Meeting transcript
Zoning Board of Appeals - Public Hearing and Regular Meeting
October 20, 2021 · Watch on YouTube · All meetings
Recording stopped. Oh, did I catch that? Sorry about that. Keep going. I'm sorry. Okay, very good. Okay, can we have a roll call? So we have Walt Ware, correct? We have Kathleen Sorka. We have Bill DeRoziers. And we have who else? William Monroe. So there's our four, which makes it nice because we can vote. That's good. Beautiful. Okay. So three, any additions or changes to agenda? No, yes, no, no, I'm sorry. None for me.
And for you. Okay, this is the part where we get the public participation So Jim is this we just open it up for anybody that can speak? Well, it's it's it's for any it's for anything other than the application for you. Gotcha.
Discussion of the matter would be held till public hearings open.
Great. So do we have any public participation from anybody on the line tonight? I would take that as a no. We can move to the public hearing should I read the public hearing Jim. Why not ZBA
twenty one-twelve-two application of Nick Clark and I'm sorry if I pronounced this wrong Breeden Duncan. They are the applicant property owners at 33 Lake Road AKA assessor's map is 32 Block 48, Lot 91 Through 9. The applicants are seeking relief from section 11.2 of the Andover zoning regulations. More specifically, the applicants are requesting a reduction in the side yard setback from 25 feet to three feet so as to allow for the construction of an accessory structure as shown on plan accompanying the application date and received and on file a town and Andover's building and land use office of 09/29/2021. I'm not sure if that's your phone, Walt. It's it's a of It's a lot of noise in the background.
Yeah. I keep cooking up. They turn my volume down. Maybe that'll help. Okay. I'm sure. Is that any better?
Sounds a little better. Thank you. Thank you. Yeah. Okay. So at this time, the the public hearing is open and is this where people would be able to speak, Jim, from the applicants?
Yep. Bill, I what I was two things I'd like to just make clear. The the notice reads construction of an accessory. It's really the placement of a of the shed. Just in the old days, they used to build them, now they place them. A minor minor details doesn't I don't think it throws anything off much. But as you know, the applicant needs four affirmative votes and is usually given the option of moving forward when there's less than the full contingent of six. And that's just giving me that's typically what what has happened historically. It doesn't it's not required. It's just sort of courtesy to the applicant. Right. You know, also, I guess, where I'm going with this is also if people are comfortable with with opening the hearing, I mean, you can always continue it. Certainly, if there was issues with with viewing the site or what have you.
Okay. I don't know if I know I went out to see the site. I know you did, Jim. I think Walt Ware said he was out there. Did anybody else, Bill or Kathleen, were you able to get out and view the site? No, I didn't. I drove by it.
Is this the point where the applicant can speak on their behalf, Jim?
Yeah. I mean, I guess the thing to do, the right, the best approach is open public hearing, give the have the applicant explain the application and then open it for comment and at some point. Give the applicant the ability to hold off until there's a better contingent We do have the ability with them. Correct me if I'm wrong here, Abby, but I mean, we we these all these meetings are recorded on thumb drive and can be viewed. So if somebody was not able to make tonight's meeting, they would have the ability to review it in its entirety. Correct? Yep. It will be on YouTube. Okay. It could be on YouTube.
But we applicant could could before the before the meeting is, I'm sorry, before the hearing is closed, could express their desire to hold off, which at which you would continue with the hearing as opposed to close it. But we procedural could move. Option that's that
I'm throwing out there. Right, but they could they could state it and we could move it to discussion and then we could bring it to a vote if we wanted to. Yeah, I just want to make it clear that just statute really,
they need four affirmative votes. Gotcha. Okay. So, have four members, if I,
right? I think you're right. Okay. So, let's go ahead then and open for the public hearing and I guess either Nick or Braden, if you have something that you would like to say to the the zone board.
This is Nick. I'm not entirely sure if everybody got a chance to review the documentation that we provided to the team. But essentially what we did, and I could share my screen if anyone would want to take a look. But what we did is we went and purchased a shed at the Big E this year. We planned the shed around the property where we had one spot where it would fit. The spot is not within 25 feet of the neighbors. It's closer to a border than that. Think I have permission to share the screen, so I'll share the diagram I drew.
Most of us should have those documents in front of us. Have that.
Know Walt's got it, so I think most of us have it. Bill, do you have it? Yeah, if it's on the agenda here. PDF, yeah, it's part of the PDF. I'm looking right at it. Yeah, I've got it.
Thank you for Yeah, I'm sorry, I wasn't able to pull that up on my screen. But essentially what's going on on this diagram is we have a septic and leach fields, which is mixed with wetland that won't allow us to place the shot in that certain area. There's wooded area next to that and also wooded area behind on the other side of the septic tank. When the people came to do the inspection for the house, we were told specifically not to put anything on or near the septic tank. And beyond that area, about halfway down right where the back of the shed would end is wetland area. We're really not able to put anything there as well. What we were asking for is essentially, leeway on the property border to have some distance between us and the property line for the shed to go where we were proposing it to be.
Gotcha. Now, this is the spot if when I looked, I didn't see any stakes out there. I was hoping that it was staked off, but on that kind of that high know where the big Rock, the outcrop is. Yes, that is correct.
And I see. So if you were to go anywhere off of that rock, we basically put you down in the middle of the yard. Close to that leach field, I guess.
Yes, it would be in it would be around the leach field or in the yard or possibly in the wetlands. Anything else you'd like to add at this point?
I have nothing to add other than I'll be happy to answer questions if anyone has any on the call. Oh, was just, I'm sorry. I was just about.
This is how it's made. Make a few comments here. Jim. Okay.
I just, for clarity, I think I I just wanna go over the plan a little bit a little bit I'm sure it's hard to read hard to read. We just got this scale scale. There's there's a line, relatively dark line off to the left hand side, which is quite irregular, which is is the actual wetlands, flag wetlands. The base map came from subdivision plan plan. And then there's there is the regulated area line line, which is a 100 feet off of that, which it is marked very hard to read. If you look down towards the bottom left bottom left, there's an arrow arrow to a line that that basically gives you that 100 foot regulated area. Now this is this is the map that that Nick used, I believe was basically the site plan as opposed to perhaps perhaps it has built. I I'm not absolutely sure. But but that as you can notice, the house was placed over on the right hand side of the property, presumably to avoid wetlands wetlands. That driveway is not entirely accurate. I don't think it has any particular bearing on the on the application, but the driveway is more to the the garage, which is which is on the right side of the house. Right. And the only the only you if you look up look up, there's a sort of a pull off pull off right right here to the right of that of well well, the actual driveway. It's odd that it appeared it that appears, but the driveway itself seems to go to go to the left to the left. Again, not any huge bearing, but but in actual fact, the driveway goes goes straight to to the garage on the right side of the house of the house, and the the
there's a little pull off right the right the where you turn around the car around around or an additional car car or in the event you had a shed there shed there might be where you'd unload unload. Nick, is that accurate accurate?
Yeah. It looks like you you kinda see the lines, Jim. There is a second set of lines that are a lot lighter, but they go straight into the garage and then you see a pull off to the to the right hand side.
I honestly know I have no idea what idea what the big circle is down right along the along the front. The circle with the lines lines in it. I I cannot read it. Cannot read it. The the circle with the two with the two concentric circles is is a proposed well well. Again, this is a subdivision plan. That's not to say that the well was actually installed there, but there's a proposed well with with with two concentric circles which which speak to to public health code. If there's a curtain drain, there's a specific requirement distance as opposed to a house without a curtain drain. So so designers designers put both of those circles on there. Just just Just for clarification, just in case anybody was wondering. If anybody has any questions about the plan, mean, the location of the septic system appears to be pretty accurate from what I could tell being on-site. It's really directly behind the house. And the and the tank the tank the tank is probably pretty close to to where it's shown here shown here.
Yeah. There's little two little squares right there, Jim. Just kind of below the right there.
Yes. Yes. I mean, I don't know why there's two, in this particular design design. Okay. And, again, it it is very difficult to read.
Those those two squares, the ten and fourteen, what are those where the shed is? Yes. There's a there's two squares. There's a 10 in one and a 14 in the other. I think those are the dimensions. The dimensions. I'm trying to show, Kathy. It's x by 14. Okay.
Yep. Yep. I have one question for the applicant through the chair if that's okay. That's okay. Yes. When I was on-site today, I happened to notice noticed there's basically a a stake fence along the property property property line, the line between the house that would be accessed off of Route 360 Hebrew Road. And there's a a stake fence and older green green stakes every whatever. 15 feet or something with sort of a wire. I'm presuming that is that is so he's estimated at the property line. Would that be accurate be accurate?
I would assume as much. I I have not seen much documentation on it myself myself. So I've been going off that assumption.
Actually, the house hasn't been there a long time either.
I could chime in for a moment. Sure. Sure. I I reside at 171 Hebron Road Road. And and I believe that property you're referring to do. I own that.
Good. It it yes. That is. It stretches out to the big road. Road. Yes. It it it does.
You own the wooded area between our property and the White House there. I saw that in the professor's office. That's correct. That's correct. Yep. Yep. Just wanted to just wanted to clarify that so if there's any confusion by anyone by anyone. So that so so that fence is the property line? I I can't specifically say that it it is or it isn't. I believe is. But that is my property. I did not put that fence up. Was there when I purchased property property. So I guess it would have to be assessed and that would have to be determined.
So, but I guess my point is you're you're facing the three feet, not you, but the applicant is facing the facing the feet, off of that fence. That fence is the property line. As far as I know.
Yes, that is correct. And we're asking to get three feet away from that fence. So we wouldn't be we would be three feet away from that fence at the shortest.
So I guess it's it's a but that property I guess if you have any comments far as the gentleman that lives on even though there has that property butting have any comments about the shed
I'm sorry. Can you repeat that? It's very accurate. I have I have no personal objection to the placement of a shed in that in that area. Only question or concern would be is property ownership where it's being suggested to put it. If it's if we're if we're suggesting that that fence distinguishes between his property line and my property line line, then then okay. But I I don't know his property technically that fence is on. So
I would ask Jim. Jim Halsey. You think there's any need need to have the kind of survey done to make sure that the shed is, you know, to determine where the property line is before we move forward?
Well, it's not typically typically typically done for a for an accessory accessory building building unless there's particular concern. There's
no particular concern on my part. I I just wanna Okay. Make that clear that clear. Okay. Thank you. Thank you. May I interject for just a second? I can suggest that anyone on a cell phone if you're able to mute mute when you're not talking, please do so. We can reduce that echo. That'd be great. Great.
So everyone on a cell phone, you could mute and when you want to talk, you can take yourself back.
That would be, I think, Kathleen and and Jack. Right? Alright. You want me to mute? Yeah. If you if you'd ask me, then, otherwise, you know, if you have some say, then unmute. But anybody that's on cell phone, you can just mute your phone unless you're you're talking.
I'm on a We could not hear you hear you.
I'm on a landline. Does that do you still want me to mute? I'm not on a cell phone. Okay.
If you're not able to mute, then that's if anyone's on a cell phone and can you can you please do so do so.
Yeah. Yeah. Thank you. Okay. So there's is there any other discussion, from anybody concerning the application? Jim, at this point, would we be able to move it to a vote? If there's no further discussion discussion. Chair DeRosa. I do have a question. Who's speaking? Bill Monroe. Why Bill? Another neighbor mentioned, or the person that owns the property said there's no problem. I'm just wondering if what saw was all trees there that whole area is. There any like liability if three falls down on the. Yeah. Seems to be liable for that. Are we is that something that we should be concerned about? I don't know the answer to that. Jim, do you have any idea about that? You're on mute, Jim.
Question was of liability is raised raised under the application for 5757, Henry Phillips that involved the flood floodplain floodplain. And the advice of our land use council was, no. You you you you you you it is not our problem. He was very clear about that.
You. Thank you. Any other questions? Any other discussions? Anybody like to make a motion to Jim, can we make a motion to vote at this point? Well, have you closed the hearing?
Did I miss that? We closed the open to the public hearing at this point. Then move to new business. There
you go. You go. New business. Somebody make a motion and then discuss Anybody wanna make a motion? The open public public is that Kathleen Kathleen? Yes. I make a motion.
The motion is to close the public hearing and open it up for new business new business. Yes. Anybody wanna second that motion? I'll second it. That's Walt Ware. Okay. Okay. So on to new business, which do I need to read this again, Jim or? Absolutely not. Absolutely not. Okay. So at this point, we open up for discussion again.
Now motion basically. Basically, a motion a motion In order to discuss it, you should have a motion on the floor. A motion and and I would suggest suggest a motion to approve because if you remember remember, I'm not suggesting that you I'm not telling you what to vote. I'm saying the motion if the motion reads on the affirmative affirmative, it's clear what happens if it if it doesn't pass pass. If the motion motion is is is is placed made made in the negative, meaning, vote to vote to, you know, move to to deny, then deny, then you're some in somewhat of limbo limbo if if it doesn't if it doesn't if it doesn't. So it doesn't pass, but it's not denied. So so that's why very often a lot of commissioners make motions in the positive. So
do I have a motion then on the floor to approve applications, TPA 20? I make a motion to approve Kathleen.
Thank you Kathleen. Do I have a second? Second. I'll second it. Walt Ware. Any further discussion before we take the vote? I'll do a roll call then. Go to Monroe. Aye. Kathleen. Aye. Walter. Aye. And Bill DeRozier's. Aye. Motion carries. Congratulations. Thank you. We appreciate it.
Good. Now we move on to open discussion. Commission open discussion. Any other business? Jim, do you have an administrative report as a zoning agent? I have nothing formal. I just don't
I would like to make I'm thinking here. I do recall that that when when the notification went out, I I had asked I had asked that that you sent to to Dave Gostiani and and Elo, and I just I'm just hoping they they were notified, and I I will double check that just because they're not here and concerned concerned, because they are new. Other than that, I just you know what? I just wanna share share. I had said I had commissioner Degrozier Degrozier, some some information information. Bill, you may you have forgotten this, but when when it was a learning a learning moment for me when when an application is approved approved, it's very specific to that to the application, meaning that meaning that, in this case, the shed shed goes pretty much where it much where it it's placed. And it comes in, it's the same height, which I don't think we have a height out here, but when it came up with somebody got perceived variances years ago for setbacks on the lake and wanted to build another story. They had the setbacks, you know, the side yard setbacks in place in place. And could they do it? And and I answered with insurance by council by council. They found out that found that they couldn't. It's just something just something that was interesting interesting to me and and something that perhaps perhaps, you know, may come up in the future. And I thought I'd share that before I forgot it.
That's all I got. Abby,
do you know if, if Dave Gustani and Igor, if they, if they were sent out the notice as well? I'm sorry. Could you repeat that?
There was a question raised by Jim a minute ago on whether or not our two new alternates, Dave Gustanian and Elo, if they had received this notice as well as well. Good question. Know there was an email sent out.
I can just check to see who's on the phone. The Abby the Abby Abby has not has not we are transitioning to where she will be handling that I believe I believe. Oh, okay. But she hasn't as of yet.
Because I think I do believe I saw Dave Staneon on the email that I received. I remember seeing Dave's name and I'm not sure about Elo, but I think I know I saw Dave's name on the
the email. You know, know that I think about it, I remember because we had it was not on the actual Elo's wasn't on the distribution sheet and the the woman that actually sent them out sent them out was in the process of of getting that address. So so he I'm pretty sure he would've gotten it. Was just showing him, you know, he could overlook somebody. Gotcha. Okay. Do I hear a motion to adjourn? I'll make a motion to adjourn. Thank you, Walter. I'll second that. Thank you, Bill. All those in favor. Aye. Aye.
Okay. I think the ayes have it. So I want to thank Abby for joining us. Know this might have been a little painful because this is a kind of a strange process still to us. But thank you very much. And I want to really thank Jim Halsey for his work helping to educate me today on some of these factors and the rest of the board for joining us tonight. So thank you all and have a nice evening. You. Bye bye.
Nice job. Thank you. Thank you. Hello. Hello. You still on? Yes. I have a question.
Okay. When you were asking people to mute, Were you asking just people on the phone versus anybody on an iPad or on the computer?
Here, can stop the recording first. We need to have this on the recording. Okay.