so neither one of these are correct correct and I apologize for that we had
a ongoing discussions throughout the the last six weeks yeah oh CH he did get a full sizee one um next slide is there another slide one more oh and then these are just you have these in your packet but I included them
in so these are our elevation drawings showing the house up on the pilings um this is the street view next this is the Ocean View and the next slide is the these are the side
views and I believe that's it yeah okay um the board have any questions for me or for the applicant I'm going to miss the Breezeway I don't know all the hours we spent we did try to satisfy the the
concerns uh from prior hearing um I have just one thought and that's the building inspector's perview but the there's 3.3 ft between the existing garage and
yeah um so I that is I mean not something that I that I um was involved in in the design plan so I would have to ask Al um but also I mean I think to your point it would be the building inspector's purview if it if for some reason that's you know the building inspector says that's that's not allowed
then we would have to address it yeah there are two structures on the same property by the same owner but yeah it just seems a little tight but the fact that the ground plane is open then it's okay um does the board have any questions in the material from the
proposed application uh the bedrooms there was a lot of discussion about that last time and I know the building inspector went out did he go out and do a account or something I guess I guess my question is is four the number that the building inspector gr agreed on the current I I think we saw it advertised
for three one point then two I'm not mistaken yeah was moving around I I believe my my understanding is that the building inspector has agreed that it's four the property is also on the tax card as four and they've been paying taxes as four forever not that that's you know dispositive but it's certainly
I think is informational um and uh to that point also I know that some of the history here was involving the the bedroom in the garage one thing I didn't mention is this plan would make the garage completely just garage space there would be no living area no
bedrooms no kitchens no no even you know living room rooms nothing it's it would just be garage outdoor you know storage space that's it um and the bedrooms would be in the main structure so two things one the assessor card that has
been presented does say um seven rooms and four bedrooms thank you secondly we um in the last go around um
the building inspector had gone out and he had said you need to improve this doorway between the garage and the other space and we made the argument or asked that the plumbing be removed that has spend
up that has been done absolutely okay so those are two things of the results to the last go around that then just ended and did not proceed and here we are now that's the existing condition of the property so with that are are there people in the
audience that would like to speak in favor of the propos you stand up and state your name sorry comments in favor only or any they usually do favors
first first go to favor we do that but if there's anybody that would like to speak please stand up state your name and say your piece and we'll take it in okay thank you my name is Jeff roloffs I'm an attorney with offices in Newport I
represent Tim and Ana Dro to live at 76 Northern Boulevard um as uh the wards Council indicated uh the primary concern that my clients have here is the Integrity of that Dune that Dune has over the years
um become a very important and and sound um robust Dune partly because um the fence in the front prevented people from climbing over it um and my clients and other neighbors have invested a lot of money to replant it
and make sure that it's in good shape so um any construction uh project that compromises that Dune will be substantially more detrimental not only to my clients but to the neighborhood because the Dune serves really important functions so we we've been in
discussions with the wards and their attorney um we do think sliding the building closer to the street uh is consistent with the pad requirements in the sense of um not being closer to the street than the exist existing structure we don't think there's any front setback
issue there um it's the the the topics that we're continuing to discuss with them relate to uh protecting the Dune during construction and after construction so what we're hoping to do between now and the next hearing assuming that this is going to get
continued is to work on construction protocol to ensure that that Dune isn't adversely impacted during construction um it it will be if it if there aren't details in place to ensure that it's not and then in the event there are adverse
impacts during construction if they can be avoided great if they're not and there are some impacts to it um we're looking for a commitment or a condition from the board that would require them to essentially renourish that Doom post construction replant it monitor it to
make sure that those plantings take effect and that so that in the end the Dune is proteced um so again we're continuing those discussions I did submit earlier today some images that I had presented to the planning board last night and maybe just quickly if you you
have copies of these i' take it it looks like yeah so if you go to page four um you'll see a list of our primary concerns at the the top basically what I just went through um the sorts of details that we're continuing to work
with the wordss on and then on the next page um what I did was I overlaid their original Proposal with the existing structure the existing structure is in light blue and the proposed original proposed structure is in brown and that
image I think really highlights the extent to which the original proposal um encroaches on the Dune in a way that the existing building doesn't obviously these are also Conservation Commission issues that we're raising there but again we're working with the wards um they've been uh very cooperative and
working with us and we hope to have the opportunity to continue working with them and hopefully before the next meeting we'll have um protocol and design details that we would be willing to support so to be determined thank you thank
you comments to that uh I guess only question I have is where exactly were you with the Conservation Commission you have not gone through them yet or they usually do more Dunes than we do they do um so that that meeting was last night and they didn't have any real I don't know if
David wants to uh speak to this but they didn't have any real uh discussion last night because DP hasn't yet issued their n uh number or com technical review comment so they open the hearing they gave me the chance to present the slides that I submitted to you they continued
the hearing to uh March hoping to get D's comments so that process is ongoing thank you yeah as as typically stated there's a lot that goes into each proposal and and um we are not the concom we're not
building department um we do listen and hear the arguments and concerns and certainly want to make sure that those concerns are addressed with appropriate people um understanding the dune's importance uh for Jack's comments
where we are more than curious as to what the comcom um finds in their direction if if if we were to make a favorable decision tonight it certainly would have to be contingent or is typically always contingent on concom and any
other department or entity within the town and any deviation from any plans that are presented would then need to come back before us so um understanding you can't do everything at once we do like to have things work in a in a linear order and certainly something
that is um understandably um a concern for another board we would appreciate that being done first um our any um any approvals that we make don't
bear weight on you know conom doesn't care you go to them and say oh I got I got my special permit I got to go big deal right and then we don't want to give you um hope in terms of what um what we're doing here so they're two
separate things certainly in terms of of protocol I would think that the comcom would would specify that um so I'm not trying to pass the buck I think we can we all appreciate and as Jack said we usually don't get as caught up in in Dunes but I think we can
understand the importance of what you're presenting here all right is there anybody else in the audience that would like to speak about the project I just like to add to what just said um I know that be my name
is I'm sorry the record please uh Tim Ros I live at 76 Northern Boulevard and we've been talk with each other rning nights right yes so I would just say that yes we've had had conversations through our
attorneys with the wards as we me and my wife would love to be neighborly with this but I would tell you as you're well aware that we've spent tremendous amount of money and been through this going through this since 2020 and things keep changing and we
hope that something gets built within the guidelines which we would love for that to happen within the guidelines of pyad looking at the plan right now it seems to me that the lock coverage they're not including the garage it's beyond the
20% so that's a concern and we are working with them hoping that everything else is followed correctly right so we want to be neighborly we're here everybody's here we all talk right I think the
these are all the people that are here surround the house I would tell you that well we I specifically always think that people operate in good faith the experience has not been there
and we'll continue to work through that but you know there's rules it's in a very sensitive area it's in a velocity on as you know the garage is staying how that works out with the town so either way uh that should be counted
as part of the coverage there is a bedro in that that space and uh we want to make sure that the house fits in within our neighborhood and and it's the that that as we have as I have followed the rules when we were renovating our house
that it's the same can I just respond that for one sure just to the uh just to the point about the garage being excluded from Far um the far calculation checkl checklist specifically says that detached and attached garages should be shall be
excluded from the calculation of far so that's why it's excluded and also the far requirement in the p p is 25% not 20% either way we're under 20% but just want to make sure that only only under that if you exclude that but there is living space in that garage
notm well you just took the plumming up there's still living space in it okay Under The Proposal the proposed project the garage would be entirely excluded if we didn't ex even if we only excluded the space that is currently parking
which is 545 ft we're still at 18.5% okay so we we um to jump in the middle of this yeah like St stated in the last
hearing every effort to improve a condition of a non non-conforming lot to remove existing pre-existing non-conformities and remedy them back to the piod requirements uh is favorable sure
um anything that is slightly improved is favorable but less favorable so you know the best you can you can do is to say that I've now taken this non-conforming lot that is non-conforming in Frontage and non-conforming in area and I meet every other sing single requirement of
the piod because then that way you're what you're proposing in terms of building by right it would be equal to your neighbor and your next neighbor that they have non-conforming lot sizes they have non-conforming Frontage but
whatever they have and whatever they proposing is within the guidelines of the piod um you know in keeping with the neighborhood so um you know we have in the past considered
what what the adjacent properties and what is going on up down the street in order to figure out what the rights are for all the properties um in an equal sort of fashion the fact that the house is being
moved back from the street um that some might argue that if you moved it back to 20 ft that you would be in keeping with the piod but then you would be creating a space that's not in line and we also like consistency so
the um bylaw has the the line or sentence that says uh or a nearer building line within or in keeping with the nearer building line which means if you take the neighbors existing properties and you draw a line that that's that's the new Frontage the fact
that you're still setting it back 12 feet is better than being 8 fet with cars pulling on out and onto the road so um understanding that youve you've um have had discussions with neighbors that
probably didn't like your first um proposal that you're making an effort to hear what concerns are and you've already changed the plans once um in stating clearly that you all the
requirements of the pi IOD it would be probably an in interest to say that the garage parking spaces are not in but the other spaces are within the calculation okay and they're still within the piod
would be a good thing to present just so I follow that cor you're saying the other area of the garage building yeah okay so if you you know we we've heard concern we've heard argument and again you make the argument that yeah the parking spaces are included but we went
as far as to take the other places that are in there and we've added them to the calculation we're still with under is with keeping of the we're happy to do that I will revise the far check list um yeah um my calculations show that it'll go up to 18.5% which is well under the
25% then um you know we like concom to be resolved the fact that you had a plan the fact that you've you've had a location of the property you've discussed the Dune and the um and putting the piling in the Dune
and the fact that you've now moved it uh seems to be going in a favorable Direction um the building inspector obviously saw the plans he didn't give you any other guidance I don't know if there was any other discussion but um and the only
reason I asked the question about the 3.3 ft is it like not they like do not like things to go through and then go back to the building inspector and then have him to say oops I should fig this out or I should have given you some guidance in the first place so we can add that to our list of things to check on yeah I would just double check
that absolutely um the board have any questions for the application as proposed and as amended before as in front um to address Mr D comment about the living space in the garage seems like the wards have removed the plumbing
as as you noted and as we discussed and uh Mr gett testified that it will only be used for garage purposes car parking storage Etc that's correct if anything was to happen other than that then that would be an enforcement problem not a
zoning problem and you can handle that as it goes and to that point um Al has expressed you know a willingness if if necessary to remove any partitioning walls in the garage to the extent they aren't structural you know if that's somehow a concern that a partitioning
wall is going to lead later become a living space then you know that that can be that can be done as well um he really wants to emphasize that the garage is a garage it will be nothing else in my singular opinion the effect
of calling the building inspector to enforce something having the building inspector arrive at the property having writing a letter to that action needed to be taken having that action being taken the process of enforcement has proven itself out once sure so um
understand concerns for for rentals and additional bedrooms but there is an enforcement process and it has played itself out and so it's not as much of a concern as it was previously I don't think that we're that much concerned about uh the garage space
as we are just the whole thing fitting in within the rules of piad I think we're here CU we're not going to go outside of that or asking for some special consideration so I think that we're want the the house to fit into within the neighborhood right we don't
want to we want to make sure that it goes through conservation properly and everything followed like it's supposed to be and and we're working through the side stuff again we're looking to be good neighbors and I appreciate where we're at right now but that hasn't been
the situation for the past 5 years and even though we're speaking tonight about what we might be working towards we don't have anything in writing nothing can change I mean to be honest with you
we don't even know if this house can be positioned in this place once it gets through the state and conservation so we we would ask that it's you know based on the experience and how much we've been
we had spend for the past years back and forth with this that it's much more thorough when we're coming through here because we can talk about this but there still needs to be studies done and what's going on with this kid you know
it's got to go through conservation and it's got to go through State and get the notes of what's going on so for us to talk about something that I'm not sure what's going to happen and then things change you know there's three foot of space that's a fire issue there's whole whole bunch of
things we'd love to work with the wars and and I think that we'd all but I think that we were understanding what the experience is as neighbors and our cost involved right so I'd like to see front of the board
that we have stuff that is real that we can talk about real things and I think that we're you know a few steps ahead of us us supporting something that's not
complete Point Tak I will say that um a proposed project for a non-conforming lot in which the only non-conformities are size of the lot and the frontage are hard to deny yeah I'm
not saying I'm not I'm not saying be denied what I'm saying is I needed to be complete not understood aru I'm just making I'm making the point of where and and giving the application some guidance and understanding what you're saying and the second point would be is that I
would take your point as being well taken is that the Bo gets frustrated when things change change at the last minute and keep morphing this this problem site because it's been here numerous times and it's had numerous issues and it's taken a lot to
understand it yeah um gets a bad WP for that but it is and things may have happened in the past that may not have been exactly what uh how they should have been um I think board and I probably asked for a motion that we continue and that you submit
uh the final plan and if it takes going through concom first to do that then we would appreciate that um and again even if we do approve something concom has it you would have to come back before us and so the time delay really isn't a time delay if if
the steps are worked out in sequence understood so hearing what what is being asked um I'm going to ask for a motion that we continue to next month yep that you hopefully can get before concom or get a
re a redrafted plan and make the existing to the proposed for all the conditions of the piod extremely clear yeah um and then we can we can pick it up at that point that's
previously said if if your house is proportional to the size of the lot you know it's yeah that gives you the same rights as your neighbors do for the size of their lot and what they can do yeah uh so and as attorney rof had pointed out we you know we we've been in
discussions continuing to discuss right up until a couple hours before this meeting this you know this morning was I received not in any way saying that he was late to deliver it at all it's just this morning I received a list of of specific items they would actually like on our plan and I told attorney rofs
that we will absolutely work on getting that so we include you know we'll work with them work out what the final conditions are final notations are that they want on the plan and that we you know whatever we can agree to and then we will include those on the plan and provide a new plan to the board um you
know with with everything done um we would have obviously liked to have done that prior to this meeting but as the negotiations have continued on it just you know we weren't able to get it in before the before the meeting um but that's fine yeah just you know it's it's uh all volunteers we all take our time
on I'm on the end over yeah so I know where you're coming from getting stuff at the last minute always doesn't get reviewed there so if probably if one of the concerns here is construction protocol if iction certainly appreciate being an architect but is out of our
purview you might ask and go meet the building inspector and have the building inspector provide his guidance on that to uh satisfy the issue because we're we're not going to make construction protocols what you need I'm I'm on well
that was one of the things that was requested here in terms of making sure that um you know that there are some outlined procedures that are going to be agreed to like no Workman there shall be
a a a s uh snow drift fence set up so that no workers can access or walk on the duns during construction I think that be conservation I'm just saying it's not our purview if it's your interest one of the ways to do that is the building
inspector deals with construction and he might be able to to help that comcom will certainly have theirs I don't know if comcom Chrissy delivers uh an outline of these are comcom things that will be followed during
construction yes in the order of conditions under the special conditions at the end of the document they list special conditions yeah I think that we feel that that would be part of the plan we're not I'm just thank you sure we brought up here and I'm just making sure that it's not expected that we're going
to come up with some um if something is presented to us we can we can comment on it but it it's not our Authority Under the bylaws to to completely agree with the stability of the Doom that's of utmost importance to conation yeah so is
there a motion to have for Contin um I'll make a motion to continue the meeting on March 20th here uh to allow discussions from comcom and new plans to be updated all right time dat Place March 20th here 7:30 great there a second I'll second
that motion all in favor hearing this continue I should asked this before but was there any chance the board wanted to do a site visit and if so could we schedule it this month instead of after the next meeting um I think it at getting us so we no we can't do it because we can't
all show up at the same time in the same place and be together and discuss something I think we've all been there on we each can do a driveby yeah yeah that's fine people wanted to go walk around the property if we saw some strangers probably understand why we
can't all sure okay thanks station is doing the Salk so if you wanted to thank you thank you yeah someone wanted to T on see yes
okay or something planning asked me to email Walter because Walter desired to do a top coat for Rion uh reasons at the site uh there's a requirement in the zoning decision that was actually approved in 2021 that
states Walter has to provide a bond of $10,000 to the town so Walter emailed us and asked how we wanted that um cash small bill all right as part of the zoning approval
decision dated 4121 and stamped in by the town Clark on 42221 for the Cricket Lane project under section 4 decision and conditions under condition 20 in part reads in the event the applicant desires to stabilize the road wide roadway by installing a binder coat
after excavation and loaming of the Wetland replacement areas but before planting and seeding of the Wetland replacement area the applicant must provide a payment of $10,000 to be held by the board as a bond to ensure the completion of any plantings within the a mentioned 6 months time frame Walter
says he's willing to submit that and wanted to know how we wanted it a passbook account or just a check to a 53g account now Martha suggested I discuss it with you she said passbook accounts haven't been used in a long
time so she said that that's not a good idea and I suggested getting the town accountant involved because she would have to set up the 53g count y so why can't we just get a regular Bond like a construction Bond cost like 100 bucks
for $110,000 Bond we want to do whatever planning board does whatever Conservation Commission does we want to do what everybody else does which is standard for the town so it sits in the same place as other bonds doesn't get lost doesn't get
confused um doesn't get misconstrued and the same person that deals with it deals with those other board bonds deals with ours that's that's what I would recommend okay we've never had we've never had a 40b before and we've never had a bond so
we just want everybody else is doing do what everyone else is doing farm farm okay cell Farms so he had to do a bond and he just went to a planning board meaning to ask for a reduction in it so I can let planning
know to do what they do for how do they receive their bond so that they they officially hold it and cause the least burden to the applicant and the least burden to the town okay bid bonds performance bonds payment bonds there all kinds of
bonds true and we don't want to have to open a bank account to receive funds and then get charged for it because we have insufficient balances and stuff like that no it should just be a piece of paper like a like almost like a check you know like an insurance policy something happened there you go yeah
understood but we don't want something new correct for Town accountant for anybody in the town to have to deal with or try to figure out very good that interest bearing account yeah okay uh just a question about V Didi v um if he
makes equal siiz wats does he still need a variance for the second one and how and then what's the hardship they'll present that but yes he he still needs separate variances for each he's assuming that this is kind of a
done deal if he does what he does because then comes in there's no hardship are we yeah I mean we can't discuss it outside the meeting so let's for that question for the moment and is there a
motion toour so I motion toour second all