Good evening everyone on this rainy evening. At least they moved it to today instead of Saturday. Okay, before we start, I'm going to go over the agenda of what's happening tonight. Today is the 17th,
6:30. We're in the city council chambers. Uh I have an announcement. Any person may make a video or audio recording of an open session of a meeting or may transmit through uh transmit the meeting
through any medium subject to reasonable requirements of the chair as to the number placement and operation of equipment used so as not to interfere with the conduct of the meeting. Any person intending to make such recording
shall notify the chair forth with all documents referenced or used during the meeting must be submitted in duplicate to the clerk and all documents shall become part of the official meeting of record of the meeting.
David, you're going to be the acting clerk tonight. Okay. The agenda for tonight case 2024 09-03 Continuing Special Permanent BCF Investments LLC
75 Oak Street Parcel ID M272457 change of two family to a three family dwelling case 2025-04-1 a continuent special permit Stevenson A0
0 Street parcel ID M22-25-5 construct two multif family dwellings case 2025-05-01 continuence variance Gary Colette and Joe Colette 2119 Stephanie Drive
parcel ID 17-5-3 individual individualized the driveway per condor lot C Gary oh uh case 2025-05-2
continuence variance Gary Colette and Joe Colette 21-9 Stephanie Drive partial ID M17-15-3 individualized the driveways per condo lot
case 2025-0503 continuence variance Garrick and Joe Colette 21-9 Stephanie Drive partial ID M17-15-3 individualize the driveways per condo
lot D case 2025-06-1 variance Donald Foster Calcat Avenue parcel ID 17-8-8 amend variance to reduce the front yard setback to 30 ft.
Case case 2025-06-2 variance Glen Mackey 101 Linus Elaine Avenue parcel ID W7-10-28 request an extension due to deadline not
met by variance or variance condition case 2025-06-3 special permit Greg Gregory Antelis 0 Chapel Street parcel ID X20 or parcel ID
number X27-22-12 clear land excuse me clear land install fence gravel and seasonal storage. Okay. Uh that's it. If anyone has a cell phone
it's on. We ask that you please turn it off. So it won't interfere with the meeting. Is anyone going to do make any recordings either video or through phone or anything? No one is going to make a recording.
And yes, that's it. So we're going to get started. The first case before the board. And you if you notice I read a lot of cases. We're going to try to move these as long as quick as we can. Otherwise, we could be working at 11:00.
So, the first case is 20249-3 continuence BCF Investment LLC and being represented by attorney Christine Tree. Good evening board members. Good evening. Good evening. Good evening, Mr.
Chair. Glad to see you all. I will attempt to make this as quick as possible. Um, what I'm looking to do tonight is simply update the board um from where we last were. Um, and I
believe we are um at a place where the board can take its vote. Um, well, that came out nice. So, yeah. Didn't it come out nice? I don't think we'll allow that on a little deeper than I thought it was going to be.
Not sure why. Um, what I intended to put up was the final plan that you have before you. Um, which is for some reason showing on my screen and not this computer. Um,
do you need a copy to look at? I have a copy to look at. I Again, you have what I have here. It's just not showing up on that screen. Thank you so much. Okay. Um, I wrote a
letter reviewing the revised plan. This was revised from the draft plan submitted on May at the May 20th meeting. Um, the plan was modified to um accommodate the comments of the board um which I'm going to review right now.
Um, snow storage is now marked at the back end of the driveway. Um, and I'll note, and again, I have it up here and it's not up there. I don't want to take too much of your time tonight. Um, if I
can There we go. Okay. So, this is the final plan. So, I'm going to point out the modifications. Um, and if anybody needs this to be
magnified any further, let me know. So on this driveway, the snow storage is now marked at the rear of the two um new spaces on the right. And just as a reminder, this special permit to con um uh convert a
two family to a three family um that was in originally built at a three family and the main focus has been that we need to add two parking spaces for the third unit. This is the plan for the two parking spaces. Snow storage is now
marked at the rear end of the driveway. The distance from the house to the driveway is now marked at 4.62 ft. Um there was a a question regarding the existing retaining wall which is on the
right hand side of the property that has been confirmed to be entirely on the applicant side of the property line. It is therefore the applicant's retaining wall. It's a low retaining wall. The um engineer was scheduled to be here
tonight, but contacted me late this afternoon to say he had um something that conflicted him from coming. I asked the questions of him that he would have responded to here. So, these are his responses. Um the retaining wall is planned to be
removed uh where the excavation happens for the driveway with no replacement. Um and the grade between the new driveway and the a butter's driveway will be relatively level. There is no need for a
retaining wall to exist between those two driveways. Um will there be anything that differentiates between those two driveways. Is there going to be anything in between those two that so one's not saying get your stuff off my driveway?
Um there is a distance of 1 and 1/2 ft marked on the plan between the new pavement and the property line and the pavement next door is um if not as close closer. Um so there is little to
demarcate. Um but that's uh not a hard if we just need a demarcation um that's not a hard condition to comply with. So um so are they going the full length uh for
removing the retaining wall? No. How far are they going with the back to the end of the rear um parking space? So, so it's going all the way to the where it says snow storage up until
where it says snow storage. So, there is a grade um that needs to be constructed um and that grade is marked on the plan. Um the maximum slope is 1 to 12. Um
and the um I know that one of the questions was how much material would be removed. that's now marked on the plan as 42 cubic yards. Okay. Um so up until
uh the end of the the space um where that grading is being done then the wall would be removed. So um if the where the end where the end of the driveway it's going
to slightly slope up, right? it's going to slightly slope up from the street. Um and to the extent uh that needs to be excavated down to accomplish that grade um then there will be no retaining wall
um required or remaining because again it's going to be relatively level between the new spaces and the abutters um parking existing driveway. Did they uh find any information about
the curb cut? Yes, we uh there was an exchange of emails from the uh city engineer. Um we had sent him the plan for any additional comment last week and um I had uh called this morning to see
if he had a chance to look and there was a response email to um Miss Negron and Mr. Leond um that I was included on and I I can read out his comments.
Um he notes that uh and this is noted in the letter, we need relief um because we don't have a 5-ft setback on the sideline. Um he would like some additional details
on the concrete sidewalk work. Um there is a slope that needs to happen and is marked on here um for uh the not only bringing the um the part of the sidewalk directly in
front of the driveway but also the sides need to be sloped down for handicapped access. And that is marked on here. But he does want a few more details when the driveway permit is submitted. um because there is another DPW permit that has to
happen after this proceeding. Um the gravel he notes that the gravel driveway proposed and we were looking for something um to handle any issue of increased storm water runoff.
Um he says it's less impervious than pavement but it will still contribute more runoff and the pitch does mean um that the runoff something to address the runoff needs to be included in the design
and um then he asks whether uh there's going to be a replacement of the retaining wall um between the butter and I think that question is designed towards do we need an engineered plan because we have a retaining wall of a
certain height? And the answer is no. Um and then he uh mentions the issue of a there being relief needed for having a second driveway. So that was a summary of his comment. Um is there anything else that you would
add, Mr. Lefon? Okay. I don't think so. Uh I am I I've spoken to the engineer, spoken to him. I am clearly not an engineer. Um and there has to be a driveway permit proceeding that has to
happen after this because we we need relief for the setback in order for that to happen. Um, and my suggestion on these detailed issues that are in fact going to be addressed during that
process is that there certainly should be a condition that um, the driveway be compliant with the requirements for the DPW permitting. Um, but that that process take place between a conversation with the two engineers
because the engineer is going to get the driveway permit nominee. um and if there needs to be a drainage system and what its details need to be are probably best specified by the city engineer to the drafting engineer and
not to me, right? Um so that is uh just kind of a I think that's the best way to resolve any lingering questions about um that issue and storm water regarding the driveway.
Um this board had a question of um the boulders being stable. Um and uh what is marked on the right hand side is that there's a twoft max height for those boulders lining the driveway. Um, and we did examine the
last time in these topography lines. I believe we deter and yep, they're a um they're about a twoft per line um is the is the topography marking on this plan.
Um the engineers response on this today was that the boulders will be laid down with a gravel underllayment. So they're going to be there's going to be a gravel underllayment with and then the boulders on top. And because the height of uh
that grade, it's not going to it's really going to mostly be around one foot and it's certainly not going to get to above two. There's no retaining all wall required and that is a standard application to stabilize a slope and
that he has no concerns about the stability of the boulders. Well, I'm reading the existing contour at 1087. I see a finish grade at 1084. You got a three foot variation difference. Two foot molders. So, there's you're missing a foot. There's a 1087 line that is Oh,
I wish I had a right there. Mhm. Right. And then um back here, excuse me, it's 1085. Yep. If you go down a little bit, it's 1084. So it's kind of blending
in between those two contour lines, right? So it's um 1084. It's marked here. Um but there is you know the presence of the twoft different is up here 1087 to 1085. And then down here
um the grade um is marked 1087 over here and 1084 over here. Um so I I think calling it um as its existing surface between two and three feet is probably correct. Um but the representation on
the plan is that the eventual grade is going to be max 2 feet at any one point along the driveway. There was a question about the um
the markings of the driveway as compliant spaces that is marked on the inset um that is in the top left of the plan as a compliant 9 by8.
Um, and I'm just going to point out, um, this was something that was needed on the last plan that this was the result of an on-site survey conducted by the surveyor. So, there is a certification on this plan to
that effect. Um, we did we did mention um the side setback is measured at 1.5 ft and is non-compliant. So we are seeking relief for that. Um the setback for the spaces
is a compliant 5t at the front of the property. So that is compliant. Um we verified the volume of material estimated to be removed. Um we've spoken about storm water mitigation concerns
being addressed through the DPW driveway permit process. um and uh the topography uh being marked. Um so that is the conclusion of the um
updates to the plan from the draft that was here May the 20th. Um we believe this is now a plan that contains all information required for the board to make its decision on the special permit. And going back to the special permit, we
are here primarily for the transition from the two family to the three family. Um and then the relief that we have requested and I just went through this again on the letter. Um parking relief
under the special permit provisions of 6757482 which apply upon a change from one conforming use to another conforming use. Um the two pieces of relief are the reduction in the sideyard setback from
the required five feet to the to one and 1/2 ft. Um and I'm going to propose to you that uh not only is this not detrimental to any other property in the neighborhood, it is similar to everything else that's going on in the neighborhood, including
the neighboring driveway that's right there. I have a question still on the the parking. Sure. I was looking because now you moved the u snow storage. Yes. Right.
It I don't know what the distance is, how large an area that is for snow storage, but they're going right up against the bulkhead. They are. So, I'm thinking you get a good snowstorm, they're going to bury the the bulkhead.
So, um I'm concerned about that area and you know, he mentioned the slope, so they'll be piling it up and if we have multiple storms,
um I'm just concerned about, you know, getting to the bulkhead. So, let me say that the bulkhead does not access a living area. This accesses the basement, right? So we are not blocking people from their entrance and exits exits from
their normal units. Um the issue um where might become relevant is if there is some kind of emergency for some reason we can't access through the dwelling which we can um we can access
the basement through the dwelling. Um, and if there's a reason for um that bulkhead to be used for access. It is not the second egress on the No, I realize I realize that, but I'm thinking if the furnace is down there and they
have an issue uh that might have to be replaced in the winter, are they going to be able to go in through the house to replace the furnace? So, there is access Yeah, access does exist in the house to the basement.
Um, as far as snow storage being an obstacle to something like replacement of the furnace, that's not an immediate like it doesn't have to happen in 5 minutes, right? We don't need it to happen right away. If it's blocked, we can have a snow plow come and push it
back further because it's just grass over there. That's all that there is. Um, we can have the property owner come and shovel it out. That can happen, too. Um the chair had mentioned maybe having a condition for snow removal from the
site if there was a snowstorm of excess volume. That's also I think a reasonable condition that can be attached. Um but that's how I would address that problem because
the location for these spaces is the best possible location for these spaces on the property. Um if these spaces are not here then uh what we have really is a request
to reduce to only have one more space for this one more unit. Um that may be the case under the zoning ordinance in the near future but um and we can certainly look at the issue of uh
if we had converted this as an ADU which we did look at that that and we don't think it's optimal because there will be unused space and um you know that would require no additional parking spaces um because this is within a half mile of a
transit station. So, I agree that um it's not great to to block the bulkhead, but there's not a other than requiring removal from of the snow from the site. Um it does there's
not a reasonable alternative and um this is not an a situation where emergency access is to be expected through the bulkhead. Um, and the non-emergency situations can be handled
by shoveling or pushing the snow back further. So, that's how I would respond to that. Um, so if it's okay, I'm I'm going to go on. Um so as I said the two pieces of relief on parking that are needed are
the um reduced setback from the right sideline to one and 1/2 ft from five um and approval as a second driveway. Um I know that um Mr. Aliva um and uh I
think from our last conversation Mr. Hanks um believe that uh this is an access driveway. Um and uh Mr. Oliva's statement today was that he thinks it's both an access driveway and a parking
space and therefore it needs to meet the criteria of both a parking space and uh an access driveway. And I think um rather than continue to run through uh the challenging language in the ordinance um we're just asking for uh
relief for a second driveway. Um the length of the driveway um as far as I would tell goes from the sidewalk 5t into the property. That's what it is. So um
uh so we're asking for that relief also to be granted. Um and that's under the same provision of the ordinance which is 740 A2 um on the basis of change from one non-conform one conforming use to another conforming use. Um and if we
look at the specific criteria on that section um relief from parking regulations may be granted that is um 675740
um by special permit from the ZBA um under subsection A Um and under paragraph two of that in the case of a change from one not conforming use to another conforming use and the lack of parking spaces will not create undue
congestion or traffic hazards on and or off the site. Um, now I will say I have treated this as the lack of conforming parking spaces because the criteria referred to are really it's really 675170
um and that's our general special permit criteria um and uh you know the general standard with the under the criteria is that the benefit to the city and the neighborhood outweigh any detriment created by the
relief that's granted. Um that is the summation on the new plan. I am happy to go back to do a general overview of the project and the special permit criteria. We did go through that at the beginning of um this process. Um
but I defer to the chair in the interests of time tonight. Um but I would like to get to the point where we close the public hearing and move to a vote on this project. Okay. First, uh, I'll ask first my members if you have any specific
questions of treat. I do not. I do not. No. Mine are answered. Okay. All right. I'll ask. Are there any city representatives who would like to speak regarding this application?
Any city representatives to speak regarding this application? For the record, none. Any of Butters who would like to speak in favor of this application. Any abutters who would like to speak in
favor of For the record? None. Any abs would like to speak in opposition to this application? Anybody to speak in opposition to this application? For the record, none. Any interested parties like to speak? And I'll say
either for or against. Any interested parties who like to speak for or against? For the record, none. I'll ask my members again if you have any questions. No. None. Would you like to move forward for a
vote? Yes. Good. Okay. Do I hear a motion to vote on this application to grant the conversion from a two to a three
family? And I think we need to put some conditions on it. So, anybody want to quote the conditions as best we can now to so people understand? So, do we need are we voting to to
change from the two to a three or are we voting for the relief for the parking? I'd like to include it all if we can. Otherwise, if we don't, they'll be back here again. I know attorney tree shot out about
three or four conditions and I wrote a couple of items down. I'd like to get in for the uh relief for the parking also. As I said, she quoted sections out of the ordinance that allows this to happen or the possibility
of allowing this to happen uh in certain areas. and under certain conditions and including the fact that they have to go through the driveway permitting process also. Correct. Just part of it. So,
so conditions. All right. Well, one condition I'll just jump on because Dave had the issue of the the bulkhead. I mean, I agree that's that's not the second egress. There is another egress. um that could be an emergency exit if
they needed it. We could put it as a timeline that it would need to be cleared, the bulkhead cleared off like in, you know, 48 hours after a snowstorm unless an emergency exists. Then it has to be cleared immediately.
We also have the condition of changing uh these 5T to 1 and 1/2 ft on the driveway. uh still off also that the engineers design for the the
sidewalk angle uh must go to the DPW and the civil engineer and that has to be approved. So if it's not approved then that would negate the var the special permit. So
neither approved by the uh the BW. That's what I had marked down. What was the last part, Mr. Chairman, that that had to go to the DPW engineer and it has to be approved. I think what we've got is two engineers, right, that are going
to have a plan. They both will be submitted, I'm sure, to the DPW. The plan has to be approved. I'm not saying which plan. The one that meets the criteria, but has to be approved by the DPW,
right? Before they're able to get a final permit on the variant, I mean, excuse me, the special permit. Yeah. They if they if the plan's not approved, they can't get the special permit. That would negate the If we vote in favor, that would negate the special permit.
Anything else you can think of? Yeah, the second driveway. Second driveway. Any comments on that, David? No, I I think seeing the um topography
and the neighborhood um it's it's like the best option is the buddy buddy parking basically for it to to what I keep in mind is I know Oak Street
fairly well. probably every house is in violation of the city ordinance and could not comply. So, I mean, if we can make the best of what we've got to work with and it's not really in imperiling the neighbor or the
neighborhood, um, I would move forward and I would look at it in a positive manner. I would say yes on the second driveway. Any comments to my comment? None. No.
Okay. So, so now just to word it all together. All right. You want to take a stab at it? Take a stab. Call for a vote. I make a motion that we approve changing the existing two family
to a three family by special permit. that on the conditions that the the within within 48 hours of snowstorm the bulkhead area will be kept clear for access um subject to city engineer/DPW
approval of the uh of the driveway curb cuts and anything else subject to this new driveway at sidewalk the sidewalks sidewalks um grant the bearings for two driveways on one lot not being more than 200 feet
apart. And what else do they have? The 5 foot to 1 and a2. Yeah. Sideyard setbacks for the uh driveway would be one and 1/2t. Yeah. From from 5T to 1 and 1/2 ft.
Sounds pretty conclusive to me. Did you like it? I liked it. All right, I'll second it. I'm going to call for the vote. All those in favor of granting the request along with the conditions,
uh, say I. I. I. I. I. Motion passed. Okay. So, there's still a little more homework to be done, but it will bypass us and go to the engineers office. Thank you very much for all of the time
and consideration given this special app. Attorney, I also would request that once the decision is made on the driveway and the sidewalk and a curb cut, etc. that a
letter or notification be sent to the building commissioner as soon as possible because as you're fully aware, uh we do not have a building commissioner currently. Uh there is one that's uh being requested to take over
on at least a part-time basis till they satisfy the new full-time or post full time. Okay, we'll make sure to do that. Thank you, Mr. Chair. Thank you.
You have a question, sir? Yeah. A comment? No, just a question. Does the building commission enforce the variances on the Yes, the building commissioner have a building inspector. You can't enforce. Well, you you you
will have one eventually. So, um they are in the process of getting an interim which would have the same authority as a permanent one. So, we did actually get an update today that Mr. Jeff Cook would be the interim. So, there is somebody.
So, the name's been disclosed. Yes. Okay. So, and the gentleman that she mentioned, thank you, sir. Jeff Cook, um, actually was building commissioner and gardener several years ago. So, he's fully aware how gardener operates. He's
a certified commissioner. So, one more question. Is there any time limit to when you can file a complaint about an ordinance not being followed?
I don't get your question. Sorry. You know, you go have certain charges against you in court. There's a statute of limitations. I just want to know if there's any limitations to when a project went through
and uh to file a complaint. Is there any I'll go over it for you. We made the decision tonight. We have 14 days to write it and then it's submitted
uh to the city clerk. city clerk and then they have 20 days. Anybody who wants to appeal our decision? No. Now say that's not the question. The project has been filled violations
and nobody's complain. Is there any statute of limitations to when you can make a complaint? Well, I'm going to I'll go back to the 20 days. Well, no. He he's he's asking if correct me if I'm wrong. you're asking that. So once this is built out
Yeah. and there's a presumed violation or there is a violation. So someone would have to report that to the building commissioner, zoning enforcement officer for there's no limitation. No, there's no a violation is a violation. Okay. There's no
grandfathering of a violation. So if if it was illegal to do, it's still illegal. So as long as you filed a complaint. So, so, so, so the the only thing that that that maybe what you're leaning towards is that um if if if if the town issues a the city, excuse me,
if the city issues a building permit to someone and there's advant granted a special permit for them to install this driveway as per the plan that they're going to work out with the city engineer. So once that's in, if for some reason someone believes that
they're not using it as outlined outlined as specified, you know, maybe they're not shoveling the ball or or or maybe they Well, I had I filed a complaint about this or something though, so I
don't want to go in any details, right? I was just trying to get some answers. Is it you're talking about this case or something else? No, a case that happened years ago. Okay. That's why I was asking about the limitations. Yeah. No, there's
no statute of limitations. If someone's in violation of their special permits of variance, there's no statute of limitations on that. All right. So, I guess I'm doing it the right way. Okay. All right. Thanks. Okay. Thanks for coming. Have a good night.
Next case before the board case 2025041 special permit Stevenson a zero emerald Emerald Street parcel ID M22-25-5 construct two multifamily
dwellings. I apologize for not being able to make that site walk. I was stung by something. It turns out you were what? I had an allergic reaction to a sting. Oh wow. Well, just for anyone here that might be
interested in this case, we uh members of the zoning board did visit the site uh met with Mr. Sai and met with u I forget your name ma'am, but one of the abutters well actually two of the abutters. So we did visually see the
property. Good evening, Mr. Chair. Board members, good evening. Introduce yourself and address, please. Yes, sir. Uh Ryan Proctor with Dillis and Roy Civil Design Group representing the applicant. Uh Steve Senny, who's also with us tonight. Um Steve just handed out a it's a copy
of this large plan. Uh just so you had it to look in front of you. It's the same plan that's on this board here. Excellent. So uh as you just mentioned, Mr. Chair, uh subsequent to opening the hearing approximately a month ago, the board did perform a site visit, uh with the
applicant and one of the abutters at the at the project site. We also met with the planning board last Tuesday in which they had a few comments. We were still working through the site plan review process with them. At the end of last week, I submitted a revised plan set in response to some comments received by
your board at the sitewalk as well as the city engineering department. uh submitted a cover letter summarizing those changes uh with four items. I'll just go through that list very quickly for you. The first and most significant change is relative to the driveway configuration. Um so a major topic of
discussion was retaining the maximum amount of parking on the street that we were able to on Emerald Street. So, what we've done with the driveways, uh, we are still proposing a driveway for each unit, but we've consolidated the throat of the driveway at the actual intersection with Emerald Street such that we're able to retain four of the
street parking spaces on Emerald Street. You'll have two in between the two properties. I'll just point really quick and then one on either side of the property um, along our street frontage. The second item um I believe was asked by one of the board members was to show
any proposed decks or patios that we will have on the structure. So on units one which is on the left side of the plan and then on either side of the uh unit on the right side of the plan I've shown two decks which are in orange there. And then the remaining units I've
shown a patio in the walkout area on the lower side of the uh of each dwelling. The third item was relative to drainage. This is primarily in response to the uh comments from the city engineer, but we've reconfigured the drainage system to accommodate the new driveway
configuration as well as some comments received from the engineering department. And lastly, uh, we've added, this was a request at the site visit. We've added a landscape buffer along Tony Boulevard down gradient of the stormwater uh, system, the subsurface
system to provide a physical and, uh, visual buffer for the development and the Tony Boulevard right away. I'll just point out that shrub row real quick all the way. And that is all I have for new information tonight. If there are any questions regarding that, I'd be happy
to take questions. I'll ask for assist. Do you have any comments you want to make before I ask questions? No. More than happy to answer any questions as they come up. Okay. Board members, I have no questions. Okay. I have no
questions on this one. David, no. See, I was there for a couple hours. I had all my questions answered. Okay. Yeah. I see the big thing is the change in the driveway. Uh, one thing you didn't mention and, uh, it's not that we
can really put it in, but I'd like to have it just, you know, publicized because the comments were made to the young lady that regarding the trees in her backyard. I don't want that to go away that all of a sudden somebody forgets about it. So if you uh please to
tell the board and any interested parties what your game plan is regarding and I believe it's two trees. We would be more than amendable to include that as a condition of this of this decision. You know to work with the
neighbor on any trees that are overhanging the property line or are detrimental to the property. more more than happy to basically take all the trees. There's only there's only a handful and there two or three of them have to come out. Yeah, there's two large ones. So, if they're either
overhanging or a potential danger to the properties, then you would remove the trees and I'm more than happy to condition that. Okay, next question. There's a city fence there, chain link fence. Is there any resolution to that fence? It will it will move forward the
project. Okay. That raises another question. Will you be required to put another fence back up from from the city regarding the city's position? DBW I Yeah, I don't think DBW or the planning board raised that as an item.
We we are proposing some street trees, some trees and landscaping along the frontage. I I know it's not a fence. Okay. I would like to I'm not speaking for everybody here. I'm speaking for myself. I would like you to pursue that with the city, either the city engineer,
etc. because that could be an issue that's raised up after this project starts of you weren't planning to put it up, the city says you put it up. So, I'd like to resolve that before who owns it or what's going to happen. What's the outcome of that uh fence
going to be? Okay. And I can put that in as a condition. Which fence are you talking, Mr. Chairman? The one up front or down. It's sort of buried in the trees. Yeah. Up front on Emerald Street. Up on right on Emerald Street. Okay.
Okay. Do you think the city owns that fence? I think I I think that I would tend to agree with that that that would be in the city. Yeah. He felt that he did. That's why I'm asking that it be resolved before it
becomes a major issue. Okay. Any comments on that? Okay. So, are you also looking because part of the fence went down along the property line? Are you including that
question also? Oh, if that's just separating the property line. I'm not overly concerned what's going down the hill. I'm concerned what's on the right against the sidewalk. That's the other issue. You mentioned the sidewalk that was not talked about.
Say it one more time. Sorry. The sidewalk. You talk about repairing the sidewalk or replacing it from point A to point B. He said he was going to replace it all the way down Emerald Street. If I remember right, correct. Just in front of the
property. Still trying to get you replace that whole sidewalk. Okay. Basically during the course of construction there's going to be enough uh removal and alteration of that sidewalk and curb that you know full
replacement of the curb and the sidewalk is the only practical solution to that. So that's that is part of our I think it's showing there isn't it it is yeah we have it on the site plan to remove and replace. Okay now members have any questions at this
point? Yes I do. There was a discussion uh about trying to handle uh parking on that street with having marked parking spaces or not marked parking spaces to try. Remember we we had talked about
that triangle. You talked about lining the parking spaces on on the on the street on Emerald Street. Yes. because uh with the uh police if people park on uh Emerald Street there's no kind of
restriction and uh as the butter was mentioning where people uh park especially coming around the the corner uh what was it the fire engine and another large truck couldn't make it
around so if there was markings on the street that could I guess increase the safety. So that that was a discussion in front of the the property. Would that not be up to the city to do though? No, I was my
karma was that's going to come under public safety safety. Right. And that would have to be because if they say no striping, he can't do it. I think I I would rather approach it in the way of contact of the
public safety committee and discuss this issue that from a safety standpoint and it's been recommended by one of the n of others would like to see lining on Emerald Street and marking that safety spot. I
mean it's going to be either a yes or no. It's going to be pretty quick because I think the point is we can't tell the city what they have to line, right? You know, is that through the DPW?
More than likely, you could contact the DPW. I think they'll get you in the right directions because there is a public safety committee. I'm not sure who heads it up, but I think if you go to DPW, they'll get they'll send you to the right stall. And more than amenable to put that in as a a condition that we
resolve it with either mark mark the spaces or don't mark the spaces and we're happy to be the one. Okay. Only in front of our right. Agreed.
Yes. Okay. Anybody else have any questions? Dave, Dick. Okay. All right. I'll open it up. Are there any representatives of the city who speak regarding this application? I'm just going to call them once because
there are no representatives in the city and in the city in the audience. So, um any others who would like to speak for or against? Now's your chance. Okay. Any
Butters and for or against? None speaking. Any interested parties who would like to speak either for or against this application? Any interested parties to speak for or against? For the record, no comments.
Okay. I just wanted to make a a comment. I noticed you on the the plan you handed out that you did move the front part reverse the reverse the houses the driveway you re you kind of
redesigned it so that that the uh driveways I'll say the way I'm looking at it from the left those now curve up so there's more space between right so you did move it over from the original plan did. It was about 10 ft
about 10 ft over. Okay. Yes. We have multiple plans here. So, I just want to make sure we're on the right one. Understood. Yes. Where where were you at with the planning board? We are going back on July 8th and
there were a handful of comments left over from the specifically the drainage system um that they wanted to address and I think the general sentiment was that we were coming back before your board. Um they we we sent in the new plan to to your board. They asked that we just send the same plan to them. So where we had a couple comments
outstanding. They So So they still have to look at the new driveways. We have one more meeting. Uh they they've seen this plan um with the driveway configuration. We presented that as a conceptual plan at the last meeting and they were amendable to it. Any other questions for my members?
Are you comfortable to move on this? Do I hear a motion? I make a motion that we grant a special permit to Zero Emeralds Street. Um conditions is the applicant has confirmed that he will replace the sidewalk along the entire frontage of
his property at his expense and he will do that in coordination with the city to meet all all city specs and handicap accessible requirements. Uh the condition number two, the chain link fence coordinate with the city for the removal and or potential replacement
whatever the city decides on that through the DPW. And I didn't really catch all that thing on the parking the lining of the parking. What was that all about? I think we left it as an op. They would have to contact the public
safety committee or DPW to find out to discuss the parking with the Yeah. So, so the applicant will will discuss with the city whether or not lining of that parking area is prudent. Who would be responsible for that? And who would be responsible? But the applicant was
indicated he would pay for the lining if the city requires it in front of his property. In front of his property and we have uh the trees. Oh yeah. Uh there are several trees uh
one of the overhanging nut butter and he has agreed to uh remove those trees at his expense. The trees that are potentially dangerous or overhanging the property. They'll be removed. They'll be removed
at his expense. Okay. Anything else? Okay, you put a motion on the floor. I did. I will call for the vote with the conditions we just spoke about. So, all those in favor of granting this. Can we
get a second? I'll second. Here we go. We got a second. Uh, all those in favor of granting this application with the conditions so noted say I. I. I. Any opposition? No opposition. Granted. Thank you very much
for your time. I appreciate it. Appreciate you. Have a good night. You too. Okay. The next case before the board, Gary Colette and Joe Colette. Case number 2023 0501.
A variance 190. I'm sorry. 21119 Stephanie Drive. Parcel ID 17-5-3. Individualize the driveways per condo lot C.
Do you want to I'm going to take all three of them. You're so smart. I knew where you were coming from. Okay, now I'm going to group them all together. Okay, sounds good. Okay. The next case also will be 202505-03.
Variance Gary Klette and Joe Klette 2119 Stephanie Drive partial ID M17-15-3 individualized the driveways per condo lot D. And the next case
we lost one. Um Joe Colette 2119 partial ID 17153 that will individualize driveways at condo lot E.
So merely it's C D and E. Yes, Mr. Klette. I don't have that much to add except to state that we did start the process with a lawyer to individualize them as condos. That's why we would like to get each
individual driveway per unit and as opposed to a shared driveway. What was that again? As a what was your last statement? As a as opposed to a T-shaped shared driveway. That's this is the thing you're interested in, right?
Okay. And you're having the documents for condos drawn up? Yes. Do you know when those will be ready? No idea. Okay. It's in the lawyer's hands. Were the current plans to be rental units? No, not to be rental
units. Condos to be sold as condos. And you will have, and I'm not sure the exact wording, but there'll be a condo agreement that all owners will have to abide by, and it identifies what their
responsibilities are, what the condo associations responsibility, and who pays for what. Yes. Exactly. Okay. Yep. All right. I'll ask if my members have any questions. That solved the big problem. When we
first started, they wanted to do there was a confusion. Yes. Driveways, but shaped like a Y go in and Right. Yeah. But now being condos, they each can have just like Mr. Sen had. They each can have a driveway.
I did not go through and read any of our ordinances based on the fact that they were changing them to condos. Is it covered by our what what's what difference does that make this uh mi Mr. S is getting his driveway states through
the planning board approval under this the ordinance. Have you gone to planning board? No, he he's not required to because he Well, yeah, he's changing now because on the relief and parking regulations um 675740B
the planning board pursuant to 67510 site plan review or where it is enacted by a special permit granting authority special permits where it is determined to granting a waiver would not be detrimental to the function. The planning board could do it
but I don't see us having that authority. I think you're correct because he's just basically doing duplexes. So it's a it's a it's by definition one or two families is the same thing by definition. You know, Mr. S is doing multifamilies.
So he was going by special permit for multif family and he's going to the planning board for his waiverss for his driveway. So that's the course of action the clutch should take those planning board especially if they're filing paperwork with an attorney condos
because that has condos. Yeah, cuz they were originally going to be multif family. I I I Okay. Regardless if it's a condo or whatever it is, it's still a duplex. It's a two families just you just happen to have two owners. Yeah. And they share
a yard. They share the property. So that's just my take on that. And I agree with you. So I think, you know, from our end, we're not going to render a decision, okay, tonight. uh you really need to go to the planning board, you
know, schedule a meeting with them and tell them exactly what you're going to do. You probably let them know what you are going to do. Now you're changing, you're going to go from duplexes or multif family duplexes to indiv individualized condos.
Okay? And then they'll give you their decision. So I think that but are these multif family each property is deed right separately they weren't going to be originally not
originally oh okay that's the game plan too deed them individually now yes okay that's how the Mr. A's his are deed individually. I think she's correctly numbered. Yeah. Right. But he just said that
before condos they weren't going to be rentals. So they would be owned by individuals. Were you going to take them as rentals or sell them individually? Sell them individually. But they are going to be as they're going to have an
association I u agreement for for they're going to be getting a deed but they're they're going to be ruled by the condo documents right going forward going forward.
If they didn't condo them then it's just a deed and there is no aortionment of expenses or responsibilities. Correct. Unless it was made part of the deed. Yeah. And I don't think your father was going to do that.
Probably not to make it part of the deed. Right. Yeah. So this is the issue we face is and we weren't allowed to cuz they wanted they wanted to go with individual driveways. Correct. They want well no
they didn't want to go. They wanted to go a sh a shared driveway. individual parking space. Yeah. Which was originally approved, right? So I I really don't see why they have to go to the planning
board. So my opinion of this is that is that as far as us granting him a variance, I don't think he's raised to that point that is something unique to him why he can't have the two driveways together
because we allow one driveway per lot until you exceed 200 feet of frontage, which he doesn't have. So, I don't see that he's he's demonstrated a hardship of any sort due to the shape of topography or the shape of of the land or anything or there's a
septic in the front yard or wetlands that would prohibit him from having the two driveways abing each other which would comply with our zoning. So I don't see how how we can approve that.
Just my side of things. Uh again, Mr. S, he has multiple driveways per lot because of the planning board has the authority to grant a site plan because for that. Okay. And you only had
originally one lot. Correct. With those on there. Yeah. Yeah. Whereas Mr. S had three lots. Okay. Well, he has three units. Two lots. Three units and two lots, right? But but he has three lots of two units each.
Correct. So again, by definition, they're just no different than a one or two family dwelling. They they're synonymous in zoning. They're treated the same. It's not you get three and above that you become a multif family. I'm just not sure if the plan book can
do anything either from the site plan, but that's Yeah, I think our I think the recommendation My my question to you originally, Mr. Chairman, was why was a variance required? Didn't he meet the requirements
for driveway and parking originally? On this one, that is what the building commissioner ruled under. It's he he said variance when he did it. So either he challenges the commissioner's ruling or moves forward
under a variance and they move forward under the varian. Well, you you you saw that he's building duplexes, right? Yes. So, so, so the city allows one driveway per lot. So, his driveways would have to be abuing each other because they can be up to 24 ft wide. So, each one would
have up to 12t wide driveway. They just touch each other. He would like to separate them, put them on the far ends. In order to have two drivers for a lot under our ordinance, you need 200 ft of They have to be 200 ft apart. Okay. Measured to a middle. Yeah.
Okay. So, I would recommend or we would recommend that you contact the planning board. Okay. Have this discussion with them for for Go ahead. I was going to suggest that we need to
still vote on this and without and and I'm just being honest and no offense but at the last meeting I would have recommended without the hardship without anything that we needed I would have voted against it at that point in time
based on what's written based on what we have. Yes. Okay. Yeah. Because what what is before us is whether or not we can grant a variance for him to separate his driveways. Don't believe we can not we can at this point you know so so it may be more prudent that we as said take a
vote tonight. you can still pursue going to the planning board. See if that is an option if you want still want to pursue that because there again if you want to write this down 675 740 relief for park and item B the planning board has some latitude but you'd have to look into that they
direct you to to another whole section of the bylaw the ordinance I'm sorry I'm from a town um send you to 1010 and there's the requirements for site plan and it addresses what the planning board can do. Thank you. Yeah, I spit out a lot of stuff. I'm sorry. I drank coffee
earlier. If you remember our our initial discussion, we said if you didn't want to do this, you'd had two years to wait. Yeah, that will not apply here. Okay, we're just going to vote. You can go in the planning board. And there's a caveat. If there's substantial change,
you do you can wave the two-year weight and just move forward. So, okay. So with that, make a motion. I would make a motion to deny the request based on a lack of
needed criteria for a variance for Stephanie Drive, lot C, D, and E. Right. Second. Okay. Any comments? No comments. And I'll call for a vote.
All those in favor of granting this variant say I. I. No. Oh, no. That wasn't the motion was to deny. Oh, you deny. To deny the request for variance.
Say I. I. I. I. Unanimous. Your original request is denied. Thank you for your time. So go to if you wish. Yep. Go to the planning board. Yeah, that could be another option for you. Pursue with the planning board. Uh but read up what the the sections that Lori just gave you and
see if you think you can tailor into them and and that that would be your only avenue. Again, we don't have that jurisdiction to to grant that for you. Unfortunately, take care. Okay. The next case
which we are familiar with. I don't know why. Case 2025. He's back 0601 variance Donald S. Foster Zero Talcat Avenue parcel ID M17-8-8 amend variance to reduce the front yard
setback to 30 ft. Mr. Foster, state your name and address. Ah, good evening everyone and thank you for seeing me again. I appreciate it. Um, my name is Don McFer. I'm of 20 Feno Drive in Westminster, Mass. Um, obviously this regards to zero telecut app here. Do you
want me to be begin? Go ahead. Talk. All right, let's get to it. I know you got stuff. I appreciate you putting all those together on the last one. We're cruising. Um, yeah. So, obviously, um, some of you remember me before we were here. We had the industrial zoning. I was trying to build a residential house.
Um, you did grant a variance, a use variance so that I could put a single family house. uh you did grant the variance for the setbacks on the sides uh to allow for it. However, what was not addressed is when we changed the use, I had assumed
and it I handed it off to Christine and I kind of switched the matters over. What didn't get resolved is the initial um the the industrial two frontage setback is 40T, residential is 30. We had assumed that when we switched to the use variants, we'd pick up the
residential. It wasn't clear. Um, so some of you who have been out to the site before, um, you saw some stakes. I'm not looking to change that. That's where it's going to be. It is about 40 feet from the road, but the town owns about 8 ft in front. So, I'm basically just looking for a variance so that I
can put it with the residential zoning 30 foot setback instead of the 40ft industrial two setback. Um, and the reason for that is one, it's just going to have a better curb appeal being forward. But the bigger issue is out behind there there are some wetlands. I
have been through conservation. Um I got an RDA. If I push it back to the 40oot industrial 2 zoning, it does put me further closer to the wetlands, which I try to avoid when possible. That would require an NOI versus the RDA that's already been approved. U as far as it
being reasonable, I can run through the questions if you prefer. Um, also attached in there, you'll see, um, on the plan with the other houses that it is very conforming with what's there. Um, in fact, even at the 30 ft, it would still be probably the furthest one of
all the neighbors. Uh, the next door neighbors is 22 feet on the right from the road from from the setback, I'm sorry, from the from what the town owns. 22 ft. I'm looking for 30. The house to the left uh which is actually West Main but borders is closer
to Talcott is 8 feet across the street I apologize because recently I have needed glasses and I refuse to wear them. Um the house across the street is 9.5 ft and the house next to that is 25 ft from the road. So it's going to be like what
everything else is in the neighborhood. It's going to be for those of you that have been out there and seen the stakes it's exactly there. That was based on the 30oot setback. So, that's not changing. It's just a question of we picked it up later on. And I would have just gone with the 40t to avoid coming back at the time and just probably
already had this house built um after the RDA. But, uh that's the issue. So, I'm hoping you can help me out with that. Well, I think Mr. Foster, you address the all the other houses that existed. It's very erratic on how far
they're back from the road. There was no no conformity. No. And I mean at least it almost would almost look wonky to put it back as far as it is because Yeah. So at least uh I'm not putting up trying to bring some conformity. Yeah.
Um and I guess we appreciate uh not imposing on the wetland as best we can. You know cuz that can cause issues. So, um, and at least you meet in the normal residential one set back and you'll probably be the one closest to
compliance. So, the the way it sits up there, if it was residential, I would be the only one in compliance. Yeah, there might be one further down, but Okay. I will state that there are no city officials in the audience to uh speak, so I'll
see with that computer. I can't see you waving your hand. Okay, I'll ask. Is there any representatives of the SP city to speak regarding this application? Name and address. Come on and step up so we can hear you.
Good evening everyone. Justin Enroy, city conservation agent. Um I will confirm um to the applicant here that um the conservation commission did previously approve of this project
through the request for determination of applicability followed by determination of applicability on the basis that the initial measurements showed that um the original scope would be of the building or the structure itself would
be out of the 100 foot therefore not creating any alteration within um within jurisdiction. Um however it was later found and you know Donald was very honest with us that um that the calculation was just slightly off. Um
and um unfortunately, you know, where the new measurement puts the structure, um it would be enough of a permanent alteration under the provisions of the Wellland Protection
Act and under our ordinance that it could possibly trigger um a heavier set permit requirement. Um and yeah, so Okay. Yeah. Thank you. That being said, regardless of the determination tonight,
um I'm here to help regardless. So, well, I like seeing here is Mr. Foster is trying to take the best approach and not impact going the other way and impacting, you know, say the wet land or something and going for that.
He's trying to improve, I think, the position that you're I appreciate. I'm trying to do it right cuz like I said I'm sure no one would notice if I done the other but I just rather bring it. Okay. Are there any other interested parties? Thank you. Who would like to
speak for this application? Any interested parties like to speak for? Any party Butters who would like to speak against this application? Any interested parties would like to speak against this application?
None. Okay. No comment. Members, questions. I have one. So, is it staying 31.2 ft? Is that where you have it marked out or are we coming down to 30 ft? No, I'm going to keep it right at the 30. 31.2. Okay. Good.
Gentlemen, no questions. And again, that is not from the car. That is from what the town owns. This almost looks like that's the actual line, right? Exactly. It's from the lot line. Right. Okay. There's like an additional eight something 8.2 ft there. Do you have any
questions? No. You are you are you dick? I have I have no questions for Mr. Foster. Wow. Okay. Do I hear a motion? He's lucky. I would I was thinking that he's getting you know he's getting coffee. It's wearing off. I would make a motion to
grant a variance from the 40 foot requirement to 31.2 2 ft that was proposed given due to the conditions of the site being in wetlands on the rear. Thank you. And the unusual shape of it being small
the fact that we approved it in good faith the first time and it is keeping in harmony with the surrounding properties. If if I may and I appreciate that you may appreciate you working with if I could I'm going to keep it exactly
with the 31.2. Thank you. It's very tight. So, I am asking if I could I'm going to put the house at the 31.2. That was going to be my tent. I don't plan on moving it. It's already surveyed. The stakes are there. I've already got it pinned left and right as far as moving
it forward. Just if you give me like maybe another half a foot 30 and a half feet. No, just just I just I don't want to get the I know. She clearly asked you. Yeah. What was that? If it was I in the and to answer your question, the answer is yes. I'm going to leave it
exactly where it is. And if it ends up being what it is, it was 31.2 ft. Well, it looks like, but I don't want I don't want to have to It looks like you got that half a foot behind before you hit the buffer zone anyways. What's that? You have that half a foot behind the house before you hit the buffer zone. Regardless, uh, not when it's pushed
back to the 40 ft. When it's pushed back to 48, there's like there's like 17.8 something square feet that are in that buffer zone. You want to amend your motion? I'm going to wait till you look at what you're looking at.
Look at this distance from here to here. There's this 100 foot buffers from here to here. He's got, you know, the scale is tiny, but that's got to be a few feet. You're saying if I go 30, you're saying don't worry about it. Put it 31.2 and make push push it back towards his
wet land. All right, we can do that if you want. That's fine. Like I said, it's got to be 31. Yeah. All right. Uh 31. The motion has been made. It has not been seconded. What What What would you like? 30.5 ft. 30 feet 6 in. 30 ft 6 in. Would
you like to amend your motion? I will motion to 30 feet and 1/2 ft. 30 ft 6 in. Any comments from you, gentlemen? No comments from me. I'm done with my
comments. Okay. All right. No comments. Motion. Does anyone in the audience have an issue of moving this thing by a few inches? No. Nothing from the audience. 8 in. 8
inches. That's a few. All those in favor? I'm calling for the vote. All those in favor of granting What's the new dimension, Lori? 30.6. 30.6. six. No, it would be if it's going
by points be 30.5. I'm sorry. It's 30 ft 6 in. It's going to be 312. Anyway, I just I just don't want to have to be back here explaining why I missed it by a couple inches. 6 in. All those in favor? I I I. Now, now you
do understand that that's ground to sky. So, any drip line. You Okay. Yeah. All those opposed? No opposition. That also gives me a little over too. No, no overhang. No roof overhangs. That's right. Well, now I have the additional I have the foot to work with.
Variance amended approved. Yeah. No, you're not coming back. No more. No offense you don't see to this lot. I don't want to hear any grumbling and begging later. Yeah. So, Mr. Foster, we had years ago somebody put their
foundation Yeah. 15 ft from the road. Yeah. thought they were okay except they measured right from the tar they lost it was seven feet that the city had and he wanted an amend an adjustment. Yeah.
Didn't get it. Yeah. Well, that's he got a $10,000 bill for the removal of his foundation. Ouch. Then you had to put a new one in. Yeah. So, thank you very much. So, just for clarification, so I think you have I don't know some time to write it up and
then 14 days. 14 days and then then it goes to the city clerk. I pick it up and then I have to wait. Was it 20 21 days? 20 days. In 20 days. And then you record on your D like you already recorded these other ones. Exactly. The last one. Yeah. And Yeah. So it's the same process. And I'm
assuming you'll let me know at some point in time. That's awesome. Thank you very much everyone. Have a nice evening. I appreciate. Thank you. You too. Have a good night. Okay. The next case is 2025 0602. Variance Glen Mackey 101 Linus
Lane Avenue parcel ID W17-10-28 request an extension due to deadline not being met by variance condition. Good evening. Good evening. Your name and address? Jim Leblanc Macki Corporation President.
Okay. You got to sit through a whole meeting, huh? Sorry. Yeah, there's only one one person. It's okay. It was it was good. Yeah, I learned a lot. Yeah, we all did. Go ahead. Why don't you Well, so basically I was on the original grant thing. Yes, sure. So, I know this, you
know, everything and uh these individuals have not. So, just some quick background. Okay. And then we have been All right. So, was it 15 years ago or so? We purchased the land off the city uh for future expansion of our property. We pretty much have the whole
right side of Linus Lane Avenue and Gardener. Um, made sense to purchase the property, bring the elevation down, and that way everything kind of stays in line for us. Um, a few years later, we cleared it, got
the permits to bring the elevation down, started bringing the elevation down, and uh, that's where the learning started as to uh, you know, you see all these people like graves or everybody digging dirt and Yeah. you get, you throw it in the truck, it's gone. Well, that's what
happens to a gravel pit, not what we have. So, um, been rather challenging. Gone through a lot of equipment, replacing a lot of equipment, burning stuff out, uh, buying more trucks, excavators, rock crushers, um, just to get through the process. Um,
I think we're moving along good now, finally, after all that time has passed. But, um, yeah, there's no way it will be done by September. Um, I really was hoping to have another building up a year, five years ago and uh, you know, things are things are just getting
tight. Our trust plant's tight, window shop is tight. We need to do something and we've gone so far. It's one of those we can't stop now. We're kind of committed. So, um, I don't know what else I want to say. Everything we've done, uh, we're
still going according to the plan that was initially submitted and approved. have had no problems with our neighbors. Uh any complaints, no violations, uh storm water, all that has been maintained. No runoff, no it's uh yeah,
I I guess I've got nothing other than uh everything's been So, you just want to extend for five more years. Hopefully, it'll be completed by then. Oh, it better. I I want it to be completed sooner. I This is not the business we're in. But
yeah, you've already That's what we've gotten into. Two excavators and a Well, there's actually three of them. Yeah. Yeah. One had to have a rock camera and there's two more excavators and then a rock truck came into play and then you tried to put the rocks in our regular dump truck and it was just too much. So,
I had to buy a fullsize rock truck. Yeah. Crusher. Yeah. This has not been a cheap undertaking. No. No. This is if uh if we were looking at it to make money, we definitely would have picked a loser on that one. But it'll be worth it. Me and when we have another building up and
we can move on. All right, members. Any questions of this gentleman? He actually answered mine. I was wondering if there had been any complaints from neighbors or anything like that. No, no questions. I think my question
might be more for you, Mr. Chair. So, he has a variance. What's the var why is there a variance on this? Is it for earth removal? Is it what? Why why is there a variance for what they're doing? Is it for earth removal? That was the building decision that
building commissioners decision came down for soil removal. Okay. Etc. All right. That's what went on. So, so just for a point of of the technicality on this. So, they have a variance and a special permit. He's only asking for an
extension of his variance. So, I think we need to amend us to include the variance and special permit. Okay, agreed. Appreciate that catch. Good catch. Any questions from YouTube?
Any questions from the audience regarding the variance? And we're going to have special to this to extend them for another five years and hopefully this will be done. I hope so. Okay. Do I have a motion? I would make a
motion that we grant an extension of the variance and the special permit for an additional five years. Second. Second. Any any questions, comments? No. Okay. I'll call for the vote. All those
in favor of granting say I I granted unanimous. Thank you very much. Appreciate it. Thank you. Thank you for waiting. No problem. We we meet every month if you want to come in and hang around. You don't want to come and hang out. It'll be okay. I did see you
with your eyes but just wide open just listening. Yeah, there's a lot going on. You got to let them know. All right. Thank you guys. I second it. Okay, the next case.
Looks like a little anxiety here to get up here and Good evening, Mr. Antonellis. How are you? Good evening. Evening. All right. The case is 20250603 Gregor, excuse me, Gregory Anteneellis,
Zero Chapel, parcel ID X27-22-12. Clear land installed fence gravel seasonal open storage. Mr. Antineellis, state your name and address for the record. My name is Gregory Anteneellis. My address is 99 Overland Street,
Fitchburg. I am the property owner for the parcel in question. Should I begin? You may begin. Um are are you all uh familiar with the So you've all read this application and and reviewed it. I assume um the as you may
have noted the um what I'm asking for here pretty much in my opinion sales right down the middle of what's permitted on a lot like this um in this u industrial 2 zoning uh etc. There's no uh building no um
uh I'm not I'm not requesting uh um relief from any provisions of the zoning code at least as far as I understand it. Um the I'm primarily here because the building commissioner Mr. up a specifically prescribed this permit
process um on multiple occasions because uh it was it's his understanding it's not possible for him to issue me a proper a permit for clearing my land with the intent of developing it in this
manner um if the uh land clearing is not associated with a building permit which you can't issue because uh there's no um building going Not. Um, so does that make sense?
Well, I'm going to ask a question because on my first page notice of violation, I see uh he let you know that there was a significant um tally of fines if you didn't file before the 16th. You filed
on the 15th. Why? And I'm going to ask you, did you delay that? Um, he He when we had our we had a verbal conversation and um he made it made it sound like that was you know if you want to get on the schedule for this month
apply this week. Um he did not make it seem like I would be that it would he made it seem like it was his discretion as to whether I would be facing fines by um um got the application in in April for May. I got the application in in
uh May for June as you all know. Our next question is, do you have any fines outstanding at all? Not that I know of. Um throughout this process became aware to me that uh the address on record um for the deed is in fact my
neighbor at 93 Overland Street. While I believe that all uh correspondence from the building commissioner was emailed to me as far as I know, um I did not become aware of the discrepancy in the deed until my neighbor noticed uh outstanding
tax bill in the mail uh which I have uh then like figured out who's who's this guy and handd delivered it to me. Um I then corrected the uh the record is discrepancy with the city and I paid that tax bill. So I believe I am
completely. I don't owe anyone anything. How much land has you have you cleared so far? Um approximately 1 acre. One acre. Yes. What is your goal to clear? Approximately three and a half is my
it's it's on the application. The um the actual uh I can I can quote it. Well, I only ask because you use terms like about, maybe. Yeah, I I I we don't work on about and maybe, right, I
understand that, but um you know, when you're clearing an area hundreds of feet by hundreds of feet, I don't I don't want to wed myself to a square inch. I mean, I I'm willing to um I believe I included specific measurements in the uh
plans and I'm willing to abide by them. Um I just wasn't sure the level of specificity uh you expect you expect in this application. All right. In the areas you're going to clear since you have the definitive dimensions would you be staking it off you know so you know
you just don't happen to go over not happening absolutely I would be I would um I would stake it off in accordance to those plans and probably um be a little conservative getting up to those states. I don't want to I don't want any problems.
You know, one thing I noticed in your plans, I mean, they're drawn out, I'll say very nicely, but there are no dimensions. Are there no dimensions? Parking area has dimensions. The plot of land does
not. That's that that that must be an oversight. Uh the the plot of the land does the clear um uh the one with the the um of the two drawings, the one with the compass
heading on it. Uh this is the one I'm looking at. This one. And then I got this one. Yeah. There's no dimensions on. There's no contours. There's no dimensions.
Okay. Um I I can have that corrected. H I I can I can I mean I can I can get a corrected version to you guys at a you know later date if needed. Well that you know you just said that we're not going to vote on it tonight. Well I mean if you're going to come in with some
updating on material well if um I have more questions. Okay. Yep. Go ahead. I assume those other questions will and this is when I said you about maybe not more than I'm just looking at this
one on grade soil. Yep. Uh the characteristics of the lot will be maintained through minor alterations. What is that? The absolute bare minimum. It's uh the the topography of the lot is
it is uh uniform. It is not uh perfectly flat, right? You It's your standard forest. You know, the the the grade is um you know, you have some high spots and low spots, but it's not like the the property is half of a is half a bowl and filling in. It's like see what you're
talking about is not even in your presentation here. I'm going to add another one. Minor adjustments. One of these minor adjustments will be made to grade where the incline of the land is extreme and particular and that is particular
areas rises and dips you know I mean sure you've got people well there's no one here tonight but that could be interested in what you're talking about you know that they're not even familiar with your partial right so
you see where I'm going and you talk So proposed alterations to the south site are not expected to substantially you get you get what I'm saying right I I I see I left myself too much and the
characteristics of the storm water or snow melt are the runoff it does not hinder now this is your opinion if if the runoff does hinder the development of the site proves to be an
issue when it is used as a conventional rock and gravel drainage etc etc you know is that from an engineer is that from you the that right I I understand that you you need that to be a a more precisely
articulated statement and the source of the statement to be better qualified those words aren't from me but they're you know I'm going to read this and then I put it into the record. This is a communication from Mr. Robert Oliver, the city engineer,
and it came to me, Jason Stevens, community development planning, Tom Zupa, building commissioner at the time, and Mariela, our co- administrative coordinator. is regarding zero chapel street special
permit app. I have received and reviewed the special permit app for zero chapel street submitted by Gregory Antonellis. After my review of the application, I have the following comments and concerns with the application and the proposed
use as described by the applicant. One, the applicant is for special applications for special permit to clear land greater than 10,000 square ft under chapter 6751060A
of the zoning ordinance as presented by the applicant. His proposal is to clear a few acres and then develop the prop property for a storage yard. The application downplays the proposed use of the property as well
as the impact this development will have on the wetlands, erosion, and runoff. A thoughtful review of this full proposal is needed beyond the special permit for clearing. The application indicates that the proposed use is permitted on the
zoning. However, site plan review may be required through the planning board. I would recommend I would recommend that the applicant consult with the director of community development planning. Three, any land disturbance over 10,000 square ft is
subject to chapter 565 storm water management. The applicant's proposal of a few acres approximately 130,000 square feet would require storm water management permit under the ordinance. This would require the
applicant to submit detailed plans and information how the project will fully conform to the ordinance requirements and the storm water and erosion control regulations under the adopted under this ordinance. The plans submitted show
wetland areas provided by state mapping. The applicant will need to have a wetland delineation performed and shown on the plans as the extent of the existing wetland area are likely greater than what is currently shown. This could
potentially lead to work in a wetlands jurisdictional area that is not shown on the plans. So there's some really some major issues behind this. Right. I I I understand cuz if we get into um
uh improper handling of storm water, improper treatment of the buffer zone, that could create a mess that involves the state. It could be a real big problem for everybody. And if there is a mess, you can't correct it and just say, "Let's do replay and bring it back, right?" Um I'm I'm willing to you know
amend my proposal to uh you know get Well, I think what you should do if you're going to amend it, this is your proposal and we're telling you you got there's certain steps you really need to take and clarify.
So we're sort of looking at the same thing that we just did u and voting something down. So you can put your package together You've got some guidance. You should be going to community development planning if there's site plan review and then
actually you could I'm sure DPW but I would actually have a conversation with Mr. Oliver and he can address a lot of these issues and guide you where you should go. I'm happy to work with these people. Um,
and you know, reading between the lines of some of the, you know, communication from the commissioner and the when I got my application, this was a pretty, um, you know, get the process done as quickly as I could. Uh, you know, to avoid, uh, any fines. I'm really I'm perfectly happy to, uh, get an extension
and, um, you know, get all these all these parties sign off. So, I I'm going to make you two offers. Sounds like Shark Tank. One, you can withdraw your application straight withdrawal.
If you take that route, that means two years before you can come back with this again or you can withdraw your application without prejudice. What that means, you ask us to vote to allow you withdraw. You can go work on
your new plan and come back anytime you think you have a proper plan and you're ready. The only wait time is what it takes you to get that done. You have two options. So, um would you consider those versus cuz
remember if we voted down tonight two years if you're back here, right? Um specifically regarding uh the existing situation and the possibility of fines, does the difference between uh do the difference between these options have
any impact on any of that? Um because I'd really not like to withdraw my application with prejudice and then get a letter in the mail three days later saying I owe 20 grand. So So to his point, he has an existing violation currently. Yeah, I asked that
question right up front if you had any and you said well the fines have were no fines were issued against me. I was I was specifically told get this application in, you know, move heaven and earth to get this application in and you'll have and by the commissioner he said you'll that will cause a stay. So
that's my primary reason for having this application in flight. Yeah. So it's he had to file this app before the 16th of May. He filed on the 15th. So that eliminated um
$20,000. That's what it says here. And then it talks about uh the penalty for violation of any pro provision of the chapter of any conditions under which a permit
is issued or of any decision rendered by the zoning board andor special permit granting authority would have $300 violations per day. It does Mariela. Do you know if there's
any outstanding fines for him at this time? He does not have them. Okay. Um he Mr. Tom Supa did not write any violations, but he did say that um he did have that deadline to be able to
apply like you just read. And also if other departments have violations for him, that would be that would be a part. Well, I want to say this. I don't you know if you have any fines or anything with anybody else depending on what
decision you make. If you do have fines and we don't know about them and you come back before us we will not hear your case. Right. If there's outstanding fines right that that makes perfect sense. Of course I need to be squared up to get and you
don't want to be in the audience and embarrassed when we say you have outstanding fines. We're not going to hear your case. I I wouldn't waste anyone's time bringing, you know, if I had a parking ticket. It would just, you know, doesn't make sense. I can handle a parking ticket. You know what I mean? It doesn't make
sense to bring a matter before the town if you're if the town thinks, you know, the city thinks you, you know, have outstanding. So, I'll ask my members if you have any questions or comments you'd like to make to the stand. Yes, I do. So, at this present time, he has not
paid the $20,000 fine because he submitted an application. Correct. ahead of time. The $300 fine is not there either. That's sort of a warning that he got. All right. I I And any violations would be 300. He he
doesn't at this point owe any money to the city that we know of that we that we know of with the Okay. All right. So, if he does an application, how how would he uh I guess
clarify that he doesn't owe any money to the to the city? I mean, I'm suggesting that as part of his application, he doesn't need that. What the process we have an applicant submits their application, our administrative
assistant goes to the city clerk. any outstanding fines to applicate applicant A. She'll say yay or nay. Okay. And she's she reports to ask sometimes she puts a paper in and said no outstanding
fine so I know so I can continue but we're notified ahead of time. So I just wanted applicant to know that also of the process so we don't get in trouble. You have anything? Well, my train of
thought is is that if he continues with the cease and desist and goes to the other departments that he needs to talk to, that it would still be a stay. But that's
my understanding, not my um that that matches legal advice that I got. You you know, you ceased and desisted. You don't have much to worry about with the generally what I just told. Yeah. I mean, if you got a cease and
desist, uh, you can't even lift a hammer out there or you shouldn't. If you do, the fines will start adding up and $300 a day can add up pretty quickly. Yes, it can. So,
I guess I would request to withdraw the application. Well, can you talk to me yet? Mr. Hanks has something to say. All right. So, so, so, so your issue for the cease and assist, you stopped working. Mhm. And you don't intend to pick that back up until you satisfy everything all
the permits required authorized in some capacity. So, have you you cut trees? Have you pulled stumps? Nope. Haven't touched a single stone. Cut cut cut trees down. And you haven't cut any down since the cease decision. Okay. So, you saw Mr.
Oliver's letter with all his concerns identifying Oh, have you seen I've never seen that letter. I heard him read it. Okay. So, so he needs to get a copy of that letter. Should we get you a copy? So, are you working with a civil engineer? Uh, yes.
Um, not in a contractual capacity. I know a guy who works for a firm and his, you know, he said, "You look at your look at the timeline you've been given. we can't get we can't get you a proper stamped uh you know product of our work in this time but here's what I can do
for you. So um so that's what he produced here because it looks like someone with some knowledge put it together but there's a lot of detail missing right so you are going to need site plan you are going to need a very welldetailed plan
you're going to need storm water so you really need to pay attention to what Mr. Oliver is saying because you know, he's he's saying you may you will need it just by the scope of what you're trying to do. Um, I know you gave him two options. One is to withdraw withdraw
without prejudice, but can he continue? Can he do a continuation while he gathers all his information? We can do a continuence, but I'm not sure how his timeline is because this is not going to happen in two months. This is going to go on and I don't want to
continue. I mean, I keep continuing it all the time. Plus, there's a continuence fee. Um, if there's no meaningful uh uh distinction in terms of my liability with uh between continuence and a
withdrawal without prejudice, then I would seek a withdrawal without prejudice. And just to your point, I think it's on his timeline. I don't want to put this application which is significantly
incomplete. What we're going to look at is going to be a big change from this hopefully. Yeah. And I think it lets him it puts the pressure on him. Yeah. So to get this done. So as the chair is alluding to it, you may want to consider the the time constraints you're going to have and what the what the true
application really would look like once you get good professional advice on this. It's just it it would probably be drastically different than what is submitted. So So you theoretically do have the three choices. One you again you ask to continue it, but then you're going to have to give us all
kinds of information, push a timeline on you as to how quick you can get it. You know, because you'd be showing up every month asking for continuation, continuation, continuation. In other words, total withdrawal or withdrawal without prejudice. And that again that just withdrawal without prejudice seems
most reasonable to me and it seemed most reasonable to the chair. So I it puts the burden right there, not over here. It puts the burden on you of how fast you want to work on it and get it done. But I think as Mr. Hanks was saying and
this, you know, you've got a a fellow who works on engineering firm, they're going to help you out. You're going to need more than just a fellow is going to help you out. Yeah. You need You're going to need formal engineering plan. We need to know who the engineering
company is. Uh like Mr. Sen had. Yep. I saw the jewel and you know, so you're going to need a wetland specialist to flag the wetland. You're going to need your surveyor to go pick up pick those up, put them on a plan. You're going to need storm water management. You're going to need a site plan review. Y they
could ask for a traffic study. Correct. There's just a lot of stuff that goes into this and it there is yeah I I understand these when I when I contacted my my friends and engineering for firm these things were raised and that they said you know they said look at the deadline we can't right well you right
you filed you came to us you satisfied the requirement of the building commission saying get your application okay so what's your decision I would I would like to withdraw my application without prejudice if you would so he would formally need to put that into a a
letter to be turned in. Mariela will get you that letter. Okay. But we can vote on Well, he would have to create that letter and give it to Mariela. Yeah. Yeah. Okay. You can help him if he needs help with the word and just get it in. That's that's not a template letter.
That's that'll be his verbiage to us letting us know that he's withdraw. Okay. I would make a motion to accept Mr. Antelis's request to withdraw without prejudice. Second. Okay. Any comments? No. All in
favor? I. Opposition? No opposition. Your withdrawal without prejudice is granted. Um, so your clock starts now. You might want to get it in as soon as you can or whenever you feel comfortable to do it. Thank you, sir.
Um, somehow we need to get a copy of that letter from Mr. Oliver. So, what I'm going to do is tomorrow I will be emailing you and I will you can stop by your office so I can hand it to you a copy or I can also send just you have my email address. Uh, that
would be fine. Uh, I I intend to um so you know the the development guide book says start with the uh community uh whatever whichever office. Yes. uh who's who's very friendly and nice to work with for the record. Everybody else,
tomorrow I will be emailing that letter over to Yeah, I int I intend to try and contact Jason and get, you know, get get something started with him. You know, don't run off. We got something to do. Oh, they have minutes to approve.
Thank you guys. Thank you. Have a good night. Good luck to you. I wasn't running. We haven't closed the meeting. Do we have minutes to deal with right here? So, do we need to make a motion to approve the minutes from May?
May 20th. May 20th. That was our last meeting. Yeah. All right. Did you read them yet? I did. Okay. So, should I make it should I be making a motion to approve the minutes? Yep. Has everybody read them? Any comments?
Nope. Make a motion we approve the minutes from May 20th, 2025. I'll second it. Second. Okay. All those in favor? I opposed. No opposition. I got a yes from both of
you. Right. We have one more thing. We had no update on Pine Street today. These are just minutes. When we made the site visit the other day, I was told that there was going to be an update on Pine Street. Okay. And we didn't get
one. That's okay. You're right. It is. So, what's this? Say visit meetings. I was not there. You weren't it? I would know you weren't. No. Neither Lori nor I would there. Nope. So noted.
I did go by on my own. Huh? I did go by on my own. Yeah. Lori and I went on the day that we thought it was supposed to be cuz neither of us I didn't read my emails. Well, I I just got back from Pennsylvania that night. Hadn't looked at my email until we got there and like where how come we're the only ones? I'm
not forgiven. I know. I'm not looking for it. No excuses. I guess that sounds like a good excuse. That sounded pretty good. Okay, the last thing we have, and I don't think we need to We can do it
right here. It wasn't on the uh agenda. We have elections for the coming year. Oh, no. Oh, yes. Not until I retire. What? like chair, co-chair, chair,
clerk, co-chair, clerk. And I even like to see a assistant clerk if need be, but we don't have that many people. So, I think we need to wait till Mel's here. Yes. I'd make a motion that we do
the elections when we have a full body. Uh members are here to vote. Who? Mel. Who? Mill. I said all six will be here. So we don't have all. So it's perfect time to vote them in as clerk. Well, that is true. That was the other thing I
was thinking is that you know an absent member gets voted in by proxy and he does all the minutes now. He does a good job. So I mean I would vote I would recommend me right away. No, I don't I don't think that's a fair way to do it. That's cuz you don't want to do it. I'm
only an alternate. We're only alternates. One, two, three. Four. Where's our fifth person then? That's Mel. No, he said you two are alter, right? We don't have a fifth person. Oh, we don't have a fifth person. No. So, we just Mel and I
chilling in. Well, why don't you become a a permanent? I do not want to become permanent. No, that's that was an option. Well, let's put it this way. He's never around. He's always on vacation, right? Okay, that's a good thing. Me too.
Soon to be me too. So no. I don't have to be chair. Do you want to be nominated as chair? No, I do not. Okay. If we're going to do this tonight, I'd make a motion that Ray Leafon be chair. Second. The next year.
For the next three years. Even though we do it once a year. Well, then why did you give me an option? Uh, I didn't think you would bite. I I second it. So, okay. I'll call for
uh all those in favor. I I oppose. You're all voted, man. Yeah. You do you do a great job. So, we don't want to lose. What do we want to do about a clerk? Uh I know Mel would say, "Well, I don't ought to be a clerk." And you two are never around.
I don't think we could be. Well, again, I alter I don't think Mike explained the job to them very well. Like, you got to be around for the meetings. Didn't explain to me either. Yeah, as a matter of fact, usually around. We accepted
with the specific promise that we didn't have to be around. I never saw that. As needed. As needed. I never saw that contract. Well, do you do you I I'm going to nominate Mel. I mean, he's he has no choice.
Unless you two guys want to be I am so swamped. I maybe a year or two, but I I would Okay, that's the plan for me, too. So, here I'll make the motion. If you want something dependable for that, that's that would not be me right now. I'll point
I'll nominate Mel for clerk. I I would second that motion and hope that he doesn't kill me. Well, then you won't be able to get the chairmanship when you retire. Okay. All those in favor? I I I I abstain.
Smart. Okay. Well, he can bring it up. We can bring it up to the next meeting. I'm going to talk to Mel anyway. I got to call him tonight. I have his money. So, oh, you're gonna drop money off the bank. Yeah. So, so, so Mel Mel for Clark, subject to him
complaining. Yeah. He was coming deep sea fishing with us. Yeah. You were trying to say and he I've got his money in my pocket. I was going to give it back to he told me to keep it, pay for it, and I said, "You're not even going charge it." So, I didn't charge him. So, uh, motion
to adjurnn. You have any other business? No. You make a motion? I make a motion to return. Second. Okay. Any comments, discussion? None. All those in favor? I I session quicker than I thought it was.