Zoning Board of Appeals - Regular Meeting

Thank you.

Thank you.

23? Okay. I got some postage for 27. What do you mean, postage? Sorry, it didn't come in the mail. To me? No, just 27. Oh, okay. Right. My house is 27.

Oh, okay.

Oh, okay. Oh, okay. Is it Sony? No. Oh, no. No, just a show company. Good. Good. Oh, okay.

Oh, I see what you're saying. Yeah, yeah. Yeah, no, so we're 23.

All right.

Good evening, everybody. This is the Carver Zoning Board of Appeals. We are meeting in room one at the Carver Town Hall, and it is May 27, 2026. We're beginning this meeting at approximately 6.32 p.m. As is our custom, we address the administrative matters first. And that would be, in this instance, the approval meeting minutes for our most recent meeting of April 9, 2026.

Has everybody had an opportunity to review those minutes?

Yes. Yes. Does anyone have any changes, amendments, or modifications they'd like to make? Nope. No. Ms. Spencer, do you have any?

I do not.

Hearing no objections, I ask for a motion. Motion to accept the minutes of April 9th, 2026. Second? Second. All in favor?

Aye. So those meeting minutes are approved as written and become a part of the official record. We thought that we would likely have two cases tonight. But insofar as case number 60-6-0R, the petitioner being billed XLLC, it has requested a postponement as they still have some work they need to be doing, at least according to an email that was received on May 4th. So it is looking to have some additional time to pull some things together and would like to be put on our June agenda. Since we're talking about the June agenda, let's talk about when we can get together for our June meeting. Mr. Poirier is a good keeper of the calendar. That's a rumor.

When are you not golfing? I was going to say, yeah, that's right. Do we have anything new?

Yes, we have this case, a continued case, and one other case from June. So two cases.

Well, for tonight, I'm saying. We have one case for tonight. Yep.

Not that that should make a difference as far as the question I'm asking. So, Ms. Spencer, do you have any preference in June?

I do not. I'm pretty open.

Mr. Barrington. I'm good. June 17 looks good. June 24th looks good.

What day of the week is the 17th? We have one new case. I think we should push it to later in June because we have to be mindful of publication. Okay.

24 or 25. WEDNESDAY OR THURSDAY.

HOW'S THAT, MR. PORTER? BOTH OF THOSE DATES ARE FINE WITH ME. MS. BENSON?

FINE WITH ME.

DOES ANY OF YOU HAVE A PREFERENCE AS TO THE 24th OR 25th? WHAT DAYS OF THE WEEK ARE THOSE? WEDNESDAY AND THURSDAY. LET'S DO THURSDAY THE 25th. DO I HAVE THAT RIGHT? YEP. AND I'LL NOTIFY THE PLANNING DEPARTMENT SO THAT WE CAN GET THE NEW CASE PUBLISHED. And they will also notify the petitioner in this case, case number 60-6-0R. Okay? I don't think we need to do a motion on a date, all right? No. Okay, so while my voice holds out, it's the pollen. I will have Mr. Barrington, our Vice Chair, read into the record the public hearing notice on this case that is before us tonight public hearing case 17-28-0 our petitioner raquel ferreira

Okay, I got lucky on that one. Requesting a special permit pursuant to section 290-2-2.5-D, 290-5-2.2-A, and 290-5-2.5-D. dash 3.3 of the Carver zoning bylaw for property located at 18 Brockton Avenue in Carver, Massachusetts. Assessors map 17, lot 28, zero, R, so as to reconstruct and extend the legal non-conforming nature of said single family dwelling in the residential agricultural district.

Thank you. Mr. Barrington. Welcome. Is Raquel Ferrier here?

Yes.

Can you come and sit in the chair up there? Thank you. Thank you. I see there's a young gentleman who was intending to sit next to you. Is that right? Yes.

This is Douglas from Boston Dream Group.

I can't hear you.

Douglas from Boston Dream Group, the builder who's building the property.

Move that microphone a little bit closer, would you please? And I should say, for the record, without being remiss, that these proceedings are recorded whenever we are in session, and Area 58 is with us tonight, as they always are. We're happy to have them. Okay, briefly, because you can assume that we have read all of the papers already and are familiar with this case.

So good morning to all of the members of the board. My name is Raquel and this is Douglas from Boston Dream Group and we appreciate the opportunity to present the history and the current status of the property located at 18 Brockton Avenue. So this project began originally under a valid permit for renovation and rear addition work to the existing home. The original intent was to renovate and improve the structure while maintaining the overall neighborhood character and functionality of the property. During demolition and reconstruction work, significant structural deficiencies were discovered within the remaining subfloor and support systems, which we do have pictures. Once the portion of the structure was open, it became clear that the sections of the remaining framing and subfloor were unsafe and unable to properly support the reconstruction. So at that point, replacement of the compromised structural portions became necessary in order to safely stabilize and continue the project. If you want, we have pictures here and copies as well.

Are you done?

Yes.

That's not the whole story, though. Okay. As you know. And I've asked the building inspector to be here tonight for that very reason. So I'm going to ask the building inspector to testify in a few minutes, but I have a couple of quick questions for you.

Okay.

The building permit that was granted in this case, who applied for that?

I did.

or is this property that you intend to renovate and then sell?

Renovate and then sell.

And who is Boston Dream Group? That's me. And what do they do?

We do development and new construction. I can't hear you very well. Development, new construction, additions, renovation in general.

Okay, so you're the developer in this case or the contractor in this case? Yes, I'm the contractor. Along with Raquel? Yes. I'm sure you listen to her. And you have, or someone on your behalf has filled out some paperwork, specifically the application, which was received in April of this year. Can you tell me who filled out that application?

I did.

And the signature at the bottom?

Is mine.

It's sort of like a scrawl.

Yeah.

Do you live in Carver?

No, I do not.

And Boston Dream Group is not based in Carver either, I take it?

We're closed, but not in Carver.

Okay. In your statement...

Then I'm going to ask the building inspector to testify in a moment.

In your statement, you were very specific about the issues that you encountered once this construction began. Specific to the point, Ms. Ferrier, that you mentioned things in heavy bold,

It was probably the computer who did that.

No, I don't think so. But you stated that your intent was to reconstruct the home exactly as it previously existed.

It still is, yes.

In heavy bold. Same footprint, height, setbacks, overall layout, no expansion, no change in use, no increase in nonconformity. True. Again, all in heavy bold.

True.

And you go on to say that granting the requested relief will allow the petitioner to complete the project in a manner that is consistent with the original approvals. Exactly, yes. Again, an heavy hold. Okay. I think this board now needs to hear from the building commissioner. So I'm going to ask that the two of you withdraw at least momentarily. Sorry to have you get up and down on it.

No, no, no.

That's totally fine.

Then I ask the building inspector to approach.

Sorry, I'm just going to grab this.

This is Mr. Rod Palmer, who is appearing before us tonight. On this particular matter, he has been involved in this case. You issued the building permit. I did.

I did. Good evening, Mr. Chairman, members of the board. My name is Rod Palmer, Carver Building Commissioner. So a building permit was issued, and I think what's happened here at the end of the day is that they've gone beyond the scope of the work that was originally permitted. I don't disagree with their rationale with structural members having been... in the need for replacement. But I think what's happened here at the end of the day is they've put the cart before the horse. So essentially, it's a new home. If they were to have applied for a permit to rebuild the house, they would need a special permit. They would have had to come before this board. because the house itself encroaches setbacks on the left, the right, and the front. So to rebuild a home that encroaches all those setbacks requires a special permit, because it's different. It's different. The box itself might not be larger, but it will be of a different shape, a different size. It will look different. So the purpose is for the applicant in a situation like that to come before the board so that it can be vetted, so that the neighbors can have an understanding of what's happening. And if they have any concerns, they could be here this evening. So I am not opposed to the reconstruction of this. I think that at the end of the day, what they're proposing will be a better home. It's just that they have gone without the special permit. The special permit should have been first. So that's why we're here today.

So as I understand it, what you're saying is that the legal process in this case has been ignored.

Well, I would say that as I had stated before, the special permit should have come first before the complete reconstruction of the house.

Now, according to the records, you issued a stock work order back in October of last year.

Is that true? Yeah, October 21st. And? Thereafter, did you receive any sort of communication from either Ms. Ferrier or Boston Dream Group? So on that day that I issued the stop work order, I explained to the applicant what would be necessary in this situation. It's been six months. I'll let them speak to why it's been such a great length of time. But on that day, I did inform them of what would be necessary. They have created new plans. We do have new plans to demonstrate what their new proposal is. However, I could not give them permission to continue without first coming before the CBA, the board.

Understood.

Which brings us here today.

Do we have those plans? Are these the plans of team design LLC? Looks like team design LLC. And are these the updated plans?

I do.

Yes, they are.

Yes.

So I think...

I believe they are, Mr. Chairman.

I'm not sure...

You asked if these were the updated plans. I don't know if you've seen what we have, so I don't know whether they came from him or... Can we take a peek at it?

Yeah, sure.

Starting on that page.

Yeah, these appear to be the most recent.

Yeah, and there's the other ones I think I said.

So these appear to be the latest edition. You can clearly see that the box itself is not much bigger than the original house. It's just a different shape.

And because it's a different shape, there's now a need for dimensional relief. Is that true?

I don't believe that there's the need for dimensional relief with respect to the sides or the front. I believe that they are within the same setbacks as the original house. But essentially what we have is we have a house that's completely new. So if you were to take that old house and tear it down and rebuild it exactly as it was, that would require a special permit. So we're now rebuilding something that is maybe within the same footprint and within the same dimensional setbacks to the left, right, and front, and rear perhaps. But it's a different shape. It's a different house. It's a different box. So that's the purpose of this special permit.

Can I ask a question? Was there a rooftop deck? No, there was not.

You're going to have to speak up, Anita. Oh, sorry. So on the original home, there was not.

There was not.

There was not. I would like to say that on the original building permit that they applied for, it was to have a rooftop deck. And I allowed that because that rooftop deck did not exceed the maximum height. It did not exceed or further encroach any setbacks.

So that was included in the first permit? So that was part of the original permit, yes. Okay.

So that was within the scope of the original permit.

Okay.

Chair, can I ask a follow-up question? Sure. The building itself, based on your permit that you issued initially, it was an ad reno, basically?

Really, the addition was Ancillary to the top. So they built a deck on the top of the back section of the house and put a perimeter railing around it. But the footprint of the house, there was no addition.

So was the intent of the scope to remove portions of that building, reconstruct that with a rooftop? Yes, yes. That was the intent?

Yes. So the original permit included the very back portion of the house to be

reconstructed with a roof deck with a stair case leading to it from the outside and based on that permit that was issued work began and during the selective demolition or reconstruction it was determined that the existing structure in the front wasn't it wasn't capable or the capacity wasn't able to carry the work and was it removed at that point my question i'm trying to get to the point where If this permit was issued and the work began, at what point did it get to a point where it was determined or the work was perceived to be removed?

MR. You'll have to ask the applicant. I can't tell you when it was removed.

So they brought it to you, to your attention?

I visited the site.

And that's when you found that more demolition had taken place?

I had received a phone call from a neighbor, so I visited the site.

So they didn't notify you that they had varied off your original intent?

At that time, no.

So they would need relief under... They would need a special permit. Yeah, they need a special permit on the 290-2-2.5D. As I see it.

So it's set back?

290-2-2.5.

Excuse me, sir? Side and rear?

They would need the... Yeah, I think within their package, there might be an instrument survey that indicates that the new structure does not encroach any further than what was there.

Everybody got that? No. You don't. 290-2-2.5. D. Nonconforming single family residential structures. Yep, I got it. Would you agree that's the applicable?

Yeah, I mean, I wrote that several months ago, so I can't quote it verbatim. Your memory's not that good?

But I try to be thorough. Where it says that they require a special permit if the reconstruction, extension, alteration, or change is... is determined to be requested and the special permit would be able to be allowed if that reconstruction extension alteration or change is not substantially more detrimental than the existing non-conforming structure to the neighborhood. So that appears to me to be the applicable bylaw. Does everybody agree with that? Yes. Mr. Spencer, you good?

Yes.

Yeah. Mr. Sullivan?

Yeah.

Thank you for your input. Okay. Do you have anything else you want to add?

No, sir.

You sure? Not happy here. At all. Okay, I'll take any questions or comments from the public at this point. Anybody want to say anything?

And you are?

You can stand where you are. You can identify yourself if you'd like.

My father lives in 20.

And your name is?

Sterling Hanson, Scott Hanson. Hi.

Thanks for coming in tonight.

I appreciate your time, everybody. My concerns are when they went in here excavating everything, All the, I've got pictures. I'm not going to go through it all. If you want to see them, I can show you. But I don't understand why there was no protection. Was there any order of conditions to protect the neighbors? Because we got a water runoff that's coming right to the foundation that fills right to the right side of this house. It's going right down where his well is. It's all draining down there, and nothing's been done. And I don't have a problem with what they're doing, building. They're making the neighborhood better. That isn't my problem. The problem is they're going the fence, and all this building's going down to the foundation. I had made a call to this young gentleman here, Doug, and asked him to put something in right. that he was going to clean this up, and I would have been fine with it. But I never received anything. So that's where I have a problem right now.

Okay. Fair enough.

All right. I appreciate your time.

Absolutely. Anybody else? Yes, sir. I can say something. Identify yourself?

I'm Robert Fishwick.

Hello, Robert. And I should say, for the record, Robert... is a longtime client of mine. Now, what he says, ladies and gentlemen, is not going to influence my decision in this case. So I do not believe that I should be recusing myself. But I do want to say for the record that he and I are acquainted in a professional sense.

Correct. Right? Correct. Nice to see you again. Nice to see you. All right. What do you want to tell us? I just want to say that I've lived in that structure for many years. It was completely dilapidated. It needed to be done what they're doing. They had damaged my fence in the meantime of all the excavation and whatnot on my side of the property, off the sill of Shorty's Sterling's. They have since come and fixed it, put new panels up. I don't have a problem with continuing what they're doing. I'd like to see it done. I'd like to see completion. That's what I have to say.

Is that Ann sitting next to you? What's that? Is Ann with you tonight?

No, she's not here. She's working tonight. Oh. This is our neighbor across the street. Hi.

Hi. I'm Judy Epsery. I'm at 13 Rock. Hi, Judy. How are you?

Thanks for coming in.

Oh, no problem. It's just been sitting. I know that this gentleman is upset about the water and what have you, but Doug, to me, has seemed very... easy to work with and talk to and anytime you bring anything up to them. So, and just like Bob said, the building would shift, would move with the wind. I mean, it was really dilapidated. So it's just like Bob said, just let's try to work this out, get it done. Obviously in a good way. Thank you.

Gentleman in the back. I don't, I'm Robert Ferreira. Hi, Robert. Not Ferreira. Ferreira. Ferreira, another junkie out here. Just in case. But I just want the road fixed. I don't care if they build a mansion over there. They can do what they want. The road is horrible. I live at 15 Brock and L. That's across the street.

We don't have any jurisdiction over road repairs. You need to speak to the Department of Public Works about that.

So anyone can come down and rule the road? Like I have to talk to Public Works?

We're the zoning board, right? We're not Public Works. I'm not talking you down. I understand and I hear what you're saying. I think a call to town hall tomorrow on this would be appropriate. And you can let them know that you spoke to us about this tonight and that we directed you to speak to them. Okay. Fair? Thank you. You bet.

Who else? Yes, sir. I'm a resident at 13 Brockton Avenue. I know that I've been in construction for 40 years.

We're not counting, are we?

But I know that there's, somebody said to me one time, there's a perfect theory to an imperfect science. And I think Doug has been on board about as much as possible. It's a tight lot. He's met the setbacks, according to the commissioner, and appreciate that. The same setbacks as possible. He's addressed the neighbors, Bob and Shorty, about attending to the on-goings of the building and the site work. I think it would be a significant benefit to continue as it is and finish the site for everybody's benefit. The road hasn't been touched since the first place. So the whole area really needs to be attended to as far as the DPW on the road bill.

Is it a big road, long road? Actually, it's a dead end.

Is it a dead end? It's a dead end. How many houses on the street, roughly? In that section, there's six, seven. There's one vacant house that's just... the wildlife likes it very much. But wash down from the hill, we used to come down, Judy and I put in a new driveway at 13 and the water coming down central just makes a river you could go kayaking in. So the structure and everything, I think it should continue and I would support Doug and his company continue to make it nicer and safer. Thank you for your comments. Thank you. Appreciate it.

Who else? Ladies and gentlemen on the board. We need to close the public. No. Yep. Okay.

Can I ask you a question?

You don't have to ask me. You just jump in.

Can I just ask you some questions? So when you purchased the land, did you bring him with you to inspect the property?

No.

So you had no idea... when you filed your original permits? No, no, no.

No, it's only when we did, we found the extent that the subfloor was literally missing. And this was the only thing that was holding the house up, was these two blocks.

So when you went there to look, obviously, at the project, did you advise her at that point that maybe she should be going a different route, that you might have to demolish the whole thing?

Yeah, so basically, when I went there, I couldn't have a chance to check all that. So there was always a possibility. So we got the permit for the whole bag and for the book thing and all that, but when we start doing the work, so we kind of, when we rip out the soup floor, we discover all the rotten, so that's when we stop it. And that was on Saturday. So on Monday, my plan was to stop by Ed Rod and explain to him. So on my way there, he already called me, and he received some pictures.

So you watched him, and you were basically recording a lot? And then what took so long for you guys to come forward? Like six months?

It was just the weather. Snow, you can't really do anything to the property in the snow.

But the permits and things that we need, you could have handled all that. Yes, absolutely.

Absolutely, yeah. Yeah, we went back and forth with Rob in regards to his request. And then, you know, that's why it took a little bit of time. We had, she has to spend some time for family emergency. And then that's why, and then we got that, all they stole. So she decided to wait.

My issue kind of ran into, as soon as you knew there was major structural issues, that that is the time that should have gone back to the building department right away and say, hey, look at what we found. We have an issue. How can we correct this? But to build and get your side walls up, I drove by the other day, so I'd have a visual of where everything is at you know to put that much building up without prior approval special permit that we may be looking at that that's what distresses me a bit about this that we we skipped over something and now we got to go back and try to square this all away. So that was one of the major issues. And, you know, I think this would have been taken care of if you'd gone a different route and we wouldn't be here tonight. Or maybe just for the special.

So are you willing to go back to the old Basically, because of what you said in your original permit, you said you weren't going to change anything?

We still aren't.

Layouts or anything inside?

We will not change anything. Just inside, like the placement.

You're not going to change anything from the new drawings? Absolutely not. Or from the original drawings? Because to replace what was there is different than what you say that you want to build now.

So it's the plans that you guys have.

Yeah, but they're different than the ones that you agreed to in the beginning that you said that you were going to not change anything, right? I think they both almost the same. So reconstruct the home exactly as it previously existed? Yes. So that would mean that you didn't change the other side?

um so yeah we would just change like this was how it was before the bathroom was super small um you couldn't really walk in right so we want to change it to where the kitchen is no no i i understand your desire to change it i'm saying that if if that was the condition of it would you be comfortable going back to that absolutely to the original format yeah i have no problem with that because you didn't

approved i have no problem with that we can do that i think the plans for me are you asking me a question yes okay so i think i understand the question so yeah if they were to demolish that house in its entirety and begin from its infancy and duplicate exactly what was there that would require us either way either way either way

What's the status of the fence and the drainage situation? Has that been addressed? Because I hear people saying what happened and this gentleman over here seems like he's not Are you still in the process of that, or where are you in that?

I guess that's the question. So on August 25th at 9.47 a.m., I knock on Mrs. Hansel's door just to kind of explain to him, apologize what happened. It's a really tight space. The machine hit a little bit of the fence. and a little bit of erosion on excavation because there's really tight space and we did eight foot walls over that. And after that, you know, he said, I appreciate you knocking on my door and then, you know, repair all this. And then I explained to him everything will be the way it was, will be nice because everything's going to be brand new. And then he was comfortable with that. A couple hours later, I received a call from his son. and i'm not gonna uh go you know keep back and forth but uh he he said not knock on his father's door because you know i don't want to not take advantage of him which was not the case i did not i just want to let him know what's what's happening and he said i want something writing and after that i talked to uh rod we guys do it he said yeah let me talk to him and then We're going to figure out when you can come back and just do that. So I'm still waiting on that. If he approves us, we can definitely do that. And our plan is not leaving all that fuel there. We're going to remove all the fuel and then make everything's going to be grass.

So there's still fill on his property right now that's from your property?

Yeah, there is still. Basically, the excavation removed it all. It just removed the grass. But the fill itself, it's on the property. But you can see there's a pile of fill. It doesn't look nice, but I'll plan it to. That's how it looks right now.

We would like a copy of this. Absolutely. We can give it to you. So are the neighbors satisfied with the proposal for fixing the issue? I guess that's the question.

You sure? First of all, backtrack for what he said. They went knocking on my door, a couple guys working there, my father's door, and they handed the phone to him. He was talking to the phone. So regardless, that don't matter. Like I said, I don't know. I'm worried about he's filled it up too high that if he doesn't bring it back to the grade it was, it's always going to, water's going to flow that way. That's what my concern is. I know I'm not happy with what's there now. If he decides and puts it on a drawing and gives it in writing and he's going to prepare everything, put it back to normal, we're all going to run off, I'm fine. What do you say to that? Put it back to normal. What's it? The pile. To put it back. The fence back where it was. It was broken. And take all the fill and put it on his land, not on ours. He just automatically went in there and started going to town. And the fill's on our property. I don't have a problem. If he says he's going to fix it, I'm all for it. But I wanted him right.

That's my key.

I know I'm covered here.

Mr. Sullivan. You are though. And at the end of the day, there's conditions with any construction site that you are responsible for as a builder. The building department enforces that. Each owner has the ability to go to the building department if there was an infraction in the material damage to your property. He's the code enforcement as much as he's the building inspector, so he would look at what the issue is and address it with the builder 99% of the time. What I have a concern with is that as you started your construction, whether the site was tight or not, were there protective provisions put in place prior to the construction? What I mean by that is silt fence, silt socks, erosion control, any of that prior to the work started.

It was not, and that's my mistake.

and I can appreciate you admitting that, 99% of your issues would have been addressed by that point. Correct. Typically, I like to have a public forum. You invite all the neighbors to understand what your extent of construction would be. That would be a normal practice as a builder. I don't see that, you know, you did the outreach to some of the neighbors explaining some of that, but I don't think you were extensive enough to talk about the preventive measures that you were going to take in conjunction with that. The other process that I'm having a hard time with is as a builder, once you inspection done and you know that's a lesson learned moving forward before purchasing a property you would have known some of these existing conditions and your permitting process probably would have been different with the building commissioner and the inspector at that point however that did not happen so you took it on your shoulders at that point to move forward the problem i have is that you took down the structure didn't go back to the building inspector and he had to come visually see it from a complaint from a neighbor to stop a work order to make sure that you go through the standard procedures and processes that follow through the zoning board You put the zoning board in a tough position because now, you know, we're trying to approve something for you on a after-the-fact matter. If you would have come, as they indicated prior to, if you would have known about it way in advance and gone to the commissioner, the commissioner had said that you have to go through the special permit, this conversation would be night and day different. There are conditions that we can, regardless of whether we move forward with a permit or not, there are conditions we can put in place associated with any type of recommendation or approval. And I would strongly recommend that we put conditions on anything if there's a recommendation to move forward that would not only identify the issues that currently exist, but would come up with provisions and measures to protect the neighbors moving forward.

Especially on the issue of water.

Right.

I mean, you're on a hill.

I mean, it's pretty self-evident. The fence, I see a number of letters in the file from neighbors that say the fence issue has been addressed. In your opinion, has it been addressed? Not ours, no. Nothing's been addressed on our side. What's your address again?

20. I don't, the fence is mine versus what I'm worried about the water.

Right, and that's a corrective measure. I mean, even when you do your corrective measures, you know, you can hydroseed, you can retain that soil by putting some type of planting there. So there's no reason why you couldn't prevent some of that erosion from happening while in construction. your phasing aspect of construction based on the setbacks, you're going to need to do something and come up with a plan that's going to meet the neighbors. You're in the middle of a pandemic. You have all of the neighbors. You're a fishbowl right there, so you're going to have to take preventative measures.

Yeah, I should have made the excavator go back because he brought a 14k ton excavator. And then it was basically, you know, he was driving in and it was already hitting the neighbor's side. That's a choice your side guy did.

I'm sorry. Mr. Palmer. Yes, you know, depending on how the board votes this evening, I'd like to recommend that a civil engineer be involved and be included for the design of some sort of a retaining wall or something to address the neighbors concerns, the neighbors of the north and the neighbors of the south. So that the stabilization of earth is maintained and we know that that plan is something that's been drawn by a profession and we know it will work. So I might just, You mentioned that, that that might be the condition.

In the state statute, you're required to retain the soils within your perimeter of your property. That means nothing should be going over to your neighbors, and you need to take preventive measures to make that happen. So the civil engineer, I saw Outback on one standpoint. I know them very well. They should be able to come up with a solution and a remedy for that. And it needs to go through the building department.

Absolutely. Yep.

Thank you. Do you live on the right? So as I'm facing this property, you live on the right? Correct. Okay. I said I drove by yesterday, so I'm trying to get a clear picture.

Yeah.

Thank you. Ms. Spencer, anything? No. Mr. Port.

Well, I did have one other thing that I wanted to mention that has absolutely nothing to do with this case, but has something to do with this gentleman here talking about getting the road, he was talking about getting the road repaired. Oh, that was you. If you should somehow get the town of Carver DPW to come and do that, please send them to ricard street because i think we probably got a street that's equal to yours okay i mean there are plenty of streets in carver that need to be repaved and certainly because i drove over there too i i agree with you that street's in tough shape and uh some other parts of town to follow up on that was any of the construction or the work that done on this property

deteriorate that road more or was it already deteriorated and you're looking to have it patched because of the condition currently? That's my question.

There was a dumpster in the middle of the road. There's two big holes in the road in the dumpster.

We got some photos here.

From the construction of this property? Excuse me? From this construction? Yes.

From the demolition of this project?

Yes.

Okay.

And it wasn't, the holes were there before. It's right in front of my driveway there.

But that could be in the dumpsters gone now, yes We have pictures on April 5th 2025 that show that the holes were already there Maybe they were made worse

get heavy equipment running over, you know, an area of the road which is already in disrepair, it's going to make it worse. Board members, continue. Anything else you want to say, Mr. Sullivan? No, I'm good. Mr. Barron? I'm good. Ms. Dahl? Well, she's thinking. Mr. Poirier?

I talked about the road. I feel better.

Ms. Benson. Ms. Gall.

Are there any ramifications from the building department? Are there any penalties or fines or anything that they've already had to deal with as a result of?

I've not fined them for any reason.

Okay.

So I'm saving this for last if everybody else has said their piece. I told you before that I was not happy with this. This is a project that went on despite the fact that you knew that it was beyond the scope of the original building permit that was approved by Mr. Palmer. And you did not let him know that it was beyond the scope or you intended to go beyond the scope of that original building permit. He had to be advised by a neighbor who had concerns. So it feels to me like this construction would have continued Outside the scope of the building permit had not this complaint been received Because you weren't going to say anything We've had this happen before where people start on a project and they decide well, we're going to change this We're going to change that we're going to make it different. We're going to make it bigger And we take a dim view of this this is a clear violation of Carver's Laws. You don't do this. Now I have heard loud and clear from the neighbors that they feel that this project, even when it's completed, will be a benefit to the neighborhood. And I don't suggest otherwise. But I need to think about what to do with what happened here. Because it's wrong. And you folks didn't say anything. The bylaws for the town of Carver allow the zoning board of appeals which is a quasi-judicial board. We're like a court without the folks up here wearing the robes. It allows us to establish penalties for violations. In this case, we have what appears to be, and what I think is troubling a lot of people up here, a violation. Again, I'm not talking about whether this project is a good or a bad one. What I'm saying is that you did not follow the rules, i.e., the laws for the town of Carver. Board members, section 290-5-1-3, again, 290-5-1-3. The penalty for violation of any provision of this bylaw of any of the conditions under which a permit is issued or of any decision rendered by the Board of Appeals shall be up to $300 for each offense. Each day that each violation continues shall constitute a separate offense. Now this is in our bylaws, in the Town of Carver's laws. for an important reason. It's there so that people understand that they need to follow the law. So what are we gonna do with you? I, for one, and I'm just one voice, and I think you've heard up here that I don't take anybody with me. These people all are of independent mind. I'm not prepared to give you a decision tonight. I'm not. I think there's some things that need to happen first, and I'll talk about those in a minute, but I want to go back to what I was just suggesting concerning the penalty. Comments from folks? Did everybody see that citation from which I read? Yep. Ms. Dahl. What are we going to do with them?

I do believe there should be some kind of a penalty for skirting the system like that. That's just not... And you're a builder. You know how that goes. You should know. I mean, whether it was an honest mistake or not, it still kind of throws our building inspector into a tough spot. It throws everybody up here in a tough spot. And it's not fair to all your neighbors either because, like they said, you could have saved yourself a lot of trouble. So, unfortunately... Mr. Sullivan.

I'd like to hear from the other board members first.

Mr. Barenty.

I have no issue that a penalty should be assessed. As I said when I was speaking earlier, that they skirted around doing the right thing. They had the opportunity and didn't do the right thing, and there should be a penalty for that.

Mr. Poirier.

well i'm in agreement in general with people's feeling that there should be some sort of penalty um since this is the first that i'm looking at it i'm i'm trying to ponder myself what seems fair miss spencer i would agree that there should be some type of penalty just for the skirting of the laws and you know it could have been avoided and i like mr foyer would

be open to discussion as to what the penalty should be.

The state building code says explicitly that the person taking out the permit, that would be you, Ms. Ferrier, is lending their name to this project. You're accepting responsibility for how the work gets done. You cannot claim, according to the state building code, the benefit of the permit on the front end and deny the burden of control on the back end. You had control, as did your building, but ultimately the legal control rested with you. And this building went up, it was different than what was permitted, and you got reported. We got outed. And so here we are. Let's talk about the nature of the penalty that this board feels comfortable assessing, if any. And I'm talking financial, per the bylaw. We'll start down at the end again. Ms. Dahl, you need more time to think about it? Yeah. Mr. Sullivan.

So the penalties under the bylaw state $300 per offense per day from the time it was raised. What would be the would it be the stop work order date?

October 21st.

Is that what the intent of that bylaw is leading? However you want to interpret it. You're the judge. You understand what I'm talking about. I mean, I think that's personally, can I ask one question of the, is this your first time you've done a redevelopment and for sale?

No.

So that gives me a different perspective because... One minute, though.

Are you asking she or he?

No, I'm asking her, the owner. Who pulled the permit?

No, this is my first.

This is your first? Yes. And can I have a follow-up question? Being your first, who did you rely on your expertise to make these decisions to move forward?

The builder.

Okay.

Mr. Barrington.

Just brought up an interesting as to stop work order would be I don't think as far as assessing a penalty after that because work has stopped so the date of October 21st but what is the start date? Do we know when...

The infraction happened.

Yeah, so when was the building completely taken down and new construction started? To me, that would be a start date. Do we have that date anywhere? Anybody?

It was on Saturday. Okay.

Mr. Palmer, do you know the date that you drew?

I can tell you the date the building permit was issued. I can tell you the date the stock record was issued. I can't tell you that definitive moment in time when the bulk of the structure was removed and rebuilt. I don't know that.

Well, having not done one of these before, obviously I have no frame of reference, so I feel a little bit at a loss as to how to establish a penalty.

Good common sense is what I would say. Ms. Spencer.

I feel a little bit the same way. I mean, logically it seems like the start date to the stop work order...

I'm going to get back to the penalty issue in a minute, but I also want to discuss the suggestion of Mr. Sullivan, an excellent one, that a civil engineer be retained for stabilization of earth purposes so that this gentleman's property is not invaded by fill that shouldn't be there, and so he doesn't have any flooding concerns, right?

Correct.

And his fence needs to be taken care of. This is at a 20 broad inhabitant.

Correct.

So anything that we eventually do on this case is gonna be conditioned, at least in my opinion. And again, I speak for myself, not everybody up here. It should be conditioned on stabilizing that earth and getting a plan. Formulated by a qualified civil engineer to take care of this gentleman so that his property is not flooded out. And so that Phil isn't coming down like he says it's been coming down. And I don't think you folks disagree with what he said. And his fence needs to be repaired. Everybody agree on that, that those issues should be addressed insofar as number 20 and Brockton Avenue? Yes? Yes. Okay. And because of this, and as I said before, I'm not inclined to ask this board to come to a decision tonight unless somebody wants to make a motion. I think what I'd like to see is for you folks to come back.

No.

And tell us that the issues relating to 20 Brockton Avenue have been satisfied. I'm disinclined to ask this board to go to a decision on the merits without that issue being addressed first. decide eventually to allow this to go forward and to grant the special permit and condition the special permit on satisfying this gentleman in terms of the earth stabilization situation in the fence. And it doesn't happen. then he's going to have a difficult time getting necessary recourse. So our leverage, at least insofar as this neighbor is concerned, this particular neighbor, is to wait until we see that his issues have been satisfied. Also, insofar as that road is concerned, we know, because there are contractors among us that when heavy machinery goes down a street, it tends to tear up a road. Or if the road is already in bad shape, it makes it worse. So another thing that I'd like to see happen is the Department of Public Works, Mr. Poirier's issue here, the Department of Public Works be asked to conduct an inspection of that road. If for no other reason for public safety Because there's gonna be construction vehicles going up and down there, as well as vehicles belonging to the people who already live on that street. So for me, these issues need to be addressed. And they need to be addressed, in my judgment, before we go to a decision on the merits. So that we continue to have leverage, continue to have control over this case. so that we can be sure that these things are followed up on rather than just issuing a decision that's conditioned and then we have to hope that there's follow through.

Mr. Chair, may I add to that? Yes. One of the provisions I'd like to see prior to making the decision is the civil engineer's drawing showing not only the erosion control, but what the end product's going to be, whether it's a retaining wall for that particular, if necessary. And I think that's imperative to actually look at not only the drawings that were submitted for a possible approval for a building permit along with the special permit, but I want a site plan showing us the end result. The neighbors have lived, you know, for six months now in disarray with that particular property. I would like to see it done as soon as possible. For us to make a decision, I would want that paperwork in front of me.

I think we're agreeing here with that.

Okay, great. You had a question?

Mr. Chairman, might I suggest a caveat to that engineered retaining wall? Yes. That the engineer that designs it also be responsible to inspect it when it's complete to ensure that it's been built and constructed according to his plan.

I would agree with that. Building commissions should not be responsible for that.

Right.

But geotech engineers should typically follow that. So the civil engineer piece the road piece through DPW In the road piece with the DPW if it's existing conditions I mean it would be ideal if we had an existing Condition survey prior to the construction then you could tell whether something was damaged or not. You don't have that luxury right now so the conditions are going to be what they are whether they're existing or Or they emphasize that the construction activity is going to be the discussion of topic. Maybe.

Maybe. You had mentioned there are certain things that they can put in place to control the erosion and keep it from getting worse. Is that part of this civil engineer thing? Or can some of that stuff be put in before? Yeah.

If they were on the pond it would even be worse because all of that silt would be in the pond right now and your cost of remediation would be even that much worse. Coopers is a treasured little spot for the whole neighborhood and it's a beautiful location that everybody enjoys. We have concerns just with the amount of septic systems around that pond that can have an influence on that. So any provisions, whether it gets by your neighbor next time and gets down to the pond, it's even going to be worse. So the answer is yes, there is. There's standard protocol.

Should that be in effect now?

I think they contact the civil engineer tomorrow and get their recommendation so the building inspector can approve it.

Okay.

That would be my recommendation.

Anything further on this?

Well, I guess I would say that while they're working on these items that we've been discussing here, it would give us time to maybe think a little bit more about what seems like a proper penalty.

I have a recommendation on the proper penalty, but do you want to go further on that?

No.

Ms. Dahl is all ears.

I would like to hear it, but I also think we should table it and have a further discussion when we get the information because I hate making a decision when I'm heated in a moment. Are you heated in a moment? No, I'm just aggravated.

I think we need to know when What's the start date? When did the issue?

Or you can just pick a number. Yeah, use the May 21st, because that's the stop. I mean, it could have been the Friday before.

You can pick a number without trying to drill down into the weeds on us, because it's going to make you crazy otherwise. So do we want to talk about the number tonight or the next time in? Because we're eventually going to have to make a decision on this issue. Mr. Poirier needs more time, his brow is furrowed. Okay.

I'm okay with holding off.

I'd like further discussion. Ms. Dahl is ready to go tonight, I can tell from her face.

No, I...

He could be next meeting, I didn't mean tonight.

Yeah.

Okay.

So, insofar as what we're going to do tonight, We're going to continue this matter.

Mr. Chair, wouldn't they ask for the continuance?

You want a continuance or you want us to vote?

Yes, please. We can get a continuance if that's what matters.

I thought it was pretty obvious that they would want to continue.

And I also have just one quick question. Sure. So after we get the civil engineer for, like, the blockage of the water, do we get it done before coming or after? Before.

Okay, so this gentleman has issues with water right now.

Yeah, no, there's a stop work order. So we just don't want to go into the property and do something that it's not a violation.

Okay, I just wanted to make sure your property come up with a plan. I just wanted to make sure it's just a stabilization thing.

It's not construction.

Okay, I just wanted to make sure he's just a professional, you know, so you're consulting, right?

Just like this gentleman here. Okay. So we're going to continue this to our next meeting, and we have a date already, don't we? June 24th. June 24th. Mr. Poirier is right on it. He's our keeper of the calendar. June 24th at 6.30. We'll be back in this room. It's the 25th. This is the 25th. Oh, that's why I went Thursday. I'm not going to listen to you. 25th. June 25th. I wouldn't. I wouldn't listen to you. June 25th. Now, that should give you plenty of time. to retain a civil engineer and get them out there to do what's necessary to stabilize that bank.

Mr. Chair, if that paperwork gets submitted to the building commissioner ahead of time, I'd love to be able to have that distributed to us prior to that meeting, if possible.

Yeah, Mr. Palmer is very good about, and the Planning Department generally is very good about getting us paperwork pertinent to all the cases which are coming before us. So if there's a site plan that's generated before our next meeting,

If I may, I'm a little confused with the timelines here. So it was my suggestion that they retain a civil engineer to come up with a special design to prevent that erosion from happening. And they would also go out and do an inspection when it's complete and verify that it's been done according to their plan. Correct. To a level that they won't have any problems. so i don't know that that's possible to do now i think maybe it's possible to have that design created and to present to the board but i don't know if that's possible to do now while it's under construction i think that's something that would be done in the landscaping so i would and i've been through a situation of that nature when

When there's adverse effects occurring because of the construction activity, let's say there's no reason why a professional engineer can't give you recommendations for remediation immediately. So even if there's a stop work order because it's going to prevent further damage or inconvenience to the neighbors. So if the civil engineer is able to provide a documentation on that and provide it to you with a stamp saying this is what we recommend and you're okay with it, The preventive measures to secure the soil conditions is something that could be approved.

I agree with that. I'm just looking at the timeline. So I know that it's possible to take measures today to temporarily secure the erosion but typically a retaining wall is done at the end of the project 100 agree but prior to the retaining wall the silt's going to go in and the protection around that so so this i get that and i agree with you that there are measures they contain yeah but at the end of the day

the paint wall is done during part of the right i agree yep it'll be part one and a part two so yeah so they do the first part first whatever his recommendations are to hold everything steady right now to come in and whatever preventive measures they need to go forward have them just do that now and to follow and then as long as it's acceptable for you that you know i'm going to go a step further and just ask him for an affidavit saying that the wall was installed for the planes effects

So coordinate Ms. Ferriero with the building commissioners office on this. If you have any questions, because you won't be able to reach any of us after this evening until the next board, work with him. Don't go off on your own like you've done already on this project. And we'll see you back here on June 25th. June 25th. June 25th. And we're going to have at this again, we'll address the site planning erosion control issue. And I also want you talking to DPW. That road needs to be inspected and perhaps you can facilitate a conversation, Mr. Palmer, with DPW on that. Because I suspect strongly, without knowing, but suspect strongly that that road and its condition is probably worsened since this construction began.

All of the conversation was all now tomorrow.

Yeah, I think they need to go out there and if it's as bad as everybody says it is, then for no other reason than public safety, something needs to be addressed there. And if it's determined that the road has worsened because of what you're doing out there, then we're going to talk about that the next time, too, as well as the penalty issue. So all of this is going to come to a head next month. We're giving you this extra month so that you can pull things together and satisfy everybody up here. You've heard their opinions. It seems to be pretty unanimous. about how this case should proceed from here. So I thank you for your attention this evening.

And we thank you for taking the time.

Thank you. Thank you.

That's why we're here. So June 25th, we will have one other case that night. So for now, we have two, yours being one. Anything else that either of you would like to say?

No, sir.

Okay, we're not closing the hearing. But we are finishing this evening, and we'll be coming back, as I said, on June 25th. Great. Good night.

Good night.

Thank you.

Wait, is there a school supervisor?

We're not done yet. Yeah, we're not done yet. We're not quite done yet, folks. Just give us a minute. You're okay. You're okay. You two can go. We'll sign everything in a minute. We want to ask if there are any other issues that anybody wants to discuss. Next, we always allow for a moment or two for people to address any new business or any issues that they would like to comment on. And I know Mr. Poirier, his brain is working feverishly. You have anything that you'd like to comment on tonight, Mr. Poirier? No. June? 30th. Anybody else have anything they'd like to say?

Last meeting, I made a recommendation on having a mile-high plan with a stamp put on there moving forward. I think the order of conditions that we put on, a project gets approved moving forward, solidifies that in writing on that plan so that there's no miscommunication. No funny business.

No, that's exactly right.

And I think that would be ideal as far as the civil engineer that provides whatever documentation moving forward.

Well, we've got to lock these plans into place so that there's no after change. Right.

And I didn't mean to open too much on what I was requesting, but I just wanted to make sure they understood.

Right, it wouldn't have affected this, but we would have had something even more to go back to.

That's all. You know, when people do this, I'm not saying they did it, but when people do it, it's contemptuous of the process. You get into deep doo-doo in court if you try to do stuff like this. um and since we are the local court in town enforcing or interpreting the bylaws we have to make sure that we send the right message and the way to send the right message is as mr sullivan just suggested we have a stamped plan so that everybody knows what their obligations are right yeah it takes the pressure off of everybody everybody knows what's expected

The issue that I have about the whole road is that... Which road? The road that they were inquiring about. We don't want to talk about that. I'm not talking about it, but roads in general in Calgary, if they're a private way, usually the Department of Public Works don't get involved. That's true. I don't know if this is a private way or not. Well, that was going to be the only other thing that... You might have to find out if it's been accepted.

DPW will. No, it's not accepted. Okay. No, it's not accepted. Okay. Any other questions or comments, issues that people would like to speak to?

Nope.

Okay. So I think we're in a position where we can adjourn.

No communication to share this evening, Mr. Chairman? No, no. Close your trip. The communications that I have are in the file.

They're from neighbors that say they're happy with their fence now.

All right. Make a motion to adjourn.

Do I hear a second? Second. All in favor? Aye. Good night, Carver. All right, ladies and gentlemen. Come on down.