To the flag of the United States of America to the republic for which it stands. One nation indivisible and justice for all >> in accordance with Mass General law chapter 38 section 20th. This meeting is
being recorded. The first hearing is a public hearing. I should get there. Um I'll read it there. an applicant of Mario Guinness. Is it Dennis? Denise >> Dennis
>> Dennis >> and Wobin Mortgage Company LLC owner for a variance to allow the storage of 12 buses and construction of a 7,000 ft² building with small office and bus storage as mandated by article 5 section
51 subject properties located at 463 American Legion Highway Westport Mass shown on assessor's map 66 lot 20. So, the way this is going to work is I'm going to have the petitioner come and provide whatever information they believe is pertinent. The the zoning
board members will then ask questions. After the zoning board has finished asking all questions, I'll open them up to the public. Voting on this will be myself, Raj Mard, Cynthia Kazekitz, Eric Catino,
uh Kevin Mcoff as our new alternate, and Janice Day. So that that will be the voting members. Uh in order for for this petition to be granted, it will require four or five members. So with having said that uh before the before I start
um there what you didn't there there's no letter from you. >> There's no letter from me on it. They somebody came to my office asked me about it. I brought it up on the screen. It's in a second res uh agricultural residential agricultural district. >> Okay. Okay.
>> I basically verbally told him at that time. >> Okay. So, there were no letter problems. >> There was no letters. >> Okay. No. >> I do have one question before we start this. It's listed as 463 American Legion Highway, but when I look on the on the GIS map, it doesn't appear to be anywhere close to the highway. What's
the >> So, I I I would agree with that, Mr. Chairman. >> Excuse me. Um it it that's the address that's been utilized for the property, but it doesn't front on American Legion Highway. >> Okay. There's there's a private way uh to allow access to this property. It's
situated quite a distance off. >> It is quite >> from the highway itself. Yes. >> Yeah. Because it kind of it perked me because I said, "Oh, well, it's it's right there. I can see where 463 American Legion Highway is and there's already >> 15 20 30 buses." >> I would parked there, but that's not
there. You had it's the property is is is correct. >> Quite a quite a distance. Um >> if if you're able to look at the site plan, there's a um a site map on the vicinity map, excuse me, right hand side, and you can see the site where it's shaded in and you can see the 12
foot wide way um and how it leads off of American Legion Highway. So, I would agree with you. The first time that I went to go take a look at the property, I drove 10 or 15 times trying to figure out where it was until I realized that it was accessed by this way. >> Okay. Go ahead. >> Thank you, Mr. Chairman, members of the
board. For the record, sir, you're going to be showing us that's the lane way, right? But that's not the public agenda where the locus is >> for what it was. >> I I did not have one to to um show up for the public. I thought that each board member would have a copy of the
plan in front of them. So again, for the record, attorney Thomas Con represent the al uh the applicant. Uh we're here before you this evening uh requesting a variance to allow for the storage of uh 12 buses in a residential/aggricultural
zoning district. Um as well as the construction of a 7,000 ft building that would allow uh the applicant to store these buses uh on the inside undertake just minor repairs to his buses and and uh do cleaning. Uh, as we've already discussed, this property, I understand
the address is a bit deceiving, indicating that it's 463 American Legion Highway. Um, but this isn't a piece of property that you can see actually from the roadway when you're driving past it. It's accessed by a 12t wide right of way and the property itself is situated considerably
off of the highway. Um, as I understand it, as as the information has been relayed to me, this property has historically uh been utilized in the past for the storage of construction vehicles. Um and in the past there may have been some either farming or keeping of farm animals at the property. Uh
property is quite large uh over 300,000 almost 400,000 square ft. Um it indicates on the plan that there's a small wetland area off in the rear of the property. Um all the activities uh that the applicant would be doing would be kept in significant difference away
from that wetland activity would be up towards what I call the front portion of the property near where the 12t wide right of way is. Uh we would suggest that overall the the use itself is is fairly benign. Um there aren't going to be uh significant traffic in and out of the property. There'll be a few workers
there um on a daily basis. Depending upon how many buses are running, um you may have a bus trip leaving from the property in the morning and and returning in the evening. Um depending upon the type of trip. Um but again, this isn't a plan to to have a a what
I'll call an oversized bus depot at the property. He's not planning to have 20, 30, 40 buses there. U Mr. Dennis is been in the busing industry for several decades. Um he has significantly scaled down his business over the years and is just looking to move his base of
operations here. Uh and again run his business from this location. Um again, the reason why we're here before this board is because this is in a residential/aggricultural zoning district. It's not a use that's otherwise allowed, but I think as this board is aware, your zoning bylaw does
allow this board to grant a use variance. We've got a fairly unique piece of property. When again, I would suggest that it's extremely oversized being nearly 400,000 square ft. Uh it's unique in in terms of where it's located um and how you access the property. So,
it presents some challenges in terms of uh developing and utilizing this property. Uh we would suggest that the proposed use um is fairly benign in nature. Um, again, this isn't going to be a large-scale commercial operation. Um, this is something that, um, again,
Mr. Denise is gonna kind of in the swan song of his career run his bus operation, um, out of this property. And again, 12 buses is all that we're seeking to store there. >> So, since you're asking for a variance, a variance requires hardship. >> Understood. >> What's the hardship?
>> Again, I think it goes to the um the shape and size of this piece of property. You got an oversized piece of property again that's that's I won't call it landlock but it's very difficult to access. Um >> it's very difficult to access. Then how are you going to get 12 buses down there? >> Well, it's difficult to access for some
other type of development. It's not difficult for Mr. Denise. I mean, he's looked at the property and he feels comfortable that he's able to get his buses to and from the property, but it's not something that you'd be able to utilize and develop for what I'd call a more of a retail commercial type of use. So I I think be where this property is
situated and given its size and its location, it presents some very limited uses that you'd be able to um to undertake at this property. >> You could make that into housing. >> You potentially could make that into housing. >> So therefore, >> or farming >> or farming.
>> It's pretty level. I I've been on the property. I actually looked at to buy the property years ago. So, it's suitable for it would be suitable for farming and it would be suitable for a houseite as well. Um, and I think that 12 I've driven down that road and it is
a little it would it's a little precarious. Um, I had a very small vehicle and had a hard time getting down there and I just I don't see how a bus would actually get down there. I have a mini tip. >> After um uh after after looking through
this, I actually called our lawyer to discuss this. Uh he was going to be here tonight, but he couldn't make it. Um what you're actually asking us to do is you're asking us to reszone your property >> for commercial. That's what you're asking us to do. You're asking us to zone your property commercial. I'm
asking to I'm asking for this board to grant a use variance which this board is authorized to do. >> Yes. But if you look through the allowed use variances for for residential, this doesn't apply to that. >> So what you're asking us to do is you are asking us to make this a commercial
piece of property >> once we proper way to do that and there's a way to do this. I understand. >> You go to the planning board and you say, "I want to make this property commercial." >> I understand how the process for reszoning a piece of property, Mr. Chairman,
>> but this your zoning bylaw specifically authorizes this board to grant a use variance, which means that you can allow a use in a zoning district that is not allowed under the table of uses. >> Um, no. No,
>> we only can allow uses that are allowed in the use table. If you look at the first paragraph, it says if it's not listed in the use table, it's not allowed. >> Okay. But section 2.5.3 of your zoning bylaw states that this board can grant a variance from the terms of the zoning bylaws, including a
use or activity not otherwise permitted in the district. So, this is a use or activity that is not permitted in this district. This board has the authority to grant a variance to allow a use or activity that is not allowed in a zoning district.
>> If we if we find that there's reasons that that property is different than other properties, >> I I I would agree with you, Mr. Cino, that that the board still has to make the findings in order to determine as to whether or not you think it's appropriate to grant a due to topography, soil,
>> but this board does have the authority to grant a use variance. That is correct. >> So it's it's not a reszoning. I'm certainly not asking for a reasoning. I'm asking >> once we a variance on the property. It runs with the property. So effectively we're reszoning it.
>> It runs with the property. >> I'm I'm not asking to reszone the property. This board has the authority to grant a use variance and that is what I'm asking for this board. >> I understand that. But a use variance because it's a variance will run in perpetuity with the property. So, if we
allow a commercial use on this property for this specific use, it's going to be hard to prevent other uses later on. >> I I would disagree just because each um petition that comes before this board stands on its own merits.
>> Can I you you sort of truncated your what your your description of the zoning bylaw. You only kind of used the part that you liked. So, let me let me read you the whole part. Uh the zoning bylaw. Uh uh all right.
Variances to hear and decide petitions for variances and to grant upon appeal or petition with respect to particular land or by structures of variance from the terms of the zoning bylaw, including use or activity not otherwise permitted, which is what you came up with in the
district where the land or structure is located. where the board specifically finds that owing to circumstances relating to soil condition, shape or topography of such land or structures but not affecting generally the zoning district in which is located a little
enforcement of the bylaw would involve substantial fire chip financial or otherwise to the petitioner. So what you what you neglected was you can do this if >> right >> there is something to do with the land that you could not use it for something
else. >> So you have to demonstrate that that you have a hardship on this land that makes it so that you cannot use it for things that would be allowed under this bylaw. >> So m Mr. Chairman I I didn't intentionally leave out anything as part
of my presentation. What I was pointing out is that this board has the authority to allow a use that is not permitted in the table of uses if the board finds that it is satisfied that it is if the board has been satisfied. Okay. In terms
of the requirements for a variance. So I didn't leave that portion out from my presentation. You were just saying that I was reszoning the land and that that's what I was asking the board to do. That is not what I'm asking the board. Actually, I actually talked to a lawyer about this and they he agrees that that what we would be doing would be
essentially reszoning that property. >> That's the effect of it. >> That's the effect. >> It is the effect is you would be allowing use at a piece of property that would not otherwise be allowed to. But if somebody else came before this board and wanted to do something different, they would also need to get permission from this board and that doesn't mean
that you would have to allow it. So it does it it is not a a a blanketed reszoning of the property to a commercial use. Slippy. Yes, it actually is. Once we allow >> once we allow this type of operation, then it it essentially becomes zoned for
business. >> No, no, it doesn't. >> Yeah, actually it does. That's according to our lawyer. The other thing that >> I'm not certainly not looking to argue with you on it, but we just have a disagreement as to as to the law and how it applies here. >> You can talk to lawyer about that. But in the other the other aspect of this we
we all have to be aware of is that >> were we were we to grant this we're not granting this for the for the applicant. We're granting this to the property. >> Yeah. >> Which is which is in perpetuity. In other words,
>> I I understand that the variance runs with the land. It goes on the land and therefore the land always has that >> uh uh has that capability >> the capability to be used for the storage of 12 buses. That's what the land would have the capability of of doing not for the not for the capability
of doing anything under the under the commercial bylaw. >> So let's go with the regard like but you you still haven't met met the substantial hardship or the shapeography of the land. you haven't given us any evidence other than the fact that it's a weird piece of property tucked away
>> uh off a a 12 foot wide laneways that I don't see how that is either a substantial hardship for the owner who is a bank um and why can't that land be used for something else? It was being it was
being marketed as for sale a few years ago. was being marketed as a be a wonderful place to build a home. Okay. So that means at least one other person decided that it would be a great place the realer decided to be >> and it wasn't sold utilized to be to build a home. No
>> just because somebody marketed it for that purpose and I think the the fact that it was never utilized for that purpose >> but it's only been it's only >> they give you some answers shows >> that it was in fact used for agricultural purposes for which it is
owned and In the in the past it may have been. >> No, it not may have been. It says the property was previously utilized for agricultural purposes >> and the storage of construction vehicles done without permission from the from the zoning board >> after that. So if there was anything
being stored while the previous owner owned the property >> had nothing to do with with the current owner of the property. So I I would hope that that wouldn't be held against the current owner of >> No, it's not. I'm just saying that you can't say it had been already been used for storing for storing construction equipment because that was actually
>> but the question is is what's the history of the use of the land. So I try >> uh could we say what's >> I tried to get as much information >> the land >> I'm sorry >> you use the word legal >> I'm >> prior to what you said what's the legal use of the land
>> I think I think they wanted to see how the land had been utilized in the past so I tried to answer the question based on the information I could gather for the property okay >> it says okay agricultural use >> right and and and I think there were commercial vehicles that had been stored there as well whether or not they had
received permission or Not. I can't speak to that. I was just trying to tell the board >> if agricultural use and they had agricultural vehicles on it, then that's perfectly acceptable. >> Okay. I'm I'm certainly not looking to argue with this board. I I filed an application with the board. >> Okay. I'm trying to answer the board's
questions, >> right? Yes. And our biggest issue is is still going to be in order to have a variance, you need a hardship. >> Okay. >> Understood. But but I I I I guess I don't understand. You know, we filed the application. Okay. We come in in good faith. We're certainly not looking to
argue with the board. We may not agree on all the legal points, but I I I don't understand. There seems to be some level of hostility at the applicant. He's just trying to put this land to use. >> There's no hostility. It's a matter certainly seems like we're waiting for your presentation. Well, I gave the
presentation to show uh Are you done? >> What the hardship is, >> what the hardship and what >> I answered the question, I understand as to whether or not the board may like it, but there had been a series of questions, so I've been trying to answer them. Okay. So, unique conditions. Let's just repeat that for us. What's the
unique conditions of this property that makes it you've already you already repeated the conditions that I presented to the board? >> So, the only ones you have is that >> those are the ones that that I have. The ones that I presented. >> All right. Uh >> substantial hardship. Anything else? I
mean, >> any other questions? Anything from uh I'll open it to the uh audience. uh come to the microphone and name and address. >> I don't think we have any other
um memos or letters regarding this. Okay. >> Uh thank you, Mr. Chairman. Thanks for letting me speak. My name is Dave Green. Um my wife and I body over 32 M. So basically our property is >> right across there >> directly abuts
>> exactly where the 7,000 square foot building would be put. Okay. So it's our backyard a little bit of woods and it's right there. Okay. So when we bought this property bought about two years ago you know we did our research and everything and you know we bought it because it's residential. We both work
many years for the state as well as government and you know we're at our spot where we want to you know retire nice and quiet and West Point. We love the town. like that. So you know basically with this bunk bus company even though if the same thing if the
variance is granted commercial um the construction of 7,000 people building the property and only 12 buses I know even if they say the stipulations are so for we all know that 12 buses back here
prior there was work being done to that property you know it was in good fa but we could still get and everything like that. You know, was great because we're hoping there was going to be a farm and stuff like that. I didn't, you know, even though it's not ours, but with buses. My point is we could hear the
machines with buses going daytime, nighttime, you know, the fumes, the exhaust, just putting that uh building pouring all that concrete, you know, where's all that where's all that drainage going to go? Probably our property. Okay.
um the noise of buses going back and forth, that nuisance, the exhaust fumes, you know, we don't want to deal with any of that. You know, we got a family back there. It's nice and quiet. We got phenomenal neighbors and just buses going back and forth. You know, we have them, you know, we oppose it. We
research the company. It is a commercial bus company. I kind of like Bonanza bus company and I, you know, do not want my neighbor to be Bonanza bus company. We also have concerns that with a bus company back there that the value of our property would go down. Um so even if
stipulations are in place, you know, if you guys rent a variance and stipulations are put in place with respect to the hours of operation and stuff like that, you know, we basically we don't want the headache because there's going to be stipulations, but we don't want the headaches of having to
call the town and say, "Hey, this is going on, that's going on, and so forth." you know, I don't not sure if you understand what I'm saying. So, basically, you know, we adamantly oppose um this variance to pass and even if it's passed and pass the stipulations,
um respectfully, we will appeal to the Supreme Court, you know, the land court, whatever is deemed necessary, you know, because, you know, we just don't want that. We came to this town for, you know, the community, the quietness and and this wildlife back. We love it and
just can't have. So, Thank you. >> Okay. Thank you. >> I live right next to the entrance to this property. I lived here my whole life. Um, >> so you're actually at 463. >> Absolutely. I knew all those people that own the house in the first place. >> Electricity.
>> Oh, name and address. Name for the record. >> Eric Py 479 American Legion High. >> Okay. Right next door. Okay. >> Okay. Um, what gets me the most is I walk the lane way today. I know the lane way. I lived on the lane way when I was a kid. Okay.
>> It's a physical impossibility if a bus is going down and the bus is going up. 12 ft. I measured it today. >> Physical impossibility to coordinate it. Um, another thing, I have a business. I had to get a certificate to say I had a
business because I got a commercial property. And if I lived on a residential property, I wouldn't even be able to get that certificate. I did it by the rules >> the way it's supposed to be. Um, I oppose it because it's just it doesn't
feel right. It doesn't feel good. It feels like there's something else later is going to go on. It just I oppose it. >> Okay. Excuse me. I have a question for you. Uh it seems to me I've seen buses
out by your property. Yep. >> Do you have buses or No, they have buses. >> That's my That's my brother's. >> Okay. So, it's your brother's. >> There's going to be 22 buses there >> and and that is a commercial area. So, yes, there's not a problem with that.
>> Um but do you know if if uh if his buses are are also all legal and and so forth in terms >> Yeah. Yeah. Do we um there was a big speculation when Tremley's was doing Westport and it was a big meeting and stuff. >> Um and then now Tremleyy's is out of it
and Amro moved in cuz they get the contracts because they're right near the edge of the road, >> right? >> So it makes it easier to operate. >> You know what I mean? >> That going down that lane way. I mean the guy that bought the house was going to build the house. >> He didn't want to deal with that. That's why
>> it's a tough it's a long road. >> Thank you, >> Mr. Chairman, um based off of feedback that I've heard from the board, um this evening, I was able to communicate with um the owner of the property, um with the board's permission, we'd ask uh that we'd be allowed to withdraw the petition.
>> Are you withdrawing without prejudice or with prejudice? >> Without prejudice, sir? >> No prejudice. Uh before we do that, I'm going to continue if there's any other uh comments from the audience.
>> My name is Kevin Long. Um I own 26 Matthew which also directly abuts this lot that we're discussing. Um, I used to live at 8 MC Court, so I'm very familiar with the neighborhood and everything that's uh, you know, operated over
there, the setting. Uh, as um, you know, Dave had stated, if I'm standing where there actually is a foundation currently on the lot that I purchased at 26 for Katy Court, I can see right through the trees and it is a nice flat piece of land, but it you're going to see it
clear as day. Um, you're going to hear it, you're going to smell it probably. And, um, you know, I bought this property with my wife probably about a year and a half ago. I've been trying, you know, as a goal to get back to my sport. I love living in Westport. Have a lot of family in Westport and we're
trying to build our first home, maybe start a family. That's definitely not, you know, something I would want. You know, I probably would have reconsidered purchasing Glock if, you know, that was back there. Um, it's 2,000 ft away from
the business district, you know, 2500 ft away from 177. So, it's it's way off the the zone. And um I think that if this was granted, it would set a precedent for other people to operate
commercially, you know, on residential land. So that's all I have. Thank you. >> Okay. Thank you. Any uh anyone else? >> I would like to give the applicant one one shot at u
trying to define for us what he considers the hardship that we should be considering. He's already discussed that a couple >> Well, he hasn't said it. Yeah. >> I'd like to hear it again, too. >> Okay. >> Is is my request to withdraw not going to be taken up, Mr. Chairman?
>> Yes. But when I closed it, yes, it will be. >> Yes. >> But I want for the record what you Hey, >> but if I'm withdrawing if I'm withdrawing the petition, >> but we haven't voted on it yet. >> No, I understand that. But if there's a request to do it, then why why go >> go through this? I I presented
>> we'll take >> my my position. >> We'll take it up. >> Well, he doesn't want to answer. So, >> well, the question is has been answered and it's been it's been repeated. >> May I said I wanted to give you an
opportunity to state your your hardship and if if there's no more to say, then that's fine. My position is is that this property is unique in the sense that it's situated a significant different excuse me distance
from the highway. It makes it very difficult from a development purpose. The land has not been utilized um or at least legally utilized. It may have been in the past few years um but it seems to have been utilized without permission from the board. It may have been marketed in the past as a single family
uh for single family development but it was never developed in that uh capacity. It's a large parcel of land again situated considerable distance off the highway. Um and this individual is looking to put this property to use. We generate uh revenue for this board's uh
for this board's tax roles. Um and again I th those are the reasons as stated before and stated again. >> Right. Okay. Any other uh if there no other comments I'll entertain a motion to close the hearing. >> I'll make a motion to close the hearing.
>> I have a second. >> Second. >> Second. All >> in favor? I'd like to say something. >> Yeah. >> Okay. >> My name is Dan. I live at 20 MC Court. >> Sorry. Are you sure this off already? >> No, it's not. >> So, my name is Dan Fry. I live at 20
Mati Court. I also don't want this there. Um, as the board said, you're going to be zoning this basically as commercial property. The question I would have is how far back is this piece property going to be located? What, 2,000 ft off the main road off of 177? I'm no civil engineer, but if you're
going to put commercial property back there, you have to have a road that's town approved or basically city approved, which is going to be 20 foot wide. Where's that all runoff going to go? Then you have to have fuel storage out there. What if that leaks? What if you have a potential fire out there? Got
to get fire engine out there. What are you going to do for water out there? Going to have to have sewer out there. What are you going to do there? I'm desenting against it. >> Okay. Thank you. Do I have a motion to close the hearing and a second? All in favor to close the hearing?
>> Yes. >> I >> I >> I That's a So I have a uh a request to withdraw the petition from the petitioner. I'll read it. Thomas Kllerin Kllerin. >> Killer. >> Kellerin. um for the petitioner uh request to
withdraw the petition regarding the property located at 463 American Legion Highway currently pending before the zoning board of appeals without prejudice signed Thomas Kellerin 21126. I make a motion to grant the petition
the to withdraw the motion to withdraw the petition from the petitioner. Do we have a second? >> Second >> discussion. No. Okay, since we have a motion and a second, I'll take a vote. All in favor of granting the uh uh request to
withdraw the petition. >> I I >> I >> I it's unanimous. So, um u since it is without prejudice, you can reapply at any time. you know, if you if you if you come up with, you
know, uh >> understood, >> you know, more information that would, you know, that would essentially uh uh alleviate our concerns about the um uh the variance, the uh requirements. >> Understood. Thank you very much.
>> Thank you. Yep. No. Come on. I'm going to go down and get >> Roger. Just go down and get some water. >> Yeah. Yeah. Kevin's on the side. Are you okay?
>> Yeah. Dancing at 6:30, not 7:15. Mommy didn't pick up yet. She'll be all right. Oops. >> The two call rule when they call twice. >> Pick her up. >> The phone.
>> Okay. Okay. The second hearing, actually the second third hearings are both have to do with um Hbridgeidge Road. We're going to take these separately. The first is a continuation hearing on the administrative appeal of serious business incorporated applicant Kendall D. trip owner from a letter issued by
the building commissioner zoning enforcement officer that the applicant is operating its commercial business in a residential agricultural district in violation of zoning bylaws article uh okay with a 16 section five the subject
property is located at uh uh zero hickbridgeidge road westport Massachusetts is shown on m on assessor's map 55 lots 35 through 36 again this is continuation. Um, since this is a
uh oops administrative appeal, an administrative appeal and again um those voting on this will be myself, Raj Manard, Cynthia Kazko, Jerry Kazenko, Janice Day, and Kevin Mcoff and uh again
this is it requires four four votes in the affirmative in order to grant the administrative appeal. Now, an administrative appeal, the only thing that we uh that that we are concerned about is
is did the zoning enforcement officer correctly administer the zoning bylaw? It's either a yes or no. either the zoning the zoning enforcement office sent if you were here for the other one sent a letter to uh the plaintiff
the petitioner I'm sorry and I'll I'll read it again after a recent visit to your property on on Hicksbridge Road assessor's map 55 l six it was uh a notice that serious business landscaping and firewood has
been allowed to use a portion of property to operate their business this is a violation of Westport zoning bylaws specifically noted were the following. Up to 12 pieces of equipment on the site and stack of cut trees. These activities constitute commercial use not permitted within the residential district which is
a violation of zoning bylaws. You are hereby order to desist. So the only thing that we are concerned about with this petition is did the zoning enforcement officer Elsoua correctly administer the uh the bylaw. It's either
yes or no. So uh in this case uh and we had again this is a we did a site visit um whatever week or so ago uh in order to look at the property to see u uh to
see uh how it's being used. Um one thing one question I have is we you talked about the stack of cut trees. Where are the trees coming from? >> The property. >> The property. >> They originated on the property. So you cut trees down and that's what's there.
Ralph, that's not a violation of of zoning, is it? >> Not if they got them from there. No. >> Okay. So that part of it is fine. >> Up to you had 12 pieces of equipment on site. U those are equipment that you use in your business. >> We do. We we
>> business that's offsite. >> Yes. >> Okay. >> We did use quite a bit of it to clear the land, but definitely, you know, we were restoring. Uh so that constitute running a business on residential property.
>> We're we're not contesting that part, Mr. Chairman. There was a mis mistaken belief that the whole property is zoned commercial. In fact, it's only a portion of the propert, but it's it's a little corner up in the
up towards uh up towards 88. >> That's right. Um as uh you know the building commissioner indicated perhaps he wasn't aware the the logs were cut from the property but uh so that part you know we don't think is a violation
but uh and there was a mistaken belief that it was commercial and and vehicles could be stored there >> but we don't challenge that commercial vehicles can be legally stored in a residential zone. I we're not
challenging the building commissioner on that. We filed that appeal be mainly because uh you know the building commissioner's letter indicates you have you know 30 days to leave. >> Yes. >> And as you know we file for a variance
which we hope >> uh you know will allow the the property the business to stay there. Um but uh we're not challenging that you know it's an as of as of right. >> Okay. So, can we dispense with uh with
you're not you're not arguing that the zoning enforcement officer was correct in his interpretation of the bylaw? >> No, we're not arguing that. We mainly file this appeal because if we we don't think if we have to leave if you don't
grant the variance that 30 days um which you know M Mr. Souza uh indicated uh that's just customarily what he does as I understand it. But as you can imagine, trying to find another location in the middle of winter, 30 days wouldn't be
enough time. So we mainly filed the appeal to get more time if we needed it and we understand from Mr. Souza that we would need to come to this board to ask for that. >> We have u your next one is a variant. So I'd like to just dispense with it. Is
there any other questions that go ahead >> for the record? I I just think we should put in the record that he he is not a resident of that property, >> right? >> Because that makes a difference. >> It makes a difference. Uh and the second thing uh is that um I have to agree with
with the last statement. Uh when we acted on this uh to uh evict them from Sodom Road, I had made a suggestion. I don't think it went into a form of a
motion to allow them till June 30th because I knew that it was not reasonable to try to move that operation. But in addition to that, the property was going to be changing hands in at the end of June. So I felt there
was no uh problem with keeping it there. >> But that was the Sodom Road. >> Yeah. From the Sodom Road, right? But I'm saying if they had had till June 30th, maybe they wouldn't have to be doing this one thing. They wouldn't have to be rushing to get over there. But uh
but I think there's no question that that the uh uh zoning enforcement officer did the right thing. >> Well, so does anybody have any questions? So I'd like to wrap this one up so we can get to the variance part of this. Is there any of the are there any
comments from uh uh from the public? No, >> I guess we should we did vote on it and we did I think we did give him to June. >> No, we gave we gave the beginning of the year. >> Oh, yeah. You're right. >> It was right. we give them 90 days and then it was like well just give them to
>> So I would say that I agree with Jerry that I think Ralph did the correct thing but I also would like if we still have to he hear the variance and that may or may not get approved. So are you requesting that we give you more than 30 days to get out of there?
>> Yes. I mean, I I think what would make the most sense is that you table a decision on the appeal, hear the variance, and then if we if you grant the variance, the appeal is moot. If you don't grant the variance, then we could have a discussion of of what amount of
time. I mean, we'd be asking for at least 6 months in order to move, you know, this operation. There's just not very many places you could move it to, especially in the middle of winter. you know, it would be an impossibility to do it within 30 days.
>> Well, it's under snow right now. >> Um >> and I I know we wanted to do it this way, but I think it I mean I think when >> does it make sense to to to finish it after the variance or do we just say we'll give them or we just talk about how many day how >> No, we have to we have to actually close
this make a decision and move on. >> Okay. >> We we can't. I guess we need Should we talk about allowing more than 30 days given the fact that it's the middle of winter and it's under a lot of snow? >> Yes. Uh but before we do that, we need
to um we need to if there's no other question, then we need to close the hearing to discuss that. >> Okay. >> The only question I would have would be have you have you completely vacated Sodom Road? is there's no commercial vehicles there
>> because if there isn't there's no need to extend anything. >> But this doesn't this is not a SOM road. This is he's got four or five vehicles. Sorry, was it >> was three or four vehicles >> on on H bridge >> if it would depend if you count the
trailers or not. Those would add up pretty quick, >> right? So, you're just finding a place for >> everything's very big >> for everything's big, but it's not it's not a it's not a big fleet. >> Um, it's it's probably I did sell off a
lot of stuff. Um, just because I didn't have a place to go essentially. >> Um, it's probably eight or 10 vehicles. >> Well, there's only when I was there, there was only three or four there. >> There's I think there was four and then maybe six trailers. It might have been under snow.
>> Something like that. >> Yeah. Okay. >> A couple pieces of >> Okay. Um I'll entertain a motion to close a hearing. So >> move to close the hearing. >> I have a second. >> Second. >> All in favor say I.
>> I. All oppose. No. >> Okay. Um I I think even the lawyer agrees. It's pretty obvious that uh that Ralph correctly administered the the the bylaw. So therefore I think it's pretty obvious uh uh that
uh that we cannot grant this u petition. However, we can adjust the time frame. So uh any discussion about you know giving him a couple extra
months to move his vehicles? >> I think we should. I mean I mean there's I mean you didn't see some of the trailer and I guarantee if they're like the little trail like if you're carrying equipment they were under snow >> cuz mine is
>> um so it's going to be a while before he can start >> I have no problem with saying you know we can give them 90 days to >> move us that that you removed all >> everything from Sodom >> everything's in violation from Sodom Road >> is now >> is now is now a dick
>> right okay >> it's kind of run problem trying to satisfy. >> Now, that assumes we're not going to approve the variance because these are these are separable. >> So, it also assumes that if we don't now it's going to take you some more time
>> to get out of that place >> and try and find another spot, >> right? >> Yeah. >> I think we gave him 90 days to do the other and that included a lot of other stuff. >> Yeah, I think we gave I mean, part of that was 90 days because we knew that if he didn't get out by December, it wasn't
going to be out. he wasn't going to be out until spring, right? So, I would say I I would think to maybe May 31st before the summer season hits. This way there's not a lot, you know, just because he's going to be hauling stuff out of there and there'll be more people here and after the after Memorial Day and
therefore there's more traffic on Hicks bridge. And >> that's 90 days still. >> Is it still Oh, it's more than 90 days. >> That's like 120. >> Let's see. I have a calculator. >> Well, from today is
That's 109 days. So it's three months 20 days from today. >> Oh, I think that's how many days? >> It's three months. It's 109 days. 3 months and 20 days of May 31st. >> Okay.
I just >> I just think that >> it'll give him the spring to figure out another place and he's out before, >> you know, we get more traffic in Westport because that's a very busy I mean Hicksburg is very busy, >> right? >> You want So you want to make a motion
>> there on the on site. Maybe I was had blinders on, but I didn't see much of any product. All I saw was vehicles. that that's all he's using for >> it's just vehicles that it's things that originate on the property. There's a pile of brush that's from clearing the
lot. There's a pile of loom from stripping. >> So as far as you can keep >> as far as becoming legal on that property, it's mostly a matter of driving some vehicles off and >> but finding a finding a place to keep them. >> Yeah, that's the biggest part. >> That's the biggest problem. Where where
do you put them? It's like they're big vehicles. So you want to make a motion? >> I make a motion. >> Can I just ask a question? I was just wondering from your experience, Chris, how long you would expect it to take you to find a a next location.
>> Um, well, that one was a Hail Mary. >> Yeah. >> Yeah. >> You can find something and then clear it and then put gravel down to park this stuff because I'm I'm sure as you're aware, there's just not enough commercial space. >> Yeah. >> In town. Yep. So, um it might involve,
you know, buying something and closing on it or getting forced out of town to, you know, some industrial park or something like that, which just >> I'd probably be better off selling my things than doing that at that point. >> I saw uh for sale sign right across the
street here next. Right. >> That would be >> that would be a good one for you. >> Beautiful. >> Good. >> No. Go ahead. Make a motion. >> Do I make a motion uh to allow the
applicant the appelllet? >> Well, it's we're making a motion to uh >> reject the >> Oh, I make a motion to reject >> the petition. >> The petition. >> However, >> however, this is good. However, uh I
make a motion to extend the time for the appellant to move out to May 31st, 2026. >> Okay. >> Assuming comments don't pass varants. >> Oh, >> if we don't have that's a whole different thing. >> Yeah. We have a motion. Do we have a
I'll second it. >> And in discussion before we vote. >> Okay. All in favor of the motion say I. >> I. >> I. All oppose. No. >> That's unanimous. So as far as this petition then uh we rejected your motion
but we extended the uh the uh the date from which you must remove your equipment to at least find someplace uh you know that will you know that you can put that heavy equipment. Okay. Um we'll
go on to the next which is same issue but as a variance. Um, so I will read uh this hearing on the application of serious business incorporate applicant and Kendall Drip owner for variance from
the zoning wildlife section 5 use regulations and be allowed to use an area of more than four acres for parking of commercial vehicles, equipment, trucks, trailers, excavators, loaders as well as stockpiling lom and other natural aggregates. Sub property value at zero Hicks bridge road was for match
and shown on assessor's map 55 watts uh 35 through 30 35 and 36. Um once again it'll be the same process. I'll let the petitioner provide whatever information I think is import pertinent. Uh the board will ask questions and then I'll open it up to the public. And I do have
a couple of um letters I'd like to read before just to get this documentation out of the way. One of them is from Kendall Trip. I am writing this in support of Chris Forier business a serious business in the use of my land on Hicks Ridge
Road. I have owned that property for more than 40 years. It has remained pretty much the same and I have maintained the taxes right up until today. I am now 80 plus years old and the rental money will afford me the luxury of keeping it a green space and not developed. I believe that having
that land developed in any way would be worse than having equipment and material stockpile on it. It is not visible from the road. So therefore, someone actually trespassed on my property to see what was being done. I don't see the issue with the variance that is requested. The minor change in the property to
accommodate serious business operation was not detrimental to the area. Serious business is only renting a small piece of my property. I still own another 8 acres that abuts that piece. I am requesting that the board grant the variance to serious business so the land will remain open space and is also
supporting local small business. If you have any questions, please don't hesitate to contact me. Second is from Alexander Brewster to whom it may concern. I am writing to express my strong support of the variance request submitted by serious business to allow
the rental of land for parking trucks and storing equipment on the property owned by Kendall Trip. As a resident of West Bro, this use represents a responsible and beneficial alternative to more intensive development options, and I urge the board to approve the
variance. For decades, the land owner has dutifully paid real estate taxes on this property without receiving any financial return. This ongoing commitment demonstrates a dedication to maintaining the land in its current state, despite the lack of economic benefit. Granting this variant would
provide a modest income stream through the rental agreement, helping to offset these costs while preserving the land's undeveloped character. Importantly, the proposed use is noninvasive, poses no disruption to the surrounding area of Butters. Parking and storage of
activities are not visible troublesome to a Butters, ensuring that the neighbors hoods aesthetic and tranquility remain intact. This low impact arrangement aligns well with the rest of the neighborhood as it avoids any permanent structures or alterations that could change the land's fundamental
nature. Furthermore, approving this variance would allow help prevent the property from being converted into a housing development, keeping the land open and undeveloped in this manner supports community preferences for maintaining green spaces and limiting urban sprawl in our area. In summary,
this variance offers a practical solution that benefits the land owner, supports local business, and preserves the open landscape we value. I respectfully request that the board grant approval for this thoughtful process. So, those are the two
correspondents that we have. Um, I also had talked to our planning department because part of that land is owned business. there's a a small section of it and I talked to our our zoning lawyer and he said a lot of towns
have provisions that if if if land is is on two different zoned zoning uh uh areas that uh uh that they can accommodate the the the the use of the
other uh uh zone. However, I got something back from from the planning board and he said he reaching out about split zoning in Westport. Pulsers that are split zoned can participate in use activity of either of the zoning districts it falls
in. However, the location of the use must align with the zoning on that parcel. Meaning any business or commercial activity in a split zone parcel must occur in that part of the parcel zone for business use. So we can't rely upon split zoning as as a a
mechanism for allowing business to be on the zone the parcel that's not in the business zone. though it was >> I I was wondering if that was by mistake of of survey like when they made the
parcel next to it business was this was the the um the boundaries not clear and that's why when the boundaries are fixed there's a little bit of business in that piece of property. >> Yeah. And it's a little widget. I mean,
it's a it's a very it's a it's a it's an interesting it's just a small >> and I was trying to figure out >> corner of like of of Hicksbridge in 88. >> Um I did talk to the Tom Planner about about this and I talked to a lawyer about this and what they both agree is
that the proper way to do this is to have that property since part of it is already in the business zone. The the proper way to do this is to request a planning board to reszone that property the rest of that property as business since it already abuts the
business zone in the first place. And that would be something that that takes a little bit more time because it has to go in front of the uh of the town for approval. But that would be the um the correct way of using that property for business is to have it zone for
business. again since it already abuts since part of it is always business is already allowed for business then uh then reszoning the remainder of that for business is a would be a reasonable thing to ask the planning board to do.
So, just to be clear, uh, uh, you have spoken with attorney Blake. >> Yes. >> About the planning board's Yes. >> uh, opinion. And he agrees with that. And now, the only thing I would say about that is that in Kendall's letter,
>> Kendall, by the way, not that it means anything, but he was a longtime member of this board. Uh anyway, uh Kendall was saying that he likes the idea that it won't be developed if if if >> Yes, I know it. But uh and that sort of
flies in the face of what the state is saying. The state is saying that the state is is vastly under we there's >> for housing >> housing is is is >> is much needed >> is much needed. >> Yes. And then Kendall could actually put
that in conservation if he didn't want it. >> If he wanted it if he wanted to keep it that way or he could or he could >> but he doesn't have to have it reszoned as business, >> right? Getting it. >> Well, no. That's what I'm saying. >> If he wanted to run it as a business, then reszoning it as business is the best way
>> because he he owns all the way down to the river. >> Yes. Right. But anyway, we're doing this. So, why don't we let the >> But his property starts from from Drift Road down to the river. like there's I was hoping that there I I looked to see if there was any connection of any of
his properties with that property and then we could work with that. I mean, I spent a lot of time looking at this to see if that was true that, you know, it it went, but I mean, I think >> um and I was also trying to figure out why >> I assume the reason why that other piece
of property where the the the cycle shop is and a couple of businesses are in there. >> They are business that they were probably in business before zoning changed. >> No, >> but there um they are that piece is in the business. It is, but I was wondering
when it got zoned when it was because it seems weird that little piece was and across the street at the dump conveniently and I looked that up uh within the last year or so. Um for other reasons, I
can't remember exactly why. And uh Jim did find out that it was I 2012 or something like that. So long long after zoning Oh yeah. went in. the but I think it had to do with the specifics. I don't know if you remember the old co-op that
was there. >> Uh it was determined >> the farmer's co-op Bob Russell started the farmer's co-op >> and it was determined >> that that was not a farm operation. It
wasn't a farm. >> So therefore they had to do something. they had this co-op there and and um my memory was that uh >> they asked for it to be resone >> it came before town meeting and because it's it's really a very small area
that's because the highway owns like 300 ft on that side. >> Yeah. >> So anyway uh uh it wasn't before zoning. >> Okay. >> So we let the petitioner provide whatever what information you think is
is pertinent. Right. Thank you, Mr. Chairman. My name is Richard Burke. I'm with Boragard Burke in Franco and New Bedford. Uh with me, Chris Forier, uh of Serious Business. Chris is a Westport native. Went to West High School and uh runs a small small business um uh which
we're looking to try to store a few vehicles in a place where he can run his uh his uh excavation and and landscaping business from. Um this property we believe is an ideal candidate for a
variance. Um lawyers uh always often argue about variances but can rarely talk about something unique about the land that meets the statutory criteria which is incorporated into the Westport
uh zoning bylaw as well. So this is an enlargement of the plan that um that you have in your uh in in the submission that we made. Um what it it it shows um a 4 acres of uh of the parcel that
Kendall Trip owns. Um his remaining land is uh to the east. North is in this direction. Uh Hicksbridge Road is here. The uh property is slightly bifurcated between the business zone and the
residential zone. Um which is shown just with this uh bifurcating uh red dotted line that so that a portion of the front of the property along Hicksbridge Road
is owned business. The rest is owned uh residential, agricultural residential. What makes this land unique and I submit to you qualifies as a hardship to the land which would really mean using the
land for something that's allowed in the district residential use. There are a couple of things. First of all, as the board may know as you drove in from Hicksbridge Road, the steep uh decline as you go from the road into the
property, you can see it. Um this is we had uh the engineer do the elevations of this property to show how difficult it would be to develop really for anything uh but especially residential use. The um so
north being this way looking to the west along Hicksbridge Road. First of all, there is a guard rail that you see in red except for the area where you enter into the driveway. That's the only area really where the frontage along the road
is not blocked by the guardrail. And the reason that the guard rail is there is the steep decline that would be unsafe if anyone veered off the road. And you see from the elevations to the west side
here of of the driveway. Uh an elevation of 123 all the way down to um an elevation of of 90. And then over on the east side, a a drop in elevation of 99
by the road all the way down to 77. And this is within um 1 in is is 40 ft on this scale. So this is within 40 ft of the road. This a 20ft drop. I asked Chris who's in the business, you know,
what would be required to uh level that? And we estimate that it would take over a 100,000 uh yards of soil to be brought in. At 15 yards a piece, that's $1.5 million just
for that portion of the property to try to elevate it. Um then if you look at the remaining part of the property, you see the same uh large uh drop in elevation over here on
on the west. Uh the elevation is uh I'll just check my notes here, but you can see it on the plan. It's um it's going from uh 103. Excuse me. Just look over here. So you
see it's a 116 here all the way down to 70 in the area that we're proposing to use and it's it's that steep slope. The area that's cleared is you can see the clearing line here and um which would
encompass the roadway that goes in and the vehicles that um that are stored that the board saw on your visit are in this area here. It's an area slightly less than 1 acre and that was as a result of bringing in a lot of material just to make one acre. This parcel that
we're asking the variance for is 4 acres. Mr. Trip owns um another 8 acres uh off to the east. The butter who wrote the letter uh indicating his support um
down here at the bottom um is uh uh Mr. Brewster Brewster I guess it is um on the southern on the southern side is the abutter who wrote a letter in support um so basically the southern butter and then there's an 8 acre parcel
over here um even with the the extensive work and the materials that Chris brought in and you you know trying to flatten it as much as he could there still is is a visible uh steep drop in elevation even in that area. So, the
hardship to the land is who is going to bring in millions of dollars of fill to try to make this land useful. And the guardrail, we we included a a case in my material. And I
would say that the guard rail is also a hardship that's unique to this land because what the Pulos case said that I included in my materials, a Supreme Judicial Court case, our highest state court, what they said is that you may
have frontage on a road, but if it's not real frontage, if you don't really have real access, it doesn't count as frontage. You can't use it as frontage. So in the Pulis case, they very similarly had a guardrail and they tried
to carve house lots up along the road and and they had enough frontage along the road, but with the guardrail there and the steep drop off, you know, which is why the guardrail was there, like in this case, the court said that's not real frontage. You can't carve house lots that way. The only way you could is
to bring in all that fill and level it. And um I question whether you could even get one house lot here for a variety of reasons, but um if the only frontage is the area that doesn't have a guard rail where the road is, uh that's not going
to qualify as frontage even for for one house lot. Um, in addition to the ele all the elevation challenges and problems and the uh and the guard rail across the street as you
know is the town dump and we measured it's about is it 200 ft that you said Chris? >> It's 200 >> on the nose. Yeah. >> 200 feet from where the town had formerly used as a landfill to you know uh I guess it doesn't anymore but it
did. and measuring that to the property line is about 200 ft. Now, we haven't done water quality testing, but it's highly questionable, I think, whether you'd be able to get a a well uh when you're that close to the town dump. In
addition, when you talk about septic systems, um I I understand that in the past, gravel may have been removed from this property. So when you don't have water quote according to Chris Virgin soil
it's uh difficult to uh get passage for septic systems. So that is another challenge the proximity of this parcel to the town dump across the street where of course you're you're also regularly seeing you know dump trucks for the town
going all day long. So, while you know, you could in theory say um this could be reszoned maybe and and a business could go in there, maybe a Walmart or something like that. Maybe they're the only one that would think
it's economical to spend millions of dollars of fill if they could even do it. Um, so you know, you have to look at what's actually practical and and and part of the variance decision in addition to
looking at the topography and the hardship to the land is what's in the town's best interest. And so what we're proposing is a, you know, Chris is a small company. It's yourself, Chris, and one other employee. >> Two two employees.
>> Two other employees. they this this area where we're talking about uh where the vehicles are now you can see it's not visible from the road. You can see on the plan the green uh which is is uh
protecting the site from visibility from the road and from neighbors. Uh it this would not be an active use of the land. It's just a place to store a vehicle so a small business can can stay in business in in the town. U somebody
that's, you know, born and raised here. Uh versus maybe a much larger uh whether it's a business or I don't know what it would be, some huge enormous residential structure versus as um as the owner, Mr.
Trip said he would much prefer it to see a less intensive use and that's what we're proposing. Um not something that the neighbors are going to notice, not something they're going to see a lot of activity. It's mostly just going to be
vehicles uh sitting there. Um, so when you look at um the I I I would submit to you that this is a classic case of a real variance that qualifies under chapter 48 section 10, which is the state law for variances, which your town
bylaw really quotes exactly all the same standards. Some hardship to the soil shape or topography. So here we're talking about soil and we're talking about topography. And this is a hardship to the use of the land for something
residential uh and really for for really anything else unless you get something in here on a massive scale. And we would submit that's not really in the neighbors or or the town's best interest or for the keeping the property
green. Um we you know we ask for your consideration. We we think that uh if you did grant the variance, you you're granting a very specific uh request for a specific type of use. It's not turning
it into a general business zone, which it would be if we were able, if the owner, Mr. Trip, were to go back and get his land reszone to business. Then any type of business, however large or whatever type, could go in there. um you
can tailor this variance to this small business that's trying to use this land in a very less intensive way than the land might otherwise be. And it doesn't mean that somebody else can come along someday and put a Walmart in or any other kind of business. They'd have to
come back in front of this board and ask for a different type of variance for whatever they were looking for. Um and here, you know, Chris is just trying to stay in town. He's a licensed septic installer, as I mentioned, a graduate of Westport High School. He's he's a small
business, and he's just looking for a place to store his materials, and we think it's it's not a use that's going to impact the town or the neighborhood in any negative way. And it's on the other hand going to protect a large parcel from something that's potentially
a much more intense abuse. We'd be happy to answer any questions that you may have. Well, I have a couple of comments. Um, uh, first is I mean, what you're really asking us is essentially in in essence, you're asking us to reszone
that that area for business even though it's a specific. The other we were all we we did the site visit a few weeks ago. Uh, and it's obvious to me that there's at least a couple of acres there that are buildable. So even though you say that the land has a lot of runoff,
the area that that you have all your trucks in and and around it, you could easily put at least one house in there, probably two houses. >> Not if you don't have frontage, Mr. Manard. It wouldn't be okay. >> We'd have to come back for a variance for that. >> You have >> because if if the guard rails don't
provide adequate frontage and you only have the >> property has frontage. So that vi that's that is that's what we look for from zoning. Well, not not according to that foolish case that I I cited. The frontage has to be real accessible
frontage from the road. According to that case, and the Supreme Judicial Court said in that case that when you have guard rails in a steep drop off, that doesn't count as frontage unless you fill it in. So there there you go back to that over a million dollars.
>> Our bylaw says, our bylaw says we have frontage. You have plenty of frontage. So >> the other thing is I mean there is plenty of land there that is flat enough to build on and you have access through the road that you built or was built. I know you didn't build it. It was there.
>> It's specifically in the ANR handbook. Um then that's from from Greg Nicholas. I'm sure you guys are familiar with them. South Coast Engineering. He's the one who who put the plan together for us and did the surveying that it is not allowable without frontage. the guardrail specifically is noted that you
not use that as frontage. >> But if you think about case law in Massachusetts when variance is very strict, right? The standards of you'd agree the standards are very strict and for the most part most variances are usually granted because of setbacks or
frontage, not particularly a use outside of the zoning. So I while we understand that there is might not be enough of frontage I think that's an easier var if if someone came in and wanted to put a couple houses there I think that's an easier variance for us as a board to
approve >> yes and in and in reality how that that property has been that way >> forever correct >> Kendall >> Kendall's own for 40 years >> he's been cutting pilings off it >> I mean that's the property has been unt has has been in that condition
since the 50s I guess the fact is they're running out of land to do things with, >> right? >> So these really undesirable properties to do anything with. >> Yes. And and according according to the bylaws from 1957,
if if you had property and if you're saying that there was no frontage, I can say, "Oh, well, that's according to the bylaw from 1957, property that was that uh that was prior to that was zoned prior to 1957 requires
no frontage. >> So, it wouldn't need a vir variance." >> Yeah. Well, again, you'd have to you'd have to perk it. You'd have to get water. Yes. >> And you'd have to Yes. And you >> bring in a substantial amount of fill. I
don't think it's practical at any one. >> It's not it's not it's not our job to decide if it's practical. It's a buildable lot >> and it's I mean it's it's determined by the town to be developable. So in my view, if you want to say because of all these reasons it's not developable, then
I think you need to go back to the town and make it such. So therefore, it can't be developed. Right? Because now you're asking us to one give it you a use variance which as Roger said effectively converts it to zone to a commercial zone because it's a slippery slope. Right? So we give you
the specific use of you as a landscaper as a small business who's only using x amount of land. You know you're going to retire someday. Kendall may want to sell it someday because he's you know he's getting to the point where I'm sure it'll just stay in the family.
then somebody else bigger may move in, right? And then it's just it just becomes it effectively becomes a commercial district and it's harder to keep it's harder to say, okay, we let you as a landscaper be there, but now why can't we let somebody else do
something that's similar or or whatever? And that's where I think I'm having trouble that when you when you issue the variance, it runs the land. Right. >> Right. So you could either, as Roger said, reszone it because I think that would I think it would be a slam dunk to reszone it to commercial because it's
sitting right next to commercial property >> and it's and part of it is already commercial. >> Commercial and it's across the street from the town, right? But I also but again I'm sort of kind of I'm torn because Exactly. Like I saw you building
I I pass that I that your spot every day. That's the only way I'm a drifter. The only way for me to get into town is go up Hicksburg, right? So I saw you doing it. I go, "Oh, someone's developing something back there." And then since then since the road got put
in, I never see a truck come out or into that place. So it must be either early morning, late in the afternoon, there is or not at all. Right. It's it's it's not a lot. I mean, it doesn't >> it hasn't affected Hicks. So like, well, why can't he use it for this? Right? So
I try to figure out, you know, was there in something in our table of use that would actually allow a special permit rather than a variance? And I don't know, and I and I briefly discussed this with Roger and we haven't
legally we haven't talked with our attorneys, but you're a landscaper, right? And I was trying to figure, well, how does all the other landscape what do they do with their stuff? Most of the other landscapers keep their stuff on their property because under the tradesman exception. >> Exactly.
>> So, >> which I requested that as well. >> Did you um >> for this property? >> But I would have to go through this whole process. I was told and we were already doing this process. >> Right. But that but the trade but the tradesman exception isn't the zoning board. It's the >> plan was build a house and live there.
>> No, no, no. Not necessarily because because it's only I was reading case law. Generally, generally, not absolutely, generally, you have to live there. >> Resident trades person. >> Yeah. >> No, but this doesn't say resident trades
person. It says >> trades place person, place of business requiring a special permit for uh by the planning board for a site plan. Again, I don't know if this >> that's for a site plan for planning board,
>> right? So, it's not us. So my view is >> we have a zoning bylaw that says a resident trades person is allowed >> where it only says trades person. It doesn't say resident. It doesn't say resident. And if you go through the case
law, it's generally that it has to be a resident, but it doesn't say it absolutely has to be a resident. So again, I would it I think it would behoove the applicant to try to find the case law where you can say it doesn't
need to be a resident because there's nowhere I read this I read this zoning things inside and out and nowhere does it require the tradesman exception to be a resident of the property >> across the the pot that talks about a resident shell fisherman.
>> Yes, that says resident shell fisherman. This doesn't say tradesman, right? If the if the zone if we wanted to say that if you read it if we wanted this to mean resident we would have put it there because we put it here. >> That means that any any trades person could can put stuff there. They don't
have to do anything. They just do it. >> Yeah. Well, that's what I'm thinking our zoning board our zoning law say. It doesn't say resident. It says tradesmen. Here it says residents sh fish fishermen can clean fish on their property. Right. Again, I don't know what the Massachusetts case law says. I'm just
saying this is something that I was just trying to figure out how we could get this to work for you in the guidelines of our zoning. Right. It's unclear if we have history in Westport of has this the planning board ever allowed a non
resident to have a tradesman exception or not? I don't know. I haven't been around town long enough. So Ralph would be the one that is the enforcer of that. Uh not the planning board itself. >> Yeah. >> I know. >> I mean, have we ever >> No. >> No. So there's no
>> I have a a picture of a hard copy of a tradesman permit on White Oak run. >> Yeah, I know who it is. My landscaper. >> Okay. >> That's why I was thinking >> this history of >> I don't know the history of how he got to be able to do that there. So >> at that time you could get it from the
town clerk. So now it's a now it's a planning board and they want to site plan, right? But you know he does exactly everything you do, >> correct? >> Except he happens to live there. >> Yeah. And he and he lives there.
>> So if you were working the property, you could have the equipment on their property, >> but that's not what you're doing. >> But he could. I mean, it's it's forestable land according to the map geo. So if he continues to forest it, >> but that's not what the that's not what
the equipment >> Well, that's that jumps into what I'd like to get into. All All you've been talking about so far is that it is uh doable as a residential property. >> Right. >> I I I take a different approach. Uh I I
want to uh I really believe that it's not suitable for residential property. But what I haven't heard yet in this presentation is what actually is he doing there and will he be doing uh that
would put it outside the bounds of of the rules. I just want to I want the record because I I think we're dealing with two different things here. But I don't know enough about what he does. I mean, if you read what he says, he wants to he wants to park a bunch of commercial vehicles, trucks, trailers,
excavators, loaders, as well as stockpiling lom and other natural aggregates, >> right? And that's okay. But he also does some stuff with logs. >> Well, he cut the trees down. >> Well, he had to cut the logs only because you had to get to clear the land. >> No, from Sodom Road.
>> No, Sodom Road. He had logs. >> Yes, but that's not Sodom. This is >> And that's what I want to find out. >> The business is the same business. >> Okay. So you sell you you do you sell firewood? That firewood actually was from the property. >> Correct. >> So there is no >> Well, I thought some of it wasn't, some
of it wasn't. >> Okay. Now it all is. >> Could you could you just explain to us what you're going to do there so that way I know what the baseline is that we're talking about? >> So my intention would be to park the vehicles that you already see there. Um
you know, maybe we'd be splitting some firewood, that sort of thing. that business is just about gone because this absolutely >> if you were splitting firewood firewood from the property or from somewhere else >> um if it was permitted then I would bring the firewood in from other lots we
could if it's not permitted >> I'm pretty much out of the firewood business due to this whole ordeal um that just there's no place to do it >> any other logging are you doing any other logging like cutting 10 foot >> log to do select cut on that property,
you know, from things like Kendall's been doing for 40 years, you know, cut the straight start stuff off or um just the deadwood on that property. That's a waste right now would be beneficial. >> Yes. But if you cut property on the property, you're allowed to sell that.
You're allowed to cut it. That's because that's part of the property. If you bring stuff in, then you're then you're a retailer, >> right? That's of course that's processing. >> And that, like I said, at this point there's none of that going on because I have no place to do it anyway.
>> No, but you'd like to. >> I would like to. And that's why we we tried to >> um put our best foot forward and and tell you, you know, maybe our extreme intentions and get it knocked down to something that more suits you or or or
whatever, even if it doesn't necessarily suit me 100%. Just we need something, you know. >> Is there any other processing that you do? Um, so >> stuff that doesn't come off that property. >> Yep. Um, so I would be storing material there. Um, not necessarily processing
it. Um, if it was permitted, >> storing it from where? Uh, >> from other places. >> From other job sites. Yep. And then, you know, you dig a foundation. You have to leave it somewhere. Then you have to go back fill the foundation to pick it up. And that's why I got the stockpile permit for the property and everything.
>> Um, and I would like to screen, but if it's not allowed, it's not allowed. Can you explain what that means? >> Um, that would be at this point like renting a screener for a week a year or something like that. The driest month of the year, July, things are thick and
green and it's quiet and uh, you know, running some material through and then and then selling it. >> What What is this material? What is it going in? What is it coming out? >> Uh, it would be, you know, either fill or loom or compost, something like that. And then >> stone. >> Um, no stone.
>> No stone at all. Um, it would any wall stone that's there is from the property as well. >> Yeah, it's nothing it's not anything unlike other landscapers in town who just happen to live on the same property. They bring stuff in, they take
stuff out, they do leaf mulch, they take I mean they do it all like and there's plenty of them. You could point to one of them who I happen to know and that's what got me thinking. Um, so you know, but for the fact that you
don't live there is the only thing and there's nothing in and then rest of my board can read it, but I don't see that we have a resident requirement. Um, where in other spots it does say resident, it says resident fisherman. I
think it also says in the beginning resident farmer. Um but the other thing is with the tracement exception I believe that I believe and again not that familiar
with it that the vehicles need to be in some sort of covered um building not just out in the the general um >> I've not seen but a covered building um
but I want to pursue this other because I I I see two different things. I see uh wood and logging and I see soil >> which means you also have to have a soil permit >> which I do. >> You you have that >> now. Do you have it for the Hicks bridge
property yet? >> Hicks bridge I have I did not on southern >> Okay. You did not. >> I have one for Hicks bridge. >> So where's that come from? This tool >> conservation commission as the sitting as the soil board not as a conservation commission. And there should be a copy.
>> Their copy of the permit was part of our application. >> But why would they issue a permit for an activity on >> they don't do zoning? >> But they should talking about zoning. >> So they can so they can they can they can issue a per they can issue a permit to do a commercial business somewhere
but then use it >> just like just like they do all the time. And and part of what they do it >> is they don't come and ask me cuz this probably zoning. They just >> versus the other way it has to happen
right now. Not you have to go to the all your permit >> when I show up. >> Yeah. All your permits have to go to KC con but all their permits don't have to come to you. Just like the selectmen, the selectmen can and do issue um
>> the u liquor licenses. >> Yeah. >> And and I brought that up one night before the selectman when they were asking uh ask asking to uh do a liquor license. I said that property is not
allowed by zoning to have this. And the answer was zoning is one thing, license is another, and they give the license. >> Yeah. It's it's unfortunate because it really puts >> it puts the applicant in a really weird place that they assume if I get can get
the permits, I can do it right because you're doing everything right. But they didn't they didn't then they sort of >> Okay. I want to point out >> pull it out >> that 3/4 of a mile from there there's a very large uh uh soil operation
>> which has been approved. It used to come before this board. every couple of years we would have to approve the zoning aspect of >> uh doing a commercial operation
processing uh in the bone farm. And I I have to preface this by saying we need these uh operations. We need these operations in town that do things with logs, uh do things with gravel and and
shellfish. There's also another shellfish uh stockpiling 3/4 of a mile from that property. Uh and u and nobody's ever said anything about this. The uh the u one on the bone farm,
we did it for years uh on this board. We would issue it uh in like two acre pieces uh where okay, here's this two acres. you uh excavate that and and then
take care of filling it back in and all and then you do the next two acres. The last I knew we had a 7 acre one and then for years now we have not had any. So, I don't know if the rules change, the people changed, but we haven't done that
for, but that's an important operation. And uh and I and I think you told me the other day that they're all excavated out. >> I believe there's no more soil they have to excavate and that's why they haven't come before you yet. >> So, it's uh but they still have to do it
for sto for stockpiling for the soil board. I would think that's >> and and it's the same thing processing. >> Yeah. >> Here. And uh so so we have those operations already within less than a
3/4 of a mile of this property. >> But I mean that's I mean that's that's great. But the we just had a a variance where I think I mean I'm not going to say but how we were going to vote but they were in less than 3/4 of a mile to
a similar operation. They had buses right at the top of the road. So and it was but you know they withdrew it so we don't know how we were going to vote >> but they were doing a they were doing a commercial business and a residential right next to a commercial business. say
that that's very very different than this one. Uh and especially my concern two things. One is the gradient of the property. I I disagree that it's very conducive. I'm not saying
you can't put a house there because you certainly could. You put a treehouse there if you want to. Uh but uh but that uh landfill and dump across the street I think is a significant difference that doesn't affect other properties
uh in town. And I think that would be a severe detriment. You also can't turn very nicely uh into the property if you're coming down Hicks V Road. I asked the applicant the other day when we were out there,
how do you get your trailer truck in here? >> I have to go all the way down around and come up the hill in order to get >> into that property. >> Or you can turn around and go, >> well, delivery truck
>> the handy house. Not Handy Hill. You could >> even >> Yeah, it is. >> We're getting sort of we're getting a little bit off on >> No, this is not off. This is why it makes this >> Well, no. I mean, comparing it to to other other properties, I don't really I don't like comparing things because
every every case is unique. I I I understand, you know, you're the issues with the with the egress onto the property. >> Yeah. >> Um, is there anything else you want to add before we open or is there any other questions before we open it up to the public?
>> No. There's anyone in the in the public want to make a comment. name and address. >> Uh my name is Barbara Benjamin. I live at 167 165 167 with together. Um we just have
concerns with like the soil. I know he stated that he wasn't planning on putting a building there, but if you zone this, does that change the whole lot? cuz we're there's there's 8 acres in between the two of us from what he's
asking to zone for variance. We've been there. They have a very nice way they have it set up. You cannot see it from the road. Sometimes I hear it, sometimes I don't, you know, but I hear the dump
too. So, you know, I mean, kind of stuck there. But our concern is like runoff down. I know that there is uh a stone wall there, but there's always the possibility, you know, trucks running off the oil.
I mean, it is good for the gentleman. It's a small business and I understand that and I support that, but certain things need to be in play. Like, if he leaves, does it go revert back or once you change it, that's it? Once we zone
this, >> it is >> it's >> but it's it's the only the four acres that he's asking for is from what I'm being told. So the eight acres in between is still going to stay residential. >> Right. >> Right. So, I mean, but just
>> the beautiful thing about a site plan by the planning board because then those all those things are taken in consideration when they're allowing him to do that, which I think is better for the community. Um, rather than change it to a true commercial, you know, area
that's >> and the conservation commission should get involved to make sure there's not storm water runoff. Well, I know he said that they did come down and and conservation's been down and they approved it. But >> the soil though, I think, great for
water. >> You know, we have a well, so you know, >> just things that we're looking at. I mean, >> a condition of expanding from the little less than an acre we have cleared to anymore would be that we'd have to submit a site plan with storm water
management, which is certainly not unreasonable. >> But that's not what we do with the rest of any board. No, but I'm just saying to satisfy >> conservation >> conservation um and conservation actually um has no issue whether even at 2 acres it would be the planning board that we would submit the plan to and
they're in charge of storm water management >> which we don't find unreasonable or anything just one more one more thing and >> but the the issue there of course is enforcement right you are hidden so if you expand it like and I'm not saying
you would >> but others would would just go ahead and clear out more land and not and no one's ever going to go back there because it's so far but vain and so it becomes a you know I rather do it in one way where it
can be all be tidied in one little package >> that you want the the four >> question Roger is is something like this eligible for a special permit >> that's what I was >> that's what we're talking about if it was an existing >> business that is no longer held
Uh, >> and there is a there's a use table in here that has a bunch of things that you get special permit for. So if it fell into one of those categories >> and I think it falls in a tradesman and then it's a site plan approval by the planning board. It's an SPAB, >> right? So
>> So >> I I also think >> any anyone else in the audience? >> No. Uh, any other questions, comments before close the hearing? No. And I'll I'll make a motion to close
the hearing. Do I have a second? >> I second. >> All in favor say I. >> I. >> I. >> Janice. >> Yes. I >> Oh, I didn't. It was me that didn't see. >> I didn't see you. Okay. Unanimous. >> All right. Um, discussion.
Well, I would like to make sure that that uh in the in our records uh we we're clear on what he plans to do. And when we were out there on the on site,
um I asked him, well I shouldn't say I asked him. I said that I was going to suggest that um if we were to improve this that the property that we're approving
has uh visible good demarcations that a neighbor can look at and see that this is where that approval ended. So it doesn't creep uh because things like
this do tend to creep. Um myself, I I very much think that this is an exception to the typical rule of especially in my again I I said it
before uh the landfill directly across the street. I know I wouldn't want to buy a house right there uh and and uh spend a lot of money developing it and having a house there. This is a perfect park. It it fits the needs of the land
owner. It fits the needs of a small business owner. I think it fits the needs of the town as well. And uh and I just think that it it it uh de definitely has the hardship of having
that landfill 200 ft away plus the fact that we already have operations just like it less than 3/4 of a mile away. Uh, and so
those are just some of the reasons why I feel that this is legitimate and and should be passed. >> Yeah, I have the opposite feelings, but >> yeah, >> I I think we're, you know, we're making
commercial area that's doesn't that's that's not zoned for commercial. It's developable. I mean, I was out there. It's obviously developable. the town >> and I'm worried and I'm worried about the long-term. We're doing this not just
for for this for this applicant but for the rest of the life of this property and that that's really what concerns me the most >> and I I have the same concerns. I it's it I I want him to be able to do this there and that's why I spent so much
time and looking at this and hoping we could find another way and I think it's a viable way or just go back and I mean either Kendall I mean Kendall doesn't want it developed so then he can either make the land he can ask the town to switch it to non-developable
so then he doesn't have to worry about it again and then I think some of our issues with at putting a variance in may go way. Um, but a variance runs with the land and it becomes very permanent where a special permit gives him the right to do what he
wants to do and nobody else. And I think and there I think that's in the best interest of the town than making it that anybody after you could do the exact same thing or maybe slightly different or it's going
to I mean it's going to be hard to you know it's it's hard to say when someone come if if you decide in five years you're done with your business because and somebody else comes in Kendall's still around they want to rent the property to somebody else it's going to be hard for us to say no to another use
that isn't that substantially different um because and and then they would have a right to appeal I think if we denied another use on that property unless it was something like you know they wanted to build a nuclear reactor or something right I mean it's like but if we were
just saying we're going to let them have another use if if it was it was reasonable I think we'd have to allow it so therefore we've now as Roger has said effectively made this piece of property a commercial property so why not just do
that either go back to the to to the town and ask for that Kendall will go back to the town and ask for that property to be zoned commercial and then this we're good or go to the planning board and see what they think about a
tradesman exception. >> Anybody else? >> Yeah, I agree with Cynthia. >> Yeah. Um what we're going to we're going to have to make a motion here. Generally, it is advisable that we always make a motion
to grant because that's what the bylaw says that in order for this to pass, we need to have four uh positive uh votes to grant the petition. So, and I know Jerry, I it sounds like you're very much in favor of
this, so I would appreciate if you would make the motion to grant and and identify if there are any. And by the way, this also allows us to put conditions on it so that when we vote, those conditions, you know, may have may change somebody's mind.
>> Jerry, the floor is yours. >> I'm I'm the only one that >> Well, not I don't know. >> No, because I'd like to push this uh task on to somebody else. >> I think three of us have already >> Well, okay.
>> Slightly >> again. And and there's a difference between making a motion and voting. Making a motion is simply that making a motion so that we can discuss it. That doesn't >> I made the last motion. >> Okay. Is that >> I made the last motion. >> Okay. So I will make a motion to grant the petition
>> to for a variance from the zoning bylaw section 5 use regulations uh and be allowed to use the an area of more of more than four acres. This is more than four acres. It would be that top that
top parcel that's delineated on there. It might be slightly over four acres. It's whatever that top parcel of land is. >> It's the area delineated on the plan. >> Okay. The area delineated on the on the supplied plan for parking of commercial
vehicles, equipment, trucks, trailers, excavators, and loaders as well as stockpiling lom and other natural uh agrids. Okay. is uh are there any conditions that we want to place on the approval? >> I do.
>> Well, what are they? >> One one would be what I just said about um delineating uh with the physical visible boundaries of of every uh parcel of that property
that that uh we would approve if we did approve it. >> Okay. Uh >> in other words, so that anybody could go out there and they can say that's where >> so those are already in place just because they happen to be there and it's
its own part >> whatever then you comply. >> Then you want to put a limit on the number of trucks you want to have 100 trucks down there. >> No, I mean it's I'm just asking. >> Yeah. You know, I understand whatever he needs to run his business.
>> Okay. Like it's >> Yeah. But but it's his business, but it could be somebody else's business in the future. So it could be a business. >> It might be, but it must be a similar type of business. >> Right. But if we can say that he's >> and if it's anything out of what he's doing, it has to come before the zoning
board. But when you say you're conditioning on how many how many how many does he need for his business might be different for somebody else's business >> in the same business right >> so we have to put a number to that >> well then put a number
>> that >> what's the maximum number of vehicles that you would put there now >> right now um probably 12 that business >> trailers and everything else you know I don't are you calling vehicles equipment as well What's the definition of it?
>> Yeah, that's >> pieces of equipment. Yes. >> Say a wood chipper. Is that a vehicle? >> Are we counting wheelbarls? >> No. >> Pitchforks? >> No. I I mean, I guess we could scrutinize that later on if we uh you know, really wanted to keep going.
>> Things that you drive in and out. >> Okay. So, there's trailers as well or no trailers. >> Do you see what I mean? >> Yes. Yeah, >> I just don't want to leave myself open for any later in the >> Okay. >> You know, later in life here. >> I think this is getting too complicated.
>> Any other any other conditions that >> Well, there's board members. when when when we were down on the site visit, I had asked him about whether we'd be maintaining or doing any um work on the trucks there as far as like m you know I
mean certainly m but not going into putting up a place where they're going to be working on with oil and >> the answer is no not even an oil change >> because we >> okay so I think I think it's a reasonable >> right >> to add that that >> no maintenance
>> no no maintenance on vehicles then you worry about oil getting into into the ground and and whatever. No. Uh there will be no maintenance on on any of the vehicles on the property. >> It's good. >> Uh I I would say another one that we
should do, which they want to do anyway, is to maintain the lack of visibility from the road. >> Okay. >> And that you add that >> that was the plan. >> That's the plan. And again, as we have
you have to look to the future as well. And and kind of the whole point of that secluded site is >> not for anybody to bother me and not for me to bother anybody. So it's really only >> the two acres of use, but I'm renting the four acres because I need to to hide the visibility of it.
>> Yeah. Well, that's saying that should be condition. >> Okay. So, we have a motion. I made the motion. Do we have a second? Again, it's just a motion and a second. It's not a vote. >> Second. You second. Okay. Any discussion? Okay. All in favor of granting them the
motion as presented, raise your hand. Two. All oppose, raise your hand. Three. Uh the motion fails. Uh and and uh Ria, can you uh note the uh
uh again, there's a 20-day appeal process. you know, I'm sorry to do this, but I think there's better ways of handling this than a variance. Um, and I think Cynthia's sort of outlined what uh what those avenues might be. Um, I mean, I hate to run you out of business, but
you know, we have to sort of protect areas. You know, I would say the trouble with the the town meeting and the changing of zoning is that it takes 2/3 vote from town. >> Yes. And I was told that it wouldn't
even get on this year's agenda. >> So it would be the following year's agenda. >> Well, what about this year? >> What about the planning board? >> That I was in there the other day. It wasn't offered to me. >> Well, >> I'll certainly go ask again. >> What do you mean by that? >> Go to the planning board to ask for a special
>> a special permit for a tradesman exception and let them deal with the case law. let them >> you I mean it's obviously going to be up to them but the fact that I it's just about in achievable to put a residence there and they may require me to have a
residence there kind of puts us back to >> I can't resell >> but that's where your lawyer can maybe help you saying that >> and find the case because it doesn't say absolutely it says generally generally which is not absolute as you as a lawyer you know that's an absolute I just
wasn't you I didn't have the time nor the resources to dig into the case law. >> So you're saying that the planning board can issue a use variance? >> No. >> No under the table of uses a trap. >> That's according to our zoning trades
exception is issued by the planning board with a with a site plan. >> They've never been able to do that before. >> No. Okay. >> I was told that I had to come to to you guys that when I went >> they like to throw us to they like to throw us to here. Yeah, but it it really but we're reading the the zoning laws.
So, >> and it doesn't say resident and it mean we're in other spaces on that table. It does say resident. It doesn't say resident when it comes to trade person. >> The zoning board handles a bunch of different types of petitions. Variances
are the hardest ones to get approved and they're meant to be the hardest ones to be approved and that's you know that that's just a fact of life. There are some places give them out like candy >> and some people give them out a hand too. >> Ridiculous. >> Thank you. >> All right. Thank you.
>> Okay. Uh next order of business. I have >> next order of business. A meeting minutes from January. >> Thank you for coming, Ralph. >> Thank you for coming, Ralph. Um, we have uh meeting minutes from
January 21st, 2026 that we uh that Maria put everybody want to Jerry >> want to pay attention. Um, >> I was trying to pay attention >> meeting minutes from January. >> Cynthia, >> yes.
>> Meeting minutes from January 21st. U, Maria put them together. We all commented on them. Uh I'll make a motion to approve the meeting minutes from January uh 21, 2026. >> I second. >> All in favor say I. >> I. >> I oppose. No, that's that
uh we also have this uh form from um the planning board application of Christopher Mito from property located at 850 for state. Did they all get a copy of this or am I the only one that got it? >> Uh I sent it to us. I did send it.
>> Okay. >> It's a It's a site plan construction of a story build. Storage building. >> Um I don't think that we actually >> You saw this, right? >> I don't think so. It's pretty quick. You want to take a pick at it? >> Did you email it, Maria?
>> You know, you did. >> No, I No, I think you did. You did. >> I saw it. >> I think that I saw something. >> Yeah, I think I saw it. >> Maybe you only get it to the chair and the vice chair. >> No, I wouldn't do that. I I don't I didn't see it. Well, just like the thing from
>> I treat all my members equally. >> Chris. Yeah. But there's some not >> some are just more recruits. >> No, no, but what I'm saying is u >> Okay. Um >> didn't didn't you you just sent something out that um the town clerk is
waiting for some conflict thing? Uh >> I don't think she's in this week. I asked her to resend me the link. consent to the members who have not >> right but I had not gotten it and I think it's because of the the email
issue she's sending it to a form of email and I never got it >> that's okay when she sent it to me then I'll resent it those who have not >> okay anyway um this is a minor a minor site plan application pursuant to section 8.7 of the zoning bylaws to
consider a site plan to construct an 18800 square foot storage building. Um it is uh it doesn't violate zoning. So I don't see that that u that that we have any comment >> prefer protection district.
>> So >> um no comment. >> That's from the planning board. >> Yes. >> D. >> Okay. Um, any other uh did everybody did we did uh did
everybody get uh the email about uh all of the zoning bylaw changes that are coming up in the >> I just sent those out came out today. >> Did you print them out too? >> Copies for everybody. >> Yeah, I thought I saw them on my pile. >> Yeah. And is everybody up to date with their ethics?
>> That's what we were just talking about. I I just I >> I got a check mark from you. >> I'm waiting in the ethic conflict this week. >> Was that I went down I I did mine and I I sent I went to the town clerk and had her stamp it >> um >> takes it takes an hour for one and it take 10 minutes for the other.
>> There's two things. >> One of them just you read it and and and say I read it. So it's >> and the other one you have to watch this video for an hour >> and answer a couple of questions along the way. Yeah. Okay. You're right.
>> Uh, okay. Any other any other business? >> I make a motion to adjourn the meeting. Second. All in favor? I I Okay, you can cut us.