And there being 6:30 on uh August 13th, I'm going to start the zoning board of appeals offer the pledge of allegiance. I pledge algiance to the flag of the United States of America to the to the republic for which it stands, one nation under God, indivisible, with
liberty and justice for all. In accordance with Mass General, chapter 38, section 20F, this meeting is being recorded. First order of business is a let me get the
Okay, now I'm looking for the Here. There we go. uh an application of uh Jeffrey Maker and Champagne Maker for a variance from the frontage requirement set lot having been approved and subdivided prior to the adoption of current zoning
regulations zoning bylaw 7 section 5 and be allowed to construct a detached garage property located at zero Pierce Road Westport mass and is shown on assessor's map 88 lot uh 191. So, the way I'm going to uh run this hearing is
I'll have the uh petitioner come up and provide what information is pertinent. Um the board will uh will ask questions to the uh the applicant. Once the board is done, then I'll open it up to the general public. Um voting on this will be Jeremy Patino,
myself, Roger Manard, Janice Day, Ray Elias, and Cynthia Kazekawitz. So, will the U applicants come up and just name and address? Yes. Good evening. Brendan McDonald, McDonald Construction, 743 Drift Road.
Good evening. Reagan McDonald, McDonald Construction, 743 Drift Road. And you're representing the the applicants? Yes, sir. Okay. Are the applicants here? Yes. Yes. Oh, okay. Good. Um, we're just here on behalf of Jeff
and Champagne Maker in regards to Zero Pierce Road. This is a pre-existing non-conforming law created prior to the adoption of the current zoning bylaw. We are requesting relief from the frontage requirement under article 7, article 7, section 7.5 in order to make reasonable
use of the property. Okay. Uh what what evidence do you have that this is um uh that this this lot was created prior to zoning? Well, I mean, these lots were created um
uh there was a deed back in uh um January 11th of 1954. And all the current lots in that particular area, they're all pretty much around the same size lot. You talking about this? Yeah, they're
all um roughly 120 by 100 ft. And you can see I think we provided uh in the document showing uh plot plan of all those existing lots and um um I think u like I said to make
like this document here the subdivision. So four Um, okay. Before I'm I'm just going to read one u letter from the zoning uh enforcement officer uh as to the reason why we're here in the first
place. So I assume it the alpha again got this letter from um from Ralph. This uh this is about the whole well uh after review of submitted building permit application and the westboard zoning bylaws article 7.5 non
residential minimum lot area and frontage. I have determined that in order to construct a structure for non-residentable residential purposes, the lot must conform to a minimum standards of 150 ft frontage and 60,000 ft of of area. At least 30,000 ft of
that area must be continuous upland. The lot in question contains 12,110 ft of area and 120 ft of frontage and does not meet the requirements of 5.7. Therefore, the building permit application is hereby denied. You may appeal this determination as law by Mass
General law chapter 40. Ralph Souza. Um Ralph, isn't there also a um an issue with with this being a a a garage on a it's in it's not accessory to anything. It's not an accessory to anything
anything. Yes. It's going to be the primary structure. So our bylaws doesn't have that. We've had a few cases over the years where that's they've come forward for buildings. One one got by the previous building inspector and it caused a
little bit of nightmare, a little bit of headache because they thought they could do anything in in the garage that they wanted. I'm not sure if it ever came before this board, but it caused headache because it was close to a commercial zone. was in the commercial zone,
but there, you know, there was letters back and forth that cease. This is right now, but you you you note in your letter just frontage requirements of square footage. Um, is it also in in conflict with other aspect of the zoning
by law as being an accessory, not attached to a primary? It's it's an access accessory building. It's going to be the primary building. It's not going to be accessory to anything. there. Mhm. Um make it a lot. Is that an issue?
An issue because it's it's an issue because it's the primary it's not accessory. It's it's that's not a dwelling. Right. I'm saying no. That violates another aspect of zoning. I have a a piece of property with
accessory dwelling on it. That's it. That's not coming to my mind right now. I'm looking He's been there. Attorney Blake. Yeah. Yeah, I I'm happy to kind of jump in and and assist Ralph with this. So, an accessory use under your bylaw is a
use or building customary, incidental, and subordinate to a principal use or building. I think we can all agree and I think there's cases on it. A garage is an accessory use or accessory building to a typically single family multif
family dwelling and located on the same lot with such principal use or building. So, I understand and I think I've been involved with Ralph on some of these where he's taken the position and I
think it's it's a it's a legitimate position that other municipalities have taken that if you have a standalone lot that's not contiguous with your your house lot, then putting a garage on that
would not be allowed. But let me So, let's back up a little bit. You claim it's a pre-existing non-conforming buildable law, right? I've seen I I just barely saw this like three minutes ago. I I can't opine, but I'm going to take what you say as true.
If that's the case, you and this is this is strange. You could put a house on that law provided you could get the setbacks and I understand provided you could get uh septic. I think sept I think you have an issue with septic. Um,
but under the bylaw without some type of relief, you can't put just a garage on. I think the relief would likely be a use variance. Now, most municipalities don't allow use variances. Use variances
have to be explicitly allowed in a in a uh zoning by. And but luckily for you, Westport's one of the few towns that I represent that has use variances, but it's got to be a
hardship based on shaped soil conditions or topography of the law. So, you'd have to make that showing. The other issue would be to put some type of living quarters above it, but then I think you run into a board of health issue. I don't know if it'd be
better for you to get that board of health issue taken care of and then propose to put some type of protected dwelling on that on that law. I mean, I think that would be as much as
a apartment above a garage. What What about the restrictions that are in the deed and the restrictions that uh one of your buddas brought up? I I researched all the way back to when they tried to put like can we put a septic system here? Well, at the time
the board of health said absolutely not. It's not a buildable lot during that time frame. Yep. But two of these things, one of them says you can't put Exactly. Any out building constructed, including such building intended for use as a garage, shall either immediately adjoin the
house or attach in the greaseway. where any where any garage may be constructed under the first floor. It says you can't do it there. No dwelling house now standing uh hereafter erected on the pre granted premises shall be built or maintained as
other than a single family dwelling unit. So in and this is this one here locally is signed in 2021. Okay. This is and I'm sorry right is a deed it's a deed restriction. It's a deed restriction and those same four are in this this 1980. Okay. But I
I think the issue becomes the the issue becomes who has the authority to enforce a deed restriction. It's likely um all of these folks that are involved in it probably would have to to enforce
the deed restriction. I don't know that it would be is that type is that like a covenant type thing for the entire neighborhood? It could be. It could be. I without having done a bunch of research, it does kind of look like a covenant for the entire neighborhood. I I I agree with
your characterization. It does indicate that in in the uh material we got from someone. It's not a legal document, but it's a summary of and it says these restrictions. This one's recorded on everyone's land.
What it says, these are the restrictions on everyone's land. And then it goes on. Uh there are four listed here. Mhm. One one has to do with the dwelling. Another one has to do with any outuildings so forth. It's and it's in the it's it's also in
the deed as well. I mean and you're right, but I guess the the question really becomes for purposes of zoning. Do we go through and enforce uh you know deed restrictions or the like? Um, just because if you sat here
today and said you've proven to me that this law was inexistent in a buildable law prior to 1957 when zoning was uh was adopted. Therefore, under 48 section 6, I think it's paragraph 4 vacant lot and it has
at least 5,000 ft and 50 foot of grandfathered. It's it's a it's a it's a billable lot. That's That's fine for a dwelling. Well, just Yeah, it's a it's a buildable W lot. Now, that doesn't mean that you
can put in an accessory building because your zoning bylaw doesn't necessarily allow that. It doesn't mean that the neighborhood couldn't bring an action against them. And it doesn't mean that the board of health can say you can't
put a dwelling on there. So Ralph, last week we had a case before us that was then uh they um withdrew their claim on that piece of property. There's an accessory dwelling there that was approved by the building
inspector. It it came through this board though, right? And what they they had the they got a use. How did they get a use? How did they get a use this? That's the laws. It all How did they get a use? It may very well have been a farm, right? So, they could build the barn of
this property if they wanted to under the right to farm. Yeah. In order to qualify, I think you have to have more than five acres or two and a half, right? Whatever. 14. Yeah. No, there's no restriction. No. Department of ages.
The department of agriculture considers one acre far from the far 61a 5 acres in production. I I in as does 61 strike that 4A section three also
defines a farm as either 5 acres or I think it's 2 and 12 acres in production and making at least x amount of and Westport's bylaw for right to farm has that listed the way I just said and that was done at town meeting changed
yeah but it's still not an acre so right you can call yourself a phone but you're not going to get 61A and you're not going to do all But if you read through the deed, the deed says, "Any out building herein constructed, including such building intended for use
as a garage, shall either immediately adjoin the house or be attached to it by a breezeway, except that facilities for a garage may be constructed under the first floor of a dwelling house." So even the deed says that it's got to have a house. Uh I I you could argue that it
means that if you're going to have a house on it, you can't have another building on it. But it says if you're going to have a if you're going to have a house before, yeah, a couple of times down there. Is this the only vacant lot down there? Yes. Yeah. And and our point, we're not disputing,
you know, the facts in terms of the covenants or the new bylaws, but we're really we're just looking for, you know, sympathetic ears in terms of uh, you know, these are upstanding citizens. They live in the community. They've lived there their whole lives. They live
down south. They're planning on spending, you know, the rest of their time up here. They're outdoorsmen. They have boats. They have bikes. They love this area. Um, they approached me. We do a lot of work down the harbor. They approached me uh a few years back and
they said, you know, we've got this vacant lot. It's just sitting here. There's all these other very similar lots, actually exactly the same in size. And um they said they really wanted, you know, to really utilize that property. I mean, if you go up into that
neighborhood, I mean I mean, like I said, we w up there. I actually drove up today. There's uh a house an architect Patrick Ahan just they pretty much they demolished house and they rebuilt the house right next door across the street on Fairway Drive. They did a beautiful job. They came for us.
Yeah, they did they did a beautiful job. Uh I mean if every house in that development looked like that, trust me, you would be pleased that they would be putting structures like this on 12,000 foot lots. and they understand that um
uh we really felt that uh just the previous planning due to no fault of anyone here but I mean uh the previous um lot owners were allowed to put septic systems and wells without the consideration of uh the makers lot. So
at to their detriment uh we felt that really that creates a hardship for them. I mean, now they've had a vacant lot here that met all the criteria at that time, and we understand as time goes by, zoning uh and and laws have changed, but we're not looking to build this a
magnificent structure. We're looking to build a very vernacular uh barn style carriage house that really it's we believe it's going to uh really be a benefit to the neighborhood. Uh they've actually been so kind. They're
actually uh in the past they've allowed uh other neighbors to use that lot because there's very minimal parking there and they've been kind enough to let uh other neighbors use the lot for parking for functions and things like that. And they're going to continue that. They've made uh they're going to
have uh beautifully uh stone walls. We're going to have uh uh gravel driveway. So um uh uh Mrs. Maker, she's an artist. She doesn't they're not looking for uh bathrooms or anything like that. She's an artist. She just wants a little place for a studio. Like
I said, he's got boats and bikes and things like that. It's going to be, like I said, a very uh architecturally uh uh sound building that's going to really blend in with the uh with the neighborhood. And actually, it's going to be really an asset. I think we're going to have uh you can see the
materials we use. We're going to be using very high-end materials. uh cedar shake roof, uh white cedar shingles. It's going to be traditional design. So, we really think it's going to be a benefit both to the neighbors, obviously to the makers, and uh really we're just
looking uh um for you guys to just, you know, be sympathetic towards them and really uh uh really common sense in this. I mean, otherwise, I mean, they're going to have a vacant lot there. I mean, they're going to be uh I mean, they're going to be resorted to putting boats and putting fences and it's going
to really be an eyes saw if uh and I feel we really think it's going to be a benefit. Yeah. I I agree with pretty much everything you said. Yeah. But we have laws. We have to find some way of making this legal. Yeah. Well, we're just we're really our premise is really our we we really think
it's a hardship and it's no fault of theirs and the bundle of law that does grant them some latitude in terms of you guys saying the hardship has to be based on the topography of the land. So if there was a ledge, if there was a stream, if there was something in the way that said you
couldn't do something, that would be a hardship. I bend it a lot. It's a nice square lot and you know the neighborhood is very nice. Um, saying that there's a there's a hardship based on the land is is really a
stretch. But, you know, that's, you know, No, I'm not saying a land. I'm saying just really the circumstances. If you wanted to put a house on it, it probably wouldn't be we it wouldn't be the same discussion because that's allowed. The house you're going to have the problem with because you probably can't
put a septic on it. So you could pass us and and and go to the health department and they would say no you know you you know you can't you know you have to be 100 feet away from everybody's well and I guess when you add up everybody's well there's no place
on your land that isn't 100t away from somebody from somebody's would that be topography of the land I mean that's that's not to zone is there any but I'm saying is that there any opening for us I I mean the opening for you is for them
to prove that this was a law in existence and you give them a determination that it's a pre-existing non-conforming buildable law. That's it, right? Um, not that you can build just a garage on it. Um, you know, I I I'm relooking over
this restriction and I, you know, I got to be honest with you. I I I find it a little self- serving that one person records something that says the restrictions are hereby extended. I I I don't I don't know what that means. But but but in any event, as I said before, I don't think that this is
something that this plant this uh zoning board needs to really get in the weeds on. If the neighbors believe they have a restriction on all the laws, that gives them standing to bring the case. But again, the issue becomes
they have a buildable law. It's not a law under your bylaws that allows just an accessory use. There's also the issue of title five. Now, I would recommend that you get an
attorney and an engineer cuz I don't know I I don't know all the dimensions and I and I do think you can vary Title 5, but we can't. No, you can't. No, you absolutely can't. You absolutely can't. So, I think the best you could do for them tonight is
either ask them to withdraw without prejudice. let them after this discussion go back get people and come back with their ducks or you could make a finding uh well I don't even think you can you know having just received this just now I don't feel comfortable
telling you that law was created prior to 1957 I think we all know from our last meeting bylaws were adopted in 1957 so we've got that off the top of our head this law appears to be created in 1954
they're showing this. I mean, that might be enough for you guys to say, "Yeah, it was created then, and it is a pre-existing non-conforming uh billable law." Mhm. I think that's the best you can give them. But that's not going to allow you to build just an accessory building.
Um cuz when you come in for the zoning for the for the building permit, Ralph's going to say, "No, he's going to he's going to say something a little different, but he's going to say, "It's an accessory building. You don't have a primary use. You're out. you you you show me a primary use, a dwelling, then
I'll I'll issue it. But at that point, Ralph will also check with the check, correct me if I'm wrong, he'll check with the board of health to make sure and and you got to get a check off from them. So, it's it's not impossible for you to do, but it's a it's an interesting one,
you know. It was quite an interesting one when I sat down and del, you know, delve into it. I It's not just a variance from frontage. No. Oh, and I know and we understand that too. I mean, we're not looking for anything that I mean, we're looking for something that's going to better anyone. That's why even we're looking for
recommendation like if you know hypothetically you said no, we don't think it's would you know for the laws like you said or the bylaws it doesn't meet the standards. So, at the end of the day, in terms of the town of West, but even that community, how does it help anybody to have a vacant lot or
what usage can he use? Can he just store anything he wants on that lot and just he can do anything other than that? I mean, we're trying to make a bad situation good for every So, what would you recommend in the event that you So, we do with that lot.
I can't recommend what you should do with it the best nature for every I mean, I hate to see it. I mean, it's a nice little lot. I mean, it would be nice if you build a nice little house, you put something there. You know, the constraints are that if you were to
build you try to build a house on it, from what I understand from the limited documentation we have, it would be difficult to pass Title 5 of the health department. uh if it wasn't for that I you know uh I think again assuming that
your deed you know and you know you know assuming everything is squared away that it is a pre-existing that you know that the deed is before 1957 and it was a non you know it was a it was assigned a lot back then then uh if it was buildable then it's buildable now essentially it's
grandfathered in but we still have to abide by the building code and the health code currently and and there was a piece there was something we also got I don't have it right now with me but they had gotten the they got either the variance from
the frontage um requirements previously to build the lot but then they never buil built a house but they never built the house on it so therefore it went stale that was back in I think your dad might have done that in the 60s or something yes the other option is as I said before you could grant him a use theory use
but it's got to be based on shapes soil and top or topography. Can you use the size of the loft on that? No. No. No. And you can't use top. You can't use septics. Yeah. In the way. Septic wouldn't be considered soil
conditions between the septic because that's really the thing that is prohibiting them to do it is the soil conditions of the buddies who Yeah. I mean, they're pretty I mean, and like I said, that is no fault of theirs. I mean that's really uh where we're really kind
of emphasis on the hardship. I mean uh they that that is the problem is the soil conditions of the septics that's creating a problem to build that and it was they didn't create that condition. We believe that the abundance created those conditions and they disregarded
the fact that that lot whether it was the building department or the previous uh administration whoever's was at the board of health they didn't take that in consideration when they granted um uh those conditions in terms of you know
septic systems on those uh abuing properties. I mean that should have been considered at the time when that was um when when those permits were being presented for building permits for them. That's no fault of theirs that that wasn't considered you know
title five wasn't title five probably was in existence when those building permits got pulled. I'm not saying they couldn't have they couldn't have for thought that at some point there's going to be this thing called title five that's going to require that septics and wells need to be 100t away from each
other. So they couldn't have done it then. They were just following the rules of the day. No, I'm not saying it's their fault, but yeah, I mean zoning changed all the time and we understand that. But we really argument was really like I mean they're in a position where like I said they're
not looking to do any they I mean they were doing something that's very modest. we thought it was going to be a noble thing to do and we didn't think and we understand you guys are here to do your job but really that was really the hardship that we thought was the soil conditions due you know from the septic
and uh um really that's you know that's really kind of we're looking for some latitude on that end before we get much further I am going to read a couple of um correspondence just to just put it into the record um zoning
trust board zoning board we are writing this letter in support of regarding Jeff and Champagne Makers desire to build an art studio garage on their uh Pierce Road lot. Uh the Makers are our neighbors. The Maker family has contributed to the Westport community for many generations. His parents were
raised here as well as his grandparents. He is committed to the community. Now that Jeff and Champagne are retired, they are spending more time here and less time at the primary residence in Charlotte, North Carolina. It is obvious that Jeff Champagne deeply cares about Westport by the time spent here and their actions such as joining the
Westport wershed and how well they maintain their house at 15 Fairway Drive. Um, we have heard of a possible restriction on the lot regarding any building not attached to a house. We know they have been denied a septic permit as the adjacent lots previously built and placed their system so close
to their lot line at the required distance between systems isn't possible. They would like to be allowed to build an art studio garage without septic as an alternative. We have seen the plans and talked with Jeff and Champagne about how they would develop the lot. In our opinion, it would be a fine addition to the neighborhood, a quintessential New
England style structure. Additionally, they want to add a stone wall and Shell Drive. They even designed the north facing side to appear as a house so as to not diminish neighborhoods aesthetics. We hope this letter and support carries some weight and helps the makers gain approval of their plans.
As we know, they will respect and honor beauty of Westport, Jonathan and Christine Burillo, nine uh fairway drive. Uh I have another I'm this one lengthy so I'm not going to read the whole thing. Um dear members of the
Westport zoning board of appeals. It's from Holly and David Cummings. And again, it is it is uh uh let's see if I can just uh every every neighbor has been able to build on their property and they were
owner of 10 Pierce Road, they would want the right to build just as the mayors are requesting. In our opinion, there is no plausible reason for any effort to try and block this request. We wholeheartedly encourage the board to approve this application. So, um anyway, that's the correspondence from from uh
the neighbors. Does the well have any effect on it yet? There's a well non potable portable. Yeah, I mean I I don't I mean unfortunately they have to get a septic system on to for the for the dwelling part of it.
Um I my advice is to get an attorney that might be able to help you out with this. I don't know if there are alternative systems that could be used
through title five. Um, somebody would, you know, an attorney may consider I I Yeah, that's what I'm thinking in my mind, but but don't I'm not giving you legal advice. And that's why I just think if you if you get a if you get somebody in here
that that knows the town might be able to assist you to get to the board of health. Um, you know, I I think you've probably can prove that it's a pre-existing non-conformant bill of a lot. I think you I think you're there on that. Then the the two issues are you
got to put some type of dwelling up there in order to to be able to satisfy the the bylaw absent a use variance. And I I don't think these guys are ready to give a use variance. And and frankly, if they give you a use variance, it'll be
very susceptible to challenge shape, soil, topography. Um, you you'll get in a butter to run into court and and challenge it. And, you know, you don't want that. I know you probably wanted to save some money, but it might be best if you if you get a lawyer in
and then maybe even an engineer to assist you at the board of health. So, if we gave them a use variance and the 20 days went by and no one no one complained and that structure was there for 10 years, you you're saying that a a
a new owner down there could challenge no 20 days to challenge you and it doesn't seem like they're going to challenge. I I'm just It just, you know, it sounds like it doesn't it doesn't seem like they're going to ch or we could we could say if
we give them a use if we're okay. I mean, we got to figure out a way to give them a use variance, of course, under the the laws. But if we did, it's only a 20-day waiting period, and then they know and once they get the permit, they're fine. And then they got to exercise the variance within one year.
Yeah, that's what happened. The they already had Yeah. And they didn't exercise. It Yeah. And that was before all the title f was in the 60s, so it was before title five. So, has there been a a formal um determination by the board of health
that you cannot put any septic there? Oh, well, um we presented it to the moment. I don't know. I don't even know if it made to the uh there was a yes, there was a letter in 2011 to cosmack realy from the board of
health saying that lot is located in the corner. there's no dwelling or structure that would activate a grandfather clause for variance from title 5. So if there had have been a pre-existing well and a pre-existing septic and they were just trying to upgrade it, they would get a variance. But the fact that there wasn't
a septic on the property, at least to the the extent of a grandfather clause, but I think what our attorney is saying, there may be some alternative systems that can be put into place. Um, but then you still have the water issue
because there's a it's not a it's it's not a floatable well and you're in Westward Harbor, so there ain't no water down there. Excuse me. But it's notable. No, I was in the middle of a sentence. Okay.
I know that the uh board of health has granted waiverss to 50 ft. uh and uh but it may be that that's like on a repair uh on an existing uh
situation. So that's why I'm asking is there been a formal No, no, there hasn't. I mean Ralph reviewed it and obviously you know he kicked it back based on the uh um uh the setback requirements and the frontage. So you don't think these folks have ever gone No help for an actual
No. And and the same thing I mean we we haven't entertained I mean with the engineers I mean we've done closed systems before. There's other alternatives. Uh we really um we weren't I mean we were trying to we really they really weren't looking to build a
structure. We really thought that this would satisfy everyone. We didn't they're not looking to build another home. They didn't they didn't want to have make a big impact in terms of having another residence. And it was nothing like that. they were really just trying to make the best usage out of
that property. But if it meant obviously we have to go down the road and you know I spoke to the uh city planner and he's an engineer and I spoke to him about it and he said everything that the attorney said that it was a pre-existing lot. Obviously, it doesn't meet the uh the
current uh zoning bylaws, but you could build, you know, they could by right build a house on there, a residence out there as long as we could get around the septic. Uh and that was the problem. But the problem with that was the butters they have, you know, the the the 100
foot setbacks with the wells and that's creating a problem. So, but there is a private water system down there. We had talked about, you know, obviously tying into that system if possible. Uh, so instead of having a private well, I mean, there are other options, but they
really they they thought that really, like I said, this would be the best uses. they weren't looking to build a dwelling, but if that's what it took to like circumvent, you know, obviously these issues, obviously, uh we, you know, appreciate you giving us time to do that before you made a decision, but
really we just really thought this was the best interest everybody to build a carriage house that was in keeping with the neighborhood and made in terms of common sense, it made the most common sense to me and all of us involved. We understand that obviously you guys have uh uh there's laws and rules that have
to be followed, but we were really just looking obviously for uh some consideration and really a variance to say, "Hey, um uh this would make the most practical sense for that lot." And we still believe that, be honest with you. You you you really want to put an art studio in there without a bathroom?
Yeah. I mean, they literally live right across the street. They live across. Oh, how many how many Excuse me. How many bedrooms in the main house? Um, what is it? Is it in the main house? Three. There's three. Yeah. Do you need three? Do we need three?
Well, I'm just saying, you know, at Catman's Neck, we we had a guy build a boat house across the street. He made his He tied his septic system from the house into that. Yeah, you could probably tie That's interesting. Might be able
That's interesting. I just don't know because of the road. We'd probably have to get some kind of an easement right to cross the road. I'm not saying it's not possible. I just don't know if it's practical. But if all of your neighbors are in support, uh perhaps that possible. Yeah,
you'd have to eliminate one bedroom in the main house and and just say, yeah, the other bedroom is now in the other bedroom is now, you know, on the top of maybe perhaps the garage and artist studio. There's a bedroom upstairs, right?
or in a be you have to have a full you have to be a full working it have a kitchen a bathroom and a bedroom where there's at least a kitchen right there be a studio they weren't they wouldn't build a house anyway but they could build a house that's not going to look kitchen
it's confusing I'm trying not to be negative but I understand there is rules no I understand Um, well, since you're here, um, you might as well describe here what, uh, what it is you plan on building. Uh, it looks
like, uh, the first floor is all garage. Yeah. Um, the second floor looks like just one big open area. That's it. It's just one big open space. It's uh, it's really just an old style. I mean, we call it, they said garage, but carriage house really. And it was
just going to be um big old barn doors on the front. Uh uh like I said, uh very vernacular, simple design. How how high is it? Um it's roughly it's within the the go. It's only a story and a half. So we're probably we got 8ft walls, probably
another to the Koopa. We're less than probably 25 ft. Okay. And I looked at where you put it. Setbacks are fine. You know, they think there's you're not violating any setback zoning
regulations. Um, but we're still What do you think is what do you think is what do you think of the the design of the building? It doesn't really matter to us. No, unfortunately. We're not to rule on aesthetics. Um,
we don't rule on aesthetics. I mean, you can It's not our job to tell people how they can build. Off the record, do you like it? It's terrible.
No, we just uh Yeah, it's even withinics of a corner lot. I mean, the setbacks of a corner lot, they have to have it both. Yeah. of often times we uh we have to agree
with you about common sense and a lot of the times the rules that we have to go by are not common sense and that's partly because we have a towel meeting and you can't really explain things and things get halfbaked in the way the
wording is and so uh it's just the way it is we have to deal with that stand. But we're still stuck with a rule that says we can't have an accessory use without a it's got to be an accessory to something. That's why I think that they ought to go
and either formally or informally discuss with the board of health what they really can do or can't do. Right. And I think Ray's suggestion of uh possibly reducing the uh if it's that closer right directly across the
No, it's actually it's not directly across. Yeah, it's Yes, it's pretty tight down there. Well, you know, you might be able to get away with something like that. You reduce the bedroom size. We we've dealt with that uh on this floor. We dealt
with that with some of these uh uh mother-in-law apartment things, you know, the ADUs and so forth where you have to reduce the uh bedroom size in one area in order to build the other,
but we don't we haven't gotten into crossing streets. But I mean, I'd like to I' That's a I'm sort of on the I could make an argument that the soil and the topography because of the the
neighborhood wells makes it impossible to put a septic on the property. But so I think to your point, if you show to us that you couldn't put a septic on that property and some case law showing that
something similar to either well location septic location title five is it does an appropriate hardship is an appropriate hardship under soils and topography. I would then be
satisfied that we could issue a use variance. But I think until we know for sure that you can't put a septic in it because I think because you said that there are we there and I remember that we had some waiverss where the town can do a 50ft waiver to a
well yeah because are is any of the neighbors using their wells or are they all using the the the public water supply? No wells. Yeah. I believe the uh um I believe the back eddi has a septic
system. It's completely across the street. So, and that never they own both pieces before us because that really is part of a commercial property now and that should have come before this board, but that's a another
issue. Yeah. Uh, so I'm just saying if you talk with the board of health in an official capacity, maybe they've got some ideas for you. I'm going to open it up to the public here in a minute, but I I also want to describe what your options are. Okay.
Um, we can go ahead with the uh voting on a variance. Now, if it fails, you can't do anything for two years. anything similar. Um, you could ask for a continue, excuse me,
they're asking they're asking for a variance of the frontage, but in reality, they would also need a a use variance, which they didn't apply for, right? I just want to make that clear, right? Um, you can ask for a continuence if you wanted to provide additional
information. Uh, you can also withdraw without prejudice. And what that allows you to do is essentially this never happened. You can come back next week with a with another petition that you know you know to satisfy whatever the issues are. So
those those are your those are your three options. You know the the various one obviously it passes you're you're good to go and you know have fun. If it fails you got two years before you can do anything. um you know like I said then you know you know the continument
just allows us to gather more you know you to gather more information or um uh withdrawing without prejudice allows you then to take your time and come back when you know what uh you know you know when when you've really ironed out
whatever issues the the board has brought up. So those are your three options. I just want to make sure you understand that before we before we move on. Right. Well, we're willing to Before you give me a minute. You have to come and actually talk to
that microphone. So, but before we do that, I want I want to hear from uh from the audience. Is there any anybody who wants to uh voice their opinion on this? Hi, my name is Kate Wilson. I live at 22
Fairway Drive, which is directly attached to the south side of Jeff's lot. I understand Jeff is asking for a hardship variance
under the zoning bylaw 7.5 to build a non-residential structure. With all due respect, it should have not even gotten this far
to grant this variance. The Westport Board of Health already determined years ago title five under title five that Jeff's lot is non-buildable because there are five wells
servicing five houses whose total radi encompass the entirety of his lot. If you allow him this variance to build, your decision will affect those wells
and our five homes uninhabitable. It doesn't matter whether Jeff says he won't put in a septic system andor he won't put in a well. Just digging a foundation
for the non-residential building will compromise all these five wells. And I'm sure I don't need to tell you about the groundwater contamination from chemicals and bacteria
that are caused by digging a foundation. Allowing construction on Jeff's lot will negatively impact the five portable water wells integrity and stability. Finally, allowing Jeff to build a non-residential structure in violation
of the codes that protect our wells could lead to issues selling any of our five homes in the future. Okay. Thank you. Thank you. Uh just just one comment on that. Sure. Um
they could legally build a house there and there anything anybody could do about it assuming that that I mean if if it wasn't for the fact that the septic issue there was nothing stopping them from building a house there,
a two or threebedroom house. Mhm. you know, 30,000 square feet, not 33,000 square feet. So, the fact that they want to put a a garage there would be less than if they were going to build a house there. you know, so
it just worries me about the I've seen foundations going in and realize that the that uh uh they if the pro if the if the if we determined the land is grandfathered so that it is buildable and if it were in
fact buildable from a water standpoint, then they could build a house there and there's nothing that anybody could do to stop them. No. Anyway, I just want you to don't understand that. I don't just because I thought the letter from the board of health. I'm just saying if if right if
if if it were not that there was a septic issue, they could build a house there and you're saying that that the garage would have affected your wells, the house would affect your wells. If you believe that, then the house would be just as bad for you. So anyway, that's Yeah. as well as the other house that we
disapproved the permit for recently that was in the same range of your house and the other five houses. I mean, there's been many there's been a lot of construction down there. Um, and we I guess I understand your point, but
there's also there's a lot of other issues regarding water down in the West Port Harbor area than you putting a foundation in, which probably wouldn't even be a full foundation anyway because you don't need a you don't need a you don't need a basement because you don't got any. No, we'd only be diving in, you know,
below the frost line for Thank you for coming up. I I I understand your concern. Um um and I and I don't know how we put this but uh sometimes
uh the alternative is worse than than you know than what's proposed. I have a question. Uh you you heard this earlier talk about all these restrictions that have been the deeds. Yes,
they're not the town rules. Uh, from your knowledge, do you or all of the other neighbors comply with all of those restrictions? So, every 20 years, every 20 years
apparently you can extend the deed restrictions. My grandfather started the deed restrictions. Then my father 20 years later and then again another 20 years later and I which was the 2001 where everyone signed
including bill maker Jeff's father signed the deed restriction and then in the year 2021 during co I extended the deed restrictions. that
what did you do to extend the deed restrictions? Eliminate them. I'm sorry. Did you eliminate the deed restrictions? I I don't know what you mean by extend extended them. So, uh, way back when in 1957
56, um, Steve Howland, the owner of this, uh, huge Yeah, exactly. Um, put deed restrictions on the whole neighborhood, which is what
you had in your hand, and there were four deed restrictions. So after that is when we just extended them. We have documentation that says uh that you can do that. I've got it here but I would be shifting every 20 years it expires. Is that
correct? Correct. If you don't get it right after 20 years it expires. But so you have to do it before the 20 years is up. So you don't change any of the content of the of the just simply extend the time period.
Is that correct? Correct. I'll go back to my question. Uh, and the reason I'm asking this is if we were to get through all of this. Uh, I'm not certain, but our town attorney
has indicated that we have no part in the deed in enforcing the ste a deed restriction, but the neighbors may. And so that is why I'm asking questions. Are they all abiding by those deed restrictions?
The the butters are as far as I know. Okay. Anyone else? Thank you. Good evening everyone. My name is Matt Glendining. I live at 3 Pierce Road, which is uh directly adjacent to the property in question uh to the west. Um,
I'm glad that we were just talking about the the deed because I I just wanted um by way of real world context, um, I purchased this property at 3 Pierce Road in 2016. Talk a little louder. Sorry. Yeah. I purchased the property at Three Pierce Road in 2016. And the question of the buildability or not of
that adjacent lot was absolutely a part of the way my property was marketed to the public and I believe also reflected in the price uh that was asked for that property. And as part of our own due diligence in exploring that property, we hired a lawyer to look into these
various issues and were given very strong assurance um that the deed restrictions on all the properties in the neighborhood would prevent um in all likelihood a single family dwelling because of the septic issues, not because of a house per se in of itself, but the related septic issues and also
the fact that a a separate freestanding garage would not be allowed either. So, I believe that was factored into the price that um I and others were looking at for that property. Also, relatedly, and this may seem like a weird thing to bring up, but um the price that um Jeff
paid for the parcel in question, which I believe was $50,000, clearly has factored in the um severe restrictions on the buildability of the lot. So, to suddenly determine uh that it is buildable, I I think is um it just feels
very very off to me. Thanks. I'm John Oanosy. I live at uh 25 Fairway, which is right across the street from this lot. And uh I've been looking at this pretty hard. I've I've walked over and I've talked to Bill
Maker about four times. went in, he showed me plans, we talked about this, and uh I can tell you from talking to Bill that he was extremely aware or very aware of all the restrictions that were on this property, including the subdivision extra restrictions. He was
aware of the uh the Title 5 issues and I think he just expected to get around him. So, there's evidence of that. One day you wake up and he's been drilling a well in the back of the property. Very close to the Glen Denning well. It was shut down by the town cuz it was too
close to the borderline, too close to their well, too close to their septic. It sits there, not even capped, no electric, no well pump in it. So he he um Mr. maker purchased a lot uh in the LA just in the last few years and like I
said he was definitely aware of the declaration from the board of health in 2011 that said under title 5 the lot is not buildable. In 2001 uh Jeff's father signed a recorded joint subdivision declaration pledging to
defend the subdivision zoning restrictions. And maybe some of you might real remember that that was inspired by the late Bill Divine who bought lot 191 and he was his thing was to come in and drive it through the town
and and get it done. He did that house on Atlantic which is up in the air right up against the bull rushes there and got everybody pretty upset. So anyway, in 2022, in spite of all the Title 5 issues and the restrictions, Jeff's father went
ahead and and drilled a well, as I mentioned, that was stopped by the town. Uh the lot is non-conforming. It's under 60,000 ft. It's never had a structure on it, which might give it any grandfather rights.
And I I when I look at the drawing, I get to look at the garage doors. Um, it suggests to me additional uses versus just storage for a small car, a boat, and an artist studio. It's quite substantial and it would cost a lot of
money for those minim min minimal uses. So once we would I don't understand why why we're here at zoning right now given what they know. They should be as your suggestion is they should be at board of health. Okay. They already know they're going to face that. And if they were to
get a variance, they know they're going to face us because we're going to challenge them on the subdivision restrictions. At least the abuters are around that. Um, see, let's see. Uh, so we we like we we mentioned, I'm just being a little redundant with what I was talked about,
but we say no sing only single family units on the property, no detached garages. Uh the the the restrictions are placed in 1957, but they did come from the seller of the property when he wanted he
was going to it just along Howland Road. He wanted to see this property developed right on the golf course there and uh in fact uh it's renewed every 20 years. It's been very nicely renewed recorded in Bristol County and the last renewal
was in 2021. Every lot developed in the subdivision since the restrictions were put in has complied with the restrictions. In fact, the most recent house, which is 29, beautiful house that you've all seen, had to make some adjustments be in order to comply with
the subdivision restrictions. So, my conclusion here is, like I said, I don't really understand why we're here given that Jeff and and his father knew exactly what the problems were. I think he would have gone to the board of health at the beginning to figure that
out to get through it. Then he would had to face the subdivision. He knew that wasn't going to fly with a subdivision and uh and they even evidence of that is he even had a water well that was drilled that was shut down that the town is going to take uh take action. So, I
guess what I think about is in our subdivision, we have 15 homes and they seem to get nicer all the time. And zoning is about, you know, keeping things consistent, keeping the quality in a town and keeping, you know,
regularity of of the development in the subdivision. I mean, we're all aware of uh East Beach, you know, where you don't have any zoning there or whatever zoning that you have. So, to take a subdivision like ours, which is 100% houses except
for one lot, which you can guess why it wasn't buildable, and to stick a garage on there is just very inconsistent with, you know, good zoning, which is to have housing all the way around like it was put in the original uh subdivision restrictions.
So anyway, I hope that you will well whatever hope you've given them three options but thank you for letting me speak. Okay, thank you. Anyone else? Petition want to say something now that you've heard everybody.
Okay. My name is Jeff Maker and I uh live at 15 Fairway Drive. Um just sorry just a a couple of things. Um first off just to uh address what was
just said. Uh I was uh totally not aware of the fact if it is a fact that the town had uh quote unquote shut down our well. In fact, the well
was dug and it's capped. And I have that's the first I've ever heard of anybody saying anything about the well not being what it's supposed to be. So that's news to me. Um, I think it's interesting in that when
you look at the Howland uh blueprint of the subdivision that besides what we've already mentioned that the this lot is the same size or bigger than many of the lots,
especially the lots that are on Hillside going down to Atlantic A. uh those are uh 100 ft by 98 ft. So just for the record uh I I I feel I wanted to
mention that but more importantly when we mention uh you know are we in compliance with the deed restrictions you asked uh Mrs. Wilson. Uh if you go down now, Hillside
is part of this uh the original Howland plans that were drawn up. You go down hillside and there's a garage separate from a house. There's an out building separate from
the house. Uh you c you can go right down. In fact, we have pictures here of this. Um, yeah. So, it it's not as though we're the first to to kind of raise our hand and say, you know, can we do something
here? Um, as far as the price goes on the lot, I mean, I wasn't privy to the to the uh transaction, so I certainly can't um uh say for 100% sure, but uh it
we don't know what what the transaction was between my father and Bill Divine. Uh they were friends for many years. Why did Bill Divine decide to sell it to him at that price?
I don't know. Uh I do know that he was sick at the end. He was he was elderly. He was sick. Was he in control of his faculties complet? I don't know. I don't know what the story was, but I I don't see that. Uh
what year was that? That was um was the year before he p it would have been uh let's see sorry let me get my 20 he passed in 2019 2018 um
and as far as the septic goes you know initially we did want uh to do something more than a garage, a little cottage
perhaps like uh the cottage that's to the west of us. Uh incorporating a a small garage where we could keep a boat or a car or something. Um but we had
questioned Lenny Potter and you know so I am told he is virtually the the god around here in terms of septic systems etc. And if Lenny thinks
there's a possibility, you know, then go check on it with the board of health. Do what if he doesn't, then you're pretty much you can't do it. And that's what the word came back. And he said, you know, you're just so landlocked here.
Yeah. I've never heard Lenny say no to anything. So uh you know so that's why we because I don't want anybody here to think as I think it has been implied that we were
trying to circumvent the system or do something that we shouldn't do. That was not our intent. It was strictly that we had been told that fat chance there and you know maybe your opportunity would be
it's a hardship and that all the other neighbors were able to be had we done this 30 years ago or whenever no problem. Mhm. Mhm. But because we're the last ones to come to the party, so to speak, you get the leftovers.
Yeah. We get the leftovers which is zilch. And so my, you know, of course it's obviously frustrating, but it's also uh, you know, you wonder, okay, is the is the town now going to give me
a tax break? Am I going to continue paying taxes for something that I I can't even use? Um, what's the point? Am I going to keep mowing it? It's a nice clean lot. You said you had been there. Uh, we keep it
nice, etc. for the neighborhood. We let people park there. Am I going to continue to do why? Why am I going to pay for I'm going to let the trees grow up if it blocks views? It block if if people can't park there. I mean, I don't
want to sound overly vindictive, but let's be honest. I mean, what the heck, you know? I mean, anyway, I've said my piece. How do you want to proceed tonight? So, I'd like to withdraw without prejudice.
Okay, we have a uh a motion to do we have to close the um No, if you need motion to to withdraw, we don't close the hearing for that. I don't I don't think you have.
No. No. So, we need we need to make a motion. Committee makes a motion. Uh I make a motion to accept the petitioners uh withdrawal of without prejudice. All right, we have a motion. Do we have a second? Second.
Discussion. Discussion. All in favor say I. I. I. All oppose. No. That's uh that's granted. So, um thank you. You're free to me again. You could come back tomorrow with with a with a different set. And that's the that's that's the good thing about withdrawing
without prejudice. It's essentially like this never happened. But at least you get all the information, all the issues, all the, you know, all the the hard points in order for you to understand how you can proceed. And I think and there is a 20-day
appeal, but you withdrew. So it's it's hard to peel off. But I guess that what he really would require if it truly is not a buildable lot because of septic issues is a
a use variance which was not what you came in front of us for. Um, as our attorney said, use variances are usually up to challenge pretty well. And there are three people I would say that would
challenge it if we did give it. Um, but if you again, I think I said earlier, if you can give us if you did hire an attorney, gave us case law to say that our interpretation of soil and topography would include the lack of the ability to put a
well on it, then I think the um anybody who would, you know, oppose it would might have a harder time opposing it in court. uh in the uh zoning by bylaws. Uh, one
important aspect of uh of this uh situation is found actually in uh a place where you probably wouldn't even know that it's there and that is in section three definitions and it's under
the definition of accessory use uh which uh states as was mentioned earlier that uh uh accessory use without a primary uh um has to be on the same lot. So, you
might want to look at that as with or your attorney or whatever cuz it's kind of varied. That's fine. Okay. Thank you. Okay. Thank you all and thank everybody else for coming. It's it's good to see, you know, neighbors show up and provide
uh you know, input uh just so that you know, everybody understands what, you know, uh what the pros and cons are of a you know, a project like this. Thank you. Thank you. Thank you. Thank you.
Good. We're good. All right. Well, thanks for coming. It was a pleasure. And maybe when these guys come back, I'll be back after. See you guys. Thank you. Um I was going to do
I didn't build it. Okay. Um, we we're going to I I I had on the agenda to do a change to the rules and procedures and and u but there's only five of us here and I really don't feel comfortable
going through the modification of our there's only two. You can see the first one is right here on the web page. It's in red. Thank you. Thank you, Ralph. Uh it just uh does and there's another one.
Um so anyway, I'll give everybody a copy of this they can go over. I'm not going to do it today because I I'm not comfortable with only five of the seven members here. I think if we're going to vote on uh procedures and and officers that we ought to have, you know,
everybody present. I'll take the other two copies and put them in. Put them in your things. Yes, that's that's good. And I'll put it on the agenda for next week, which I already posted. Um, that's gonna be a lot.
Put it Put it on anyway. If we get to it, fine. Depending. We can always kick it to the next. We can always kick it to the I don't think there's a rush on this. There's not a rush on this. No. So, um, you can see there's only two changes on page one. It just says the chair may assign the vice chair to preside over a
meeting or hearing where currently if the chair is here, he's the chair for the meeting. And the second one is way down on page six. And what essentially that says is that
an alternate member alternate members will only be seated if one of the five members is unable to vote or to replace a regular member by a majority vote of the regular members. So that allows us to then on a on a given hearing to
assign an alternate to be a voting member. And I talked to uh to Jeff Blake about both of these and he didn't see an issue with either. Now um in both of these I think it should be clearly stated that whether or
not the person given up the chair for example uh is in an attend is in attendance and whether or not they are um in conflict or in other words it's not it's not just for the
uh yes that's well anyway you can read it because Yeah. I just mean the chair may assign. Obviously, he has to be there in order to assign it. No, you could you could know that you're not going to be here next week and you say, "Well, I want you to
but but if he's not here, the vice chair is automatically share." Yeah. Okay. So, anyway, if you know, again, word smithing is fine. This is a draft. This is the first thing we did when I joined was
I'm glad to have this. We we we worked on a lot of revisions. That was the first thing that was we were doing a lot when I first joined the board. This piece of little procedural thing. Yes. So, it' be good to review the whole thing to see if there's any other cuz we went through a lot.
Yeah. You read through it. There's anything else that Do I have uh something else I have to sign today? No. No. I don't have any meetings or No minutes. No minutes. No. Oh, no. This was just a copy. Okay. The election. You don't have everybody here either. No,
that's what I said. I'm not I'm not I'm not going to do that either because we I don't feel comfortable doing that with only five of the seven people here. So, Rich, when you like So, you've lived in town forever. So, you know, probably what 50 60% of the people that come in
front Yeah. Well, working at least for 48 years, right? And so, that's what I'm finding too is that like just because you know them doesn't that doesn't mean there's a conflict. Okay. Correct. It's just like because like I knew um Brendan Lord
growing up Kathy was I told you okay we talk about other stuff. Yeah. If there's any other business I'll make a motion to adjourn the meeting. Second. Are we favorite?