gonna get started. >> Great. Thank you. >> All right. So, um, welcome to the >> of the zoning board of appeals. Um, Cha, did we get I don't have minutes for last.
>> Uh, not for the most recent one, but um I did send minutes with the October meeting that we waited. Um, so I don't know. >> Um, a chance to review those. >> I I haven't. So, let's we'll we'll do minutes next time. >> Um, all right. So, we're going to start
with um our continued hearing, which is petition um 2515, which is um the um Pine Street Project. And hi, welcome. >> Um, so I wanted to we had talked a lot about
the parking lot last time and changes that could be made and couldn't be made. And I know that there was kind of an email sort of documenting the review of the idea of having the parking lot exit through um the um
the smoke shop and that was kind that Can Do you mind just going over the sort of rationale on that just or >> can I have the microphone? >> Sure. >> I know that an email went around but I just want to make sure that it's just for the public record that everybody kind of knows what Yeah. But the thought process >> We appreciate that. Thank you. I'm Holly
Grace with Benabirth Housing and um direction from our meeting last month was that we were going to take a look at um the driveway entrance serving our new affordable housing development to share
the driveway access with the dispensary. So, our team um consulted with our engineers to look at this plan and also our lawyers to see if it's possible because as you all know, just as a reminder, this property that we're
planning to develop this housing on is owned by the town and we will have a ground lease with the town for this land. So, we investigated this and determined that it's not a viable option for us for a variety of reasons. um
including parking in circulation in the area could even get worse. Just logistically thinking about if every single individual who's visiting this building coming from an automobile would be driving further to the parking to
park, including delivery drivers and things like that. There's a concern that they'll be parking, even more parking along Pine Street or even double parking for quick deliveries. and we know that that is not appealing to anyone. Um, in addition, there's programmatic
challenges. Um, just with community identity, with our veterans housing, sharing the driveway entrance with the dispensary. Um, we especially want to make sure we have safe and sober housing for the people who live there. So, I think the identity um is a concern. Um,
operationally there's blurred and confusing lines of who owns and who controls uh responsibility for things like snow plowing and um potential control over activities within the dispensary
um and just I guess navigating emergency response. And something that's most complicating on this are the legal hurdles. We have a land agreement with the town. Um, and it would require a formal amendment or clarification to be
able to use this as our primary access. And that opens a very long list of questions and potential timing with um to edit that or get it changed. Um, and it would likely also
require consent from the dispensary and potentially um an amendment to the town the town's lease with the dispensary. Um, so it could significantly I guess put this development off track.
So, um, we view it as not viable. >> We do have something else we'd like to talk to you about as an alternative that hopefully meets some of the concern, but I don't want to. Is that okay if we if we talked about that? Okay. Well, >> before I shift, are there questions about this or
>> are folks Okay. So, moving on, we um investigated an alternative that tries to address the concern and one of the biggest concerns we heard was from the property owner directly across from the plan. So, we're sharing on the screen
what we shared at last meeting >> in October. So the and this was revised I believe since our initial submission from August which had a drop off area noted to try to address these concerns about Pine Street deliveries, drop offs,
things like that. So in this October scheme um the driveway is pretty much perfectly aligned with the house directly across the street and we heard the concern headlights directly across. This is a big change, a big impact.
As you know, we looked at an alternative driveway location to share with the dispensary. Okay, we're not doing that. But we would like to consider this November 2005 driveway configuration which tweaks the driveway
location especially for the exiting traffic from the parking lot so that traffic exiting isn't directly facing the house across the street. it's somewhat a skew and um we hope helps
address the partially the concerns of that house. Um in addition, there's some benefits to shifting to this plan, including bigger sight lines than the plan from last month. Um including for views of
pedestrians on the sidewalk and other vehicles coming along Pine Street. Um I guess a drawback to this plan is that some to fit this tweak. Uh some of the parking spaces
need to become compact. Um but this is a condition that also exists at the Michon a different development that Benabirth Housing did here in Swamcott and it operates efficiently and fine even with the senior population. So, we feel
comfortable proposing this as an alternative that tries to help address the concerns of the neighbors across the street. I really like the improved sight lines on this. I think that that my biggest concern was how close you were exiting to the building and not being able to
see the sidewalk. So, I think this is is a big improvement. So, you didn't lose any spaces. You just you just moved it to the center and did compact. >> Yeah. So as you can see the comparison here we lost >> still showing 35
made it up with a >> with a compact. Yeah. Yeah. >> Yeah. So we lost one at the bottom row but gained one in the middle aisle had to become compact. >> Yeah. A little less curbing in the parking lot also
>> or green space but might be brown space honestly because it's very narrow. >> Yeah. probably would not have grown much and it was very narrow >> and it actually increased the foot and a half which is also good. >> Do you want to toggle back and forth a couple times so people can see? So between October, it's labeled at the
bottom. November. October. November. Yeah. Well, that's helpful. And I think there were some um there were some concerns from Gino about sort of some of the plantings right
right at the exit anyway for sight lines. So I guess that didn't really get narrower, did it? Maybe it got a little bit narrower. Um, but that isn't really much of a loss in the sense that having plantings there was probably not great for sight lines anyway. So,
>> um, >> a little narrow. >> October, November. >> She's looking I believe. Are you looking at the driveway entrance? >> Yeah. >> Yeah. >> The to the if you were um exiting to directly to your right, it looks like that little strip got the little area
got a tiny bit narrower. All right. >> What's the width of Was there any change in the width of the >> No. >> Where the exit point entrance point? >> Is that a question that Jacob can answer? Our civil engineer is here
on Zoom, I should say. >> Okay. >> Yep. >> Can you hear me? >> Yep, we can hear you. Jacob Mu with Hancock Associates, 315 Elm Street, Marboro, Mass. Um, so the actual width of the driveway doesn't change. So it's
it's the same in both. The only thing that changes that we brought it angled it further towards the south and moved it away from the building. >> Thank you. It also sort of delineates that um that standing area a little better, I think,
rather than, you know, you actually have would have to kind of pull into that that area, which which is kind of nice. >> Yeah. It lines up a lot more with the aisle now. >> Yeah. >> All right. Does anybody else have any questions about this change? >> Looks good to me.
>> Yeah, I think it's an improvement. Um, and then we have I think our the person who's going to be doing the peer review is supposed to be here today. >> She's online. >> Hi. >> Um,
>> hello. I'm here. >> Hi. I just Thanks for coming, Vicki. Nice to meet you. Um, so nothing's actually started yet for the peer review because we just got these. All right. So that will be for the next step. Um, Is there anything else that's
new this month? >> No. >> Does anybody from the board have any questions? >> Um, no. I think what's new is looks good. >> All right. Does anybody um here either online or in person have any questions
specifically about the parking? >> Yes. >> Just curious. just say your name and your address, please. Thank you. >> Hi, Steve Gadman, 11 Pine Street. Uh, at the last meeting, they talked about um
talking to the fire department. I was wondering if that was uh has been handled uh about being able to get in and out of there >> because of the bump out. Has there been any um do you know if there's been any consulting with fire?
>> Didn't is Jacob still on? I believe our civil engineer. >> Yeah. Um I we haven't received comments back from fire. Um, I can certainly reach directly out to them to see if they have any issues, but I believe early on um, we had fire at our team
meeting that we did prior to our filing who had reviewed our preliminary plans and, uh, gave us the verbal okay on that. So, um, we could certainly just request a memo from them. >> Yeah, that'd be great. Thank you. Also, as a reminder, so this building is on a
corner, so there's two public roads that abut the building on two sides and >> right, it meets the fire code. Uh the fire truck can access the building on three sides and um is less than 150 foot
burst maneuvering. So the building needs the fire code with the access and um you can get a memo from the fire department speaking to that. >> Okay, great. Thank you. >> Thank you. >> Does anybody else have any questions?
Is there anybody online who can use the raise their hand button? All right. >> This is the first >> I know my entire career. >> Excellent. Well, um All right. So, we
what are our um I guess we should probably do our figure out what our hopes are for next meeting. Um hopefully we will have the peer review done. >> Yeah, maybe asking Vicki how much time she thinks she's going to need. >> Vicki, if you could let us know.
>> Yeah, I think um our proposal said um two weeks to kind of do the you know discovery. Obviously, we have the plan set, but it's a matter of looking at some of the documents at um DPW on the the drainage and the culvert and kind of
get our hands around that item. Um and then completing our review two weeks beyond that. I think that was our timeline. I can double check. >> So, >> we've got a December 16th meeting scheduled. You think we could do it all
then? >> Yeah, that sounds reasonable. Yep. >> Okay, great. Yeah, that would put us at four weeks. So, yes. >> What >> I said I'm going to be traveling on the 16th. Does that matter? >> Um, you have not missed a meeting, correct? So, you could watch a video. Okay.
>> You can watch a video for one meeting per petition. >> 16th is the meeting. >> The 16th. December 16th. Yeah. >> Um, so that would be great. And if anything that you get in before the 16th, if um so we can distribute it, that would be excellent. >> And I just wonder if Paul >> Absolutely.
>> Yeah. >> thoughts too. Um, and Paul, welcome. Do you have any additional thoughts for preparing for next meeting? >> Hang on. We're trying. >> Just muted. Yeah.
>> Sorry, I was muted. >> Great. >> Uh, I I don't have any specific thoughts about getting ready for the next meeting other than getting the peerreview comments completed. Um, I am available that night. So, want to make sure you're aware of that. >> Great. Thanks.
>> All right. So, that'll be the plan um to have all the peerre done, submitted, and then we'll have hopefully we'll have some time to review before the meeting. >> Excellent. >> I'll make a motion to continue to December 16th
>> and look to I'd suggest we look to put this as the first item on our agenda. We should try to do that. Yep. >> All right. We have a second. All in favor? >> I I >> All right. See you next month. >> All right. Thank you. >> Thank you. >> Thank you.
>> Have a good night. >> The shortest 40 meeting up here. But still, you know, >> did I just wanted to flag that for you in case >> I can definitely watch
it. >> I mean, you could go watch it, right? I'm gonna be on that night. >> No, that's fine. Okay. >> Thank you. Good night. >> And you only have to watch the things that >> Yeah. Yeah. Yeah. Yeah. Okay.
>> All right. >> Okay. Moving on. We're going to um going to move on to our next petition. If you're still discussing this, if you could go out in the hallway, that'd be great. All right. >> So, we are going to open the continued petition number 2517
which is um for uh realy garage previously's garage. >> Hi. Sam couldn't make it tonight. >> Friday. >> Hello. Good evening. >> Hi. >> Jaro and Julo, manager, Lai Garage LLC.
Unfortunately, Sam had a conflicting appointment in Lynn. He couldn't make it, but I know that he supplied you guys with everything that he supplied me, which is his explanation as to why it's just continuing existing use. Everybody got the packet? I assume >> we got the memo. Yes.
>> Yeah. >> Thank you. All right. So, I think this is one of those that comes to the um there's sort of two underlying
questions. Is the use continuous? And if the use is not continuous, is the use allowed as a extension of the existing use? Um, and whether or not the use is
continuous, I think is really hard to prove because it was owned by someone else for so long. And I think most people who visited that shop would say it was not a um you know it wasn't auto body. It was a
repair shop but not an auto body shop at the time previous to your ownership. >> Correct. But your license states clearly repairs bumpers and fenders and we possess the same license that Swansk Auto Body possesses. And we can all agree that Lai's has been there since
the 1800s. It was a train switching yard. If you go back in the records, unfortunately, all the original records of the building have been destroyed because there was a flood at city hall like 50 years ago. Bob Wilson told me he always repaired cars. He always fixed cars and he always painted cars. He just
never painted cars properly with what we want to do, which is a spray booth, which captures all of the bad stuff that you will omit into the air and do it properly. It's the same use. It's the same shop. I own a body shop in Lynn and I have a repair license there and I have
a body shop license that says I repair bumpers and fenders. So that's why we believe it's continuing existing use. So Our bylaw does I mean it lists it under the same number but it definitely separates them by kind of ors rather than commas.
It doesn't say that it's all the same. It definitely kind of separates them as separate. >> I don't know how everybody >> it clearly states and or >> Sam Sam pointed that out at the last meeting. >> Yeah, this just ours just says motor vehicle general or body shop or
automatic automobile vehicle washing facility. Um, >> can I disagree? >> Yeah. Yeah. >> So, that's the kind of >> Sam pointed out or in his memo the use
of that and then how did he describe it? So he decisive the the definition section motor vehicle general and body repair in article six the table of uses is inconsistent with using the word or
>> so he pointed out that yeah >> conflict. >> Yeah. And you know, how do you reconcile that was his >> I understand why you could use you could you could use and when you're
saying I'm referring to these two uses and you use the word or when you're separating the uses under the use the um >> definition he's shown that they've been painted before they use painting in painting cars,
>> but it's still currently painting now. >> Yeah. >> Like I pointed out at the last meeting with today's advancement in vehicles and Teslas and Fords that are aluminum, you can't just paint in the atmosphere. You have to paint in a controlled environment which would be a heated
spray booth which comes with its own fire protection and would be very safe to the environment because I know there was some concerns about that. But these are mechanisms that are installed all over the United States of America in every city in town. It's nothing out of the ordinary. >> Yeah. No, the the issue isn't
necessarily that I mean we're glad that if you're going to be spraying you want to do it properly. It's more just that the use of um any sort of auto repair is is only allowed because it's grandfathered in at this location. It's not allow it's not zoned for it at this location. So therefore, it um it can
only be permitted because it's a grandfathered use from previously. So I understand that it's been used most recently and that you do have receipts for paint. It's >> it was never not used. Bob Wilson operated until the last day he was
there. When he left, I took over. It took me months. My sister and I to clean the building out and get it so you could actually use it. Then we rented to a gentleman who did repairs and installed tires. Sadly, he failed in business. He couldn't make it. We had to evict him. He left. And now we have a body shop
that's interested in renting it. We're asking the town to please see that it's continuing of existing use for repairs. It was never not used. Bob Wilson fixed cars and changed oil and dented bumpers and helped people until the last day he
was there. After we bought it, he paid us nine months rent to stay there cuz he couldn't move out fast enough. There was a lifetime of stuff in there. And if anything, I think we bettered the building. We bettered the way it looks. And it will be five times better than that when we're done with this project.
>> I was just put mark on that page definition. That's okay. I thought you might want to take a look at that, too. >> Oh, yeah. Sorry. I did want to take a look at that. That's the definition that was back here. I just pulled it out. That was under It's >> with all the definitions towards the end
that area alphabetical under motor vehicle. >> Yeah. Does anybody on the board have any questions or thoughts on this? I just think, you know, Sam's point about the difference between the definition with and or or looking at the
table of principal uses that I I I would agree with his argument that really is should be or um that I don't think it's
exclusive of either one. I think that either one would be so if you go back to the table of principal uses, >> right? >> Yeah. I mean it is listed under number nine under the same use. >> Right. Right. So and and what's the
district is it >> it's not it's not permitted in the district. >> Yeah. I'm just wondering what it is. Is it the I should look on the application. It's a um B1, right? You're currently a B1. I
don't have the full application here. >> I'm pulling it up right now. I can show it on the screen. >> Yeah, B1 is on the application. >> Yeah, which is which is, you know, an N. Yeah. >> Okay. Just wanted to confirm that. So, it's a protected use as far as the use that's
there. Okay. So I don't know whether that's really part of the analysis. >> Yeah. No, it's more that >> I think you're >> kind of where it says or here. I agree. And then where it says and as if it's
one and the same, the definition, it has one definition for both motor vehicle and body repair as if it's one thing. Um whereas in in the use it lists it clearly as separate things. >> Right. on the continuous use argument
where we asked for, you know, receipts. There are some receipts for paint products, you know, not from 25 that were produced. >> Yeah. >> Prior to that, it was there's receipts there that show that the gentleman's
name was actually worn. He owns Tire. His receipts are all there that he serviced cars, fixed cars, he installed tires, and sold tires. not limited to and including batteries, brakes, alternators, starters, all kinds of miscellaneous repairs to vehicles.
>> Yeah, I think that part of it isn't highly contested that there was at least that more than the light duty repairs going on there um that it meets the definition. Yeah, I think there's no question that
it's a general motor vehicle repair that that it's more is it an auto body shop and has it continuously been an auto body shop without any stoppage of use for all the that time or are they the same thing by our bylaw
definition and therefore it's irrelevant. >> I would say we don't really have evidence that it's been a b a true body shop. Um but continuously but then we do have the issue where our
definition lists as one thing. >> Well, I I think he's produced some evidence. I I think the burden, you know, we heard some testimony the last time from some neighbors who said it wasn't they didn't see any make any observation there being any painting, but we do have some actual evidence. I I
I would think the burden would be on the petitioner to show that there was the continuous use and he's put forth some evidence of that. I don't know if the testimony of the neighbors who said their observation is enough to
rebut that um that testimony. >> With no disrespect to the neighbors, they can't see what goes on behind closed doors. I mean, that's just fact. >> Yep. I think one of the neighbors had
>> Yeah. Please state your name and address, please. >> Yeah. They'll get you a mic. >> Thank you so much. >> Hi, my name is Elaine. Can you hear me? >> Yep. >> My name is Elaine Lipkan and I live at 25 Essex Street. My husband Dan was at
the last meeting where this was discussed. Um, we are new residents in Swampscott. took possession of our property on the 17th of April of this year. Um, we saw the property for the first time in Mar mid-Marchch, which was
actually the last time when this prior business, Rahobuts, was in was on the premises. By the time we took possession of our property, it was already empty again. And since that time, it has been operating as a towing company. I
understand from hearing from my husband and Sam, our neighbor, that there was some discussion last meeting that there was painting going on of dumpsters on the property, but we do live right across the street. We can see in the
windows. We can observe what's going on there. not every minute of every day, but as far as I can tell and from getting to know our neighbors and asking around because we're new and we want to know what's going on in the area, there has been no evidence in my mind that
there's been continuous operation of anything but general towing, tires, and basic repairs. If there was painting going on on the premises and it was manual painting, I think I'd like to challenge the notion that manual
painting of anything car related or otherwise is an entirely different ball of wax than a fullon operational spray booth for bodywork. These businesses themselves are actually still available online. You
can go on and see what they offer as their services. body work and painting is not one of them. And that's even just in the last two years. Li's has been gone since more than two years. So I I'm we're new.
We don't know. I can't produce photographic evidence of all of this, but much of this material is readily available online. And we're in a different we're in a highly residential neighborhood. We but we're across the street, but the entire affordable
housing complex is right behind this property and there's kids playing there all the time. So, in my mind, yes, I suppose the zoning board is stuck between a rock and a hard place having to approve something as being grandfathered. But at the very I think
at the max, all you can grandfather is what's been happening there. So, if they're comfortable handp painting some bumper repair, that seems to me like a clear grandfather. But the idea that they are
going to put in a big spray booth that has to have first of all has much higher, you know, aerosolized particle matter and chemical hazardous chemical exposure risk. I mean, and and and it's like apples and
oranges to me. So again, I can't wave a wand and show you evidence. I am not allowed to go in the property. I haven't been in there myself, but there's a lot of things that are visible to us as residents. So I would just ask the
zoning board to consider why what is the nature of that grandfather and does it meet does what they are proposing to have a permit for actually align with common sense zoning practice in a
highly dense residential area and I really appreciate your time. >> Thank you. So the idea of abandonment of use, it's two year, you'd have to have two year. So if there the use existed
and two years went by without it, that's the the statute of limitations for use >> and the use has been abandoned. >> And just to add, we do spray, as you could see on the receipts from the hardware store we supply. We buy spray paint just like everybody else does. And we spray all the parts of the dumpsters
that you can't reach with a brush. We spray bumpers on cars. We spray door jambs. There's a Cadillac in there we're working on now. We do spray. It's just we don't spray in a booth. If we were to improve to a booth, you take away all of the pollutants that go into the air. And
also with respect to the fact that the kids play behind it, the ventilation system would vent out the side. It would not vent towards the children, but it doesn't matter because what it omits is 0000, which is in accordance with D law with the booth we would purchase.
part of the Clean Air Act, >> right? If there's any problem, D is going to be right on it >> or the health department or the EPA, >> right? There's m there's municipal protection, >> right? >> There's state protection through D and you have liability if
>> and there's all kinds of yearly filings that have to be filed by the operator. Just you have the microphone. You could just say your name and address first. Neil Marvash. I live at 19 Essex Street. Um I just want to make a small correction. If the permit goes forward,
the D would no longer have authority to look at the records. It would just be the board of health that neighbors could complain to. >> I I I couldn't hear all of that. Could you >> Okay. um if the if the exemption permit goes forward and um it's approved, the D
gives up its authority to look at their records or to ask for the detailed monthly records that are meant to be kept. It would just be it would revert like you said to the municipal board of health. So the neighbors would only have the avenue to complain to the board of
health because the D would have released its authority. Um, the other thing I'm confused about is is ownership of the business and ownership of the property two different things because um, Mr. Andula refers to having bought the business, but when I look at whose name
is on the deed of the property recently, it's still Bob Wilson and his wife. So, are they two different things? Can you buy a business from someone who owns a property and that person can still own the property? >> Um, yeah, you can, but you bought the property. you own.
>> We We own the property as Realy Investors LLC. We also bought Lai's LLC from Bob Wilson. It's all been transferred years ago. If you found that information, it's old documents. And just a comment, you're entitled to make your complaint to the health department. If the health department finds an issue,
the health department reaches out and calls the DP or the EPA. That's how the chain of command works. >> All right. Does anybody want to sort of opine out loud so that we can sort of feel where the board is thinking on this?
>> Sure. >> I should probably constitute the board um before I do that. So, I'm just going to constitute the board as um everyone through Michelle. That's all right. >> But you can also Oh, you can still have an opinion if you'd like.
My my opin my opinion is that hopefully in this booth it's going to be consolidated better and tracked better than them spraying with nothing. You know there's they're using that now and it's God knows where it's going. So if anything it's going to
be a better consolidated situation. >> The word >> do it either way. >> The words encapsulated >> encapsulated >> filtered and put back into the other the right way. Whereas a regular person, anybody here can go to Walmart, buy two cases of spray paint, and go spray paint
on the wall. That's omitting um >> gases from spray painting. We're not stopping them from painting. >> I'll go out. I'm fine with it. >> What was that? >> I'm fine with it. >> Yeah, I am too. I I
>> have an idea. >> It's he is a heavily regulated industry and that's out of our jurisdiction. And you know this whether we missed two years in one day or whatever. I mean this is going on. This is a garage. This
is I'm fine with it. And I agree that it'll be better regulated if >> anything. Michelle, >> I'm I'm torn and I and I think the issue is the change in business ownership because
yes, you presented the records you have. You haven't owned it that long. So, they're all 2025. If we're looking at statute of limitations issues, what do we have for 2024, 2023? It's tires. That's that's not painting. And and and like you said, you know, we
have some evidence on either side. So, I'm torn, but I I think probably at the end of the day, because it is a heavily regulated industry, once you get the right permits in place and you do all the things you're supposed to do by the D, the board of
health, it's it is ultimately probably better for the community that you do it correctly. And and if there's not enough evidence to suggest otherwise, I think I'm leaning towards this is probably okay. I would have to completely agree with you.
>> Sure you do. >> Got to speak up, Mark. Right. >> So, people do Oh, sorry. >> Oh, people online. I mean, I'm I'm still my my feeling is I I don't I'm not buying that this that this had been an auto auto body shop
continuously. So the continuous use for me is is difficult to for me to accept. But what I'm having trouble is our bylaw very much sums them as the same thing. So it doesn't really separate these two
uses out. And that's where I come down on. I don't think that this has been an auto body shop. I think an auto in my mind an auto body shop and a general repair are two very separate things. But our bylaw they are not. In our bylaw they are one thing. And that's where we
have the problem. You've clear it's clearly has been a repair shop. Um and and that's no one questions that. Um but um you know most people think a collision you know if you if you have a an accident you go to a different you might not go to your regular repair guy.
A collision person is a specialist and they're different. And I think most people see those two as very separate. Our bylaw does mention them as one thing. Um and that's sort of where my disconnect is. Um, >> so with regard to that, if you get in an
accident and you have mechanical damage to your car, the same shop fixes the mechanical damage. In other words, if you hit a curb, blew a tire, and smashed your wheel into your fender. I'm going to fix the tire, straighten out the frame, put it back together, but I'm also going to fix the fender and paint
it if I'm a body shop. In today's world, no body shop just does body work. They're going to fix the mechanical part, too, because there's some heavy lifting and some money. There's a lot of mechanics that are not body shops. >> Agreed. There's a lot of body shops that are not mechanics, too. Right. >> Right. Right. >> But a lot of both.
>> Yeah. >> Um I think that we could probably debate this like on at Nauseium. Um for me there's two issues. One is that this notion that they're going to do it
anyway. It's the same thing is not helpful for us because if somebody comes in and they've got a fender bender and you're doing a spray can to fix one spot, the amount the
volume of what you are per producing in that space is an entirely different situation than running a full on body shop where you are actually spraying full cars. which is of course why you need the specialized equipment.
The problem is that this level of shop at this size is under threshold for anybody to care about compliance. So once this permit actually goes through, the likelihood that anyone from any type
of authority will be checking on whether or not there's a proper downdraft and that that that thing is actually doing what it's supposed to be doing is very is slim to none in my opinion. Um, the other question I would just have maybe
to all of you is your comment early on like this is only a discussion because it's grandfathered. My question to the zoning board is then why why is that? Would this type of a business not be allowed in our community
in a dense residential area like this now if it were not grandfathered? And if that is true, then why are we even having this discussion? Why isn't the the nature of that new regulation not as equal weight to considering
the grandfathered question? >> So, uh it isn't a B1 and in our use of our zoning bylaw, a B1 cannot have um a repair shop at all. But if a repair shop exists, then that can continue. That use can continue. And in our zoning bylaw,
it also refers to a motor vehicle general and and body. It says mo it even doesn't even say the word repair until the end. It says motor vehicle general and body repair as if it's one thing. Um and then it defines that. And that's really where
we're at. If these are I understand sort of that we think of them as two separate businesses, but our zoning bylaw considers them one and the same. And if something's existed it's allowed to continue to exist >> and and even if it was separate, the
zoning act 48 section 6 protects pre-existing non-conforming uses, the so-called grandfathered use. And what that does, it not only protects that use to continue, but it allows essentially an accessory use to that
existing use so long as it is not substantially more detrimental to the neighbor than the existing use. So our bylaw defining those two things together, the general repair and the body shot tells us that the way that the
the intent under the bylaw is looks like to treat those as the equivalent. So that so there's the the applicant has two roads to being able to put in this paint booth and have the body repair
work and paint booth uh as a use. One is the grandfathered use, if they can prove that. It seems like there's some questions whether the board, members of the board agree to that, and then the second is if it is a pre-existing non-conforming use, which
I think everyone agrees that it is as general repair, then is the pain booth, the addition of the paint booth just simply a permitted expansion of the use that's protected under 4D section six. And you know, that's the way I am leaning. I think that there's likely not
there's some evidence of the continuous use. I don't know that it's enough to meet the burden, but I think that from on this one vote, the um that the use for the paint booth is an
extension of the pre-existing non-conforming use under the intent of our bylaw. And in terms of the worries about environmental issues, relief can be conditioned upon um certain compliance,
right? So we've heard from the applicant that there's going to be zero emissions. We we can condition our relief, >> but that's not our purview. That's the perview. It's not our purview, but we can we can we can specifically condition that it complies and if and perhaps once it's up and operational to have a
certification from the installer or have some there's independent places that test. I mean I >> Mark if I could interrupt for one second just to rebut what she said. >> Six aerosol cans of spray paint released into the ozone is much worse than painting a full car in a spray. I I understand that >> also. >> Yeah.
>> Also, there is much and many many requirements in physical testing for this booth to get inspected. I believe it's quarterly. So, there's no games with this. This booth is licensed by the state. It It's not like we just buy one and say, "Okay, don't change the
filters. Nobody cares." This is a very specific unit and it will tell the body shop when the filters need to be changed. It has all monitoring stuff. It's not like we bought this at an auction sale. Right. Yeah. Right. I >> This is brand new equipment.
>> I'm just suggesting I I I I think that having a condition for some type of certification, it may be the certification that you're already required to have under D law and EPA. >> If you if you pull if you pull it up online, it comes right up. It's it's state inspected. >> So that's that's what I'm looking for.
That you comply with all of that and that there's a certification that it's complying with Massachusetts law and federal law. I I think that's a very basic >> giving giving permission to a special permit and telling the guy as a condition of the special permits you
have to go get a building you know a building permit. >> I don't think you need to get a building permit to have that. >> No, I'm just saying that >> you're saying it's analogous. >> Saying because of course you need a build is his point is of course you need building permit. >> We try and do traffic the traffic isn't you know once it's over like it's not
that's got to be forced. >> That's all I'm saying. Yeah, I think it's a bad precedent to >> that we're not the enforcement body at that point. >> But I I think a a regular condition that we we've put in is that you comply with all other all other requirements of any
other board, >> state and federal regulations. >> Yep. So I think that's fair. >> Are you required to uh I guess have that inspection report anywhere like posted? >> They would keep it right in the shop. Yes. >> Okay. >> Because they the inspector can come at
any time. city, state, or federal. Just like a liquor establishment would have the liquor license on the wall, you'd have the license for the booth. And I know there was some concern about the model number and what it was all about. And when we finally get to that point, we'll be happy to supply all
that. But of course, if we make it past this step, we have to go apply for license and we have to do some construction and get approved by the building department. There's other steps that follow this. >> You have another question. >> Thank you. Um, yes, I'd like to challenge the notion of 100% encapsulation. I know you've made it
clear to me that it's not in your jurisdiction. Um, but mechanical things can fail all the time and the de the EPA and its state partner, the DP, um, they
they look at larger like like Elaine said, this is kind of a small businesses under the radar. they look at larger industry to see if they are complying, but industry is supposed to self-report um a a pollution violation. So
the so what they're looking at is larger industries that do if you look at the research of self-reporting of industry on pollution violations, it's really poor because what they're what they're doing what their 100% attention is focused on is their production. whatever
their production is, whether it's painting cars or building oil wells or constructing, you know, whatever. Um, self-reporting comes at the la as at the as the last step because they're going to be interested in completing their production first. And like I said, if
you look at the research on self-reporting, it's really poor. >> So, we have a quick explanation of 100% encapsulation. The booth doesn't operate unless the doors closed. The booth is sealed. Everything goes out through the filtered ventilation system. So when I
say 100% encapsulated, I mean we're not spraying cars in the parking lot and we're not spraying cars inside the shop. We're spraying them in the booth. Then it does its job. If it won't operate, meaning if the filter is full or if there's a system failure, the heat won't turn on in the booth and you can't paint
the car. There's all steps to prevent any type of what this woman is referring to. >> This is we're going around Yeah. >> Yep. This is >> so I I think >> for me the um
>> for me if the if they were two separate uses I would say is not grandfathered in and that you can't have this use. But because our bylaw has it as the same one and the same and doesn't separate them as two separate uses. I don't I think we're sort of in a at a place where
um the way this is written it it an auto body shop is a general repair shop and there is no difference. Um so that's where I'm at. >> Me too. >> All right. So
does somebody want to make a motion? Um, >> can you get Sam to write? >> Yeah, if I can get Sam to write the uh decision, he'll >> Yeah, Sam will write it. >> All right. I'll So, we have >> So, and I I am okay with conditioning um
that I get I I understand what you're saying. It's the same as saying you need a building permit. Well, of course, you can't build without a building permit. Yeah. But there seems to be some um like lack of understanding on on the board as to what sort of um because this
isn't something we do every day. I don't know how often um a booth is inspected and where that report goes and how the neighbors have access access to those reports um and or how the health department gets access to those reports. So, I'd like I'm okay with conditioning
um that all the um state and local reports are >> federal >> somehow accessible. >> It would be ISD inspectional services. >> Inspectional services. >> Yes. >> They're the overseer. >> What's that? >> They're the overseer. They watch over it.
>> Over the boots. >> Yes. Over the body shops, over the mechanical shops. Same with the fire department. Random fire inspections. It's yearly. They check the system. They check the extinguishers. They check all the tags. It's the same sort of thing. >> But I would be comfortable with conditioning that anytime an inspection
or a report is um done that that's um filed with our health department. >> That's agreeable. >> So that we at least we know that it's um it's getting reported as far as whether it's passed or not that you're required
to anytime there's an inspection to file that the results of that inspection with our health department. Does anybody else feel comfortable with that conditioning? fine with that. >> Okay. You just read the decision. >> So, uh I'll make a motion >> close the public hearing. >> Yeah. Close the
>> I'll second. >> All in favor? hearing. Uh, and I'll make a motion to approve petition um 25-17 uh to make a finding
that the addition of the spray booth as proposed being what is attached to the petitioners memorandum submitted today from Infitech or its equivalent
um be permitted to be installed and used as an expansion um of the existing use for general repair um conditioned upon there being
compliance with all uh federal, state, and local regulations governing um the use of a spray booth or paint in this proposed and actual use and
I think that's all I need to >> conditioned on any report being >> and conditioned on any >> local >> reports or inspections that are taken by any state local or federal agencies being provided uh to the board of health
within uh 14 days of receipt of any report inspection. Second. >> Second. All in favor? >> I. >> Thank you very much. >> And if you could ask Sam if he can direct a draft for
>> I will bring that up in the morning. He he's still in Lynn. A different situation, but I'll talk to him in the morning and get back to you. Thank you very much. No. >> So, Susan, I should have left you on that one because I forgot you're off these two. >> What's that? >> I should have left you on that one. I
forgot you were off. Okay. >> These next two are >> Can I talk about them or No, >> no. >> You can even leave if you wanted to. >> All right. Yeah. >> You don't don't feel um >> You're noticed a butter, right? >> I'm a butter to both. >> To both. Okay. Yeah. I mean,
>> I'm just curious. >> No, I mean, you can definitely stay. Um, all right. We're here for the next petition, sorry, is um petition number 2518, which is for um number 80 Puritan Road.
Um and In this case, we have um an abut butter on the board, so she's going to recuse herself. >> Oh, okay. >> All right. >> Should I start? >> Yes, please. >> Ready? >> Yes. Please tell us about your petition.
>> So, this this is a uh a twostory two family with a hip roof. Uh what I want to do is uh add a bedroom uh to an unfinished attic area and uh change that hip roof to a gable.
And the rear is nonconforming. Uh so we'll just be going straight up uh not extending that nonconformity. size of third floor footprint. >> What's that? >> What's the size of the third floor? >> It's uh it it'll be a half story.
>> So, it's half the size of the floor below. >> Okay. It's one foot overt. Take the front off. So, this is it's currently a two family, correct? >> Yes, it is. >> Is the third family I mean is is the
third story um going to be a separate >> Well, it's a half story. >> It's a Yes. Sorry. >> It'll be It'll be part of the second floor. >> Part of the second floor. >> Yeah. question. >> So it'll it'll stay a two family. >> Yes.
>> Um to look at Oh, here we go. application. with the having the covered with the deck being sort of a covered deck. >> Okay, thanks. Um, should that be where the setback is as
opposed to the building >> covered deck included for setback? So that's so we I don't think the stepbacks are accurate on the application because >> So which deck is covered? This these ones on this this one here where
>> but he has but doesn't isn't this showing 5.9 ft? >> Yeah, the application has the sideyard step back >> 16 >> as the 16. >> Yeah. No, it should be 5.9 but it's protected. >> Yeah. But now the the additional deck
though is sort of um >> it's going right to that. It's it's under bala. It's not increasing the non-deerforming. It's going right up to it. >> Yep. >> Now, if the deck was open, I mean, is
the difference that now it's covered and before it was open? >> Yes. Oh, >> that's that's my that's my concern. So, >> Well, that's a good point. So it's not covered currently. >> It's an O. It's one deck >> and it's open to the sky. >> And it's open to the sky. >> So I decision. >> It is going
>> That's what I'm saying. Yeah. >> It's going from 16 to six. >> It is an increase of the non-conforming nature. It's a good catch. >> And why is that? So, an a deck that doesn't that's uncovered doesn't count
as part of as being in in the setback, but if it's covered, it counts as part of the structure. >> And with the addition of the deck, it becomes covered. >> Becomes covered. Yeah. With the addition of the upstairs deck. So, that's sort of that was the only thing that sort of stood out to me about this was that
deck. Um, you cut that deck back in half. What's the >> You could cut the deck back in half. This third floor deck. >> You could cut it to make it um smaller so you're not within the set back side
>> all the way. You know, it goes 50% of the way out there. >> Yep. Right. Because the problem is it's going into the sideyard setback, right? >> And it's making that first floor deck or the second floor deck >> in this non non-conforming. >> Non-conforming. now.
>> Yeah, I think the second floor deck's got to be smaller. >> Excuse me. H how is the how do you consider it uh covered >> because if it's not open to the sky, it won't be after so the the second floor
deck will be covered by the third floor deck. So it will the the second floor deck then becomes a covered deck and the sideyard setback would after construction be six feet less than six
feet whereas now it's 16 ft. So you're increasing the non-conforming nature. >> What's the sideyard setback? >> The sideyard setback you're increasing >> what's the require? >> Oh in this Oh seven and a half. Yes. >> And so you're at six. So you'd have to just make the top deck um so that it was
>> would fit in the conformity the side step back. >> So the top deck would have to be at least >> 7 and 1/2 ft. >> Yeah. >> From the from the sideyard. >> Yeah. But but you could ask for a dimensional special permit and wait get rid of that. >> You could ask for a dimensional special permit to get to
>> six feet to six for the one and a half by 20%. >> Right. And now we're talking 5.9. So, we're clipping them for two inches. >> Yeah. >> Measure the 5.9 might be six >> next time they measure.
>> No, I'm just saying. >> I hope not. >> Um, sorry for this. Here we go. >> And and the the second floor deck, is that in good shape? Are you are you replacing that as part of >> Actually, it is in good shape. Yeah, >> it is. It's staying as is.
>> Oh, yeah. Yeah. I wasn't going to do anything with it. >> Um >> probably new decking. You know, it's old decking. >> Yeah. >> Did he advertise it? >> It's got 6x6 post on it. It's in good shape. Seems like it's >> didn't advertise for
>> bolted in. >> Yeah. No, it's not advertised that way. >> Right. So, >> so we could go to six unless you wanted to readvertise >> seven. Seven and a half. He has to be at seven and a half. >> But or if you re if we came back. >> Yeah. So,
>> just just to explain. So, the um by putting the the deck, you make the the existing deck non-conforming by putting the roof over it, the the deck above it. Um and >> really, right now it's actually conforming. It's right now you're
allowed to have uncovered decks in your setback, but you can't have a covered porch in your setback. >> Oh. >> So the um so in your setback is 7.5 ft. And right now you're at just under six. So you could move that top back that top
um deck a little bit shorter. Your other option is to advertise this as a dimensional special permit, which it wasn't advertised. So, we can't give you relief for something that wasn't posted when you when the me meeting was noticed, right? >> But if you would like to have the decks match and aesthetically that might be
the better choice. >> Well, I think it plus structurally speaking, you want your point loads over on top. Correct. Be able to add you're not going to be able to cut the third floor deck back one foot or two inches
because it's not going to line up on top of it. you might as well knock the whole deck down and start again. >> Yeah. So, so the the most the most relief you can get is for it to be so with a with a dimensional special permit. This would be a situation where I think that would be allowed because it
is um you know it sort of isn't more detrimental and to be honest aesthetically having it line up would be the probably the preferable choice. >> I think it would look better. >> It would look better, right? So, and structurally and all that. So, um you would probably be very likely to get that relief, >> but um you're still
um a little off because you're at 5.9 and the most we could give you relief for would be to be at six. >> So, you would have to be, you know, an inch and a whatever. >> What is it? >> It's three inches off, right? Just we
can't pay for that. >> It's 1 point it's it's 5.9. So, so it's 0.1 ft. So, it's like an inch in a 12. >> Oh, so it's a Yeah, it's What is it? An inch. >> 1.2 inches. Yeah. >> Yeah. So, you basically need the top deck to come in an inch and a half or
whatever to >> an inch and a quarter. Thank you. An inch and a quarter to comply, which you could do. And aesthetically, I think it would be fine. >> Um, but you do need to revertise and come back and ask for a dimensional special permit. If you choose not to
readvertise um and you want us to make a decision right now um the best we could do is you'd have to meet that seven and a half setback. So you'd have to be coming in um you know more of a foot and a half than >> Yeah. So so you had to uh apply for the
zoning again. >> Yeah. My guess is usually they will wave the fee on something like this. You would have to pay the the fee. It's usually waved in the situation where um where once you get to the situation, the relief you need is different than the relief that was advertised. >> So my guess is that they would wave your your additional fee,
>> right? You fill out amended. You would just check off the dimensional special permit box >> and just write amended on your petition >> and that and submit that. So we would have a record amended petition >> and then it would be readvertised for our next meeting so that your auterss
would all get notice again. >> Yeah. Yeah. Yeah. >> At the re that you're asking for a dimensional special part. >> Okay. All right. If I have any questions, Christa. >> Yeah. Yeah. Krista will definitely be there to help you. >> She's my go-to person. >> Yeah. Good. >> And and checking out, you know, engineering wise how it would work to be
the the key is >> Oh, you mean for that inch and a half? >> For that inch and a half. >> Yeah. That's >> making sure it's going to work. >> Something with trim or something. Yeah. >> Yeah. Yeah. I think you could definitely do it. I would think so. >> Inch and a half. And it'll still it'll still look nice and um
>> it'll look better than having it in a foot and a half, I think. >> Oh, well, it's going to look good. >> Yeah. Yeah. >> Have you talked to any of Butters? >> What's that? >> Have you spoken with any of the abutters? >> Uh not really. Well, people around there. Yeah. I mean, they're excited
about what I might do. Uh they know I'm a builder, so and I live there, so of course they probably like that. >> Yeah. Uh, it's a it's a great area. I love it. Very nice. >> All right. No, no, I don't see anybody online here to
Oh, there's one person. If anybody has a question, and I know you're here for the other petition, so nobody has any questions. All right. So, that's what I would recommend. Now, in that case, do we continue it? >> We would continue. >> We would continue this. So, it's technically amended an amended petition, not a whole new petition. So, we can
continue this, okay, >> to our December meeting. And then you'll just have to check make sure you check the dimensional special permit box. >> Okay. Terrific. >> Okay. Just to clarify, we renoticed for the dimensional special permit even though it's being continued.
>> Even though it's being Yeah. >> Um and that's continued to December 16th, >> right? Very good. >> All right. >> Thank you. >> Thank you. >> Thank you. So just need a motion to continue that. >> Make a motion to continue to December 16th. >> Second. All >> in favor? I >> Thank you.
>> Thank you. All right. So, now we are moving on to petition 2519 for 55 Puritan Road. and um there so I know I understand that you're in the process of going through planning
and the um so the only sort of relief that you're asking for right now is this what we're talking about squaring off in sort of the the way of Balta. Now, I I was
speaking to Christa about this earlier because I think the only way for us to really make that determination would be if we had um site plans with the measurement from the clo the current
closest point to the property line and the measurement from the new closest point to the property line because from the drawings it looks like it is actually getting closer. um even though it's getting closer along the same plane of the building, it's not along the same plane of the property line. And that's
where um you'd have to say, okay, is it creating a new non new nonconformity? We might we would assuming the numbers, we would say yes, it is creating a new non-conformity. You could still go with Vala if if um and we know if anybody
disagrees with this on saying that this new nonconformity would not be more um detrimental than the existing because of the unique shape that we're literally just filling in a small sliver to square off the building. That that wouldn't be more detrimental than the current non-conformity. That would be a
determination we'd have to make. But I think it would be difficult to make it without actually knowing what any of those numbers are. It is I looked it up on the site plan. So again
um it is approximately 6.3 ft right now and the one that you noted will be about 5.2 feet. So it's about about a foot shorter as you said it looked to scale. >> Um
>> good. Yeah. I mean that >> Yeah. put it in here. >> Oh, thank you. >> Um, >> Mark, does Balta not apply to three families? >> Um, I believe it's Balta's one and two families. >> Okay. Sorry. >> So, I don't think we can do
>> Thank you. Sorry. That's important. Um, >> another good catch. >> That was a good catch. So, it does not apply to three families. We don't have a lot of three families. Um, >> no, not in the ocean either. >> Yeah, they're property.
>> It's unique. Um h I would say that it would be very challenging to get the relief even if we had all the correct paperwork because it the the relief that's us that we usually grant in these types of situations um
only applies to single and two family homes. So >> I'm going to confirm that right now. >> Okay. take me a minute >> because I I understand and agree with the reasoning for doing
it and I don't think it causes anything to be more detrimental but or wait can you do it just with the dimensional special permit No, you can't. Sorry, I'm just looking at the application on y online.
Is the uh head house just for access to the uh air con the uh condensing units? >> Yes. >> Is that for like a deck or something? >> Um it was for access for the AC units. We had originally talked about doing a
deck up there. Um planning board yesterday didn't like the height of it. So, I don't think we're going with that anyway. I think we were talking about accessing because it's in the flood zone, so I have to put the AC units on the roof. So, it's we're looking at
maybe doing a hatch or something different for up there. >> But the plans were submitted, you know, before. >> Yep. >> It'd be nice to put a roof deck up there. I mean, it's I was up there the other day just to check the roof and I was like, "Wow, it's
you have you have um even though it's on the ocean, to the right there's a like a garage structure there. So, the first and second floor doesn't have the views and then to the left the structure goes all the way out." >> So, that's why >> I walk by this all the time. I know.
>> Oh, yeah. So, so I'm trying. It's like a little sun room right now. It's like 9 ft by 16 ft. So the idea was just to get a straight wall and eventually have either a, you know, a primary bedroom there or a living room there. So you really capture the view because you only
you get that view straight on. >> Yeah. >> You know, >> so is this um is this a renovation of the existing or is this a full tear down? >> It's a renovation. >> It's a renovation. Um so and the only relief that's being sought from us right
now is that um >> to square off >> to squaring off that. So any of the is there any other relief showing that's needed? >> 38t height, right? >> That's why I was asking about the head house though. If you look at the elevations
um it looks like we're at what 30 35 ft. 35 >> cuz that head house should not if it was because it's just a mechanical or just to access mechanical equipment, it doesn't count for the overall height. So, >> right.
>> So, it doesn't need >> No, not not for that. No. >> Yeah. Does does the hen house need >> are they requiring you to lift it out of the flood zone? >> No. >> No. >> No. >> Okay. Because that was also something that the building inspector had said about this project that if the >> if I was going over 50% of the construction,
>> if the construction cost was more than 50% of the assessed value, >> which is only $500,000, >> right? >> So the project is going to be less than $250,000. >> Yes. >> For the whole building. >> I'm not doing the whole building over.
The building is in decent shape inside, but the the front, as you can see, I'm looking to get more parking from the planning board and then square off the back of the building and renovate the apartments. >> Yeah, but you're talking three new kitchens. >> I'm not doing new kitchens,
>> baths. >> No, no, right now I'm keeping it as is. Um, and I've done, you know, the the the most of the money that I'm spending right now is just to get the parking in there. All right. So, the only relief that
we're being asked to give right now is for that squaring off and which is for that sideyard setback. >> It's a rect it's showing it as the same. Yeah, it's not though. So, it's so it's going from
6.3 to approximately 5.3, but like I said, even to sort of do the full analysis, we would expect to have actual plot plans with, you know, stamped plot plans and >> and which we don't have. >> We have it's stamped by registered architect,
>> but it doesn't have the dimensions. >> It doesn't have any of the dimensions. Um, but I want to make sure that we don't send him on sort of a fool's errand. I want to make sure that if he that if if we ask him to get this
information, it's actually going to be something that would make a difference if there's absolutely no way we can give this relief because it and I apologize for and thank Michelle for realizing I wasn't thinking about the three family versus the two family. Um
and if therefore there is no way to have that relief, I don't want to say, "Oh, you need to go get some, you know, pay to have more plot plans made." Um, does anybody see a pathway where this relief because I do think it's practical and makes sense?
But >> so the question is he's got 6 point something 6.3 now. >> 6.3 now. >> His relief can go down to six and he's and it's coming in at like five, >> right?
5.3 about >> I mean yeah >> and six is the permitted sideyard setback in the district. >> Well seven seven I don't that's a variance to me to get to >> to get to 5.3
>> anywhere below the six it has to be a because we can only give 20%. >> And that we can give that 20% for >> a dimensional special permit >> dimensional special permit and that doesn't matter if it's three units or anything like that. No. >> Um, >> so,
>> so what would it be? 20% is the max you can get. >> What what you what we're allowed to to do is Yes. It's basically get it down to six. >> Yeah. >> And right now it's at 5.3 you said about. Yeah. So, if >> there's a way of getting um a plan to us where it's I mean it might be at an
angle. Well, it might be. I'm not sure what it what it would be to get it to um six or if the decision is that it doesn't need to be done in this. >> Well, based on the based on the diagonal of the line, you could, you know, step it or something. >> That's how the the current building is.
>> It's currently stepped. Yeah. >> Yeah. >> So, I mean, it could be that once you do the math to get it to six, you realize that, you know, cost analysis of the what you gain from doing it doesn't make sense anymore. But basically, if you can
get it to six um and then then it would be it could be done with a special permit. >> All right. And what's what's that process like? Is it is it a real path of of getting it or >> Yes. Oh, yeah. Yeah, definitely. I mean, if you apply for a special permit, it's the same it's basically what we're doing
right now. Okay. So, if you apply for a special permit and um and it's within that um 20% and there's um >> No, I'm saying if I wanted to square it off and get it to 5.2, >> you're not going to variance. You're not going to get it.
>> So, you're not getting a variance. >> No, this board very rarely gives varian. >> Yeah. No, that's I I appreciate the honesty. I just want to know. >> Yeah. A variance would you would need there would need to be some sort of um difference with your lot that makes your lot different from every other lot in the neighborhood. And it really doesn't. your lot's very similar to all the lots
in the neighborhood. So, >> and he needs an amended petition as well because there's no dimensional checked off on >> Okay. >> Right. My you have no dimensional checked off on this one. >> All right. So, you need to amend to to come back just asking for the six. But
again, if you think that that's not worth it, >> I don't think I don't think it is. Yeah. Because you're only going to get >> the whole the whole idea is just to have a straight wall. >> Yeah, I understand that. Yeah. Yeah. So, um I guess
then because there's no other relief you're looking for right now on this petition, you may need it for height if you if things >> we do have. >> Okay. Yeah. But before that, I just want to explain explain to him what's >> Sorry. Yeah. >> Oh, sorry. Sorry.
>> I just want to explain to you. So, so if there if you if you decide that you don't want to move forward with this portion of the um of the >> special permit >> special permit and you don't think you need that and then you're going you're going to go back to planning. Um they may they may realize okay through this
process that there's other things you need a special permit for or you need to come back to zoning then you can come back to us. But um what you can do is you can withdraw without prejudice. And that basically means that you withdraw your petition. Um and and if you want to continue to next month anyway and then withdraw time to think. >> Yeah, I might as well do that.
>> You're welcome to do that as well, but I just want you to understand the process. Yeah, >> I appreciate understand one thing. So where is the um where is it the five feet and change that is >> in that corner? >> Because once you take this to here >> y
>> you're make you know it's getting closer. trying to understand. Okay. And I'll I'll confirm that with the engineer because I'm just going off of a CAD plan. It's not a certified >> dimension, but it looks to me that it is what it is. >> It's close to 53. Yeah. So, that would
be if you can get that to six and have and still have your straight wall and have something make sense for what you want to do inside the building, then then um so yeah. So, I guess the most >> you know what what could happen is I can bring it down a little more. So, I don't know if that's going to do anything for me, but until I get to that six point
and then bring it in, >> right, >> it might do something, but >> Yeah, but it might just make cuz it seems like that's going to be right smack in the middle of the bedroom. So, it might just make it have no clean wall to put something up against and it might >> Yeah. >> make it not >> It might work. I'll look at it. So, I'll I'll do a continuence and then if I don't see it goes anywhere. If I can't
make it happen, then I'll just withdraw. >> Okay. And then we'll h we'll see we'll ask public comment because that might affect what you decide to do as well. >> Please. So, is that enough time for you to December 16th? >> Yeah. >> All right. >> Hi, I'm Sean Connley. I live on Sculpin
Way across the street. I want to complement your architect renderings for the building because it definitely needs it. My concern is where I live there's a lot of multis and parking is a huge issue. I see that you have two spots tandem and then one spot. What are the
makeup of each unit? Three bedrooms. >> It'll um it'll eventually be a twob Right. So average the homes next to me are two two families and they have six vehicles per family. So where is someone
with an additional >> I I won't be able to rent a person with six vehicles at the end of the day. I mean >> but you have one spot so far. Is that a twobedroom? >> The first floor is a twobedroom. So number one will be for the twobedroom and then um I'll have two tandem for the
second floor and two tandem for the third floor. >> Yeah. And that is u meeting the meeting the requirements. So two and a half spaces um per unit. >> Um >> right. >> So >> I I mean that's the best I could do. >> One and a half. Sorry. One and a half >> unless I can park in one and a half
space. I apologize. One and a half spaces. >> My driveway is packed. I'll come in your driveway. >> Well, I just say people going to have guests. Our street is not a one weight. I mean, you have the property that has >> That's all I got. I There's nothing else I can do. I can't I can't get more.
>> No, I understand that. I just It's a concern. There's already enough. You have the unit across the street with the driveway on Sculpin Way as you know, you can't park on the opposite side. I'm just concerned guests neighbors coming here are going to start coming further down on the street. >> So, what do you propose?
>> No, I'm just I just wanted to understand what you're doing. Again, you're doing a nice job. It's going to make the property look much nicer. Just here to understand. >> Yeah. Yeah. No, I didn't know if you had a better recommendation. I I'm all ears. I don't have all the answers. >> Puritan road. I mean on Sculpin. You
can't park on Puritan Road. I was just curious. >> Was there going to be some kind of accessory spot for a guest visiting or staying overnight? They're going to be parking on Sculpin Way, which is already difficult. >> Yeah. I mean to be honest as the current use with it is a three family and it has
>> one spot >> one spot. So this is a huge improvement. It's gonna have five spots. >> So um >> so four and five is going to go to >> it'll go to one floor. >> Four. >> Two and three. >> Two and three because it makes sense for the tandem people to be on one floor and
>> right >> uh the two the first floor would get one spot. >> Yep. >> Right. But what if So you're going to have to tell in your listing that you can only have one parking spot on the first floor. >> Yeah. >> No.
>> Yeah. There's no there's nowhere else to park. >> Yeah. But it is more it it is more spaces than required. >> Okay. >> Um All right. So we just need a motion to um continue. >> Make a motion to continue to December 16. >> Thank you. Thanks. >> Second. All in favor?
>> I All right. See you next week. And if if you have any questions, Christa can help you along the way. >> Thank you very much. >> Thanks. >> Thank you. >> All right. Thanks. >> All right. >> Before the board leaves, um, we did have
the 2026 meeting calendar. Yes. If you wanted to take a look and if you decide to adopt it tonight, we would have set meeting dates for >> Yeah, that'd be great. >> 2026. And that way we can make sure the rooms are reserved. and >> um it'll make things a lot easier uh
moving forward. >> I can share it. >> I mean, some of these I know right now I can't make but I don't think that means we need to move them, >> right? Are there any issues with doing the 40B
remotely when they come back? >> No. >> No. >> Here they are. You just have to be there. >> I will be there. I will be there. I just uh I'm going to be going down south a lot. >> Okay. >> This winter. >> Okay. >> For business or pleasure.
>> Uh no, my family lives down there and I'm going to go see them more often. >> Get out of the cold. >> That's good. Where you going? >> Miami. >> Oh, nice. >> That's where Andy spent some time. >> Oh, yeah.
>> All right. >> Yeah. >> I won't be this year that much. My wife will be dead, but >> So, I do want to make sure that we're here. I do want to make sure you're here for the >> beginning though because >> So, I'm not going to be here in February
>> because I'm going to the Olympics. >> Oh, nice. >> Nice. What what event are you >> as a competitor? >> No. No. Yeah. Competitive uh observing. So, we're seeing speed skating, short track, >> aerials,
>> freestyle ski on the halfpipe, and ski mountaineering. All metal events. >> Nice. >> Wow, that's awesome. >> So, we went in Paris a couple years ago. We took our son for like his everything birthday, graduation, forever gift, >> and my husband and I loved it so much
we're like going back. Awesome. >> So, I've been like vigilant about what we're going to see, where we're going. So, we start in Milan and we end up in Boro and Linho. We're going for like ever. Like, we go Friday and we don't come home again until like the following
Monday. So, like it's whole plus week. So, >> okay. So, that is Friday the 13th until >> Monday the 22nd. >> 22nd. Um, okay. So, >> we do need to look at that because >> what month was that?
>> So, that's February. >> Our meeting is on the 17th. Is there any way to move that one to the 10th? >> Um, let me double check. Um, only because if we lose you, like we're Yeah. And we know you're going to have to watch the next one. >> Yep.
>> So, um, >> otherwise it doesn't really matter if people aren't there, but we just want to make sure we don't Yeah. I mean lose one of the top one of the top five. >> Let's see. >> So, should I put that up to the to the >> Yeah, we should be able I can revise it
and move it to the top. >> Move that to the 10th. >> Um >> there's a small chance I can be here for the 16th, but just I haven't booked my flights yet. So, I can try to get an earlier flight. >> Let's just do the 10th because I think it's better to keep it on Tuesday because then you interfere with end of that's um a holiday for so who knows. Okay.
>> Um All right. So, let's do this that one and then um >> March is the 19th. I can be at that. >> No, March is the 17th. >> Sorry, it's I can't I can't see. >> Oh, St. Patrick's Day. >> Yeah.
>> Hey, Heather. Yep. >> I don't think I'm going to be here on the 10th of Feb. >> Okay. You're not on the um >> So, I'm not on this one anyway. >> You're not on You haven't You've already missed two. >> All right. Great. So, you can't be on the >> You don't have to worry about >> So, you don't have to We don't have to worry about you, right?
>> Because you can You're only allowed to watch one video. >> Okay. >> Yeah. >> Um >> All right. So, you move that one and then um the March one, the 17th is fine for me. Yeah. >> And then, you know, hopefully we'll be done by the April one. Thank you. >> Hi. Thank you.
>> All right. So, we just need a motion to adopt these. I mean we can also if we >> total immersion they don't speak >> if there is something where it's it's we can always um separate the two meetings if if we have a full agenda and not all
of the five people can who have been part of the 40B can make it we could hold the 40B >> alone on a separate day >> to make sure that five people are there and so >> you'll just need to continue to a date certain from the meeting before >> right
>> um you'll just have to know what that is >> what date is. So, we'll just have to make sure we know at at each meeting for certain that all five people can come to the next one. But, I think this is good for now. Does someone want to make make a motion to >> adopt this? >> I'll make a motion to adopt the proposed schedule. >> All right. Do we have a second? All in
favor? >> I thank you. >> Thank you. >> Thanks for commentating on change. I was uh