okay I'd like to call tonight's meeting of the Gardner zoning board of appeals is February 18th uh we have a pretty heavy agenda so we're going to try to move along expeditiously as we can if you have a excuse me a cell phone I ask ask that
you turn it off so as not to inter interrupt the meeting as we go forward before we begin the hearing I'm going to go over several of the ground Rules by which this board operates in Garder four members out of five of the zoning board of appeals must
be present to conduct a legal hearing tonight we have five applications will normally be heard in sequence in which they appeared in a public notice the board is not under no obligation to adhere to the sequence all hearings shall be open to
the public and no person shall be excluded unless he or she is considered to be a hindrance to the workings of the board an applicant may appear an applicant may appear on his
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 AB Butters the property present shall be heard and those those
in opposition shall be heard members of the board who are hearing the case may direct appropriate questions during the meeting the board must render decision regarding variance request 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 filed in the office of the city clerk the board must
render its 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 for the the application of special permit see be
approved and granted the right to appeal the decision of this board is provided for in chapter 48 of the zoning act the information is available in the office of the city
CLT no variance special permit or any extension modification or renewal thereof shall take effect until notification from a 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 of District the board requests that each person identify himself herself uh by name and address before addressing the board sitting on
tonight's hearings are to my far right laori Widow uh next to Lori is Richard Hanks myself Raa far's chair to my left Mel cornette and to my far left our newest member Bob
rice this meeting will be taped and videotaped does anybody object to the taping for the record no objections okay the first case before the board it's case
number 20221 01 continuation Jonathan bambach 163 165 Pine Street parcel ID Sr 22-
6-8 it's an update on a special permit attorney tree you may begin good evening board members um welcome attorney rice nice to see you um I am here representing the applicant attorney Christine mree of Fitchburg um with me
is Matt the co-owner Mr we don't we can barely hear you is that better that's better okay um attorney Christine Tria Fitchburg
representing the permit holder with me is Matt kierman perian um he is the co-owner uh together with Jonathan bombach who has been regularly here before the board Mr Bachi is U unable to
attend tonight um we're here with a uh and have provided a written update that update was submitted in January um I am happy to go through it um we have a little presentation um but I do want to cut to
the chase here which is that um we've complied with all other conditions but we are not going to be able to expand the parking area so I am going to go through this just a little
bit for review um this was an abandoned property um that was uh renovated by special permit of the zoning board into an 8un building um along with the special
permit granting the uh ability to resume the use as a multif family um parking was reduced from 16 spaces to 11 spaces um two of those spaces were buddy parking on the right hand side to be
allocated to one unit the remaining nine spaces were to be constructed by um a parking area in the rear of the property supported by a substantial retaining wall um the property in the back slopes
down substantially um substantially from the sorry I'm trying to adjust this correctly so I don't bother you but you can hear me um slopes down substantially and quickly um from
the back of the property so a a fairly big retaining wall had to be constructed already um for that parking area um so there were partic uh in that um
parking lot it was constructed short by error of the contractor um by approximately 8 ft I believe and it was not realized until the end of construction that resulted in
only seven spaces fitting in the back instead of Nine the two on the side of course will still fit um we were brought back before the board uh for a review of compliance with
conditions including but not limited to um amendment of that parking area reconstruction so that it would be in compliance with the plan that was allowed under the special permit um and while we have and I'm
going to review the other uh conditions we are compliant with we are not going to be compliant uh with the plan as allowed under the special permit so just again
reviewing we had started out um uh looking at a few issues number one making sure all of our inspections and certificates were completed the final um certificate of occupancy cannot issue until the parking
is resolved um but the temporary certificate of occupancy has been issued um The Building Commissioner requested that we have an architectural plan depicting a change in a landing on a stairwell but has given a date of May
20th for that to be submitted the certificates of inspection for all units have been issued um and after obtaining an engineered plan for the new retain retaining wall a building permit was issued for the new retaining
wall um according to the special permit there were three conditions the first one is that there must be one parking space dedicated to each apartment um and those parking spaces
shall be appropriately delineated so again eight units seven spaces in the back to allocated to the same unit on the side we do technically meet that condition but I owledge the
construction was not to the allowed plan um the uh spaces have been delineated um and a letter was sent to uh the tenants instructing them on parking once they allocated per unit in
the back to on the side these are the pictures of the delineation that was done in the fall that was in November and then this you've seen before it's the letter to the residents
um instructing them on how to park the second condition of the special permit was that the Buddy parking be located on the north side of the building be for one department and be clearly identified um the resolution we uh landed upon was
to make sure that signage was installed um signage was installed first temporarily in August um and then permanently in October um and that was also the subject
of the letter to the tenants that you saw before this was the temporary sign and as you see on the left two pictures that was the installation of the temporary sign the permanent sign is on
the right it has been installed on the property I apologize I just don't have a picture of the installation and then the third condition um was about snow removal yes uh now is there anyone parking there we
speak in that buddy parking area most of the time I address either I'm not sure how a car can move it down the parking is um on the Buddy parking is scheduled to be paved we were holding that off so it could be paved as part of one project when the new wall
was extended it's not going to happen so we're going to need to schedule that in the spring regardless um and again uh we do have a uh Property Management candle realy under contract to remove the
snow um and that again is a letter that you've seen before just acknowledging that they have a contract to remove the snow at 163 165 so this is the issue um the expansion of the parking
lot so we had a 2020 one plan um a contractor constructed using that plan but failed to follow it um and as a result we are short um and uh short seven spaces we
had a plan drawn for expansion um but as we previously reported to you the cost has been triple to quadruple the expectation but more important ly we've gone back to um the
people who did submit bits and they have substantial safety concerns both for damage to property and for damage to persons if this additional ball is constructive what is the additional
concerns in terms of safety the um and there's two letters on this that were in in the packet with the letter the equipment is going to have to come in from behind it's going to have to come up that hill from behind and
construct it from behind so the entry from that grade which you know I would describe as this um it it's it would be a challenging hike let's say and it's
completely unimproved and uh so if the equip needs to approach from that way and the the uh men need to approach that way and the existing retaining wall needs to be
deconstructed in order to fill in further have a new wall um and then pave over the top of it conditions with the equipment that is needed to do that because again it's a tall retaining wall
um so we're going to need some major equipment there that equipment is subject to slide instability create ground instability in that slope and uh that could affect the
ground which is supporting the equipment as it goes uh as it's sitting there trying to do the work um and as that existing retaining wall is torn out um the stability of of the parking lot
which is also of course uh you know supporting the building because the whole thing starts here and goes downwards um they were not alleging that there was a stability problem as it is right now
but the act of going in there to tear it down reconstruct it um and build a new one they had substantial concerns for their equipment for the property and for their employees
um I know this board has uh previously stated it's not so concerned about the cost um and I understand that there is a very correct line of thought here that the permit holder should have paid
attention monitored the contractor made sure they constructed it according to the plan um and that the reason we're here is because they failed to provide sufficient oversight I understand that
um but what we're talking about is a cost which was expected to be 50 to $60,000 and the lowest oral bid from someone who has not been willing to submit a written bid was
150,000 and 185 and 196 um have been submitted in writing I believe the other the others were inv Bol Park of higher than those so I think somewhere upwards of $150,000
to $200,000 is the projected cost of creating two parking spaces I do not generally think as a matter of policy it is um an expenditure that
benefits Gardener to that extent regardless I think the safety issue issue is substantial um and I think it should be of concern um it is certainly of concern to
the permit folder to the extent where between the two factors they are just not willing um and feel that they are not able to construct that wall extension so if the alternative then will
two units or now so this is are they suggesting they want to vote for I I've given I've given three options and that's one of them is eliminating units so um this was the plan um just because I know that attorney rice wasn't here
for the prior hearings that's what it looked like um I'm sorry I'll go back so on the left is this front and then um the land slopes downward the uh orange circles number
the parking spaces in the back um and then where it says snow that's the drop off for the retaining wall and you can probably see the topographical lines being very close together indicating a um very severe
slope on that on that illustration on the five rear that the purple that says snow that's where that retaining wall is supposed to be in that zone yes so this is the plan that was supposed to be built and the parking
lot is is not as deep if that makes sense um but it's supposed to be just 7 feet back it's supposed to the parking lot is supposed to be 7 ft further from where it ends now correct yes yes yes so
you're saying that's a major obstacle to to not take that down and move if someone built that once on that same incline that you're talking about that you say is now dangerous that the contractors that we um have looked for bids from are saying that it's dangerous
and it's different to approach it from that side than the front side which is how the the parking area was originally constructed why do they have to remove the existing
they can't safely put another wall F that's I I'm not a contractor I'm forwarding the opinions of the contractors that we reached out to and offered employment on this FL that's a judment
yeah so um I had updated the table I just want to say uh that we've had many companies look at this and tried we've had many many bit different contractors look at this and for some reason you can't build over it I don't know why um
but it's not that simple I wish it was so could you go back to that slide please yes but looking at the Contours it looks like you have more than seven feet before you hit that slope so again I don't see why if if the First wall was put there
and it seemed like again it looks like you've got a good8 10 ft before you hit that slope I don't I'm not seeing the connection why that wall can't be taken down and moved back so there are contour lines at the end there but if you look
I'm sorry about the sound um if you look at the bottom of the diagram you can see that those contour lines are are subsidiary across that entire lot um so let's say that the last line of Orange
circles is about where the um existing parking lot goes to maybe a little bit further assuming we have a 9 by8 parking space at the end there um so you can see
that the topographical lines are are quite challenging still there maybe not as challenging as the bottom um but that was also the topography prior to the construction of the wall
um now the original wall that you you didn't put it in the correct spot that's why we're here right but the original design had that thing s feet back yes so but now it's impossible to go s feet
back we're approaching it from the other side we're approaching it from the other side well why why approach from the other side why not approach on the same side that you would have done it from the first time because if you're going to do that again the contractors have said that the
wall that exists needs to be torn down so you're putting a big heavy piece of equipment sitting on a parking lot that has been built up with a retaining wall and then you're going to take the retaining wall out you're going to have a problem with
the weight of that Machinery never mind uh just the weight of Earth not being stable um we've submitted two of the contractors letters on this issue um so please don't take my word
for it because I don't build houses I I I I I see site work all the time and it doesn't seem like it's that complicated they they they build Bridges alongside of rivers while the rivers are flowing and you're saying this is an impossible fee I'm saying that the reason that
we're getting quotes for work at approximately $200,000 for in the the effect of having two additional parking spaces and being a danger to the safety of employees and the equipment and the
property is not a worthwhile proposition it's not worthwhile to the city um and believe me the last thing this this permit holder wants to do is come here and say I've tried but I'm not going to be
able to comply I would love to say we can comply um we can't so what I have looked at this is the um uh checklist that we had created
obviously we are now in the middle and unable to progress any further um what can we what can we do about this um um and
these These are the three options that I came up with um and they will all three of them require a modification of the special permit um and I would like to talk to you about what procedure you would like
to use for that um the first option would be to accept the existing condition reducing the required parking to nine spaces and requiring the permit holders to subil an as built plan depicting the
parking lot as it was actually constructed the second option is to allow the permit holder to provide the two missing off street parking spaces to um the nearest property it owns at 307
Pine Street um and subil submit an asilt plan for 163 165 and then a new parking plan for 307 clim Street the third option would be to
reduce the number of dwelling units um and I propose that we reduce from 8 to 7 generally one parking uh one apart one dwelling unit requires two parking spaces we would still be in the
compliance with the at least one parking space per unit if we had seven units um and uh I have checked with a permit holder um this is something that we've been talking about coming up as a possibility
unfortunately and um there is now a make get unit they have not moved to fill it um we can make that reduction right now without throwing anybody out um and bring us down to seven I did have a couple of maps
depicting what it would look like if um the board preferred the two parking spaces off site down the street so this is Pine Street and that is the difference between 163
165 and 307 Klein Street the two properties um and then using the mapping tool we have about 1150 Square ft um 22 miles it's about a little under a quarter of a mile um I
understand it is not optimal not optimal um but it is a street that has a sidewalk all the way up and down um and then this is a satellite image of 37 Pine it has a garage it's a
two family I believe mhm it has a garage with two uh parking spaces and then approximately five parking spaces on site so there is some excess parking and there is a willingness to uh build one more parking
space so that you would have four for that dwelling and then two additional for the other PL Street property um that's what I have to offer um I am going to if unless anybody want wants to
see anything else in the slideshow um and again I'm looking for a question uh from the board to be answered on clearly all of these would require a modification um how would the board like me to proceed on that with an
application or um as part of the current review proceeding and then any any commentary um uh I know this is not the resolution the board was looking for um but we've
reached the end of what uh easly we can do and I don't want to pretend that if we keep looking there's going to be some magical solution out there we just have to deal with it and figure out what the you know what should be the
response thank you I have two questions first one have all the certificates of occupany been approved and signed off by the building commission or do we still have some
outstanding that have issues to be corrected the temporary certificate of occupancy for the building as a whole was the temporar is for generally six months but the Building Commissioner is
beinging in correct me okay e the communication that I understood from the commissioner was that um the permit holder had until uh May 20th to submit an architectural plan on that
Landing um that needed to be corrected my was I right and interpretting that statement right right thank you for clarifying I appreciate I think we've got some issues here that still have to be corrected and
there's a timeline that's sort of governing when this is going to happen or should happen my second question you have one apartment that's vacant would the appc can be willing to give up another apartment so we have two
and bu that parking no at this time we were going to we would not give up two units especially since right now there's always vacant parking spots out what was that I can't hear you and I think it should be talked about amongst the
principles uh in terms of what we're looking at at follows here you know significant money and start you know way if you terminate one more apartment what's the impact financially is it cheaper to go that way or look at some
of the additional parking and so that's why I'm saying you don't need to answer that right now you can talk it over with Mr lak and the other principles but I'm just throwing it on the floor that you're down one what would the impact be if you went down to two and what would
it's negatives or benefits be for the company plus you've got the issues of the permits here that so I mean there's a lot on the table and so I would assume attorney Tre that next month you'll have
an update on these items the potential on that I just think we need to close the gap on a few of these things you know if it keeps extending out you know I mean these things will
expire then there's going to be some other issues as we go forward and you know that do we want to shut down a project I think the project is very worthwhile and provides you know residences for individuals but we've got to make sure it's it complies the best
they can it's safe and then go fly I'm going to ask the CL board have any additional questions at this time okay have time to the letter from so I I review it briefly um I think
you have it's my opinion that um none of them are ideal um should the bo the board vote to allow Apartments to be removed or not rented there need to be
um steps taken to ensure that they're not going to be rented meaning you have to remove in its entirety back to the source one of the components that makes one of those glowing units a glowing unit me you move the kitchen back to the source and that's back to the basement
Source or can be easily you know uh replaced once once we move past uh the Eternal comment that I have and I uh understanding both sides of the coin it's difficult to enforce when
there's existing uh framework in there to um violate at the same time there's nothing prohibited any dwelling unit having more than one bathroom or more than one kitchen although we all know that a dual
kitchen is the most likely inappropriate use as two dwellings so I I would my rebuttal to that would be none of these dwelling units are connected right we all have individual agressiv directly to outdoor so none of them share a common
Corridor they all Ingress and egress through a COR so nobody sharing two apartments right so you have an individual Standalone dwelling unit and in order if you're not going to rent it and you're you're going to remove it the building department is
going to require that one of the components be removed and if another opportunity presents itself to provide appropriate parking to this to this
building um you know and thinking that there needs to be some kind of response right now that takes us down to a level where um the board is comfortable with the result um but that we might uh take some
limited period of time a to a to V capable units I don't want to reix somebody um and attrition happens in a set unit building naturally within a certain period of time um the that you know a time limit starting
with removal of one component of the necessary fixtures um and ending with B removal um along and this is just my thought right now along the lines of six months so that if there is another solution that presents itself that we
don't have to tear everything down to the basement and build a back up again so some period for looking for a further opportunity to amend this um and if in fact we are
permanently going to go down a number of units um then I would think that uh what the uh hermit holder would look to do is combine the spaces so that each unit is a little bigger or couple of the units are a little bigger that still probably will
not result in two kitchens necessary okay no okay thank you thanks anything else you want to add the only thing I want to add is that we've come full circle they seem a couple years ago they were before the
same board requesting that they didn't have to move that wall they have to create the parking spaces that they agreed to do during their special permit so you said as that it's going to be very costly to create two more parking spots but it's more than just a two parking spots because you already got concessions to eliminate five others
give or take I don't remember how many it was so it's not just two we're talking about it's really getting back to compliance with what you agreed to from the beginning and again it was a couple years ago that they came before this board I wasn't on it but they said yeah we screwed up we put in the wrong spot
and again 7 ft One Direction I don't see that you know conveniently both these letters from these two contracts is stting the same thing almost like that was like hey say is really hazardous and that's going to be uh cost prohibitive and we have to come from the bottom up uh you know
so it seemed like the the contractors m mostly Co coached as to what possibly to say in order to make it look like it's practically infeasible to do the work and again I've seen I've been been around construction a off a long time and I see some pretty amazing things with people on equipment and I don't see
moving that things s feet as a major feet that's imprac itical to do and I stated before that what the cost is isn't an issue to us what is issue to us is that you go follow your plan as to what you originally said you're going to
do or make concessions get back brought the units down to an acceptable level that meets the parking M my St I very much respect your St sir um
I on a policy level very much disagree that it is not completely without concern as to costs that the board should evaluate this the way that um projects are handled within any City affects the
future investment because other investors see what did this what did this contractor have to go through um and $100,000 of parking space is not a small amount that is
$200,000 that could have otherwise been invested in the city in housing production or other things that will benefit the city to a greater extent than two off street parking spaces they they're not making any rent
money so this this is a losing proposition right now so200 ,000 added on to the cost of a project that has I think approached a
million yes yes it is yes it is is that our concern it is investor it is your concern the biggest point is they're basically wasting $200,000 and that be put for a much better use so so let let me flip the
equation you you you go ahead already par already I I first and foremost would I'll take so so now now getting back you comment that um you were saying that they've got a lot of money invested and
everything else and what what what what are we telling future investors to come the gardener right what what we're doing if we keep making concessions is that we're saying go ahead and come on in and do what you want and just go back to the GBA and we'll Grant you Rel I think the permit holder has offered
concessions we have offered I know it's so we have offered concessions this permit holder has experienced what I understand to be the first review proceeding ever held in gardener on a special perit um this is
our I believe our fourth or fifth hearing here they've experienced my cost they had to have an engineered wall designed um applied for the permit and all of that is going to go to waste it's money down the drain because that wall
is not going to be built um they they will have a some concession um but there will be you know I hope at least seven units of housing that are currently being used that are
currently providing sufficient parking and are to the benefit of the city and I think some reasonable response to this situation will help contractors understand that Gardener is a reasonable
place to do business and construct the project the problem with that Christine is this has been going on for at least a year and a half if they would have dealt with this back when we asked them to a year and a half ago if it have cost them at the time they were estimating
$3,000 now all of a sudden dollars are becoming a major issue here that is not the concern of this board because they should have taken care of it when they had the opportunity and they wouldn't be facing this they created this problem they
created the problem by not making sure that W was in the right position to start with they didn't correct it when they could have and should have now the costs are driven up dramatically and all of a sudden it's our problem that's not our problem these
folks created the problem they need to fix it and that's getting pretty tiresome hearing how all of a sudden now these costs are out of sight they own it let them fix it I like to interject this time we've got a lot of comments Mr
Hanks Mr cornette they're all focusing pretty much on the same issue we know the timeline here that I think it's been abused over time but we're not going to solve it tonight a few issues that we've
thr on the table my question willing to give up another apartment a lot cheaper I $300,000 to fixing that there may be some newer legislation coming through maybe take a look at
that and you need to talk and plus you still have outstanding items on this kizuka stable so we're not going to come to a solution tonight I think I want say put the burden back on you and your clients to answer the question when are
those going to be fixed what is their decision to do without the parking let me ask the question on the parking with the I don't know 300 P Street or some the alternative plot if you take that
property and requirement for their cars and you're going to put these cars there is there adequate parking to handle all those cars there's adequate space to there is one extra space there and one additional
parking space can be added there to make up the two I think even if we were come up the original I think I'm going to go back to when I introduce the meeting tonight we have a pretty hefty agenda so I don't
want to spend half of it on this one that's been around for 18 months I think if you can meet with your client some decisions have to be made with some very valid timeline there no additional extensions to do this what do
they want to do how do they plan to correct it or make it as best as possible and saying this is it you know now def I'll say against the wall you know make it as clear I think there's some big issues
that need to be directed on Mite especially with M EES and everything else so I think we have weigh the actions weigh the dollars and which is the better way to go so if it's okay
I'm going to ask you attorney 3 to provide another update next month I'll ask for an extension to go next month the continu so we can start narrowing this down to getting maybe this one item left or something that's much better
than I think it's an open book right now and I would the board like me to submit an application for modification to help address this or shall we for now keep it within the review I think it's time to come up with
the best answer no more we can do this let's give the final answer this is what we can do and this is our best answer so I can come back and say is that your final answer and we'll move forward and get this I I want to close
this gate you know I don't want this to be the legacy of the Zoning Board of a two-year case they couldn't come to solution you know we want to close it I'm sure you want to close it and Mr and his company wants to close it so
hopefully let's do it we'll see you next month let me ask her do I hear motion to continue this next month okay all in favor thank you Mr CH okay thank you very
much okay the next case before the board case 2024 901 continuance Donald S Foster second zero Talon Avenue ID
m788 relief of side yard setback and I'm going to take the next one with it at the same time case 2024 d92 a continuance a variance PR one a variance also Donald us POS a second
zero t CID m17 d88 build a single family home good evening board members attorney Christine tree um and I thank you for uh taking my
places I I am here representing uh the owners Margaret and Stanley um looka who are behind me um and they had uh given permission for Mr Foster to receive read on the two applications one
for a use variance and the other for a dimensional variance um this is my first appearance on this case there have been a number of proceedings before the um and various questions that had
been asked um at one point uh there was a question of whether this was a chapter 48 section 6 grandfathered lot um and uh the former solicitor attorney flick did reach a
conclusion that the use was not grandfathered so um there is no grandfathered use uh Mr commissioner has issued a determination letter um to the effect that the dimensional
grandfathering does not apply um I disagree but for purposes of this proceeding I'm just going to note that I disagree we have an existing application for the two variances um and I do believe we need
the criteria so I'm going to proceed on that going to I need to connect to the internet so I'm going to note to the board that in an attempt um to give it a good
presentation I added a video to this slideshow and my thought is video is creating problem right um so what we have before you um
you've seen it before is a lot that it has 50 ft of Frontage and 7400 squ ft of area it's about 150 to 160 ft long and it's in
talcot AB um talot AB uh was uh incorrectly marked by the assessor's office as um I believe R1 and it is actually um in the ind2
district the entirety of talcot ab is a little offshoot from West Broadway and it is entirely single family homes
and in the industrial two neighborhood so what we are looking for is permission to build one single family home one modest single family home and due to the determination letter
um on the use which is correct uh a use variance is required in order to build a single family home in the2 District in addition because the dimension
requirements have not been met and that is the industrial District's requirement for 30,000 square ft of area as opposed to the 7400 we have 150 ft of Frontage as opposed to
the 50 we have and a sidey yard setback of 20 ft as opposed to the 13 and7 fet with we
propose both dimensional relief and use relief so this is the visual of the lot from the street it's fairly level with a slight slak down um mostly clear um on either
side there are single fling hes it is a small deed end stre and if we look at um the overhead satellite pictures um we can see again it's undeveloped to the left there is single
family home and to the right there is single family home uh if you can see the large roof to the right um I believe that was the bolo ra on West
Broadway that is not on tpot Street but it is the only uh structure that fit fits within the uh District zoning um and then here is an aerial view um of the neighborhood talcot AB
has 10 plots eight are single families one is vacant um that is as far as we know non-buildable um and the other one is our vacant all in the IND to Z and then so that the
board is familiar with the neighborhood if it works so this is a a Drone footage that went down tcow AV um and showing you again
that the neighborhood is quiet then the neighborhood is entirely single families and that it has a dead end that is created by rout two see if I can get us on to the next slide um so again this is a review of our
requests and then what I'd like to do is review the variance criteria so this is the first criteria little enforcement of the provisions of the code would involve substantial hardship Financial or otherwise owing to circumstances related to soil conditions
shape topography or structures especially affecting such land and structures but not affecting the general zoning distri District um in your materials I had compiled a table those are the 10 Lots
um on talod AV um and an explanation of uh what they are which is either vacant or single family loes so zoning as far as I understanding goes began in Gardner
1974 um with the adoption of the zoning ordinance um a number of these uh properties were constructed prior to that time um but at least one variance has been issued to
build a single family dwelling um on this on this neighborhood um finding again that there were peculiar circumstances to its creation and the existing dwellings I'm also going to have you
note um that there is not one single lot that is developed on the street that is dimensionally compliant um certainly not with imd2 the area is uh too small um for the
most part the frontage is too small um and the most compliant uh property which is 20 talot number three even that proper when you say it's non compliant are you saying it's non- compliant in
industrial too yes what about residential are there any they are closer to residential um so but what residential we can't just pick a residential district and pluck it out of the air and apply it
to the imd2 so again I guess let me rephrase it again what is the average normal setpath for the other units ter of
History so I see I I will say I laid it out in a table I don't think I uh summed it up in average um but I would say that that it's uh the sidey setbacks are generally
somewhere in the 20s we have one at 16 one at nine um and I believe the lowest one on the table is five and that is on 17 toalet as a side
yard setback so attorney Tre safe to say looking at that chart the proposal for Mr let's go or Mr Foster first none of those properties meet all
setbacks yes they're either short in the front short in the rear all s so none of them are compliant with those yes Mr chair and that is my point that we have a non-compliant neighborhood the neighborhood is
non-compliant as to use the neighborhood is non-compliant dimensional it originates from this plan from 1925 which platted out the whole area for a residential development on the
subject property I believe is two or three of the original lots and that's how we ended up with this neighborhood um and if you take a step back you can see a little bit of the
original Lots in the layout um right now so the shape and the existing structures are the uh criteria on which we uh base the application the existing
structures being the neighborhood of single family homes on non-compliant lots that have built themselves up around it um and the shape being small thin little Frontage unusual in the ind2
district because this is a residential neighborhood in the ind2 district um again I I just want to blame my otherwise wonderful paralal for trying to Jazz up this slide and putting it
diagonally but um that's just a depiction of uh the neighborhood uh Lots all in I to this is the proposal so the proposal I know marks 31.2 ft as the front setback but there
is no reason you cannot be compliant with the 40ft setback so there is no need to request that relief it is perfectly fine to put to parking spaces um for this property um the relief
that's required is the frontage the S the size and the side yard setbacks one of the things that I do you have a slide in there that shows the the distance between the two the
houses on each side and where this would be located I don't have a slide but I did take the measurement and I put that within the um written submission so I can you give me just a moment it was
substantial sorry I know you have to I address Mr Leto on this one Mr letco looking at that slide right there and where where the house is
located what is the distance from the top line where is 150 ft what is the distance of the nearest structure of your neighbor on side on the most
side approximately if we go to the South Side M part what's the difference from your property on structure of proper
okay so there's an imposition in thing on the North side but not depend how you call significant or not but if you take your 15 his 15 seven get 22 ft between
structures okay I'm just trying to put it perspective of how much this home would approach on the but okay so that's need thank you the measurement that we came up with
um to the north side is 536 driveway um 37 ft and then the be and that be 73 the next criteria is that desirable relief may be granted without
substantial detriment to the public could or creating or aggreg vating a safety hazard we just discussed the fact that there is sufficient distance between the buildings that is proposed um and uh given that the use
would be consistent with the remainder of the neighborhood um there would be no Inquisition in the use there this is a dead end Street um where we provide adequate off street parking the um
backing out and uh pulling in um should not create any additional safety hazard greater than presented by other buildings it is also the not the first slot off of West Broadway so it's not right there these are examples of the other um
single family homes in the neighborhood and the size um of what we are proposing to build is consistent with these other buildings on the right there is 20 T cab that was the
southerly that lot is pretty much cleared now yes it is at one point the family were gardening on it um but never living never owning any abing property etc etc um so desirable relief may be
granted without nullifying or substantially derivating from the intender purpose of the um we rely on the fact that uh the intent of the zoning ordinance is to provide for the most appropriate use of
property this lot should never be used for industrial purposes unless the remaining single family homes in the neighborhood are torn down I cannot imagine the imposition of a factory
going on a 50 by 150t lot um but I will will additionally Point um to the mayor's state of the city address this year which pointed out um the housing crisis that is being faced in Commonwealth and that is being faced in
Gardner um and that is although we've had population growth of 5% um the number of houses has decreased by 20 21% and the sale price has increased over
100% um so the type of dwelling that we're looking at building small single family home small lot in a single family neighborhood that is very much in line with both state and local po
policies um on increasing available appropriate quality housing available to Gardener residents and with that I end my slideshow and I assure you it was a great video
sorry you didn't get to see it Mr the only question I have was is the applicant uh married to that house plan could they go with a narrow narrower plan deeper not married to the plan and and I
also want to point out there were two different step backs seven and 13 the reason was that we assume there's going to be a 3ot concrete uncovered walkway into one side of the house otherwise if
the walkway could be moved the steps could be moved it can be a 10 and 10 so that it is even on both sides um and and open to a narrower but it needs to be a functional
um so if it's 20 ft of setback between the two that would mean that the structure is clearly so I think there's a little bit but not a huge amount of I don't think going down to a 20 fo structure would be
quite quite such comfortable um so do you have any questions or comments thanks I just want to respond to your question I think we raised that question oh several meetings ago about was make it a little narrower give us
more side set back but if we look at a lot of the properties in that development if you want to call it uh some of them are like 7 ft same thing and I think if you shrink the width of that house yeah we can bring it closer
to 20 ft but now you're not m in my opinion not maintaining the character of the neighborhood in terms of the refers of the single otherwise this would be long and narrow and you would like for the stake of maintaining the character of the
neighborhood that's how I live that is a lot of them are already in violation of the side setback so this is not going to be the only one that violate s okay now that's just my comment how I
looked at from day one on this no other questions bottom email good thank you Mr zuper would you have any comment you'd like to make no okay Mr Hanks anything
further thank you um I think we've wrapped this one up at least my mind I hear a motion from Wan the application we've got two application variances here one is for the residential structure and then the
other one is for the side setback we've got plenty of Frontage more than adequate re we we don't have adequate Frontage Mr chair and we don't have adequate side and we don't have adequate
area because area is 30,000 area I hear a motion Mo on all those requests for the varant it' be what three uh use variance threedimensional variances
four point on B Mr chair but we do have two application one is for u a use variant probably should be heard and then separately if the that is affirm then we would go for the next onen want yeah I intended to incorporate
both issues within my presentation that's one why I called them both together for together what additional information would you like I don't necessarily need another presentation on it I um I guess my take is that had this
been Zone residential we would ahead be having this conversation you know the lot was created initially as a residential lot intended to be a residential lot so that's where I'm at at what would you
propose call I'm at your mercy Mr chair whatever you wanted to go call them both than I have a motion on the 20249 one Donald Foster zero tal reled
from I'm going to drop down for the next one 202 492 Donald Foster build a single family house that's a motion on that
okay those favor I I I all oppos no opposition any further comments or discussion on this none motion granted now I'll call the
next one case 202 4901 Donald Foster the second zero tal re on side yard set we have multiple
and dimensional got to bring in the area because we have we need to Grant an area use variance and we did use just did the use so now now we have to do a dimensional for Frontage area
and Set Side yard SE correct have adequate Frontage I believe we only we have adequate front yard set I was thinking set that yeah okay so we
H setb the side and yard yardage on the property I'll move to uh on this application can I have a second second second all in favor iing those multiple
variances I thank you very much Mr chair and board members much appreciate I said thanks missing okay oh you next okay turning tram you'll be presenting
this next case that correct that's correct that's um case number 202 4- 09-03 BCF Investments LLC um this is a request for a special permit um relative to a third unit uh
being restored in a currently 2 unit property um with the addition of two parking spaces the last request from the board was for a top graphical plan and an engineered plan need to be
located we had asked for a continuing um the first quote was quite High uh we spent uh some time investigating whether a conversion to an Abu property might be more appropriate
um the conclusion is that the property is not suited to that um so we will be proceeding to ask for the special permit um but we are requesting a two- Monon continuance now to get that plan brought
up um and I do have a letter with the request and it continues please no I continu to do that oh you continuing I'm sorry Speak a horrible and I'm out of hearing so I the double negative on me
here I I don't know whether to go closer and then it echoes or up I know so we would be requesting a continuance to the April meeting um because I don't want to come back here again and ask for another I
need okay was trying to Second yes move to April okay all those in favor iOS no opposition Contin thank thank you very much than
Mar 20241 011 royman 68 K Ro id M 32- 21-6 is 4 by 36 ranch style single family home are you Mr C that's what I
thought yeah my name's my name's uh Josh JN I'm with grass engineering I think to catch up a lot of activity that's happened uh that's why is it continuous because the structure was built at one
time and where it was located and we move forward to cons uh converse with the Conservation Commission correct y really the result that we're looking at here and the results of your conversation with the uh Conservation
Commission made some modifications correct yeah but why don't we pick it up there we don't need to go all the way back to Step One okay yeah so B basically like you said we've gone to the Conservation Commission several times and ultimately they were not going
to allow us to put any structure within that 60 foot no build Zone originally we had like you said the 24 by 36 structure proposed they requested that we turn it into an L-shaped structure um I'm sorry the the printer was a little
faint but essentially we created an L-shaped structure that is 60.2 feet from the wetlands on one corner and 60.5 ft from the wetlands on the other corner so just fairly meeting their 60 foot set back and the L-shaped
structure is the exact same square footage as the 24x36 house and added the concrete patio on it um so we'd be SE relief from the front setback of uh 4.9 ft and side setback of
8.0 ft uh and the 8 foot side setback is uh the same setback that was there with the existing mobile home um I point out that one kind of unique feature of this property is that it's located at a roadway intersection so the the Frontage
that we're seeking the 4.9 ft front setback from is at an angled right away where it's actually about 21.9 ft from the edge of the pavement if you look at that plan you can see that the the right away itself is angled but the pavement
is a hard right angle and then I did I put the dimensions on of the neighboring properties the property to the north is 16.8 ft from that front right away and the property to the South is 17.4 Ft
from that front right away and our front front left corner is 15.5 ft from that from the front line and then 4.9 from that angled property line which is that angle right away I disgusting I'm looking at M you gave
me on the right front corner roughly 5 yeah that's correct y front left yep would' be 15 and a half 32 ft on website yep okay and I know the
the owner of the property did bring some photos in that might help you visualize it a little better because I know 4.9 ft sounds close but if you look at it compared to the fence that's there and compared to the road it it really seems reasonable in use for the for the
neighborhood but we have I'm G to ask a question right now if I'm looking at the property with the c Road being to my right we have the property your but so it would be
this this question is kind of important yeah has he been contacted or the Mr Con in heaven or you have any conversations with them about this new plan
does he feel it impact him so he Mr C come up with I don't know if uh Mr copin contacted him directly but believe he was notified about this hearing today I didn't quite get that did you
get what he said because I didn't really hear him I'll say it again I was just saying I don't know if Mr copen has contacted him directly but I know he should have been notified for the meeting tonight I don't know if you talk to him
Roy Roy copen and I I haven't talked to him about that issue I talked to him about a month and a half ago when I was out there at the property um but not on that topic and then wish we if you building your house hasn't he hasn't made him known to
me if he has he hasn't said anything like that I would like to point out that from the side setback we're we're maintaining the8 foot setback that was there with the existing structure so there was the mobile home that was there
was 8 ft from that fence line and the proposed structure we're keeping it 8 ft but we're just shifting it closer to the road so it's not getting any closer to his side property line just f it the right way I'll share the issue with you
the original plan did not have de sh house when this was published or in the paper it did not include this it included the original house with the original modification we have a
modification and see why you think it's important to know about the abutter if he's fully aware of this does he have any impact or concerns that it's going to somehow interrupt or whatever but he
does and he would be against it because if he does then we would need to republish in the paper okay because a Butter's got to know what's happening and other than
yourselves and maybe most of them don't know the house has been redesigned follow me the chair's point this this was what was published in the newspaper and now it's it's right this this is what you
initially applied for right and now now that's to to his point it has changed and it probably needs a reposting so that the utter does have an opportunity to realize it's not the same thing that he got a notification for 6 months ago year ago I don't know
how long you've been at it for a while I know that so that that's that's understandable yeah Ju Just to put you know you want to cover all your bases because you don't want an appeal after the fact you know should we Grant something then all of a sudden a neighbor come along like that's not what was posted that's not what I
saw yeah that can happen but I'm just going to have a little to that uh I had a conversation with the city today about this and he's the one who raised the question is the eleral Americans because
I raised the issue of if you are to reapply you know it's another $350 so we trying to control the to here time he suggested he called it in standing but
if you got a or issued him a letter a certified letter said that he would sign and his signature would be notified that you notifies him with the change and that he has no issues with the change at all and get that
back then we can look at that I I realize you got a legal opinion on that but what about the neighbor across the street what about anybody within 300 fet of this could have standing that that would be my concern anybody with De Fe has has standing we
we'll expand it if he wants to Mar up on the street and go talk to everybody well no shoot them all a certified letter okay and you can darel can give you the listing of the people so would we otherwise we'd have to reapply for a new variant application we couldn't just
continue it with the the letter go out certified and signature notified of the other and then return back to Mariola and Zoning look at it have to move you out the next month I'm going to
assume you would want to get it back quickly but not with the weather we've been having we're not going to stop building tomorrow so I mean I think there sign time in the calendar but that was the option the city cicat had if you want could do that
and he calls it ining but if not then you have the new application file with this plan go through the whole the process we've already got so let me ask you the question which way would you prefer to go because it
depends on how I'll move tonight you can either do the letter or say I'm just going to reapply so if I was to reapply would I be I would be in the next
meeting if you get in the sign line if we've got the time line we still have time to get an application in Fr I you have it I did send in emailed an updated applications of the new with
that plan that you have now along with both those plans you have now I believe Mar on Friday okay but so that that was just an update to this application that's not considered a new
application do um if it's going to push us to April I would think it's probably better to try to get the letters right all the ABS will be notified anyway iess I guess my thought is if we
can contact the abuts and get them to sign letters higher of the March meeting then' be a mar well that would be your choice I would think so unless the only thing about unless boy okay waiting for April thing is if you if you do that you're
going to have to chase all your Butters to make sure they all signed and yeah some someone could be away on vacation and if if you miss one you you missed them all I I think it would be best to go with the procedure that you normally go with where you mail it out and um
send it to them but I just have one question with him having sent that information on Friday that wouldn't be possible that information for the next players in this you're a butter
know if anybody's going to raise a concern it's going to be that and just no matter when you get this to us your brothers don't see this I guess no I he was asking if with me submitting Friday we still wouldn't
be able to get onto the March being it have to be April last Friday was the deadline for March you with the completed application that just for so I'm going to ask again I just want to
make certain your choice is a reapply you would handle the letters certified letters and all that then get i'll Rey he okay point a matter if he's if he's going to reapply would he not be be
withdrawing this one without prejudice right you understand what he just said you can withdraw this application without prejudice that means you can reapply any time you just withdraw it's
two years before you can reapply so a withdraw without prejudice B just withdraw you're going to want the first one oh you want to do it with a okay I
hear a motion to move on the application or allow withdraw without prejudice make a motion that uh the applicant withdraw without prejudice second okay all in favor I iOS appliation and withdraw without
FR okay the next case a 2025 d11 kof Guardia 242 West Broadway paral ID R 17-16-1
read on signed s hello can you hear me all right you can't I he my name is kristofh sharder and this is Ken Wong Ken's the owner of sa restaurant the new building
that we renovated where Southside used to be and Mr chair would you like me to explain what I'm asking for I know what I'm going to do I just going to have phone with you
okay on I I've read it I know what you want to do okay Mr charer I'm ready ready okay so through through the building process we had come across the sign uh the sign
zoning issue which neither Ken nor I were aware of that there was a limit on how big signs were and Ken purchased the signs before we were aware of it um Mr zupa kicked us back out for the sign
size and so we're here requesting to put two signs one on the front of the building as it faces 242 West Broadway and one on the other side it faces uh the plaza the Tim the um
it's not syy it's where where the Starbucks is the new Plaza and both signs that we have are a little bit bigger as as I the way that I read the the ordinance it's going to be four feet high and his are 4
foot6 and it's got to be less than 80 square feet which we would be and on the secondary one which would be on the side facing the new Plaza it's going to be four less than 40 square ft which we right close on
that how far off on we're we're 4 foot6 by 9 foot that's on the primary sign on both they're both the same size oh they're both the same size but it's if you look at the picture that the architect Drew and it's it's Mr Hanks you'll know the
it's uh I think it's Mark triver who do it um but the signs have like lettering above them so it it's kind of hard to give the exact Dimension yeah this this doesn't show up very well actually the're both 4.6 by 9
correct is the so really are you applying to are you looking for um permission to put uh 6 in different or is it also the it's the 6 in just the 6 inch on the top height correct and
then since square foot the square footage I think we're compliant on in both in the way that I read the sign ordinance but it but there's a second thing which is that there's something in the side ordinance about if you're above in no
case are you allowed to be above a buttress wall and in this case we would like to be above the buttress so can you you've all probably driven by that building there's kind no s no I haven't I'm sorry you know where the old
Southside was yeah it's that building oh okay we keep completely renovated so it has a mansard roof that's about 6 feet you know it it's 8 ft off the ground it goes up about 6 ft and it's just like maybe
a 10 pitch or something and the way that the architect drew the sign is it comes up and it sticks up above the mansar roof a little bit like this so it is above the roof line it is so so that's the second part of relief that we're
asking for well the the question I would have is that according to the rendition here yep uh you could have the option of lowering correct uh the sign down at that at least six correct
if my my argument would be though that in the neighborhood where it's at you've got two plazas on each side of it it's all commercial around it and we're not talking a gigantic sign nor are we talking it be 20 feet in the air it's
just going to be six you know a foot higher than the roof line I don't think it's going to negatively impact anything but I also don't know why this why exactly this sign ordinance is written what you're
Comm you can meet sign not youve got plenty of space that sign the wall yes I think so ordinances set that maintain like kind Conformity people put the signs up you
know and you put it up at 6 ft higher I mean 6 in he puts another one up that's only 8 in so you see what I'm saying things just get out of control and was any contact made with the Building Commissioner before these signs were
purchas no first so fall that nobody talked to the building department so this happens periodically and we have to be careful because you you're thereare if things
set precedent sure oh if we Grant certain sign and yep it's okay then the guy next door comes up with a sign and so you gave it to them so now we're in Vine you and it makes it hard that's why
the ordinance is written to maintain Conformity uh so everything that's natural not out of filter and I think looking at the sign Mr cornet's comment you have adequate space to drop that sign 6
in that's correct but you could always cut the sign we we thought about it after we you know it was informed by commissioner you know
the sign is too big but the sign itself also have our name on it sa a which is on the edge of it if it's smaller we will cut it right away and we don't have to go through l so that's option b that
is not a viable option option A is to lower the sign on that building now why would you not want to lower the sign you be in compliance with I mean we got an issue nobody contacted building department went ahead
and bought it and now sort of through number our for case now the burden falls on the planning the zoning board because you bought the sign you follow me I follow you Mr lefon but it's it's
not it's not that we were avoiding talking to the commissioner I've been through that building multiple times before we started work this was this was and I said it in my cover letter that uh I was suggested by some of you last meaning to write um it's just a
mistake and I understand I wasn't insinuating yet to converse with Mr zupa we have had done numerous interactions over but there is an option not the cut sign I would want the cut
side for low little sign a couple inches and you meet that going up and all day my concern of L is you know um is he going to have to enough what's call
underneath clearance there's a there's a there's a mansard roof that sticks out and overhang that comes out over entrance and comes in there so it'd be awfully close and it would
be about 8 feet off the ground where the bottom of the sign would be so could I ask Mr zup's opinion Tom would do you have an opinion on this in terms of the height of the
sign on the you know where that front overhang is um not sure what opinion you're asking me of or for so I know the sign is sign's too big in a couple ways right so the sign is Too
Tall and it's too high so I'm not sure I understand what the board is asking can you lower the sign are you asking me if lowering the sign um puts it at an increased risk of damage or I'm not really sure what you're
asking I think I think on the side that faces the big Plaza uh where it's just a parking lot lowering the side would have zero zero impact on usability but on the side where you're walking right in the front door and it's right over you it would be
a little bit nice visually to have it up out of your face your your plan shows it's 9 fo6 in from from the pavement to the bottom of the sign as I zoom in on that printless okay thank you doing the wrong thing that's right I would assume we're
talking two two issues one we're right now dealing with the sign being too tall over the over the roof but that doesn't hate the issue that the sign of Sol is too correct so let's not miss the fact
that there's two issues so no your sign seems very um simple I'm not in a negative format it's just has your name on it and it's what is it black letters white background or did you have a a a picture of it a good
renditioning of what it looks like it it's black letters white background black little so it's it's not trimmable you take three inches off the top three inches off the bottom you still have a decent looking sign CU it's not going to change the the the font of the size of
the letters because it I'm looking at this and there's a awful lot of white background yeah th this doesn't he'll show you a picture but this this is a architect's rendition where he just wrote something in it the actual thing shows the logo which is circular and it
comes up kind of to the top of the sign so so that red circle doesn't show doesn't show on there yeah so so so one sign you're allowed 80 square feet the other one you allow 40
correct and they're both the same size they're both 4 and a half by n correct but it's it's it's the height the the the height of the sign ordinance is 4 feet but so so when when it was the The Border Grill and all the other restaurants before I used to go to have
a a pavilion um pedestal sign up on the side of the road as well that that was allowable to be grandfathering because it was existing but yes it's still there and we put a new insert in that okay so so that sign is still there so that's highly highly visible that's that's
that's what's going to draw you in yep these other signs kind of tell you hey's my ha is my front door correct yeah okay yeah so these aren't true identification signs to let them know yeah's my front door it's Lo yeah so I agree with Mr Hanks this is
more of this is where you come in correct and it's Aesthetics it's a it's a it's a new restaurant that he's pen and his wife are proud of and it it's it's part of what the look of the outside of the building is if if the
board was willing to considering consider letting us use the signs we have we would certainly be willing to lower them so they're not above the mansar roof if there's a compelling reason for precedence that you'd like that to be and I just want to add one more thing
just uh it was my mistake that we did done compact commission for the suggestion out of thousand we communicate we didn't communicate this particular thing and it was purchased paid for it and made and I
just hate to have to throw them on that just sit there and weo it like you know I would like to reuse it and let's say 5 10 years later the side is broken and I had to redo it and I'll definitely make
make the right size to the place those if that happens what what is what are what's the material the sign is made out of is it U plywood is a plastic uh it's a alumin
Mater metal and plastic outside with the ls being made with uh plastic as well the lighting inside it oh so it's an luminal housing with a um some kind of plastic poly yeah so it's so it's illuminated from
internal internally illuminated is the are the letters illuminated or is the whole sign is aluminated the itself outside you have uh standing still at the back of natur have you talked to the Sign
Company see if they could trim it down on all four sides to get you to the 40 square F feet is that or is it make a whole new sign or can they modify that one and modify the sign yeah I'm trying we did try we we asked those questions
before we we're trying to avoid having to ask the first thing we say can we cut it to smaller then we look at it all those letters are on the edge of it so we next out the option then we contact
line sign option either oh Mr travia I have a question for you because you answered so so quickly with this question have you contact with the sign company to see if they can make the adjustments of the modification we we we contacted we talked to Jake Lyman who
did the other sign out front and then we looked at it together and yes we contacted the supply place which is Ken's contact and no it's it can't be done with those existing sites any other coms
L I guess I'm have a question for Tom what what is sign board area how do we Define sign board area I'm in a sign BW but in order you know I'm trying to talk and read at the same time is it I'm just trying to establish how how are we designing sign board area what is it
the most extreme of display area the total surface area individual letter sign or irregular shaped sign shall be the areas of the smallest rectangle into which the letters the shapes will fit the sign
faes are placed back to back and face an opposite direction the display area shall be defined as the area from one face of his what I say I I have Mr zup's letter for me to me here if it's
helpful so Mr B commissioner so so it's noted and it doesn't specificity it's just a s area within the housing or area outside of the housing I give an example when we did um there
meas the ofay area of that one well the only only comments I have is is the criteria the three criteria can and I didn't know if they took that
into account Sly shaped topography the land location the land is more isolated than uh than in a mall or or so on and I don't want to put words in your
mouth but what understand is is the fact that um it's not near any other commercial properties in substance but that's part of the thought uh you had asked when we chatted at the last meeting when there was no
Quorum um a couple of you gentlemen had and Lori had asked me to put together those reasons I did a letter that I brought to Mariel which I I uploaded to the file um and the reasons for the appeal
is is one the one that we're both talking about we purchased the wrong sign so there there's a a our mistake um but that that's a reason that we we have them we'd like to use them if possible and then to the second the
topography in the area uh the building is in a commercial area surrounded by two shopping malls and on the other side there's a Cumberland Farms there's only residential area on just one side and neither of the signs pce the residential
area and I don't think these signs would be any more impactful than the building itself and all the cars and the parking lot nor would they be any more impactful than the surrounding commercial shopping areas that are there and then the the third reason that
I stated was that good signage is appropriate on a commercial building in my opinion to identify its purpose these signs will be no more impactful than the signs that has always been on the building during its tour of the restaurant it's been a restaurant uh it was Southside and before Southside it
was mahake I don't remember that but some of you might um watch I I I don't think it's going to be what we're asking for I don't think is going to be negatively impactful on the neighborhood in anyway
well definitely more but Tom I put on Squad again if you go to the signs and you read display area am I just interpret this incorrectly it says the display area of an individual letter sign or irregular shape sign shall be the area of the
smallest rectangle into which the letters or shape will fit individual letter sign so what you do draw a rectangle sck that Aang okay thank you this individual this
would be you'd be looking at to surface area okay thank you okay you have any further questions Mr Han all of them um so you're not seeing an issue with
dropping this down correct even up down that's not an issue anymore that you have the clearance to drop ass sign down if need be so it's not over the roof line it's not what we want to do and I don't think it would look aesthetically as well as it would if it was 6 in above the mansard roof but if you're willing
to Grant a permission we're willing to do that and I think we can do it my only other thing is um are you willing to I hate to put like this way would you be willing to replace that one that exceed that six square feet six square
in excuse me too much say in 60 days or 90 days or put a promotional Banner there in its place until you replace that sign I don't know what what you pay him for the sign so I'm just two it's two sign it's one that one's performing what
I thought you said you could have 8 square feet on one side you you got you said they're both the same size side no well the way that I read the ordinance the one on the front of the building facing West Broadway has to be less than 80 square feet one on the other side facing the new Plaza has to be less than
40 square fet and I think we're over that by a few inches right so so there's only one that's not compliant or area but they're both not compliant in height right well the height you can deal with because you have the height to drop them down but there two heights there's the height
above the mansard roof which it says in the bylaw you don't can't go above a mansard roof right that's one thing the other thing is the height of the sign itself in the bylaw it says it can't be more than 4 feet we're at like 4T 6 in oh so they're both four so there's so
there's there's three different areas non-compliance between the two signs um the only count the only comment I have it's in an area that I think you would have considered it would be less
impacted than anything else it's out by for the most part even though it's a a commercial environment it is in an area that really it's more of a stand L and I don't know if it's 16 people make that
much that point how far you are from the sign and you're on the road or whatever not significant impact you probably be so any other question go
comment unless you're going to get sign to the board's decision hey are there any City officials who would like to speak regarding this request this application any any City officials like
to I'll add add one comment so I would agree with the board I think U 600 is a minimum amount of space not going to notice the 6 in height from the road um it was included in the denial letter simply because following the letter of
zoning that's part of it really the the bulk reason why I believe they're coming for board because uh the sign is stick up above the the par is what that actually say are there any of others would like
to speak regarding this application any of Butters to speak regarding this application any interested parties who'd like to speak in a in favor of this application any interested parties who would like to speak in favor
of is there anyone here who would like to speak in opposition to this application anyone here would like to speak in opposition to this application not comments on the Neo's
request but now we just move to the board I hear a motion from one request all those in favor of granting this application say I
hi are we voting on to to accept this the over size of six square Ines or accepting the with conditions of lowering the with the condition of L the he the the sign down that doesn't
rise above Grant the variant for the size but not the height the height has to conform with the proper as byw yeah understand that okay so I'll try to rephrase
that V on the app ation and lowering the sign so won't be over the paret and allowing the extra 6 in of area all those in favor I
oppose no opposition granted propos condition thank thank you very much now when you get your sign can please confer with the building department I didn't hear that Mr I said when you get your sign location
everything please confirm with the building make sure it's in the right place I'll set to go 75 on next case 20252 D1
variance Kristoff charia 108 Grant Street cross ID r 22-17 [Music] we leave on rear set back for second e good evening
uh here this is an existing two family that I'm renovating and there is like many Gardener two families there's a two side porches
with an entrance on the first floor that goes into a hall with stairs that go up to the second floor that enters into the second floor apartment so essentially there's no second ESS out of the building and it's on Grant Street which
is below peid street so it's there's two streets coming down a hill so this is in the middle or the bottom of the hill and the setbacks are tight on the three sides that doesn't already have the porch on it and the porch runs the entire length of the building so I'm
suggesting that we put a secondary egress on the rear side of the building in the rear left corner where on the first floor we will just be walking out at grade it's the only place that we'd be able to do a secondary egress walking out at grid and then on
the second floor there'd have to be a 3ot by 3T clear Landing with a set of stairs going down it's about 10 ft to the property line there and there's a retaining one of those oldfashioned poured concrete retaining walls halfway up the slope and
then there's probably another 25 ft of woods and another 15 ft of elevation before you get to somebody else's backyard on pbd street so this would be a secondary egress for safety
purposes on Lake I think it would be very low impact in the neighborhood and I think it would be the best place you not visible from the street and it's not going into the side setback for a
side neighbor and that with which would have to be two and a half stories of structure on the side on the back it's just the one Landing for the second floor coming down oh both of these is both of those units
occupied no the whole building's vacant I'm I'm renovating vac so s there I have a couple of comments I'm make y first of all looking through your packet
yep uh I find it incomplete okay in the application Parts having a slot plan there's nothing in here to represent the plan I have no idea the board has no idea on your side di mentions to your
property lines Etc so it's hard for us to look at this especially the one that was drawn with a magic marker yet not sure how far that is the propy propy one the rear I don't know and I mean you made a comment but I don't know if you
Mt or 50 ft there's nothing that shows me property lines and dimensions and then the actual dimensions of the structures you want to put on I did get the property lines from The Gardener website that
show the side and the in the back view and they're in there and my comment was that it's it's 10 ft to the rear setback but behind that there's about 20 foot of 25 foot of trees before the next house to
uh's point I it' be nice to have a plot plan with the showing the building and all the dimensions that you have all in one hard to visualize this that's the package they have I'd be happy to do a
plot plan that I pay a survey inter do and I'd be H happy to do an architectural plan showing a 3 foot by 3ot Landing with stairs but if we continued it maybe you could give me a general sense that you like my way of thinking I got to put a second erress on
this building somewhere and there's nowhere that I can put it that doesn't meet setbacks so I'm what I'm describing is where I think is the least impactful place to the neighborhood and the best place to put on the building I stand that okay but the
application tells you what you need this came in Inc complete if this ever gets appeals and goes to court I have nothing here to defend in terms of where's the plot plan how do you know what the mentions are they follow
me a certified plot plan is a certified plot plan's in the list of things in the application yes I'm going to make you an offer okay I'm going to continue this case the next mon yet I ask you to bring in a plot
plan that would be a mortgage PL plan or anything there went out there there's a copy because if you went through a bank you know they all going to require a flop PL and give us all the dimensions
you know front side back and you've got that erress coming down from the second floor on the side correct how wide is it going to be the height so we know exactly what we're working with but this is in my opinion
going in blind you know and I know you're going to do the right thing but if there is a court case or was a challenge to it I have no evidence to back it up other than Mr try has said I think we'll continue with the
next month you know all the dimensions on okay you can come off the back by 10 ft into the 50 you got plenty I have no idea looking
at okay so so to the expand on what the chair is just trying to get across is that if we Grant you relief we have to give you an amount you have to be asking say I want 7 feet based on the survey plan or you want six feet so that would be part of our decision would be if we
were to Grant it would be we are giving giv you a side J setback of 6 feet or 7 ft what whatever that number is but it has to be verifiable that they can't just be Whimsical that we think that you're starting at 10 ft you're coming into it by 3pt so you theoretically have S fet to spare and that would be your
new sidey setback we need something tangible that to the chair's point that should get appealed we don't look like idiots by just blindly just giving you a side yard variance okay okay and also you need the
three conditions you know take you know creative s the D gate from the intent of the ordinance of course that's why you're here and do the shape topography and certain conditions you can put a good
case together safety of the inhabitants of the neighborhood Etc but you should have those three conditions address I did I put them on a cover letter that that I that did the same thing with this the other application
because I came in last month and got that feedback so I my three reasons for appeal was there's nowhere on the property we can put a secondary egress that meets the setback that the Le left rear corner because of the grade in the Topography
is the least impactful spot to put the secondary egress and that the secondary egress is required for safety of future inhabitants and I did have dimensions in there but I can see where it's not easily seen so if it makes it an easier thing
for you folks to look at I can put a plot plan that shows all the setbacks where I'm thinking of putting this stair and am I understanding correctly Mr Hanks and M Leon that this could be an
aerial view if I draw the stair on the on the on the building so so you you'll have a a surveyed plan that's going to show the footprint of the building and the boundaries of the property and then and then they surveyor should be identifying the setbacks to all your lot
lines and then yes you would show that you're going to come out three feet that's your minimum for a landing correct on the building code so then You' show the balance of what your side yard setback would be so that would be the realief that you're asking for but
but to be clear do I have to hire a surveyor or can I right on a mortgage plan and you gave you three answers I'm going to ask you questions on your first one there's nowhere on the property where we can put a second e
list that meets to setb my first question is why so that you see you got to expand it and tell us you made a statement but why that's like when we make a decision if we deny somebody we have to put why we deny them
it's not a no and if we Grant one when we write the decision we have to validate why you granted that decision I can't come in with me say there's nowhere on the property of have to tell them why shape topography yeah shape tooc
soil conditions and some of that stuff doesn't matter because you can't do it it's probably not it could be soil conditions the Topography of the land will tell you I only can put it in this corner because rest goes like this and then
thirdly the secondary egress is required for the safety of the inhabitant and you just take the this Creator activator safety that's the that's the number three you can say no this is not for you to safety but is for
the safety of the inhabitants Etc just expand it and validate your comment that's what I'm asking question I'm just going to circle back because he did ask a question does he need to have it surveyed and I'm going leave that to you Mr chair is what what
level of a plan are you going to accept if he has Mr TR do Finance this property did I finance it well do you have a mortgage that's iage on it no well a I'll call Certified FL plan
would be great we have accepted plot plans in the past that were handrawn and that took a lot of work to get it done you can have it certified quickly would have up okay yeah it thank you
and not to belabor the point but I could very easily draw in a stare on that and the setbacks or I could also go down to Alex's office and ask him to draw it in if in my opinion and this is only my opinion if you have something that shows a definite side yard setback say it's 10
ft and then you say you're going to encroach into it by 3 feet I'd be I would accept that okay but I'm only one of five does everybody else agree with that as long as long as it's a surveyed plan that identifies what he has for side Yad
currently and then he tells us how much he's coming into to a buy that's okay I'll get up the podium thank you very much thank you okay I need a motion to continue this make a motion to continue till next
month okay all those in favor sign that you're extending right we all have paperwork for you next case 202 5-3-1 special
permit also B ke roog paral ID 1127 D14 d101 com at-11 27-14
d102 and H 27-14 d103 environmentally restore all Disturbed 20 acres good evening U I'm Russell Burke I'm with the BSD group and here with me is
Emily Molino who um uh representing the um North County Land Trust who's the owner of the property and W Tech um presentation style that's all right when
that's okay with the board um good to me I don't want to have to thr my neck like that this time I know I don't blame you very familiar with that property very familiar been lingering around from what
I gather what it's been lingering around um I granted the original variance to construct that Hing project so when I saw this I went oh boy it comes back around well hope hopefully this is has a better ending than the
than the first one um right ahead okay um how how deep do you want me to dive on this uh well I'll I'll give you kind of an overview and then we can if you want to
get into the some nitty-gritty we can do that as well hopefully I've covered all your points um uh we're seeking a a special permit um and the zoning code has a a special special
permit for this um which is the Earth Earth moving um and Earth removal section and we are by virtue of the amount of proposed site work um meeting the uh the threshold that we uh requires
a special permit for this property um as some of you may or may not know the um the proposed property um is a 157 157 Acre Site that was uh previously
approved for a 107 watt subdivision some 10 plus years ago the uh proponent um started moving ahead and uh put in some some Road
stubs and uh did some you know initial utilities uh but I think the the major focals um seem to be this was a an area that was rich in uh gravel Sandy gravel
material that was um very vigorously um worked on on on the site uh for whatever reason uh two or three years into the project the uh development uh ran into uh difficulty
and ultimately the construction lender took the property over um and there it sat for 10 10 plus years um the uh the bank tried to sell it and uh wasn't
finding any takers um ultimately the bank uh decided to uh work with the north county land trust was here representing um who agreed to take over the the
property um and the purpose for for the property was to uh turn it back into a a conservation open area um now they have um Emily can get into some of the
overall plans um that that entails but one of the first uh issues they had con the conditions on on the site if all this material is pack all my up right now
that represents about uh uh 20 acres or about 12% of the site area that is in that condition and so one of the first steps that the north county landfest wants to do is do some regrading of that um those
stock piles of of gravel and spread them out over and uh create more of a a level level playing is not exactly the right word but to create a level area um so in order to do this in addition to
the uh special permit that we before this uh board um it also required uh going before the Conservation Commission because the stock piles and where the uh the spoils are to be spread work is going to be
occurring within the um 100 foot buffer to the resource areas um identified by the Conservation Commission um we just received today uh the order of conditions from the Conservation Commission um which was
being applied for on a parallel course with the special permit application um so we're very pleased with that that entailed um us looking um into the storm water and the
sedimentation erosion control and many of those technical actors that the Conservation Commission uh took a a real close look at and were pleased that they the primally issued it in order of conditions to allow the work to proceed
from their their jurisdictional point of view the uh work untils the the regrading of gravel as I mentioned um from the stock piles the um work will occur totally on site
there's no net export or import of material so there's going to be no other than the mobilization of equipment on the site and then taking it off the site and then the daily traffic from the the work is going there there's going to be
no um back and forth of heavy machinery um though during the the work itself there will be um equipment you know pushing pushing the material around top soil off the site or there there is no
top soil on on the site whatsoever the the ultimate goal is to create a a grass planed area what they're looking to do is to um re um spread the material and then
use the natural vegetation get rid of the invasives that are there and to create a a more Environ we we call it an ecological restoration but an environmental restoration of the property um to give it a chance to start
regenerating with some natural as well as uh selected plantings to augment the natural vegetation to create more more suitable habitat for the um uh vegetation and the wildlife that occurs
there the uh let see here the the existing soil is has poor Sandy nutrients so this type of um sand plane
grassland our environmental ecology people think this is the better way to uh treat this propit rather than to try to you bring in top soil and and put types of U plant materials there that doesn't want to go
there and not planning to replicate it when it was before they started moving anything thing exactly um exactly I might have messed up are you going to do any plant plant
shy um yeah so we are taking a wait and see oh sorry Emily Merlino I'm the director of land programs for North County Land Trust um so we're initially only going to do plantings on the um the remaining slope where we're moving some
of the material and that's just for a control and there are some seed bank plants there we're looking for a little boot stem to establish across the site and we already have um some of that established there so we're going to take a wait and see approach for um one to
two years for major plantings we're hoping to do some very small plantings of mostly little blue stem um potentially this year once the site is graded but no major plantings in the initial on small level
planting you're you have or going to identify the naturalized plants that were in that area or still in that area plant is the same thing POS so we'll be planting little boo stem which is
already there and then there are a few other key species of Inland sand plane grasslands that we will be planting there but mostly little bo s to begin it's a keystone pieces of that habitat keep okay so as I said the um essentially
what this is a a first step I think from a much larger master plan that you have to improve this area but I don't know if you've had the chance to to walk out there it's um quite overwhelming when you look at the size of these piles that
have been left Left Behind um I I think this uh is a good first step to try to uh re reclaim a uh a busted subdivision the lack of a better better phrase they actually
remove top soil or did they just relocated I suspect I think removed but when you walk the site and look at areas that have not been Disturbed there wasn't a lot of top soil to begin with um that
sand and grael that whole area when you look at the soil Maps is Sandy gravel in there looks to be some areas around there that have been used as gravel Barrow pits over the years as well um and it's quite possible that the site
you know 100 years ago might have um had people grabbing gravel from the site that's just my speculation right well that like like I said I'm familiar with but I've walked it a couple of times I walked it
when it was probably close to beginning and then uh we were notified that they were putting in utility you know I called junking boxes and wires and then the terrain went sort of
like and you could see where the bulldozer pushed all this gravel up and probably 25 I put Ro down and it was all over and they said it was that F because they were still focusing on sell rocks
and everything but then it was just work like that and so I'm not sure if it's still in the same condition but I'm going to assume so but there's got to be some erosion there a there's a a little bit but because of the gra grael nature of
the the soil that the percolation is is quite uh good um and so you know we have done a storm water uh plan as part of the Conservation Commission and it met all the requirements uh from BP in terms of
runoff Etc and also has a fairly extensive um uh operation and maintenance in terms of sedimentation erosion control and then postao monitoring to make sure everything is is being done accordingly to the uh
approved condition oh I'm no speci we have nine have have the address in get fact that here you have address oh the public has not seen it so I'm going to ask if you can highlight it
and go over it you can read right from your report have I I even dog a it in my uh my report the uh the first one is The Proposal sh shall be suitably located in the neighborhood in which the proposed
Andor entire city um and shall be compatible with the neighborhood character existing uses and other uses permitted by right in the same district um I think that's rather obvious that uh we're going to be reclaiming what was
proposed for 107 lot subdivision uh to reclaim it back into its the as as much as possible the natural state that it it um was in previously to the subdivision the second uh item is the proposal shall provide convenient and
safe vehicular and pedestrian movement within the site and in relation to adjacent streets properties and improvements um there are two access points going into the site um which will be the I guess the trail heads speak of
of the property uh the applicant um with respect to the proposed work before you um the vehicular movement is basically going to be the uh mobilization of the
construction equipment site equipment onto the site and then uh the daily commute of the uh construction workers the uh excavators Etc um so I don't think the vehicular access is going to
be a factor as far as the approval um of the a special permit The Proposal shall provide adequate space for off street parking loading and unloading of vehicle Goods products materials equipment Etc I think we have enough room on the
site to probably handle the stuff we're going to be doing uh so I I think we meet that requirement um The Proposal shall provide adequate and appropriate facilities and utilities for the proper operation of the proposed use and
disposal of sewage Refuge other waste products methods of drainage of surface water um in terms of disposal of sewage I think we'll have some temporary need and uh portable uh sanitary facilities will
be provided by the contractor um with respect to um U methods of drainage and surface water I think the the storm water report that was uh done it's part of the Conservation Commission uh basically
talks that the proposed work is not going to act exate or make any worse um than existing conditions uh currently on the site The Proposal shall not constitute a nuisance due to a and water
pollution erosion flood noise odor dust vibration lights visually offensive structures or site features in fact we'll be removing some offensive site features the the before mentioned gravel
stock piles um with respect to there will during the operations of the excavation that's going on there will be um noise um uh you know fumes from the diesel engines Etc but that will just be
temporary um during that that construction period um and then other once the work is completed um none of those issues will uh be perpetuated other than if they have spot work here here and
there um number six The Proposal shall not be a substantial inconvenience or Hazard to abuts Vehicles pedestrians as uh determined by the special permit permit Grant I hope you'll agree with us that we we think that the proposed work
um uh will not uh constitute a substantial inconen it's are Hazard to to a Butters um we have had um the Conservation Commission uh a buts um
appearing of this and I don't know if we have any buts with us this evening um but um youve not um received any negative uh feedback The Proposal shall be in harmony with the general purpose and
intent of this chapter um we think the um uh the environmental restoration of the busted subdivision is in keeping with the purpose and Harmony and general purpose of of the uh the code The
Proposal shall not have a significant uh detrimental impact on city services tax-based employment opportunities um it uh well I guess you could argue uh may have a negative effect on the tax
base because it's going to be um owned publicly not generating Fu in the way of tax but it will also um not be generating um any special services in terms of school
population uh city services fire um Etc uh and lastly The Proposal is consistent with the City's community velopment plan or master plan uh the city doesn't have a master
plan actually one is about to commence uh shortly uh but the um he's Conservation Area is mentioned in the city's open space and Recreation plan which uh basically States the uh uh
uh the proposed restoration effort proposed Ed by the north county land trust is consistent with the goal of of uh improving and uh upkeep of open space for in the city of
Gard hope that addresses your your um question Mr chairman um in your restoration L how many days a week will you be
working um that has not been finalized I would assume and that Emily you're going to be the one that's been dealing with the contract I would say at least five days a week holidays okay what are your hours of
operation uh again if you wish to put some time limits that's you know customary and uh I want to say close to residential areas I mean not right next to it but still
you know you're using heavy equipment you know land movers Etc they make a lot of noise yeah but of diesel engines are backing up warning going on
yeah I would think if the board looks to Grant this uh we would probably put a condition on that like holidays and weekends off you know I'm going to say and I'm going to throw a number out you you can
say well this is normal not normal you 7 to 5 7 to six that was too easy how about I came too early I'm moving back 9 to
one oh it's just trying to be reasonable and considering it might be a couple thousand feet away but still that's part of your responsibility in prog so I I I think we're we're amendable to to reasonable uh restrictions of that nature they've
also already committed to making sure they they keep track down during like commuting time and school time um which they hope will help as well and one thing and I don't have it here but I would
ask that maybe you contact the school department to determine what the bus runs are you know because you got to go on the Keys Road and I'm not sure how heavy or light the traffic is but I would prefer not to
have that heavy equipment going in and out when the buses are coming through and they'll tell you what their busy times are you know probably 7:30 in the morning 3: or 3:30 in the afternoon yeah I would I would imagine
mid midday type of mobilization would be the uh so I would ask ask you to research that and if we do gr that I you could get back and if you're going to change your hours or do something a little bit about the traffic submit it
to us and when you know either aim it down or it will stop for an hour something okay I put that on the T right really be you know U I would imagine fairly limited first the the
mobilization putting all the equipment in there and then upon finish taking it out so I don't think that's going to be a heavy lifi on on what hours are you uh committing to 75 7 to four eight what
number I I think seven seven to five um would be board members have any questions or comments to the applicant Mr HKS uh I applaud your efference I think it's great project um I agree with by Partners here that um
just when you're mobilizing just make sure you're walking around a school bus schedule depend depend on you know like you said once once the equipment's there I don't see it coming and going you no just the the daily labor is coming coming and going good things you're not
extracting any material that's where your traffic really comes up when I saw that I said well boy that makes this a whole lot easier to sell oh any questions right okay any representatives of the city speak regarding
application yeah was at my defense off to come by you just contact administrative offices I believe bu pick up is 705 there's a bus stop there uh West Street at n ke Road bus off 705 um I would just add that uh I think it's a
good project I think it's been lying with the city's City's Vision uh it's extremely difficult to grow a city and move a forward while offering um businesses and amenities schools and um
you know we we only have one or two other recreational areas so being able to I'm going to date everybody in this room just about uh most of us remember when this was Simplex field right so baseball field Simplex time quarter had their outings there so at one point in
time this was recreational use uh so it's going to be nice to to have it converted back to that I heard back in the day there was also use some extracurricular use there too I'm going to put an as us too about the time of travel because most of your
equipment or probably all is going to be on site it'll really be beginning coming in and coming out so you know I mean next between 7 I'm after the school traffic but it was really just workers you know four five six guys to run the
equipment couple of cars isn't going to matter but if you're going to be moving heav equipment just please keep that no that that's perfectly reasonable and I think it uh something that we we would
do irrespective of uh um are you comfortable Mo decision okay do I hear a motion to Grant the special affirment we have some arms up sorry
Paul any of others who would like to speak in favor of this application any interested parties who would like to speak in favor this application Paul De Mayo 9 Willis Road um I probably know this prop property
better than just about anybody else in this room um it's been part this property's been part of my life over 50 years um I was also a director with
North County Land Trust I watched the um desecration of this property through the development I I I know um every every uh
single acre of this property and what um North County Land Trust proposes his R now since that um development was discontinued um there really hasn't been
that much change in the property because the detention basins um the drainage systems were all already put in so there really hasn't been um much erosion at
all um there was um excavation of loom uh from all the roadways um it was and is still stockpiled but that's not part of the
equation here what's part of the equation here is the uh leveling out of um the uh gravel piles which um amounts and um for them to bring in the um
equipment um it's really not going to have any impact um on the neighborhood because of the setbacks from uh Princeton Street and uh Keys Road on the other side of the railroad tracks you have a junkyard
on another part you have a bigger Alan Russo who owns 75 acres and um Alan who is my brother-in-law is ful in support of this bringing the restoration back to
the Simplex property um I I like I said I fully support this um this property uh dates back in time back to the late
1700s um it still has a Sol hole on it that uh dates back to Ean Ean a kees when uh he lived on the property um so um without any further delay the
Conservation Commission has gone ahead issued an order of conditions of approval without any further delay I would hope that the uh zba uh would get behind this project get
behind North County Land Trust and approve this tonight thank you may thank you for the history lesson too is there anyone any other interested parties who would like to speak in favor
of is there anyone who would like to speak in opposition to this application anyone to speak in opposition to this application no opposition okay now I'll call for the motion one condition about they get the
school bus you know schedule okay there two least is there are there any other conditions besides in school bus hours days hours of school bus
for the hours of operation between 7 and 5 Monday through Friday and no holidays no holidays holiday we want to have um ability for special circumstance or for some reason
they have to get something done and they have to go hour through that they find a Building Commissioner that's fine that's pretty much the Ard it says an issue that comes up that provision to have things they could be in some ways where where it just
really P to they finish up a certain aspect and they might need to have to maybe go to six o'clock but if if they notify him in advance that way um if the phone starts ringing he's like yeah we're well aware of that and they'll be doed by 6630 that's
isue second second okay all those in favor I all no opposition speci F granted good luck and thank you thank thank you for your consideration and um advice thank
you all this material remember that I don't think we need the full size we just need can I keep the easel th [Music] okay the next case before the
board case 2025 d03 I'm sorry that's face 20252 Christina cardle 877 Tony G
07-15 D4 retail own operation good evening and now just this is an administrative theice all right um do I just Dive Right In okay all right so I am appealing these uh zoning determination that IED
on January 8th um because from the time I initially contact the board of health on October 29th up until January 9th I was never informed that the first oh I'm sorry I'm sorry my name is Christina McCardle I am at 877 tempy Boulevard and Gardner
um I was never informed that the first step in the process should have been to contact the building department uh due to this lack of communication has resulted in significant confusion and causing me to unknowingly proceed the wrong order of the process um I am a permitted Cottage Baker and I'm trying to obtain approval to have a Farm Stand
in my property to sell baked goods to Gardener residents um within um the packet there's an email that read from November 5th uh at 10:47 titled water testing from Board of Health Inspector stating that please make sure to acquire a form of intent
from the building department as well this is a requirement to start a business I responded asking do I submit the form of intent before after getting the water tested I have to get my water tested because I have a private well I don't have City Water um which was obviously not a problem in obtain um
water tested and submitting my application and necessary documents to you the inspector replied saying the sample should be submitted within the application if contacting the building department was such a crucial step within this process of getting permitted then why was I given the wrong information that answer should have been
I should have contacted the B Department right away or the very first step rather than when I would submit all of my documentation to the Board of Health when I was ready for inspection for approval and all of that when I received the zoning determination it states that your
proposed business would cause an outward manifestation of a business being conducted on the premises would not be permitted if me putting a farm stand on my property would cause an outward manifestation why are there multiple Farm stands in Gardener operating with no issues there's one on Willis Road there's one on Whitney Road which
is very close probably a little bit more than 300 feet of Butter's notice but it's very close um and they're operating with no issues I don't know if they're operating within the guidelines and the parameters of codes but they are operating nonetheless um in response I reached out to my neighbors to gauge
their opinions about having a farms in our community which you'll see in the packets I have attached sign letters from all of the abutters on tiany Boulevard which is five neighbors all of them have signed and are okay with putting a farm stand on the property um and in support
of this attached also within the packet is other Gardener residents signing that letter in support as well as other individuals that are from surrounding towns those supporters are also from towns that already have successful Farm stands which I find that intriguing that they're supporting this even though they
have their own Farm stands their own towns to further demonstrate the strong Community backing this project I launched a a business Facebook page my bakery which has already garnered over 50,000 views and nearly 600 followers for a business allegedly causing a negative outward manifestation this
level of support I speaks volumes don't you think uh the zoning determination also States my proposed business would violate code 675-8329 not just one there's multiple of them are they also violating this code did they receive permits despite this violation why am I being denied for the
same reason for them operating with no issues after speaking with the Board of Health of one N I learned that current CLE licensed Bankers are operating and selling from their properties without any issues I reached up to two license cage Bakers one on Elm Street and the other one on Leo Drive FSE assured me
they followed all the required steps and do not break any rules however if they do have not have a special permit they may in fact may be in violation not through any thought of their own but because there seems to be a lack of clear communication between two different departments for of health and the building department it seems to be that there's one hand not talking to the
other for some reason um and that's has happened from the beginning of this whole process up until now um for example on Monday January 13th Micah the health department director he called um because he made aware of there's
supposed some confusion in regards to uh what is or isn't allowed under Cottage food law during the conversation might be confirmed I am permitted to conduct deliveries and Pickups um on my property and to clarify I wanted to make sure we were on the same page in regards to pickup whether that was someone placed
in order for a big good and they came and they paid for that item in person and picked it up or if they place an order ped online and then pick up their order however it was done nonetheless it was a pickup and the transaction was done on the property or in some way shape or form if that was okay and Mike
confirmed that yes both scenarios are completely acceptable then expressed my confusion explained that I've been denied by The Building Commissioner due to sales in the property viol violating code 67530 M St that he would contact the B Department to seek clarification of work to resolve the issues wide
away I've also been in contact with city council George tyros he reached in also January 30th and he has been in discussions with the building department and the board of help um to try to help get resolutions to issue because there's clearly not a
transparent rule in place for all Cottage Bakers and Gardener feeling this decision is my last resort I Have Nothing Left to Lose over the past seven months I've invested countless thousands of work thousands of dollars which I've also attached an itemized investment list of the Investments that I put into creating the
bakery within my home um to show you everything that I bought purchased and put installed while doing this to prepare for inspection opening my Cottage Bakery I was inspected on January 16th and approved by the Board of Health so I'm fully permitted to sell and baked
Cottage uh baked goods out of my home ironically when I got my permit I did notice that there was a verbage on there which I wasn't able to attach to packet at the time but I do have a copy of it if you'd like um and it says type of business and any
restrictions and it says retail sales are not permitted without approval from the zva permit is for Preparation only of non-time temperature controlled for safety based Goods like items that have to be at a certain temperature like cream cheese milk dairy products some
stuff like that um baked goods jams jellies and other non-time temperature control safety Foods produced at a Cod food operation I found that intriguing that my permit states that verbiage so I reached out to the two Cottage Bakers I mentioned before Leo drive and Alm
Street and ironically both their permits do not see this verbage so I'm not sure if this is the new policy that the Board of Health and building department have come up together and now it's in effect starting with my permit going forward um so I'm not sure
if the current Cottage Bakers should be getting a new permit because they're currently being they're operating under their old or current permits that don't say this so they're selling from their homes they're baking from their homes they're doing everything that I can't do even though I am permitted to do it from
one department just not the other um so I do find that really intriguing um Mr chairman you've said with a swa case that you want uh everything to be the same if you let one person do it then it's just a domino effect that it's going to allow other
people to go oh mine's just six is bigger mine's 8 in bigger why is it okay that all these other Bakers in the city of garden are operating which is great but I can't do the same because I want to have a Farm Stand the transactions are happening here is sure you're
bringing these other we did not have any of those others come before us if they're operating we have no idea nobody told us and that's generally not under jurisdiction right way you're here for ministrative appeal correct for
appealing Mr zup's decision where he said no uh what happened with the Board of Health Etc I can't stand up to that I was not the board was not part of that that decision process or anything all we do
Mr loing the board we go to the zoning ordinance and we read it and that tells us yes or no and I I don't want to have you go through a whole thing of all these people because that's really not part of all of this and I'm going to
quote and I think did it and we're looking at it he under 675 830 home occupations we've had a number of Home occupations over the years but not a banking one and pretty much the product
was produced in under 15% of it was space and everything that they produced was either shipped out mailed out there was no retail activity of people coming in picking up buying it was all done
right through the house or they delivered it the post office and it was delivered so I'm just going to read part of 8:30 for you see where the Lord is focusing on 75 8:30 home occupation
it says uh a home occupation is defined herein may be established in all residential districts and Commercial one uh no more than one person other than the resident of the premises shall be engaged in the conduct of the
property no offensive noise vibrations dust e holders Etc there shall be no public display onsite repail sales of goods or we show be no signs except that permitted
in in the ORD such use shall be clearly secondary to the use of the premises which yours would be so so there's no retail sales on on on any property property and
display of retail Goods in the package we got you've got this little display shant or sha that's where your product would be for sale that's a retail sale and that's a public display not allowed in the ordinance you know
and it's not up excuse me up to subject to discussion it's it's clear that the answer is no okay now if you were LED down the path by the Board of Health I can't answer to that I don't know what they did they didn't submit any to the
plus and I really the first course of actions Mr zupa and we read I mean 8:30 and 20 203 talks about home occupation and then not allowed with a retail sale or
public display of goods or public coming in to pick it up okay on um is the problem of it being like a permanent structure if it was something temporary that was on Wheels I'm sorry I'm sorry if is it because it would be like a um a permanent structure if it
was something temporary that was on wheels that could be moved is that if it's too big it would it be need to be smaller is it just across the board it's just no okay I've had a public display care if it's 10 ft or or like a your little
display okay car check I don't know what you want to call it but that's not allow okay so if you produce the product in your house M you had it in a package and you drove it to your
customers no problem what to have the customers coming in stopping picking it up going to that little display boo not allow okay um so the city of garders we do have a farmers
market which is great wonderful do you know how many days that Market's open that farmers market is not under what home occupation what you to do no but it does coincide with me selling my product and having it accessible to customers so
that Market's only open four days a year are you asking if you can sell at the farmers's market or are you saying that just it's just a reference of gardener residents should have access to Big Goods they shouldn't have to rely on a big box store or or go across town lines
to Templeton winon Westminster that all have Farm stands that are thriving and doing well because that's what residents want we're not looking in the fance market here no in a home occupation that is it's not right it's not
a it's not a right to farm community what what what you got to keep in mind know is a a Farm Stand would be you're selling an Agricultural Product so if you were growing the wheat and then making product out of it then you could theoretically possibly you have to
confer with a commissioner that that would probably ify for a Farm Stand but you you you're you're buying all your product right for you know you're buying your wheat year and your eggs and everything else so it's it's it's not that you are um qualify for Farm Stand
you have to be an agricultural use all of that selling farm fresh eggs would that fall under that category um well you I am zoned as rural resident so I can have chickens but I guess I just don't can't have a spot to sell them
well I think it's it's pretty clear under 8:30 s not allow we can't start comparing it against Prim market and everything else that's not the rule how the regulation is written your appeals
to say his interpretation is incorrect that's what you're looking for and that's what this board is going to render its decision on now if we vote for it it's a go you'd have to work with him if we deny it there are other options you can look at
like I said you can drive the product everybody and tell your customers not a problem you can B all you want long as it's less than 50% of your which it is um I also have a letter that the mayor uh filled out and sent over you have
that okay want to make sure you have that um yeah I mean I've also attached uh pictures of my property where there would be parking an area where it would be that's all so so you did an excellent job with your application so we're not
denying that you you did a phenomenal job with your application but what what uh just to reate where the chair is coming from is that you you're here for an appeal of the building commissioner's determination Zing determination whether or not you you're what you have to do is
is show us that he is incorrect with his determination and it's it's quite clear that there there's no retail sales at at that location you have the ility through Board of Health and through um the home occupation to to run a business and as the chare says as long as people aren't
coming there to pick up your product so if you can you know maybe have a runner that you you have so many orders in a day and that person just cuts them all over and makes all deliveries I love what you're doing I I don't I I don't fault you at all um
you're trying very hard I commend you for that our role here unfortunately is is the Building Commissioner correct in there's a inter interpretation of our ordinances which I believe he is you know it's it's right there you know it does say no retail sales at that
establishment um yeah it's it's again your application is phenomenal you got to put a lot of effort into it your whole business philosophy is phenomenal you're right there probably is a big demand for what you're trying to do hands a hide and I think it's clear
that you want to run a retail operation other than just a home occupation because you'd like to set up a self-service roadside stand so customers can pick up their orders right if they want to place an order yeah if they wanted to place an
order or if they just want that's a retail operation that's not a home occupation no it's based out will be a byproduct if it's in the right place and in the right time sry but Gardener unfortunately it's not a right to farm
community can't do that so we have to vote on say said whether we support Mr zup's decision or we say no we think your determination was wrong that's how that's how we have to move I'm going to
read the mayor's letter before we vote it's a address the r upon chair and Zoning Board of appeal members Garden City Hall anic 155 Pleasant Street Garden regarding letter of support case
2025 of 2011 Christina McArdle 877 timoy Boulevard C ID m71 15-4 retail from home operation de Mr chairman and members of the Zoning Board of
appeal not him writing this letter and supported the application for administrative appe field to miss Christina M for the operation of retail business and her residents on 877
temp government has made significant strides in growing our economy by boosting our business community in recent years if we are to move forward as a city we must do everything we can to promote business growth cut back on red state that can stunt Business
Development and work with those looking to open businesses here to get them set up with success the business world today is quite different from what it looked like before even 10 to 15 years ago many people Associated businesses
particularly bakeries with storefronts shopping centers in Wier commercial areas however just as regular office workers transition to a more homebased model in many areas also have businesses
like Cottage IND cage B I am supporting of the efforts of M M McArdle in looking to open our B business in on her or at her property many people have been asking for Baker bakery business in the city for years and this
helps fill the Gap in industry for this type and S City additionally other locations in the city have recently been approved and open for similar businesses as was recently seen with Laurel and
Company on Elm Street thank you for your attention to this matter please feel free to contact my office at any time if you have any questions respected Michael J Nicholson mayor city of G and I'm just going to
reference Laurel and Company never came before this board that's just the point of what I was trying to make is that it's uh frustrating that there's other Cottage bakers that are permitted yes through the Board of Health um but I don't think they're appropriately permitted through you commissioner uh to
be selling from their property but yet I'm trying to go through all the dot my eyes cross my tees and I'm getting denied it's well I'll say on Laur on company if needed they would have to go before the Building Commissioner he
makes the decision he interprets the zoning law and either they they meet the requirements of the zoning law or they don't if they didn't they would have been before this boort if they do we never see it okay so we're only when there's a violation is on
right so that's what it is so board members have any other questions I think the only comment I think there are other Alternatives if we want to pursue this and it's called
variance I think the the approach that we taking is I think the uh subject matter is clear resting on our DV now they are other and the way to go about that is
for variance that's that's one way I'm not here to advise you no just wanted to make sure I was crystal clear thank there are alternatives to and I'm not ask to take but in order to get that
considered and I'm not going to ask if there's any that support there anybody doesn't support it because that's not what's here for a variance for a special permit you're asking for an administrative appeal all we will do
is vote on his his decision sure I was also told by the office that that's what I was filing for I wasn't aware of what was the right thing to file for whether it was an administrative appeal variance a special permit that's just what I was told and after our decision if we vote in
favor well say we vote in opposition to his interpretation then okay if we we vote for it then you have the option Mr cor has to look at other options uh and I'll say this is and I don't always say this
all the time but might want to consider hiring Council to have them look at it okay going through the ordinance and see if there's any option orever but the ordinance is very clear but and no retail sales you know
no Standalone product display display Etc it's very clear and that's what it is you know May be right maybe the ordinance is stale but that's what we have to work with and the ordinance has to be changed sure up to the city council and the planning board to look
at that sure uh any questions or comments from board members that this St no okay so I'm going to call for a motion
to phras this correctly here if the board agrees the Motions the board agrees with the building commissioner's decision that would be a yay if the board does not agree with his decision being
made so I have a motion and it's to agree with the building commission's decision for a second I'll those in favor of supporting the building commissionary decision is
correct say I I those not supporting the building Commissioners say nay no Nays Building Commissioner decisions upheld thank thany thank you the last case but I have
another material yeah this is yours is somehow I'm not sure I it's where they came from they have some minutes to need approval okay I have
minutes this goes back BF 89 bigford Hill Road sorry of course DA's on here that the Lor have sign thank you oh thank you minut that's for
um I'm sorry November meeting thanks you get the option to uh sign this one Lor also yep it's com my
group well I did everybody I got another I got more I have more you have more first of all do I have a motion to accept the minutes all in favor I I'll oppose the
opposite so guys you and Lori used to it by now now Y and now these are September 30 minutes you and lry on that one show me your
[Music] not ready there was no car and it was from the mayor that's he had two I hold one off too October hold this one going see the
mayor next time how was Jane these days fulltime grandmother now fortunately Mar yeah oh really he's been he dates a lot he's finally found one local
good I used to my flavor how old is he oh doesn't sound like bad life he's done okay okay thank
you that's right that's try okay to a journ know nobody want go make a motion Mo second third all in favor all oppos meeing