Zoning Board of Appeals

Board of APPEALS 166 Boulder ZONING Drive Fitchburg, Massachusetts MINUTES May 12, 2015 ATTENDANCE: Lauren McNamara -Chair, Vincent Pusateri II – Co-Chair, Joseph Byrne, Joseph Maramma, Michael McLaughlin, James Concannon – Clerk 1. Call to Order LM Pledge of Allegiance: All 2. Communications: Attendance: LM, VP,JM, MM, JB, JC 3. Hearings 7:00PM ZBA-2012-02 Jefal Fitchburg 571 John Fitch Highway Review of a Variance under §181.5363 to construct 2 Electronic Reader Board Signs located in the Central Business District at 35/21/0 LM – Chair – Please tell us how things are going. WM – I am the manager of the Walgreens store, technically our address is 571 John Fitch Highway. We meet all of the criteria for the conditions for the variance and I brought a couple of pictures if anyone would be interested in taking a look (Exhibits A & B). The messages display for 5 seconds each. As you can see our settings are set so that Corporate cannot send down any animation. There are no colors, just red. Those Seeking Information: None Those Opposed: None Those in Favor: None Open to Board LM – Chair – Joe Maramma would you like to start? JM – I went by and reviewed it, everything seems to be in order. Nice job, nice and clean and neat. I’m all good with it, no further questions. JC – No questions, I’m fine. MM – Maybe just a comment, I would like to see some of the new plantings that got decimated during the winter replaced. WM – The New England Sweeping people take care of the property and they do a really nice job. I’ll talk to Mike from New England and I’m sure he will take care of it and do a nice job. JB – I’m fine with it. VP – I’m fine and I don’t believe we need another review. LN – Chair – I don’t think we need one either. MM – We can make the plantings a condition LM – Chair – We can adjust the address for the record. Close and deliberate LM – Chair – Joe are you in favor of the petition? JB – Yes, I am. JC – Yes, no issues MM – Yes VP – Yes, strike the review and add the condition to maintain the plantings. LM – Chair - I’d like to entertain a motion. Amendments to original conditions: 1. Plantings that are damaged from the previous winter are to be replaced 2. Adjust the address to 571 John Fitch Highway 3. Strike the review MM - Motion on ZBA-2012-02 to approve the review with the amended conditions. JB – Seconded Vote – 5-0 - Approve the review with the amended conditions. 7:15PM ZBA-2014-26 Paul Amanatidis 1109-1151 Main Street Review of a Special Permit under §181.313C.12 to operate an automobile repair service. In the Central Business District at 17/64/0 LM – Chair – Please tell us where you are at with your property. PA – The convenience store is almost done. The garage I haven’t been able to finish due to the fact that I have to put a tank in for the oil. I couldn’t do it in the winter because of the weather. The contractor would like to start in the next couple of weeks. We have a problem with the water running through the property. We haven’t been able to resolve with the water department. I’ve been there maybe; 50 times and have had no result. I don’t know why they don’t get back to me. All I got is “I can’t do anything about it because it’s not my property”. I can’t touch it, I can’t do anything about it. I went with the contractor to see if they would let me do it and I was told that I couldn’t touch it because it’s not mine. I want to pave, I can’t pave and the sidewalk cannot be done because all of the catch basins are collapsing. The middle building is getting worse than it was. Every day it is getting worse. Now the roof collapsed. There is another catch basin in the top, we’re trying to clean the top. It needs a round cove. It has a square cover, half of it. Dirt keeps going in there, I clean it up but I can’t contain it. MM – I will call the water Commissioner tomorrow. PA – I go over and they tell me he is upstairs, I go upstairs and they tell me he is not there. Whatever the reason is he doesn’t want to see me, I can’t get any answers. I can’t fix the sidewalks, I can’t fix the pavement. LM – Chair – What about the other building? PA – What other building? LM- Chair – There are three buildings on that site. PA – There are technically five buildings. Two buildings I have no plans for yet. I am going to paint them and fix the roof and get them looking better. LM – Chair – What about the general condition of the yard and the status of the vehicles on the property? PA – I sold the camper. It’s all cleaned up. I want to get the top and bottom paved. I can’t because the water is running through all of the time. I don’t want to spend money to do half of the work, then rip it out and do it again. Paving is not cheap. I only want to do it one time. I told him that I was going back for review and need to get it done. He said he could get me an extension. I told him I don’t need and extension I need to get it done. I need to resolve this issue before the building collapses. LM – Chair – Ok We’ll see if we can help you. What we want to do at this point if you have nothing else to add then I am going to open it up to the audience. Those Seeking Information: None Those Opposed: None Those in Favor: None Open to Board LM – Chair – Jim would you like to begin? JC – I do not have any questions. MM – You had quite a few unregistered vehicles on the property during the winter. It seems that you took care of that. The entrance into the garage. There have been a few instances where there have been ramp trucks blocking the street unloading vehicles that I have seen. PA – I bought restaurant equipment and unloaded it with the ramp truck. MM – The one thing that you really need to be conscious of is parking on that sidewalk. When I was coming down this evening there was a vehicle there. PA – Somebody broke down and let the car there. MM – It’s on the sidewalk and it is less than 10 feet from the fire hydrant. PA – That car has nothing to do with me. MM – Over the last few months there have been cars parked there regularly. I can only assume that they are there visiting your establishment. PA – Sometimes sales people come and park there, I don’t understand why. I have plenty of parking available. If I’m there I tell them to move, if I’m not there I can’t do anything. I will have to put a sign or block it. I will take care of that. MM – As far as the improvements to the sidewalk and that general front area, what are your expectations on when you might start that process? PA – If the water issue had been resolved I would have started that already. I can’t do anything there until the water issue is resolved. JB – I’m fine, everything has been answered. VP – No questions. LM – Chair – I have a few questions. Mr. Thibeault are you the one doing the work? KT – No, Mike Longley is. LM – Chair – What do you think the water is coming in underneath the property? ML – I went up to Lenny’s office on a couple of occasions and he said he was going to check on it. As far as I know he hasn’t. ML – It is flowing quite rapidly, it’s coming from the hill up top and it’s starting to collapse the catch basin. PA – It’s not ground water. MM – The brook starts at Applewild, it is above ground and underground in certain areas. It goes under the road, it goes under Arlington, it is exposed on Gloria Spardaro’s property and goes under 1 Goddard Street. It’s an old city clay pipe and after it goes under Goddard Street it disappears under your property and then it goes into the river. The pipe has some issues, I will talk with Lenny and John Deline. VP – So it’s a brook that is being channeled through a pipe. MM – That is correct. PA – They came once and ran a camera through and that was it. I haven’t seen them since. The cover on Main Street is ready to collapse also. LM – Chair – I think it seems that we should move to a continuance. VP – A three month continuance sounds reasonable. Motion to continue the matter to provide the Water Department with a written communication and give them three months to figure out what is going on. JB – Seconded Vote – 5-0 To continue to September 8, 2015 @ 8:00PM 7:30PM ZBA-2015-04 Michael Longley – Longley Trucking 402 Broad Street Special Permit under section §181.313.D.5 to conduct a construction, excavation, and demolition business and store construction vehicles in the Industrial District at 28/10/Lot A - 402 Broad Street LM – Chair – Could you please tell us about your petition? ML – I have a trucking and excavating company I moved over to 402 Broad Street. I did a lot of business with Kenny Thibeault over the years and he did basically the same kind of business as myself. The same type of business has been there since the 50’s. LM – Chair – Can you tell me a little bit more about the demolition portion of the business? ML – I do a little demolition, it’s just a part of what I do. LM – Chair – Would there be things stored on the site? ML – No, just a machine once in a while. LM – Chair – Any customer visits, things like that, anything else you want to add? ML – No, just the repairs, I want to make sure that is good to go. Those Seeking Information: Those Opposed: Those in Favor: None Rep. Steve DiNatale Richard Gonzolas Rep. DiNatale – I am here this evening representing the Crocker Restoration Committee. We are neither in favor or opposed to this. But, we are concerned. The appearance of the field is always a challenge. We obviously don’t want something that is detrimental to that effort. Mr. Longley has mentioned publically that there will be no debris stored there and that’s what important to us. Richard Gonzolas – I own 5 properties on Broad Street 318-340, 342, the abutting one is 356. I am very concerned with the appearance, even what’s going on there now. I have a couple of photos (Exhibit’s A & B) if you would like to take a look. I don’t want this to get out of hand, there’s a pile of logs being stored on the property line. These piles of debris have appeared since Mr. Longley moved in. That kind of appearance is not good for my tenants and their businesses. I have owned this property for 18 years and have put a lot of money into them. I consider this blight. I think a construction yard belongs on an isolated on a large parcel or out in the woods. Not on Broad Street, with the efforts I am trying to make, I am also a prior member of the Crocker Restoration Committee and I believe that this is totally against the efforts we were trying to make at that time. VP – I believe that you had a petition here before. Can you just tell us about the use of your buildings? RG – I have a church in one half of the mill complex and I have all office use in the other part of the complex. I’m just concerned, piles of dirt and debris. The dust is flying when you’re trying to have a conversation in the parking lot. Open to Board LM – Chair – Michael would you like to start? MM – Same concerns, the general consensus is that it’s been pretty unsightly for a while. But that’s just the type of business that it is. It’s a construction yard. I see this beautiful piece of property to the left and to the right I see a construction yard. One of my primary concerns would be the visibility I know that you mentioned that you want to do large truck repair. I don’t know how great that is for the City when we have events at the field to have the trucks and everything visible. Have you thought about how you’re going to mask some of this? Maybe with a privacy fence. ML – Not really, not yet. It’s been a truck facility since it was built in the 1950’s. KRT was there for 15 years before me, and prior to that there was another company there with tractor trailers and everything else. I’m just a small contractor. MM – You submitted a plan with some hand sketching on it. I’d like to see a more detailed plan of what the site going to look like. What you’re going to do for plantings, parking for the vehicles. ML – Inside the fence is most of it, and then some parking on the front where it’s always been. MM – A site plan would help me determine, you have little squares for the trucks but there are no dimensions it doesn’t really give me a good picture. ML – There are always different trucks, I can’t say that this truck will be parked here today and then tomorrow something is in the way and I have to park it in a different spot. MM – Are you looking at a perimeter fence of sorts to be able to screen everything? I think it may help you as well. ML – I may put a fence further back to my property line and put a couple of gates, one by where that wood is. I can give a key to the guy in the back. I know he went out of business, it would still allow access to the easement. MM – Is the easement where the logs are? ML – Yes, that is my firewood I’m actually going to take tat out of there. MM – That’s what I’d like to see before I can look at this favorably. MM – Like I said I really can’t tell you exactly where everything will be parked, it will change. I will park some trucks inside and some outside it will change from day to day. The only thing I can say is that I can put a fence further back. JB – I have just one question. The municipal lien certificate, has that been paid off? ML – Yes, that was paid off at the time of the closing. LM – Chair – What are the hours of your operation? ML – I work from 6:00AM to 6:00PM most days. Sometimes Saturday and sometimes Sunday depending if something needs to be fixed. LM – Chair – So you are looking for a seven day? ML - Yes LM _ Chair – How is the lighting there? ML – I haven’t put any new lighting there yet. There was one pole, they were charging me $500.00 a month. I had it taken down. I have to put some other lighting there. What do you mean lighting? For security? I’m going to put in lighting for security and cameras. LM – Chair – Going back to the screening issue of screening the property. Is there any intention of doing something like that? ML – Do you mean to completely block it? VP – I believe that zoning by-laws for storing of outside materials has to be screened from the street and the abutters. A privacy fence or something similar is typically what they want. ML – You mean like a chain link fence with sleeves in it or something like that? VP – Yes, the only problem with that is graffiti. ML – If that were to happen I would just have to fix it. LM – Chair – Is there any way that you could maybe take some of the larger size vehicles that you would be working on and make some kind of a plan that’s in line for us? A more concrete plan that you could show your screening, that you could show if you’re doing some things outside where you’re going to do it, how you’re going to do it. Are you going to have a dumpster on the property? ML – I have a small one inside the building now. LM – Chair – I guess I would like to see everything laid out on a plan. MM – You’re in the construction, you get certified plot plans, drawings, and architectural renderings of what a site is going to look like. That is what we want to see. ML – I don’t know what the finished product is going to look like. I mean one thing at a time. LM – Chair – We are asking you to come up with that plan so we can decide whether or not it’s going to be suitable for the neighborhood. ML – What do you mean? Block the view or something? Like I said I can’t tell you where I’ll be parking what truck but it will be behind the fence. LM – Chair – Right now I don’t even see a fence. MM – We would like to see a basic site plan. LM – Chair – It’s really a requirement of the package and it wasn’t provided. If you could do that and we can continue for one month. If you don’t think one month is enough we can continue it for two months to give you enough time to get it done. VP –Another question is that of the dust issue that one of the abutters brought up. Is it inconsistent with your business to pave that? ML – Yes, the heavy vehicles would just tear it up. MM – So you could put some gravel down to keep the dust down. ML – There’s already gravel there. VP – Do you mean crushed stone? MM – Yes ML - You don’t want to put crushed stone down. MM – I understand that you probably don’t get it. The same kind of business has been there for the last fifteen years, but there’s been a lot of stuff in the city that has gone unchecked properly. There should have been a permit for the previous owner. LM – Chair – We’re not asking for anything we don’t ask from anyone else. ML – I know it. I just have to figure it out. LM – Chair – Would a couple of months work for you and give you enough time to get everything together? I don’t want to put the pressure on you for one month if you don’t feel that is enough time. ML – I think one month should be fine. I’ll see if I can get somebody to draw something up. LM – Chair – What would that date and time be Lois? LO - That would be June 9th @ 9:30PM. VP - Motion to continue until June 8, 2015 @ 9:30PM JB – Seconded Voted – 5-0 - To continue until June 9, 2015 @ 9:30PM. Petitioner and Chair sign an Extension of Time. 7:45PM ZBA-2015-05 Ronald and Sonya Thomas Ernest & Roberta Lafleur 21 Liryc Lane Special Permit under §181.34 for elderly parents to occupy an existing accessory apartment located at 21 Liryc Lane in the RR District 171/18/0 LM - Chair – Please tell us about your petition. ST – We bought this house last year and would like to have my parents live in the accessory apartment. LM – Chair – For the record, I am an abutter and have any problem moving forward with this. The previous owners put the addition on and their aunt lived in the addition. Do you have anything else to add to that? RT – No, working hard to fix it up. Those Seeking Information: None Those Opposed: None Those in Favor: None Open to Board JB – No questions at this time. VP – No questions. JM – No questions, I viewed the property and everything seems to be in order. JC – No questions. MM – Did we approve the original accessory apartment? LM – Chair – The previous owner actually built an addition to put that on, and we approved the petition. OK It’s already been approved once and now it has new owners. JC – Is the accessory apartment currently in use? ST – No, not at this time. You’re rehabbing it, do you have any plans for an expansion? ST – No, no expansion. Close and deliberate JB – In favor JM - In favor MM – Yes, it meets the criteria under §181.34. JC – I am also in favor of the petition. VP – Did the previous decision we made on this accessory apartment include the standard conditions for an accessory apartment? LM – Chair – Yes VP – Do we have a copy of that decision? LM – Chair – Not in front of me. ST – I have a copy with me. VP – I’d like to include that in the motion. My inclination in doing that would be to prevent the renovations from making any alterations to the single family home appearance. MM – Motion on ZBA 2015-05 to grant a Special Permit as requested under §181.34 to include all conditions that were previously applied to the Special Permit at 21 Liryc Lane granted in 2006. JC – Seconded Vote – 5-0 To grant a Special Permit as requested under §181.34 to include all conditions that were previously applied to the Special Permit at 21 Liryc Lane granted in 2006. 8:00 PM ZBA-2015-06 Donna & Markku Uusitalo 909 Ashburnham Hill Road Special Permit under 181.34 to erect an accessory apartment over the existing attached garage located at 909 Ashburnham Hill Road in the RR District 78R/26/0 LM – Chair – Please tell us about your petition. DU – It’s an existing garage that we want to raise the roof on and have my daughter move in. LM – Chair – Do you have the layout of what it would be? DU – Yes, I think I gave everybody a copy. LM – Chair – Yes, we do have the small version. Can you tell us more about the petition? Will it be separate utilities? DU – Nothing will change with the building structure other than to raise the roof on the garage. No bedroom or bathroom changes. We will be putting in a small kitchen for her. LM – Chair – Anything else to add at this point? DU – I don’t think so. Those Seeking Information: Dominic Howe Those Opposed: None Those in Favor: None DH - I was just wondering how many people will be living in that room above the garage. DU – Two people, my daughter and granddaughter. VP - What are their ages? My daughter is 36 and my granddaughter is 9. VP – So there will be one additional vehicle. DU – Yes, my daughter’s vehicle. DH – I am an abutter at lots 4, 5 and 6. I would also like to add that on the other side of me there is another neighbor that has an accessory apartment. It looks terrible. The added room was supposed to be a master bedroom. I believe it to be over 1000 sq. ft. It wasn’t the intended look of that home and I have to look at that. My concern is that this is a single family neighborhood and it is losing that the appearance. I am looking to the future I plan on being there for many more years. VP – When the accessory use is over would you be able to turn this back into a single family structure, and how would you do that? DU – It’s going to be tied into the existing house because it will be entered into from the inside. DU – There will be an entry through the house and another one on the outside for safety purposes. VP – Will that second egress be visible from the street? DU – No, it will be on the backside of the house. It’s all wooded back there. LM – Chair – Mr. Howe to address your concern in respect to the other property, it is not something we can take up this evening but we can understand your concern. VP – I want to address that. What he is saying is that somebody pulled a building permit for a master bedroom on that property and he believes it to be much more. DH – My concern is that you vote on these things and everyone has good intentions here and then things change. In my opinion that is the downfall of a lot of mistakes the City has made and I order to change that we really need to start looking at these things. And in the future the impact is going to be on that neighborhood and the City as a whole. It says here that it is renewal every five years and that it must be a relative. How do you enforce that? How do you enforce what has already happened on the other side of me? MM – Let me help you out on that, we seem to think alike. I just ask you as a citizen that if you believe that there has been something done illegally in your neighborhood I would recommend that you file a complaint with the Building Department so they can investigate it. We are all eyes and ears for our own neighborhood. This particular by-law is designed specifically so as we get older or our parents get older it is designed to be able to share a home or stay in our home and live as a family. It is not designed so it becomes a rental unit. This is one of the newer by-laws since I’ve been on this Board and it has actually worked out quite well. Upon the sale of these properties, the City is doing a good job making people come back in, you have to sign an affidavit that states that a family member will be living at the property with you. There are some good by-laws. VP - If someone goes to buy this house it will say right in the chain of title that this is not to be sold as a two family home. MM – And it has to keep the appearance of a single family home. VP – Another issue is that we don’t have a check of who doesn’t come back. We keep getting applications from the people that are compliant, they come back. But, we don’t know who is not coming back. LM – Chair – We do, we keep track of that. We send the renewal notices out to them. VP – What do we do when they don’t come back? If it doesn’t get renewed we have to figure something out. DH – What about the architecture? VP – The particular drawing has the appearance of a single family. The only thing is the second means of egress, and it is in the back of the house and not visible to any of the abutters. Open to Board VP – I am in favor of the petition JC – I have a question I would like to clarify. Special Permit to raise the roof on the garage. According to the plans you are going to add a bedroom and a living dining area above the garage. DU – Well that’s true, the bedrooms we have now we are taking away one and making a kitchen there. JC – So currently the second floor comprised with the new construction above the garage will be the entire accessory apartment? MU – Yes, it will be able to be used by both of us it’s not just for them. JC – So it’s really common area. DU Yes, for both. MM – Reference the plans and questions if stairs already exits, petitioners states that they will be part of the addition. They also discuss means of egress. MM – Really by design this is a great plan because it’s pulling the accessory apartment into the main body of the house. JB – I’m fine with it. LM – Chair – Since you are raising the roof what are you doing for drainage? DU – There is a circumference drain on the bottom when the house was built. LM – Chair – The façade will be the same as the original house once you are complete? DU – Yes it will all be the same. Close and deliberate VP – No questions, I think it’s a good fit and meets the criteria. JB – In favor, no concerns JC – I’m good MM – Yes. It meets the criteria under §181.34 LM – Chair – I am also in favor with the standard conditions. VP – Conditions to also include reapplication for Special Permit. Motion to approve ZBA 2015-06 for a Special Permit under §181.34 to erect an accessory apartment over the existing attached garage located at 909 Ashburnham Hill Road in the RR District 78R/26/0 with standard conditions and added condition of reapplication. JB - Seconded Vote 5-0 T o approve ZBA 2015-06 for a Special Permit under §181.34 to erect an accessory apartment over the existing attached garage located at 909 Ashburnham Hill Road in the RR District 78R/26/0 with standard conditions and added condition of reapplication. 8:15PM ZBA-2014-13 Michael Robillard Ken-Bon Display Service, Inc. 120 John Fitch Highway Review of a Use Variance under §181.5363 to construct a two (2) sided electronic reader board sign in the Central District 98/10/Lot A which are prohibited in all zoning districts per §181.5363 LM – Chair – I believe we continued this last month and requested the owner come in. MR – I brought Mr. Blaisdell with me tonight because Mr. McLaughlin obviously had some issues with the use of the message center. LM – Chair – Michael why don’t you begin? MR - We had talked about being able to use some sort of animation the problem we had was getting a real definition of how much animation we could use. This is more of a test type situation to see what we could do and what would be within the proper guidelines. But, we’re still trying to find a definition I’m working with Time-O-Matic the manufacturer to see if we can come up with some kind of definition and bring this to some kind of area we can deal with. MM – I share my thoughts with you while somebody is looking for the conditions. We put some conditions on the Variance, I know it’s hard because these signs can do all kinds of things. Before the last meeting I stopped and watched it for awhile and it was rock’n and rolling. That was way above what we had approved. Another thing we need to address is you should not be applying for the Variance the owner should. Realistically we gave the permit to you. LM – Chair – The original conditions were 1. Be operated in a manner consistent with the D.O.T. standards 2. Maintained and kept in good working order 3. Subject to a one year review 4. No flashing, scrolling, blinking, video, limited animation, 5. The petitioner will do service announcement in the messaging 6. Not to be operated as a nuisance. Open to Board MM – The intent for the sign is to help you grow your business. Not to advertise for other businesses or other communities. Maybe it’s time for you to share this sign with the community. JB – I believe we do that. We have messages that address texting and driving, watch for workers due to the construction, seat belts “buckle up”, we are also supporters of the “Make a Wish Foundation”. We’re trying to do the right thing. I you have some suggestions we would love to hear them. MM – We try to leave the personal aspect out of it as a Board Member and just look at the by-laws. Safety is our concern. If this thing is going on over here, let’s face it I’m going to look at it. It’s just like texting I’m over here not over here. Those Seeking Information: Dominic Howe Those Opposed: None Those in Favor: None LM – Chair – Board members, any questions? JM – There is one thing, I was there today and noticed there weren’t any numbers on the building. JB – Carla did mention that to me and we’ll take care of that tomorrow. What’s the size? JB – They have to be visible from the street. I believe 6 inch. JC – No question MM – No questions JB – No questions VP – If you could have any animation that you want what would you like to have? Is the word limited animation restrictive? JB – I thought I had limited animation. I would like to do more. VP – So it’s been in operation for a year? JB – Yes, I’ve had no complaints just praise. Close and deliberate JC – I’m fine JM – I’m good VP – Strike the word limited. MM – I don’t particularly want to do that LM – Chair – I think they are working within their means. Not to be operated as a nuisance and we could drop the limited animation. MM – I’m only one member I can certainly be overruled. VP – I’m not saying limited. I want him to be able to have the animation. LM – Chair – We can take the word limited out and we still have “not to be operated as a nuisance. VP – Change #4 to No flashing, scrolling, blinking, video, animation is permitted. That’s what I would say. JB – When we have him come back in a year and if we have no accidents or complaints. We can use this as a test case. VP – I think Mike is going to want to see what kind of animation we have here and if it becomes offensive. JB – If I’m going to be a test person can we put something in there that says I won’t lose the sign. JB – If we feel the need we will just bring you in for review earlier and explain to you. JB – But, that’s the Board as it is today. MM – I just want to bring up the whole sign thing in general. Setting that precedent. VP – My opinion is that John Fitch Highway is a great place, It may not be good on the Putnam Place sign but this is a commercial area not in the downtown historical area. JC – Is Carstar a franchise? JB – They are individually owned. JC – The entity that franchises this probably has a graphic standard manual and already has what would be a limitation for these signs that’s approved JB - They only have logo limitations. Reopen JC – I’m just trying to look at it a different way to try to corral where this might go. VP – Mike when are you going to give us some language on animation? MR – I’m working on it right now with Time – O – Matic. They’ve done a few outside of this area and tried to come up with some definitions, to form some parameters for the verbiage when we go to the ZBA in these situations. But it’s had to give an exact definition. MM – See that’s where limited works. We are allowing him to do it but not constantly. VP – As a small business owner I want to see what he would have and that is the perfect area for it. If we come back an find that it has been offensive or caused an accident I don’t think it’s going to be any more dangerous than any other reader board signs in any other community that’s out there. Amended Conditions 1. Be operated in a manner consistent with the D.O.T. standards 2. Maintained and kept in good working order 3. Subject to a one year review May 10, 2016 4. No flashing, scrolling, blinking, video 5. Animation is permitted 6. The petitioner will do service announcement in the messaging 7. Not to be operated as a nuisance. Close and deliberate VP – Motion to approve the review and strike the words limited animation from # 4 and add a new condition that states animation is permitted and a one year review on May 10, 2016, not to be operated as a nuisance. JB – Seconded Vote – 4-1 To approve the review with amended conditions - strike the words limited animation from # 4 and add a new condition that states animation is permitted and a one year review on May 10, 2016, not to be operated as a nuisance. 8:30PM ZBA-2013-05 Mark Cordio 672 Water Street Review of a Special Permit under §181.313C11&13 to occupy a portion of the portion of the property for Automobile Sales and Washing located in the Central Business District at 109/35/A LM – Chair – Mr. Cordio, do you have the updated plans with you tonight? MC – Yes, I have the updated plans as requested (Exhibit A). Now he has three openings and only 27 cars. We agreed we were going to come up with 32, I was at 38. Then we decided when I left the last time we were going to do 32. I wanted more than that, but that’s ok. LM – Chair – Are these spaces 9 x 18 ½? MC – Yes they are. In the old plans there were another three cars there. VP – Is this the plan you are talking about? MC – Does that plan have 34? VP – Yes, this plan has 34. LM – Chair – I believe the reason he changed it would be because you need the accessibility to drive in and out. VP – What he seems to be doing is drawing a parking lot for some type of a retail store. But, this isn’t a retail store it is a used car lot. For example you don’t need to back those cars out unless someone wants to take one out for a test drive. He made this this way so that everything can move around according to the by-laws. LM – Chair – I believe that last month on your plans you didn’t have the actual size of the spots on there. MC – What he did on this one was he made my inlet and my outlet here when it is really here. It’s not easy to work with. The way we did all this before when we set it up there was space for 26 cars for sale and some in the back as long as it wasn’t a mess. That was fine with me but they wanted an exact number. The 27 doesn’t really work for me. I wanted 40 and you said 32 and I said ok. But, he didn’t come up with a plan that had 32. This one here comes out to 34. This piece of property over here belongs to Mike Montouri it’s a driveway. I could take all of these cars and go right out there. It’s easy access. Not access by the by-laws. MM – We can’t look at an exit and entrance through someone else’s property. MC – I understand that. The guy that was there before me didn’t have any of this and now it’s going on 15 months working on this. Just give me a number and let’s work with it. You guys go by my lot. It’s not a mess. If you want to come by my lot and look I’ve got 35 cars there tonight and I have four open spaces. Those Seeking Information: None Those Opposed: None Those in Favor: None Open to Board MM – I don’t have questions Mark. I think what he did was design the plan to allow safe and proper entrance and exit. I look at this plan and I am all in favor of it. I know it’s not as many as you want but it is well thought out and well designed. MC – This plan as it is laid out is useless to me. The way the cars are displayed here will not sell these cars. JB – Mark I know that if you were a new car dealer that you would have everything floor planned and everything like that. The State would come in and say how many cars you are authorized to have. A trooper would come in and look at your books to verify that you do not exceed that amount. Used car dealers do not play that game. So if nobody is going to wail on you from the State for you license, plates or anything else if we give you 28 cars and some days you have 32 cars there it’s not going to be a big deal. Now we can look at this plan and assign you a number of cars. MC – That’s fine. LM – Chair – The bottom line is that we can only vote on what is presented to us. What you have here is an acceptable plan to most members, if you would like to come back with a redesigned plan that would be up to you. MC – I don’t understand why you can’t just do the other plan. VP – Well, why don’t you offer it? MC – They saw this one last time and they didn’t like it. Lm – Chair – This plan here does not have the correct spacing on it. It has spaces of 8 ½ x 15 and 9 x 18. Our size is 9 x 18 ½. That is what the by-law is. So this is not a correct plan. We asked him to come back with a plan that would be suitable. This is the plan he brought tonight, it has nothing to do with us it has everything to do with him and his architect. If he would like us to vote this evening on the plan he has presented we can do that. He can come back again if he wants to meet with the architect again. Would you like us to move forward? MC – That’s fine let’s just do that. VP – I think that the regulation we are talking about is for a parking lot. This is to display cars for sale at an angle along the road so people going by can see them. LM – Chair – You also need a pathway entrance and exit. VP – He has that on both plans. Would you like us to move forward on this this evening? MC – Yes, at least there will be something. VP – Was Joe at the last meeting? LM – Chair – Yes he was. VP – Ok, then Joe will vote. JC – Is the plan that we are voting on? LM – Chair – Yes, we are voting on the plan that was presented this evening. MM – No questions JB – No questions JM – I’m all set JC – I’m good Close and deliberate JM – I’m in favor of this plan JC – I am in favor of this plan but I agree with Vinny’s comment about the parking lot vs the car sale lot. I think that is something that certainly can be looked into. LM – Chair – I agree. That is up to the petitioner to look into with his architect. MM – I’m in favor of the plan as submitted. JB – I’m also in favor. MM – Motion on 2013-05 To approve the review with the plan as submitted and with conditions as amended. #4 – change to 27 cars, #8 – change to 1 year review, #10 - Plan as submitted on May 12, 2015 and add #13 - Petitioner is welcome to request a meeting prior to May 10, 2016 JB - Seconded Vote – 5-0 To approve the review with the plan as submitted and with conditions as amended. #4 – change to 27 cars, #8 – change to 1 year review, #10 - Plan as submitted on May 12, 2015 and add #13 - Petitioner is welcome to request a meeting prior to May 10, 2016 8:45PM ZBA-2015-03 Gary Therrien 14 Putnam Street – Putnam Street Lanes Variance under section §181.5363 to install a wall mount electronic message center on the Boulder Drive side of 14 Putnam Street, flush mount approximately 25 ft. from grade in the Central Business District at 43/7/0 14 PUTNAM STREET which are prohibited in all zoning districts per §181.5363. LM – Chair – Gary, did we give you any task for this evening? JB – Yes, he was asked to bring the owner of the building with him. GT – No, I don’t recall that. JB – We told you that you would have to bring the building owner because we can’t give you a Special Permit to put a sign on somebody else’s building. We told you that you would have to bring the building owner here because he has to apply for the Special Permit. I was at the right meeting right? Isn’t that what we said? LM –Chair – We talked about it. GT – You said that you were going to pass it on to some other committee and ask them about a Special Permit. You never said anything about the landlord at all. LM – Chair – What we did say is that we wanted to check with Mark Goldstein our Assistant City Solicitor to find out whether or not we could issue a Use Variance on a building that he does not own. MM – And whether we have the ability to issue a lesser permit being a Special Permit. LM – Chair – Mark Goldstein said that we could do that. We could put a time limitation on a Use Variance. MM – Can we issue a Special Permit instead of a Use Variance, I think that was the question. In fact I think it’s in the minutes. In fact Attorney Barrett had mentioned that some years back. LM – Chair – His opinion was that we could impose a deadline I have the language here. MM – Can we issue less a relief? For example a Special Permit vs. a Variance or Use Variance. LM – Chair – In his opinion he didn’t think that we could change that. MM – He didn’t give us a written determination? LM – Chair – No, he did not. Under MA Land Use and Planning Law states that the Permit Granting Authority may impose conditions, safeguards and limitations both of time and use including the continued existence of a particular structure, but excluding any conditions, safeguards are limited are based on continued ownership of the land or structure to which the Variance pertains by the applicant, petitioner or any owner. Just to bring Vinny up to speed the petitioner wanted to fix an electronic sigh to the exterior side of the building on Boulder Drive. If you come down Putnam and take a left onto Boulder, up in that top left corner he wanted to erect an electronic sign so that when you come up over the bridge from the old Stuart’s you can see the sign. Some Board members have some concerns. Especially about an electronic sign in the area, secondly the fact that it will always be there because it is a Use Variance not a Special Permit. We then discovered that he is not the owner of the building that was a cause for concern as well. If the business was no longer there what would happen to the sign then. We needed some clarification on that and with regards to changing it to just a Special Permit that was not recommended by Attorney Goldstein. He feels we are going down a slippery slope by changing something that is a Use Variance to a Special Permit. He did feel that we could put a time period on it just to say a long as the business (bowling alley) is in existence that could be the end of the Use Variance. MM – IU don’t understand why signs are Use Variances and not a Special Permit. VP – Did the Building Commissioner say he had to put in for a Use Variance? LM - Chair – I called Duffy regarding that and he referred me to Mark Goldstein. VP – So if he applies for a Use Variance, we can’t change the application. LM – Chair – That’s correct. MM – If you want a sign that is larger than allowed by right it’s not a Use Variance it’s a Special Permit. LM – Chair – That’s what my thoughts were last month. That’s why I checked with Mark Goldstein. VP – Does he know that his petition will be viewed more favorably by the Board if it was a petition for a Special Permit? LM – Chair – In the by-laws it doesn’t provide for that. MM – That’s why we need a written determination from the Lawyers. A few weeks ago I spoke with Duffy and I had a specific question for him and his reply was that he would have to talk to Mark. I asked him how he could make a determination if he couldn’t answer my question. VP – A Special Permit is not available for a sign according to the by-laws? LM – Chair – It comes under Use Variance. Again, it may warrant a visit from him to us for clarification. VP – I don’t see anything that prevents issuance of a Special Permit for a sign. LM – Chair – I say we can make a decision and do what we want to do. VP - If someone has a problem with it they can file an appeal. They have 20 days to file an appeal and if somebody says that we didn’t make the right decision it will be remanded back to us to decide it as a Use Variance. MM – Then we should look at all future cases because what’s going to happen is that every application for an electronic sign is going to come in as a Use Variance. LM – Chair – I think the problem as far as the Use Variance is it usually is a structure itself and that’s why it usually stays with the property. GT – If I was to leave I would want to take the sign or sell it with the bowling alley. LM – Chair – The bottom line is that a Use Variance goes with the property. With respect to all of this I feel that it should be a Special Permit. Where would you like to go with this? VP – I think the petitioner should be aware that we are particularly opposed to giving Variances and we are more inclined to give Special Permits. He may want to make a motion to amend his petition because he is looking for relief through a Variance which we will probably not grant. LM – Chair – Do you have any documentation that allows you to put the sign on the building? GT – Yes, I have a letter from the building owner. I submitted it last month along with some photos. Lm – Chair – Would people be more inclined to vote favorably on the petition if he were to amend it as a Special Permit? Are you having trouble getting through the Use Variance? JB – Yes I have a big problem with the Use Variance because we are giving it to the property and he doesn’t own it. A Special Permit is a lot easier to deal with. MM – Another issue is that if he attaches the sign to the building is will the property owner consider it a fixture? If it’s a Special Permit and the permit is in Gary’s name for him to have the sign there his landlord can’t keep it. JB – That’s why we need the landlord here. LM – Chair – There is a notice he gave us from the landlord allowing the sign. VP – But what I am saying is when he vacates the premises LM – Chair – That’s not our concern. VP – We can grant a Variance for a lifetime, we can’t grant a Variance for time period. LM – Chair – We could give it for a limited number of years. VP – Originally limited to a lifespan. LM – Chair – But we could put it for a limited number of years. VP – Is the petitioner going to make a motion to amend his application? LM – Chair – Would you like to ask if you could amend the application to be a Special Permit? GT – Yes VP – So moved Those Seeking Information: None Those Opposed: None Those in Favor: None VP - Motion to include his request that his petition be amended to a Special Permit. JB – Seconded VP - This vote is only on the amendment to a Special Permit. Vote 5-0 in favor of amending the petitioner’s application for a Use Variance to a Special Permit. VP – Was Joe M. here for the last meeting? LM – Chair – Yes, he was in attendance. VP – I’m not really sure where the sign is going so Joe will vote on it. LM – Chair – That’s fine. Open to Board LM – Chair – Mike do have any questions? MM- I had mentioned this to you before. I’m ok with signs in certain areas. I am not a fan of it being located in that top left hand corner way up high. I’m ok as I had mentioned with a more standardized sign even of much greater magnitude properly positioned on the side of the building. JB – I have no problem giving him the sign. But, I do feel as Michael does about placing it in the upper left hand corner of the building. He has already purchased the sign. GT – I was at a show when I did it. VP– How much was the purchase? GT – About $7,600 plus they had to crate it and ship it. VP – What’s the size of the sign? LM – Chair 3 ft. x 8 ft. VP – How would you remove a sign like that? GT – The guy said all he does is put a bracket across and bolts it in. VP – What are the colors on the sign? GT – You can change it to whatever you want. VP – What does the sign say, or is it programmable? GT – I was thinking about just putting up messages like “New League starting in September “ and things similar to that. JM – I’m on board with Joe and Mike the building itself is kind of in disarray at this point. I’m ok with it he has already purchased it. JC – I think it is a very odd location for a sign but I’m fine with it. Lm – Chair – What about limited lighting on the sign like monochrome? Would that make it any better? More favorable? The things that we are struggling with is that the building is in disarray and there hasn’t been a lot of effort by the building owner and a lot of effort by you in other methods to promote the business. GT – This is what I believe I need to let people know I and there and we are open for business. LM – Chair – Is there some limitations that we want to put on the sign? MM – What about that? See that’s the sign with static information. I could see something static although electronic tied into something above with that. VP – When you say static, do you mean something moving? MM – Static, display and he can change it. Not scrolling, animation, flashing. VP – So you would allow him to use a 3 X8 sign that would work in conjunction with a larger sign? MM – I’m open now with a time lapse and a change. LM – Chair – So you want the location of the sign lower? MM – Lower and centered. I know you said you have juice in the corner that just doesn’t work. GT – If I bring it down any lower I’m getting into my ceiling and possibly my carpeting to wire it in. JB – I really don’t think we should be doing his marketing for him. We should just approve the sign and give him a one year review. And let him come in and tell us how the sign worked for him. LM – Chair – We don’t have to give him a year we can give him six months. JB – You can give him anything you want, the thing is we’re not going anywhere with this and we should move on. MM – My thought process is that the sign should be placed slightly above the ceiling of the first floor, this gets you above vandalism height. JB – I believe that would be too low for what he is looking for. Lm – Chair – Regardless of that that goes against everything we’ve talked about on an actual electronic sign. If it’s down lower it’s going to be more distracting to people driving by. MM – I’m still talking a 15 or 20 ft. elevation. LM – Chair – My thought process here is regardless of your drawing that we move to approving the electronic sign for a certain amount of time with limited use of the sign. Like monochrome, not a lot of graphics, no video it would just be basic information. We allow that for the next 3 or 4 months and somehow we come up tonight with a location that he puts this sign and from there if we want to enhance what he does with the signage we can do that at a review. I think we need to get this ball rolling tonight. VP – Our electrician just pointed out that you can run an exterior conduit anywhere on the outside of that wall with that sign. JM – You could come into a small box a pipe it down to the sign and it would still look neat. If you stayed on that corner the electricity would be there and it would just be a matter of running 10 or 20 ft. of conduit. LM – Chair – At this point you have already purchased the sign for $7,600 putting the conduit down the side would be a minimal cost to you. If you could get a decision here tonight that was a compromise that got your sign a little bit lower but you got you sign up would that be agreeable. GT – It kind of takes away from what my purpose was. LM – Chair – It’s better than nothing. GT – It is definitely better than nothing. I’m going to have it down low any nobody is going to see it from where I wanted people to see it. Lm – Chair – I think people that are coming and going into Fitchburg are going to see it. GT – How much further down do I have to bring it? I have a pipe that sticks out of the wall for the heating and condensation. JM – I don’t know if it really matters what height it is. LM – Chair – How far is the sign going to be from the top at this point? I think we need to come down half way on the building as a compromise and still get some painted sign up here. VP – He is not committed to a painted sign in addition to the electronic sign I think it’s yes where it is or it’s a no and we move on to the next case or we can continue it and ask him to get a price for this concept. GT – I have spent a lot of money here already, I’m just a small business and I am struggling. The painted sign is a good idea but I don’t really seeing it as being a good fit for me. Nicholas Squailia - 225 Scott Road – I just discovered his bowling alley about a month ago. I’ve lived in the City for over a decade and never knew it existed. The sign is temporary and removable whereas this painting you’re talking about is not so easy removable. The owner of the building might not be so open to him painting this massive thing on the side of the building. MM – Absolutely, that was just a concept. VP – With that input I think you take a vote and put it on for a review and it’s either going to get moved or it’s not. Or it’s going to get taken down. We are willing to take a shot on it. You can get it up and see if it has an impact on your business. Maybe this other concept is something we can work on and develop over the course of the year or so. GT – Let’s give it a shot. MM – Where is it going to go? LM – Chair – I would say just where he has proposed it. Are we going to put limitations on the time for the sign? When he closes his business? JM – I thought we talked about shutting it off at closing time. JC – I believe he sometimes closes at 11:00 PM and sometimes 12:00 AM. LM – Chair – We’ll say at the time of closing the sign will go off. I think we should have a time and I would like to give him the latitude as long as he is there because he wants to encourage more people to come in. But on the other side of that bridge it is a residential area. GT – I drove right up to the top of the bridge and you can barely see it. You can’t see it until you get over that hill. What about monochrome? Are we limiting that or are we going to limit it to 2 or 3 colors? MM – Alpha numeric only. What about time? VP – No, just public service announcements. MM – Time change 3 seconds, 5 seconds what? VP – That’s in our standard conditions to comply with D.O.T. Standards. LM – Chair – Yes, we do put that in. We can also specify 5 seconds if we would like to because it’s an area where we might like it to be a little slower. MM – What would you like for a time change? 5 seconds? GT – I not sure what you are talking about. MM – When you display some information, how quick before it changes to some other information that you would have displayed? GT- That’s a tough question. Are you looking for faster or slower? 5 seconds is quite a long time. VP – Give him 3 seconds just like everyone else monochrome and then see where we are in a year. LM – Chair 6 months VP – My other thought is that it goes up higher. When you’re at that light if you’re only going to put it half way up you’re really going to be looking. GT – You said something about colors. I can only use three colors? LM – Chair – Did we say monochrome? GT – What’s monochrome? LM – Chair – One color GT – Just one color? VP – Do we want it consistent with the color of the building? Do you want yellow? LM – Chair – I was just throwing it out there to see what other people were thinking. Do you want multi-color? Do you want monochrome? GT – I’d like multi-color. VP – Why don’t we try multi-color and then there is the review. JM – We can review and change it if we need to. That is what we have the reviews for. VP – We can write it right into the decision. We can make a finding that we specifically discussed how we will likely have to remove the sign, amend the conditions to make them more restrictive, put it right in the findings and then if we have to do it we can really remind him that it really was a no vote until we decided to put our necks out there. LM – Chair - OK Are you ok with the color? JC–JM-JB- VP–MM- I’m ok with that. Close and deliberate LM – Chair – Would you be in favor of the petition with the conditions that we’ve discussed? JB – Yes JM – I am in favor JC – I am also in favor VP – With the finding I am in favor MM – What are the colors? Location of the sign is? LM – Chair - Multi-color and placement is as submitted by plan. JB – Motion on ZBZ 2015-03 to GRANT a Special Permit with conditions to install a wall mount electronic message center on the Boulder Drive side of 14 Putnam Street, flush mount approximately 25 ft. from grade in the Central Business District at 43/7/0 14 PUTNAM STREET which are prohibited in all zoning districts per §181.5363 Conditions 1. Sign to be maintained and kept in good working order 2. No flashing, blinking, scrolling or video 3. Petitioner to offer public service announcements 4. Not to be operated as a nuisance 5. To be operated in a manor consistent with the D.O.T. standards 6. Alpha Numeric only – 3 second change 7. Six month review – November 10, 2015 8. Placement as submitted by plan LM – Seconded Vote – 4-1 To GRANT a Special Permit to install a wall mount electronic message center on the Boulder Drive side of 14 Putnam Street, flush mount approximately 25 ft. from grade in the Central Business District at 43/7/0 14 PUTNAM STREET which are prohibited in all zoning districts per §181.5363.with the above mentioned conditions. 8:45PM ZBA-2015-02 Karen Stroparro 158 Airport Road Use variance §181.313.E.2 to conduct a scrap yard business for salvage and recycling of scrap metal in the Industrial District at 142/1/0 158 AIRPORT ROAD LM – Chair – When we left the meeting last month because once again this petition is a request for a Use Variance and we wanted to discuss it with Mark Goldstein. My sense is the concerns last month was the size of the scrap metal pile. Correct me if I am wrong about that, but it seemed that it was the overriding concern for some members here. JC – Also location on the site we talked about where it was depicted may not be where it will end up. AS – I thought it would give us a three month maybe a six month period to figure things out and see how the scrap metal and the roll offs and such would be work for safety standpoints. Obviously when people work and there are both employees and people coming into the property, efficiency of operations and then call it beautifications so that it would be less visible and have less impact visually from the street and such. Brian Rehig / Vogue Plaza had expressed an interest and I think this might have come up from the Planning Board that it would be over in this direction and everyone is agreeable on this portion of the property if we say and not have it right over next to the plaza and that would be functional for us anyway because this is where vehicles will be coming into the scales and going into the building. We have equipment going to be staged here along this area. The plan was pretty much here or over here. We again went to the Planning Board last month and they approved of the plan and I think were appreciative of what we are planning to do to fix up the property. Our landscaping, paving, circulation, buffering, fencing and our trees. JB – Did anything change from the last time you were here? AS – No JB – What are the conditions the Planning Board gave you? AS – To my knowledge if there were any they are there but I don’t believe they were particularly extensive. JB – That doesn’t answer my question. It says here to submit a follow up plan once the conditions of the ZBA decision have been determined. Secondly they granted you a site plan approval with conditions. What were the conditions? Alberto Fiore – I think their conditions were that they are waiting on the ZBA conditions. AS – The conditions was that when we finalize the location of the scrap metal pile and the size of the pile and once we have gone through our introductory period that we submit the plan to the Planning Board with that finalized upon the plan, that was their main condition. JB – You do realize that all of this was discussed last month. All I want to do is get around to find out what is going to happen here. LM – Chair – Vinny is trying to get up to speed on this. VP – Joe M. is going to vote he was at the meeting last month. JB – I’m just trying to see if there was any change. VP – My primary concern is the investment of this very attractive strip mall. Have we reviewed these buffers? What about dust, noise, and debris? Have we talked about that? LM – Chair – Yes we have. BR – Yes, we haven’t talked much about dust, we have talked about noise and odors and traffic. I am very well satisfied and I have said before to this Board and the Planning Board that the Fiore’s are good business people. I think that the conditions that the Planning Board have put on the site plan are important to us including both the buffering and the location of certain operations. I am confident that we can rely on them to run a clean operation. The main thing that I am concerned about is the extent of the Use Variance expiration. I think the other issues have been pretty well addressed from our perspective anyway. I would like to make a comment just to be clear. When I said that we weren’t concerned about dust my assumption is that the entire site will be treated in some way if not paved. The RAP will be fine and take care of all dust concerns. VP – Your interpretation is that you have been doing the same business for many years and don’t expect this to be a concern. KS – Yes, it may be a different location but it is the same business. If needed we have a water truck in the very dry weather. LM – Chair – I think we have gone over this this enough between the last meeting and this meeting. I think what we really need to figure out is how to address the Use Variance. Because in the future the concern is that you may not own the business. KS – Isn’t it a concern with almost every business? LM – Chair – Yes VP – That’s actually not true. Most businesses are being operated in a zone in which they are already permitted to be operated. In this particular case this business is going to be operated in a zone where it is not permitted by right. KS – If I was to sell to someone to do the same business wouldn’t they have the same restrictions that I am operating under? LM – Chair – That is why we went to speak with Mark Goldstein so that we could get an opinion from him so that we could put an expiration on this. Then that means that you would have to apply again. AS – Would it be dated by date or ownership? VP – This is telling us here that a permit granting authority may impose conditions in awarding a Variance. They may impose conditions, safeguards and limitations on both time and use including the continued existence of a particular structure but excluding any condition, safeguard or limitation based on continued ownership. So we would have to pick a time frame. This one says that a Variance may be permissibly limited as to a lifespan. I am assuming like a life estate kind of a thing. So I think this Board would be well advised to a time frame or to go with the life estate concept. Those are the two cases that our Assistant City Solicitor gave you. AS – A life estate, could you please elaborate on that. I could convey a piece of property to you for the rest of your life and after you expire it has go to my kids. AS – In terms of the Use Variance it would be this piece of property has a life estate? VP – It would be measured by a human life. AS – So, the choice is really an arbitrary time period in a number of years or the life of somebody. VP – That’s based on what they told us. We have based on continued ownership and apparently we are being told that we can’t do that. LM – Chair – My biggest concern is that we want to be able to deal with the next owners. We have had such a good working relationship and we want to make sure that we have that in the future. If that means that we do a time frame what would you suggest? VP – What’s your client’s anticipation? KS – How do I answer that question? VP – It’s a tough one. VP – How long are you going to work before you retire? KS - If I have to go through this, not long. I’m not really sure what we are trying to figure out. If you put a 20 time on it does that mean that after 20 years I won’t be able to do this any longer? AF – You could come back. AS – Let me just give you an arbitrary number of years, say 20 years which is not related to an owner it’s just related to 20 years whether it changes hands five times in that 20 years. It’s related to the property and the time period then it has to be renewed. Or it is tied to somebody’s lifetime and it operates as long as long as that person is alive or the owner. VP – Alive AS – How old are you Alberto? AF – 24 AS – I would gamble on the lifetime one. VP – If we said 20 years or 25 years at least we have the chance to fix a problem if we have one. LM – Chair – I say 10 years. I think that’s more reasonable. You don’t mind coming back again. VP – Of course she does, she would rather not see us again I’m sure. KS – If I’m going to invest all this money and work into this property I would like to at least get 20 years. When would I invest all of that time and money for 5 or 10 years? I’m already limited, I don’t even use half of the property. I don’t think 10 years is very fair. VP – Despite what’s written on that piece of paper if we make a decision that so long as it is being operated by this petitioner and then if it’s not it will cease to exist as long as there is no appeal taken, the appeal rights would have been waived. MM – Can we put a sunset clause on there? VP – Attorney Goldstein’s reply to use was either life or a specific time frame. LM – Chair – Mark said he wouldn’t recommend a sunset clause. VP – We can make a decision to use a sunset clause and if the petitioner doesn’t file an appeal it will likely be upheld. If she does file an appeal it would likely be remanded. Another idea is we could use the sunset clause or 10 years whichever is later. Then you’ve got yourself covered both ways. LM – Chair – I like that because that gives them latitude for longer than 10 years. VP – We may be thinking a little bit out of the box but if they file an appeal then we will ask the court to remand it and we can have a new decision. AS – When you said a sunset clause or ten years it could be a long time or maybe not. VP – Who is the petitioner in this case? AS – Karen is the petitioner. Those cases that he is sighting in that letter we cases where the petitioner appealed. The second case particularly, they got the Variance first and it was based on a lifetime. Then, the person apparently died and they had to come back to the Zoning Board to get new relief and the Zoning Board then denied the petition and that case was brought up on appeal and the court said that was ok and what the Zoning Board was right with what they did. To grant it on one occasion and denied on the second. The other one is a statute that says you cannot tie it to a specific ownership of the property. But, if you do that and they don’t file an appeal I believe they waive their right to pursue that. LM – Chair – Are there any other questions? I think we need to come up with some questions and move to a vote. BH – I have a question. I’m happy with whatever time limit you want to put on this. If Alberto’s children were to wind up operating the business that is fine with me. Our concern is much more the scope of the operation. They are proposing 5,000 sq. ft. of scrap metal operation our concern is that the Use Variance only allows that kind of scale of operation not a larger scale of scrap metal operation on the site. VP – A condition in that case would be saying that this plan would be a condition of the Use Variance that plan right there, it represents 5,000 sq. ft. of scrap metal. AS – Actually we would like more than that if we could, we would like 10,000 sq. ft. right now we’re using roughly 6,000 sq. ft. and we would like to be able to expand the operation to 10,000 sq. ft. VP – This is the third meeting this case has been on the agenda it is now 11:00 and we have a plan here with how many sq. ft. are on that plan? AS – There is nothing specifically outlined on here because as we had talked about before under the 3 month operational period we want to find the best place to locate it. But we are happy to say that the located area when we do it we will put stakes in the ground. VP – You didn’t answer my question. How many sq. ft. are laid out on that plan? AS – None on this plan. VP – So you’re going to operate 0 sq. ft.? AS – No VP – How many sq. ft.? AS – I have an example plan which I have here, just let me look at it. This plan shows 5,200 sq. ft. VP – Which plan has been submitted? LM – Chair – We haven’t accepted one yet. AS – Again we had an operation here. VP – We will review it in a year. And we’re going to review the length of time and the scope of the operation. We can get you started and then see where we are next summer or next spring. Is that acceptable to your client? KS – I still am not understanding what you are talking about. You’re telling me that in one year from now you’re going to come down and see what we laid out and if you like what you see we continue. LM – Chair – It was laid out as 5,200 sq. ft. KS – I think what we did was put down what we have now at our existing business. LM – Chair – What we had been talking about is the plan as is 5,200. And now you are telling us that there is no number there. AS – What we are asking is that we can have a trial number. LM – Chair – When did we discuss that? KS – That why we came with the other plan. We talked to you and the Planning Board about us trying to move it around and work with it so it would be safe, functional and that is would look right from the street. Everybody agreed at that point that that was what we would do. LM – Chair – I didn’t necessarily know that we were changing the size of it. I thought it was more about location. AS - I think that this gentleman’s concern is that there is 3 acres here of open land and an acre or so of that is buildings. His concern all of a sudden and I think it’s everybody’s concern is that all of a sudden there is 2 acres of scrap metal here or 20,000 sq. ft. of scrap metal and all of a sudden the whole thing is scrap metal. That is not our idea. So we were saying that we would like to say it will not exceed 10,000 sq. ft. We will survey that nail it down and put it on the plan. Then it comes back to you and comes back to the Planning Board as a final. LM –Chair – We need to nail something down ahead of time and if you want to come back for something more I think that’s the better route to go. AS - We would like to start with 10,000. MM – the 10,000 is just going to be outside storage of scrap? AS – Yes VP – The scrap metal staging area on this plan is 5,200 sq. ft.? AS – That is what we are using currently. VP – My next question is that when you put this notation on your plan is it what you determined this staging area to be? This entire area? AS – Somewhere in that entire area, it is 3 acres and the only reasonable areas are here or over here. VP – So when you wrote 5200 sq. ft. where did you determine the staging area to be? AS – I didn’t I just simply meant by that is that it requires a minimum of 5,200 sq. ft. based on what we are doing now. Though we would like room to expand. LM – Chair – How about we get started with 7,500 sq. ft. and then we can come back in 6 months? What do you think of that? JM – If they are currently operating at 5,200 sq. ft. I think that we are being more than generous saying 7,500 sq. ft. LM – Chair – and if a neighbor comes back and says this is out of control we can look at it again. BR – I don’t think 7,500 will be out of control. LM – Chair – In six months’ time you will know. VP – 15 years, six month review to review the time frame and the square footage. JC – You indicated that you were going to be in operation for about three months and you will be looking at what makes the best sense for location. AF – The problem with six months is that we are not going to be able to move and be set up in that time frame. We would have to stop what we are doing and rush everything down there. VP – How long do you need? KS – We were going to fix the buildings and land and get it ready for the move. Then move the business there. I don’t believe six months will be enough time. JB – It doesn’t matter, you will come back in six months and let us know at point you are at in you plan. And then go from there. Let’s do a year. AF – A year is fine. KS – I have a question, is it possible that I can give up the Variance you gave me on Benson Street? If I could move her I would surrender that one. VP – I don’t know if you can do that. MM – I don’t know the ramification behind that. KS – I think in a year or two from now you’ll be very happy with what we have done. MM – But I can’t take back what once it’s given. VP – Security camera out front for vandalism, Graffiti will be removed within two weeks, As plan submitted, with 7,500 sq. ft. for scrap metal, location of scrap metal pile as located on the plan location of roll off containers shall be noted on the plan in one year, not to be operated as a nuisance, no banners only professional signage. As a finding do you think I should put that they are willing to surrender the Use Variance at the present location. Improvements to property and buildings are to be completed prior to moving operations, Use Variance expires upon fifteen years VP – Let’s make a finding that at the one year review we are going to look at the use, and the time. Close and deliberate LM – Chair – Is everyone ready to close and deliberate? MM – My vote would be to deliberate on another night when we are fresh. VP – I would like to take a poll of the Board. My inclination is I am in favor of the petition in connection with a vote with the conditions 1-11 that we have articulated. LM – Chair – I don’t think our conditions are going to get better at a later date. I think that we are fresh in it now. I think that we need to move on the vote. MM – Just take poll. Lm – Chair – What do you think Joe M.? I agree with you and Vinny with the Conditions and am ready to move forward tonight. JC – I agree with that VP – I am not opposed to giving Mike additional time if he wants to consider whether or not he is comfortable with these conditions. We need a unanimous and if Mike needs to have additional time I think we would all serve ourselves to give ourselves additional time to digest this and make sure everyone is on the same page. MM – I think the conditions are good. JB – That makes a lot of sense. If we don’t have everybody to move forward then this makes sense. LM – Chair – Are we going to have everybody to move forward anyway? No guarantees MM – When a lot of communities have large projects like this deliberations are done the following month. We’ve had a whole lot of information come in, we have a list of conditions. VP – What I would add to what Mike is saying is that they have a one year time frame as it is and they need more time we’re already talking about them possibly asking for an extension. LM – Chair – They came here with very little new information this evening. We left here charged with speaking to Mark Goldstein and with the hope that Vinny would be here to offer his professional opinion on some of these items. I don’t think that we gathered any new information and I think we owe it to the petitioners to move forward with conditions and move this on tonight. And I think that everybody is willing to move forward. I think that these are very good conditions and that we spent a lot of time articulating these conditions. I’m not sure what else we will gather in a month. I think we are going to lose steam in a month. That is my personal opinion. I know that we have had other cases and the have lingered on way too long and we really need to move this along. Mike – We got a lot of new information tonight and after looking at this thing and asking questions there was some talk about the potential for some outdoor seating for the restaurant. I like this idea for the buffer and all that but this road is not paved. It would be nice if it were paved. You have to look at the hundreds and thousands of dollars that were invested in next door. LM – Chair – I think we have the right when we review in one year to revoke or change any part of this decision. VP – My understanding from what happened at the last meeting is that Mike has come a long way to seeing himself voting for a Use Variance. And what he is asking the five of us to do is to give him a little time to further digest whether or not he is satisfied with these conditions. Once we put the thing to a vote and everybody raises their hands it’s over one way or the other. MM – I’ll go either way I am telling you how I feel I am one Board member. Again, these are big projects. LM – Chair – You don’t think that some of these things could be cleaned up in a year? MM - Possibly VP – Do we have another monthly meeting? LM – Chair – We do, we could have another meeting. JB – We can have a second meeting this month and put nothing else on the schedule. We will just continue our deliberation until then and take a vote at that time. LM – Chair – That’s fine. VP – Motion for the Board to resume deliberations and vote on Tuesday May 26, 2015 @7:00PM JB – Seconded Vote – 5-0 - The Board to resume deliberations and vote on Tuesday May 26, 2015 @7:00PM 4. MISCELLANEOUS LM – Chair – Lois have we received communications on the 1-3 Prospect. LO – We have received communications from Fire Prevention and the DPW-Engineering Departments. Mike O’Hara and Paul McNamara responded to say we should have their responses at the end of next week. Building Commissioner has declined to respond upon the advice of Mark Goldstein, Assistant City Solicitor. MM – Let’s invite him to a meeting. VP – We are an oversight authority of the building Commissioner and we have requested and he says he doesn’t want to so I think we should issue and order. I think we should also send Mark Goldstein a letter stating that the statute says we can make orders and we just made one. LM – Chair – Would you like these responses from DPW – Engineering and Fire Prevention emailed to you? VP – I move that we continue this discussion to May 26, 2015 also. 5. ADJOURMENT Vincent Pusateri II – Motion to adjourn Joseph Byrne – Motion seconded VOTE: 5-0 Adjourned