25-04 which is 39 summer ad and I have an email here from them asking for continuing. I just got a motion to approve motion to motion to accept the request to continue. Okay. Second. All in favor?
Okay. Great. Moving right along. We go to case number 25-08 57 Pearl Street. The zoning board of appeals will hold a public hearing in the stock board meeting room at town hall 16 street writing Massachusetts on Tuesday July 1st 2025 at 7 p.m. on the
application of Ian Smart to match general law chapter 4DA section 10 for varian zoning bylaw section 4.51.1 4.5.2 6.3 7.0 and 7.4 Four as may be may be determined by the zoning board to
construct a front edition covered landing and stairs the non-conforming front yard setback on the property located at 57 Pearl Street. This is map 28 lot 78 in ready Massachusetts an objection I'll dispense with reading the butters list accept say the butters
were notified as for the following select boards the town clerk the police department fire department building department conservation commission health department's office and division CPC the members and associate members of the board of appeals as well as the planning boards of Wakefield Lynfield
Northring Stone W and Wilmington um so the testimony given before this board is taken under oath. So if you think you me want to speak on this case, please stand and raise your right hand. Um I swear the testimony given by me before this board will be the truth. The whole truth is nothing but the truth.
Response just I do. I do. All right. Great. Thank you. Um yeah. So I Are you Ian Smart or No, I'm I'm I'm in I'm a neighbor on Belmont Street. Okay. Um I live right around the corner. Unfortunately, they're stuck in DC at their daughter's soccer tournament at
the airport right now. Okay. So, um, he said it's it's a possibility. So, he did fill me in. We had a discussion the other night and, um, I'm here to represent them. Uh, they said it would be okay. So, Okay. Uh, here I am. Yeah. Okay. Sounds good. Um, I was aware he I
did talk to him and said like someone would be here, whether it was him or his name. Okay, great. Uh, sorry. Can you say your name? Oh, sorry. Do you have a question? I'm in a butter so I also like an opportunity to speak. So, yeah. Yeah. So, if anyone wants to speak at all tonight, why don't I just Yeah. Mark Vento, 142 Belmont Street. Okay. Thank
you. Um, yes. So, just to get this out of the way, if anyone wants to speak on anything tonight, if you could just stand and take the oath, that'll make it easier for you. Do it. Okay. You don't have to do it. That's all right. Um, testimony given before this board is taken under oath. U So, I swear the testimony given before by me before this
board will be the truth, the whole truth, and nothing but the truth. And just I do. I do. I do. Great. Thank you. Okay. Sorry for that interruption, but uh yeah, if you just want to give us a brief rundown of what they want to do or you got anything? So, I I don't have any visuals unfortunately. I do have a small
site plan. I hope um we can pass it around, but you can see we have the site plan already. So, they'd like to just um the only thing we're really talking is the portico in the front because that's where we're looking for the variance for
the purposes of this meeting. I don't know anything else that's going on on that. Um, so right now the house is sort of flat in the front and it's their main entrance. There's no shelter from guests or anyone that that comes in. Um,
they're looking for, I believe, uh, 4.6 ft for the zoning setback for the variance um, on there. That will enable them to give shelter to the people in, give them a little mudroom. And actually, if you look at the
architectural drawings up above that front entrance, um, in the existing condition, there's like a 3-ft wide clo long closet, deep closet that's almost useless. This would open that up and give their daughter a,
you know, much needed closet space in their house. Really about it. Okay, great. Thank you. Um, does anyone board have any comments or questions or I guess my question is, is this a variance or a permit? It's a variance. Variance.
It's a variance on the front yard zoning setback. Yeah, I know we had something like this on I forget what it was, but there was they wanted to do a porch or something. I think Yeah, I think Washington Street. Washington Street. I forget the I know
Cindy and Chris always come up with the codes, but I think having the uh already a masonry wall out there coming up. I know it's something about impeding the sidewalk, but it's already there, the land, and that
I think I'll go to a photo. It does give much more character to the house in um I believe the uh I have a photo of the front if you want to. Yeah, we have it right here. Oh, you do have a photo.
The there's no variance on the side. It's 18 ft, right? Yeah. I mean, my my issue is and and I mean, I'm not sure you're you're not the homeowner, so I'm not sure how much this is going to mean to you necessarily, but we have very strict criteria under the
town bylaws about issuing variances. And there's basically four factors that all have to be true. And the first factor is that there's something unique about the lot itself. Either either a weird shape or something wrong with the
soil. You can't build on the whole thing. Something like that that require that makes it that you you know that you really need to have a variance in order to use it. Um and that's why in this application those qu questions are asked in order to get the answers to to those
factors and the answer in the application to that particular question number one is basically no there isn't anything. So right there for myself I have to I have to think and you know I looked at
the other factors as well too but I I don't think the factors for granting a variance are met in this case um under the rules that we have to follow unfortunately and you know we have to follow the rules we can't much as we would like to I I agree that the that
the it looks very flat although also to me it feels very close to the road already. Yes. And and making it any closer would would be very um I'd be curious about other homes on there because they seem closer. Um sometimes
I'll have to check along Pearl Street. There are definitely some that they are not. I measured mine. I'm across the street. I'm 27 feet from Yeah. Yeah. So, so I mean and that's actually one reason why getting a variance is so difficult
so as not to establish a precedent that would allow the whole neighborhood to do the same thing and and you know completely change the character of the neighborhood. I drew I did go go go there myself and looked and um
and and even if the criteria were met, I mean, one of the one of the the last criteria is that the relief does not detriment the public in in this case, in other words, the rest of the neighborhood. And to me, like I said, I don't think it really meets any of the
criteria, but that one too, just because the house already feels very close to the road compared to the others. And it is. I mean, it's pretty close to the it's legal, but it's right right there. And adding to it would would um would,
you know, make it even worse. So, for myself, I would have to say that I've got concerns about our ability to allow this, but I'll let other people speak to it if they want to. So, are we bound by that law or Yeah.
It's the town bylaws. I think it's the state law, right? I Yeah. Which is an adaptation of the state law. Yeah. You know, it's funny. We we we slammed in all this high density housing with really subpar parking ratios that did have a that does have a detrimental
effect on this town with parking, with traffic, and everything else. Here, a nice family that's been in writing for a long time that's part of the community to put a little covered portico to give them a little bit of a mudroom. They're
still almost 16 feet away from the street. There is a a three, you know, it varies in height, but probably on average a three-foot stone retaining wall in front of the house right along the sidewalk. Um, yeah. I I mean, I I I'm really I mean, it just literally
says no variance shall be issued unless the zoning board appeals finds these four factors. we we have to find that all four factors are true or we're not allowed to issue a variance. Um and that's, you know, that's where our hands
are really tied. Can they revisit it and maybe I would see a full I mean maybe um I'm not sure if if a lawyer was used for this application or a builder or anything like that. I understand that they it could be hard for a layman, you know, to do it, but Oh, I I I'm I'm in
construction. I was I was before I got into project management I was a civil engineer. Oh okay. So I know all this all these stuff. Yeah. Um as I am just representing them because they are stuck in DC and I do not want
them to have to wait two years to refile. Um this is something they really want for their family. They want to invest in in their home. Um, I would request that we we postpone this then
until they get back and reschedu unless there's a chance right now we can get it to pass. But okay. Uh, yeah. Except for myself, I think I agree with everything said. So, yeah. Yeah. And that that would be the the right thing to do is to continue the case because I don't want to have to come
back and tell them the bad news and oh you have to wait two years and they could come back and with a with a more this is only rest of the stuff there's no variance required or so that's that's there is a variance required they're moving their
front facade we're going to do public one second okay it's just that that's been going on for a few minutes I want to have a chance in the addition on the side. They meet all the zoning setbacks. So, they're able to do that by right. The front portico that they want to push
out and put the little mud room and give their daughter a usable closet upstairs. That's what we're seeking the variance on. Can I have a chance to speak? Uh, I think we're good for we open for public comment. Yeah. Yeah. Open for public comment. Okay. So, first thing is
they're moving the front end. Ma'am, I'm sorry. Could you could you state your name first and 88 Pearl Street. So I'm the butter across the street. Okay. So number one, I think the lot's supposed to be 15,000 square feet. It's 14,259.
So it's a non-conforming lot, which means they would need I I think a special variance to do the portion. They're not looking a special permit, but the variance is asking to move the facade out two feet and then a covered porch. So, we're asking for almost 5T to
push out, which means the stairs will almost be on the sidewalk. Yeah, I agree with that. There's stairs there now. But stairs don't count if they don't have a covered porch. Isn't that correct? I'm saying there's stairs there. No, but there not a covered porch. According to the separate set of
stairs there. Yes. That's part of the retaining wall. His walkway was short. That's it. Right. But that's a whole run of stairs with no open space. set of stairs, but the walkway would shorten up. That's about it. Okay. There's already a Are you Are
you here for the the 57 pearl or are you here for the board? I'm here to understand your concerns that we're not meeting the four criteria for a variant and that we're doing a continuation because people didn't plan properly to be here. I think that that's not quite right. I think I think I think Oh, it
is. You put in an application meetings in July. I just want to say you're emotional about this. because I'm not emotional. I mean, I had to attend this meeting to have the abutter say and I made it to the meeting and now we're going to
continue it because the homeowner wasn't here. I think I think it's legit. They're not here. So, um continuences are very common like we already have another case that's continued. That's just kind of a part of the process. What's the reasoning for the continuence? They're not here. I think it's because often we have feedback for people like just we have feedback for
the showman and this property and they want to reevaluate what they're doing for the next time. So it's very common to get feedback, go back and forth, take a couple iterations to go through this. It also gives them a chance to review and see if they can meet the variance criteria if there is a way that they can look at four feet to work with. They're
at 20.4 and the setback's 20. Yeah. If they can't meet the criteria, then they're not going to get the variance, but they're entitled to, you know, have the have the best opportunity um to present their application. And I don't I don't know what this what the
circumstances are as far as them not being here. However, even if they were here, they would have a right and having listened to us, they would have a right to request a continuence in order to um review and and represent. Okay. In light
of our input. And at the next meeting, if they don't attend, then what happens? Um, sir, do you know when they would want it continued to? Would it be the August meeting or the September meeting? Do you know? Just made his flight now. So I we
can continue to August. I'll have to have them reach back out to you. We could continue to August and if that doesn't work for them, they could contact the office and ask for a further continuence to September. We can't leave it open indefinitely. We need to have
Yeah. Well, they want this I mean obviously they've engaged an architect. They they want to move forward. Um, you know, I think I think the the lot size is existing non-conforming. We just can't tie someone's hands on that. Um,
so I think the only issue that was brought up why we're here is the front portico. And it's not it's the entry and the portic. Well, that's your issue, but the reason why I'm here, it's not my issue. It's what they're let one person at a time, please. The reason for this
hearing is for the variance on the setback which the only setback they're in violation of is the front portico. So you're welcome to bring up anything else whenever you want. But that's the point of this discussion. So I if we can continue it if it's not going to happen tonight I have no problem with that. I
would just like to be able to continue it by right. Um so when they are here they can come. It was a last minute thing. The plane got delayed. Yep. I am here as a as a friend, a neighbor. I'm also a town meeting member. Um,
you know, I would just hope the the zoning board would just consider um, you know, the impact it will have on the family. Um, there's already walk there. There's two sets of stairs. You're you're pushing everything out 4.6
ft. So, so we understand that what Cindy says when our hands are bowed, if you can do your homework and figure it out. I mean, we're Yeah. I'm just to answer your question. We're all from reading. We're all here to work together. We're not here to insult anybody or we're
trying to help. And if we could help, we could help. Okay. Can you just criteria, please, so I can Well, let me I'm just I I won't do that, but I'm just going to refer you to the exact section of the bylaw on the website. It's section 4.5.2.1
5.2 one and then you the four criteria A through D are right there. A okay we'll relay that information to them and let them work with their design team. Like I said I'm just here to represent as a prime. That's all. Y I want to be
clear too because I think you actually were correct. It's not just the portico that's in violation. It is the entire bump out of these varants. So just to make sure you communicate that. Well, yeah. And that's the portion that's getting bumped up. But what what I was told by them was the the thing in question was the front yard setback. All
other setbacks fall within the zoning criteria. Setback criteria. Yeah. I want to be clear like that. So if there's any other information that I need to relay to them where they may have to investigate or come up with some answers, I'd like to leave here. No one. They should come in with their architect
and maybe Who's the contractor again? Oh, they should come in with those people if they if they really to the extent that any part of their proposed changes is within 20 ft of the front yard of the front line, they need
a variance and it's it's not. So, okay. Anyways, all right. That's all I have to say. I will let them know. Um, my neighbor at 56 Pearl wanted to know if she could provide a written statement because she also opposes this. Absolutely. variance request. She can
submit that to Amanda. Yeah. Okay. By email or what was that? 56 Pearl 2. Yeah, we can read that into the record next time. I move to closed public comment. Second. F.
Motion to continue. Yeah. Okay. I move to continue um because the applicant couldn't be here until August and if they want to follow up and choose a different date. Is there a certain date in August? It's the first Tuesday. First Tuesday in August
85. No, I'll second that. All in favor? I'll give us some time to get some answers for you guys. Thank you. Thank you very much. I need to recuse myself for this case.
Oh, you're putting on a different hat. Put your helmet on. Uh, yeah, sure. So, just for the record, Tara has refused. I'm sorry for the case. Um, okay. So, we're going to move on to case numbers. Just be folks. I I don't I just don't want anybody getting
a motion. Yeah, we can talk about that. Um so we're going to go on to case number 25-09 1111 Pleasant Street. Uh the writing the zoning board of appeal to hold a public hearing in the select board meeting room town hall 16 street writing Massachusetts on Tuesday July
1st 2025 7 p.m. on application of Taylor Gregory pursuing to match law chapter 48 chapter chapter 48 section 9 for a special permit under wring zoning bylaw section 6.3 7.0 67.37.3.2 Construct a deck on existing non-conforming structure of the
non-conforming side setback on property located at 111 Pleasant Street M 22 lot 16 in ready Massachusetts objection I will dispense with the reading of the butters list except to say the butters were notified as for the following the select board of town clerk police department fire department building department conservation
commission health department assessor's office injury innovation CPDC and the members and associate members of board of appeals as well as the planning boards of Wakefield Lynfield North Reading Stone and Grant Wilmington I think you already sworn And then um we do either of you want to speak on this case or have you already been sworn in?
I think you were are you interested in speaking to or Steven Crook 137 Pleasant Street Houses Dam just came to speak in favor of the Okay. Sorry. So I'm just I'm just going to swear you in for now and then you can talk later. Okay. Um so I just swear the testimony given by me before this board will be the truth, the
whole truth and nothing but the truth. My response is just I do. I do. Okay. Great. Uh so you can sit down for now and then I'll open up a public comment later. Thank you. Um all right. You want to give us a little overview? All right. Good evening. My name is Taylor Gregory. I'm one of the
homeowners at the property at 111 Pleasant Street. Before I present my case, I have a few disclosures that I need to make. I'm an associate member of the zoning board of appeals. I was appointed in 2024 and recently reappointed by the volunteer appointment subcommittee. I did not have business before the ZBA through the VAS process.
My application interview occurred before applying for the special permit. My contractor applied for the building permit and it wasn't clear until after I was done with the FAST process that I would be the one applying for the special permit with the ZBA because I'm familiar with the process. I've not discussed the specifics of of my case
with anyone on the ZBA. I've discussed administrative matters with Amanda Beatatrice and stuff on town staff. So my project uh my spouse and I are looking to build a deck between our house and driveway. Our home was originally built in 1850 before zoning bylaws were in place. Our house is 2.2 2
ft from the property line shared with 97 Pleasant Street and it's considered a non-conforming structure. The deck we are proposing measures 8.8 ft from the sideyard setback. So, we're not creating a worse condition than what already exists on the property. We've spoken to
both of our immediate neighbors on both sides and both have expressed support for the project. The ZBA approved a similar project during the June 2025 meeting, case 25-6, that replaced their existing deck with one that extends the length of their house without further encroaching on the sideyard setback. I'd
like to ask that the board approve my special permit and allow my project to proceed. Thank you. Great. Thank you. Any comments from the board? No. Looks pretty straightforward from I just found out about it. Yeah,
it's um it wraps around your house on the opposite side. Yeah. Yeah, it's contained before the bulk. So, it'll be between the driveway and the bulkhead. Basically, I'm surprised you didn't just go a little bit bigger. No, we thought about it, but like the contractor thought it would be a harder time getting the permits to replace the
bulkhead as well. So, we just stopped short. I meant the other way where you conform it. What? The the corner. Yeah, by the driveway or maybe towards the yard, you know. I'm confused. Yeah, I think I think he's just saying you could have made No, no
ideas. Oh, you want to enjoy? Yeah. So, basically, we're just having it run the length and then it's going to be like a one step down to the yard. Nice. Great. Okay. Any other board comments? No. This is a special permit of a
non-conforming lot without substantially increasing the non-conformance. It's all right. Let's open up to public comment then if either of you want to speak on this. Uh go ahead. Sure. Uh thank you Andrew. I appreciate you
giving me the opportunity. Amanda Haley 71 Tennyson wrote, "Taylor Gregory should have recused themselves entirely from the zoning board of appeals proceedings related to their special per permit application for a deck on a non-conforming structure due to the clear conflict of interest. As an associate member of the ZBA, Taylor had
a duty to disclose any potential or pending business." Can I just ask what's the conflict of interest? I'm getting to it. The conflict of interest is that she's on excuse me that they are on the board. But I'm getting to it. I know. But is that restricted? This this is public comment. I don't want to get into a
whole like hour. This is public comment. Okay. Go ahead, please. Thank you. As an associate member of the ZBA, Taylor had a duty. This is not the This is not the select board. Let her finish where they play political games and talk and self. Right. We can hold it for now. Yeah. We
We don't We want to make sure this doesn't come. She's got a Everybody has a right to speak. Yeah. Go ahead. Sorry. Go ahead. Taylor had a duty to disclose any potential or pending business before the board during the reappoint process of the volunteer appointment selecting committee Vasque
on June 9th, 2025. Although no appeal was formally pending at the time of their interview, Taylor was aware of the likelihood of filing appeal for the deck permit as the evidenced by the denial of similar permit on May 28, 2025 and their subsequent appeal on filing on June 10th, conveniently one day after the
Vasque interview. The property's long-standing non-conformity documented since it purchase in 2020 and reference in 22 2022 ZBA appeal for similarship further indicates that Taylor knew or should have known the potential for future ZBA business. Additionally, Taylor was present at the select board meeting on June 24th, 2025 where Karen
Gate Herrick emphasized that applicants should disclose pending or anticipated business before the board. Taylor failure to speak up at that meeting or disclose the impending appeal during the Vasque interview violated this expectation. Moreover, Taylor has been noticeably vocable vocal about alleged
conflicts of interest involving other residents and neighbors serving on other boards. Yet, when faced with their own potential conflict, they took zero action to to address it proactively. By pursuing this appeal, Taylor has placed the ZBA, the very board they serve, on a difficult position of having to vote for or against a fellow board member's
project. This should require the ZBA to review the past three to five years of deck setback applications to assess how many were approved or denied and determine how often, if ever, a board has come before their own board with a project with a personal project, further complicating the board's decision-making
process and potentially undermining public trust. Instead of having the property owner owner Andrew Gregory file the two the June 10th 2025 appeal application as was done in 2022, Taylor chose to submit the pro the application in their own name. To maintain
impartiality and uphold the integrity of ZBA, Taylor should have recused themselves of any involvement in their own appeal to avoid the very appearance of bias or undue influence. That precisely is what my husband did when we went with our own project before the conservation committee. We've also dealt
with Glenn the building inspector for our deck. Our deck side setback was off by a couple inches and he noticed immediately. This deck is over six feet is off by over six feet and is so is the entire dwelling. This will exacerbate negative effects on the neighborhood compared to the current state of the home and further increase
non-conformity. The 2022 edition went up matching the character of other homes in the area. This is going out both sides of the property lines almost touching another driveway and violating the neighbors and violating both neighbors setback substantially different.
My biggest issue with this is that one day after the appointment, the appeal was filed under Taylor's name when it was originally filed under Andrew's name. Thank you. Uh, yeah. You have anything to say on
the case? Steven Crook, 137 Pleasant Street in a butter a couple of houses down. I have no problem with the addition. It it appears it appears to be put on the side away from the the side that that's
closest to the the property line there. So, it doesn't increase the nonconformity any. the line of of the the thing down the side is is even with the edge of the house. So from the streets not visually extending out any farther than the existing structure is and there's plenty of set back to the
rear. So without an increase in non-conformity I I have no problem with it whatsoever. Thank you. Thank you. Thank you. So let me ask you this. Is there any legally wrong with this or after that what she's mentioned or something we
have to look into? Um, do you want to pick this as like I sure I personally would say that any ethical issue that public has with this should be taken up
with the town. I will handle it the same way I would hand handle anyone's application. And I wasn't aware that she was even presenting today. I do have two questions though. Um, do you live at the property? Do I? Yeah.
Yes. I'm married to the homeowner. Okay. So, you're on the deed. Yes. Okay. I would handle it any other applicant. So, I guess why why was the why the name change one day after being reappointed to this
board? That that's that's that's Do you want to do you want to just respond to that just to get it open? Yep. I am the one on the ZBA. My husband is not familiar with the process. So, I was the one that went through the process
for it. My contractor applied for the building permit. I had no idea until I went to review the email from Amanda on 610 because I completely I didn't know that I was the one applying for the special permit until I was done with the FAST process on June 9th. Okay. So, I
guess my my concern here is that you are on the ZBA, my husband is on the select board. I did the entire process myself. for the entire project in our yard. I have no idea what I was talking about. I brought my contractor here. I did everything while I could have had my
husband do it because there was a massive conflict of interest. Okay. So, and not to mention the fact that what they're asking for is ludicrous. Like Glenn noticed by inches. This is feet.
Feet. Okay. Ma'am, let me try to address this a little bit for you. And I I appreciate your you know what what you are thinking of and the potential conflict and we all take very seriously our obligations to Would you let me speak please? I didn't open my mouth. Okay. Sorry it looked like you were
about to. We all take our obligations very seriously. We are required to take courses and then take refresher courses now and then regarding our ethical obligations. Um I can speak speaking for myself. I did not even realize not not remembering what the last name was that
this was an application of a uma of a member. We have never discussed it. I I see Taylor for you know a half hour once a month if that because I miss meetings and you know all of us miss meetings now and then. Um we we have never discussed
this. I did not even realize until um just as this meeting was be or actually into this meeting that it involved a member. Um and I can assure you that there has never there has not been any sort of side conversation um regarding this. I don't know what your own
situation is with your husband being on the select board and what you were trying to do. Um perhaps that wasn't necessary. I have no idea. Oh, but it was but um in this it was conservation. In this case, I'm confident that whatever we decide to do, it's going to
be in conformance with the rules that we have to follow. Now, as far as the special permit itself goes because the property is non-conforming, it existed before the rules exist existed. It already compi did not comply with the
rules when the rules were established. Therefore, it is grandfathered in and a different process. You heard us deny a or talk about potentially denying a variance earlier on in this meeting. It's a different um set of standards for
this particular situation. Um what we have to decide in this case is that the nonconformity, you know, because it already has a nonconformity. It it's way too close to the sideline, but that's nobody's fault because there was no such thing as being way too close to the
sideline when it was built. So, it's non-conformant, which means that inherently whenever you want to make a change to it, that's also going to be non-conformant. But that doesn't mean that you can't make a change. Just has to be in a way that does not increase
the nonconformity. In this case, it doesn't. They're not getting any closer to the sideline. In fact, what they're building is further away from the sideline than the rest of the house. um and I do not see that it violates the rules that we follow for this particular
type of case. Um um if we allow it and I I would be inclined to allow it and I would say that whether it was a complete stranger to me or whether it was my sister, I would be inclined to allow it because it complies with the rules that we follow. Okay. I'm I I just think it was very important to point out the
conflict of interest. I think there also needs to be some investigation done. Um, I'm hearing that Taylor's actually not on the deed, so I think that needs to be looked at. It It's also not required that the person who presents the application be
an owner, so they could be a contractor. You heard a a friend do it earlier, but he wasn't the applicant, though. Oh, okay. That's massively different. Okay. He was just representing because somebody got contractors are also applicants, too.
Yeah, we we we frequently see that. And just like to also address your concern about us applying the same standard equally like ter or Taylor represented a case we did in May that was a very similar situation where it's a non-conforming deck on non-conforming lot and we granted it without any you know personal relationship to the
applicant. I think what I think I think I think I think it's also really important to bring up that Taylor just lied and said that they're on the deed and they're not. So just FYI actually Taylor didn't say that. She just said he asked. Taylor said yes I am.
Okay. I'm not I'm not sure. I'm I'm done here. I wanted to make my point that there was a massive conflict of interest. Andrew was the original applicant changed over to her one day after her appointment to the sport. Thank you. All right. Thank you, ma'am. All right. Anybody else want to say
anything? All right. Uh we have a motion of ration comes out from the way that select board I think yeah handles things it's important I want everybody to know that we're not going down that road you know what I
mean understood is that Cynthia and I both stated it but maybe you two stated on the record but you had any no pri no conversation outside of the yeah
record. I looked at the application without any knowledge that it was. I wouldn't have known. Okay. Um and honestly, if Taylor's name had gone it, I still might not have made the connection. I probably wouldn't either because I don't usually look at the name
um in that way. Um all right. Well, I'd like to then make a motion um to um grant um the petitioner Gregory Andrew a special permit under section 7
um what is it three of the bylaws the zoning bylaws of the non-conforming lot at 111 Pleasant Street in Reading Mass as shown on the certified plot plan um prepared by David P. Teranzone pls dated
May 5th, 2025 that was submitted with the application um and certified also by David Teranzone. Um the special permit is subject to the following conditions. Number one, the petitioner shall submit to the building inspector a certified plot plan of the
proposed construction and proposed foundation plans prior to the issuance of a foundation permit for the work. Number two, the petitioner's final construction plans for the new structure shall be submitted to the building inspector along with the asbuilt foundation plans prior to the issuance of a building permit. Number three, as
built plans showing the completed construction shall be submitted to the building inspector immediately after the work is completed and prior to the issuance of an occupancy permit. Second, and just going to note that it was also under the dimensional requirements in 6.3. Oh, thank you. All
right. All in favor? I You're set. Thank you. Thank you. Yeah. Thank you. Um, we didn't get the minutes, right? I didn't. Yeah, I had seen. Okay. I had
two typos in here. If you do, do you want to move them? Do you have to move them to the next more than I think you have to vote on it, right? So, we have to Yeah. Let's push that
next. You have to see it. Okay. Actually, it was the June meeting. I don't care. Great. Is there any other blood pressure? I didn't put it on the agenda, but I
know you won't be here next meeting before organization. Um, I know we typically do at the beginning. It's up to you guys if you want to like postpone it till like September one or you just want to keep things as is for now. Um, let me check. I will also not be here
the next meeting. It's August 8th. Okay. What's that? August 5th. Yeah. Yeah. Yeah, maybe postpone that. Okay, we'll have a new just postpone the reorganization of the board. One, two,
three. We will have another member. Okay, we need to be appointed another member. Okay, they couldn't make it tonight and they had to be sworn in. So, we should have hopefully enough people and I will also let Pearl Street know that two people won't be there. they
want to postpone to like another right so we'll postpone to 95 for the four just looking ahead um I have the same issues last year for as of September I have hockey practice Tuesday Thursday
Tuesday okay until like December I'm sorry you said as of as of September 1st Okay. Motion to I move to ajourn. I will second. All in favor.