Planning Commission - Regular Meeting

Heat. Heat. Sorry.

Yeah. Heat. Heat. Hello. All right. Um, good evening, folks. Welcome to the city of Lowe's Appeals public hearing for February 9th. Um, just a few reminders. So, if you have a cell phone electronic device, if you can shut it off or put it on vibrate so it doesn't disrupt the meeting, it' be appreciate it.

Um, also, if you're if you're in person, if you can just sign in and the lect turn, say your name and address for the record um when you talk, that'd be great. You can also join the meeting tonight um via Zoom by planning ahead with DPD. Going into continued business, we have ZBA-2025-55. The petition is a variance. The applica Cruz and Maria Viddell uh property located at 13 Whitney A. The laws and court appeals will hold a public hearing to interested persons relative to an application by the applicant to split an existing lot at 13 Whitney A into three lots. Lot one will be on the site of the existing three-unit building. Lot two will be on the site of a single family home. Lot three will be on the site of a two-unit building. The subject probably slower than traditional two family TTF zoning district. Lot two requires varants under section 5.1 for lot area lot area for dwelling unit usable open space for dwelling unit and for any other relief regarding low zone ordinance. Lot three will require vance under section 501 for lot area patrolling unit maximum stories use open space patrolling unit and any other required in low ordinance. Good evening Mr. Ensley.

Good evening. Um, again, my name is Ian Aninsley. I'm an engineer from Myer Brem. I am here with Joiner De La Cruz, the property owner. So, since the previous hearing, we took a step back and took a look at this plan and, you know, saw what we could do just based on the feedback that we got from the neighbors, from the board, from city staff. We have made, I think, some some good changes. Um, one of the concerns that staff raised was sight distance along here. If you recall, there's a retaining wall along the front of the property that is now proposed to be removed and relocated 15 ft back from the edge of pavement. And what that will do is it will give you clear sight lines when a car is at the street. That front portion between the wall and the street will be flat and so they'll be able to see when they turn out of there either direction. Um, there was a neighbor at the previous hearing that was concerned about the large tree on their property. We've moved the retaining wall further from that tree. There's a note on the plan that states that that tree uh must be preserved during construction. It can't be disturbed, its root system. And we're requiring that the applicant um hire a certified arborist to make sure that that happens during construction. But the biggest change we made is we reduced the quantity of variances in the magnitude of some of those variances. So what we've done is kind of took a look at this kind of rearranged the new lot line that we're proposing and made the single family house lot a little bit bigger. And what that allowed us to do was to get the usable open space on both properties. So we are no longer asking for a usable open space variance. We are also reducing the height of the two family building so that we're no longer asking for a three-story variance. It'll be two and a half and

conform to the zone. And so now the four remaining variances are all lot area and lot area per dwelling unit related. And to kind of aid with that, I have a map of this portion of Bridge Street. So these are the two lots that we would be cutting out here. You have the single family, which is 3,700 ft². You have the two family, which is 5,500. The lots along Bridge Street here, we have a two family that's 3,800. a two family that's 3,900. A one family that's 4,100. A three family that's 4600. A two family that's 2900. And a two family that's 3,300. So when you look at this area, the size and the density of these lots, it makes sense in this area. And it's it's actually a little bit better than some of the other properties in this area. So, as staff actually noted in their memo that the size of these properties and the density of them does fit along this portion of Bridge Street. And I remind the board that this property is very steep. It's a special condition of the property that's along kind of this section of Bridge Street here that might not necessarily affect all the other lots, you know, in this area. And that's that's going to require, you know, a lot of cost to to develop this property and and to deal with that. So that's really what we have and I'm happy to answer your questions.

Okay. Thank Thank you, Mr. Hley. You have nothing further. We'll open up the hearing to the public. Um, anyone wishing to speak in opposition's petition? Good evening, sir.

Good evening. I'm loud enough I don't need a mic, but thank you. uh sharing out with the I'm speaking for myself also for the home owner of 79 with the ROS we above that property this changes that have been brought forward really not that big to us you know I know he pushed the wall back but they're still asking for one of these properties to be built on almost you know less than half of the required And I know he says, "Well, this house over here has it and this house over here." And unfortunately a lot of times l forgets that the motto is art is the handmade of human good and not would have always done it this way. Just because past zoning boards have allowed undersized lots doesn't mean that this zoning board should not enforce the lot sizes that are in our zoning of 7,000 square ft. As some of you are aware, we just have a massive snowstorm trying to get out of 18 street onto Bridge Street. It's tough. My ins pictures of cars that are in some of the houses that are already there blocking sidewalks because they didn't have anywhere to put the snow and they le they're going to face the same problem after this that my understanding is they're going to have to tie into storage and some of you may be aware is about to undergo a $36 million storage separation that's going to tear up roadways and cause people right in that neighborhood. Billing Street, L Street, Brick Street, 19th Street, 20th Street, and Will are

all going to be under construction for the next part of the next six years. 18th Street and with the A where the original building is that section is going to be to blow up sometime between 2028 and 2032. That neighborhood is going to be suffering enough with traffic and construction and to put another under. We had met the gentleman after the meeting last time. We told him if you just wanted to put one two families the neighborhood is not quite that but determined to try to squeeze in an underside and that's not favor the rest of us. Thank you.

Thank Thank you. Uh anyone else wishing to speak in opposition? Good evening councelor.

Uh Corey Robinson, 5 West 10th Street. Again, I think the concessions made were minimal. um you're dropping half a story. You needed a variance to do that half a story. Anyways, um the 15 ft back from Bridge Street, you're still going out onto Bridge Street. So, in the morning, during morning rush hour, afternoons, 4, 5, 6:00 p.m. It doesn't matter if you're 15 or 5t from Bridge Street, you're still dealing with traffic and that backs up at that intersection something bad. I don't know if a traffic study's been done to understand what whoever potential tenants or whoever's living in that house would have to face. But and then in addition, the biggest I think sticking point that I hope this board really takes a look at is that neighborhood has done 130 140 plus units of of housing in the past 18 months. And a lot of that has come through this board and you've guys worked tirelessly to to find a compromise with the developers. Whether it was looking for starting out 16 on street parking spaces has been whittleled down and and figured out. This project is pretty much the lots are under uh undersized for what they're doing and that just continued that they're back here looking for these variances. And to me that just points out again it's profit driven. It's it's it's a disregard to the concerns the neighborhood has brought. This is the second time, I believe, that we came and spoke. So, as a result, it's it's just a complete ignoring of any concerns, chasing the profit as a developer, and I I understand it. I mean, you're going to invest and that's great, but scale down and please make the project fit the neighborhood. Don't make the neighborhood have to fit your project. Thank you.

Thank you, counselor. Um, anyone else wish to speak in opposition? All right, seeing none, that portion of public hearing is close. Anyone wishing to speak in favor of his petition in favor? You go to the electron, sir. Go ahead.

Hi, my name is John Del Cruz. I'm the property owner. Um, I spoke to some of the neighbors uh last time we were here. I think that we address um majority of their concerns. Um like Ian said, this development doesn't make sense if we don't try to push as much as we can and um we have to build a big retainable wall that's going to cost a lot of money. Um uh I moved four minutes away from the property just so I take care of it very well. All the trash from Whitney Avenue from Whitney Avenue and up on on my on my street. I keep the the the lot clean. I keep the the whole property clean. I think my that house is the cleanest. I try to clean the snow on time. I'm a good um um landlord and I'm a good neighbor. I believe um when I met uh this gentleman the first time I met him, I told him that any you have any problems with the tenants, you can call me. I'll get him rest. I'll get it fixed uh as soon as I can. Um yeah, that's that's all I have to say.

Thank Thank you, sir. Thank you. Anyone else wish to speak in favor of this petition? In favor? In favor? All right. Seeing none the public hearings close. We're going to open question and comments to the board. Uh chair recognizes Mr. Prote.

Yeah. Thank you, Mr. Chairman. Um, I appreciate the neighbors coming out to to make their their comments and um I appreciate that the applicant is making investments in in the neighborhood. Um, but I have to say that with the upcoming in constructions that's going on in in that neighborhood and it's not just $36 million. It's actually $350 million that's being invested um in sewer water separation and it does start by on Bridge Street Billings. I just think that we have to think of a way to to make things palatable and I I think the variance is a little too much in in my opinion. Um there's a lot of changes and I think from a zoning perspective we should try to adhere to as much um to the zoning bylaws as we can. And I mean there is always some wiggle room as far as um you know variances you know when it comes to you know making the signs more conducive but I think the location of this property and the to the point the traffic and the construction that's going on that's going to be happening there and not just because of the construction itself but I just think that location is very risky. Um I think it should be a little more um it should be more uh there should be less of a variance. Uh going down from six to four is okay, but the size I I I just think that you know we we need to

do a little more compromising on that. Um, under under these circumstances, I I I would have to not vote on this or vote and no on this. Thank you, Mr. Chairman. Thank Thank you, Mr. Proco. Uh, the chair recognizes Mr. Hav. Mr. Hav, the floor is yours, sir.

Thank you. Moving the retaining walls back, dropping down half a story. Uh, I think they're good effort. Uh, I'm all for development and I know Senville's taken a lot um on their back as far as development. I think this property um could maybe should be developed. Where I have an issue is it can be developed at a lower scale. So instead of splitting into three different spots and asking for a bunch of variances, if we just went to two with the multif family house, uh we probably wouldn't be in front of this board. So development's good, but it has to be smart development. It has to fit the neighborhood. Um, you know, maybe if this project was somewhere else, uh, less dense, less traffic, um, we'd have more of an argument here, but we're talking about on one of the busier streets in the city. Um, where we rarely could develop something that fits and isn't um taxing so much on on the neighborhood. So, uh I appreciate the changes. Um I don't think I can support uh a project that could not need variances. Um and I get uh financially maybe that it has to be, but financial is not a hardship. It's not something we can take into consideration. um because I think this could be uh separated to just two instead of three and then you wouldn't be in front of us. So uh I can't support it as it is. I couldn't support it um last time were in front of us and and

the changes while I appreciate them they they um didn't move the N needle in my opinion. Thank thank you Mavi. Uh the chair recognizes Mr. McCarthy. Mr. McCarthy, the floor is yours, sir. Uh

thank you Mr. Chairman. Um I I I um am amazed at the height of these retaining walls. Um and they go up to 13 feet. Is that correct? Um those are sizable retaining walls that come at a dramatic cost. I I I would I would wonder if the idea of going to the third unit and doing these heroic retaining walls is is a is a is worth it. Um you would you would do two units on the lot by right and I would even suggest maybe you have a access easement off of um off of Whitney A maybe uh to get to this front lot and not have to deal with the retaining walls at all and save I don't know whether you've done the proformer to see the costs on the site work here but it's it's dramatic There could be dewatering. There could be ledge removal. Most likely there's ledge removal. It's um I think the ask is too much. Um but um in addition, I think the cost is hard to we've we've had projects like this come before us before. Uh, it reminds me of one on First Street and I I was looking through um real estate and the one that we had in front of us on First Street that we approved was cont uh uh there was a a a lawsuit against the city by one of the residents. I'm looking at those lots being developed now as uh four units and again it's like you know 13 foot high retaining walls. I don't know how these costs work out in on

these projects, but I I don't know if this one even will happen. This was a couple years ago on First Street. What I'm starting what I'm saying is that um I think the costs are going to be enormous here. Um I I don't feel comfortable approving this to begin with, but I think more importantly, I think that before you even come in front of us, you should have some numbers as to the site costs, maybe some borings done to understand if it even makes sense. I don't know if that's been done. Do we know how much ledges there? I don't think your mic still understands. Like you just press a little button there. Yeah, should be green. Is it working now? Yeah.

Okay. Uh, I think he has spoken to a contractor. I don't know if we've gotten exact numbers, but kind of a ballpark. Um, you know, because of the grade on the site, whether you do the two family by right or, you know, splitting it into the two family and the one family, you're going to have serious grading and retaining walls. Either way, I I beg to differ with you. I think that you could possibly uh have an access easement off of Whitney AB to that front lot through the um existing and and then your retaining walls would be minimized. You'd have to fill it to do that, but I know you're saying,

right, two to one slope up against Bridge Street and then there's no traffic on Bridge Street. It it's a win-win for everybody. Um and I I mean, uh Mr. to nutter. I don't know how you feel about blasting going on nearby, but that's a that's a that's a tough site. I I I think we should um in my opinion uh um withdraw without prejudice and come back with a better understanding as to the site and what you can do there. But I I I can't support this. Thank you.

Thank Thank you, Mr. McCarthy. Uh the chair recognizes the vice chairman, Malian. Floor is yours, sir. Thank you, Mr. Chairman. Um, I appreciate the applicants uh going back to the drawing board and coming back with something and um, you know, at least reducing the number of variances that were previously requested. Um, um, and I certainly appreciate the still the sentiments of the and the uh, concerns of the neighborhood and I'm glad that you met with them afterwards to go over it and tried to work some sort of compromise. Um the property has a lot of as as is the property has a lot of challenges obviously especially with the topography and the need of the retaining walls and whatnot and um same to Dennis's point I was even wondering why there's no cons there was no consideration of possibly uh an easement access to Whitney a as opposed to on Bridge Street because that's that's a big that is certainly is a big challenge as well because it's a state highway and um heavily trafficked And um and I believe also there were some comments and I can't recall if we discussed it last time about possible street trees and I think you mentioned did you mention the street trees LA did we discuss street trees at the last hearing?

I don't know if we did. I know we talked about the tree on the abiding property. Yeah. tree removal in general.

And that's something that was brought up by um by by staff in their comments about, you know, possibly conditioning approval and planting of street trees, which would make that access on Bridge Street um even 10 times worse, even though I know Dennis would be certainly uh very very happy if that occurs and many of the board would as well. But um that being said, um I'm sharing the same sentiments as my fellow board members. just there's a lot of challenges here. Um you have can by right go to two two units and if you're if it comes economically feasible for your client hope they can consider doing that um I would also possibly hope they consider the possibly access if they do proceed easement access via Whitney a as opposed to on Bridge Street because it's just it's it's just very challenging to to do that. So, uh, I just I don't see myself as is approving this and, um, you may want to consider what Dennis probably proposed and see if we can move this along, but if if if it's if if something can be done. So, um, that's those that's my opinion. So, thank you.

Thank you, Mia. Uh, Tog Mr. Shenan floor, sir.

Thank you. Um, with regard to these variances, I'm not as much concerned about it's dumping out the Bridge Street. I mean, that's going to be the same problem as every other resident has on that stretch anyway. And I don't think three units is going to significantly add to traffic. It becomes a rental issue. You know, it's going to be market rate based on location. So, I don't see that really coming into play with the variances. But, as I said last time, the problem is, and I echo everyone else, is is the difficulties with the topography of this area. And I appreciate the property owner coming in today and the fact that he did reach out to neighbors. But again, that property existed in that condition at the time that he purchased it. And again, it's a real balancing act here between what makes financial sense, not necessarily to make profits and and and and hit me bucks here, but it's just about is it feasible economically to do this. So, I understand why he's trying to fit these three units in here. Um, but again, as as the other board members had stressed, it's it's a big ask for that particular location on Bridge Street. And would agree that any, you know, putting this off without prejudice to revisit, you know, at at another time gives you guys another bite at the apple.

Thank you.

Thank you, Mr. Canyon. Um, Mr. Sinsley, I don't want to belabor this um topic, but um I appreciate you working with the neighbors and the butters to kind of reduce some of the the the needs and the varants and and everything. Um I think like my colleagues, I I do want to see it scaled down to size-wise. I I understand it is a difficult lot. um the layout, the landscape. Um and and again, I think the neighbors have been very reasonable with their requests and comments. Um I just think it's too much of an ask myself personally, too. Um I I don't see myself supporting it. Um but again, you and your client have all the options. I think you heard the comments of the of the board. you can go forward with a vote uh you know a yes or no vote for the the Branson special permit or you can you know the other option is to withdraw without prejudice too that's an option for you so

so my suggestion would be to withdraw without prejudice and come back later when you know yep maybe you don't have to come back some of the the members said you can just scale down and do it just by the permitting process sure so I'd like to request that we formally withdraw without Prejudice. Sure. Okay. All right. If there's no further comments, can we have a motion, please, to withdraw? Three. Mr. Chairman, I'd like to make a motion for ZVA 2025-55 for variance at 13 Whitney A to be withdrawn without prejudice. All right. Motion by Mr. McCarthy. Second. Second by Mr. Proco. Can roll call, please.

Uh, Chairman Pek, uh, approved with our prejudice. Um, Vice Chair Callalahan, approved withdrawal without prejudice. Member McCarthy, approve withdrawal without prejudice. Uh, member ProP approve withdrawal without prejudice. Member Hovie, approve. Uh, member uh Shanahan, approve.

Item's been uh withdrawn. Wish you best of luck. Okay. All right. Moving on to new business. We have ZBA-2025-57. The petition is a variance applicant until interested persons relative to an applicant by the applicant to construct a second floor addition to the property at 351 Parker Street. the subject properties located in the traditional single family TSF zoning district. The addition requirements under section 5100 for max employer F and final brief require low zoning ordinance.

Good evening ma'am.

My name is Kendra men and I work for men construction and I am here for Kayla today. Um we are the ones that are going to be working on this project if allowed. Um the homeowner would like to take out the existing interior staircase. They would like to have one built outside, use the existing um footprint of the home on the second that is the on the first floor to have on the second floor um by adding three additional bedrooms and moving the bathroom um to where the staircase was and having a utility closet um and laundry. Okay. Thank Thank you, ma'am. Um, if there's nothing further, we'll open the hearing to the public. Um, anyone wishing to speak in opposition petition in opposition. All right. Seeing none, that portion of public hearing is closed. Anyone wishing to speak in favor of this petition? In favor? All right. Seeing none, the public hearing is closed. We're going to open questions and comments to the board. Uh, the chair recognizes uh Mr. Hubby. Mr. Happy to close yours, sir.

Thank you. Uh, quick question. Is there still going to be access interior access? So, it's going to stay one family. It's a two family home. It's a two family home. So, the second floor, um, there is already another staircase that where they have access through the front door. This would be taking out the existing staircase that's at the side door. Okay. Um, so then we would build the one at the exterior. Okay. Um, yeah, I don't think the ask is much. Um, we're staying within the same footprint. The F is not different than most of the neighborhood. It was it was 0.61 and it's going to 0.69 for this. Yeah. The floor area ratio. Is that what you're Yeah, I think it's like

it's not much. 29 is moving. What? Regardless, I don't think it's it's a big ask. Um, again, we're within the same footprint. Um, and we're just adding bedrooms, right? Yep. And a bathroom. Is it bedroom and bathroom? Bedroom and bathroom. Yeah, I don't have any. Well, there's already existing bathroom. We're just moving it over. Moving it. Yeah, sure. Yep. No problem. All right. I don't have any issues with this. Okay. Thank Thank you, M. Uh, the recognizer, Mr. McCarthy. Mr. McCarthy, the floor is yours, sir. Uh, thank you, Mr. Chairman. Um, I I go by this property I I've been going by this property for over 40 years.

Okay. And it has improved. so much in the last few years and I really am glad um that it's going to be improved even more now. This is a beautiful addition. Um uh Kaylor is doing a fabulous job taking care of the property. Um so we're really grateful to have him in the neighborhood and I I don't see this um uh one variance for F that's a minor uh request. I don't see this as something that I can't support. So, thank you. Thank you. Thank you, Mr. McCarthy. Uh the chair recognizes the vice chairman, Miss Kelly. The floor is yours, sir.

Thank you, Mr. Chairman. Um same I I echo the same sentiments as my fellow board members. I don't see any really concerns. This is a very minimal request. Um and uh yeah, I wish you the best of luck. Thank you. Thank you. Thank you, Mr. Vice Chairman. Um the chair recognizes Mr. um Shenhen. Flo is yours, sir. Thank you. Um think the project's very straightforward. Um minimal variance. Um I'll be voting in favor. Thank you, Mr. Ch. Uh chair recognizes Mr. Pro. Mr. Pro is yours, sir.

Thank you, Mr. Chairman. Um again, this is a very minimal ask and I think that it's a great addition. I think it's a great plan what you're doing. So, uh I'll be v voting in favor. Thank you, Mr. Chairman. Thank you, Mr. Proco. Yeah, I don't have any concerns. I think this is a minimal ask. Um, side note, big fan of your channel, so nice seeing you in person. All right, if there's no further comments, can we have a motion, please? Mr.

Three, Mr. Chairman, I'd like to make a motion for ZBA 2025-57 for variance at 351 Parker Street. And the variance is to increase um the uh to exceed the maximum floria ratio um and to ex uh increase the existing from 23 to 29. Second. All right. Motion by Mr. McCarthy, second by Mr. Hubby. Can roll call, please. Chairman Pek, approve. Vice Chair Callahan, approved. Member McCarthy, approve. Member Pro, approve. Member Hovy approve. Member Shanahan approve.

All right, you've been approved. Wish you best of luck, ma'am. Thank you.

All right, moving on to new business. On the next item on the agenda, we have ZBA- 2025-58. Petition is a variance. Applicant is Danny Vera. Uh property located at 202 Barker A. Um the low planning board and the low zing board appeals to hold the public hearing until interested persons relative to an application by the applicant to split the existing lot at 202 Barker A and construct a single family home on the new lot. The subject properties located single family TSF zoning district. The proposal requires special for approval from the planning board under section 5.1.7 to reduce the frontage requirement. The existing lot requires Vance relief from the zoning group of appeals under section 5.1 for the room lot area minimum law for join area ratio and for any other requiring low zoning ordinance. The newly created a lot requires a variance relief from the zoning board appeals under SE section 5.1 lot area and require ordinance. Good evening councelor.

Thank you Mr. Chairman. Good evening to all. For the record my name is John Giri of Gary and Gary LLP 32 Church Street Lass. I'm here tonight representing uh Danny Rivera. Danny is here with us tonight. Danny is the applicant and the owner of 202 Barker Avenue. We also have Matt Hammer from Landplex. Uh in advance of tonight's hearing, we have submitted the typical application materials, including the site plan, which has been revised a couple of times now. Uh you have that most recent revision in front of you that Matt just uh delivered to you all. We also provided the um elevations and floor plans for the proposed home on the uh lot that we're intending to create. And we've provided provided a neighborhood exhibit plan. The subject property presently consists of 11,68 square ft of land. Contains a single family home with three bedrooms, one and a half baths. It's on the corner lot corner. It's a corner lot on the corner of Baka Avenue and By Street. Um, in addition to the single family home that's situated on the lot, there's also two detached garage structures that Mr. Reber uses to store some of his contractor equipment within. Um, if all approvals are obtained at some point, then Mr. Rivera intends to demolish those garages to make way for the proposed home. The proposed home uh is a three-bedroom, two bath home with about 2200 square ft of living space. Um, as the chairman mentioned, we're here tonight looking to uh split this existing lot into two lots in order to create a second lot for a single family home for the construction of a new single family home. The lots are identified on the site plan as lot one and lot two. Lot one is where the proposed home would be. That lot is proposed to have 6,842

ft of land. Lot two is the uh lot with the existing home and that lot has 4,226 square feet of land. Uh in terms of the relief that we're requesting tonight, so for lot one, we're requesting relief for lot area, lot area per dwelling unit. For lot two, we're requesting relief for lot area, for uh floor area ratio, and for frontage. Um, in terms of the lot area uh relief that we're requesting, both lots, we we've provided the neighborhood exhibit plan, that exhibit plan gives the board a pretty good sampling of the lot sizes in the immediate neighborhood and and shows that there are several many lots um I would suggest the majority of the lots of less than 7,000 square feet um in very close proximity to the to this property and many of those lots actually 5,000 square feet or less. Um so what we are proposing in terms of lot size for both lots is certainly uh within character of the existing neighborhood. In terms of frontage uh my narrative you may have noted suggested that we were uh going to the planning board uh for a special permit to reduce frontage pursuant to section 5.1.17. Uh so which allows us to reduce frontage from up to 50 15 feet. So we were proposing to come down from 70 ft to 55 ft. Uh we were the before the planning board last Monday evening. Uh the planning board voted uh 3 to2 in favor of the special permit. But however uh we need a super majority for that special permit and because it was a 3 to2 vote the special permit was denied. Since then, I've had conversations with DPD staff and we have determined that we can uh seek relief for their frontage uh before this board this evening and go back to the planning board on a new

application for definitive subdivision approval. So, that is exactly what we're intending to do. Uh which is and and that's why we're requesting the relief for the frontage tonight. in terms of the frontage uh the you know the narrative uh I'll refer you back to that exhibit plan the neighborhood exhibit plan I identify almost 20 lots in the immediate neighborhood be between by street and uh billing street that have 50 ft or less of frontage. So certainly what we are proposing is in is consistent with and in character with what currently exists within the neighborhood and and the re the relief being requested is I would suggest appropriate. Uh in terms of the floor area ratio request for relief for lot 2, that house has a pull down attic with with significant attic height. Um and it has a full basement which really throws off the floor area ratio calculation. So we need uh we need relief for floor area ratio for lot two as well. Uh we have received and we've reviewed the staff comments. The bulk of the comments are from the project uh project management and uh planning team and the um and the engineering comments. Uh so we've made some revisions to the to the plans to address some of those concerns which were to identify the size of the trees on the lot particularly the trees within the right of way um and to show the amount of imperous material on the site. So we are actually reducing the amount of imperous material by about 1500 square feet which is about 29%. That's a significant reduction in imperous materials. Uh in terms of the trees, we're not removing any trees within the public right of way. There might be one tree uh towards the back of the lot that Matt would be able to point out that is leaning that might have to come down, but we're proposing two new trees. So,

there's a net gain of trees on the lot. Um I'll leave the um you know, the Matt when Matt's reviewing the plans, he he will be addressing most of those comments uh from staff. Um, ultimately here we believe that what we are requesting can be done without any detriment to the public good. We're increasing housing within the city. We're really enhancing the curb appeal of this corner lot from what currently exists on this lot. Uh, relief can also be granted with any without any substantial detriment to the I'm sorry, with any substantial deriggation from the intent of the traditional single family zoning district. Again, what we are proposing is very much in line with what exists in this immediate neighborhood. So, with that, I'll turn the presentation over to Matt and he can review the the plans with the board.

Thank you, councelor. Good evening, Mr. Hammer.

Uh, good evening. Um, my name is Matt Hammer with Lamplex Engineering, uh, 60 Fletcher Street, Lass. So, existing on the property is a is a um single family residence. Um there's multiple um drives that access that residence of which will be removing this driveway here in restoring the um the uh shoulder to uh by street by the removal of that uh gravel and uh reveating that area with loom and seed. The parcel is 11,000 approximately 11,000 square ft. The proposed lot here is 4,226 square ft. And what we'll do here is uh provide two parking spaces uh as well as drainage uh for that um paved area and then leaving essentially everything around the existing dwelling in order to service that lot. The newly created lot shown as lot one is 6,842 square ft. As I said, the driveway will be reconfigured to just have a two um car parking next to the proposed dwelling as well as two uh proposed shade trees um located uh here and here. the the primary um comments from the engineering department were specific to identifying the existing trees as well as providing more detail for the sewer and the water connection uh to the proposed dwelling.

And this dwelling will also uh be providing full drainage uh for the um for the for the the home and the um paved area for the parking. And that's my initial presentation. Thank you, Matt. So, Mr. Chairman, that's all we have. We're happy to answer any questions or try to address any concerns that the board members may have. Thank you.

Thank Thank you, counselor. Um, now we're going to open the hearing to the public. Anyone wishing to speak in opposition this petition? In opposition. All right. Seeing none, that portion of public hearing is closed. Anyone wishing to speak in favor petition? In favor? All right. Seeing none, the public hearing is closed. We're going to open questions and comments from the board. Uh the chair recognizes Mr. McCarthy. Mr. McCarthy, the floor is yours, sir. Uh thank you, Mr. Chairman. Um it's a it's a nice change to see the reduction of 29% of uh Yeah. of pvious material. Yeah.

And and and we're getting another residence in the city that's a reasonable size. um uh three-bedroom residence that's certainly not extravagant and and hopefully it's not priced at a million dollars. It might sit there for a while. I understand. All right. Um um I I just want to try to understand the uh list of variances. You mentioned the F. Um so the proposed lot one has uh on this document uh F at 32 and.35 is allowed. So you don't exceed the F on lot one

on right the proposed lot two is where we exceed the F. So we're looking for a variance for F on lot two. Okay. And then you're looking for a variance for frontage on lot two. And then you're looking for these other four variances. Minimum lot area and minimum lot area per dwelling on lot two and minimum lot area. Minimum lot area per dwelling um on lot one. Yeah. Yeah. Lot area and lot area per dwelling in the TSF district go hand in hand.

And actually Yeah. And usable open space on lot one as well. So that's something that I did not mention but you but correct uh member McCathy u both lots one and two uh lot area and lot area per dwelling unit which again go hand in hand if you don't have the lot area you're not going to have the lot area per dwelling unit. Seven variances. Yeah I I know it's it seems like a lot. Um, but it, you know, again, what's what we're proposing is consistent with what we see in this immediate neighborhood.

Uh, you know, the GIS uh exhibit that you provide is pretty telling. Uh, it's it's extremely telling. Uh, and and that's not even trying to reach for more. That's just going for the TSF district that you're in. and um you kind of uh hope that our new zoning code that we're going to be uh developing in the city will will do something about this. But um so uh five of the variances have to do with the lot area, lot area per dwelling unit, minimum lot area. And then we have the frontage which is also very much um aligned with the the neighborhood and then the F which I'm not quite sure how that so that that one is the outlier in my opinion that that's a bigger but anyway I don't know how that uh responds to the F on these existing lots that are smaller but okay. Um and then if if this were to happen, how how are we addressing the trees? Uh so the comment from the uh city engineer was uh we don't have existing trees identified as far as um on the ex on the new plan or are they?

They are identified actually. Um they were added here on the corner. Okay. add it here and then there was a tree within the property here. Okay. And then there's one in the rear which um attorney Gary said that that one actually is leaning precariously towards the new dwelling. So we're anticipating that that tree will have to be removed.

Well, um I I would like to condition the 14 comments from the engineering department as a condition u of approval if that's all right. Um Um okay. Um seven seven seven. Okay. You know it it it is what it is. Uh it does fit into the neighborhood for sure. And we're gaining uh a lot more green space and we're getting gaining street trees. So a lot of gains here. We're gaining a reasonably priced property with only three bedrooms. It's not like a McMansion or anything. uh out street parking for both. Um uh I think that's all I have.

I would also suggest that the you know I'm sure you've all been by the lot. Um it's you know it's not a very sightly lot as it currently exists. Um you know creating this additional lot constructing the single family home on it and landscaping that lot I think is going to go a long way to enhancing this corner lot. for the neighborhood. I agree. I agree. Okay. Thank Thank you, Mr. McCarthy. Thank you. Uh chizes the vice chairman, Miss Callahan. The floor is yours, sir.

Yes. Thank you, Mr. Chairman. Uh yep. I agree, council. It is I have gone by that lot is really unsightly and does would uh fixing it up and cleaning it up would be beneficial for the neighborhood and for the city. Um and thank you for providing the analysis of the GIS. Um, yes, there are numerous lots well below um the $70,000 square ft uh especially in the general vicinity of the of the of the property. Um and uh looking at the information you provided including the deed um and the description of the property and it looks like at some point these two lots were just merged together at some point during the course of the uh the history of the property. Uh I tried to go online. It goes back to about 1967 I think or so where that was around the time where it just got merged

uh together. So um it look I would I would hint that you know these were se to be two separate lots at at some point back in the day. And uh I think um no unmerging them at this point to add in an additional uh single family residents uh would be beneficial to the city and add another um property to the tax role. So um yes, a lot of variances, but um I see no opposition. Uh there's really nothing from staff or any other the departments that I can see that have any real issues. Um, so I uh I would probably be voting in favor for this. So I wish you the best of luck. Thank you.

Thank you. Yeah. And staff actually concludes that the the uh project meets the character of the neighborhood. The proposal meets the character of the neighborhood. Thank you. All right. Thank Thank you. Uh Mr. Vice uh recognizes Mr. Shenan. The floor is yours.

Thank you. Um, I agree with attorney Gary that raising these structures, these garages or storage uh structures that are there now, putting a modest size home on that lot would certainly, to use the word, enhance curb appeal, I think would be uh a nice improvement to that area where you're still maintaining green space on the corner. um given the number of variances, it seems again excessive, but if you take them one by one, case by case, it's really not that big of an ask. Um and again, I'm happy to see modest single family dwellings going up in this city and neighborhood like this versus, as Mr. McCarthy said, these McMansions that, you know, seem to pop up everywhere where someone's trying to maximize profit. So, um I think it's it's a good project. think it's good use of that lot. Thank you.

Thank you. Thank you, Mr. Han. Uh chair recognizes Mr. Pro, sir.

Yep. Thank you, Mr. Chairman. Uh I echo the sentiments of my fellow members. Um simply because um it does make sense um just based on some of the previous applications in in the Sunville area. Uh this seems to be very conservative from that standpoint. And again, the fact that you are going to have uh a modest a modest home and it's going to be landscaped, I I think it it would um it'd be a nice addition, you know, to that area. Um it's unfortunate you have to remove one of the trees, but um you know,

Yeah. I think it's a net gain of trees anyway. We're gaining at least one extra tree. Yeah. Yeah. So, yep. I I think it's it's a good project. So, I'll be voting in favor. Thank you, Mr. Chairman. Thank Thank you, Mr. Proco. Uh check Mr. Hav. Mr. Hav the floor is yours, sir. Thank you. Um I I think some of the variances Mr. Rivera lives in lot two currently. Yes. Okay. So you're building a lot one with somebody in lot two. So they're they're aware of what they're getting, right? Cuz it's his project.

The side setback on lot two, that can't change. It's already 1.3 ft away from the neighbor. That's regardless. That's not new construction. That's existing. So um and even the F that's on the existing house. that's not something that new construction is um coming up with. Um I think one of the arguments that falls flat is saying it's going to be an improvement on lot one. Well, he currently owns lot one, so it should improve his lot anyways. So, that's not a reason to to approve something is the lot's not getting taken care of. And if we allow this building, then it will be taken care of. Well, ideally, we take care of our property uh regardless of if we're getting variances to build on it. That being said, um this isn't out of line with the neighborhood. Uh the fact that property owner is staying in the lot, I think that's going to be the tightest, um kind of leans towards, okay, we're not trying to just jam this in. um everything's above board. Everybody knows what they're getting. And I think this uh will, you know, obviously enhance that that uh part of the neighborhood. But um yeah, I I think the fact that, you know, seven sounds like a lot, but when we're talking about some aren't because of the splitting of the lot or or the new build or anything, you kind of have to take that into consideration. uh and I do and I think this is a you know I mentioned a little bit earlier smart development I think this is part of that it's a it's a lot that can be developed without affecting everybody around them uh so I will vote in favor of this

thank you thank thank you Mavi um councard I I really like this plan I think it fits well like in the comments from city u in line with the neighbor neighbor characteristics um and again no No butter is against I think um you could have asked for more but I think it would have been more difficult. So I think this is very appropriate um project here. Um so I have no concerns and then the only condition we have is the comments from engineering to include those. Yes, we're agreeable to that. Okay. All right. Any other comments from my colleagues? We move forward with a motion.

Oh, Mr. McCarthy. Go ahead, sir. If I could just be clear on the one other um we we added the frontage uh minimum or um uh frontage um variance for for uh lot two, but we're adding a usable open space for lot two as well. Lot two. Okay, got it. Thank you. Okay. Thank Thank you, Mr. McCarthy, for the clarification. All right. There's no further comments. Can a motion, please?

Three. Mr. Chairman like to make a motion for ZBA 2025-58 for variances at 202 Barker A. Variances are for lot two for minimum lot area, minimum lot area per dwelling unit, maximum floor area uh for street frontage and for usable open space and variances for lot one uh minimum lot area, minimum lot area per dwelling unit. um uh with the uh condition that we adopt the 14 comments from the engineering department. All right. Motion by M. McCarthy. Second. Second by Mr. Proco. Um can we have a roll call, please? Chairman Peek.

Uh approve of condition. Vice Chair Callahan, approve of conditions. Member McCarthy, approve with condition. Member uh ProP approve with conditions. Um, member Hovie approve. Member Shanahan approve. All right, you've been approved. Wish you the best of luck. Appreciate your time. Thank Thank you.

Have a good evening. Uh, moving on to the next item on the agenda. Here we have ZBA-2026-1. The petition is variance. Uh, the applicant is Jack Lee. property located at 150 East Meadow Road. The low board of appeals will hold a public hearing to interest the person's relative to an application by the applicant for an existing addition. The subject properties located in the traditional neighborhood single family TSF zoning district. The addition will require a variance under section 5.1 for maximum floor area ratio F minimum lot square footage minimum land area per dwelling unit LA and DU minimum frontage front yard setback and for any other rel ordinance. Good evening Mr. Lee.

Uh hello everyone. So my name is Jack. Um um I'm present today is for my um uh actual owner is uh Fong Le and Bichung Lamb is uh my father and my mom. So they they cannot speak English well so I uh help them. So um basically that the the um uh we living at uh 150 East Meadow Road uh lower Massachusetts 1854. So uh since 2014 and um uh so the things happened is during uh uh co and uh we home and I have uh two kid um born in uh 2018 2019 and um 2020 we start to adding like additional uh to extend a little bit space because uh we have only two uh bedroom at home and um we have no room for the kid. So during that time that um uh I decide we we both decide uh together uh uh gather some money and then uh hire the construction to do the the additional for the the house. So the the square feet is around like 14 by 15 and it's going to be like um uh additional like uh living room because uh me and my me and my wife so going to stay in on the living room because uh uh the two kids going to stay in the uh the first room on the first floor and uh during that time that um um we don't know about that we have to go through a lot of like a permit and stuff like that because um um immigrants here in 2008. So, uh everything is like um uh new for us. So, uh we just go with the friends tell us to do and stuff like that. So, really hope that um I have to go through a lot of stuff. So, Mary had to help me a lot. Yeah.

Thank you. Thank Thank you, Mr. Lee. Um we have no further comments for an open hearing to the public. Um anyone know she can speak in opposition petition in opposition? Seeing none, that portion public hearing is closed. Anyone wishing to speak in favor petition in favor? Seeing none, the public hearings closed. We're going to open questions and comments to the board. Now, uh the chair recognizes uh the vice chairman, Mr. Kellan, the floor is yours, sir.

Thank you. Three, Mr. Chairman. Um sir, unfortunately, I I understand the need, but I'm looking I think the application is incomplete. I don't know what it is you're actually trying to include or what adding. All we have is a a site plan. Um we usually would like to see, you know, the existing interior of the property. Uh so you're not you're just you're just adjusting are you just adjusting things inside the property? Like nothing's getting added on to the getting added on to the residence or anything, right? Yeah. No.

Okay. Um normally we get floor plans that show what the existing like first floor is, what the existing second floor is. Yes. third what's going on the third floor um and what are you proposing to do and all we got in here as far as I can tell from the application is just a site plan um that doesn't even is I can't even tell what what what it is that we're adding on um or what the additions are going to be what you're asking for how you how how we how we're why you're here as to you know asking for all this relief from the variance I can't based on just a site plan alone. I can't I can't understand what it is. So,

uh yes. Uh so, the the addition is already built and it's on the back of the house. Oh, yeah. It's like uh uh it's on the uh the the floor plan that is like 12 ft and 15 ft and um it's on the back on the left. So, uh just small area and that's not identified on the site plan. I mean, it just says 1.2 1.5 story single family residence.

That's all it says. It doesn't say where the addition is. What's the addition? Um I maybe I'm missing something. I don't know. I mean, I'm just looking at the site plan right now and it just looks like it's just standard site plan of what is existing there right now and not what was added on um without variance approval. So uh I don't know, Mary, can you help out a little bit here or is that So it it's going to be on the the back. Um yeah, give me a second. I'm just

Yeah. So on the uh single family residence, uh there was that tri uh kind of that extra square. Yeah. The one in the back. The one in the back. On the back. Yeah. Okay. That's got to be identified as to what the addition is in in the site plan. So Uh yeah. So now is that I have a third kit. So that's me a three kid in there. So that's why Yeah. And

I uh I'm I'm a little hesitant to to make any ruling on this right now based on that. But, uh, I'll listen to my other fellow board members if they want to, I don't know, maybe consider continuing this to get updated site plans or updated and even floor plans so we know exactly what we're dealing with as far as what the what's in the addition um, or condition it if the board wants to approve it. I'll I'll I'll listen my fellow board members have to comment on that. So, this is my first help me uh, Yep. I will catch up everything. Yep. So, all right. Thank you. Thank Thank you, Mr. Vice Chairman. Uh the chair organizes um Mand sir.

Oh, yeah. I would like to see some additional information to get a better understanding of what's been done and what you're asking for. It looks like So, is there a square structure behind the original building was when was that constructed? Uh in uh 2020. Okay. So we all home and then um my friends uh recommends me a construction a constructor and uh we say okay so we because seven people at home so like a lot so that's why we say okay we do something. Yeah I think we would or at least I would like to see some sort of floor plan to see what exactly is going on inside these structures.

Yeah before because again it's not really clear kind of what variances you're really seeking here. Thank Thank you, Mr. Shan. Uh the chair organizers, Mr. Proco, Mr. Proco, the floor is yours, sir.

Yeah. Thank you, Mr. Chairman. Um I agree. I I I think we need to know what we're voting on. Um I mean, I understand that this project was completed back in 2020, but um just based on the site plan that we have here, we're not knowing what was and what is and what was changed. Um my suggestion is that we continue this um so we can get updated information. Um but again I would um listen to what the chairman has to say. Thank thank you Mr. Proco. Uh let's check Mr. Hy. Mr. Hav the floor is yours here.

Thank you. Uh yeah some of these uh variances are are already needed right frontage uh setback that has nothing to do with your addition. Yeah. Um, but the issue is we don't know what it looked like prior and then after. So, I think if you have uh you have the existing plan, but if you can show us what it was prior so we can see what exactly you did, uh, that'll help move this along. Yeah. Thank Thank you, Mr. Heavy. Uh, the recognizes Mr. McCarthy. Mr. McCarthy, the floor is yours, sir.

Uh, thank you, Mr. Chairman. Um uh I'm unclear if you've met the minimum requirements also for um this application which is to um put a sign uh to notify the um residents in the neighborhood. I went by and I didn't see one. Um uh so that's a minimum requirement. It it could very well mean that a resident doesn't agree with your addition and would want to come out and speak. um and would have a right to speak. Yeah, my neighbors are very friendly. So, they didn't say anything. Okay. I didn't know too, you know, if they they they they

tell me. So, I don't do that in that time. But

I think we need to see a sign put up. I don't know if um you understand the criteria for that, but it would be basically the site plan illustrating the addition, which you should probably do for the next meeting that you come in front of us on. uh that clearly identifies the uh requirement um for the for the variance. Um so I I would suggest that we condition that we uh continue it just because I don't think we met the minimum standard anyway. Um, but I agree. I I'm not understanding the plan clearly as far as what the addition is because it should clearly state the size of the addition, the dimensions, um, what the additions used for, why you have to have why why you're seeking the addition. Um, you you kind of said that, but we should have that on a document as well. Thank you.

Thank Thank you, Mr. McCarthy. Um, Mr. Lee. Um, so I think you heard the comments of my colleagues. Um, I think it's best for you to continue the matter. You provide us with the updated plans. Um, put the physical signage of the plan in front of your property for for public viewing if anybody wants to see it. That's that's part of the process procedurally um for the public hearing and all that. Um, so we're going to continue this um, so work with your contractor or your person doing this uh, um, to get the updated floor plans and then the signage, the physical signage, you have to put in front of your site as well just for Yeah. public posting.

Posting on the garage already put the 3x4. Yeah. Yeah. The big the big poster sign. Yes, sir. Yeah. Exactly. Um, so we can we'll continue this. Um, Miss Brandage. Um when's when's the next available opening on on our agenda for the dates for the hearing? Yeah, we have an opening on uh February 23rd. Okay. Just two weeks from now. Two weeks, right? Yeah. So, what's the next one after that? Because uh that would be uh March 9th.

All right. All right, Mr. We're going to continue this to March 9th. So that way you can get all the plans, all the signage, everything posted so that it's uh up to requirements with all the meeting laws and and zoning laws and all that. Um so we're going to continue this for March 9th. All right, sir. Is that is that enough time for you and your developer in person? Okay. All right. Um one other comment. Yeah, Mr. Chairman, through you. Um I'm just kind of curious and I'm looking at know satellite picture of the property and and the plans here and there's a lot of concrete on this. Oh yeah, there's a patio because uh when my uh I do it like uh uh like landscape

and we before like it's a lot of rash and we not good at take care of rash and um is keep like dead you know. So that's why we start doing the patio so that uh when the kid can come outside and play and um Okay. We don't bring them to daycare. So uh my mom and my dad help me take care of kid so during uh summer time they can come out and hang out around. Yeah. Is there any consideration of just a portion of it being some form of green space? Cuz that's just it just seems like a lot of concrete on the property just some I can't tell you what to do with your property but I mean it's something to consider. It's like really be honest. a lot. I mean

uh the the the guys who do the landscaping y and he get he got me good because he give me good price so that I just do it. They say okay this is good area you can do like this like that and okay good price and I do all right okay I'm just bring just just asking all right thank you that thank you Mr. Vice Chairman all right if there's no comments can we have a motion to continue march 9th three Mr. Chairman would like to make a motion for ZBA 2026-1 for variance at 150 East Meadow Road to be continued to March 9th. All right. Motion by Mr. McCarthy. Second. Second by Mr. Pro. Um can we have a roll call, please?

Uh Chairman Pek, uh approve continuence. Vice Chair Callahan, approve continuence to March 9th, 2026. Member uh McCarthy approve continuence to March 9th. Member Prote approved continuence to March 9th. Member Hovie approved. Member Shanahan approved. All right, sir. The the matter has been continued to March 9th. We'll see you then. Okay. Yes. So, we'll see you in a little bit. Yeah. Thank you very much. All right. Thank you and have a good night. Thank you for coming out. Thank you again. Okay. Really appreciate it.

Thank you. All right. Just for the public notice, that was the public notice. There'll be no other notice regarding this petition. All right. Moving on to the next item on the agenda. behave ZBA-2026-2 petition the variance uh the applicant is Robbie Newen propert at 26 Mariner Street um the laws board of appeals will hold a public hearing child person relative to an application by the applicants to create an addition additional curb cut and add another driveway at 26 Mariner Street the subject property located in additional single family TSF zoning district. The project requires variance approval for section 6.110 of the low zoning ordinance for relief from the maximum cut requirements and any requirement on low zoning ordinance.

Good evening, Mr. Leian. Hi, good evening everybody. You want to tell us about your project? Uh yeah, the this is my uh first house. Um what I'm trying to do is um add just an additional parking spot to the uh right side of the house. um not directly in front of it. So um just trying to maximize that that that space, but we we still have a lot of green space left um in the back and in the front. Also,

uh we have a lot of family, so they come every weekend or, you know, especially summertime. Um the driveway, the current driveway that when we bought the house gets filled so quick. And um also um I have a couple of old cars from when I was 16 that I still keep. Um I have a um a patio way in the back and that's why I'm also trying to put a carport back there. Um so that's pretty much it. Okay. Yeah. Okay. Thank thank you sir for your comments.

Um you have nothing further. We'll open the hearing to the public. Anyone wishing to speak in opposition petition in opposition? Seeing none, that portion of public hearing is closed. Anyone wish to speak in favor position in favor? Seeing none, the public hearing is closed. We're going to open questions or comments to from the board now. Uh the chair recognizes um Mr. Shan. Mr. Shan, the floor is yours, sir. Uh thank you, Mr. Chair. So, it's going to be the new driveway will be to the left. Um if you're uh facing facing the property, if you're facing directly in front of the house standing in front of it will be on the the left side. Okay. And it appears though there's already something there like dirt or gravel. It's okay.

Yeah, it's dirt. And it would be about the same dimensions as Yes. where you're going there. Huh. Yeah. I It's a tight It's a narrow lot. I mean, that's that's a problem. You have a like a single strip driveway, so I get it. If you're parked in the back, everyone has to move for you to Yeah, pretty much. that driveway, right? It definitely helped with the uh two snow storms that had the first one and then the um the recent one. So I I plow for our city as well and the F250 that I have with that 9 foot blade. It that's where I parked every night pretty much on that spot on the dirt. I mean I think it's pretty straightforward. I have I don't have any questions. Thank you.

Thank Thank you, Mr. Chen. Um chair, Mr. Pro. Mr. Pro is yours, sir. Thank you, Mr. Chairman. Um, when I drove by the your property yesterday, I didn't see a notice uh to request for a permit to the public. Um, um, is it that 3x4 sign or I I I I didn't really understood the whole process. I I thought that was after if the variance was um was permitted or approved and then put that on. It's it's usually put it uh before the meeting so that your neighbors have a right to appear here whether they can speak in favor or against.

Okay. I I thought um that that's my mistake and I I didn't fully understand that. Um I spoke with Peter um I thought the certified mail was um was the notice and I did get more than half back from um the abutters. So the um the the neighbors directly on my left and right and front definitely, you know, knew about it and called me and text me about it, but uh yeah, that's my fault. I I didn't Yeah, that's usually a prerequisite. Okay, gotcha. Um yeah, I I think Well, that's our standard practice. So I I I wouldn't feel comfortable in in voting on this at this point. Um,

oh, again, I would prefer a continuence. Thank Thank you, Mr. Pro. Chairman, thank you. Uh, chair, Mr. Hav M, the floor is yours, sir.

Yeah, obviously signage is an issue. I was by there today. You already said that you didn't know it had to go up. Uh, I do have another concern. When we originally, and this was project was before us, we originally approved this project. it was under the condition that that driveway on the left was removed. It was filled in. Um, obviously that hasn't been done. So, a condition of approval on this property wasn't met, period. Uh, so I have an an issue approving something that we condition being taken down. Uh, secondly, when we approved, and I I didn't get an answer to this yet, but when we approved this project, the driveway went halfway to the house. Now, we see it goes all the way to the back, and that's why you're looking for the um carport. Now, I don't have a problem with that, but I don't know if the permits were pulled for that driveway to be extended. That's not what we approved again uh when we approved this project originally. So, I I think the the driveway on the right, that's uh a building inspector, that's their issue to see if the permits have been pulled. The driveway on the left, now that's our issue because it was conditioned that that was removed when the house was built and obviously that hadn't been done. So, um, if if we're going to make conditions on approving a property and one of them isn't met, I have a hard time, you know, two years later coming up and saying, "Hey, can we approve this thing that you took down?" So, that's just uh food for thought, but um, as member Pro said, I don't think we can move forward anyways until um, proper signage has been posted.

Thank Thank you, Mavi. Uh, the chair recognizes Mr. McCarthy. Mr. McCarthy, the floor is yours, sir. Uh, thank you, Mr. Chairman. I I'd like to thank you for plowing for the city. Oh, yes. We're grateful for all the efforts that you put in. I'm sure it was not the easiest. Yeah. Sen Centerville is pretty hard. The the residents there are they're they're pretty hard, but you know, we we we I try, man. Well, thank you. Um uh so we have a revised site plan. uh I think had uh some more information on it and I think that that's probably what would make sense to mount on a board and put in front of your property so it's visible from the street. Oh yeah, for sure. Um if you could do that like tomorrow.

Yeah. Then I think maybe we could continue this. I think um you know there's an upcoming meeting in a couple weeks and so it would do the the trick of solving that prerequisite which I don't even know where to get that. Where where do I get that three by? You could probably go go to Staples and just Okay. email a PDF to and have them print it out. Okay. They could probably figure it out. Got it. Not to give Staples. There's other places you could go. I didn't mean to.

Um Um I don't know what to say about the conditions that weren't met previously, but that's not uh your hunt because that's the uh builder. That's that's not that's that you're you're the owner would property. So instead of the the um pavement or driveway would gravel be okay?

So So that was not to get into it. That was there previously. That driveway was there previously and the condition to approve that project was to remove that driveway and keep that driveway on the right. Build the driveway on the right. There wasn't a driveway on the right. The property right had concrete that was kind of overflowing into the back. So, we had that concrete removed, the driveway on the left, removed in order to approve the building. And obviously, the driveway on the left was never removed. Not your fault. Unless you were the builder, right?

No, I wasn't the builder. No, no, but the uh the patio way that that that led into in the back where you see it updated that that that that was me and um a couple of friends of mine that we put those patio stones in there and the the extensions of that extra was it like maybe 5 by 10 um connections of the driveway. We we did that. We had someone do that. Um, I I didn't know any of this stuff until, you know, someone said you you have to get a variance or get some type of permit before you, you know, get in trouble or something. So, understood.

Yeah. And and I think um comments from Peter um reflect on the fact that we still even with the carport um meet the minimum usable open space requirement. So, um, Pete said that was like his typo. Um, it's it's it's five from, from what I'm understanding, from the rear set back line and from the side and then 15 or 20 from the main structure of the lot, which would be the house. So, that got that that patio way there is way more than 15 feet from the house, and it's actually about 56 or 57 from the rear end side.

Okay. All right. Yeah, just get the sign up and I think continue this but we'll Okay, no further questions. Thank you. Thank Thank you, Mr. McCarthy. Uh chair, recognizers, the vice chairman, Miss Kellian, floor is yours, sir.

Thank you, Mr. Chairman. Um yeah. Um I would suggest possibly continuence based on the lack possible lack of notice. Um and I apologize, but I'm blanking on recalling this project coming before us. I will take member Pav's word for it about what was previously approved. Uh if that was the case, um I don't even understand why we're here if we previously conditioned that driveway to not exist at all um on prior approval. But I would have to reserve and go back into uh the mind grapes and try to remember what was discussed at whatever prior approval was and conditions set and uh kind of figure it out from there. But um at the very minimum, yes, I would suggest at least the continuence because of notice purposes and um then we'll address that later. So, thank you.

Yeah. Thank you, Mr. Vice Chairman. All right. Um sir, I think you heard the comments of the board. Uh we can continue this so you can get the the public notice of the signage um for the public um open meeting laws requirement. Um, and then Miss Brundage, when is the next available opening for for an agenda item? Um, we could do March 9th. I think 2:23 would be too early if we wanted to get the notice out. So, yeah. Yeah, sir. March 9th is okay with you for the next meeting. Uh, yeah. Yeah, that would be fine.

Okay. So, am I just um getting that that main sign out like in front of my house and or the window and that's what I is that the only thing I'm missing out of the Okay. Yeah, just a public notice sign that big post or whatever in front of the Gotcha. in front of your lot your your your house so that way the public knows. Okay. Um and then everything else um we're we're addressed on March 9th. Um, all right. If there's no other comments, can we have a motion to continue the matter, please?

Three. Mr. Chairman, like to make a motion for ZBA 2026-2 for variance at 26 Mariner Street uh to be continued to March 9th. All right. Motion by Mr. McCarthy. Second. Second by the vice chairman. Um, can a roll call, please? Uh, chairman Pek. Uh, approve continuence. Um, vice chair Callahan. Approve continuence to March 9th, 2026. Member McCarthy, approve continuence to March 9th. Member Prote approve continuence to March 9th. Member Hovie, approve. Member uh Shanahan, approve. All right, sir. You've been continuing to March 9th. We'll see you on March 9th. Okay. All right. Thank you guys.

Thank you. Have a good evening. Thanks for coming out, sir. All right. Just for the public notice, that was the public notice to be another no other notice regarding the petition. All right. In other business, um, we have we have a member to appoint to the zoning rewrite steering committee. Um, so we we're going to appoint the vice chairman, m Mr. Kalan. Thank you again for offering. Thank you for your service. Um, any any comments from you, sir?

I appreciate it. Thank you for the uh for the faith in me and I will do my best to report uh find out uh what the information is that we'll uh come back and see. how zoning will be possibly changed in the city. So, thank you again for the confidence. Thank Thank you. Thank you, M. Kellan. All right. Um, minutes for approval January 12th, 2025. Any edits, updates, provisions for my colleagues? All right. Seeing none, can have a motion to approve the minutes for approval. Three. Mr. Chairman, like to make a motion to approve the meeting minutes from uh January 12th, 2025. All right. Motion by Mr. McCarthy January 12th, 2020.

Motion by me. McCarthy, second, second by the vice chairman. Um, all in favor say I. I. Any post say n eyes are unanimous. Any other comments before we adjourn tonight? All right. Seeing none, can a motion to adjurnn, please? Three. Mr. Chairman like to make a motion to adjurnn. All right. Motion by Mr. McCarthy to adjurnn. Second. Second by the vice chairman. All in favor say I. I. Any oppose? Say n. As unanimous we are journ Thank you. Have a good night folks. I I I don't remember that driveway either. I compose.