{"citations":{"019e012e-6db9-7cde-821e-d5da5cf1a31a":{"num":1,"sourceItemId":"019e0107-f263-77f2-a8ed-d52eabb88e77"},"019e012e-6dd3-78f4-aa72-ed64e0709a67":{"num":2,"sourceItemId":"019e0107-f263-77f2-a8ed-d52eabb88e77"},"019e012e-6def-7de9-998b-f088796b218c":{"num":3,"sourceItemId":"019e0107-f263-77f2-a8ed-d52eabb88e77"},"019e012e-6df7-7c59-88ef-99627c88d942":{"num":4,"sourceItemId":"019e0107-f263-77f2-a8ed-d52eabb88e77"},"019e012e-6dff-7b98-afe7-a1c9fb09f40c":{"num":5,"sourceItemId":"019e0107-f263-77f2-a8ed-d52eabb88e77"},"019e012e-6e0e-7d97-a192-a458dc5754df":{"num":6,"sourceItemId":"019e0107-f263-77f2-a8ed-d52eabb88e77"},"019e012e-6e16-7d2f-bc67-6c7c6ed41fa9":{"num":7,"sourceItemId":"019e0107-f263-77f2-a8ed-d52eabb88e77"},"019e012e-6e1e-757c-83da-0b1c7bc18032":{"num":8,"sourceItemId":"019e0107-f263-77f2-a8ed-d52eabb88e77"},"019e012e-6e7b-7cdf-91c6-fbe1092b1c4c":{"num":9,"sourceItemId":"019e0107-f263-77f2-a8ed-d52eabb88e77"},"019e012e-6f81-7310-8f3d-bc5187c60374":{"num":10,"sourceItemId":"019e0107-f263-77f2-a8ed-d52eabb88e77"},"019e012e-6ebd-7b6f-9a68-c971e2b3740a":{"num":11,"sourceItemId":"019e0107-f263-77f2-a8ed-d52eabb88e77"},"019e012e-6ec5-723f-8a21-63aec7ef9f7e":{"num":12,"sourceItemId":"019e0107-f263-77f2-a8ed-d52eabb88e77"},"019e012e-6edd-7f34-9b37-d399009017f1":{"num":13,"sourceItemId":"019e0107-f263-77f2-a8ed-d52eabb88e77"},"019e012e-70bc-7a3a-b5f3-e3e01dc27d28":{"num":14,"sourceItemId":"019e0107-f263-77f2-a8ed-d52eabb88e77"},"019e012e-6ffb-7dac-94ce-a14fe58dbdaf":{"num":15,"sourceItemId":"019e0107-f263-77f2-a8ed-d52eabb88e77"},"019e012e-6f0f-726e-b263-86e514678c6c":{"num":16,"sourceItemId":"019e0107-f263-77f2-a8ed-d52eabb88e77"},"019e012e-6f99-7632-ad77-5eb4f581d555":{"num":17,"sourceItemId":"019e0107-f263-77f2-a8ed-d52eabb88e77"},"019e012e-7055-744b-9c84-428040d077f3":{"num":18,"sourceItemId":"019e0107-f263-77f2-a8ed-d52eabb88e77"},"019e012e-70ad-7916-bc57-dfe39ca9e05c":{"num":19,"sourceItemId":"019e0107-f263-77f2-a8ed-d52eabb88e77"},"019e012e-7064-7f27-85d9-284499738ebc":{"num":20,"sourceItemId":"019e0107-f263-77f2-a8ed-d52eabb88e77"},"019e012e-706c-7da4-bda4-6a380a771006":{"num":21,"sourceItemId":"019e0107-f263-77f2-a8ed-d52eabb88e77"},"019e012e-70d2-7068-8a04-437b630edf5a":{"num":22,"sourceItemId":"019e0107-f263-77f2-a8ed-d52eabb88e77"},"019e012e-6fad-74e8-8fdf-4d386840ccd7":{"num":23,"sourceItemId":"019e0107-f263-77f2-a8ed-d52eabb88e77"},"019e012e-7125-741b-916d-202ee18f59e2":{"num":24,"sourceItemId":"019e0107-f263-77f2-a8ed-d52eabb88e77"},"019e012e-7113-7ce6-b1cc-54234ff2ca15":{"num":25,"sourceItemId":"019e0107-f263-77f2-a8ed-d52eabb88e77"},"019e012e-7160-7539-96b9-1803bf4a8a8a":{"num":26,"sourceItemId":"019e0107-f263-77f2-a8ed-d52eabb88e77"}},"sources":{"019e0107-f263-77f2-a8ed-d52eabb88e77":{"sourceItemId":"019e0107-f263-77f2-a8ed-d52eabb88e77","title":"Zoning Board of Appeals — 2026-03-10","videoUrl":"https://dkjpoal1tejoa.cloudfront.net/sites/a1000000-0000-0000-0000-000000000001/source-items/019e0107-f263-77f2-a8ed-d52eabb88e77/Zoning_Board_of_Appeals_Meeting_-_March_10_2026.mp4","chunks":[{"id":"019e012e-6db9-7cde-821e-d5da5cf1a31a","content":"Speaker 1: \n\nSpeaker 2: It is 7:33 PM on Tuesday, March 10th, 2026. Good evening. My name's Christian Klein. I'm the chair of the Arlington Zoning Board of Appeals, and I'm calling this meeting of the board to order. First, I'd like to confirm that all members and anticipated officials are present. Uh, so the members of the zoning board of appeals, uh, we have Patrick Hanlin. Patrick is here. I see you're on mute. Waiving, uh, then Ka Holly here. Have you Adam Lu blank here. Good to have you with us. Uh, Brad Beski, our associate here. Good to have you with us. And Nicholas Rosenberg, also our associate here, have you with us. Mr. DuPont is unable to join us this evening. Um, on behalf of the town, we have Colleen Ralston, our clerk and and zoning assistant\n\nSpeaker 3: Here.\n\nSpeaker 2: Good to have you with us as well. Um, and then checking in on the dockets this evening, uh, for docket 3 8 7 3 1 25 Broadway. Uh, we have John Leone. Oh, yes, I'm here. Oh, good to have you with us. Thank you. And for docket 3 8 9 2 4 68 Mystic Street, uh, we have Mary Win Stanley O'Connor.\n\nSpeaker 4: I'm here. Mr. Chairman,\n\nSpeaker 2: Good to have you with us as well. Thank\n\nSpeaker 4: You.\n\n","timeStart":0.085,"timeEnd":89.175,"chunkIndex":0},{"id":"019e012e-6dc2-7e4f-b306-d3ca85e53dcf","content":"Speaker 2: So tonight's meeting of the Ton Zoning Board of Appeals is being conducted remotely consistent with the bill signed by Governor Healy on March 28th, 2025, which extended temporary provisions pertaining to the open meeting law to June 30th, 2027. The extension of these provisions allows public bodies to hold their meetings remotely by providing live adequate alternative means of public access to the deliberations. This meeting is being recorded and will be broadcast by A CMI. Members of the public court participating via Zoom and who wish to offer public comment should be aware that they will be asked to provide their full name and address so that a complete public record of the meeting can be taken in accordance with state law. All participants of this meeting are advised that people may be listening to the meeting without offering public comment, and those people will not be required to identify themselves. Any votes that are not, that are taken at this evening will be conducted by roll call vote.\n\n","timeStart":91.995,"timeEnd":137.055,"chunkIndex":1},{"id":"019e012e-6dca-7895-977a-83f91311d218","content":"Speaker 2: All supporting materials that have been provided to members of this body are available on the town's website, unless otherwise noted, the public is encouraged to follow along using the posted agenda as chair, I reserve the right to take items out of order in the interest of promoting an orderly meeting, as the board will be taking up new business at this meeting as chair and make the following land acknowledgement. Whereas the zoning board of appeals for the town of Arlington, Massachusetts discusses and arbitrates the use of land in Arlington, formerly known as Monomy Algonquin Word, meaning Swift Waters. The board hereby acknowledges that the town of Arlington is located on the ancestral lands of the Massachusetts tribe, the tribe of indigenous peoples from whom the Colony Province and Commonwealth have taken their names. We pay our respects to the ancestral bloodline of the Massachusetts tribe and to their descendants who still inhabit historic Massachusetts territories.\n\n","timeStart":137.755,"timeEnd":180.445,"chunkIndex":2},{"id":"019e012e-6dd3-78f4-aa72-ed64e0709a67","content":"Speaker 2: Today, uh, at the prior meeting I had made a public notice. I'm just gonna repeat it again tonight. Um, and then, uh, it will just appear on our website. Uh, so last December, the board was made aware that an applicant had received an email claiming to be from the Department of Planning and Community Development, itemizing additional reviews that were required and including an invoice for additional fees. The applicant is told to wire money to an undisclosed account or their application could not proceed, uh, that we learned last time of a second occurrence. The demand included specific information about the application, included an invoice demanding payment in order for the application to proceed. These are not coming from the town. These emails are trying to impersonate a communication from the town. They're phishing attacks. It appears the culprits are accessing the public records for upcoming hearings and using that information to make their emails appear more official and they are not.\n\n","timeStart":180.455,"timeEnd":231.365,"chunkIndex":3},{"id":"019e012e-6dde-7613-b4ac-87ffc512a6ee","content":"Speaker 2: The fees that applicants will be charged are listed on the board's website. The fee for all applications before the zoning board of appeals, with the exception of comprehensive permit applications is $400. That payment is made directly to the town. There will not be any additional fees imposed or required. If you receive or have received an email purporting to be from the town requesting that you pay more money, please bring it to the attention of Colleen Ralston, our administrator. You should also make the police department aware of the email. We are distressed that someone is trying to take advantage of applicants before the zoning board of appeals. We hope that meeting this making this announcement will help bring this scam to the public's attention. The board will be considering how to add a warning to our documentation notifying future applicants to be wary. In the meantime, please be vigilant in your review of unexpected emails and always contact the board if you have questions or concerns.\n\n","timeStart":231.905,"timeEnd":280.605,"chunkIndex":4},{"id":"019e012e-6de6-7364-9a58-c093d903c1c6","content":"Speaker 2: So with that, I'll move on to our post-it agenda. Um, so starting with the administrative items, these items relate to the operation of the board and as such will generally be conducted without input from the general public. The board will not take up any new business on any prior hearings, nor will they be the introduction of any new information on matters previously brought before the board. So item one, uh, is the vote for the approval of the meeting minutes from, uh, February 24th. These are minutes that were prepared, uh, by Ms. Ralston, distributed the board for questions and comments and final version posted back to the board. Are there any additional ques, um, questions or comments from the board in regards to the meetings from February 24th?\n\n","timeStart":283.595,"timeEnd":325.735,"chunkIndex":5},{"id":"019e012e-6def-7de9-998b-f088796b218c","content":"Speaker 2: Seeing none, I move the zoning board of appeals for the town of Arlington. Approve the minutes from the February 24th, 2026 meeting of the board. Uh, Mr. Hanlin is seconding, so vote of those present. Um, unfortunately, Mr. DuPont is not with us tonight. Uh, Mr. Hanlin? Yes. Uh, Mr. Leblanc? Yes. Mr. Baranowski? Yes. And the chair votes? Yes. The minutes are approved. That brings us to item two on our agenda vote on the, uh, decision for 3 0 7 Washington Street. Uh, this is a decision that, uh, was written by the chair distributed to the board for questions and comments. Final version posted back, uh, to, uh, the board. Are there any additional questions or comments in relation to the written decision in 3 0 7 Washington Street? Seeing none, I will move that the zoning board of appeals for the Town of Arlington approve and adopt the written decision in docket 3 8 8 0 3 0 7 Washington Street, which grants a special permit for an essential services use in the R one zoning district under section 5.4 0.3 in the zoning bylaw. And if I could have a second from among Mr. Leblanc and Mr. Baranowski and Mr. Rosenberg?\n\nSpeaker 5: Second. Second.\n\nSpeaker 2: Okay. Um, with that a roll call vote of the members. Uh, Mr. DuPont is not with us tonight. Uh, Mr. Leblanc?\n\nSpeaker 5: Yes.\n\nSpeaker 2: Mr. Baranowski?\n\nSpeaker 5: Yes.\n\nSpeaker 2: Mr. Rosenberg?\n\nSpeaker 5: Yes.\n\n","timeStart":328.335,"timeEnd":420.505,"chunkIndex":6},{"id":"019e012e-6df7-7c59-88ef-99627c88d942","content":"Speaker 2: And the chair votes? Yes. That decision is approved. That brings us to item three in our agenda, approval of the decision and docket 3 8 8 9 73 Edgerton Road. Uh, this is a decision that was written by Mr. Baranowski distributed to the, uh, I believe that was yours, wasn't it? Not, yeah. Perfect. Okay. Uh, distributed the board for questions and comments. Final version posted back to the board. Are there any additional questions or comments in relation to the written decision? Um, in docket 3 8 8 9 73 Edgerton Road scene? None. I move that the Board of Appeal, the zoning board of appeals for the Town of Arlington, approve and adopt the written decision in docket 3 8 8 9 73 Edgerton Road, which grants a special permit for a home occupation under Section 5 9 1 in the zoning bylaw.\n\nSpeaker 5: Second.\n\nSpeaker 2: Thanks Mr. Lon. So, roll call, vote those, uh, present at the hearing. Mr. Hanlon?\n\nSpeaker 5: Yes.\n\nSpeaker 2: Mr. Leblanc?\n\nSpeaker 5: Yes.\n\nSpeaker 2: Mr. Beski?\n\nSpeaker 5: Yes.\n\nSpeaker 2: The chair votes? Yes. That is approved. That brings us to item four on our agenda. Vote on the decision, um, in docket 3 8 9 0 1 72 Overlook Road. Um, this is a decision that was written. Uh, Mr. Hamlin, I believe wrote, no, not, no, it was Mr.\n\nSpeaker 5: LeBla.\n\n","timeStart":420.845,"timeEnd":500.495,"chunkIndex":7},{"id":"019e012e-6dff-7b98-afe7-a1c9fb09f40c","content":"Speaker 2: I believe Mr. Leblanc wrote this. Thank you so much. Apologize. Uh, Mr. Green by and Mr. LeBla distributed to the board for questions and comments. Final version posted back to the board. Are there any additional questions or comments in relation to, um, the written decision in docket 3 8 9 0 1 72 Overlook Road, seeing none, uh, will move that the zoning board of appeals for the town of Arlington approve and adopt the written decision in docket 3 8 9 0 1 72 Overlook Road, which grants a special permit for an extension of a non-conforming side yard setback under sections 3, 1, 1 and three, and excuse me, 8 1 1 and 8 1 3 B in the zoning bylaw. Second. Second. Thank you. Mr. Leblanc. Roll call. Vote of the board. Mr. Hanlon? Yes. Mr. Leblanc? Yes. Mr. Broski? Yes.\n\n","timeStart":500.535,"timeEnd":552.525,"chunkIndex":8},{"id":"019e012e-6e06-7dc9-bf42-af69f0d0bcad","content":"Speaker 2: Sheriff votes? Yes. That is approved. So that concludes the administrative portion of our meeting. Um, so then moving on to the public hearings section. Uh, before opening tonight's meeting for public hearings, here's some ground rules for clear and effective conduct of tonight's business. After I announce each agenda item, I will ask the applicant to introduce themselves for themselves and to make their presentation to the board. I'll then request members of the board to ask what questions they have on the proposal. After the board's questions have been answered, I will open the meeting for public comment. At the conclusion of public comment, the board will deliberate and vote to either continue or close the public hearing. All votes will be conducted by roll call vote the final vote on any matter before the board will be taken at a subsequent meeting. Once the written decision has been drafted and provided to the board, after the decision has been adopted and signed, the decision will be filed with the town clerk starting the 20 day appeal period under state law. After that time, the applicant may proceed with their building permit. However, under state law, no decision granted by this board shall take effect until a certified copy of the final decision has been filed with and recorded at the Middlesex South Registry of Deeds in Cambridge by the applicant. So with that, uh, brings us to item five on our agenda, which is Docket 3 8 7 3 1 25 Broadway. Um, and so I will, uh, recognize Mr. Leoni and ask him, uh, to bring the board up to speed on, uh, where they are.\n\n","timeStart":553.195,"timeEnd":635.655,"chunkIndex":9},{"id":"019e012e-6e0e-7d97-a192-a458dc5754df","content":"Speaker 6: Good evening. Um, we, I have been working with, uh, Mr. Hanlin a little bit, trying to come up with a definition of an inspection bay that worked for both of us. We, um, weren't able to come to, uh, agreement on that. We had different ideas as to what an inspection bay is and what it should entail. Um, and I see saw his, um, definition of it, and frankly, um, it's too ir restrictive in our opinion as to the timeframes and what can, can and cannot be, um, done within that inspection bay. In the meantime though, um, I see that it was uploaded to the board's, um, the town's website, the minutes of the 1991 town meeting, article five, um, excuse me, the article. Um, it was Article five Service Station, um, debate. And, and I think that reading through that, particularly on lines 38, excuse me, page 38, lines 14 and 1741, um, and page 42, lines one and two, it bolsters our position as a bay is a door.\n\n","timeStart":636.485,"timeEnd":722.525,"chunkIndex":10},{"id":"019e012e-6e16-7d2f-bc67-6c7c6ed41fa9","content":"Speaker 6: Um, and if I, if you wish, and, and that's further bolstered by the 19 93 20 0 9 Dec, um, zoning Board of Appeal decision. So, Mr. Faulkner, who was the, um, head of the a RB at that point, um, said, service bays refer to the police in the garage where you drive the car in and then go, and it goes up on the list, not the gas station islands. There was debate whether or not it was a bay, was it the gas station island or not. And then on take 41 at lines eight through 12, um, uh, Mr. Korra, uh, precinct 13 asked the same kind of question. I'm curious, when you say, as a Service Bay, are you referring to where you get gas pumped or are they actually the garage facilities? Mr. Faulkner at line 21 through 24 said, service Bays refer to the part of the service station with the doors on, doors on it, where you drive the car in and it goes up on a left, the next page, that's a bay that's a service bay.\n\n","timeStart":723.345,"timeEnd":790.375,"chunkIndex":11},{"id":"019e012e-6e1e-757c-83da-0b1c7bc18032","content":"Speaker 6: So there was a definite discussion during the town meeting as to what a lift was and of what a Service Bay was. Um, they, I take that reading of the town meeting minutes to say The Service Bay is the door that contains the area with the lifts in it, where the work is done. Um, I, and that is bolstered, I believe, by the 2000 and, excuse me, 19, um, 93 decision, excuse me, 1993 decision on, on Docket 29 0 3, where they refer to it being a two bay station, meaning the two doors where you drive in to get a lift and taking those two items, which I think answer the board's question, what was town meeting thinking back then? And in my opinion, the, um, grandfather, um, issues for the 1993. We have a two Bay garage right now and two Bay service station, and we wanna add a third bay, which is the one around the side of the building, which we've referenced in the past.\n\n","timeStart":791.075,"timeEnd":861.915,"chunkIndex":12},{"id":"019e012e-6e25-747e-b962-91c9318929b2","content":"Speaker 6: So I don't think we have to jump through hoops and call the left hand bay where Mr. A Cooley does the, um, inspections and inspection bay and, and, and frankly almost relegated it to, um, sub usable status just so he can build another bay with another left. Um, and, and, and I think that doing so would not be in the best interest of the town nor its citizens. If we go back to that 90 19 91 decision, they talk about how in 1971 there were 20 gas stations. 1991 they were down to 10. And now today, um, I was counting on my fingers. I think we're around eight or nine. So this is a business that is decreasing in the town. And this is what Mr. O Cooley wants to do, is to help the citizens and do a great benefit to the citizens of the town so they can get their cars serviced locally.\n\n","timeStart":862.255,"timeEnd":922.585,"chunkIndex":13},{"id":"019e012e-6e2c-76cf-8416-f7d663623f77","content":"Speaker 6: You want your car serviced before you go on 4th of July vacation. You bring it up, he checks it, make sure it's safe, changes your oil. If he has a bay with a lift in it that he's not able to use because it's an inspection bay, that person's gonna have to wait until another bay and the lifts within that bay are free. What he's wants to do is be able to use all of his lifts in, in a normal business-like manner. These lifts costs about $10,000 each, I believe is the, um, purchase cost. And then to install them as an additional cost. So to, to literally enforce the bylaw. The way, um, the board had been thinking, I think is a, um, extreme hardship upon the citizens of the town as well as the, um, business owner. And, and frankly, we wanna be nice to our business owners and our citizens. So that's why we're just think that the board can easily approve this with the three bay, um, provisions under the definition and of the bylaw provision allowing three bays in the service station. Um, otherwise I would gladly continue to tell you the same thing. But I, I don't wanna waste the board's time, but as it is, um, I would, I'd like to hear from the board.\n\nSpeaker 7: Thank you, Mr. Chairman. Uh, Mr. Hanlon. So Mr. Delony, can you point to any place in the minutes of the, um, of town meeting where anyone talks about more than one lift behind a door?\n\nSpeaker 6: No, they didn't discuss that. They said, and I, and I'll go back and read it.\n\n","timeStart":923.365,"timeEnd":1030.565,"chunkIndex":14},{"id":"019e012e-6e3d-7fee-a40c-be980da6718e","content":"Speaker 7: No, no, no. I, I, that's enough. The question I have for you now is, isn't it true that your position is that if there is one door in two lifts behind it, you still have only one bay? That the two lifts together are only one bay? Isn't that your\n\nSpeaker 6: Position? No, my position is a bay is the area behind the door that can contain a lift. It can contain two lifts, lifts does not equate to Bay, A bay is the area behind the door. And that is almost verbatim from the 1991 minutes.\n\nSpeaker 7: Let me, let me just focus again. Yes. If, if you, if there's anything in there that meant it was, just think about what might be important to us in deciding this.\n\nSpeaker 6: Yeah. I, I've been\n\nSpeaker 7: I do care a little bit about how many bays are there, and I am looking for something that says that the way in which town meeting dealt with ADO is that if you had more than lifts behind it, there was still only one service area, even though you were serving on two different cars and on two different lifts. Is there anything, inconsist, is there anything that says that in these minutes? And if so, just tell me where they are.\n\nSpeaker 6: Oh, I, I can't prove a negative Mr. Hanlin? Well, yes you can. You have,\n\nSpeaker 7: You have a question. Alright. Alright. Excuse If the answer is no, you can't find\n\n","timeStart":1030.665,"timeEnd":1114.255,"chunkIndex":15},{"id":"019e012e-6e65-7c99-bc18-b835de1c9a89","content":"Speaker 7: And it doesn't refer back to the definition that's in the definition session. That doesn't use any of the words that were used in the definition section. So as of 1993, when the Board of Zoning appeals takes this up, there was no limitation on, because there was no operative language in the zoning bylaw having to do with service base. That didn't exist then. But it does exist today. It, it exists today because if you look at the, at the, uh, use table, it includes the words, uh, auto service station. And that is what's actually defined in the bylaws. So now the explanatory part and the definitional part are the operative part are put together. So Mr. Porter had his station and Mrs. Uh, Mr. O Cooley, uh, has acquired the station. And we assume because the board did, and because I think it's fair to say that the permission that would be sort of equivalent of a special permit is the 1972 variance.\n\n","timeStart":1515.305,"timeEnd":1584.125,"chunkIndex":20},{"id":"019e012e-6e6c-7be6-b7dc-bb4ef1b88763","content":"Speaker 7: I'm willing to sort of assume that that is the permission that you need, um, all this time. The, there, they, they have that permission from 1972 as it's been modified and there is no requirement that limits the number of bays until at some point, and we don't know exactly where that point, point is. It certainly is after 2 20 18, because that's when the zoning bylaw was reified and put into its current form. It might have been before that. But until that point, there was never a limitation on the number of service bays that Mr. O Cooley could have in this gas station. But now there is, and the question I have, and I'd like to basically put this to the board, uh, and especially the people, uh, like Mr. Rosenberg who's who've done work in this area, if you have a situation where you have a special permit that says you can do that, doesn't, that says you can do something that's a given thing is a permitted use.\n\n","timeStart":1584.225,"timeEnd":1646.335,"chunkIndex":21},{"id":"019e012e-6e73-7dee-a76c-2f0d901d8c3f","content":"Speaker 7: And you have that for a number of years, and the permit never says that it will expire at any point. And it can't even be challenged because you had it for such a long time that the statute of limitations has run, and then the zoning bylaw is changed to no longer permit the use that is permitted under your special permit. Right. Because maybe, of course, Mr. Mr. Leone is right and that the numbers work out, but no matter how you look at it, there's a regulatory thing that springs into existence when they re codify or somehow when they, when they, they put the, the service bay limitation into the operative part of the bylaw, what happens? Can you keep operating under the old special permit and the new special permit only applies to new uses or extensions or something like that? Uh, is it, are you now suddenly in a prior non-conforming use, do you suddenly have to go and get an amendment of your special permit in order to legitimate the, in order to, uh, deal with, with the new restriction?\n\n","timeStart":1647.035,"timeEnd":1711.005,"chunkIndex":22},{"id":"019e012e-6e7b-7cdf-91c6-fbe1092b1c4c","content":"Speaker 7: What, what is the rule on that? Because one way of looking at the situation that existed here is that Mr. Porter and Mr. L Cooley were always in compliance. And until, at some point the definition was cha was made operational that forbid an extra surface bay. And suddenly your special permit was for a use that under the bylaw was no longer permitted, but had been permitted. What's the usual for now, forgetting this case necessarily and the facts of this case and the ins and outs of one thing or another in general, what happens when you have a special permit and then the laws change so that the special permit is authorized as something that's no longer allowed? It's a question in the answer to, which I'd like to know because it might,\n\nSpeaker 6: It's grandfathered,\n\nSpeaker 7: Have the seeds for a different way of getting to Yes. In this case\n\nSpeaker 6: It's a grandfathered use path. It's if you ed a special permit to somebody and then you change the law later on, you were grandfathered in the town cannot, the town cannot willy-nilly just wipe out people's special permits and, and impact their property value in, in that fashion. So, and and I, and I'm gonna take a little bit of exception to, to your findings, uh, regarding the two, the 2 0 0 9, um, decision of this board right there on page three under findings of fact, these are the facts the board found. Then the subject property contains two bays. And Mr. Leon, the operative\n\nSpeaker 7: So many agree you that it says\n\n","timeStart":1711.315,"timeEnd":1811.725,"chunkIndex":23},{"id":"019e012e-6e85-77e8-9dc0-2e6ecd15a54a","content":"Speaker 6: You're arguing about may I I let you speak the operative parts of that you're arguing about when was the definition of three bays and two bays regarding a service station. That's what the two, the nine, the 1991 town meeting did right there on, on, on page two of the, of the minutes that the board itself put up, they were changing two service bays to three service bays. So it was defined in 1991 what a service bay was. It has nothing to do with the lifts inside that day. And, and I think, and I think you're stuck on that fact, and I, and I apologize, I know\n\nSpeaker 7: I'm stuck on that, but Mr. Mr. Leon asked this before, said that he wasn't going to waste our time. And it is not that he's wasting our time. It's just that almost word for word what he's saying now is what he said 20 minutes ago.\n\nSpeaker 6: Exactly.\n\nSpeaker 7: I wonder if Mr. Leoni appreciates that. What I'm trying to do here is to develop an alternative pathway to say yes.\n\nSpeaker 6: I I don't see that though.\n\nSpeaker 7: I'm looking, I'm the very statement that you can't apply the new rule under the special permit when you previously had a special permit that allowed you to do something, would be a theory that enables us to get to Yes. Without worrying about whether something is an inspection bay or not. But\n\nSpeaker 6: I'm asking, I don't see the\n\n","timeStart":1811.745,"timeEnd":1893.715,"chunkIndex":24},{"id":"019e012e-6e8e-7d2e-8fe3-b017c571d24b","content":"Speaker 7: Asking the board, I'm asking the board to consider and to explore because I, I don't have any particular reason for not wanting to have Mr. Ko to make the improvements he wants to do on his gas station. I'm looking for a way under the bylaw to make that happen. And I personally don't accept, and I will have one vo vote of many in this case. I personally don't accept even with the amendment that he's made today, that, that the lists are unimportant. So bear with me under the theory I just laid out the list would be unimportant because the whole new provision of the bylaw would not apply because he already had a special permit that didn't require, uh, any service ba li limitation at all. So I wonder if the board could discuss this. I think unless if Mr. Leoni can address that issue, I think he should understand that it's an issue that favors his position.\n\nSpeaker 6: I'll let the board discuss it.\n\nSpeaker 2: Appreciate that. I would refer to the, uh, the, the lawyers on the board as having probably better perspective on this than those of us who are architects. Not to put our two associates on the spot. .\n\nSpeaker 9: Oh, I had a, a question going back a little bit, which is, if, if there were, if we adopt the, the reason of Ms. Leon, they stated earlier on, I, is there a way we can distinguish this? A situation where there is one, one door entering a facility that has a dozen lifts and service areas within it?\n\nSpeaker 6: Oh, is it,\n\nSpeaker 2: So Mr. Rosenberg, are you asking how that would be\n\n","timeStart":1893.775,"timeEnd":2002.585,"chunkIndex":25},{"id":"019e012e-6ea3-71cf-b330-b46cc513a58e","content":"Speaker 9: If, if, if that situation were Tori, if, if we were to adopt that, that, that a bay can have multiple lifts within it mm-hmm . Is there any way of distinguishing or limiting that, that precedent from being applied where you have a facility that has, you know, when I take my car in the, the, they pull the car into an area and there's I think a half dozen or eight lifts in their cars and staff working on them. There's one, one door, one garage door that goes in that facility. Is that one bay or is that many? And, and how would, how is there a path where we could adopt your, your reasoning but distinguish that situation?\n\nSpeaker 6: I, I believe that let, let's just, um, say my rack now McGovern mm-hmm . Yes. They have one giant door that you drive into, and then they bring it to all the, uh, technicians at the different lifts. It, that facility falls under a different section of the bylaw. I believe this section of the bylaw that we're talking about here, that, that we're looking for our, um, our variance on is, is re related to gas stations because it's a service station that sells gasoline and it can have three days. We're we're not talking about a, um,\n\nSpeaker 9: Right. And, and I, and I respect and I respect that. Yeah. But I, I use my, my, my shop as an example, but suppose it's a gas station, a service station with that sells gasoline and they have the room and they decide, rather than adding a door, they'll just add other areas within one door to service multiple vehicles. Is that distinguishable?\n\n","timeStart":2003.365,"timeEnd":2103.515,"chunkIndex":26},{"id":"019e012e-6eac-79e0-9e48-e977fbf8ee0d","content":"Speaker 6: I don't see why we have to make that distinction. What goes on inside the building, it's what is presented to the public. The public is seeing two doors. The public is seeing the three doors. They're not seeing a\n\nSpeaker 9: Well, but you have a line of cars. But, but they, they're issues of traffic and congestion and the, a number of cars waiting to get service. So I I'm just cu I was just curious. It sounds like, sounds like there's not I'm not, and I'm not, I'm not making a judgment. I just Right. My sense is that, is that if two, two areas of service cars behind a door is one Bay, 12 areas to service cars behind the door is one bay as well, right?\n\nSpeaker 6: Yeah. Okay. Thank you. Yes. In, in our opinion.\n\nSpeaker 2: So I guess I would, following up on, on that, so the zoning by, we don't, this, unfortunately we don't have this in the zoning, in the information we have from the town, but what would be the purpose of restricting the number of bays when a service station can have an infinite number of lifts inside whether it has one, two, or three bays?\n\n","timeStart":2104.755,"timeEnd":2182.425,"chunkIndex":27},{"id":"019e012e-6eb5-746e-914a-64b75f06d151","content":"Speaker 6: Well, I'll speculate. Which, which all I'm doing really, um, is the size of the building and the structure itself. Uh, most gas stations are on, um, the main thoroughfares in residential areas. So you want to make, you want to keep the size and scope of the station in keeping with the neighborhood. Um, otherwise you, as Mr. Rosenberg says, you're gonna, if you have 18 lifts behind three bays, you will incur, encourage, um, more vehicular traffic and a bigger parking lot full of cars waiting to get in. That isn't really the case here. 'cause we have a very limited size, um, building and a very limited size lot that won't 'cause of the number of parking spaces can't accommodate mm-hmm. Added traffic and added vehiculars vehicles hanging around. Um, they can't put 'em on the street and parked in the customer cars in the street. They have to keep 'em on their own property and that will limit their number of service customers.\n\nSpeaker 2: Mm-hmm .\n\nSpeaker 10: Mr. Chair,\n\nSpeaker 2: Mr. Baranowski,\n\nSpeaker 10: Can I ask a question,\n\nSpeaker 2: Please?\n\n","timeStart":2183.175,"timeEnd":2264.875,"chunkIndex":28},{"id":"019e012e-6ebd-7b6f-9a68-c971e2b3740a","content":"Speaker 10: So, Mr. Leoni, um, I I, one I do want to hear at some point, Mr. Rosenberg's view on Mr. Hanlon's alternative theory, um, to get to Yes. But before we hear that, if, if Mr. Rosenberg has a view on that. But before we go there, I was curious in the legislative history, if you go up on 41, the legislative history, you read us from Tom, meaning, um, it starts by, before we get to Mr. Faulkner's response about what Service Bay is, it starts by Mr. Kura referencing, um, a facility, another facility. Um, it looks like this, it starts on line 12 on 41.\n\nSpeaker 6: Yes.\n\nSpeaker 10: It says, and I'm wondering if this is to cover a new fast oil change facility there across from the continental cable vision. Don't they have three or four bays there? Am I right or wrong? We go back and forth for a little while. Mr. Faulkner says his definition, um, of service well kind says something about Service Bays, um, going down, Mr. Kura comes back into the conversation and says, okay, now if that's a bay, I'm curious about the number of bays they have, which I take it to be referring back to this facility.\n\nSpeaker 6: Yeah. That facility for reference, um, yeah. Is the, um, what's it Valvoline on Mystic Street near the police station? Continental Cable used to be across the street and which is at, in the Armstrong Ambulance Building. Yeah.\n\n","timeStart":2265.725,"timeEnd":2360.285,"chunkIndex":29},{"id":"019e012e-6ec5-723f-8a21-63aec7ef9f7e","content":"Speaker 10: Yeah. So, so my question, my question is, is 'cause just to lay my cards on the table, I don't find what Mr. Faulkner says to be super clear about what Service Bay is. I could read it as either the door or it's the actual area where you go up to the lift. I just mm-hmm . Don't think this is enough. But the context here to me is interesting because they're referring clearly to a actual building that exists. Correct.\n\nSpeaker 6: And\n\nSpeaker 10: They say, Mr. Faulkner says, who's, that's the one proposing a definition here says they have three bays. So my question to you is, can you tell me more about this facility they're talking about, does it have, how many doors does it have for one? And then two, do you know anything about the interior of the building in terms of what it would've had at the time?\n\nSpeaker 6: Uh, I, I've had my oil changed in that I, I believe it's Val Lane. Mm-hmm . Um, and, and it's, it has you pull up on, as you're coming down, um, that Mystic Street, you take a right or a left into the north side of the building, you are facing three bay, three bay doors. The door goes up, you go in and they don't even have lifts there. Um, they have a pit that a guy stands underneath and changes your oil from below, and then you drive out the other side another set of doors.\n\nSpeaker 10: So, so let me ask, okay, so let me ask you the, another follow up question. So there's actually sounds like six doors there. Mm-hmm. One on either side,\n\nSpeaker 6: One on either side. Yeah.\n\n","timeStart":2360.515,"timeEnd":2449.685,"chunkIndex":30},{"id":"019e012e-6ecd-7276-8619-dd785e92572c","content":"Speaker 10: Right. So that's, so let me follow up question. How much, how many cars can they service? And I know we're, this is, we're going back in time and everything, but I just wanna have a little, I'm just assuming that the building hasn't changed radically in 30 years. How many cars can they service in that building at any, at one time? At three. Okay. Okay. Thank you.\n\nSpeaker 6: But we, we have to point out that that's not a service station 'cause they do not sell gasoline.\n\nSpeaker 10: Right. But, but I understand that, but yeah. But there, but you're referring to this discussion as if it, you, Mr. Faulkner is giving a definition of Service Bay, correct? Hmm\n\nSpeaker 6: Mm-hmm\n\nSpeaker 10: . And he's giving it in reference to an actual building in the world. Yeah. And my question was, what does that building in the world look like? Because Mr. Faulkner says that's three bays. So whatever that has, if it had it at that time, that's a pretty good reference for what exactly a Service Bay is, at least on this, in this context. Now, I, I'm not saying that we shouldn't pay attention to Mr. Hamlin's alternative theory. I'm just trying to understand first what this legislative history teaches us. It seems like that is of interest. So that's all I have.\n\nSpeaker 2: Thanks Mr. Baranowski. Um,\n\nSpeaker 7: Mr.\n\nSpeaker 2: Rosenberg, now to put you on the spot, did you wanna try to respond to Mr. Hamlin's question?\n\n","timeStart":2449.975,"timeEnd":2534.705,"chunkIndex":31},{"id":"019e012e-6ed5-7e0b-a4eb-d57b1ab776f6","content":"Speaker 9: No, I, I'm not sure I understood the full nuance of it. Um, I, as to the, the Service Bay, I, I think I'm leaning towards, I, I understand I'm sympathetic, but obviously Mr. Understands that we need to, you know, con concern ourselves with precedent in a definition that will affect projects beyond his clients. So, um, as much as you know, at this site, an additional area may not make much of a difference, uh, or not, although it arguably it, it could and would, um, I think the concern is that there's no limitation then on that if a Service Bay is, is defined as just a, just a door. So that's, that's concerning. And I think the fact that there are, uh, I believe towns both in Massachusetts and elsewhere, that you, that tie the Service Bay to required number of parking spaces and other factors, um, that suggest that it is related to the number of cars that are being serviced, um, that require parking, that lead to congestion and, and other factors that we talked about. So, um, I am concerned about that. Um, as to Mr. Len's point, if someone can maybe put a finer point on it, I'd, I'd love to some help in understanding it. ,\n\nSpeaker 7: Mr. Chairman,\n\nSpeaker 2: Please\n\n","timeStart":2536.805,"timeEnd":2614.545,"chunkIndex":32},{"id":"019e012e-6edd-7f34-9b37-d399009017f1","content":"Speaker 7: Let me, just in the simplest thing, I'm, I'm assuming that there was a special permit for this gas station that somehow the 70, I think seven, somehow the 72 variance was also counted as a special permit. And think that afterwards people were assuming that that was an authorization under the use tables. And so they have a permit. So they have a permit, although maybe it's constructive permit that says that the use they made back then in 1972 as may have been amended by later decisions of the board, uh, is all in a special permit. It's as if they had a special permit that said, write out you could have this business there and, and the number of base doesn't make any difference. And then suddenly the town changes the law and says, now it does make a big difference. The number of bays has to be no more than\n\nSpeaker 9: Yep.\n\nSpeaker 7: And my question is whether they're just grandfathered because they already had a special permit.\n\nSpeaker 9: I, IIII, I think I understand better now. Um, I think the challenge is that the special permit was the use that was made of that permit. Suppose it was a blanket permit for use. The use that was made was three bays. Right. Um,\n\nSpeaker 7: At that's what we were trying to deal\n\nSpeaker 9: With at, at the time. Well, no, but, but an expansion of that use would no longer fall with,\n\nSpeaker 7: I, I don't really know in 1972 how many bays they had by anybody step.\n\n","timeStart":2615.005,"timeEnd":2709.245,"chunkIndex":33},{"id":"019e012e-6ee4-714b-9aa5-ead11f799b9b","content":"Speaker 9: So if, but if in 1972 it was, you have a special permit permit to operate a service station with however many bays a service station requires, or you require. Right. And therefore, today you are, you, you have the same permission. I think the problem is that, is that whatever was there then now there is a request to alter presumably the use that was there at the moment prior to this request for a special permit, right? Mm-hmm . Um, and so you, so any grandfathering doesn't exist. 'cause it wasn't the, the, the applicant didn't avail themselves or whatever unlimited permission there was in that prior permit. So I, I be, I, there may be other situations where that analysis holds where a, a special permit is sort of a blanket permission for whatever extent of use you require, even if that subsequently becomes more limited under the zoning code. Um, but I'm having a hard time seeing that.\n\n","timeStart":2709.425,"timeEnd":2774.905,"chunkIndex":34},{"id":"019e012e-6eec-74f8-9115-858a23dbcc1a","content":"Speaker 7: Yeah. I, I think that the way of, of figuring out, at least now what, what happened just before the, the law changed is the description that was, that was CI that was read by the writer of the opinion in the 1993 decision because whatever it is, she certainly thought, or he, whoever was who wrote the opinion, um, thought that whatever Mr. Porter was doing met the definition that she read. That was from the bylaws that it existed at that time. So it was specific. I, I read some of it, but I didn't board the board and reading all of it. Um, but it's, it's there on I think page, I dunno, page seven of the opinion. So if you assume that, I don't know that that makes any difference, but at least it makes it more specific. If you assume that whatever the special permit was that was being carried on at that point, it would've allowed those things. And then the laws changed not to allow those things anymore. And then after the change, and this is I think what Mr. Rosenberg is adding that I didn't put in after the change, the app of the owner is seeking to extend that use in some way, or change that use in some way. Does that suddenly mean that, well, if you want to exchange it, you need to meet the current def the current definition in the pilot. Do I understand what\n\n","timeStart":2775.775,"timeEnd":2858.125,"chunkIndex":35},{"id":"019e012e-6f05-77d1-85f7-6a98743056a6","content":"Speaker 9: Well, well imagine, yeah. I imagine a simpler situation, maybe it's simpler, is, is you have a special permit many years ago, uh, for use as a station that has 10 at the time has 10, we'll call 'em bays, LA later there's a renovation. You eliminate, you know, eight of those bays and there's two, and now you want to put a couple back. Can you rely on the special permit you had previously that you got, went back when you had 10 bays\n\nSpeaker 7: When, when 10 and two were both in compliance. So there were,\n\nSpeaker 9: But now wait, but then there's a subsequent change that limits it to two three. Now you want to put back in a couple more, you wanna go back to 10? Can you go back to 10? Um, because you had a special permit for 10.\n\nSpeaker 7: Okay.\n\nSpeaker 9: I think you've now you've now you are now seeking to extend your, your use after the more limiting zoning change. Right? So I, again, I I, I'm, I'm sympathetic. I'm just, I'm concerned that I don't know that that, uh, the, the interpretation aligns here too,\n\nSpeaker 7: Right? There's a lot that we don't know. The opinion of 1993 says this is all going to the redevelopment board for a, for a special permit. And, but there's not a sign and the material before us that the redevelopment board said anything in 93 or for that matter at any other time on this. Um, so, you know, there is a hound that didn't bark here somewhere. That, that there must be other things and that might be relevant to this that, that we just don't know about.\n\n","timeStart":2858.235,"timeEnd":2960.185,"chunkIndex":36},{"id":"019e012e-6f0f-726e-b263-86e514678c6c","content":"Speaker 2: So at this time, do we consider this structure, the, the, the current use as it is today as being defined within the zoning bylaw as a service station, which is allowed to have up to three Service Bay? Or do we consider this as being a non-conforming prior use\n\nSpeaker 7: Mr. Chairman? I, I personally don't see any point at which it was non-conforming.\n\nSpeaker 2: Okay. Till\n\nSpeaker 7: Now. Okay. I mean, it also to have been conforming.\n\nSpeaker 2: So it had a prior, so a prior conforming use that allowed for a greater number of service bays. And when the zoning bylaw was reified and limited the number of bays, the question is, does that hold here or because the use was ate was recategorized, were there certain a advantages to the older, um, definition that no longer apply? I think that's, and I think Mr. Leoni, you had sort of intimated that if you had, if you had a use and then they changed it and it limit it, it reduced the amount of options you had on the use of your property. That the prior, should the prior use c category should be allowed to ma be maintained. Um, because the, the, the change in the code should not limit the chances you, the the opportunities you had to develop your land that you had previously.\n\nSpeaker 6: Yes, correct. Okay. Once granted permission, you're good to go.\n\n","timeStart":2968.355,"timeEnd":3078.825,"chunkIndex":37},{"id":"019e012e-6f17-7996-abe8-443b970e05e8","content":"Speaker 2: Okay. And part of the reason I asked that is cer the, the implication from the discussion that happened at the town meeting in 91 was that they had instituted a restriction on the number of bays that could be allowed at the service station to two. And then they sort of noted that there were a lot that already had three. And so they were gonna change the category to sort of be more in alignment with what was going on at the time. And so mm-hmm . Does, does their change in the definition to align with what they see on the ground mean that those, that the stations that are existing at that time now need to conform with that? Or is the implication that anyone who is coming in, they just want those news stations to be more like the ones that they have currently?\n\nSpeaker 6: Uh, I took it more, um, as the pound correcting its mistake in defining a service station as two base. And after the fact they realized most of 'em had three and sort of a, whoops, we gotta fix this.\n\nSpeaker 2: Right.\n\nSpeaker 6: That's sort of how I read the, um, introduction of, um, the article.\n\nSpeaker 2: Okay.\n\nSpeaker 6: Itself. And, and, and of course that's, that's within the dis 50, the minutes itself mm-hmm . But that is sort of how I as a town meeting member for 35 years read it.\n\n","timeStart":3079.815,"timeEnd":3172.445,"chunkIndex":38},{"id":"019e012e-6f20-7e19-93ad-9fa8e3d14ff2","content":"Speaker 2: Okay. So it's not, the, the implication is not that the change in the, that stations that were in existence prior to the, the change in the bylaw are automatically updated and now have to fit within these new categories. This, the change in categories really applies to stations that go into the operation after the time that the bylaws changed.\n\nSpeaker 6: Yes. Okay. Yeah.\n\nSpeaker 2: Thank you Mr. Hanlon. I think you were,\n\nSpeaker 7: Yeah, Mr. Chairman, just, I, I just wanna be really clear that, that all of this business about service base didn't affect anyone's behavior until the reification that suddenly took that definition and stuck it into the use table. Right. And that's exactly what was said during the course of the meeting and the, and mm-hmm . That's exactly what was done in 1993. So this was all sort of explanatory material. It was blah, blah. And it had nothing to do with, with what the rules were that actually applied to service stations until it was changed. So that an auto service station became a distinct use, which is now allowed, uh, under the use tables in the bylaw. And which that definition refers back to the definition that existed in 1991 and the one that had previously existed in 1975. So those were both just atory at that point until the change in the bylaw suddenly made them applicable.\n\n","timeStart":3173.995,"timeEnd":3262.765,"chunkIndex":39},{"id":"019e012e-6f28-7488-961f-9066a2cfc709","content":"Speaker 2: All right. So it sounds like we have two things. We need to come to a, a decision on the first, um, the sort of the, the sense to exactly what constitutes a service bay. And then the second question is whether the definition of a service station that involves a limited number of, um, service bays actually applies to this particular, um, uh, site given, uh, the history of the, of the bylaw and the changes in the bylaw since the establishment of the, of the business.\n\nSpeaker 7: Yeah. I think on that issue we do now we do also have a couple of other issues that into including other conditions that we may want to go over with Mr. Leone and see mm-hmm . Details about those.\n\nSpeaker 2: Okay. So I had, I had gone back through the, the zoning bylaws, sort of looking at some of the things that apply. Um, there was a discussion at the last hearing about, um, the required planting of street trees. Um, I would note that the, the section of the bylaw that references that, um, specifically notes, it applies to additions that are 50% or greater, um, which this would not be. So I think under the zoning bylaw, that provision doesn't actually apply here. Where it's not a new building, it's not an addition over 50% or whatever the third category is. That has escaped me at the moment. Um, and so I'm, but that would be a decision that would fall back because it's in the zoning that would fall back to the building inspector to determine, um, uh, there's this, uh, the section 5 3 7 A, which requires screening and buffering between commercial and residential uses.\n\n","timeStart":3274.585,"timeEnd":3395.935,"chunkIndex":40},{"id":"019e012e-6f68-7936-9185-077229fab4c1","content":"Speaker 2: So with that, public comments are taken as they relate to the matter at hand, should be directed to the board for the purpose of informing its decision. Members of the public will be granted time to ask questions and make comments. Those who wish to address the board should digitally raise their hand using the button on the React tab and the zoom application. Those calling in by phone, please dial star nine to indicate you would like to speak. You'll be called upon by the chair. You'll be asked to give your full name and address for the record, and given time for your questions and comments. All questions are to be addressed through the chair. Please remember to speak clearly. And once all public questions and comments have been addressed, or a designated period of time is elapsed, the public comment period will be closed. So with that, um, the public comment period is open. I would ask if there are any members of the public who wish to address this application. Um, again, this is 1 25 Broadway. With that we have Mr. Steve Moore.\n\n","timeStart":3804.305,"timeEnd":3849.045,"chunkIndex":46},{"id":"019e012e-6f70-7f08-a7f8-9172a50868d6","content":"Speaker 11: Uh, yes. Thank you, Mr. Chair. Steve Moore, Piedmont Street. I appreciate you opening public comment prior to talking Anymore about conditions that you might consider putting on, uh, any decision that the board might make, because I wanted to comment on conditions. Mm-hmm . Um, I'm, I am, uh, applaud the fact you are, are dealing with the, uh, dumpster issue, which seems to be kind of a mobile dumpster, and it does move around. And I think an enclosure's a good idea. And I'm also glad that you are, um, considering the fact that that fence behind the, uh, property, uh, that fronts on the neighboring property really needs to be kind of modernized, upgraded, and, and fixed as part of neighborhood relations. I think, however, one of the issues I raised at the last, uh, hearing or the, whenever that was, was I was concerned that whatever now is stored in that shed, which, uh, is sort of like a, you know, kind of a really a bandaid placed on the building and now is gonna be a service bay, uh, perhaps with a lift in it, depending on how all this this comes out.\n\n","timeStart":3850.375,"timeEnd":3917.7,"chunkIndex":47},{"id":"019e012e-6f79-700d-871c-219a535300f6","content":"Speaker 11: I'm concerned, as I said before, that the equipment that's currently stored in that shed still be stored within the enclosed building, not, not moved out to hang out on the property in some open space or parking space or whatever is, is there, because probably the equipment I'm talking about here is all mobile. It, I think the board needs to consider what is going to happen when the storage capacity of the building is decreased by replacing what is now a storage shed with stuff in it, I'm assuming, and, and where the dumpster was with now a service bay. I, I think the storage of that excess equipment has to be considered. Thank you, Mr. Chief.\n\nSpeaker 2: Thank you. Mr. Moore.\n\n","timeStart":3918.625,"timeEnd":3962.765,"chunkIndex":48},{"id":"019e012e-6f81-7310-8f3d-bc5187c60374","content":"Speaker 2: There other members of the public who wish to address this application? I see none. I'm gonna go ahead and close the public comment period. Um, in the discussion of, um, conditions, I would also note that there are two outstanding conditions from the original, um, 1972 decision that are currently in effect. Um, one is that the owners and operators of the station and premises and all their successors entitled cease and desist from so-called heavy or major motor vehicle repair work and to perform only the type of repair work normally associated with gasoline filling stations, namely those of a strictly minor nature. It is meant by this restriction and contingency to eliminate heavy body work on motor vehicles and major overhauling of vehicles on these premises. Um, I would ask, uh, Mr. Leone and possibly through him, uh, Mr. El Kahui, whether that condition is, um, in any way is interfering with the operation of the station today, or if that, if, if that is a true statement of the kind of work that would be anticipated here.\n\nSpeaker 8: I well, we Go ahead Mr. Leoni. No, I was gonna say, I'll, I'll let Eli speak to that. Well, we, we don't do any heavy work there as we do tires, brake suspension works, uh, alignment. So it's all minor, minor stuff. It is nothing like, uh, we don't rebuild engines. Um, the most things we do probably replacing a clutch, which is not a heavy work. Okay. Nor do you, we we don't do, we don't do any of that stuff, nor do you do any body work? No, no, no. We don't do, we are not equipped with that stuff. No. Okay.\n\n","timeStart":3968.755,"timeEnd":4077.445,"chunkIndex":49},{"id":"019e012e-6f89-764a-a85f-8d1f876a08df","content":"Speaker 2: So that condition as it stands can just continue and we don't need to worry about\n\nSpeaker 8: Yeah, no.\n\nSpeaker 2: Okay. And then the other one that's currently in CON is that no additional structure is temporary or permanent or vehicles to be situated, constructed or affixed to the premises, which would be utilized for the storage or sales of any equipment whatsoever. Um, I keep reading this and I'm very puzzled by the vehicles affixed to the premises, but that's what it does say. Um, so that would to, to Mr. The point that was raised by Mr. Moore about the, the storage of things of extra equipment, um, this current condition on the, that came out in 1972 and is still in effect would preclude the construction of additional storage outside of the confines of the building. And I just wanted to\n\nSpeaker 6: Yeah, the, as, um, Eli's son, Richie told us, um, one of the previous meetings, the, there's not a lot in that storage shed snowblowers, um, some engine lifts and things of that nature, which would be easily accommodated mm-hmm . Within the excess space of the new proposed, um, area, we, that they want to build it, it could be stored along the walls near the front in the corners that, and it wouldn't interfere with their work in that new area. Okay. The new car lift four, we'll call it area.\n\nSpeaker 2: Okay. So that, so that condition can stay as is and it's not a,\n\nSpeaker 6: It's not an issue. Not\n\nSpeaker 2: An issue. Okay.\n\nSpeaker 6: Perfect.\n\n","timeStart":4077.945,"timeEnd":4178.555,"chunkIndex":50},{"id":"019e012e-6f91-7e87-a246-001e40359d85","content":"Speaker 2: No. Okay. I just wanna confirm that. Um, and then on the, we had discussed previously the other, um, conditions I had proposed. Were there any other conditions that members of the board wanted to apply before we sort of got back to the sort of the meat of this discussion? Seeing none. Um, so as it, that noted before, um, to sure these, these two real, um, the, the real contentions, uh, one is what exactly is a service bay? And the other is whether because of the, the age of the station and it's the time when it was originally, um, approved, does that have any, uh, bearing on the number of bays that it is allowed to have at this time? Um, and I think that this discussion is very complicated because of, there's the, the term service bay and there's a reference to bays, and sometimes it appears when the term bay is used at mean Service Bay.\n\n","timeStart":4178.855,"timeEnd":4252.225,"chunkIndex":51},{"id":"019e012e-6f99-7632-ad77-5eb4f581d555","content":"Speaker 2: Um, and sometimes there's the term bay is used and it may or may not be related to Service Bay. So it, it is sort of very complicated and it's unfortunate that the decision, um, from 93 does not, is not more specific in what they mean by the term bay. Um mm-hmm . You know, I think that obviously that would've made everybody's life a lot easier. Um, the discussion that took place in 1991, um, where it defines a bay as a door leading to a lift is tricky because if you take it by the door part of the statement, then as many lifts as are behind the door, that's still a bay. If you take it going to a lift, then it sort of leaves that open to interpretation. Is does that mean that if there's two lifts and you are, you have a car going into a lift, then you have another car going into a lift, does that mean that there's now two bays?\n\n","timeStart":4252.765,"timeEnd":4313.125,"chunkIndex":52},{"id":"019e012e-6fa2-7897-be51-607da956ab75","content":"Speaker 2: Um, and my, my and the, to the, the point that was raised earlier, um, the question about, um, sorry, I was just letting someone in the waiting room. Um, you know, if you have a three doors, but you have a wide, but you have those lead to nine or 12 bays, when the town put the, uh, or lifts, excuse me, when the town put the bylaw into effect, was the town trying to limit the size of the building, meaning the number of garage doors that would be on the front? Um, or is the, was the town trying to limit the number of service areas within the buildings, um, for whatever reason they may have wanted to limit that, um, as opposed to limit the number of the, the size of the, of the building itself? Um, and I, I, unfortunately, I think that's a sort of a very complicated question.\n\n","timeStart":4313.865,"timeEnd":4379.865,"chunkIndex":53},{"id":"019e012e-6fad-74e8-8fdf-4d386840ccd7","content":"Speaker 2: We, and we have very limited guidance mm-hmm . On that point. Um, so my, my sense has always been that the number of service bays is the number of places where service can take place. Um, and that if you have the, in the case of this structure, because there are three lifts where service can take place, um, that constitutes three service bays. And certainly when I, I was at the site this morning about nine 30, uh, around 11 o'clock, um, and sort of walking around, checking out things, there were vehicles on all three lifts. Um, and there was a fourth car that was in getting an inspection at the same time. So there were four vehicles, um, inside the building. Um, and then, you know, people getting gas, there were probably six or seven cars in the parking area. So it's obviously it's very busy. Um, and that there's, you know, the, there's a need for, um, facilities to service buildings and the, the service vehicles that this building that there certainly appears to be a lot of, of desire for that.\n\nSpeaker 2: Um, it definitely appears that the lift that is on the, the left hand side, that that one is being, you know, it was up on the lift, assuming somebody was, I couldn't quite see if there was somebody working in there or not. I didn't wanna be obtrusive. Um, but definitely there was, you know, there were three cars being serviced plus an inspection at the same time. Does that mean that there's currently three service base on this in this building? I don't, my sense is yes. Um, but, um, I would certainly entertain other dis other dec other opinions on that.\n\nSpeaker 10: Mr. Chair.\n\n","timeStart":4380.005,"timeEnd":4497.575,"chunkIndex":54},{"id":"019e012e-6fb6-7acd-892f-bd62303fa1c0","content":"Speaker 2: Mr. Baranowski,\n\nSpeaker 10: I tend to agree with you that the service bays and interior space of the building to work on one vehicle at a time and with the emphasis on service, I think that the conversation, um, that we've had over the past several hearings meetings have taken us through various data points that bolster that the dictionary Websters indicates that it's the interiority that matters. Um, I think this discussion from the e from the, um, town meetings points in that direction as well, in terms of it focusing on driving up onto a lift and also focusing on this building that at least if the building hasn't changed over time, um, has has had space to do work on three vehicles inside. Um, and if that's the context that they're thinking about, the time they're thinking about that building, having space for three servicing of three, three services, basically three cars to be serviced at that moment. Um, I think just stepping back, I agree with Mr. Rosenberg. I think it is one can imagine the reasonable reason for being concerned about what's going on inside the building in terms of how much service can be provided at that building, and therefore how many cars are going to be trafficked there beyond the, um, provision of gas. Um, so I tend to, I tend to think that the most sensible reading of this, given what we have is, is that surface Bay means what you've said, basically interior space to work on one vehicle.\n\nSpeaker 2: Other opinions on that matter from the board, Mr.\n\nSpeaker 7: Chairman,\n\nSpeaker 2: Mr. Hanlon,\n\n","timeStart":4498.155,"timeEnd":4618.615,"chunkIndex":55},{"id":"019e012e-6fce-7310-bae7-9c31711d5c81","content":"Speaker 7: I don't have another opinion. Um, I share the opinion that was just expressed. Okay. Um, and I also would like to point to Mr. Rosenberg's pointing out, uh, the, that frequent that other towns at least use the same concept of a, as a bay under circumstances where they're attempting to control parking and activity on the site. And where they do that, they clearly, uh, talk about having more than one bay, uh mm-hmm . For a single door.\n\nSpeaker 2: Okay.\n\nSpeaker 2: So with that in mind, can we interpret, and I lean more heavily upon my, um, my lawyerly board members, uh, where this, the original permitting for this, this use on this parcel was done without restriction on the number of bays that were allowed, and the use has been continuous throughout, um, and has not been discontinued, um, and has never been reduced at any point in time and was increased, um, in 1972 with the, the construction of the new building. Is there any reason to that the current restriction, uh, limiting the building to only having three bays supersedes the prior approval that was granted to the building, where the, it was granted the permission to be a service station, um, and at the time service stations were allowed to have as many service bays as they, um, as they deemed fit.\n\n","timeStart":4618.975,"timeEnd":4721.855,"chunkIndex":56},{"id":"019e012e-6fda-7fe0-93a9-e07dfd466259","content":"Speaker 9: Again, I have a, I have a hard time understanding how, how you could interpret it in a way that the original, uh, permission to use to make a use of a service station when there was no limitation on the number of bays. Um, how that would supersede a subsequent restriction on that, on that use, um, when the number of bays was not being utilized at the time of the original permission. I don't, I I have a hard time seeing that.\n\nSpeaker 2: So you have a hard time seeing how you could have bays in addition to three where they were not bays in addition to three at the time it was originally constructed. Is that what you're saying? Yeah.\n\n","timeStart":4728.385,"timeEnd":4786.855,"chunkIndex":57},{"id":"019e012e-6ff0-7aa5-aee8-a749c8723b95","content":"Speaker 9: If I understand how a subsequent restriction on a use, um, obviously restriction on use cannot, uh, cannot take precedent over, uh, an existing permitted use that became non-conforming. You know, because the extent of it was limited by subsequent zoning that certainly, um, but where the u but where it was not being, that probably was not being used previously prior to the zoning change in the manner that at, at the, at the extent to which the zoning change limited it, I don't know how you have any sort of what we, what we call grandfathering rights, um, to that extent of a use I mm-hmm . Don't follow. Um, you know, it may have, unless I'm mistaken at the time of the original per permitting, it may have made use of as many bays as it desired, but it did not use more than three bays has not been using three bays during that period, and now seeks to add a bay mm-hmm . Um, so that additional bay was never, was, never utilized. So it can't be have been a pre-existing use prior to the zoning change. Okay. Right.\n\n","timeStart":4786.915,"timeEnd":4867.065,"chunkIndex":58},{"id":"019e012e-6ffb-7dac-94ce-a14fe58dbdaf","content":"Speaker 7: Mr. Chairman, Mr. Hanlon. So I'm, I'm kind of persuaded by that. I'm not just kind of persuaded by that. I am persuaded by that. Um, I'm not sure that if we were invent and had a long time, we couldn't try to figure how a way around it, but that's because that's what lawyers do. Um, so I'm not, I I am tend do tend to be, um, too inclined with Mr. Rosenberg's view, unless somebody else can think of a way of rescuing my own theory better than I can. But I do want to say that if we're in this situation, just judging from the conversation so far, um, all members of the board who've addressed, who have addressed this, have addressed the, the chairs have basically endorsed the chair's formulation, uh, that a bay consists of the area where the work is done. And I'll, I didn't get that exactly right, but the transcript will show set, um, and at least Mr.\n\n","timeStart":4869.975,"timeEnd":4933.995,"chunkIndex":59},{"id":"019e012e-7004-7872-b8a9-071070d96635","content":"Speaker 7: Rosenberg and I are are not very confident in the theory that I try to deal with where earlier. Um, now if we stick with that and there's nothing else that goes on, um, then the sense of the board as I see it now, is that, um, this should be denied. And we did have a theory before that Mr. Leoni has more or less rejected practical reasons because he thinks his theory is better and because, uh, it it is more restrictive and would have an adverse effect on, on his client's building. Um, but I'd like to actually say is that, that if we're in a situation where the word acts, uh, in the way in which it seems to be leading now, whether he'd rather us just do that or whether we should revive the notion of an inspection pay, and I think that Mr. Mr. Leoni and his client really, it's up to them with which way we go, or at least as far as I'm concerned, I'd be very much influenced by what they said.\n\n","timeStart":4933.995,"timeEnd":5002.645,"chunkIndex":60},{"id":"019e012e-700b-75e5-8635-2b16b2be1d9a","content":"Speaker 2: Mr. Leoni, in regards to the, so at the prior hearing we had discussed the possibility of differentiating between service bays and inspection bays, um, and allowing the construction of an additional service bay at the station with the, effectively setting aside the, the current area where the inspections take place and the lift behind it as being what we would refer to as an inspection bay. Um, and I know that yourself and Mr. Hanlin had gone back and forth a little over the intervening two weeks on sort of how one might define that. Hmm. And I know you had reached out to the board, uh, late this afternoon sort of indicating that you had not come to an agreement on what that might be. So was just to ask if you could, um, talk a little bit about the conversations you've had with, uh, with your client and sort of where\n\nSpeaker 6: The, that,\n\nSpeaker 2: Where that went off from what we were talking about two weeks ago.\n\n","timeStart":5006.035,"timeEnd":5062.665,"chunkIndex":61},{"id":"019e012e-7013-7b05-bf22-4a5d27faf5e5","content":"Speaker 6: The project wouldn't be economically feasible. Okay. Um, to build the new, the new, um, area, install a new lift, and then relegate the existing lift to a, um, matter of an inspection day and keeping within the, the DMVs, um, requirements that people can only have to wait so long. Mm-hmm . That does limit by itself the nature of the repairs that can be done in there. And, and, you know, that's anything he does in there is not a long term thing. Say he's replacing somebody's tires mm-hmm . Which wouldn't be something that is, um, discovered during an inspection, but someone got a flat tire that car goes on the lift that wouldn't fit within the definition that had been proposed. Um, and the car could go on the lift and be, could be lifted up out of the line of sight for the, um, headlight inspection portion of your inspection, which is the reason you need such a long, big bay, um, that would not be able to be done in that bay. So it's gonna cause extra traffic at the site, it's gonna cause extra weight for the clients and it's gonna essentially make that lift in bay economically un viable. So it would impact the entire project. Whether he would proceed or not, I don't know.\n\n","timeStart":5063.805,"timeEnd":5162.405,"chunkIndex":62},{"id":"019e012e-703a-7783-ae10-36b4878da59b","content":"Speaker 2: And so the concern that we had is that safety's a very open term. Um, you know, safety could be changing a light, it could be fixing a tire, uh, could be replacing a ball joint, you know, it just sort of goes off the rails in terms of, you know, what the full scope of what would be a repair to a car that impacts its safety because it's almost everything in a vehicle now is really to safety. Um,\n\nSpeaker 2: So I, I think that was our reluctance to sort of exploring that avenue further. I'm wondering if, um, as we had to before the inspection bay, it could be for inspections or uh, analysis and evaluation of vehicles. Um, and I don't know if we're, if the board would want to consider additional things that it may find are sufficiently close to those services to be included in that and not fully fall under a service bay. Um, and how do we define that without it being too fuzzy a delineation? Um, because it, you know, to your point, I, you know, I could certainly understand that the, you know, given the amount of business that appeared to be on site today, that, you know, certainly the ability to, to move more quickly through more, uh, vehicles would certainly be an advantage and be something that would be amenable, you know, that the, the public would certainly enjoy our, you know, our side of the thing is that, you know, we need to make sure that whatever decision we make is a decision that we're not putting ourselves into a hole somewhere down the line. Um,\n\n","timeStart":5295.425,"timeEnd":5403.035,"chunkIndex":65},{"id":"019e012e-7043-7b8d-9d12-def255013502","content":"Speaker 6: Well, if, if, if I think about it though, we're talking about eight stations, nine stations in the town mm-hmm . Almost all of them have\n\nSpeaker 6: Three base already. Yep. Doors, um, if you go down Mass Ave, you have the two up by Jimmy Steer House, they don't have three doors, but they also don't have the room to put another, um, addition such as he's mm-hmm . Doing. Um, so, so I think the fear that if you allow a bay to be called a door that leads to an area where lifts are located, um, it, it, it sort of, you know, the future harm mm-hmm. I don't believe is there, and, and, and this station is configured on its lot that would allow it. They would have, anyone else would have to come back to you for approval and it would have to have such configuration to allow that use. I mean, you have the Grass station up on Par, gather extension, he's got a lot of land there. Um, I think he already has three doors.\n\n","timeStart":5403.145,"timeEnd":5479.075,"chunkIndex":66},{"id":"019e012e-704d-78b1-885e-0fe933a332fb","content":"Speaker 6: You go down Mass Avenue, the next one you hit are the two by Jimmy Steer House, two small stations on small lots that have two doors. The next one is Shell, he's got three doors already. Then you have Eli's, he's got three doors across the street. You have, um, bp BP has two, but he's got a very big lot there. Um, and then the only other service station besides Eli is Gulf down on the bottom of River Street in Mystic Valley Parkway. He's got two doors, um, and his station is configured so he, unless he rebuilds the entire station, wouldn't have a place to put another door mm-hmm. In another bay in that lot. Um, so I, I think your, in the way I'm reading it is an intrinsic fear that if you allow a door to be called the Bay with the lifts behind it, there's gonna be a rush of people trying to do this.\n\n","timeStart":5479.135,"timeEnd":5537.275,"chunkIndex":67},{"id":"019e012e-7055-744b-9c84-428040d077f3","content":"Speaker 6: Um, and the only other option is to go back and have town meeting change the bylaw to define Lift to Define Day. Um, but that's gonna be 2028 at this point, right? Because it's the warrant's closed for this year, so it'd be actually next year 27. Yeah. Yeah. It'd be next year, 2027 un unless there's a special, but then you gotta get a hundred people to sign off. So, um, it, it, I I, I think that if this is not letting the horse out of the barn by utilizing a bay as a door, and then if you wanna redefine it later on, go for it. Um, but I, I, I don't think that there's a, you know, I, I discussed these with, with my, um, my, my workmates and other people, and they're sort of like, sort of like, they can't believe that, that this is an actual, um, hard decision for you folks.\n\n","timeStart":5538.295,"timeEnd":5602.085,"chunkIndex":68},{"id":"019e012e-705c-7e66-9ddd-1e790a618ac6","content":"Speaker 6: Uh, it sounded of like, it's a no brainer. I mean, a door's a bay and if there's two lifts inside a bay, who cares what goes on inside the building, moves the traffic in and out of there faster. So there's less cars on the lot, there's less people hanging around waiting. It, it's just the convenience to the public I think outweighs any, um, hesitation you may have defining a door as a bay with one lift or two lifts behind it, and to say it's a inspection bay. I don't think he'd do the project. I, I, he had to, he just texted me he had to leave to go pick his daughter up. Hope she's not at the airport . Um, so, um, I, I can't ask him that right now, but, um, you know.\n\nSpeaker 2: Okay. Well thank you for that. Um, so I guess what, what would be the, the sense of the board on that, um, if we're not redefining that bay and we have two doors and three lifts, do we want to reconsider how we think of what connotates the Service Bay? Or do we feel that we have our answer?\n\nSpeaker 9: Mr. Chair,\n\nSpeaker 2: Mr. Rosenberg, I,\n\nSpeaker 9: I think one of the challenges we're having is that, and, and I think to Mr. Leon's point, is\n\n","timeStart":5602.265,"timeEnd":5705.075,"chunkIndex":69},{"id":"019e012e-7064-7f27-85d9-284499738ebc","content":"Speaker 9: It, I don't think there's been any instances where this need, this concern needed to be addressed because I think that it's sort of self-limiting, right? The typical configuration of a service station, you're going to have a number of doors and a number of service areas, and typically the way they're configured is you're going to have approximately a one-to-one of doors to service areas. And a bay is whether a bay is the door or the service area inside it, typically it's gonna be about one-to-one. Yeah. Um, and certainly to some extent we'll be self-limiting so that the, the intent or the spirit as you point out, which is either the size of the building or the number of cars that are being serviced and coming in and out generally is circumscribed and adheres to around three vehicles in three doors or three service areas. Um, and, you know, we don't have anyone running out scrambling to build a mega, you know, car service facility behind one door.\n\n","timeStart":5707.805,"timeEnd":5770.645,"chunkIndex":70},{"id":"019e012e-706c-7da4-bda4-6a380a771006","content":"Speaker 9: Um, so I, I think, you know, I agree this may be a problem that may not come to fruition. Um, I have a challenge as a board member and a lawyer of looking at what I think the definition means, um mm-hmm . And, and and ruling otherwise. Um, so I, I'm left with that. I, I do think that, you know, in terms of meeting the spirit and intent of this massing and the sizing and the traffic of these facilities, four service areas within three doors or two doors, um, probably meets that intent, but I don't think it meets the letter. Um, I don't know what to do with that, but I, I just want to point that out that I, I agree, you know, that this is probably not a situation that's going to be an affront to the intent of those restrictions. Um, but I have concerns with the definition. If there was some way we could understand this tandem situation of the service areas behind a door as being distinct from a door that leads to multiple bays, maybe there's a distinction there that I'm missing and Mr. Leon can, can help us, you know, think about that first bay, which has two tandem service areas behind one door as something different than the hypothetical, I imagine, where you have multiple areas behind a door, which is problematic. Mm-hmm . That might be a helpful distinction.\n\nSpeaker 2: Yeah.\n\nSpeaker 10: Mr. Chair,\n\nSpeaker 2: Mr. Bruski?\n\n","timeStart":5771.545,"timeEnd":5872.915,"chunkIndex":71},{"id":"019e012e-7074-734a-98b0-230515954fa9","content":"Speaker 10: Uh, I, I agree with Mr. Rosenberg. I think it's not so much the, whether we're kind of opening a can of worms per se, in terms of how we interpret this. I just think that we're just trying to figure out what this means, what's the best meaning of it, given the words, given all the information that's been submitted to us in terms of the dictionary, in terms of the, um, this legislative history in terms of possibly what the legislative history was referring to in terms of buildings out in the world. Um, and I just come back to it just seems that it, the Service Bay, and also giving what seemingly was the purpose. Here it goes, I go back to the service base still goes, seems to be about the interior space where services provided. Um, so I agree that that might lead you, you know, that, that that leads to a bad outcome here, . Um, but I'm ultimately just trying to figure out what that means. Um, that's what is most concern, the biggest concern to me, um, because those are the words we have and those are the words we have to make sense of the best we can. Yeah.\n\nSpeaker 7: Mr. Chairman, Mr.\n\nSpeaker 10: Hanlon,\n\n","timeStart":5873.535,"timeEnd":5943.655,"chunkIndex":72},{"id":"019e012e-707c-7067-bba6-0c30fb2778d5","content":"Speaker 7: Um, just picking up on Brad's point, um, what concerns me isn't so much, I mean, I agree that, that I would rather be able to say yes. I've actually tried hard to figure out a way of saying yes. Uh, so I'm certainly not against this and, and frankly, if, if this comes back to town meeting, I have a pretty good idea how I would vote on it. Um, but I think that I'm very nervous about our adopting a practice where we, we have developed a view as to what a certain language means as I have here. Um, but then we say, but if we don't interpret it that way, let's interpret it in a way that, um, that will enable something that is forbidden by the bylaw to happen because it really ought to happen. And that is a kind of, sort of a methodological adult, uh, a methodological way of approaching this, that, that essentially it, it kind of undermines the rule of law here altogether.\n\n","timeStart":5944.385,"timeEnd":6011.695,"chunkIndex":73},{"id":"019e012e-7094-7bb3-9fe2-d4f542d85f25","content":"Speaker 7: And I'm not so much worried about what somebody else is going to do with the service station. I'm worried about somebody else coming here and, and making an argument essentially that, look, if you don't follow what you think the law means, you shouldn't worry about it because it's not gonna be a bad precedent here. And the next time we think that the law might have been written better, you can continue to go down that same road each time. Uh, and that leads to, we have had that situation with respect to our bylaw more than once, and it ultimately is not a good way to proceed. And that, that's my concern, is that we're just undermining procedurally every time. You know, it is always a good argument that it would make better sense from a policy point of view to take an interpretation you think is wrong and, and do it because what's the harm and the harm is that you undermine the integrity of the bylaw.\n\nSpeaker 2: Okay. So it sounds from where we are at the moment, um, that we don't have the votes to approve\n\nSpeaker 6: Mm-hmm .\n\n","timeStart":6012.435,"timeEnd":6095.915,"chunkIndex":74},{"id":"019e012e-709c-79ce-9a45-c093f5dd6207","content":"Speaker 2: Um, and that being the case, um, I would ask the board if there's any additional information members of the board feel they need in order to render a decision on this application. Seeing none. Um, I think based on what we've heard so far, um, it doesn't sound like the board is in a position to render a positive decision on this matter. Um, this, so the board can either move, we can either move to close and draft a decision, draft a decision in favor of denial, um, or if the applicant would perfer to withdraw, that's certainly an option as well. Um, but if the applicant's looking for a specific denial with an eye towards the future, then um, I think that that's where the board is at this point.\n\nSpeaker 6: Well, either way it's a bad outcome. Um, I think for the applicant and the town, um, a, a denial without any direction, um, leaves Mr. L Cooley with, with only one option, um, and a withdrawal leaves him with no options, um, a withdrawal. But we can't come back with the same plan 'cause we know it's gonna happen. Yeah. Um, you know, short of going to town meeting and changing the bylaw, uh, with Charles useless.\n\nSpeaker 2: Okay.\n\nSpeaker 6: Um, and I, I, I believe, um, it's not like you guys are gonna change your mind if I, I I file again next week. Um, and, but I, I think that it, it, it depends on your interpretation of a ill-defined bylaw.\n\nSpeaker 2: Yep.\n\n","timeStart":6096.955,"timeEnd":6239.705,"chunkIndex":75},{"id":"019e012e-70a5-7d99-b4a9-37b68724559e","content":"Speaker 6: And it, it can be defined either way. And 1, 1, 1 definition, one definition, um, leaves us with a denial and the outcome of that and the other leaves us with an improved parcel that is a benefit to the town.\n\nSpeaker 2: Okay. Well thank you for that. And\n\nSpeaker 6: Yeah. And, and, and , just as she said in 93, uh, um, you know, the economic hardships on the, on the applicant, if it's denied, outweigh any, um, harm, if there is any harm.\n\nSpeaker 2: Mm-hmm . Okay. With that, um, to ask Mr. Hanlin if you'd be willing to direct the drafting of a decision in this matter,\n\nSpeaker 7: Mr. Chairman? I will. Yes.\n\nSpeaker 2: Okay. Um, and then with that, um, I will move that the zoning board of appeals, uh, close the public hearing. Um, docket 3 8 7 3 1 25 Broadway\n\nSpeaker 14: Second.\n\nSpeaker 2: Uh, thank you so much. And with that, uh, vote of the board, Mr. DuPont being absent. Mr. Hanlin? Yes. Mr. Holly? Yes. Mr. Leblanc? Yes. Mr. Beski? Yes. Rosenberg? Yes. Your votes? Yes. We are closed on the matter of 1 25 Broadway. Um, thank\n\nSpeaker 6: You. Thank you for your, um, consideration and your time Was a, um, good thought exercise.\n\nSpeaker 2: Thank you so much for being with us.\n\nSpeaker 6: Yeah.\n\n","timeStart":6240.325,"timeEnd":6357.895,"chunkIndex":76},{"id":"019e012e-70ad-7916-bc57-dfe39ca9e05c","content":"Speaker 2: Uh, with that, uh, that moves us to, on our agenda. Alright, there you are, uh, to item six on our agenda, which is docket 3 8 9 2, uh, 4 68 Mystic Street. Uh, this is an application for a special permit. Uh, the, um, applicant is represented by Mary Wind Stanley O'Connor. So I will go ahead and ask her to introduce, um, those involved and tell us what they're proposing to do.\n\nSpeaker 4: Thank you, chairman Klein. Uh, good evening and members of the board, uh, let me introduce the team. Uh, on the call is Jim Simmons, who's the general manager of the Winchester Country Club. And we have the team from Biles and Thomas Sarah Sterns, who's a principal and the project manager, and has dealt with the, um, conservation aspects of this project. Thomas Matt Cote, who was the civil engineer, and Judds Judson Hor, who was the project architect. They're all from Bees and Thomas. Um, there was a request for after consultation with Mr. Chappa, the building inspector. Um, there was, um, a special permit filed, uh, to, um, add additional clubhouse space at the Winchester Country Club. Uh, this was, uh, filed under 8.1 0.4, which as you know, uh, provides for, um, other buildings other than one and two family homes that are prior non-conforming uses the Winchester Country Club, uh, I found, I did not realize this has been around for 120 years at that site.\n\n","timeStart":6360.215,"timeEnd":6454.845,"chunkIndex":77},{"id":"019e012e-70b4-70b7-9923-f15de4815ffd","content":"Speaker 4: So it, uh, it preceded the, uh, zoning bylaw by some time. And under that section of the bylaw, um, the non-conformity conformity may be extended or altered, providing the resulting alteration and extension shall not cause the structure to further violate the dimensional and density regulations. Now, this proposed addition does not violate any of the dimensional and density regulations, uh, nor does it, uh, violate any other section of 8.14. Uh, I can tell you that, um, they, uh, team has been to the Conservation Commission and after extensive hearing and review, they have approved the needed relief to do, to add this, uh, addition. Um, I don't know, chairman Klein and the board, if you'd like me to go through the special permit criteria now, or wait until the team makes the presentation. 'cause they have a slide deck to show you.\n\nSpeaker 2: Okay. Uh, why don't we go ahead with the presentation and then we will come back to that.\n\nSpeaker 4: Okay, thank you. Thank you. So I would, Sarah, um, Sterns, I believe has the slide deck.\n\nSpeaker 2: Ms. Stearns?\n\n","timeStart":6455.345,"timeEnd":6524.065,"chunkIndex":78},{"id":"019e012e-70bc-7a3a-b5f3-e3e01dc27d28","content":"Speaker 15: Yes. Thank you Mary. And thank you Mr. Chair members of the board. Good evening. Um, for the record, Sarah Sterns with Fields and Thomas, um, my colleague Matt Cody is gonna be sharing his screen. We've got a few slides to share. I know it's getting late, so we will be as brief as we can to get our point across. Um, and just give you a sense of the, uh, planned, uh, addition to the clubhouse at Winchester Country Club. So starting sort of high level and then zooming in, this is the entirety of the property. And you'll see, um, the majority of it is in Winchester, uh, with the southern portion being in Arlington, excuse me, Arlington. And where Matt's, uh, hand is over by the swimming pool area is right where we're talking about the proposed addition. So if you go to the next slide, Matt, and sort of zooming in on that, uh, aerial image, we've got a clear view of the existing clubhouse.\n\n","timeStart":6524.525,"timeEnd":6580.945,"chunkIndex":79},{"id":"019e012e-70c3-71d9-990f-e1ee4874414a","content":"Speaker 15: As Mary said, it's been in place for many decades. Um, the yellow square indicates the proposed addition area in the rear of the building, uh, between the existing structure and the swimming pool area, which is right now consists of a, um, portion of it is a, a maintained lawn and a portion of it is a, um, terrace, um, sort of indoor outdoor space. Um, I'll point out with this image because I think it shows it pretty clearly. Um, as part of the assessment of the location and, and sizing and scope of this addition, um, a lot of thought was given to the surrounding area, um, particularly the mature trees that you see, um, between Mystic Street and the existing clubhouse. Um, a lot of care was put into that to maintain, um, the vegetation and also the privacy screening. Um, and really just, you know, minimize the footprint for this addition as much as possible.\n\n","timeStart":6581.085,"timeEnd":6646.725,"chunkIndex":80},{"id":"019e012e-70cb-77ea-a888-534f8c342e5e","content":"Speaker 15: The right where Matt's hand is actually is a small, um, little sport court basketball court. That is the location of the proposed stormwater management area. Subsurface stormwater management. Again, trying to keep the footprint of the required elements to manage the stormwater from the new structure in an area that was not gonna cause additional disturbance. Um, as Mary mentioned, we um, completed our review with the, um, Arlington Conservation Commission in February. The Herbert Meyer Brook runs just south of this area where the tree line is. So this whole area is within their jurisdiction. So we went into a lot of detail with that commission too, and made some, um, adjustments to the plan. Um, again, keeping in mind minimizing the footprint of the proposed work as much as possible for various reasons. Um, the size of this addition is about 3,100 square feet. And just to give you a sense, the existing clubhouse is about 18,000 square feet.\n\n","timeStart":6647.385,"timeEnd":6710.205,"chunkIndex":81},{"id":"019e012e-70d2-7068-8a04-437b630edf5a","content":"Speaker 15: So just scale wise, it's, um, you know, it's not nothing, but it's not a huge addition. And, you know, the purpose of this, um, is to really help the club refi reconfigure the interior space as well as they possibly can. Um, but after going through that assessment, it was clear that some additional square footage would be necessary. Um, one of the goals of this, um, is just to give the membership, you know, different dining options and, and improve the flow of a building that's been sort of pieced together over time. Um, and I just wanted to make sure we made the point tonight that the intention of this addition is not to increase the membership of the club. Um, no, you know, it's really just to, um, serve the existing membership. So no additional members, no additional, um, uh, parking or anything like that as part of this proposal.\n\n","timeStart":6710.305,"timeEnd":6770.365,"chunkIndex":82},{"id":"019e012e-70d9-7879-b599-3fd4aeb74ce5","content":"Speaker 15: Uh, I think we can go to the next slide, Matt, and if anyone wants to jump in or stop me or ask a question, feel free. Um, this is, uh, I hesitated to put this in here because it's the reverse. So you'll see the north arrow is facing down on this. Um, but I figured you could, uh, bear with us just because I think it does showcase, um, the plan view pretty well. This was a rendering done by the landscape architect that's involved with the project. Uh, so again, just sort of the reverse view with Mystic Street on our left this time. And Matt, maybe you can point to the addition itself, um, just as it compares to the existing clubhouse. Um, we are close to the townline, but the entirety of this addition is proposed in our LinkedIn.\n\nSpeaker 15: Uh, I think we can go to the next slide, Matt. It's so nice to have somebody else sharing the screen for me while I'm talking. , uh, this is just a, an excerpt of the site plan that we presented to the Conservation Commission. Um, it's a little more detailed. It shows a bit more of the, uh, stormwater design and infrastructure that was reviewed as part of the notice of intent with the ComCom. Um, again, just kind of showing where the subsurface infrastructure is proposed, where that, um, tennis court is now, or excuse me, basketball court is now, um, with minimal, uh, grade change or site work, really just trying to keep that, um, uh, proposed work in that small footprint there.\n\n","timeStart":6771.495,"timeEnd":6868.855,"chunkIndex":83},{"id":"019e012e-70e1-722a-adb3-e94709a688c0","content":"Speaker 15: Uh, next slide. Um, so this is one that I thought would be helpful. Um, our, our architect from Chambers is on the line tonight as well, um, who helped put the, put this rendering together for us. So in the large picture, you see the existing conditions sort of looking from the area where the brook is or from the pool areas to the left in the photo. Um, and you know, that's what things look like today. Um, pivoting over to the smaller photos. Um, really that lower right one I think kind of gives us the best, um, vision of proposed sort of overly overlaid, um, with existing. So I think that that gives you a sense of what's proposed here, um, with the interior and outdoor space as well. The one right above it. Um, if you can scroll up, Matt. Um, it, I, as I said to the architect, it's such a good rendering, you almost can't tell what's proposed and what's existing.\n\n","timeStart":6870.935,"timeEnd":6929.165,"chunkIndex":84},{"id":"019e012e-70e8-793f-b08f-0aa1e8dbd882","content":"Speaker 15: So we wanted to try to highlight it in that lower right photo to give a better sense of how the, um, addition and the architecture would blend with the existing, um, feel of the building. And, uh, you can see the trees that I was talking about in the earlier slide here, um, preserved. And, you know, I think that was an important aspect to, you know, the club's, um, maintenance of the area. Um, you can't see it in this, oh, I guess you can see it in the existing photo, but there is a stockade fence as well that runs along Mystic Street in this area. So again, you know, I, I don't, we don't anticipate that much of this building even will be visible from Mystic. Um, perhaps a portion of the roof. These are deciduous trees, so maybe when they drop their leaves this time of year, it would be, you know, peeking between the fence and the trees. You'd see, uh, the construction and sort of the upper part of the roof line. But again, it's sort of tucked in the rear of the building, uh, existing building. So, um, I think that's about it. I'll pause there. Um, turn it back to you, Mr. Chair, and we're happy we've got plenty of people on the line to try to answer, uh, the board or the public's questions as they come up. Thank you.\n\nSpeaker 2: You're welcome. Do you have any, um, just floor plans? This is just sort of showing a little bit as to how this integrates with the rest of the building.\n\n","timeStart":6929.305,"timeEnd":7014.975,"chunkIndex":85},{"id":"019e012e-70fb-7173-b395-3bbdd3560944","content":"Speaker 15: Um, I think we have that slide, Matt, that shows the, um, overview and then, um, perhaps we can have Judson share a floor plan if he has it at his disposal. If this one isn't as, uh, detailed, maybe you can, you can stop sharing your screen and, and find that other slide if you need to, or Judson if you have a better, um, better, um, slide at your fingertips that you'd prefer to share, that's fine too. You're muted Judson.\n\nSpeaker 17: Sorry about that. Yeah, just gimme a moment while I bring up, uh, slide here.\n\nSpeaker 15: So maybe while he's looking for that, Matt, you can put up the one that we just have it, um, show the area wise. So this just shows, um, area wise how this, how this blends. But, um, I guess it's, it's more general.\n\nSpeaker 2: So is there still sort of a court where the, in the white area between the blue and the red, where the, or does it, is it continuous throughout?\n\nSpeaker 15: Um, I'll defer to Judson to describe it. Just representing the architect. I don't wanna speak for him.\n\nSpeaker 17: Sorry about that. I'll, uh, I'll, I'm gonna just try and put something here and do a little work around and, um, bring the, uh, bring the plan up and we can talk in depth about it. Uh, can y'all see my screen here with the plan up?\n\nSpeaker 15: Um,\n\nSpeaker 17: How about now?\n\nSpeaker 15: It is loading. There it comes. There we go.\n\n","timeStart":7016.905,"timeEnd":7237.635,"chunkIndex":86},{"id":"019e012e-7103-77b2-bced-8f6a39351449","content":"Speaker 17: Okay, . Sorry about that. Um, so, um, I'll try to zoom in here. Um, you know, as we, as we work through the spaces, but, um, if you can imagine, um, you know, mystic Street is on your left here. This is the, um, the front parlor kinda historic building. And then, you know, this, if you can imagine this rectangle here, um, is the new addition. Um, and so when it comes to the existing walls, um, those are the kind of posha gray that you can, um, imagine here. Uh, we're reconfiguring the, uh, kitchen inside to provide, uh, more space for both a la carte and banquet functions. Um, and we're making the corridors themselves a little bit wider, more gracious. Um, and then when it comes to the addition, um, this is where we have, uh, our approach here as well as a casual and adult dining, uh, portion. Um, and then associated, uh, outdoor seating, um, that wraps around here. Uh, now you will notice that we've been very, uh, cautious about the, uh, existing, uh, front parlor house. So we made sure that any addition, uh, happening here, any construction's happening outside of the footprint of that historic building, uh, so as to not, uh, impact it at all.\n\nSpeaker 17: Um, and were there specific questions about the plan that I can, that I can help with?\n\nSpeaker 2: No, I think, I think that sort of clarifies the, it was more sort of the way it connects to the existing building and just making sure, sort of understood it's how it's set into the existing, you know, fabric of the building.\n\n","timeStart":7238.305,"timeEnd":7346.265,"chunkIndex":87},{"id":"019e012e-710b-7a17-b97a-6cf809c22ca9","content":"Speaker 17: Mm-hmm . Yeah, we, we kind of described them as little architectural gaskets where, um, we're being careful with not only, um, you know, the building itself, um, the historic building itself, but just the, the foundations and everything where the new portion is, is connected, um, to the old existing building. But, um, you know, we've got this corridor space here and this service zone here that kind of act as the, the, the glue that connects them on either side to this new addition and, and blends it in without too heavy of a touch on what exists.\n\nSpeaker 2: Okay. Thank you. Um,\n\nSpeaker 2: So there were, I had a couple questions that sort of come up as looking through it. So this is being, this is seeking a special permanent under section 5 42 B six, which is the large additions, um, which we don't often see in a non-residential manner, but it, because this is in the R zero zoning district, that that section of the code still applies. Um, and that section has its own specific findings that the board needs to reach on top of the, the standard, um, condition, uh, findings that the board needs to reach for a special permit. Um, and also, uh, under section, um, 8 1 4, um, it's, uh, I think it's, uh, I noted in the, in reviewing some things, so the, I think the existing gas service may be, uh, relocated temporarily or permanently. And, and I remember, I believe Ms. O'Connor in your statement, uh, that you had written, um, that that has been cleared with the Bon Building departments. That's not an issue here. Um, I,\n\n","timeStart":7347.915,"timeEnd":7454.915,"chunkIndex":88},{"id":"019e012e-7113-7ce6-b1cc-54234ff2ca15","content":"Speaker 4: I, I actually, um, chairman Klein did not meet with the building department, Beales and Thomas prepared this application and they met with, um, Mike Champa.\n\nSpeaker 2: Oh, perfect. Okay. Um, and I know there was some discussion about prior decisions on this site. Um, there are decisions going all the way back to 1944, uh, which involved a dismantling of some military installation to build a curling facility on site . Yes. Um, so there's a, there's a long history of this, um, but in, in going through it did not appear that there were any specific decisions of the board that would necessarily be impacted by this. Um,\n\nSpeaker 4: No. Ms. Ms Ralston was kind enough to send me the decisions, which are quite old and very brief , um, and . Some are only one page. Uh, and they, I agree with you on that.\n\nSpeaker 2: Okay. Um, so I don't, so those were the things that had come to me, um, in my initial review. Are there any specific questions from other members of the board?\n\n","timeStart":7455.675,"timeEnd":7523.195,"chunkIndex":89},{"id":"019e012e-711b-7fb6-8d2d-2fb59ef32bcc","content":"Speaker 2: None at this time. I will go ahead and open this meeting for public comment. Just remind the, those the public comment is taken as it relates to the matter at hand should be directed to the board for the purpose of informing its decision. Those wishing to speak can digitally raise their hand using the raise hand button and the react tab in the zoom application. Those dialing in by phone can dial star nine. You'll be, uh, asked to identify yourself by name and address and given time for your questions and comments. All questions will be addressed through the chair. So with that, are there any members of the public who wish to address this application? Um, again, this is docket number 3 8 9 2 4 68 Mystic Street. Seeing none, I'll go ahead and close the public comment period for this, uh, public hearing. Uh, so again, what the board has before, it's, this is an application for, uh, in addition to the existing, um, uh, building at, uh, the country with Chester Country Club. I believe the addition is in excess of 750 square feet. Is that correct?\n\nSpeaker 4: Yes, it is.\n\nSpeaker 2: Okay. Uh, so it falls under both, um, 5 4 2 B six, uh, be as a large addition, but also, um, this had been stated that at the start, um, under 8 1 4. Um, so with that, um, Ms. O'Connor, you had prepared some preliminary findings for the board to consider,\n\n","timeStart":7532.435,"timeEnd":7624.805,"chunkIndex":90},{"id":"019e012e-7125-741b-916d-202ee18f59e2","content":"Speaker 4: Um, yes. To review the special permit findings. This is a prior non-conforming use in what is now the RO district. Um, so it preceded the bylaw. Um, I would suggest to you that the requested use is essential, a desirable to the public convenience or welfare because it, uh, provides services and improvements for members as well as operational needs at the club. Um, the, it will not create the proposed edition will not create undue traffic congestion or unduly impaired pedestrian safety. As, uh, Ms. Stern said there'll be no increase in membership as a result of this edition, and thus no increase in additional, uh, traffic parking. Um, the requested use will not overload any public water drainage or sewer system. Uh, it is unanticipated that this project would put any additional strain on the utilities. Um, uh, the special regulations that apply are 8.1 0.4 a, and, um, I believe that I have gone through 8.1 0.4 A. Mm-hmm. Um, uh, the, uh, requested use will not imp impair the integrity of character of the district or adjoining districts nor be detrimental to the health or welfare, uh, for the town. And clearly their requested use will not by its addition to the neighborhood cause in excess of that use. Uh, because this is the only country club that's partially in the town of Arlington. So I would suggest to you that, um, the, the applicant can, can satisfy the special permit criteria. Thank you, Mr. Chairman and members of the board.\n\n","timeStart":7625.705,"timeEnd":7719.095,"chunkIndex":91},{"id":"019e012e-712e-70a9-b643-7fa6d02b6d51","content":"Speaker 2: Thank you. Um, in addition, we had noted, uh, uh, section 5 4 2 B six for large additions. Uh, so the, the findings that are required by the board, the board needs to be able to find that the alteration or addition is in harmony with other structures and uses in the vicinity. In making its determination, the board is to consider the dimensions and setbacks in relation to abutting structures and uses consider conformity with the purposes of the bylaw. Um, so specifically in, in relation to the large edition ones, obviously, um, the only structures and uses in the vicinity really is the country club. Everything else is pretty far afield. Um, and as we had seen from the presentation, um, uh, the, the proposed edition, uh, is a very, uh, well crafted addition to the existing building and keeping with the sort of the form and scale and detailing that's, um, in the existing building.\n\n","timeStart":7719.545,"timeEnd":7782.345,"chunkIndex":92},{"id":"019e012e-7135-781b-b65c-b9546aebe83f","content":"Speaker 2: And, uh, certainly could easily be found to be in harmony with the other structures, um, the dimensions and setbacks in relation to a budding structures and uses. Um, so that to, for the, uh, abutting structures, um, similar to before, um, it, you know, it's intended to be an integral part of the building, but it's also, um, it is not encroaching upon any other structures, um, or directly upon, uh, BIS Street any far any, or to any abut. So, um, there's no issues there. Um, and in conformity with the, the purposes of the bylaws, it was also addressed, um, in the initial findings that this is, um, an expansion of an existing use of an amenity that, uh, many members of the, the Arlington and Greater Arlington community are able to, to take advantage of. Um, and it provides a, a place for outdoor recreation and, and, uh, preservation of open space, uh, and has also, um, which has acknowledged that this has been approved by the Conservation Commission, who has looked into, um, issues surrounding the, the brook on the property, um, and the, the relation of the addition and the building to that brook.\n\nSpeaker 2: So, um, and they have found in saver of the proposal. Um, are there any additional questions or comments from the board,\n\nSpeaker 7: Mr. Chairman?\n\nSpeaker 2: Mr. Hanlon?\n\n","timeStart":7782.685,"timeEnd":7874.075,"chunkIndex":93},{"id":"019e012e-713d-7ec0-a41e-29f87449b692","content":"Speaker 7: Um, I'll be very quick this time. They, I, I was impressed by the showing of, of all of the preservation of trees that are going on, and it a general theory really of what this is about. Um, because I mean, ultimately this is an area which, uh, it's purpose under the bylaw is to be Lowden low density residential. It's our lowest density residential in town. Uh, and the preservation of vegetation and the preservation of the kind of uses that are being made here, I think are very helpful in contributing to, uh, the continuation of the feel, uh, and the nature of the, uh, and the character of, uh, of, of the zoning district. And, and in that sense, uh, it's particularly, uh, it's particularly value. You, you could easily imagine what else might be done. Uh, and those are not very pleasant things to imagine necessarily. And, uh, and it's a relief to have this continue to thrive and continue to do what it's doing. And it fits so perfectly into the setting in the town.\n\nSpeaker 2: Thank Mr. Hanlin. Anything further from members of the board?\n\nSpeaker 10: Mr. Chair?\n\nSpeaker 2: Mr. Beski,\n\nSpeaker 10: When you refer this to Mr. Handling to write an opinion, can I say we do a condition that we write them only, we write them this opinion only as long as these old opinions. Let's make that our, our, uh, to ourselves. We just do that. We, I think everyone would benefit, including the authors.\n\nSpeaker 2: Yep. ,\n\nSpeaker 10: That's\n\n","timeStart":7874.745,"timeEnd":7969.685,"chunkIndex":94},{"id":"019e012e-7146-7cfd-9129-0f4cbc7c61da","content":"Speaker 2: All my, but my favorite was that the, the wooden shack that was constructed temporarily for curling during World War ii was of a later donating decision, like 15 years down the line where they were looking to re-use it for another purpose.\n\nSpeaker 10: Simpler times,\n\nSpeaker 2: Simpler times. With that, I, there are members of the board who feel that there's any additional information the board needs before it's able to render a decision in this matter. Seeing none, I would ask Mr. Hanlon if you'd be willing to direct, direct drafting of an opinion in favor of\n\nSpeaker 7: Approval. Gone for just a second. Did we do public comment and there wasn't any? Is that the,\n\nSpeaker 2: That is correct.\n\nSpeaker 7: Okay. Yes, I'm happy to, happy to direct the assignment. Um, preferably to the most concise member of the board.\n\n","timeStart":7969.685,"timeEnd":8024.205,"chunkIndex":95},{"id":"019e012e-714e-73a8-9d07-3c6237a8de31","content":"Speaker 2: Excellent. Then with that, um, I would ask if there are any, so there are three standard conditions the board would apply to, um, any of its decisions. The first is the plans and specifications approved by the board of, for the special permit shall be the final plans and specifications submitted to the building inspector. The town of Arlington in connection with this application for zoning relief should be no deviation during construction from approved plans and specifications without the express written approval of the Arlington zoning Board of appeals. Second is the building inspectors hereby notified they're to monitor the site and should proceed with appropriate enforcement procedures at any time they determine that violations are present. Building inspector shall proceed under section 3.1 of the zoning bylaw and under the provisions of Chapter 40, section 20 1D of the Massachusetts General Laws and Institute non-criminal complaints if necessary, the building inspector may also approve an institute appropriate criminal action also in accordance with Section 3.1. And the third is that the board shall maintain continuing jurisdiction with respect to this special permit grant, are there any additional condition that members of the board feel would be appropriate? I did note in the, um, information that was provided by the applicant. Um, believe there was, there's some proposed condition, the existing condition, oh, that's conditions under a different definition of the word conditions. Okay. Nevermind that. Um, are there any legal conditions that members of the board feel would be appropriate to, in addition to the three standard?\n\nSpeaker 2: Seeing none, I will move that the zoning board of appeals for the Town of Arlington. Close the public hearing in docket 3 8 9 2 4 68 Mystic Street.\n\nSpeaker 7: Second.\n\n","timeStart":8025.165,"timeEnd":8133.255,"chunkIndex":96},{"id":"019e012e-7160-7539-96b9-1803bf4a8a8a","content":"Speaker 2: Thank you Mr. Hanlon. So, roll call, vote of the board in favor of closing the hearing. Um, absence of Mr. DuPont. We have Mr. Hanlon.\n\nSpeaker 7: Yes.\n\nSpeaker 2: Mr. Holly? Yes. Mr. Lu Bank? Yes. Mr. Beski? Yes. Mr. Rosenberg? Yes. And the chair votes? Yes. We are closed on Mr. Street. Thank you all very much. Thank\n\nSpeaker 4: You, gentlemen. Have a good evening.\n\nSpeaker 2: Thank you. Thank you as well. Thank you everyone. Thank you. So that comes to the end of our, uh, agenda items. Um, just, uh, for, uh, reference of the board, um, this morning was the, uh, groundbreaking for 10, uh, Sunnyside Avenue. Um, the weather was incredibly cooperative. This was appreciated by everyone present. Um, very nice present, uh, just, uh, set of speeches and presentation from the Housing Corporation of Arlington, um, who presently has over 200, uh, units, um, that are available to, uh, at affordable rates. And this, uh, project will add 43 to that account. They hope to be done, um, late spring of 27. Um, and they are, they're starting out, they're getting out of the ground right now. So they're, uh, they are, are working diligently and quickly. So as you're driving down Broadway, take a look. Um,\n\nSpeaker 7: Mr. Chairman,\n\nSpeaker 2: Mr. Hanlin,\n\nSpeaker 7: I, it's my understanding that a fairly large, not a huge large, but a substantial number of, uh, units will be available to people at 30% of the EMI, which is much more discounted than the minimum that's generally done and is particularly welcome.\n\n","timeStart":8133.935,"timeEnd":8246.645,"chunkIndex":97},{"id":"019e012e-7167-790a-8c96-7f3c90d2e333","content":"Speaker 2: That is correct. Yep. Um, and, uh, we have one more meeting in March, uh, which will be March 24th. Uh, Ms. Ross, what's on our agenda for the 24th?\n\nSpeaker 18: One second. I had it up and I put it back out. I think , let's see. We know, um, 71 Mystic will be back with their fence. Oh, great. He's, he should be off for that one. And I believe there's one other one. And then 49 Fisher Road. I believe they're just doing, um, a porch slash edition.\n\nSpeaker 16: Okay,\n\nSpeaker 2: Great.\n\nSpeaker 18: And all of their stuff is up in OpenGov. If anybody wants to read them now for fun,\n\nSpeaker 2: .\n\nSpeaker 2: Excellent. Um, so April is the time of year when the board, um, elects officers. Um, as I have threatened for several years. I have been serving in the position of chair since, uh, for six years. Um, and I, I think it's due time for someone else to, to take over the reigns of this, uh, this board. Um, and I'm happy to speak with anyone who is, who has interest in doing so. Um, it's, uh, it's been my, my privilege to serve. Um, but I think it's time for someone else to, uh, to take over. And so we'll, um, be accepting nominations in April for the, for that position. Um, and we also, uh, pat and I have been talking off and on about updating the rules and regulations, uh, for the board. 'cause they're, uh, probably five years old now. Now they're fairly outta date.\n\n","timeStart":8247.455,"timeEnd":8368.885,"chunkIndex":98},{"id":"019e012e-716f-705a-a34f-0e56fc870b59","content":"Speaker 2: Um, and so if someone is interested in, um, joining in on that task, um, please let one of us know and we'll, uh, find a way to, to, um, to incorporate you in such a fashion that we are not creating a, a public records issue, uh, and not violating the public meeting law. So, um, those are are the two things that are coming up for us. Uh, and with that, I would like to thank you all for your participation in tonight's meeting of the Arlington Zoning Board of Appeals. I appreciate everyone's patience throughout the meeting. I would especially like to thank calling Ralston, Mike Chappa and Mike Cunningham for their assistance in preparing for and hosting this online meeting. Please note the purpose of the board's recording of the meeting is to ensure the creation of an accurate record of its proceedings. It is our understanding that the recording made by ACMI will be available on demand at ACMI tv within the coming days.\n\n","timeStart":8369.425,"timeEnd":8424.155,"chunkIndex":99},{"id":"019e012e-7177-7452-a477-12abba5e0dad","content":"Speaker 2: Arlington Community Media is dedicated to providing an electronic forum for the free exchange of information and ideas which reflect the talent, skills, interests, concerns in the diversity of the Arlington community. Please visit ACMI TV to learn how to support this valuable public resource. If anyone has comments or recommendations, please send them via email to zba@town.arlington.ma us at email address is also listed on the zoning Board of Appeals website. And to conclude tonight's meeting, I ask for a motion to adjourn. Thank you Mr. Hanlin. Have a second. Second. Thank you. Mr. Full blank. So, roll call, vote to adjourn. In the absence of Mr. DuPont, we have Mr. Hanlon. Yes. Mr. Holly? Yes. Mr. LeBla? Yes. Mr. Broski? Yes. Rosenberg? Yes. Chair votes? Yes. We are adjourned. Thank you all very much. We'll be in touch. Thank you. Evening. Evening, all\n\nSpeaker 19: Good night. Good night.","timeStart":8424.705,"timeEnd":8483.345,"chunkIndex":100}]}}}