Zoning Board of Appeals - Regular Meeting

So everyone understands we are a five-member board. Five to zero, or four to one, the petition will be granted. Three to two, or anything less than that, the petition will be denied. Tonight on the board, zoning board members are member Steven Lanus, member Monique Screenberry, member James Sweeney, member Abraham Belise, and myself as the vice chair tonight, Brian Nardelli. The zoning officer for tonight's hearing will be Acting Building Commissioner William Forti, and the recording secretary will be Monica Fregazzo. At this time, I'd ask Acting Commissioner Forti to speak on some recent zoning changes.

Good evening, members of the board, people in the audience. There have been some significant changes. You'll see that I gave you a spreadsheet of some of the zoning changes that have come out as part of the new legislative House bill that basically speaks to some significant liberties given to Chapter 48 in the Zoning Act. I'm actually going to a seminar on this tomorrow, but to give you some brief overview, just in the variant side, where the zoning board could grant a variance based on substantial hardship, that no longer exists. The hardship can be granted because of practical difficulty. So if a lot is undersized and provided that they can't find an alternative, that would be a practical difficulty. So the hardship threshold doesn't have to necessarily be met anymore for a variance to be granted. With this next one, literal enforcement of the bylaw, strict enforcement of the bylaw is now the new, is the wording that was taken out of the old and put in with the new, where literal enforcement of a bylaw or ordinance, if you will, no longer applies. The next one is relief may be granted without substantial detriment to the public good. Now the bill has kind of shifted the language to include that it weighs the benefits of public interest versus detriments to the public health, safety, and welfare of the neighborhood. So if a variance petition is asking for the good of the neighborhood, it can be granted based on that. It doesn't necessarily have to, it doesn't really have to meet the threshold of is it gonna create a detriment? So the way that the zoning board has made their decisions has usually been a pretty strict, rule, if you don't have unusual shape or topography or some other kind of hardship, which again is kind of hard to scrape up, now the changes in the law have made it a bit more liberal to the applicant and gives the Zoning Board of Appeals more options. That doesn't mean you can't grant a variance on the basis of a hardship, but also it considers other factors, and one of those is practical difficulty. Before, hardship must be related to the soil shape or topography. So if you had ledge, if you had, you know, unusual shape, then that might be something. And practical difficulty can be related to soil condition, shape, or topography. Financial hardship can also be considered. It was almost unheard of that, you know, that's one of the things you didn't say in front of a zoning board is that, you know, it's a money problem. Now that can be considered. There was, you know, in the old statute, there was no consideration for the production of housing, and now there's actually a special consideration for housing. So the idea is to promote housing in Massachusetts, and that's why this bill is aggressive, if you will. I would say that it's not going to go without challenge. But certainly, there's going to be a lot of changes as to how the board is going to vote. Just a couple of other small things. It used to only be good for one year and a six-month extension, a zoning order, once it's been written or decided. Now those orders can go for two years, and the zoning board also has the power to grant a two-year extension. I don't think that it might be up to the zoning board if they only want to grant a six-month extension, but the maximum is now two years. Um, use variances were usually not allowed unless the local zoning allows them. Um, our zoning ordinance is kind of silent on it, but in the absence of a special permit for use, say in a commercial zone for residential housing, that would be a use variance. Um, you know, I would like to dress it up and call it a special permit, but, but here, um, Now, use variances are allowed for housing even if local zoning doesn't allow them. So that would supersede anything in our ordinance that says that a zoning board can't necessarily make a use variance determination. So now, in the interest of housing, that decision can be made by you whether your zoning ordinance says it or not. The notice to abutters used to be by mail. Now it can be done by email as well. And again, I'm not saying that these things are ironclad. I'm going to get more information and try to come up with something that's a little bit more easier to understand, a little more friendly. And then finally, there are some liberties on nonconforming uses and structures, whereas before a one and two family had, you know, there was no there was no limit on one or two family. Now that same that same statute applies. where lots used to be blended for purposes of zoning. They were combined by common ownership. That now applies to commercial properties as well. So commercial properties are also protected from the merger doctrine. And again, I'm going to get some more information on that. I just wanted the chairman wanted me to just kind of brief you on some of the changes that are coming. I'll have a much better understanding of it after this week. And I will provide some further guidance on this once I get it from the experts who are still unpacking it at the state level. But that's it. Thank you. Thank you, sir.

I'll give one last chance. Anyone who might want to withdraw this evening to do so now. Seeing none, we will proceed with case number 26-18 in regards to petition of Patricio Montenegro of Montenegro Remodeling, 31 Reynolds Avenue, Randolph, Mass., for a special permit seeking relief from section 27-4 and section 27-9 for the rare setback to build a two-family unit on an existing non-conforming dwelling in an R1C zone located at number 21 Henry Street. Would the petitioner please step forward or his representative? Just say your name for the record and at your address. Say it again, sir. Just like on the thing, sure.

Jason Plutro, architect.

Thank you. I'll set whenever you gentlemen are ready.

Yep, so ladies and gentlemen. of the council and board. What we've presented to you, and I believe you've seen a copy of the drawings, are a proposal for a two-story, two-family, 2,350 square foot structure on an existing R-1C single family lot. The plan is the existing structure on the lot which is non-conforming to three of the four setbacks Including the side setback would be raised in its entirety and a new structure built on the r-1c site what we are asking for in relief is It's twofold, really. There's dimensional requirements in order to get the floor plan of the home to work and have adequate space for a central hallway and bedrooms. When we look at the R-1C lot and the front and rear setbacks, we're actually left with less than 20 feet of buildable width of the home along the length of the lot. And what we're asking for is relief on the rear setback from 30 feet to 26.4 feet. And We are meeting the front setback of 30 feet at the first floor where we meet the earth, but we're also cantilevering the second floor out in order to get more space for the bedrooms above by three feet. So I believe by definition of the zoning law, I believe eaves and chimneys are allowed to extend past the setbacks. First floor levels, Is is something we saw to put before the board as a as an item to get relief on as well, so our goal here. Besides the dimensional setbacks is to create a two family in the single family zone as well, but design the two family to relate with the neighborhood. which also has a mixture of single-family and two-family homes And also be below 30 feet in height. So right now our overall height is set at 28 feet from grade to reduce the scale of the two-family and So what we're looking for is to try to improve the positioning of the building on the lot to basically center it on the lot as possible. Provide parking, two parking spaces on the lot as well, one for each unit. So no street parking. And I believe that covers it. Yeah.

Is that all, sir?

Yes, sir. Any questions from the board? Yeah, Mr. Chair, if I could. This lot went through the planning board, correct? Or did it not?

So if I could just ask real quick, it looks to be like a duplex style house, uh, first and second floor on either side from what I've seen in the plans it will take up a good portion of that lot as you stated the other house was going to be raised there's obviously some debris trees stuff like that that'll all be removed on that lot any other questions from the board Seeing none.

Mr. Chair, if I could. Just as far as water and stormwater runoff, could you just highlight the plan for that, please?

We're actually looking to work with the existing grade as much as possible. We're not looking to regrade the entire site. So, and in terms of vegetation as well, we're looking to remove one large tree and looking to keep everything else in the periphery. We see some minor regrading around the home in order to create some positive drainage. But in terms of, I believe the question you're asking is how we're tying into the storm drainage off, off. Correct. On the street. Yes. We don't, we don't have a plan. unless we could do it. Yeah. We're not, we're not tying into the, um, if you're asking if we're tying in from the downspouts to, I just want to know what the plan is and if you have one.

Yeah. Okay.

Any other questions from the board? Everybody good. Okay. Thank you very much.

Thanks.

Anyone like to speak in favor of the project? Anyone? Anyone here to speak against in opposition of the project? Opposition?

Not so much in opposition or for it.

Okay. Pat, come to the mic and just give your name and address to the clerk.

Yes. My name is Pat Churamela. I'm at 29 Henry Street. I haven't seen any plans on this particular law yet. I was just curious. I'm not for it or against it at this point, but I'd like to see the plans if it's possible. Okay. Mr. Commissioner?

Hello, sir. Those plans are available on our Google Drive. We can certainly, if you email me, I can show you. I mean, I can't really take the time during the meeting right now to show you. But if you want to stick around after the meeting, we can show you exactly where to go on the webpage. And all of our filings, just by the way, for public... for public information, all of the ZBA filings and plans are available on our webpage. And you would just go to ZBA files and open up this year and you would find this month's and today's meeting on that drive. So it's available publicly before the meeting has been announced. So. Can I make a suggestion?

future meetings, maybe it might be useful to send these out to the abutters like you normally send a letter to them?

Sir, that's not really a requirement under the law, and it's an expense that the petitioner would have to bear, and it's not required. Therefore, that's not something that we would do. Okay, thanks.

Okay, thank you. Any elected officials you'd like to speak, sir? Come on up, please. Hi. Hi.

Just give your name and your address to the clerk, please. It's Mahmoud Khoshidianzadeh, 40 Mountain Street in Brockton, Mass., 02302. It's a long, long name. Sorry.

That's all right.

Go right ahead. I hope it won't get exhausted. So I'm right behind this lot that's supposed to get built. So I'd like to know is that the number of the feet. Sorry. Don't speak that much on the outside. The number of the feet need to be moved back because I have a fence and everything right behind it. What's going to happen to like grass and everything else that they have to? In other words, if I want to put like a bigger shed or so forth, does it affect that distance or it doesn't?

Well, that would be your that would be your property, sir. That would have to only go on your property. You said you were but in the rear, correct? Yes, right in behind them. Yeah, so that would be on your property only. They'd just be addressing the property issues on number 21, Henry.

21. So the distance doesn't affect if I want to put something... As long as it's not on their property. I'm not aware of that, though. Okay. And you mentioned they're going to remove all the trees and so forth because a lot of trees over there and some of them are kind of rotted out and so forth too.

It's probably a good thing then.

It is. It is. Yeah. Yeah. We're not, you know, I mean, we are happy that things are going to take place. And this is supposed to be one family down and one family up, not side by side. It's side by side. It's side by side.

Two story.

So one house, one house? They're connected, just like the other duplexes on Henry. Okay, but the size of this, I believe it's less than five acres compared all to the other ones. They are six and seven. I mean, mine is even bigger than what there are. Understood.

That's what the conversation is. Yeah, it doesn't appear that this degradates from the actual neighborhood though, sir. Okay.

Thank you. And I didn't see any plan as you mentioned.

I was looking to see what it is here.

Thank you.

Yes, Mr. Commissioner. Mr. Chair, I just want to point out to the board a couple of things about the plan. It's not actually showing the setback of the decks that are on there. This seems to be a common theme with everyone. Decks have to comply with the required rear yard. And so... The variance asked here is for 26 feet, four inches. And in actuality, that setback would be even less than that because this creates a problem when we go to issue a building permit. Even though it's on the plan, if the variance says a 26-foot setback is required, then it throws complications into the approval of the building permit. I've had to make people actually come back to this board to include the deck in there. So I think that probably needs to be corrected or at least enumerated in the wording so that we don't have that problem when we go to issue the building permit. In addition to that, if there's a drainage issue, I think any single-family home with a significant increase in impervious surface should have subsurface drainage so that that will quell the neighbors' concerns about runoff. When you take a footprint and you increase the amount of runoff that comes off that footprint, there should be... roof runoff mitigation and subsurface drainage should be required in all of these. Okay. Thank you. Got it.

Anyone else have any questions about what you saw, what you heard from the petitioner? That'll end the open session and we'll open up deliberation amongst the board. Board members.

I don't think this, I think it falls in line with the rest of the neighborhood. I don't see it as a detriment.

I don't know how the other board members feel. I would agree. I think when you look at the property and you look at the other properties on the street, this actually is much more appealing to the eye in the building. Unfortunately, some of the people that asked were unable to see the plans or did not see them ahead of time, but this actually has some nice peaks to roofs and things of that nature. There are a number of duplexes on that street, but these are much more appealing.

Kind of cleans up the lot, in my opinion, and fits in amongst the neighborhood.

Motion to grant? Second. Motion to grant.

I'm sorry, do we want to include the back deck?

So what we can do is we can put a stipulation in that the back deck would need to come within that 26, that they're speaking on foot, 26.4 foot setback.

Your mic's

or not be allowed. Yes, Mr. Commissioner.

That setback distance should be reduced for the amount of room that the deck is, or if you want to include it in that setback, it just has to be worded in there that the deck is proposed in there is okay. Sure.

And on the motion also, the runoff impervious surfaces, should that be a stipulation? Yeah, I think that would also be part of what the building permit would come out to be. That's covered under your department, fine, but if not, we could stipulate. Okay, then I would suggest we stipulate that.

Okay, motion by Mr. Landis, second by Mr. Sweeney. Mr. Clerk, please call the roll.

Mr. Landis.

Yes.

Mr. Belize.

Yes.

Mr. Sweeney. Yes. Ms. Screenberry.

Yes.

And Chair Nardelli. Yes. Yes. Okay. Mr. Chair, that is five in the affirmative, none in the negative. That is five in the affirmative, zero in the negative.

The petition is granted. Thank you. Next case, number 26-19, in regards to petition of Edson, Texera, 63 Custer Street, Brockton, Mass., for a variance seeking relief from Article 3, Section 27-9, Article 3, Section 27-13, and Article 3, Section 27-13A, for minimum frontage, lot area, and width front setbacks requirements to construct a single-family dwelling in an R1C zone located at number 33 Custer Street. Good evening, gentlemen. State your name for the record.

Good evening, Chief. Chris Vale on behalf of the applicant Edson Teixeira, who owns Levee Chase Property Development LLC. Along with me is engineer Scott Ferrier from J.K. Holmgren Engineering. As you heard, this is a petition to the board seeking a variance to construct a new single-family house in the city of Brockton. Mr. Teixeira is seeking relief from the city's minimum lot area and with frontage and front setback requirements in order to do so as you did here at the beginning of the meeting that Massachusetts on July 9th 2026 passed a major change to the standard for obtaining a zoning variance under general law 40 a section 10 Petitioners seeking a variance have a much more relaxed standard of needing a substantial hardship The new standard for granting a variance now states the zoning board shall and like I said shall grant a variance if they specifically find that strict enforcement of the zoning ordinance or bylaw would result in a practical difficulty Thus, the old asking about soil condition, shape, and topography are no longer mandatory threshold requirements for granting variance, but the board now shall grant the variance with substantial greater flexibility. And so when I was trying to study this, what does practical difficulty mean? And my interpretation is that it essentially is telling the zoning board that you are now directed to weigh the benefits of granting a variance, including public interest in supporting the production of housing against any detriment to the neighborhood. Oh, we know. Sorry. So in regards to Mr. Teixeira's project, plot 19 is located at 33 Custer Street in the city. The lot is in an R1C zone. On April 4th, 2026, a definitive subdivision plan was approved by the city of Brockton's planning board. This divided the locus into two lots of record. The definitive subdivision plan is properly recorded at the Plymouth County Registry of Deeds, in which I attach the plan book 69, page 1022. But lot A on the plan would consist of 7,711 square feet of a minimum lot area with 76 feet of frontage, 32 feet of a front setback, 24 feet of a side setback, and 32 feet of a rear setback. Lot A would have the newly built single family Gormley style house that would fit nicely on the property. It has plenty of green space, a nicely constructed back deck, and ample amount of parking for a four bedroom and a two and a half bathroom home. Lot B would have an existing but now newly renovated single-family home, which would consist of, once again, 7,711 square feet of minimum lot area, 76 feet of frontage, 10 feet of a front setback, and 15 feet of a side setback, with 43 feet of a rear setback. The existing garage that is situated in the rear of both lot A and B will be removed to give both properties more backyard green space. The newly created lots will be similar in size to the abutters on Custer Street and would be aesthetically pleasing to the neighborhood. In fact, Mr. Teixeira has received several support from abutters who attach letters of support to the application. When reviewing these letters, it was a common theme that these abutters essentially said that they always believed that a house would fit and should be there, as well as the fact that they believe that the lot's been neglected And that it would be nice to have it, have a house constructed there. But traditionally plot 19 is a unique size and shape due to it being the largest parcel in the neighborhood. This is believed to be that historically it was once two lots that was eventually merged but was always believed that it could later be divided to construct a single family home on the parcel. The petitioner purchased the property with an older pre-existing house that he renovated and believed that due to the size and nature of the lot, he would be able to build a new single family home at its locus and continue to grow Custer Street into being a nicer neighborhood. And for all these reasons, we are asking for you to grant Mr. Teixeira a variance.

Thank you, Mr. Vail. Any questions from the board?

So we saw this on the planning board. In the plan, you know, as you know, I've seen this. Do we have any greenery in the front yard? Two trees. Sorry.

Two trees, Mr. Sweeney, one in each corner. Okay. And also on the existing house. So four trees total.

Clean the whole thing out. Are you going to have to leave what you can that's going to be operable? For sure. While you're building?

Yep.

Any other questions from the board? No. No. Everyone good? Okay. Thank you, gentlemen. Thank you. Thank you. I'd like anyone that would like to speak in favor to come forward to this project. Anyone in opposition like to come forward? Any elected officials that would like to come forward? Good evening, Councillor Griffin.

For the record, I'm Phil Griffin, an award three city councilor. I'm in favor of this project. I think it would add to the character on Custer Street. I received absolutely no pushback from any of the neighbors or rebutters. In fact, I've used several letters of support that the attorney provided to me. So I encourage you to vote favorably on this tonight. Thank you very much, board members. Thank you, Mr. Chairman.

Thank you, councilor. Anyone have any questions in regards to what you may have heard tonight? I'm going to end that session, the open session, and begin deliberation amongst the board members.

Before you go, there's some letters of support.

I did attach them to the application, so everybody should have them.

It should be on your desk.

Yeah, I got them.

Stand by to stand by. So I have a letter from Kayleen DePina, owner and resident number 34. She is in favor of this project adjacent to her property. Also, and that's the only one I have. Is that correct?

This is another one from Joe Rutkakis, 43 Custer Street.

Sorry, I got that right here. Mr. Joe Rakowskis, number 43 Custer Street, also in favor of this project. And that is what I have. Thank you. All right. Any deliberation amongst the board members for number 33 Custer?

Another one that suits the neighborhood. I'm surprised to see it was the largest lot on the street. It doesn't make any sense to me, but here we are. So I don't have any pushback with it.

Yeah, I don't think they're asking for too much. And I think it is an improvement for the neighborhood.

Motion to grant.

Second.

Motion to grant by Mr. Sweeney and a second by Mr. Lanus. Mr. Clerk, please call the roll.

Mr. Chair, before we call the roll, I just want to add that there again is a deck that's 20 feet off the rear property and should be included in the vote. Okay, we'll add that in. Mr. Lanus? Yes. Mr. Belise? Yes. Mr. Sweeney?

Yes.

Ms. Greenberry?

Yes.

Chair Nardelli? Yes. Mr. Chair, that is five in the affirmative, none in the negative. Thank you, everyone.

Thank you, that'll be five in the affirmative, zero in the negative, the petition is granted. Thank you, board. Thank you.

Good luck.

The next... Case will be 26-20 in regards to petition by petitioner Victor Texera of number 112 Auburn Street, Brockton, Mass. For a variant seeking relief from section 27-36 to convert a single family dwelling to a two family dwelling in R1C zone located at number 75 Auburn Street, Brockton, Mass. Good evening, sir.

Excuse me. My name is Rami Sidani. I work for North County Group, an engineering firm in Tarn. I'm presenting Victor Teixeira, owner of 75 Auburn Street. So you are representing? Mr. Victor.

Sure.

Understood. So the project is to convert the existing single-family house to a two-family house with an addition on the side of the house, a 12-foot addition. The addition is the length of the house. The proposed addition meets all the setbacks. The variance will be to allow a two family in the R1C district. Across the street at 64 Auburn Street, there's an existing three family house with a smaller lot. Across on 86 Auburn Street, there's also a two family house with a slightly larger lot with a 0.33 acres. Our lot is 0.28 acres. And then at 87 Auburn Street, there's a two family house. So our lot has plenty of parking. We redesigned the existing parking driveway to accommodate four parking spaces. And by eliminating the existing driveway and proposing a new driveway, we're able to lower the lot coverage. So as you can see on the GIS map, the existing lot is slightly larger than the neighboring property. It's a fairly large corner lot comparing the neighbors. So this house addition will fit well in the neighborhood and will not adversely affect the neighborhood.

Okay, thank you. Is that all? Yes. Awesome. Any questions from the board members?

Could you repeat which ones were multifamily houses? Yes.

So 64 Auburn Street is at the corner of Auburn and Coral Street is a three-family. 86 Auburn is a two-family. 87 Auburn is a two-family lot. Thank you. You're welcome.

How much, if any, additional square footage are you adding?

It's about 600 square feet.

Okay. And how much of the footprint is going to change?

Existing is 23.4 proposed 22.6. So it's lower than it's lower than the existing coverage.

Thank you.

And I see the parking will come off of the side street, off Auburn, right? That's where the four parking spots will be?

Yes.

Right there. And is that, I see the pool that's in the rear, that's being removed?

Yes, it's an above ground pool.

But the shed will stay?

The shed will stay. Yeah, the shed is taken.

Okay, just so you know, it's on your plans for after the fact that it will stay, but you're going to take that down as well? Okay. Okay. It's a big lot.

It is a big lot, yeah.

Okay, all right, any more questions from the board? Seeing none, anyone would like to speak in favor, please come forward.

Thank you gentlemen.

Anyone would like to speak in opposition? Any elected officials that would like to speak on the matter?

Mr. Building Commissioner, any comments? Mr. Chair, I don't see additional parking for the existing, for the new dwelling unit. Two family on the new plans. They do show four lots. Oh, there is, I'm sorry. On K Street. I see it, okay. That's the only comment, thank you. Yeah, yep.

Does anyone have any questions about what they heard this evening? That ends the open session. Deliberation amongst the board members. Board members. Sure. Okay. Yeah, I agree. I think, you know, if you got on Auburn, there's three families there. There's all different, you know, I think this is going to fit the neighborhood. It's going to clean that lot up. It's a little elevated, but it's going to fit the neighborhood perfectly, especially in the backyard and such. Looks like they've already started doing some work to the building. Anything else, board members? Motion to grant by Mr. Sweeney, second by Ms. Greenberry. Mr. Clerk, please call the roll.

Mr. Landis?

Yes.

Mr. Belize? Yes. Mr. Sweeney?

Yes.

Ms. Greenberry?

Yes.

And Chair Nardelli? Yes. Mr.

Chair, that's five in the affirmative, none in the negative. Okay, we have five in the affirmative, zero in the negative. The petition is granted. Next case, 26-21, Petitioner Emmanuel DeSantos, number 263, West Elm Street, Brockton, Mass., for a variant seeking relief from Section 27-9, Table 1, and Section 27-13A, to be allowed to construct a single-family dwelling lacking lot-size frontage, side setback, and lot width in an R1B zone located at number 20, Windsor Avenue. Attorney Creeden.

Good evening, Mr. Chairman. Attorney Jay Creeden, 71 Legion Parkway, Brockton. With me is the owner of all of that area, Manny DeSantos. And with us is our engineer, John Spink, who worked with myself and Manny over the last year or so. And the board should be aware that only as recently as a couple of weeks ago, nevermind the law change, that we reduced the size of the house to make it so that there's plenty of green space and lawns and other things, benefits for the city. I would like with the permission of the chairman to just digress for just one minute and indicate to this board in 1966, I was on the committee that wrote the zoning law with my brother Robert, who was chairman of the House Committee to rezone, to do 540A, and Joe Moakley, who now is deceased, but he was the Senate chairman. The reason we did that, and I've discussed this before with the building inspector, is The 99% rule was that substantial hardship didn't allow outrageous growth. If you had a residential area, you had single-family residential houses in there, up to a couple of multi-families. In an industrial zone, just industrial zone things. This board may remember three months ago, I had a decision... in the negative, which it should have been, when I tried to put in West Chestnut Street some residential units in our very protected industrial zone. And you people made the right decision. I reluctantly had to present it because I got paid. But it was the only way we had to stop outrageous growth, okay? So I'll now get to my petition. But again, here it is 60 years later. And with the stroke of a pen, our governor has changed all that. So it's changed my life also.

I think you just told us how old you are, Attorney Creed, and I think it's what you did.

That's okay, though. I know people don't think I'm as old as I am. I'm 82 years old, okay? Yeah. Don't tell anybody, though. You won't. Okay. On that committee... fire chief was Ed Burrell. Oh, yeah. Okay. John Murphy, who was the chairman of the board of the planning board. My brother, Rob, myself, and Mel Lewison, who was a big time criminal lawyer who ran for mayor and lost. We met twice a week, once on a weekend, once during the week to get all the cities and towns to find out what we should put in the zoning law and what we should take out. And that's that history, wiped out with the stroke of a pen. All that work for nothing. No, we slowed growth down. In any event, this petition, which again, these are three existing parcels on Windsor Avenue. I can tell you that This part of Windsor is the other side, the west side of Rockland Street. There's only three houses there, three beautiful houses, his neighbors, and then Reynolds Memorial Highway. we by combining lots two and three almost have a 30,000 square feet is 25,000 square feet. So really the only two variances we need if we needed them would be the 30,000 square feet and the other one was the another de minimis situation. We also have on the plan, as John has put, we do have a management of runoff and stuff that goes to the southwest corner of the lot. You can see it on the plan there. The house itself, Manny lives out front, so I can tell you for sure another benefit. He's not going to rent or sell if this is approved. to anybody but somebody is going to be compliant with him. And I can tell you again, benefit for the city. The new situation could possibly allow multi multi families in there with units where people One neighbor doesn't know whether the other's grilling or not, whether there's gonna be a fire at night or all these other things. With a single family house, which is so necessary in this city, people that are in the entry level of police, fire, teachers, paraprofessionals, They will be the people that would want this nice simple family house. It's a three bedroom with a master bedroom. It's got all the water and sewer as John Spink has shown coming off of the tip of the den end there. It is... It has so many benefits to the city. It has two parking spaces. You do a multi-multi, you got a whole bunch of parking spaces tying up on-street parking, which we don't allow, except that de facto, every side street and every main street in Brockton is cluttered with parking on both sides. This doesn't impact that at all. A single-family house, two cars, right drive on the property, and so another benefit to the city. I did look up, because of all the research I've had to do over the years, the specific language as to the new law. And for your benefit, I don't think any of the Webster dictionaries can properly identify what difficult is. And the other one is what... Practical is. Practical difficulty. But in the third definition of both, just for your benefit, okay, is about the closest I can get to it. It says capable of being put to use, inclined to action, as opposed to speculation. And that's what you just did in the last few hearings here. Difficulty. Third definition, again, something hard to do, understand or deal with. Well, I can tell you as an attorney, zoning attorney, so far this is very difficult to understand the new law. We have to put an easement in there. We combine the two lots. It comes up to almost 25,000 square feet. It'll give a nice front lawn and back lawn. There's just no downsides as far as a single family residential unit house in a residential area, which it's meant to be. So the forefathers wanted it to be residential. This is the perfect argument for it. Just wanna touch a couple of other little things. It certainly, there's no question I think in your mind that a single family house that actually is gonna have a single family occupancy there is so much better than multi-family situation car wise traffic wise that's a very quiet dead end there's only three houses all of them similar frontages nobody has the required 175 so there'll be no impact negatively or derogatorily to the to the to the town to the city so I could go on and on with all the discrepancies I've found, why this would even almost make it as a substantial hardship that I would hope you'd grant it, this board.

Thank you, Attorney Creeden. Appreciate it. Any questions from the board members?

Yes. I'm actually familiar with this property. I did deliver papers there when I was in junior high.

Everybody's going to date themselves now.

Now the one that's going to be demolished, that's a trailer, right? Yes. Is there any reason why this house is being set back so far in the back of the lot?

Well, so we can have a front lawn and a back lawn. Presently, if you've been there, Mr. Linus, there's a chicken farm. It's Manny's Chicken Farm. And so the little shed and the other stuff, and unfortunately the chickens, I guess, are going to have to go too. But it's really a higher and best use of that property.

Now the house couldn't be moved up closer towards like where the trailer used to be? Was that part of the lot or?

Yeah, it'd be too close to the lot line of the highway. That's another, what I would call a beneficial hardship because the, go ahead, John, do you want to say something?

Could you just take the microphone? No, they can bring it to you. Just, we just need to speak in the microphone. Thank you.

I'm John Spink, 59 Clay Street, Middleborough, Mass. Development Assistance. Basically, it sits in the middle of the lot because the lot is in the back. It's a back lot. It's almost like an estate lot. And we're just putting it in a, you know, it could be pretty much, it's got a lot of room within the setbacks. It doesn't have to be where it is. It could be forward, backwards, or whatever. But that's where you just put it in the middle of the lot.

It also would allow an ADU, which again, is not the highest and best use versus a beautiful single family house.

So yeah, I was thinking the same thing. They could put an ADU back there, but they've chosen to put a house.

You could almost put two of them there. And Manny lives, again, Manny's lived there out front since he bought it in like 19, 2020. Okay.

Questions from the board members? Anyone else? Everybody good? Okay. Thank you, gentlemen. Appreciate that. Would anyone like to speak in favor of the petitioner? Anyone to speak in opposition? Ma'am?

Can I look at this?

Of course you can. If you're going to speak, though, you have to go back to the mic. That's all, okay? Go right ahead. Thank you.

Comes in by the highway. Yep, in the back. The end of the street.

Yeah. That is, this is what we do, right? Well, no, no, that is up here, and it's .

Ma'am, would you like to speak on it to us at all? Sure. No. Just come over to the microphone, ma'am. Yep. Thank you.

Can I make a suggestion? The plan is upside down. I don't know if we can flip it over.

No, it's not upside down. It's the way I looked at it from the street. My name is Sarah Barnum. I live at 377 Rockland Street. Okay. And my neighbor, Janice Goddard, I walked out.

Ma'am, could you just take the microphone with you? Only because it's being recorded. You can carry it with you, ma'am. You can carry it. That's fine.

All right. So I live up in here.

Okay.

And I didn't... There's some kind of a... There's not a lot there. Yeah, but there's also a pass to get through to the highway that's a right-of-way, I believe.

No, you're... Nothing official?

Actually, I thought it was on my plot plan. Anyway... So you're going to have this driveway go all along the side of this guy's house?

That's the gentleman that owns the property.

And so he owns all of that.

Yes, ma'am.

Yes, yes, I see that. And so how big is the house gonna be?

Square footage. Do you have that right there, attorney Creighton?

Yeah, 32 by 24.

So ma'am, are you in opposition to this?

Yes, I'm in opposition.

All right. Thank you.

I'll study it more. Okay. I didn't realize that I had to go on the computer to...

I know.

I didn't understand all of this. I thought...

Understandable, yes, of course.

I thought it was... A little less difficult.

I understand, ma'am. Yeah, go right ahead, Mr. Commissioner. Point of information, ma'am. You can come to the billing department anytime during regular business hours and view a paper copy of that same filing for future reference, okay?

Okay, I'll do that.

Sorry that you didn't know that, but... Yeah, okay. Thank you, ma'am.

You know, I'm... I'm concerned, as Janice is concerned, what we thought is going there, but you're really going to put another whole house in a comparable lot to what the original zoning of all, you know, in that subdivision when all those houses were built there, that it's going to still fall in line with right in line. Correct.

Highest and best use, as we say. This will be the highest and best use for those lots.

And increase or decrease the value of my home.

I would say it's good. Ma'am, thank you very much. Appreciate it. Anyone else like to speak in opposition? Just, ma'am, just give your name for the clerk and your address, please.

Janice Garda, 389 Rockland Street.

Could you just say your name one more time?

Say your name one more time.

Janice Garda, G-A-R-D-A.

Thank you, ma'am.

And my question, yes, 389 Rockland Street. My question was... It says it's an appeal to construct a singly family house, lacking lot size frontage side and lot width. Now, my question was, are all of these things not up to Okay, yes. All of these things, though, are lacking. All the sides. Not anymore.

Not by the new law. 30,000 square feet and the 175-foot frontage, because where the easement comes in is our only access to the public road.

I see.

And the water and sewer is only in there.

I'm trying to get a copy of that now. Ma'am, I... Are there any for me, or do you have to go in this one? Please. Sure.

And the building department could get you one too, ma'am, if you needed.

Okay.

All right. Anyone else in opposition? Seeing none. Any elected official that would like to speak on the matter?

Building Commissioner, any comments? Just be advised, board members, that this is a real lot subdivision. It's not anywhere in our zoning. I haven't seen this very commonly in the city of Brockton, although, you know, it wouldn't be unfounded, especially back in the 40s and 50s. Whenever you see a house that's behind another house, that's a real lot subdivision. Yeah, okay. All right. That's all I have. Mm-hmm. Yep. Okay. That's it.

Anyone have any questions about the testimony they heard tonight? That will end the open session. Deliberation amongst the board members? Is there any deliberation?

Ladies and gentlemen? The attorney kind of hit the nail on the head. There are other uses that can be allowed on that property. However, this, in my opinion, would be the best ISP. you know, an ADU situation, something that doesn't look quite as nice in the neighborhood, something that doesn't perform as well. In that aspect, I don't think it's as detrimental as any of the other by right uses.

Yep. I agree. Mr. Lanus. I don't understand that. Mr. Lanus. I agree. I think getting rid of that trailer too will make a big improvement. Absolutely.

No, I couldn't agree more. I think it's going to spruce up that whole back area there, what it looks to be.

I'll motion to grant.

Motion to grant by Mr. Sweeney. Do I have a second?

I'll second.

Second by Mr. Lainis. Mr. Clerk, please call the roll.

Mr. Lainis.

Yes.

Mr. Belize. Yes. Mr. Sweeney. Yes. Mr. Greenberg.

Yes.

Yes.

Yes. Five in the affirmative, zero in the negative. The petition is granted. Next petition, Mr. Fenton Bradley, 120 North Main Street, Suite 305, Attleboro, Mass., for a variant seeking relief from Section 27-9, Table 1, lacking rear and side yard setback for an existing garage addition in an R3 zone located at Number 436 Warren Avenue. Go ahead, sir. Just if you could state your name for the record and your address.

Good evening. Fenton Bradley, D21 Architects.

Sir, could you speak up just a little? Maybe point the microphone up towards you, that little bendable head. There you go. Perfect.

Thank you. Fenton Bradley, D21 Architects, 120 North Main Street, Suite 305, Attleboro, Mass. I'm here on behalf of the owner, Andrew Baines. He's the property owner. This is the property that was purchased in 2019. We're here seeking variance 27-9 for rare and side setback. Just a little history. This is an... This is a garage, uninsulated, unconditioned, attached garage onto the rear of his existing home. He's a multifamily, and he's an owner-occupant. And just the history, this kind of started out from a build-out of an original garage that was in the rear of the property. The homeowner acknowledged that he... started the work without a permit, but everything is built and in place. The violation had came for him to demolish part of the garage, so I originally drafted plans to reduce the side setback by six feet, to essentially remove part of the garage by six feet, and then the violation came back that the rear setback was also deficient. On the rear setback, I believe it's six inches on the side set back. It's right up to the property line. So we're just kind of seeking variance to kind of leave the construction in place. The owner is a licensed plumber and contractor and uses the garage to store tools and security reasons.

Okay, thank you, sir. Questions from the board?

The work is 100% complete. It's been in place since he started it around COVID, kind of started building upon it. So it's been in place. We have had no complaints from any abutters or any neighbors. I believe this might have been caught on a drive-by or inspection from the city officials. But there has been no complaints.

So... As the fire chief, I have deep concerns about this project. First and foremost, it was begun without a building permit. It was in violation. It was completed without a building permit. Sir, I know you're representing the owner.

Yes.

How many cars can be stored in this garage that is up against the house, abuts the other property, has no sprinkler protection, has no standpipe protection, no fire protection whatsoever? Do you know how many cars fit in there?

I would say reasonably four to five, but he only parks one car and one van, but yes, more vehicles can hold in there.

But he could park four or five? Yes, yes, absolutely. So I look at it as the fire chief's perspective as I sit here, and I think to myself, if we have a fire in that garage that is one story, barely, completely enclosed below the grade of what that sill level of the house is, a fire in that would quickly consume that home without any fire protection. You said it's not insulated. There's nothing to protect it, that house at all. So these are the concerns I have. So I don't have any other questions. More of a statement. Thank you. Any other questions? No other questions? Okay. Anyone like to speak in favor? Thank you, sir.

Appreciate that.

Anyone want to speak in favor? Anyone opposed? Any elected officials like to speak on the matter?

Mr. Building Commission, any comments? Mr. Chair, I was trying to look up the notice of violation that was issued for this. I wasn't sure if that was submitted as part of the package. I'm not sure. This might have just been denied based on a building permit application. There was probably no notice of violation generated for this. But by the time it was discovered, it had already been fully built. So that's the only comment I have.

Thank you. Any questions from anyone in the gallery that has any questions about the testimony? Seeing none, close the open section. I'd like to open up to deliberation amongst the board members.

So Mr. Chair, board members, what are we dealing with in terms of, is this something that would have been allowable to begin with?

Deep. If you look at the overhead view of that neighborhood and how that is all constructed and linked together and next to the one next door and just it's It's just a tangled web of unsafe environments as far as I'm concerned.

Looks like one big building.

One big building. And so to that point, Mr. Sweeney, you think about the foundation that comes up yay high off of that driveway. Now the vehicles are below that. Convection, heat, and things of that nature of heat that would create in that that's directly correlated to the building is of deep concern.

So if... If this is not approved, they would have to tear that structure down?

I would say that's the case. Am I correct, Mr. Commissioner? I'm sorry. They would have to take the structure down. Is that correct?

Yeah, there would be – there's really no way to comply with zoning. And the fact that there's no side setback – It's a violation of the state building code to build within five feet of a property line without fire protected walls. So anything less than five feet is considered a building code violation as well. I didn't cite that under the building code, but essentially if this board were to approve it, I would cite it as a building code violation and they would have to cut at least five feet off on all sides. Which again, I don't know that can be done from a construction standpoint, but it's not very likely it would be successful. I don't see how it could comply with the state building code in the state that it is now. Even if you were to approve it, they would still have to cut five feet of it off and get it back from the property line by five feet because it's combustible.

Now for myself, if this came before us, before construction, I wouldn't be in favor of it. So I can't see being in favor of it now.

A motion to grant.

Second. Motion to grant by Mr. Sweeney, second by Mr. Lanus. Mr. Clark, please call the roll.

No.

No.

No.

No. Five in the negative, zero in the affirmative. The petition is denied.

Thank you. Thank you.

Next case, 26-23, petition of Nadim Sattar, Warren Avenue Convenience Incorporated, 1 Erica Drive, Lincoln, Rhode Island, for a special permit seeking relief from Section 9-7 to be allowed to operate the business from 5 a.m. to 11 p.m. in an R2 zone located at number 761 Warren Avenue.

Mr. Chairman and members of the Zoning Board, with your permission, I'm Attorney Jim Burke. with offices at 48 North Pearl Street in Brockton, and I have the pleasure of representing Mr. Sattar in relation to his Warren Avenue business and his request for a expansion of ours from what was previously given. I would just add that when my brother Jake was up, it was interesting to understand he was directing the affairs of the city of Brockton when I was still in high school. I had a meeting with your chairman last week, and I mentioned the year I graduated from law school, and his comment was, I wasn't born yet. I thought that was our secret. To get an expansion of ours, this is a little different. We were here in 2023. We requested an hours that were generally common with stations that Mr. Sattar had been with and we requested 1 a.m. There was some discussion about 11 p.m. Ultimately a decision came down and it was five to nine. Mr. Sattar is a businessman who's now been in the Brockton since 2009, 2010. He has five different gas stations. He has gas stations, two on East Ashland Street, Crescent Street, and two on Warren Avenue. He has run a very good business. He has not had problems or complaints. This specific shop is in a residential neighborhood. And I understand that you may have a counselor who presents some concerns of its citizens about the hours because they're concerned of what might happen there. Well, the reality is since 2023, we've kind of had a probation period because he's been operating the store and essentially nothing has happened in terms of untoward gatherings, problems, community issues, youngster issues, and he's ready to go ahead and please request the extension to the normal hours of just about every gas station in the city, unless it's later, 1 p.m., 1 a.m., excuse me. You've got a letter of support in there from the mayor, and I think it justly so, because part of what the mayor's message has been to the city is he wants economic growth, he wants development of good businesses. Well, he's proven through his many stations that have not had problems in their operation that he is a good businessman, and he's proven in the operation of the present facility that he's not likely to have, nor will he have, issues that are akin to the concerns of what might happen with some of its neighbors. He's had outreach in the neighborhood. I met with the building inspector beforehand and we've got letters from 43 different neighbors suggesting that the hours of operation be granted. I don't think it's a stretch to request and there is an impact for him because roughly 27% of his gross occurs between the hours of nine and 11. I don't know why. I'm not in the business. But that's a reality that he faces. He's had community outreach. One of the stations now has been utilized by the Brockton School Department. He closes for approximately one hour, one and a half hours, or two hours. And all of the buses for the citizens of the community are gassed at this particular station at a reduced rate. So he's had outreach in the community as it is. You've got a good businessman with a normal request looking for equality with the other stations and a track record that suggests if you give it to him, there's not going to be a problem. This is a variance request and I heard Mr. Bale earlier today when he was explaining the new statute. I've spent the last two weeks, two and a half weeks studying it and we're gonna have a lot of surprises down the road when it comes to be. But essentially he's right. The statute as it was written was a zoning board may grant relief. It actually says the zoning board shall grant relief provided they identify something called a practical difficulty. That's gonna be expanded on. I'm gonna talk about it in the next case that's up before you. But it's the same thing here. There is absolutely no neighborhood impact that we've seen. There's no public safety issues. There's nothing that really impacts the greater community that this board should say no in terms of the meetings. So we respectfully request that you go ahead and grant what, again, is just consistent with the normal business operations of stations are, and that's between 5 a.m. and 11 a.m., operating time. And that's it.

All right. What percentage did you say from 9-11 is this business?

27%, believe it or not.

I think that's pretty high, but... Are those gas stations in residential areas also? Are they...

The hours of those other gas stations? Yeah.

Are they in residential areas also? Yeah.

What are the hours of the gas station? Come on.

Hi, how are you, sir?

My name is Nadim Sattar. Most of the stations are, there's 633 Warren Ave. The other gas station we own down the street from the one we're asking for a grant. Second one is 253. He's asking for the hours of operation. This one? All of them.

No, he's asking if the other gas stations are also in residential areas.

They are 521. I have 24-hour permission, but I try to run 521. That is of support.

Okay, that's good. Just can you repeat that real quick? I apologize. So your other operating gas stations are 5 a.m. to 1 a.m.?

I have Grant for 24 hours, but I'd run 5 to 1. Okay, and what are the locations of those ones again? 53 East Ashland Street, 633 Warren Ave, Brockton, and then we have 761 Warren Ave. Understood. Okay, thank you, sir.

It begs the question, just because I don't know, and I'm hoping you folks do, emergency response and police response to those locations, say, over the course of the past year, has there been any?

No, not major. Like, you know, nothing happened. Problems? No.

No.

Good one. Clean business, family business.

Well, the gulf to the corner of Warren Avenue. 633. 633, the gulf station? Gulf station. Okay.

You said you had a petition of... 43 neighbors, do you have that with you?

I do, right here. That's what I just got.

I don't have that in my documents.

I also believe you have a, a, a, a, a, a, a, a, a, a, a, a, a, a, a,

And tonight, real quick, Mr. Attorney Burke, you're coming to us for a special permit?

No, I believe it's a variance because it originally was granted under a variance and a condition of the variance. It says special permit in your petition. Well, I didn't actually file a petition. Mr. Sittar filed it on his own.

Okay. Point of reference, Mr. Commissioner, is that a... concern and issue, would it be under a special permit or would it be under a variance? Just for my own edification.

The original order was a use variance, correct? Or was it... The last one in 2023?

Yeah. I don't remember off the top of my head.

I do not have that in front of me. I believe it's pre-existing non-conforming use. Okay, so it was expansion of a non-conforming. Right. Right. So this would fall... I mean, it's an amended order. Everything else stays the same, right? All the other conditions are still in perpetuity, right? This is an amended order. So it's an amended order, right? So it would be a use variance. Yeah. I guess it would still be a use variance.

It'll be a change of condition of a variance. Yeah. A granted variance. The high chip has already been established. It's just changing a condition of the variance. Okay.

Any other questions by the board? Yes, Mr. Sweeney, sorry.

Was it 633 you own, also on Warren Ave? Yes, sir. And you said there was no police response to that in the last year?

We've had, I checked into it today, Mr. Sweeney. We've had no issues with this property here that we're speaking on tonight, because that's the one we're speaking on. We've had no issues with that property. I checked on us. We had one medical call there in the last six or eight months. There was a tobacco issue you had years ago with a minor, other than, nothing that any other...

Correct.

I don't have that right in front of me. It was reported to me by my deputy chief of fire prevention. So would Mr. Sattar be amicable to a change, any other variation in those hours at all? Or is he looking at five to 11 hard for this? Would there be any potential stipulation to talk about maybe doing a one year trial. Obviously there's been opposition in the past and maybe amending those hours come from 5 a.m. to 6 a.m. and go to 10 p.m. I guess my question is he has hard numbers on there and I was just wondering if there was any wiggle room with that before we move forward out of the question part so the members could ask questions.

What's that? Do you, we can do it? If chief thinks, you know what I mean?

I mean, one of the things that you can do is you can put a condition that I've done a grant surveillance. Say that again, Tony Burke, I didn't hear you. There's a condition of grant. Yep. And with a condition of grant, you can enter the stipulation that if the building inspector in consultation with the fire department, the building department determines that there are any substantial problems within the next year, that he could bring to the zoning board an issue that could raise the question of the hours of operation. Not indefinitely, but for a year. I mean, that's a condition you could put on it, which I think might provide some level of comfort to the abutting neighbors.

Mr. Commissioner, do you have any comment with that? Mr. Chair, I think in this case, The zoning board can put any condition on it that it likes. Whether or not it can be enforced, I mean, I'm just looking right now, there's a clear path of, there's a clear pattern here of pulling permits and not having any violations. You know what I mean? There's been no trouble over there whatsoever, at least on my screen, which is code enforcement, which would be like an overflow dumpster or, you know what I mean? I would have those notes here. If we had constant disturbances, dumpsters overflowed, it would be on my radar screen as well from task force. This has never been on task force. Honestly, I don't see any detriment. I mean, the city doesn't lose its ability to enforce anything by granting an extension of hours. I mean, it would be obviously if there was a violation of that, whereas they were staying open past 11 o'clock and next thing you know, everybody's having a burnout session over there, then that might be a problem as well. But honestly, I don't see any detriment whatsoever. in granting the variance here. I just don't know to what end I could enforce. I wouldn't necessarily be able to enforce anything that's a police matter or a criminal matter that would have to come before police. And I believe, is it a mechanic shop? Is there a mechanic shop associated with it? So you could also enforce through the city clerk and licensing if there were a big problem.

So I think, Mr. Satat, real quick, what's the story with the backyard? I spent $30,000. Anything old owner never completed, I completed.

All right. So it's still pretty, like there's like a boat. Is there still a boat back there? No, no, that's gone. You're talking about the rear? The rear.

Yeah.

Well, it's a mess. Let's be honest.

That's option number two, because I believe we're going to be coming from the board in the near future with a request for different use. that the station will be, or rather the repair facility will be closing. I don't want to know.

It will be closing or opening?

No, in other words, we're going to come in before the board in the near future with a request for relief for another use other than what's there because he wants to pull them out.

Are they not your... Are they renters of yours?

They're a tenant.

They're a tenant, okay. Because it's kind of a disaster. You just drive by them and you look in the back. It's still pretty messy. And I know in 2023, when this came before us, I know Chair Galligan, myself, we had some concerns about the buildup of stuff in the backyard. I mean, the front looks beautiful. I'm not going to deny that one bit. But the rear is... Maybe you should get your tenant in line.

Well, we hope to attack that in the near future.

Okay. All right. Any other questions from the board members? Seeing none, I would like to see if there's anyone who would like to come up and speak in favor.

Good evening. My name is Fausto Pena. I'm a resident and business owner in the community. I actually run two businesses not too far from Mr. Sattar's.

What's your address, sir? 675 Warren Avenue. Your address is 675 Warren Avenue. That is correct, sir. Thank you. Go ahead. Appreciate it.

Um, and he's, I've gone to normal last three years. I actually frequent his facilities regularly, not just for gas, but they keep saying gas station, not just the gas station. There's also a convenience store. Pretty much every one of his locations that I've been, I've been to. And those do serve a purpose in the community because many of the stores close after certain hours and you have people in the community that need those, um, locations to shop. It makes it easier for some of the seniors. And we have probably eight people, butters and people that live in the community with us here today that are in favor of this because of that reason. It makes it easier for them. Late in the evening, it is a blue collar town community. People sometimes work late and then the gas station being there makes it easier for them to get gas and get things late at night before they get home. I think the only store that was there closest is Vicente, but they closed at a certain time. All the other convenience stores, I don't believe there is any right now. There were two in the past, they both burned down. So from my knowledge, I don't think there's anything else there to service the community. So we're talking about highest and best use. I mean, before he bought it, that place was a mess. But that place has been transformed, and we have a beautiful building there. And he doesn't have any issues in the community. He runs all his stations very well. I've gotten to know the staff, not just at this specific location, but many others. And I find that he does a very good job with his staff and also maintaining his properties. And he gets along very well with the abutters and people near him. So for that reason, I'm in favor and I'm recommending that the board grant his petition just to extend his hours, which to me is not out of the ordinary. It's in line with what many of the other gas stations, comparative to his, are doing. And he's creating jobs in the community. He's spending money. And I think, you know, it allows him to recover by having extra hours to work and operate.

Thank you. Thank you, sir. Appreciate that. Anyone else that would like to speak in favor? Folks, just real quick. If this is where everyone can speak if they'd like, but just let's make sure it's on point and to what it is only because if it's the same repetitive thing, we have a number of people that wrote letters of recommendation. So be more than happy to hear what you have to say. What's that?

I said, I'll make it quick. Never really liked. That's fine.

No worries. If you could just give your name.

My name is Emily. My address is 64 Woodside Ave. So I've known him. I also own a couple of multifamilies in the area near his gas station. I've known him for over 15 plus years. I'll make it short. He's the gas station I like to go to when I get out of work. I work in the nursing field, so sometimes I leave late work. So, you know, gas is, I've done, I've ran out of gas a couple of times, not going to lie. And, you know, I have kids that I live towards, you know, going into Bridgewater, but for some reason, them gas stations, when I get there, I knock on the window, no one answers me. So he's kind of like always my go-to when I need milk. If I don't have the money, he's the milk man. I'll bring it to him tomorrow. I'll send the kids. And he's just, he's not just a gas station man, like he said. He's family. He's been in the community for a long time. I used to live next to the old Shell's gas station, the East Ashland one. I mean, I used to live over there. So that was always my go-to. And he needs to be open later. I need somewhere to go. I need some milk. I need to send the kids to get the milk. He's family.

Okay.

That's it.

Thank you, ma'am. Appreciate it. If you could just state your name and address for the record, ma'am.

My name is Gigi Montero. I am also a business owner in Brockton for over 32 years, and I do own a house on 125 Tribble Street, my permanent residence right now, 66 Guild Road. I'm here to speak on behalf of an Indian from the gas station. I know him since I came to America about, I'm saying, 20... Three years now, and he's a wonderful kind of person in the business. Ways around, he's not like just a business person, but he is somebody I can call a family. So right now, sometimes I get out of the hair salon, 10 o'clock at night, Other gas stations are closed. So if a gas station over there has no problem, no issue, and he's a person, one phone call where you call him, he's there. So if I run out of gas, I can go get a gas. Or other people who goes to work, works late at night. I think it's a great idea for us. I'm asking the chairs if we can support him. It's very helpful. I appreciate that. Thank you.

Thank you, ma'am.

Yes, my name is I live in 760 and I've been here 29 years. So after this gas station, two years I have no problem. I'm fair, I'm fair, give it to him, five pence, let him.

Okay. Thank you, ma'am.

You're welcome.

Appreciate that. That's all right. Just your name and record. Name and record.

Manuel Cardoso, 245 Main Street. So a great guy. I work around the area and can't find a gas station anywhere around there when I leave work. I got employees and where they're going to go, they have to go all the way down to Belmont Street. So imagine if you have no gas. So... So there's a lot of business around where he's at, and including mine, and it's really hard to get out of there. And the first gas station that, I mean, everybody's been there. The first gas station that we see, we're going to put right in there. So I will grant it. Thank you.

Thank you, sir. All right. Anyone else in favor? Okay. Would anyone like to speak in opposition to the petition? Anyone who'd like to speak in opposition? Ma'am. Just come on up and I'll give you a name and address for the record. Thank you.

My name's Deborah Nordean, and I am the homeowner and the sole resident at 766 Warren Ave. The house has been in our family for over 100 years. Just, you know, yeah. Oh, let me see. Yeah, I am here to oppose the extension of hours. I don't have any personal grievance against, you know, the owner or anything like that. There are issues in the area. It's very busy there. You know, Warren Abb down is the new Main Street. So, you know, it's very busy, hectic, a lot of fast-paced traffic. It goes north and south. More often than not, it's noisy, loud music, mufflers, car horns, beeping. You know, you got ambulance. I mean, you know, I mean, daily there's, You know, police cars going up and, you know, fire trucks, ambulances. It's a very hectic street, and it's a very fast-paced. Cars are really going very quickly. In fact, I had even inquired at one point, you know, maybe there could be a blinking light, you know, reinforcing that it's a 30-mile-per-hour traffic. because it's really fast. And there seems to be a lot of confusion at the gas station in terms of entering and exiting. And I don't know if you're real familiar with the layout, but if a car goes in, from Warren Ave immediately there's like a no enter sign you know to get gas here so there's always cars that are nose to nose and then there's cars coming in from Myrtle Street and it ends up being a lot of congestion and a lot of confusion for the cars that are coming in and the cars that are exiting and I So it's kind of, I'm surprised there haven't been a lot of accidents there. But anyway, it's, I don't know, I'm probably, I've got to read this. I can't, I need to stay on target here. Yeah, there's a lot of confusion with the cars going in and out. In fact, some cars even go in where the, there's a crosswalk. So some cars, you see them, I don't sit there all day looking out the windows. You know, I go in response to you hear a horn coming, you know, cars are coming out of the gas station. They're going down Warren Ave, up Warren Ave. It can be very confusing. It is a high, I would dare say it's a high-risk area. I mean, there is a shot spotter on the, what do you call it, the street light there. You know, there have been a lot of issues in the area. I wouldn't say it's, you know, surrounding that area.

You know, there's been... Has it been related to his gas station?

Um... I can't say that.

Okay. I didn't know if you knew.

I mean, there have been street shootings down there. I mean, I can't say. No, I don't think it was directly related to the gas station.

All right, thank you.

But I'm trying to give the climate of what is there. You know, I'm concerned about the noise factor, the late hours, you know, winter's coming up. It's going to be, you know, really dark in the morning. It's just, it's very hectic. I know there's a gas station right down the street. I'm not sure if he owns that one right down on the corner of Forest Ave and Warren Ave. So I wonder why do we need to have two gas stations that are operating at that hour of the night? That one is just a block, a block and a half away, which there was a shooting down there when they were having you know, all the problems, you know, after the games and all that. So I am in opposition to it. I think it's a breeding ground. You know, those late hours, I think, is just an invitation for, you know, loitering, criminal activity, unsavory activity. That's, you know... And to borrow somebody's statements earlier, I don't think it's... best for the neighborhood or really suits the neighborhood, those late hours. I'm just looking.

What about the five o'clock hour? The 5 a.m.? He's requesting 5 a.m. I hear you speak a lot about the 11 p.m. Yeah.

I guess the 5 a.m., I mean, if the I just think it's early. A lot of the trucks and you hear music. It's going to be dark. If I had a choice, I would say take the 5 a.m. and forget about the late p.m., later p.m. And I think it's about the quality of life for people that live in the neighborhood, peace of mind, quality of life, safety. I think they are very legitimate concerns. And again, it's nothing personal. about the owner of the gas station or it's just the climate that's there. So.

Okay. Well, thank you, ma'am. Appreciate it. Thank you for your time. Anyone else like to speak in opposition to the petition? Seeing none. Any elected official that would like to speak on the petition?

Good evening, Council. Good evening, Council.

I appear here tonight in opposition to this for the following reasons. This gas station, admittedly, is well run. I have no problem with the owner of the business he does there. The problem I have with it, with the gas station and the residential area, the hours that you people inflicted on, placed on this business now, I think are very appropriate. And because there's been no incidences there during this time, I think you were correct in the original setting up of the hours. If this gas station was up in my ward again in Ward 3, it was up on Belmont Street with no residential area, I'd be fine with this opening up to 11 o'clock. In a residential neighborhood, I don't think any ward should have a gas station open past 9 o'clock. People will tend to gather there, and inevitably there'll be problems there. So I think we have the hours right as we sit here right now, so I encourage you to keep them the same. Thank you, Mr. Chairman. Thank you, Board members.

Thank you, Counselor. Mrs. Sattah, one other question. The 633 Warren Avenue location. Yes, sir. What's the closing hour of that gas station?

We close at 12. I think 12 now. You close at midnight? Midnight. We just bought it like three, four months ago.

And do you have the same amenities at that gas station that you do at the one that's two blocks away?

We're fixing up, sir.

Yes. It's going to be the same. It's going to be the same.

Correct.

It's going to be the same. So about midnight, it's going to be about the same. You'll have the same amenities at that gas station as you do as the one on the corner of Myrtle.

You have to carry the same stuff. Okay.

All right. Thank you, sir. Okay. Good off topic. Mr. Building Commissioner, do you have any comments on this?

No, I'm just looking this over. It appears as though it's a special permit and a variance. That's how it was named.

Okay. Okay. So it's both. It's both. Anyone in the gallery that has any questions about what they heard this evening on this case? None. Okay. I'll close the open portion of this and I will open up to deliberation amongst the board members. Board members.

So Mr. Sweeney's question earlier about 633. We don't know if there was any incidents. At 633 Warren Ave last year.

I did not look into that. I only looked into the property at hand. What's that?

As Councilor Griffin mentioned, we could have had the hours correct, you know, till nine o'clock. Now he doesn't have any wiggle room, right? You just, it's a hard 11.

That's what the attorney Burke spoke to. I asked a little earlier if it would be willing to amend those hours at all. And it sounds like they're pretty hot on the five to 11 hours is what I understood.

And that was seven days a week. We're saying five to 11. Correct.

The only, the option we could do is look at You know, we talked about, and Attorney Burke actually brought it up himself, about looking at this over the year, a one-year period from when it's granted, to potentially see if that's a... and see if there's any problems, any trouble in that period of time. And if not, I'm not sure, Mr. Commissioner, would that have to come back before us to be ruled permanent, or would that be something that would just... go on its own unless we had problems and it would have to be dealt with by the task force or inspectional services.

Mr. Chair, I'm not sure on that question. That's a legal question for our city solicitor. Whether or not an order can be extended for a year and if there's no problems and it remains in perpetuity, I'm not exactly sure. It's not my area of expertise. Okay.

Any other...

There seemed to be an issue or concern about sound after the extended hours. Is there any type of sound ordinance that we can do?

Go ahead. Cars, traffic, it's stuff that's not... Like she mentioned loud music.

Well, remember, I think one of the things, think about we've had car washes before us, and sometimes they've failed because of the vacuums, right? 24-hour car washes, and they've failed because of the vacuums at certain times of night. Obviously, the downward lighting, we could put a stipulation that all lighting would have to be aimed downward in a certain... I don't know the percentage of... at what level it needs to be leveled down and nothing that would be blazingly bright after the certain time at night after 8 p.m. But noise, I don't know how we could do. I'm not sure, Mr. Commissioner, if you had anything on that.

You could diffuse the lights. You could have the lights diffused as part of this condition. And obviously... you know, I mean, traffic noise wouldn't be something that could be abated. And our zoning ordinance is very, very vague when it comes to noise. So again, that would be a police matter probably, but I don't know that there's anything. I mean, you could condition the owner that there'd be no groups gathered out in front, you know, something like that. What's the time on the lighted signs? I don't have that information in front of me.

Yes, at closing hour, correct?

Has to go into a dormant state, okay.

Any other deliberation amongst the board? Motion to grant by Mr. Sweeney. Second by Ms. Greenberry. Mr. Clerk, please call the roll. The stipulation for diffuse lighting? Yes, downward lighting, correct. No. What is that?

No. No. Yes. Yes.

That is four in the negative, one in the affirmative. The petition fails. Next petition. 26-24, petition. Thiel Well Group, LLC, 31 Lowell Street, Brockton, Mass., for a variant special permit seeking relief from Section 27-9, Table 1, and Section 27-24-5 to construct a two-family dwelling on a lot currently lacks the required frontage area, front and rear setbacks, with exterior access in an R2 and C2 zone located at No. 10 Battle Street. Attorney Burke.

Again, Mr. Chairman, Attorney Jim Burke, and I have the pleasure of representing Isaiah Elwell and this project on Battle Street. And Scott Farrier is here from Holmgren's office, the engineer. And... We are presenting for the board's consideration, a request for variance for a two family home in an R2 district in a somewhat small lot. If you look at, and I think I mentioned this in the prior variance, if you take a look at the revised amendment to 48 section six. This is exactly what it's talking about. In fact, before I had known that the act had passed, I submitted a brief to you. And basically as part of the brief, I basically, along with hardship issues relating to the fact that a third of it is in a commercial zone and the rest is in an R2 zone, which means you can't do anything without a variance. on that piece of property. It basically is, you know, a prime example of infill housing in an urban city. That's exactly what this new statute seeks to protect. This is exactly what the new statute, I submit, want you to grant. It can't be used, has no other practical use if you don't grant the variance for the high-chip. As I again mentioned, it isn't even all in an R2 zone. It's in a mixed zone. The ordinance, or rather, I should say the statute, and I give credit to the zoning board of the city of Brockton because what the new amendment basically is doing is what the city has been doing for the last 30 years that I've been involved. That's listening to facts, making a determination if it makes sense and if it's practical and good for the city and pass it. And less criteria to some of the hardship issues which sometimes are harder to reach. Well, that's exactly what this is. Certainly there's practical difficulty because of the size of the lot. It complies with the ordinance. Is there gonna be an impact in the neighborhood? Absolutely not. Is there an impact on public safety? Absolutely not. Is it impacting public services? No. You have your ward counselor. Counselor Azak has submitted a letter, glowing recommendation, hoping that you'll pass and grant the variance. It's certainly a small lot, but it's a lot that you can be now put to use, that working people will have a nice place to live. and in a great neighborhood in the city of Rockton. Scott, do you wanna go over and identify, if you would, the layout?

So just like we do on most of these lots, we have, it's a two family, an up and down two family, not a side by side. We do have two proposed shade trees at each corner, separate driveways for each unit. So we've taken care of any packing issues we may have. trying to green it up a little bit with the trees. Everything else, as Attorney Burke said, it's a small lot, so there won't be much green space left, but everything else on the property will be loamed and seeded, so it'll have a little bit of green to it, and then the two trees certainly will help the neighborhood. We're meeting the side yard setbacks. We're at roughly 15 feet and 18 feet. On either side, we're relatively close to the street, about 10 feet from the street, but again, that's kind of in fitting with the neighborhood. All of these older multifamilies that are up and down Battle Street are really close to the street within that 10-foot limit. That's why we felt comfortable having it at that distance to the street. And again, as Attorney Burke said, if you look on the plan, we have all the abutting units and the units across the street listed, the majority three and four unit residential structures around us.

I guess to close the presentation out, the primary focus of the new statute is the interest in supporting production of housing. And that's what this is. So we respectfully request that the zoning board grant the requested relief. It certainly meets all the criteria of the new statute. And I think it's in the best interest of the community and the neighborhood.

Questions from board members.

Can you bring the board closer? For some reason, we don't have this one.

Any chance it might be a post and rail fence across the front there? Could we do it again? So I don't get yelled at by the rail chairman?

Yeah. Yeah. Questions from the board.

Is that a deck back there or is that just part of the house?

six-and-a-half foot deck in the back.

What's the relief requested again?

Well, the original relief was to request a right for two-family house in an R2 district lacking area, frontage, and setback. Not really, yeah. What? Not rear yard setback? Not rear yard setback.

No, it was actually front and rear yard setback. The front setback is required at 20. We're at 10, again, in fitting with the neighborhood. The rear yard setback is at 25, and we're at 13 with the house, 7 with the deck. So it would be front and rear setbacks.

Was it off the deck is where the 13 is, or is it off the house?

13 off the house, 7 off the deck.

So that would be a consideration now for, correct, Mr. Commissioner?

Yeah, that's correct. Um, that, that means of egress stairway is the minimum width that it requires to get a set of stairs down with a, uh, with a, with a landing in front of each door. So there's nothing more there that they, they need, but there's nothing less either.

That is the minimum requirement. I think it works. I don't have any further questions.

Anyone, all set? Anyone like to speak in favor, please come forward. So just give your name and address for the record.

Valentin Gomes, I live on 16 Battle Street, right next to this property. May I look in the drawing for one second? I've been leaving my brother house 1987. While back, a couple years back, I had a problem when I had a motorcycle in there. Because I get up early in the morning to go back to work, they all block my driveway, park inside my driveway. I call the police, they don't show up for so many times. I spoke to my city councilor, Shirley Isaac, so they put a park on the street so I don't park in front of my house. As long as he has space to park for two houses in there so they don't park on the streets, I don't have a problem with that. And also that... The property just bought the three family. It's totally like, you know, that property three family is ready to fall down and Chinese golden corn is not a, it's not a thing, which is that they need that thing to be upgrade because it's kind of mess. I hope when you buy the house, you fix it, you can work with them. So they need to clean up that, that neighborhood. Cause it's totally.

It's a two family, sir.

Yeah. Okay, so you're in favor? I'm in favor of him to do it, you know, clean up that neighborhood. And that's up there. So he's going to do so. I don't have nothing against him because, you know, my house is right next to it. As long as he can clean up the place, he'll be fine with me.

Okay. Thank you, sir. Yeah, you're welcome. Anyone else like to speak in favor of this project? If not, anyone like to speak in opposition? Okay. No one in opposition. Any elected official that would like to speak on the matter? Councillor Griffin.

Good evening again, Mr. Chairman, board members. I want to speak in favor of this tonight. My colleague and friend, Councillor Azak, is also in favor of this. Mr. Thibault is a tremendous developer in our city. He's doing some really great developments. I want to encourage them to continue building in our city. As you know, I'm always up here most times pushing for more development, and this is the type of development we want. He'll come in. He won't take any shortcuts. He hires professionals to advise him. He's doing really some good development in our city and believing we desperately need it at this point to increase our tax base. So for those reasons, I encourage you to pass this tonight. Thank you very much, Mr. Chairman. Thank you, board members. Thank you, Councilor.

Mr. Commissioner.

Mr. Chair, there is a letter of support from Ms. Azak. I have it right here, yeah. Yeah, okay, I'm sorry. Nope, got it.

Thank you, appreciate that, yep. So we do have a letter of support from Councilor Azak on this project. Anyone have any questions about what they heard tonight as far as this case is? All right, it's going to end the open session. I'd like to open this up to deliberation amongst the board members. Board members?

I think this is another development that fits in nicely. It cleans up a more, like the gentleman that actually lives there says it needs a little bit of development. And I think that's just what it needs. And it fits in, the development is suiting for the neighborhood. So with that, I would be in favor of that.

I CAN JUST SPEAK ON THAT AREA OF THAT PROPERTY OVER THE YEARS. I WOULD SAY A GOOD 20 YEARS AGO WE WERE HAVING A LOT OF PROBLEMS WITH THOSE PROPERTIES. THINGS NOT DONE THE RIGHT WAY. ILLEGAL BURNINGS DONE THERE OUT BACK. A LOT OF DEBRIS LEFT AROUND. I THINK, YOU KNOW, TO THE GENTLEMAN'S POINT THAT KIM GOT UP AND SPOKE IN FAVOR OF IT, I THINK, AND AGAIN TO MR. THELWELL AND WHAT HE DOES IN THE CITY, I THINK HE DOES GOOD WORK AND I THINK THAT WE we have a good opportunity here to put something here that would spruce up that area, especially with that corner because of the commercial property on the corner that's not as well maintained as maybe some of us would like.

Especially those lots in the commercial, but it does drive people there. And then if you have an empty lot, there's room for mischief and trash and stuff like that.

Yeah, I agree. I think this works for the neighborhood. I'd like to make a motion to grant.

Motion made to grant by Ms. Delanus, second by Mr. Sweeney. Mr. Clerk, please call the roll. Mr. Delanus.

Yes. Mr. Belize.

Yes.

Mr. Sweeney.

Yes.

Ms. Greenberry.

Yes.

Chair Nardelli. Yes. Mr. Chair, that is five in the affirmative, zero in the negative.

We have five in the affirmative, zero in the negative. The petition is granted.

Thank the board for its time.

Thank you.

Thank you, everybody.

Next case, 26-25, petition of Evans Machine Company, Inc., 32 North Manchester Street, Brockton, Mass., for a special permit seeking relief from Section 27-36C to be allowed to expand its existing industrial building within a flood zone in an I-2 zone located at 32 North Manchester Street, Brockton, Mass.

Thank you, Mr. Chairman, members of the zoning board. Once again, uh, attorney Jim Burke, uh, and I have the pleasure of representing Dan Evans. Uh, and he is a outstanding business, uh, that, uh, needs the support of this board. And in fact, uh, the city of Brockton needs the support of this board. Mr. Evans has been in business in the city, uh, for decades. Uh, he is in his location. That's, uh, uh, I identified a Manchester street, uh, and, uh, he has reached the limit of what he can do in his present facility. He's a manufacturer with a steady stream of business, has to turn away work. He has 70 employees in the city of Brockton. They are all well-paid employees. He has reached the point that if he doesn't get the ability to expand his facility, he has to move. He has looked at other sites in the city of Brockton. They do not meet his requirements, and it's not an option. He's looked at vertical expansion. Obviously, it was probably one of the first. It's not successful. It's not a possibility. Because of the weight of some of the equipment that he has and the vibration, it would not work. So what's before you today is actually fairly simple. It's a special permit to be allowed to build in a floodplain zone. And Scott's going to give you basically the mathematical answers as to why it's before you. Again, Dan is now leading the Chamber of Commerce for the City of Rockton. He's been involved in just about every community activity you can think of over the years, and this city needs this project. We had a special meeting in which the mayor participated and various department heads, and I believe the message from the mayor was very clear, find a way to make this happen. So this is important for the city, We're looking for the relief that we're requesting, which is the ability to build in a floodplain zone. And Scott, go ahead and identify if you would. Thank you, Attorney Burke.

So this project, like all of our commercial projects, it needs site plan approval, so it's still going to the planning board. In this case, we are, as Attorney Burke said, we're within the floodplain for our proposed building, also within the buffer zone area. Also, within the buffer zone to the wetland of the Trout Brook, your zoning ordinance in the city of Brockton requires a special permit for work in the floodplain. So this is really the first step. We still need to go to Conservation Commission, file with Conservation, file with DEP to work in the floodplain. In order to do that work, the Wetlands Protection Act... outlines very specific regulations that we have to meet and in requirements that the city has to ensure that we meet in order to issue that order of conditions, essentially their approval. In this case, because it's a, in addition to a flood zone, this is also technically a floodway when you have a river. So it's kind of a different flood regulation that The federal government FEMA comes out with a flood study on a lot of these rivers. The Troutbrook included had a flood study done in 2024. And it showed that during a 100-year storm event, which is what we're always worried about with these flood zones, that during a 100-year storm event, the water rises a tenth of a foot. So roughly an inch is what the water rises during that 100-year storm event. So our task in going to the Conservation Commission and to DEP once we complete tonight's hearing would be to show them that our proposed building within that flood zone will not Greatly increase that tenth of a foot of rise in the flood zone. That's there currently obviously we feel like it won't In mr. Evans previous developments that he's done on the site He's had a couple of additions that he's placed on the site most recently probably about ten years ago He purchased the property pretty much at the dead end of North Manchester and built a new parking lot there as part of that that development We received permission to build a drainage system and also a compensatory storage area or flood storage area. So he's already provided a lot of flood storage on the property. And like I said, with the current FEMA regs, we don't feel like we'll have any difficulty in convincing both DEP and the Brockton Conservation Commission that this project will have a very minimal impact on the flood zone and the property and will have no adverse impact whatsoever. on the neighboring property or the neighboring flood zone at all.

I've got a question. What is it that the machine shop? Can you just explain your operation?

Thank you. My name is Dan Evans, and we've been here since 84, and expanded greatly with the help of the city. And we manufacture everything from defense, medical devices, automotive, you name it, we're in it. It's been one of our successes. We haven't narrowed. a specific industry so that we've been able to survive and expand through economic downturns in certain industries. We do a lot of food processing work. Robotics this year, we just signed a big contract with Boston Dynamics, which was not a customer of ours. We've been in business 59 years. They found us and We've already this particular year, 2026, bought and commissioned two robots, robotic equipment that will run lights out to help us with the growth that's here now. So we wanna take advantage of it. And Boston Dynamics is the largest robotics manufacturer there is. Yeah, we're pushed for space. The two machines we bought, we bought one, it's a Citizen Swiss style, and one we bought from Spain, and we brought them in. It increased our productivity for this type of work, which is lights out, high volume. But the sad thing was is we had to get rid of two machines. I mean, we're just stuffed. We can't push them over to the side any further. So it's good. It's a good thing. But we want to take advantage of...

My next question would be, there is a plan for the Trout Brook, correct?

Correct.

And how does that come into play with this scenario?

I think the Troutbrook redevelopment, the whole CSX area, it's really on the backside of the Troutbrook, not on Dan's side. So all of that redevelopment that we've been talking about for about 10 years now at least, it's all on this side of Troutbrook and heading north towards Elliott Street and downstream that way. So there is development.

restoration i'll say along trout brook proposed but nothing on what would be the south side of trout brook around dan's property if that does get built out and there is opportunity for any part of the other side is that something you want to participate in or is that something you don't want to

I think just answer for him. I think, you know, realistically, he's probably 50 feet from the trout brook, and then the brook's 20 feet. You know what I mean? So there really wouldn't be much of a chance, I don't think, for Dan to do anything. He's pretty much locked into his location and kind of stuck within, you know, within the confines of his property and the brook. I don't think anything would happen. That's my thought.

You mentioned Trout Brook, and you've got a letter of support in your file from Jeff Thompson, who can't be at least the biggest supporter of the Trout Brook project, and he's a big supporter of Dan's, and I think it's a glowing recommendation. You should read it. It's a good message for the city.

Thank you. Any other questions amongst the board members? Anyone?

Good? Yes. So, you know, again, back to the development of the Trout Brook. As upgrades come, would you be willing to beautify the outside of the property to match the trails, stuff like that?

Absolutely. I think if you've ever been down there, I don't know if you have or not, but we've accumulated over the last few years, we bought a big lot from Trojano because it was an empty lot and it was where tires and everything was getting dumped. And twice a year, we would clean it up, and I'd bring my tires, and the only place it would take them was Trujano, and they were $5 a tire to get rid of. And then finally, I'm like, what am I gonna do with this land? I came to City Hall, they put me in touch with the owner, It was Trajano, so I was paying him to clean up his land all these years. So it was... We picked up some acreage there, and then the city had an auction not too long ago that further along Trout Brook, behind the Haitian church. We purchased that with hopes... that we would pick up some compensation, some dry land back there in order. But anyway, we landscape weekly. It's all irrigated and all the kids in town come down and play soccer after hours and all summer on our property. We have a couple acres of grass that's well maintained and it's landscaped. It looks... It's certainly the nicest landscaped area in that section of town. And I spoke with the people from CSX. They wanted to know if we would help. And I said, yes, but I'd have to see more. I want it to be beautiful.

That's all I'm really looking for.

My goal is to put a dock and have a kayak tied up to it.

There was a plan to put a river all the way through Boston and forget about the canal, right?

Right, right. Any more questions? Anyone like to speak in favor of the project? Anyone like to speak in opposition of the project? Any elected official that would like to speak on it? Councilor Griffin.

Good evening again, Mr. Chairman, board members. I am in favor of this project. My friend, Councilor Thompson, sent you a very glowing recommendation of Mr. Evans and his business. He's been there for a long time. It's a very good employer with providing a lot of jobs and residents in our city, and we want to continue this and expand upon it. I think this would be a very good opportunity for the city to grant them this relief, and I encourage you to do it tonight. Thank you, Mr. Chairman. Thank you, board members. Thank you, counselor.

Anyone else have any questions about what they heard tonight? If not, I'm going to close the open section and open it up to deliberation amongst the board members. Thank you.

I got some information today of what they do in this company. I had no idea what you did, honestly, and I thought I knew most businesses. But, you know, seeing what's being done here, seeing is there a participant of the Trout program, process as much as they could. I don't necessarily find it detrimental to allow them expansion in an area that the city desperately needs.

I agree. They also still have to go through conservation planning. So there's other levels that they, Oh, I'm pretty loud though. There's other levels that they need to go through. So it seems like a, a good idea for a local business to allow them to expand.

I think um just if I could just speak real quick I think that property down there is immaculate um and Mr. Evans speaks of that in the neighborhood. I think it's a shining star at the end of North Manchester Street. Not to mention people forget the problems we had in the CSX property for many years that overflowed into a lot of places and Evans machine stayed. They did not give up on the city where other folks that's not the case. So I think it's important to remember that history and the jobs that he's brought in to our community. that he keeps his property immaculate. I wasn't playing soccer, but I was snooping around last week, taking a look. But I think they're, in a city that's an industrial city that is losing its industry, I think they're a beacon that we can really hold high and try to attract more industry into the city.

I think the relief is reasonable, so I'll motion to grant.

Second. There's a motion to grant by Mr. Sweeney and a second by Ms. Delanus. Mr. Clerk, would you please call the roll? Yes.

Yes. Yes. Yes. Yes.

So we have five in the affirmative, zero in the negative. The petition is granted. Good luck.

Okay.

26-26 Petition of James Guerrero Ripple Construction, LLC, 182 Prospect Street, Brockton, Mass., for a variant seeking relief from Section 27-29 to convert an existing three-family dwelling unit into a six-unit in a C2 zone located at 703 North Main Street, Brockton, Mass. Sir, just come up, state your name and your address for the clerk and go on with your petition.

My name is James Guerrero, located at 182 Prospect Street, Southeastern, representing 264 Court Street, LLC.

Real quick, I'm sorry. So you're at 182 Prospect Street, Southeastern, not Brockton, okay? Yes, yes. We have it as Brockton, okay? So just make sure we have that changed. Yes. Thank you, appreciate that. Go right ahead, sir, I apologize.

Yes, representing 264 Court Street LLC as the owner, came on to help this petitioner, not only as the general contractor, but also to help through the permitting process. This project came before the zoning board last year, February 11th, and was denied. We went through the planning board and materially changed our plan petition here. This was previously had a commercial space on the first floor with units above. We had changed it significantly. I had done a significant amount of research and looked at that zoning hearing and had proposed to the client to convert this into a six unit dwelling just due to the sheer size of the building. Secondly, actually took a lot of comments from this gentleman that's sitting here actually to change a lot of things on the site. The biggest thing is there is a garage or ancillary structure on the site that we're proposing to demolish. and remove specifically I believe from this gentleman's property line. The other thing was the location of the dumpster and also the parking flow. We're proposing 14 parking spaces, two parking spaces per unit in addition to two handicapped spaces. We're proposing to move the dumpster closer to the street near the fencing area. And we're also showing that there is about 22 feet in between each parking space and also some parking right next to the visitor parking that's left open to be able to accommodate three point turns as well. That's basically our proposal. Each unit will be two bedroom, one bath units and the property will be completely renovated. It's currently a dilapidated site right on North Main Street is a major eyesore. We took some recommendations as well from planning board as well. They wanted to add a rock to the corner of the site with the with the signage and address on it as well. And we created a lot of landscaping and green space and reduce the impervious area on the site currently as well. And so that's That's basically our petition, and we're really hoping to move forward with this.

Thank you, sir. I'd open it up to any questions of the board members.

Just on the stipulation from the planning board, we did have like on that corner grass and like some landscaping in there as well. Okay.

You mentioned that you're going to have a handicapped parking space, but is the building going to be handicapped accessible?

Well, I think that just due to code, due to the amount of parking spaces that we have, we will. And yes, we will have a ramp in there to make it handicap accessible.

What is the square footage of each unit, roughly?

Square footage is range anywhere between around 700 to closer to like 700 square feet. 700 to 750.

So were you approved by the planning board?

Yes. To return back to zoning. Yes.

Okay. Thank you. I missed that.

Are you going to upgrade the fencing around there?

Yes. Um, we're, We're really debating that. We're thinking about just removing that fencing all together, but some of that fencing will need to be replaced, especially separating from the neighbors and property lines as well.

From the abutters?

From the abutters, yes. But along the main street will be removed, yes, and broad will be removed.

I think that would be a nice touch. I think sometimes we just let fencing...

So we'll definitely be removing that and replacing those.

All of the parking, it looks like we'll enter off in North Main. Yes.

Correct. All into there, into those spots, correct? The majority of that. And then there's an existing curb cut off of Broad Street where we could add one more additional parking space, which we would use as a handicapped parking space. but open to changing that if the board may see fit as a regular parking space.

I've requested one on Main Street. more towards the south this is a large building on main street would you be opposed to adding some sort of light sconce to the front of the building to kind of make it look nice yeah definitely definitely would that just be something you'd take it upon yourself to do and yes okay because it doesn't necessarily have to be stipulated yeah but i think it'd be a nice touch if you're gonna go definitely it's it's going to be a complete renovation the the building is currently gutted now so siding roof windows everything's going to be replaced okay a nice light sconce that, you know, up and down from, say, the middle floor, lights up and lights down. That's all.

Yeah, we can definitely do that.

Any other questions by the board members? Seeing none, I'd like to see if there's anyone here that would like to speak in favor of the project. In favor? In favor?

Well, I always get confused because I didn't even see this yet, so I kind of don't know where I'm going to be.

Okay, so I'll say in favor and opposed, and you can now speak.

Just state your name for the... Rick Texera, and I own the property. I'm the closest to them, 9 Broad Street. So looking at this, will the dumpster be on the Father Bills and Main Springs side? That's the way it looks in the paperwork.

Is that correct, sir?

Yes. It will be closer to one parking space off of Main Street, so about 10 feet in.

So let me ask you real quick, and just to his point, no, to your point, will that be a rolling dumpster that will come out? Because you're not getting a rubbish truck in there to be able to get around that corner to pull that out, right? Have to be on wheels to pull it out? I mean, we do that at the new public safety building. This is completely understandable. I just don't try to put something that doesn't have wheels on it in there. It's not going to work, I guess is my point. Go ahead, sir. I'm sorry. I didn't mean to interrupt you. It's fine.

I thought about switching that parking space and just putting it right on Buddy Main Street, but I'm not sure aesthetically if that's going to work.

Now on my property line in the back, when they raise the garage, are they going to put like the same fence that is on the Father Bill side and that's on my property, like the privacy PVC fence across all the way down? Okay. I mean, I've been looking at this place. Oh, I'm sorry. I apologize. I just got disoriented. This place has been dilapidated for decades, not even years. I'd love to see it done. I appreciate the fact that the last time I made a few suggestions and they actually changed it on here previously, other owners, they didn't know what to do. I CERTAINLY THINK THAT THE PERSON PAID GOOD MONEY, I BELIEVE FIVE, CLOSE TO $600,000 FOR THE PROPERTY THE WAY IT IS, PROBABLY OVERPAID, BUT THIS WOULD PROBABLY BAIL THEM OUT. IT WOULD MAKE THE PLACE LOOK A LOT BETTER. I THINK SIX UNITS IN THAT BUILDING ACTUALLY WOULD MAKE MORE SENSE THAN PUTTING IN THREE, FOUR OR FIVE BEDROOM OR MORE. IT'S A BIG BUILDING. I just want them, as long as they're doing it for the right reasons and they're going to take care of the building, because I'm the one that cleans up. I don't know if any of you have driven by there. It's a mess. To look at it. I'm the one that has to clean for years, from the stop sign all the way down, pruning things through. I'd love to see this pass. The only thing that I would say on the negative side, because I feel compelled to say it, I just wish that when people are in the process of going through this to fix something, that they take care of the property in the process. There's no reason for all that vegetation growth and everything else. Even if it was months away, they could go in there and clean it so the rest of us and the neighbors Don't have to look at that. And I'm pruning. I'm not going to go on the property. It's locked. But I'm cleaning up so the kids can walk on the sidewalks. So for me, if that chain link fence on Broad Street is coming down, the chain link fence in the front is coming off. And they're going to put green space there. and do the building over correctly, I would be in favor of it because I'm just honestly, I'm exhausted dealing with that place. Even the garage is being torn down. Every week I have to pick up shingles because that's an asphalt roof that blows into my yard. Every week, vinyl siding. I take the pieces and if you've driven by there or walked by, I take them. I either slide them under the fence because it's destroyed anyways, or I throw it over the fence onto his property. I mean, and I'm not saying this gentleman, I know he's the contractor, but I just wish that, you know, in the process, they didn't let it get all, you know, the growth. If you've driven by there, you'd see it's disgusting. I mean, the fire department's been there years ago, and I had to tell them, you know, before they ripped out the inside. On the second floor, there are steps missing. If you take the corner, you go up. And that was, I believe, Mr. Williams was there with the crew. So I'd love to see this thing fixed. I hope that, you know, everything is going to be done properly. And I appreciate a fence across. They've already agreed. And just be a good neighbor, and I'll do the same. And that's all I ask.

Appreciate that. Thank you, sir. Thank you very much. Mr. Commissioner.

Just to note, there's been several violations here on this property, and I think as part of a condition, you should consider that the property should be cleaned up. And I agree with the last speaker that just because a building is going through approvals doesn't mean it shouldn't be taken care of. And it's been deplorable. We've had numerous complaints on this, and I think it might be something to consider when deliberating on this project. Sure. Absolutely, go right ahead.

Would you be okay with coming into compliance with the brush in what's been prior to or immediately?

Yeah, for certain. We can definitely have someone there probably by next week to start cleaning up the outside.

And I think it would be important not just that one time, but as you go through this process, right? It doesn't end with us here now, right? I think to the point of your neighbor, Mr. Texera, I think it's important to continue upon that. Obviously, there's violations that Mr. Forty's seeing from the task force or from inspectional services. And you know what? That's right on North Main Street, right out in front of everything, right? And Mr. Texera's. it shouldn't be a burden on him so and i know it's not you you're the contractor you're brought in to fix these things but we got to make it we got to beautify it now not not when it potentially happens six months from now or whenever that may be for sure agree mr swing yeah we could definitely do that okay great thank you what's that sure come on back up no worries

There's a 55-gallon drum that's been sitting in front of the garage. I don't know what's in it. It's sealed. Okay. If that's something that they could be careful with, I don't know what's inside of it, but if you go... Straight up the driveway on the Broad Street side, you'll see it straight ahead. If you come in from North Main, you'll see it straight ahead. It's to the left of the garage if you're on North Main Street. And then there's a loveseat. It's actually behind a loveseat that's been sitting there forever, too. So the drum, it could be empty. I just found it.

We can look into that.

I assume it's not because it probably would have moved with all the storms we've had in the snow and it hasn't. So I'm just, I just wanted to put it out there.

Appreciate that. Yep. We'll look into that. And if not, we'll send inspectional services if you can. All right. Understood.

Yep.

Where were we? We still have questions. No, we were at opposition and now we are, that's right. For an opposition. Now we're at, um, We're at any elected officials? I don't see any. Everyone, there's only two of you here, so everyone understood what we're talking about. I'll now close the open session and open it up to deliberation amongst the board members. Board members.

Yeah, you know, I'm planning, and obviously I've driven by this a million times. It's a property that's desperately needed for proper development. A nightmare. Some of the other properties are starting to come together. It's good to hear that, you know, the neighbors... you know, clean that area. I'm in favor of this. And it comes into compliance before all the starts that immediately start to change.

Well, I think, too, the last time they were before us, The previous owner did not want to remove that garage building out back. That was the hang up with all of us. They weren't going to have the appropriate parking. There are a number of different things like that. And I think that might be partially why it was denied last time. But I think they're obviously going about this the right way.

I've made some stipulations that they were on the planning board. No problem coming, you know, to comply with the property. So I think this would enhance it quite a bit.

And I think when you look at North main street, it is to the overgrowth and the broken windows and all of those things. I think it's, it will make it a big difference.

Do you mind sharing what the violations are?

Sure. Um, I'm looking at, it looks like there's a housing violation. It's still open. And it looks to me, let me just check the notes. It's gotta be for deplorable conditions. My computer's not responding here, sorry. But I would say, let me just read what the letter says from Mr. Doucette. Yeah, state sanitary code. Let's see, it looks like probably overgrown vegetation. No certificates of fitness, although it wouldn't have been, there wouldn't have been any fitness there anyways. But it looks like structural defects, soffits, building is dilapidated, trash and debris is on property. Building's not energized, so it wasn't maintained properly. It's all unplugged. It's, you know, what you see there is pretty much what the letter says.

Trash and the overgrowth.

Yeah, trash and overgrowth are the biggest things. And building elements being loose, you know, vinyl siding, so forth.

Yeah.

Open to the weather.

So can we put stipulations in about these things getting addressed?

Being addressed, yeah. I think you're going to handle that, cleaning that mess up, right? Yes.

I'll motion. I can condition the building permit to also say, you know, because we're not precluded from enforcing their provisions of the nuisance ordinance while construction is going on.

Um, yeah, I'm definitely concerned about this garage. That's pieces of flying off of, you know, that is definitely a hazard. Okay.

And I think probably before you do your work, you're going to have to probably take that most of that down anyways. Yeah. Before we can get any equipment in there. Yeah.

What would be the plan to get started? Like what's the timeframe?

We're trying to start sort of as soon as possible. So as soon as like next month, we're working through financing right now. So as soon as our appeal period is done and we have a building permit granted, we're starting right away. Okay. All right.

With that, I'll motion to grant the stipulation that they come in compliance with all code enforcement.

Yep.

Do you want to add anything else? Is that it?

You made a motion.

I'll second.

Ms. Delanus will second. Mr. Clerk, please call the roll.

Mr. Lenis, how say you?

Yes.

Mr. Belize?

Yes.

Mr. Sweeney? Yes. Ms. Greenberry?

Yes.

Chair Nardelli? Yes. Okay. Mr. Chair, that is five in the affirmative, none in the negative.

That is five in the affirmative, zero in the negative. The petition is granted. Thank you, sir. Good luck.

Good luck. Appreciate you. Thank you very much.

See you, James. So that closes our business for tonight. Mr. Forty, if you could shut off BCA, we do have to take a vote.

Have a good night.

Okay.

All right, so BCA is still rolling. We need to vote for chair and vice chair for the upcoming year. I feel like we do this every other month. It just seems like it comes up again.

I'd like to elect for vice chair, yourself, fire chief Brian Nardelli.

I'll second.

I'd like to end nominations.

And nominations. Do you have a second?

Yeah, second.

All right. All those in favor of Chief Nadelli? That's five in the affirmative, zero in the negative. I will be the vice chair.

Mr. Chair, I'd like to select Kenneth Galligan, chair of the ZBA. Second. I motion to end nominations.

Second on the closing?

Yes, second.

Mr. Lanus? Mr. Clerk, can you take the roll on that? That is Mr. Chair, for the Chair, Chair Galligan, Kenneth Galligan. All those in favor? All those opposed? Five have it. So for the coming year, the chair will be Chief Kenneth Galligan, and the vice chair will be Chief Brian Nardelli. And that brings us to a close for the evening. I take a motion to adjourn. A second? We're adjourned.