Thanks. Okay. Uh, good evening everyone. Um, welcome to the Danver Zoning Board of Appeals. We're now in session. Uh, I'll take a moment to introduce our board. Uh, to my right is Karine Dhy.
Our clerk tonight is Ken Scholes. Uh myself, John. >> John, are we good? >> I just needed to mute someone. >> Oh, good. >> Uh John Ber, uh the chairman. Uh to my left, Ken Jarvin, and to my far left is
uh Chris Dembowski. Uh from our planning department is uh Mr. Brian Kelly. Um we only have a couple cases tonight, so we should be able to move right along here. Uh I'll quickly go through our process. The clerk will read your
application. We would ask uh that you go up to the podium, announce yourself. We are on Damas cable, speak into the microphone uh nice and loud and clear uh to help everybody, including myself. Uh tell us what you'd like to do with your case. Uh from there, we'll bounce it
back to the uh zoning board. Uh we'll ask questions of the applicant. Uh from there, I can open it up for public comment. Uh from there we'll close the public comment and uh come back and deliberate uh as a board. Um you'll be
able to hear and see uh what it is we're thinking at that point and we will give you your options um as we come to that point. So with that said, uh we don't have minutes tonight. Um so we will go right into our first continued case. Mr. Cler, >> thank you Mr. Chairman. Our first case
is three Lorine Road. This is R2 zoned. uh request a special permit under section 9.2 of the zoning bylaw in order to build an uh conforming extended family living living area on a lot which is nonconforming due to size where
20,000 ft is required and 9,640 ft is supplied. The request is made by Scott Harris care of John Parsons dock at 25-5125. >> Hi there. Good evening. >> Good evening. John Parsons, Parson's Contracting.
>> How are you? >> Tell us what it is you're looking to do. >> I'm hoping to um provide my um customer uh with the kitchen um within that uh addition that you see in front of you. And um >> is the owner here tonight?
>> No, I'm represented. >> Okay. Anything else you want to tell us? >> Well, yeah. um their their main goal is to, you know, be able to live, you know, with their um uh it's it's her it's the the mother's um parents. So, it's um the
grandparents, the daughter and the son-in-law and two children. And they just, you know, their goal, their mission is to uh be able to, you know, live with their uh next door to the grandchildren and be able to have a kitchen available to them instead of, you know, kind of like intruding into
their, you know, their kids space. Um, so that's the whole idea behind, you know, having a kitchen there. >> So this started out as an addition, but we want to turn it into an efflu. >> Well, it started out as an yes, as an addition with the kitchen and then I
guess it became an um efla, which I wasn't familiar with and then it was brought to my attention that uh I need to see Brian about that. And >> yeah, I think the work has already begun. Correct. >> Correct. Yeah. >> Yeah. >> Okay. Um, anything else you want to
share with us? Um, no. I think that uh covers it. >> Okay. Um, I will unless you want to say anything? >> I can just give a little more detail. >> Yeah, sure. A little backstory. >> Um, uh, so uh, a building permit was
applied for through our online portal. Uh, all the necessary plans. They had everything they needed. And then it got flagged in uh, it got sent uh, up to the zoning department and I was like, "Nope, this is this is an EFLA. You have to go through ZBA." and they said, "Okay,
we'll do, you know, we'll do whatever whatever we need." They got the go-ahad from the building inspector because the addition itself is a conforming addition. They're allowed to they're allowed to they're allowed to, you know, pour the foundation. They're allowed to do everything essentially in there. Create living space, create bathrooms, create hallways, create everything other
than a kitchen. Um, so that that's why the the addition was allowed to move forward if if that was the question. Brian, before I hand it over to the board, I just wanted to I guess maybe for my own clarification, if they were um just here on the addition, or it
wouldn't be before us on addition as you said, but um could they still build even though this is only a 20,000? I mean, I'm sorry, it's only a 9600 square foot lot. So if you have a conforming house every in terms of setbacks >> y
>> even if you have a non-conforming lot so if even if you have a a narrow lot or even a small lot but if the if the house so lot is non-conforming but if the house is conforming with re with with uh with referred to setback you can still
play within that setback. So you can do additions that are compliant >> with just a building permit >> even though it's a non-conforming lot. >> Correct. Okay. But the thing is most non-conforming lots you can't really be compliant. That's why that's why you're like well why is that >> because they could meet setbacks with
this? >> Yeah. Generally the house like just the way it is like the house the way it sits it's just yeah either or it's just like not that wide. But but in general um the reason why you don't see them is because they just are building permits. So there a lot of these do happen just through a
building permit. But I just to be clear, a a conforming house can get larger as long as it's still conforming on a non-conforming lot through a building permit. >> Okay, I think I got it. Okay. Uh Kareem,
we'll start with you. >> Um yeah, I drove by and I also noticed that construction has begun. When did you begin construction? >> Like how long ago did you start? the foundation went um
believe middle of uh middle of September. >> Okay. >> Is okay. So, you've been going for a while. And when did you apply for your permit?
>> I want to say perhaps in uh May, June. >> And did you >> not positive on that? Did you change the plans or were the the plans the same that were submitted when you applied for your um your building permit application? >> The plans were the same. >> Okay.
>> But the only only thing that you guys required um is for the uh property or the addition to be set back a little bit further off the street. They needed a 30-foot uh setback from the street of which we did push back >> 30 to conform. There there was a there
was a redesign uh because at at the time they would have needed a special permit just for the just for the EFLA but they also would have needed a finding for this front setback encroachment and they decided to get it behind that front setback and that's allowed them to pour
foundation move forward with the project before winter. >> Okay. Okay. All right. So, so basically you're just here um with us for the kitchen. So, if we didn't um grant this, you would
eliminate the kitchen. Is that what you would do? >> I would have to. >> Okay. >> Fortunately, for the customer sake. Yeah. >> Okay. Thank you. No further questions. >> Thanks, Karine. Uh Ken, thank you. Um what's the square footage of the air for? 750. >> Yes. >> On the nose.
>> On the what? >> On the nose. Exactly. 750. I believe it's just on to seven uh 749.88 roughly. >> Pretty close. Just like >> close enough. >> Um >> I don't think I have any other
questions. Thank you. >> Okay. Thank you. >> Uh Kenj, >> so what is the shared um space you're going to be sharing? >> It's it's uh it's it'll be the in-laws on one side. the addition that you see on your far left and
>> on the far right is the existing house which the uh the family lives in >> and if I answered your question >> it's this living area here. >> Okay. >> The common area so in the >> in the closet the closet well as well could be shared I guess as a storage
space. Um, yeah, it >> so it's >> so yeah, the F the F is on the the left. >> Yep, I could see that. >> And then um this living area here is considered the shared space
common living living room sitting room. >> Okay, >> for Sounds good. All right, thank you. >> Thank you. Thanks, Kris. Uh, no questions. Thank you. >> Thanks, Chris. Um, I'm looking at the
perspective, I guess. So, there's only uh one front door of the house or is there two? There there is a front door on the existing and and there's a um there's a shared is there's is a rear
egress too on on the um the back deck >> and uh >> so the front the front door is existing and and you're not adding in a second front door. Correct. >> That is correct. So yeah, there's an existing front door in the main residence and there'll be a shared um door that will join the two units and um
>> in the rear >> uh no in in the actual living quarters and in the rear of the house each each one of those dwellings has their own. the existing well of the main house obviously has that his own uh their own in the will be um a new uh rear egress
on the addition um okay so this view I'm seeing here is the front and there >> that is that is the >> one entrance in the front >> this lowest picture. >> I want to see. Yes. >> Can I approach?
>> Yeah. Come on up. Just want to make sure we got >> Oh, here you go. >> This is This is the uh rendering for the front. >> That's the existing front of the house. >> Okay. And there and there's one front door. >> Yes. >> Very good. Okay.
Um I don't have any further questions. Anyone else? Additional questions? >> No. Thanks. >> Okay. I'll open this up uh to the public. We're here on uh 3 Lraine Road. Anybody want to be heard? Hearing none. Seeing none, nobody online. Uh we'll come back to the board
and uh we will deliberate. Karine, I'll start with you. >> Um I don't have an issue with this. I will vote for for it. >> Oh, beautiful. >> Uh Ken, >> and I will vote for this. >> NJ, I'm in favor of this, too. >> Thank you, >> Chris.
>> Uh for the record, the permit was August 21st. >> Okay. Thank you. was when it was issued and vote in favor for this as well. >> Thanks, Chris. And uh yeah, I see this is pretty modest. I was a little confused when I went out there um saw that the work had already begun, but Mr.
Zaki explained what he explained tonight, which was the work um I guess started under the standard permit process. So, uh I will two vote in favor and if I could get a motion, please. Um, I make a motion to grant a special
permit under section 9.2 in order to build a conforming extended family living area on a lot which is nonconforming due to size where 20,000 square ft is required and 9,640 square um feet is supplied and that the
exterior appearance of the structure is not substantially changing. The structure remains residential in nature. adjacent properties will not be adversely impacted. The proposal would not be detrimental to the public good and would not substantially deviate from
the intent or purpose of this bylaw. >> I'll second. I've got a motion. Can I get a second? >> I'll second. >> Any further discussion? All in favor? I. >> Any opposed? Thank you and good luck. >> Thank you very much. Appreciate time.
>> Good luck. All right. Uh, yeah, you're good. Yeah, I'll be in touch. >> Mr. Clerk, we'll go to our one and only case tonight. >> Our next case is 56 Liberty Street. Uh, this is zoned R2. Um, request a variance
under section 37 to install a new building mounted sign uh to replace an existing sign in a zone that does not allow building mounted uh signage. Request is made by Brentwood Properties LLC care of Nancy McCann Esquire docket
25-5126. >> Hello. >> Good evening. Thank you very much. My name is Nancy McCann. I'm here on behalf of Brentwood Properties LLC. With me tonight is John Akins who is the administrator of the Brentwood Nursing Home. Also with us uh remotely is Dena
Napoleano with the Healthcare Contracting Group and uh my favorite topic, the new signed bylaw. Um this property at 56 Liberty Street is located in the R2 zoning district and has been a
nursing home for 50 plus years, uh a long time. In 2014, this board granted uh zoning relief to allow two signs. One is a freestanding sign that's located on the corner of Liberty and Elliot Street.
That is not being changed in this proposal. That's uh 19 1.5 square ft. that um zoning relief in 2014 also granted relief to allow a wall mount mounted sign um that uh I provided you with a
photograph of the existing wall-mounted sign um and that decision referenced the the height of the letters um and it's located along the um that white cross
beam that white roof section And you'll see that in your packet. There is the 2014 um photograph of the 2014 um signage. And u that sign um simply
said Brentwood Nursing uh and Rehabilitation Center. Um and it's uh about 33 feet uh in length. What we are proposing there it is right there. You can see that's >> can't really it's hard to read but >> it's hard to see but it says the
Brentwood Nursing and Rehabilitation Center. Um what we're proposing tonight is to simply update and replace that sign with a sign that's the same length 33 feet long. Um and uh says the
Brentwood Rehabilitation and Health Care Center. Has a nice little leaf logo on it. and it will be located uh at the top of the building. So, the the visibility will be good for that. Um
and that's really why we're here. We simply want to change the uh existing uh older uh 10-year-old sign now update it um move it to the top of the building and uh and uh replace the lettering. The
Brentwood and the logo are 20 in high. the rest of the sign, the um rehabilitation and health care center uh lettering is 8 in uh as well. Um so we're simply updating the sign we think
is more attractive. It's certainly clear and easy to read. The visibility of it is good. And um under the bylaw uh the uh the the bar here is that uh this sign will uh be
there will be no substantial detriment will result from changing the uh existing wall sign to the wall sign proposed. And I think that certainly is the case that there would be no substantial detriment. I I'd be happy to answer any questions. >> Thank you. Um,
Chris, we'll start down there with you. >> No questions. Thank you. >> Thank you, Ken J. >> I have no questions, >> Mr. Scholes. >> Um, no questions. Thanks, >> um, just a couple. So, this sign will also be illuminated.
>> Yes, individually illuminated letters. >> Okay. All right. So, I'm but I'm assuming and again I'm not a a a light specialist, but um the fact that those the other lettering was on that like
white facade of the building that it actually glowed brighter than it would on the stone. >> I think that's probably correct. Yes. >> Um yeah, I I think it is. And and also um you indicate that it illuminates um
inward. So, I'm assuming that that means that there's no arc of light outside. >> That's right. >> Okay. And the light would be on 24/7 because that's the operation of the >> Yes. >> Okay. >> Okay. No further questions.
>> Thanks, Karine. Uh, Attorney McC. So, the the older sign, the one that's uh up now, this one. >> Yes. >> This this one's lit. >> Those are just letters. They don't they're not lit, I don't think. It's lit from the ground a little bit.
Are there some lighting? They're certainly not lit. Uh back lit. >> Yeah. >> If you're going to speak, go to the microphone. But >> yeah, >> come on up. >> Just identify yourself for us, please. >> Um John Akens. I'm the uh acting
administrator for Brentwood. Um and as we were discussing, the letters that are currently there are not illuminated themselves. >> They're not illuminated. No. >> Okay. So, the only way this is seen is just uh as Karine indicated, the fact that it's got a white background and
it's uh I guess are they colored letters? >> So, there's some ground lighting that will light kind of illuminate the building. >> Okay. But not not the signs specifically. >> Correct. >> Okay. Uh thank you. And um attorney MC
does square footage change from what you have and what you would like to go to is what? >> Uh the existing square footage is uh 22 square ft and the proposed square
footage is 39 square ft. And that additional 17 square feet is just because >> increasing the size with Brentwood and adding the logo. >> Yes, >> I see. >> Yeah.
>> Um Okay. Uh I don't think I have any other questions. Um I'll open this up to the public. We're here on 56 Liberty Street. And you said someone was online, but that was not
>> Adina Npalitano is part of our team and she is online. Yes. >> But nobody else. No. >> Okay. And I'll ask it again because I'm I'm uh I've been doing this for a little while, I think, and I'm still confused about the our signed bylaw.
>> You you would or wouldn't be here if if this change wasn't made. It sounds like you would on this one. >> I think on this one I would. And because we're increasing the size >> um >> and we're going over the >> because we're changing the the location
the size. Yes, I I guess so. And it's because it's in a residential district. >> So, and under the new bylaw, there really is no provision for a commercial use, which this is essentially a residential type of use, but it's a
commercial use. Um, all that's permitted in the residential zoning district, no matter what the use, whether it's a home occupation or whatever it is, is a 20 square foot sign, which is freestanding. >> Okay. Um, but explain this one to me
because I know we granted this a variance and a special permit in 2014, >> correct? >> 2016. We modified the special permit for an alteration. Why isn't this another alteration to the
special permit? >> Because your new bylaw calls it a waiver variance with this odd um requirement. The criteria is no substantial detriment
will result. U that is a change in your bylaw. >> So the bylaw didn't change. You would be just here. Well, if it didn't change, hold on. you would be here on a modification of the special permit from 2016 or
>> I I don't think so. >> You don't think so? >> And you >> the special the special permit had nothing to do with the sign the signage. The variance was the signage whether this bylaw changed didn't change old bylaw new bylaw that'd be here because a variance governs the signage in this
location. It has nothing to do with the mistakes or whatever we want to call with the new bylaw. >> Okay. >> The special permit had to deal with many other things. parking um >> right? >> Yeah, >> it was parking and then other conditions about parking area and signage related specifically to parking. So anyway,
signage is the variance. >> Okay. And while we're here, >> how is the parking going and the uh the no parking areas and I I remember this to be a boner contention before with people parking out on the grass and
things of this nature and this is kind of what drove that. So, while you're in front of us, why not tell us how that's going? >> Yes, back then there were some changes. There were site plan changes uh that happened at that time. Um, and John, is
everything all right out there as far as parking is concerned as far as you know? >> Yeah, I've been there for about three weeks now. Um, and as far as parking on the grass or anything like that, >> three weeks isn't uh nine years, but uh >> so that there hasn't really has any issues that I've observed with parking.
>> Okay. So, no complaints from neighbors or anything of that nature. >> Okay. Okay. Um that said, uh we'll come back and deliberate. And uh Chris, we sat with you. So, uh I'll say you >> I would vote in favor. Thank you.
>> Thank you. And Kenj, I think it's a lot better. It's going to be more visible um than those gold letters on the white. Um and I like the little leaf emblem, too. So, I'm in favor of this. >> Very good. And Mr. Schles. >> Uh, yeah, I'm in favor of this. I mean,
it's a unique situation. You said it's been there for about 50 years. >> Yeah. >> So, it's a little bit odd that this is in an R2 zoned area, so I think it's pretty modest. I will vote for this. >> Thanks, Karine. >> Um, I would vote for this, too. I I like
the new sign better than the old sign, and I don't really see much impact to the neighbors, so I would vote for this. >> Thanks, Green. Yeah, I see this as a modest uh change, a little more modern. Um, looks like something else changed on
that facade as well from the old picture to the new picture. I'm guessing it's that porch. So, I think all of it combined has a better look. So, with that, I will vote in favor and uh if I could get a motion, please. Um, I make a motion to grant a variance waiver under
section 37 to allow for the installation of a new building mounted sign to replace an existing sign in a zone that does not allow building mounted signs and that this condition does not affect other properties or structures in the same zoning district. A literal
enforcement of the zoning bylaw would involve substantial hardship to the applicant. Granting this variance waiver will not create a substantial detriment to the public good and will not nullify or dergate from the intent and purpose
of the zoning bylaw. >> I've got a motion. Could I get a second? >> I'll second. >> I've got a second. Any further discussion? All in favor? >> I opposed. >> Thank you very much. >> Yep. >> Good luck. >> And Brian, if you don't have anything, we'll uh I'll get off to the Patriots game.
>> Yes. >> Yeah. I guess just a just an announcement that uh we have no applications for next time around. So the next time the zoning board will meet is in 2026. It'll be January 12th.
>> Okay. Well, with that said, uh happy holidays to everybody out there. And uh if I could get a motion to uh adjourn. So moved and a second. Second. >> All in favor? I Good night. Good night. They ever.