i told you i like to call the meeting to order please for today's Gardener Zoning Board of Appeals uh before we begin tonight's public hearing I will like to familiarize you with some of the ground
rules on which we conduct the hearing in Gardner four members out of five of the zoning board of appeals must be present to conduct a public hearing applications will be normally be heard in each sequence in which they appear in
the public notice the board's under no obligation to adhere all hearings shall be open to the public and no person shall be excluded on he or she is considered to be a hindrance to the workings of the board an applicant may appear in his or her
own behalf or be represented by agent or attorney the applicant or his or her representative shall present the case to the board representatives of the city shall be heard the abundance of the property present shall be heard those in
opposition to the application shall be heard the board must render this decision regarding variance requests within 100 days after the application was duly filed in the office of the city clerk the board regarding special
permits must conduct a public hearing within 65 days after the application was duly filed in the office of the city clerk the board must render this decision regarding special permits within 90 days after the closing of the
public hearing all four members out of five of the board must vote in favor of the variance of special permit for it to be granted and approved the right to appeal the decision of the
board is provided for in chapter 4A of the zoning act the information is available in the office of city clerk no variance or special permit or any extension modification or renewal thereof shall take effect until
notification from the city clerk that 20 days have elapsed after the decision has been filed in that office and no appeals have been filed and is recorded in the registry of deeds for the county or district the board requests each person
identify himself or herself as to name and address before addressing the board sitting on tonight's hearing starting on my far right Lori Wida Richard Hanks myself Ray Leaf Fawn
Mel Cornet Dave Ant the meeting will be taped and videotaped does anyone object to the videotaping there's no objections so we will begin our first case it's really it's a continuence
uh that has gone on for a while and it's case 2022 01 01 MHG3 Fund LLC Jonathan Bombachi 163 Pine
163-165 Pine Street parcel ID ID R22-8-6-8 special permit violation followup and attorney tree is going to be representing individual for Mr bombachi i will be doing that all right
i will be connecting and then hopefully starting PowerPoint presentation today so good so at the last meeting we had a substantial discussion of
um a some proposed alternatives to how are we going to resolve this issue of the retaining wall was built in the wrong place we're just not able to comply with the reconstruction plan um and we had presented three alternatives
and we had received some substantial feedback and comments from the board um which was much appreciated um and helped give us a little bit of guidance um so I'm going to just uh page
through uh we've at various points addressed all of the other conditions associated with this special permit and the interests of conserving everybody's time today um I just want to focus on the issue of um the parking lot and what
are what are we going to do to resolve the special permit uh conditions i did want to give an update on the building uh issues which is that the contractor to perform the um uh fixes to the
landing um on the exit has been signed and their work start date is uh the week next week um the building permit was pulled on March the 15th for that work um that uh that work will need to be completed with the inspection done on
the work after its completion before we can get to a request that a board made which was can we get a letter from the building commissioner verifying that other than compliance with the special permit conditions there are no other outstanding conditions barring the
issuance of a permanent certificate of occupancy um and I believe the building commissioner has noted there will be annual inspections due on the rented units as well um in the future oh that that's going to depend on the condition of the building um which will determine
the length of the area inspection strict right um but that's a determination that will be made by the building uh commissioner and then complied with in the future so um we had at the last meeting presented three alternatives and
centered um on an option uh that uh changed the configuration of the existing parking particularly movement of one of the buddy parking spaces towards the rear parking lot plus the
addition of two spaces on the offsite location at 307 Pine street um and if I move forward to that uh because this is just about where we are right now um I just want to make sure I have the
right uh version of this up nope that is today's version um this was the parking plan that was approved um the site plan that was approved for the lot um and as you can see we are missing the three parking
spaces that were lost once the depth of the part uh of the lot shrunk um and those are uh the three spaces over nearest to the building so this is what we're proposing um as uh a
resolution and I understand that procedurally um we're going to have to go through some additional steps um at the last meeting the board wanted a little more information before it gave its indication of how to resolve this
understanding that the board is not bound by that because it's um not going to be bound by a vote um and I'm just going to hopefully Yeah um this is our proposal we allow the permit holder to modify the
existing putty parking on the side that is the two spaces over here that were allocated to one unit by sliding the interior space into the upper right corner of the rear parking lot which will require the construction of a small
retaining wall of about 6' 3 in and I say small because the other one would have been 22 feet um in height uh and that is near um as I said the corner of the parking lot on the right in yours to
the building and then also marking it as a compact space um this will result in having nine separately functional spaces on site now that doesn't change the number on site but what it does is it
makes each unit each unit available to use a space without having to worry about the tandem parking issue of who's behind me so I think it improves the functionality of the spaces that are available in the lot so is that mean
on looking at the building and I assume you're talking the the I'll call it a driveway on the right hand side of the building yes that goes down so you've got the buddy parking there for two mhm and now you're going
to build in some addition to put another car in yes how is their entrance and exit is that through the main parking lot the interior space is through the rear parking lot the um upper space is
via the street um and there are plans that I would go I'm going to show in a moment um the second thing would be allow the permit holder to provide to um the two missing spaces on the offsite uh
location at 307 Pine Street um we would submit a new parking plan for 307 Pine Street um and I have a proposed easement deed um that is between uh the ownership between the two lots so it would run
with the land it would be recorded um at the registry of deeds and be a permanent easement for the use of those two spaces i will bring those out a little bit later on after we've gone through the plan um we are proposing that if we do these two things um that we keep the
number of dwelling units at eight no more than two bedrooms per unit um that we complete the paving including the paving of those buddy spaces and uh put in permanent striping um the striping right now is temporary while this was being resolved um and then uh submit the
asbuilt plan which would be required anyway uh for both parking lots um so that in summation to the is the proposal um I'm next going to move through the plans a little bit um unless you want to
stop i just have a question we're going to have a compact car space what are what's the dimensions of the compact car space as depicted on the plan it's 9 by8 it's dimensionally compliant so we've
depicted it as required um It's noted as compact because you're going to see um the spacing between that but space and the other parking spaces at the end is limited so there's limit more limited
maneuverable maneuverability um and that's that's the reason for the labeling as a compact space we still think it is usable as a space and more
um usable to the residents in the building if it's separately accessible um than tandem so you still would be able to put in a normalsized vehicle in that compact space as delineated it's
9 by18 which would be for a normalsiz vehicle we're not proposing to reduce the size of the space but I did want to note that there is a limited um distance between that and other parking space excuse me are you referring to uh for
the person in that space meaning that they would have uh less room to maneuver to turn around to exit or even enter right um you know pulling in if you pull straight in it's not really going to
matter um coming out okay it's going to be um so same size uh uh lots uh parking space size but because of the maneuverability you want to label it
compact yes um so that if it's a compact car we should get a shorter car length in there which will allow for better maneuverability thank you how uh do you intend to police that going forward um I mean
it's easy enough to mark it it is uh but we know that people tend to park where they don't park unless they are designated per apartment so each each one of those uh parking spaces is going to be
designated to specific apartments um so that would make sense with the number of parking spaces versus the number of units um you know I think it's this is something that can be conditioned as marked and designated to
specific units the landlord is going to have to manage that with the tenant right i know um and I think that's going to require an application for that particular space um verification that it
is in fact compact car and then designation um of that space to the unit that might mean that that space moves from unit to unit as vehicles uh change i understand i just wondering how you're going to manage it that's all yeah but I
don't know that the building commissioner wants to get involved in that long term well I don't Yeah I'm sorry i don't think that it's something that we would police um the only thing I worry about is what if your tenant has a
child or becomes disabled in some capacity and is no longer able to have a compact vehicle how do you police it and what happens if you tell that individual no you don't have a parking space anymore i think you have a significant problem
i think that's not a um city liability issue at all it certainly is a concern for the landlord to properly deal with there is I believe one of the units is um accessible in this building the allocated to the to the to the buddy is
is accessible yeah the rest of them are upstairs so like you have an ADA issue getting access to the building other than the one spot that has two so there is a natural progression of if we if somebody becomes disabled while
attended yeah so what I would say is the building itself is not accessible to persons with disabilities none of the units are none of the driveways don't meet the slope requirements the steps up into even to into the lower levels um not that it's required to be because
it's not enough units um but just point of clarification are there any specific modifications to that unit that makes makes it um more accessible there's just no stairs into the Mr i'm gonna ask you to state your name and address if you're
going to address the board so if this is looked at and there's another voice the government will know who is speaking so Sure yeah john 88 Main Street so this is the asbuilt plan um this was depicted last time and it displays uh
the parking spaces in the back and the two buddy spaces on the side seven and buddy um at the last meeting we had a rough version of uh the proposal which is to and I think here um we left seven
and buddy and just created eight over there um would there be a dimensional issue with continuing to do that so we could still do that it's not what's depicted but we could still do that so you'd end end up um with still having the two
buddy spaces so So could could you please go back to that slide of course thank you so the green outline is the proposed parking spot number eight which is you said it's a 9 by8 compliance spot you're
trying to put a compact car in there but from that bottom left corner to the compliant say space number one you only get about 12 ft in between those two points um and I and I drive a compact
car and that would take me about a 30point turn to turn that car around to come out of that driveway so I I the one of the next the next slide has um dimensions on it and I did a closeup of this area and I'll see if I can make it
a little closer so you can see the spot labeled 8 um has uh 9 by 18 um and the if we go from the uh spot number one uh straight
to the edge of the pavement that surrounds the building and the landing for the stairs um that has 19'6 in um I also asked um in looking at this plan we do now have a little extra space between
the end of space one and the existing retaining wall that's about 2 feet um there are 10 ft between the top end of space one and the bottom end of space 8
so I think that's the dimension that you were probably just talking about 10 ft um that's one of the reasons I think a compact car would be uh preferred in there um and just to review I I want to
acknowledge what the requirements are under um the ordinance a maneuvering aisle for 90° parking is 24 ft 60° parking 18 ft 45 degree parking 14 ft um
and again you have a width there of 19t 6 in did you say the maneuver maneuverable station 90° is 24 it's 24 and we've got 196 we do um for 60° it's 18
ft um so in the submission of this plan um there may be some dimensional relief that is required in order to make it work um but that is the amount of space available if we have compliant 9 by18 parking spaces um there's simply no room
to move any closer um so this is the proposal before the board i'm going to go back to the prior slide um we did insert top graphical lines there on the back
um and I apologize i don't know why I thought we admitted omitted one of the buddy parking spaces they're both there so you have two buddy parking spaces on the side you have that inserted diagonal space on the right corner um and you
have the six compliance spaces on the left hand side that are existing now is the paving on that parking side does that go all the way back to the retaining mall it does it does and so in theory that car could park its way into
that spot a little bit i think the engineer was a little bit concerned because it measured a couple of inches short than 9 ft but in reality that car probably ends up coming up the driveway a little bit it's just it's not quite 9 ft wide which is why he stuck it at the end of the building if that makes sense
it's like it's like a couple inches shorter or 9 ft wide so now this plan is different than the one with the green yes it's a different that was a draft plan so this has more measurements in it um and is more
specific this was done by um McKenzie Engineering I believe yeah and so there's a the the PD the PDF of this PowerPoint will go into Mercedes at the end of the evening today and she can circulate it
to everybody so there can be some further review of the details of the plan i'm happy to focus in on any area if you want me to enhance and enlarge it right now please
okay um so here was the proposed plan in the March meeting um and I'm I'm just going to point out again this was presented for concept um and the request was to have a little more detail um that's
present here there's no modification um of course to the existing driveway on the other side which was constructed to plan um and I think the spaces are kind of scooted down a little bit so that you do have
that uh little bit of space at the top of parking space one between there and the wall um up here uh where the new wall comes in you can see that there's a little bit of the old
wall um that would have to come down here um the construction of the new wall up here again the maximum height is 6'3 um just to address uh should it arise an issue as to whether or not it's appropriate to construct this so close
to the boundary the existing driveway over there is pre-existing non-conforming structure which can be extended back along the same property line that does not um extend or uh increase the non-conformity nature because it simply goes along the same
line is that property line right is that driveway right up against the property line I assume yes always has been i think yes always has been there would be a guard rail on top of the wall um for safety
purposes um all around i don't know what else I could uh say to further explain um but happy to answer questions okay um I'm going to move on then this is looking at the issue of the
offsite parking the other two spaces um this was a slide from last uh month showing you that the distance measured between the two properties is 1159 uh feet um the the road is
sidewalked and I really look at this as um necessity parking when there's a need to remove cars from the on street parking that is regularly used by everybody in the neighborhood in case of snow or other need yeah is
there unfortunately I missed the last meeting so you probably had this discussion but why uh only two spaces versus the three and not to the uh parking lot of the Well I think we're
only missing two spaces but um we're missing three i So I It's labeled eight plus a buddy parking space so that's nine i've always counted it as nine and we need two i'm going to say on the plan you're going to see in a moment there is
room for another parking space because there's more parking just in case cuz when you get a little snow back there that I'm guessing that space may be a little tight to get in and run out of yeah so I I I think there's some um flexibility of the permit on that if
there's a desire to have three spaces down there if that improves the situation um this was the aerial of 307 Pine Street and just to center in it's uh this structure right here there is ex an
existing garage in the back this is an abandoned um or vacant property that was recently purchased by the permit holder um it is a two family and the intent is to renovate it to a two family um so there are two parking spaces in
the garage existing um and then there's this is kind of again a rough draft of um the current parking situation on that lot um two two in the garage three more available on the
side this is the proposal um and I'm going to uh just note that at the front right um we have the existing dwelling structure in the middle the crosshatch structure is the existing
garage and then there are um seven spaces proposed to be constructed behind the garage this is this has an existing interior driveway um that is runs along
the bottom um past the house and has an existing parking area as you saw that is about half of the space between the house and the garage the proposal would be to continue that paved parking um
past the garage to create the parking area on the left um and I do have a little bit of a a closer picture here so on the exterior these are
sevendimensionally compliant state uh spaces there is a 24 ft maneuvering aisle between the spaces um there is and I was uh noting this as I was looking at it today
um there it's a residential use one way or the other and the parking spaces um should not be located more than 5 ft uh closer to any lot line while we do have the existing driveway again we can extend out under that pre-existing
non-conforming structure um we can also move the parking spaces 5 ft this way um and just set them off that line a little bit that would comply um as well with some discussion that the board had that
it might be good to install a fence or some landscaping screening along that property line in order to screen lighting from vehicles from the other residential properties i'm also going to note that because the spaces are located
behind the garage the garage itself is going to screen some of the lighting from the structure on that lot is that all going to be paved or some type of Yes hard surface yes it'll be paved will be
paved um there are less than eight surface spaces eight and your ordinance uh 67570B is very specific about surface parking and eight no more than eight spaces
um uh and then you don't have any requirement to meet the lighting and the landscaping um portions of the ordinance now where we have nine spaces here but two of them are within the structure this we are under that with the seven
that are surface parking spaces the permit holder also um wanted to do a little designation of um snow load and again we are in draft form here so the snow load would go over to the other side of the parking lot um and
that uh conicle shape the tan one is meant to represent um the light dispersement from the light on the back of the garage um I'm glad Mr uh Commissioner Zippa is here um uh the permit holder
had sent this plan for comment to the building commissioner um this was the comment that was received back in email i don't think there was anything like a formal uh form of intent or anything submitted for a zoning opinion a zoning
determination um so uh the referral here was uh the board's past reluctance to approve off- premises parking um and then there's a comment about this being considered a commercial parking lot that I do want to talk about um but I I also
want to say that um the building commissioner should be given a full opportunity to review the zoning ordinance and come to a formal determination i am and I don't mean to surprise him with an email comment i did not know he was going to be here
um so on this question uh there is no definition of a commercial parking lot uh in the zoning ordinance there is not a use associated with that in the use table we had parking structure or parking area in the definition section
of the ordinance that is 675-210 um and this is a structure building or lot or part of a lot which is accessory to a residential commercial or industrial establishment and is primarily for the parking and storage of
vehicles operated by the occupants customers etc um so this refers to a parking lot or parking garage um and it re I think this language is referring to
the fact that it's accessory to the primary use on the lot um where it's primarily for the use we have again nine total parking spaces or seven surface parking spaces only two of which we're
looking to designate for off- premises use so I still think we do stay within that um primary use being accessory to the residential structure on the lot um and again I do think it's appropriate
for to give Commissioner Zupa more of a um a more of a argument on that question so that he can look at it and make an appropriate determination um as he sees fit that is all I have for Sorry could you go back to that i didn't finish reading
that oh sure thank you okay okay okay so um the summation of that is I don't think we have a use variance required for um off premises parking as long as the primary parking us is for
the um structure on the lot uh all of this area is going to be hard top of some sort black top what percentage of open land are you going to have on that lot i don't think there's a determination on that i don't
think we have a calculation on that um but I can go back to the so if you can see from this there's a small portion at the end um that is uh but it's important to know what percentage of coverage you have
i think that's um definitely appropriate for inclusion on the final version and thank you for bringing it up question yeah please could you go back to the that last slide that I as you go back to because I was still reading i am
sorry sorry I'm slow so reading the definitions a structured building or lot or part of a lot which is accessory to a resident residential commercial industrial establishment and is primary
which is highlighted that was you very good for the parking and storage of vehicles operated by the occupants customers visitors and employees of such an establishment or residence these parking spaces are not for that
establishment they're not the two spaces we've been talking about are for an off premises what I'm saying is there are seven surface spaces and the majority of those spaces
are dedicated for the use of the residents of the building at 307 time and therefore the primary use of the lot which is what we're looking at the parking lot not individual spaces the primary use of the parking lot is
accessory to the residents of 307 Pine Street but are we are you not trying to bring people from 16365 parking this lot two or three which out of does that not contradict what that says it's it's not part of the
establishment of that residence it is primarily for the parking and storage of vehicles operated by the occupants so primarily for the occupants of 307 Pine if I have seven spaces in a lot and I'm looking at the lot I'm not looking
individually at spaces if the lot has two out of seven dedicated to the use off premises and five out of seven dedicated to the on premises use then the primary use of
that parking lot is for the on premises use uh Mr chair um may I just you may um because my email was used here I would say this is a two family structure two bedrooms each so the requirement there
is four parking spaces it appears that you're creating nine parking spaces which if I do the math correctly there are five additional spaces that are not for this so the creation of five additional spaces are not accessory to this to this use they would be accessory
to 163 165 Pine Street since only four spaces are required so you're creating an abundance of extra spaces that are not required or not needed um so I think that pulls out the primary aotment of spaces there which are not required for
307 Pine Street i think it's a fair assumption to say that they're allocated to 163 Pine Street 165 Pine Street so um there's a difference between a requirement and actual use um the relationship that would be set up is by
easement and um the easement allows a specific uh right to pass through pass and park pass through passes through the necessary um channels of plan park is only on two designated spaces so there
is no right to use the additional parking spaces by 163 165 Pine Street um we can certainly reduce the amount of parking and uh struct many structures have parking in excess of the
requirement um but I don't think uh that really helps anybody to reduce off streetet parking and if the balance ever got um so that there was a right to use more than half
um of the parking in another in another off streetet use um then we might use that lose that primary use remaining in 307 Pine Street attorney tree mhm do you consider the
driveway on 307 to be an access driveway i consider it to be an access driveway that is pre-existing it's it's there
okay have you looked at chapter 675770 Mhm about access driveways and dimensions and location and other conditions of snow removal i'll call it you know you you touched a little bit on blocking light you know
for neighbor or budding properties um landscaping etc have you looked at that and if you have any comments on that so I would comment on um 770 and the uh discussion that you're having about lighting and
landscaping requirements is in section B and in the introductory paragraph it says all surface parking areas containing more than eight spaces shall be laid out and enhanced by landscaping in according to the following standards so that whole section B is not
applicable to this parking lot um as far as other drivesways um anytime we have a driveway that is pre-existing non-conforming that we are not modifying um you know we're not modifying the existing driveway and its
width um then the fact that it is nonconforming with any current requirements as to width doesn't matter um and it is going to be a pre-existing non-conforming structure as long as it's been there for 10 years or more um this
certainly is a building that is and uh paving that's been there for 10 years or more so it's a pre-existing non-conforming access so now you're intensifying the use of that pre-existing non-conforming
area you're not by adding more parking of the driveway um you know there's you your borrow from a garage that holds two cars now you're trying to get eight nine parking space out that's a true that's an increase of a nonconformity it's um an increase of a
nonconformity that we could seek a special permit for um through the through the um zoning provisions but yes I think there's an argument to be had so so along that lines though too is what I guess one of my concerns about this is that you know we're talking about moving
or allowing the ability for uh 16365 to be able to park at 307 what ability do we have to grant that without uh any of the a butters being notified that hey heads up all of a sudden you're going to have nine
parking spots right above but abuting you where in the past it was a two family with two to four parking spots so so that that would be one of my questions is what um should there be some kind of notification to the utters
that we're trying you're you're seeking to modify your special permit from 16365 to to include 307 mhm um and and and the letters have not been I I absolutely agree there's a notification that would
be required um we're talking um or we've been reviewing the existing spatial permit and its conditions always or at least since the expansion didn't work out always knowing that we are going to have to file an application to modify
the existing special permit that is a application to modify and it is required to do the publication and the notice to a butters just like a new application um would have and if we do in fact require
that special permit for an intensification of pre-existing non-conforming structure intensification and use by special permit then it would be appropriate to include an application for that as well referencing the um property address is that all the butters
are put on notice okay definitely i see what you're saying and this is at least my interpretation of what I understand you're saying we're trying to adapt the special permit for 163
165 over to 307 mhm so I would say stretching the special permit over to 307 a bit um but I I think if there's an issue that that is separate that needs
addressing at 307 that's probably a new special permit we just submit them at the same time okay i'm just going to ask a question you know out of my order of the building commissioner and what is your interpretation of what she's saying
about moving the special permit as I look at it extending from 163 over 307 and sort of borrowing part of 1635 special permit yeah yeah so I would say and I think attorney Tree just
touched on this they would need to do a special permit for 307 to extend that um continuation of the non-conformity in this particular case I don't see how when you read through uh section 9 or 4A and I'm not familiar with any cases that
allow um the extension of one a special permit issued on one property attaching other properties to it unless it's specifically attached to certain uses like scientific research and development um so I don't believe in this case you
can modify the special permit for 163 165 Pine Street to include an off-site premises i think attorney D just touched on it she would need to apply for a special permit 4307 go through that peritting process notice to butters to extend the existing non-performity of
the current driveway so so I I think we just agreed that we need a special permit application for 307 um if there is a non-conformity that we are uh ex uh intensifying the use of that we need a special permit to expand
um and the access driveway the requirement is at least 24 ft wide at its narrowest point and I do see that we are 229 on the existing um access driveway it's a short foot
i didn't catch that i'm sorry uh that if I've been I uh magnified the access driveway the requirement is 24 ft and it is 22 feet 9 in wide um so there is going to be uh that is going to be
pre-existing non-conforming versus 24 versus 24 attorney Tree does that garage go to the property line 7 foot8 no all right there is it's 7
foot8 from the property line which I don't think is enough to fit a car down but maybe a motorcycle is it paved on that side do you recall John i think it's partially paved i don't think it goes all the way back to the garage though i
think it probably goes about 90 ft back i have a draft easement um to circulate which was the other thing that was asked for um enough and and I'm going to leave the PowerPoint but there's
nothing in the PowerPoint in there um there was discussion at the last meeting about having an appropriate easement deed that would be on record um that address some of the concerns that arise when you have uh other people parking in
the lot um and what this easement does is it grants the easement to pass repass and park in two specific sites the plan would be attached and the the spots would be designated on the plan as they
just you saw just now um the agreement uh imposes upon the grantor um the owner of 307 pine some obligations and that is um
in the paragraph at the bottom right there those obligations are described so it talks about um maintenance of the asphalt fixing of potholes um fixing of
cracks um a review on an annual basis of the condition of the parking lot and then that parking lot maintenance uh performed within a reasonable period of time um which is assumed to be six months and who is responsible for that
the owner of the of 307 pine um it also talks about uh snow plowing salting and sanding being an obligation and maintenance of light fixtures and supply of the utilities required to make
those light fixtures go light fixtures are given a 30-day um window to be repaired um and then with snow removal it's going to be 12 to 24 hours or as otherwise reasonable depending on how
many feet of snow we get at any one time you never know no um and then if you go to the next page the paragraph at the top provides for cost sharing um so there's proportionate cost sharing from
the owner of 163 165 Pine Street to 307 Pine Street right now we have friendly but different entities so we can have an easement between them and we have this obligation between the two entities it
is not on the tenants that would be pretty unreasonable um but the proposal is there's proportionate cost sharing 307 PIN performs the work there's a bill generated um the bill is presented to
163 165 PIN and then is paid within 60 days um so that would be the arrangement for not only the permanent easement but also the ongoing maintenance issues that were raised at the last hearing how how
do how does one establish the value of the work because 307 can say I just spent $500,000 and I want my portion of it well in the law we have this very arud saying uh pigs get fed and hogs get
slaughtered I think is what it's might be the other way around um but at any rate if somebody thinks that it is worthwhile to pay attorneys and or a team of attorneys to litigate whether it's reasonable to charge $500,000 to
fill a pothole they can do that um we can't resolve all future issues between parties um but we can provide the standard framework under which rights and duties exist the courts are very
used to dealing with this issue of what is reasonable it's a factual question um and if the parties don't agree that's term that can be litigated by either party so if I'm living at 163 165 Pine Street
I'm already paying rent that would be including my parking now I'm going to have to pay a subsidy no because the obligation is between the property owners it's not between um the
tenants and we'll probably end up paying for it don't you think that they would increase the uh rent in order to pay for the expense especially I'm not saying it's 500,000 but if it is a significant
number like you're going to be re repaving or it needs some other work um I'm going to end up paying for it in the long run mhm there's always the possibility that the landlords can increase the rent at either unit for any
reason including legitimate increase in costs or less legitimate desire to generate more profits for their owners right right um we can again only set up the framework for parties to be reasonable
and work together um there is no personal obligation to any tenant under this agreement it is just part of whatever the charges are um from the landlord in the rental agreement but if you do want to take that into
consideration the place where it comes into consideration is whether or not it is really that worthwhile to add these additional off- streetet parking spaces um you know I I don't know what will happen in the future politically or with
changes in the ordinance i do always hear rumblings that there's going to be changes in the required parking um you know I I tend to credit these things when they actually happen and not when they might happen um but we
can't we have to kind of look ahead because if we say okay and then things do happen it's almost kind of too late so let's say that um the parking requirements gets reduced to one space
per unit um which let's say that's within the realm of possibility um in that case you have a building that already has sufficient sufficient parking on site that is true um with a new
application it will be if if we end the review hearings here or at least suspend them and the next thing we do is submit um the applications for modification and maybe the additional special permit um we are two months out right we're we're
two months out from that easily because we have to put the applications together there has to be sufficient time for advertisement and I believe we've already missed the deadline for the May meeting so um we're looking at June the
next time we'd be here um maybe there would be a change in that time maybe not um if there is a change in circumstances um we'd certainly be requesting to um allow the parking as is that would
eliminate a lot of these troublesome questions for the board with building commissioner um uh and we'd be uh compliant within the ordinance so I would say that you know we
don't say we don't require relief i do think you know there's some a few um dimensional nonconformities in the maneuvering aisle back there and things like that but um the relief would be less all the tenants tenants at will or do
they have leases uh we do leases across board written leases one year in term typically how long typically one year I'm the uh easement agreement What's the
penalty to the say the landlord if they don't adhere to I the bottom all right i mean it's nice to put this in in words but uh what happens if they don't do it
you know I mean the tenants can complain complain and nothing's happening there's no real penalty to the or any way to enforce this so there is a way to enforce it it requires um an action for a specific
performance which is the court forces the owners to comply with the agreement um and that is an available remedy it's a court remedy but it's an available remedy um and I believe any modification is going to require this easement as a
condition of the special permit um if there is a separate special permit for construction of that lot on 307 Pine Street this easement can be a condition of that special permit and then the board is going to also have some ability to bring the parties in for review as as
it has done with us for compliance with the special permit conditions um those are the two ways I can think of we can't always have automatic enforcement um though it would be nice i agree with you that there is a remedy
if they do not comply but using snow your remedy is you've got to hire an attorney go to court start preparing your case and by then the snow has melted mhm so you know it's not a it's
not a feasible or I guess a feasible remedy it's um it's not an immediate remedy and um if there is consistent non-compliance with let's say the snow removal um there are
damages and there is a injunction and um an affirmative order possible from the court to comply the remedy if there is no um compliance is the court can hold them in contempt so thank you to go way
down the road okay I'll ask my members if you have any questions at this point i actually only had one question when you showed the overhead of the actual property it appears that the
driveway for next door it is not a shared driveway correct no they have kind of like a U thing going on where they have access on two sides and they could somehow pull into our driveway if they wanted to um but there's a property line there you can see the car kind of
parked against the property line right okay i think that's They have separate curb cuts but they definitely they definitely blend together does the pavement touch it does okay has there been any issues over there
with them parking building's been abandoned for I don't know and they stayed off a fire a couple years ago okay that's it okay question no I'm good i'm set okay okay are there
any city representatives who would like to speak regarding this application okay any interested any of Butters would like to speak in favor of this application for the record I do not
believe there are any Butters are there any is there anyone who wants to speak in opposition to this application for the record there's no one else to speak in this opposition to this application okay let's open it up to the
board again if we have anything that just came up nope no nothing nothing okay well I think you brought some information to the board a lot of
information to the board uh potentially some solutions um I would just like to get a little more on the easement uh not from you but I will make some calls on this get some
clarification and I'm not sure if we need to continue this again but I guess I would like to continue it again because if I'm going to get some information I'd like to get it as quick as I can and move it forward so Mr chairman one of the things I'd like
to do um is to see the layout of the parking space at 163 and 165 Pine Street how they're going to actually cuz there's there was two different pictures there and I like to
see now at the angle how that's going to fit in there and as you know as we've been there it's quite a drop off at the edge but if they could lay it out I would like to go and see how that's actually going to Okay uh look okay um
just that one space uh you would like marked out then new that new space number eight right cuz you you had two different kind of pictures and I've been there before for the initial um special permit so I want
to make sure I'm clear on how that's located and you mentioned there was an extra or not an extra space like parking but space available from the uh guardrail area so I'd like to kind of see that for the turning radius okay um
so what we can do is temporarily mark uh the move over of that uh space number one with a little extra 2 ft there from the existing wall um and then we can mark space eight but I just want to remind the board that there is currently
a retaining wall in the middle of it and so it may you know it's going to go over right so they could put the staper marker on the other side so 6' three so you put it in the pole and give us a mark where where it's going to be where the end would be it's going to be yeah
but it will be um I think level with maybe a little bit of rise on the driveway to be fill that spot in so it's level yeah that's the So I understand that but how far is it going to be and then I noticed the guardrails kind of
crooked well kind of makes a bend so be able to get that a better view on that okay would you like the um new retaining wall to be a little bit marked out then too okay yeah i mean you can use either stakes or like spray paint a little
orange spray paint if you have to mark off and I'd like to just expand and I'd like to take a walk down to 307 and take a look at 307 and mark off where the parking is going to be we take a ride instead
can we take a ride instead no get to see feel how the tenants You got to walk from 163 you got to walk down to 307 you got to get the feel of the tenants what they would have to go through like I said I don't take a ride i understand
they're going to get dropped off too really you know I I I really do want to emphasize I think this is last resort off streetet parking is what it is and I just want to acknowledge the reality of the situation is that barring a
snowstorm or or you know someone with three or four cars which I don't imagine is going to be in that building it's not going to be used that often okay what I'd like to do is confer after with my members here to see what might
be a good time to attend and most likely will be on a I'm going to say probably a Saturday cuz many of you are working and what I can do is get a couple tenative dates given Mariela and
she can contact you and see what time if it fits thank you and we'll try to do that as quick as possible great but I'd like to hear a motion to continue this the next month motion to continue
second okay any comments no all in favor i oppose no opposition continue to the main meeting thank you Mr chair thank you board members thank you okay the next case before the
board case 2024-09-03 it's a special permit continued BCF Investment LLC 75 Oak Street parcel ID M27-24-57 change of status of the building from a
two family to a three family dwelling good evening board members attorney Christine Tree for the Good evening applicant um I we are unfortunately and I apologize for this here to request a continuence one more time waiting for
the plan i spoke with the engineer who has been retained and that is Needs Engineering Need Engineering LLC they have been retained they are scheduled to make the on-site measurements tomorrow they state their time to production of the plan is two weeks and so I'm here to
ask for a continuence for one more month until May i do have that written request as well as the fee for the continuence with me and I'm happy to sign an agreement i have a question on that so is is the engineers part of it for the parking it
is for the parking it is for the parking only um and so because there's a difference in elevation they want you had asked for a tropical graphical plan basically part of the materials that are going to have to be produced um in order
to have that driveway permit through the DPW anyway um I did talk to Mr aliva about that i got specifications for what he'd be looking for the engineer has them and so you should have a plan that shows the current topography the
proposed topography and estimates the amount of material removed in order to get there um and it will be uh obviously because they're going out to the site it'll have the on-site measurements of the spaces and the curb cut and the curb
cut location of the sidewalk also yes um all of that is part of the DPW permit the materials that are needed um and Mr oliva did of course uh just remind me um that we're going to need to do the accessible entryways um to and from the
sidewalk gradation after the driveway cut as well so okay so they're requesting an extension to May yes please do I have a motion to grant make a motion we continue 75 Oak Street till
the May meeting second okay any discussion none all those in favor i oppose no opposition continue to the May hearing thank you early night for you Mr chair an early night for you right and early
night for us thank you and I'm just going to um and then later next case before the board case 2025-04-01 special permit Stevenson 0
Elm Street Emerald Street I'm sorry parcel ID M22-25-5 construct two family dwelling are you Mr sun yes sir okay attorney do you want to stay for this one too
busy girl we're going to request this to be continued to next month as I said when I found out yesterday there was going to be a half a presentation this month half a presentation next month no we're going to do a presentation in one month and get as much as we can in one
if we have to continue with the lack of data just like with attorney three we'll do that also there was an error made in terms of how it was advertised one was uh two family homes
and an application that said two multi-family homes which are not identical and so that's published out in the newspapers to the abutters etc we have to make sure the data is identical you know an individual might think it's
just going to be two single families somebody else is saying now it's going to be multifamilies so we have to make sure everybody's on the same page yes sir so what we're going to do and I'm going to call for it is to continue this the next
month i will state this though we will not charge you another $350 thank you because the error was ours and not yours so that's the good part of this
the other one is we're going to continue to next month okay so I do hear a motion to move or continue to next month i make a motion we continue it uh zero zero Emerald Street emerald Street emerald Street yep till next month and to wave
any applicable fees that's correct second okay any discussion are we not charging the customer for the continuence either that they wave any applicable fees perfect yeah because that's our fault that it's happened okay
let me use that phrase you like that one for any part there okay all those in favor i I opposed no opposition continuence granted okay if I could just add we we were before the
planning board this is just kind of bigger picture context we were before the planning board one week ago and we will be going back to the planning board in May in May again how does that
meeting schedule fall with with the I don't know when the planning board meeting is i don't think I don't think they meet the same late we do oh no i just I just wanted to know if we were going to be ZBA is out for planning so ZBA 20th I believe planning is first week okay
if there's anything we can do for the board ahead of time just let us know and we can try to make sure you have as much information as possible i think that's fair but like I like we know there's nothing been presented tonight so we can't come up with a list of questions
that we need yes sir we can read what's in the file but okay you know something in a presentation may come out differently is it is it appropriate to forward uh any information from the planning board or answers to anything to Mariel yes
right to Marielle and then she will get it to us all right and I think that that's a good approach because if the planning board comes out with questions comments information we want to make sure they don't put any conditions in there that may conflict with zoning correct so I'd
like to get as much data as we can and I always say that's one of the issues in between planning and zoning is which one do you really go to first that was my question so we'll we'll forward you on any information
that we have as it relates to the planning board and any questions or comments from that we'll make sure you guys have ahead of time perfect thank you very much thank you for coming in okay we've got we're going to vote on there was an
amendment made to Mr roy CPAN on 68 Acadia Road we did vote that however there was a couple of discrepancies in the decision uh we mentioned the 100 foot no build zone it
was a 60 foot no build so that number had to be changed in the decision and also there was a couple technical errors on book and page uh which was caught very quickly but
since the decision had been made uh we voted last meeting but we got to vote that that those changes are appropriate and I know I compared them after the initial run in so do I I'm just going to ask for a
motion to approve the changes made as I would make a motion second okay any discussion none all those in favor of the changes i approve unanimously that's that and do you need signatures
on that i don't think so Lori oh maybe one well you just changed it yeah we not need all new document this time all new document
why don't we just all put our signatures on it tonight you know put the date and we're okay on somewhere along that is all the members here that was heard that case
yes no did you sit on top on no no you sat on Aadia i did mr rice okay four there's only four of us there's only four um
so where would you like me to sign i think we should number these pages though as well so that we know that there's the number of pages that go along with this document yeah two of three four and I would say we sign on the last page
okay and we can just put approved on the 15th of April i would like to get a couple of dates from all of you um you know when it might be good to go on a Saturday and if you've got a time give me a time preference too i'm
an early riser my Saturdays are usually free so I can make it work okay mel anytime after 10 I'm available after 10 there goes the early rising thing yeah that's after that oh yeah i'll go
midnight as not night not 8 in the morning and Mr ante are you going to be around um I will be back for May 3rd saturday May
3rd are you gone what day are we talking this coming Saturday no may 3rd oh oh I I won't be around Saturday i'm not around i think I'm going to South Carolina when um I got to be down there my granddaughter's
birthday is May 4th i'm I'll be down I leave uh May 2nd and I won't be back till 6:07 how about can we pull it off this Saturday i could do this Saturday so could
I otherwise I'm just going to be at home baking for Easter unfort is Christine still there i will say no she's just for the same reason easter oh because Easter yeah because
between my family and my daughters and their families they will be working preparing stuff and Oh is this weekend the holiday yep and Monday is um Patriot patriots day yes do
we still call it that i don't know keep changing names for a lot of uh Well every every day is a holiday so I don't I can't tell the difference i am very envious
i didn't say that i know my days are holiday all right let's see what we got getting there so we'll be into May right what's wrong with the 26th how's the What's the 10th look like
i would think that'd be clear for me that'd be good for me no but Mal is saying "What's wrong with the 26th?" I heard you what day the 26th of May no no april oh April i won't be here
how dare you i know it i know it that would be uh not next Saturday but Saturday after right that's May 3rd is that what you were no he's saying
April 26th april 26th right and then the following Saturday yeah what's You can't make the 26th no i'll be in North Carolina well maybe if we can get together you're going to be a state park we all go together
split the fuel well we're going to be on the lumber river so Oh my only conflict when are you coming back in May i'll be back uh the 7th which would be a Tuesday yeah the
first two weeks of May is dead for me i was getting her knee replaced so well not your knee no but you want to come over and take care while I go out i've been through it all right all right i don't understand come over you understand all right let's get another
date looks like the 24th well let me ask something do we all have to go together can we do it to You're going to have to do it I think separately huh i think you're right separately and I just want to say this out loud too because I've had to deal with this with my own board
members that you want to be very careful to either post it that you're doing it or not be a quorum when you do it well if you split it you're not a quorum yeah we'd have to go in with less than four people yes to not be a qual good
night good night it's our retreat that should be easy enough to do just let me know that and the thing we need to know first is who's the first group going in cuz if they're going to
mark the places we don't want like you going in on a Sunday and there's nothing marked because they haven't done it yet and and but they're going to let Mariela know when it's ready to be looked at right that's what the conversation was actually she said um that she was going
to mark it open and they were going to have that ready for you guys but she wanted to know when you guys were going to go um to the property to to the site visit for her to for them to have that ready for you for me it's anytime this is the 15th
right it is the 15th i mean the 26th I mean I'm going to say it doesn't have to be Saturday it could make not too many people happy if you do it on Sunday but I could do a Sunday i'm home on Sundays
too we're all the same today so I don't care we establish that i know why do you keep asking you know I know i'm just feeling left out if you are all going on a different day on a different day when are you going to be free
will be the one i'm never free i think we're probably going to split up so you don't is fine by me 2 and 1/2 day two and a half day if I don't april 26 april 26 i can go part of
us can go to 27 i can go by myself because I've been to You know what I mean i've looked at that property a lot i don't mind yeah you want to see when these things are marked out right but I need to have at least When are you going
to be there we'll be back uh okay the 29th do we have to post discussing it in the field you got you should post but we can go do the 26th he can be there 3 days later so just tell them to keep the thing up for 3 days yeah if
you're doing a site visit you should you should post it and minutes have to be kept with the site visit lory's doing the Can can So if we're going to a site visit though can we're not supposed to liberate in the field though or or can we do that if
it's a posted meeting no because the public's not there public's not there so we can go look keep our comments to ourselves that's right and then we come back here yeah we can discuss deliberate here that's that's what I thought it would be okay so do you want to do the 26th yeah and then I'll when I get home
I'll just I'll just go there on my own you go on your own with one person you could go with you i might go with you for a charge it cost breakfast excited to have an outgoing i saw that did you notice i did notice
the exuberance was beyond description well cuz he's trying to get a free breakfast so 26 i'll go with you for free breakfast what oh now I got an octopiz all right Mariela we're going to look at the 26th of April
and what time is good for everybody i can do whatever anytime 9:30 9 10:00 9:30 anytime after 9 I'm okay 9:30 9:30 on the 26th yes everybody's buying
a coffee 163 and then if you could just let them know when a stranger's coming either the 29th or 30th um I'll I'll go look by myself or I'll scoop now go down oh we'll go down because I've already been there i can
tell you what happened yeah that would be good so we'll have it done before the meet next meeting okay 9:30 yeah 9:30 is probably good because I probably won't be home till midnight that night so I
can make 9:30 okay all right any further business before the board no I don't think so do I have a motion to adjurnn motion to adjurnn wow second second any discussion you want to set a
calendar yes okay all in favor i I opposed meeting adjourned ow you hit my finger