total time: 4.9 minutes
total words: 428
[Mike Caldera]: Hello and welcome to this regular meeting of the Medford Zoning Board of Appeals. We're going to take a quick roll call and then we'll get started.
[kCdGHg1OaMo_SPEAKER_21]: Jim? Present.
[Adam Hurtubise]: Andre?
[Mike Caldera]: Can folks hear me? Yeah, I've got you.
[Denis MacDougall]: So I think it's Andre's.
[Mike Caldera]: Okay, well, I see Andre is present. So he'll work to resolve the audio issues. Christy Evetta? Present. Yvette Velez?
[Yvette Velez]: Present.
[Mike Caldera]: Mike Caldera, present. All right, so we have a quorum. We can get started. Dennis, could you please kick us off?
[Denis MacDougall]: Sure. Actually, the first thing I want to do is that we got a request to continue 121 2nd Street from the attorney. We've received an email from them just asking if they could continue that to the meeting on, sorry, my calendar is a bit wonky right now. It'll be July 31st.
[Mike Caldera]: July 31st, OK. Um, so we got an email. Do we have anyone present for that one? Okay. Um, well, we haven't heard any. Testimony in that case, so customarily we will just continue. These cases, if so requested by the applicant, so chair awaits a motion to continue this matter. To our next regular meeting on July 31st.
[Mary Lee]: Motion.
[Mike Caldera]: So the second. Second. All right. We're going to take a roll call. Jim. Aye. Mary.
[SPEAKER_09]: Aye.
[Mike Caldera]: Andre. Aye. Chris. Aye. Yvette.
[SPEAKER_09]: Aye.
[Mike Caldera]: Mike. Aye. All right. That one's continued to our next meeting. All right, what's next, Dennis?
[Denis MacDougall]: The next matter is 38 Harvard Avenue, case number A-2024-03. Applicant and owner OB's Automotive Collision Center are requesting a six-month extension on a variance granted by the Board of Appeals with the decision dated on June 14th, 2024 and filed on June 27th, 2024 until December 14th, 2025 to sell class two used motor vehicles at 38 Harvard Avenue.
[Mike Caldera]: Thank you, Dennis. I see we have attorney Desmond here for the applicant.
[Kathleen Desmond]: Good afternoon, Chairman Calderia, board members. I had requested this extension under the what was, I believe, the current law. However, I sent to Dennis today as I was looking at this this evening in the Massachusetts Economic Leadership Act, which Governor Healey signed in late November. It appears that, and I sent you both, KP Law had a update, and also I sent you the portion of the statute, section 280. The statute itself is this much double-sided paper, so it's a little difficult to see where it is. But in any event, it appears that any variance in existence between January of 2023 and January of 2025 is automatically extended if it was in existence by operation of law for a period of two years. And the statute itself specifically deals with chapter 48. I don't know if you've had an opportunity to look at it. I just saw it at quarter of six tonight and sent it along to you. But I wanted to at least know that the board would be willing to grant a six month extension. We ran into a little bit of an issue with the application for the license that needs to go before City Council for approval. The applicant is now required to obtain the certificate of compliance with the DOR and that took a little bit of time to set up the account. The EIN number had to be worked out and then it came to tax season. So then the tax returns had to be filed. And once those were filed, the workers' compensation certificate was due to expire. So it's just been kind of trying to get things in the right order and all. in good standing to bring it before the council. We have taken all of the reports that are required from the admissible departments, all but the traffic is in. So we're in a position to go before the city council within within a month or so anyway.
[Mike Caldera]: Okay, thank you. So I mean, customarily, that's something that we would typically vote to agree to the extension. It sounds like under the new law, you don't even need us to take action. So, Attorney Desmond, are you comfortable proceeding without the board taking a vote in light of that?
[Kathleen Desmond]: I'd like the board to take a vote just on the six months in case there's some exception, excluding Kathleen A. Desmond's variances that were granted, something wonky of that nature, just to know that under the old ordinance or under statute, I would still be valid and still have the six month extension.
[Mike Caldera]: Thank you. All right, sounds good. thoughts from members of the board? Hearing none, chair awaits a motion to grant the six-month extension.
[Mary Lee]: Motion.
[Mike Caldera]: Second. Second. All right, we'll take a roll call. Yvette?
[Adam Hurtubise]: Yvette?
[Yvette Velez]: Hi, sorry, technical difficulties too.
[Adam Hurtubise]: No worries.
[Yvette Velez]: Hi.
[Mike Caldera]: Chris. Hi. Andre. Hi. Mary.
[SPEAKER_09]: Hi.
[Mike Caldera]: Jim. Hi. Mike. Hi. All right. You have your extension.
[Kathleen Desmond]: Thank you very much. Have a nice 4th of July, folks. Thanks, you too.
[Denis MacDougall]: Great. What's next, Dennis? Next is 173 Arlington Street. Applicant and owner, Don Foote, to install an addition of 173 Arlington Street within the side yard setback extending existing side yard setback nonconformity, which is not allowed per the City Methods Zoning Ordinance Chapter 94 Table of Dimensional Requirements.
[Mike Caldera]: All right, great. And I see we do have a Don Foote on the call. Hello and welcome.
[SPEAKER_13]: Yep. Can you hear me?
[Mike Caldera]: Yes, we can hear you.
[SPEAKER_13]: Right. We have a tiny 910-square-foot single-family home that's in antique and in disrepair. We're going to just extend the rear out 12.5 feet, the exact width of the house so we can have a three-bedroom, two-bath home. That's pretty much it.
[Mike Caldera]: My understanding is that in extending the home in this way, you're not creating any new non-conformities. Is that right? You're just extending an existing non-conformity?
[SPEAKER_13]: Just extending an existing non-conformity. The right side non-conformity, which is we're 2 and 1⁄2 feet from the right side setback. We're supposed to be 7 and 1⁄2 feet. So we're going to extend that straight back.
[Mike Caldera]: All right, so in light of that, the standard we need to apply here is the special permit standard. So if there's no substantial detriment to the public good, then that would be allowable under the Medford ordinance. So Mr. Foote, did you want to? show us plans or anything, or have Dennis present those?
[SPEAKER_13]: I've submitted plans. It's a very modest addition of about 440 square feet. We're going to still have a very modest home of 1,300 and something square feet, so I don't think we're really impacting the neighborhood in any way, except we're going to totally rehab the house and make it beautiful again. It's a beautiful older home that's just been falling into disrepair.
[Mike Caldera]: Thanks, Dennis. Could you maybe just pull that up? OK, great. And by the way, I forgot to say this at the beginning. So we have six members of the board present, five vote. So I'm appointing every member except for myself as voting members on this one. All right, so looks like we have a lot that's got 35 foot of frontage, but it's also 35 foot wide. And so, yeah, the existing dwelling is about two and a half foot from this orientation left side. And so the addition is just extending a little bit back. OK, I'll open it up to questions from the board. I'm not seeing any questions from the board. I'll just say it looks straightforward to me, so I do not have any questions. I'll now open it up to public comment. If you're a member of the public and you'd like to speak on this matter, you may do so now. You can raise your hand on Zoom, turn on your camera and raise your hand. You can type in the chat, or you can email dennisdmcdougall at medford-ma.gov. I do not see any members of the public who would like to speak on this matter. So the chair awaits a motion to close the public portion of the hearing and enter deliberations.
[SPEAKER_09]: Motion.
[Mike Caldera]: Do I have a second? Second. All right, we'll take a roll call. Jim? Aye. Andre? Aye. Chris? Aye. Mary? Aye. I. All right, the board is now deliberating. What do you think, folks?
[Yvette Velez]: I can start. It looks like a great improvement to the home. The addition is pretty minimal, including the dormers addition on top. I mean, I think it's a small, existing and small addition, in all honesty.
[Adam Hurtubise]: Right.
[Mike Caldera]: Other thoughts from the board? Seeing none. Yeah, so even though this isn't part of the standard, I mean, there's no real other way to extend this building. So it happens to be too close in the side yard setback. It's not making it any worse. Seems like there's not any members of the public raising concerns. So I'm not seeing a substantial detriment here. So I'm not voting, but in general, I think it meets the standard.
[SPEAKER_13]: Thank you.
[Mike Caldera]: All right. Other thoughts from the board? being none, chair awaits a motion. Oh, did you have something you wanted to say, Andre? Sorry.
[Andre Leroux]: No, I was just going to underscore what Yvette said. I agree.
[Mike Caldera]: Okay. Chair awaits a motion on this matter. So there's a request for a special permit to extend the existing non-conformity. So moved. But technically, I didn't make a motion. So you're going to have to.
[Andre Leroux]: OK. Motion to approve the special permit for 173 Arlington Street. Do I have a second?
[Mike Caldera]: I'll second. All right. We're going to take a roll call vote. Yvette?
[SPEAKER_09]: Aye.
[SPEAKER_09]: Aye.
[Mike Caldera]: Chris? Aye. Andre? Aye. Jim? Aye. All right, your special permit is approved. Thanks so much.
[Denis MacDougall]: Appreciate your help. And Don, so now in this situation, I'm the one who writes up the decision. Luckily for you in this instance, your neighbors had a very similar, pretty much the exact same case, you know, a few months ago. So I basically had that decision pretty much written and it's already been like checked by our legal counsel. So I should just be able to, you know, go through it and just make sure that, you know, change some things out to, you know, for yours. So I think the turnaround in yours should be pretty quick. So once the decision's written and approved and signed by the members, then it gets filed in the city clerk's office. That starts a 20 days appeals period. At the conclusion of that 20 days appeals period, you know, you just go to the clerk's office, get a letter basically saying there's been no appeal, file that decision at the Middlesex South Courthouse, and then you can get your building permit.
[SPEAKER_13]: Great, thanks so much, Dennis. And I think I still need to do a ConCom application with you, correct?
[Denis MacDougall]: You do, yes. So I'm out tomorrow, but on Monday, give me a call, and we can start going through that process.
[SPEAKER_13]: Yeah, I should have all my paperwork together by beginning next week. I'll see you then. Thank you. Thanks, everyone.
[Mike Caldera]: Thank you. Good night. All right, what's next, Dennis?
[Denis MacDougall]: There we go. 58 Myrtle Street. Applicant and owner Bartlett Development LLC to alter and extend an existing single family residence at 58 Myrtle Street within the side yard setback extending existing side yard setback nonconformity and add a third floor which is not allowed for the City of Medford Zoning Ordinance Chapter 94 Table of Dimensional Requirements.
[Mike Caldera]: All right, thank you. For this case, again, I'll be appointing the other members of the board as voting members. Do we have Do you have the applicant or representative for the applicant present?
[William O'Keefe]: Attorney Bill O'Keefe, online. Hello, welcome. Great, you can hear me. I appreciate everybody's time on this cool night. Just wanted to give an update with regards to the applicant. He's just proposing to alter and extend an existing, pre-existing, non-conforming, single-family residence on Morell Street. The existing structure right now is a one-story home. with a small attic and a non-conforming due to the side setbacks. The proposed work includes a vertical expansion to the removal of the existing roof and construction of a full second floor. Additionally, the project includes a horizontal expansion of the building footprint by approximately 4 feet to accommodate the reconfiguration of the exterior living space. A new level is also being proposed above the 2nd floor, which contained an unfinished storage area and remain below the threshold that would constitute a full 3rd story. Um. While the dormant areas are included in the added design, the building will remain compliant with the zoning definition of a two-and-a-half-story structure. The total gross living area will increase from approximately 1,435 square feet to 29 and 24 square feet. The project doesn't increase the degree of non-conformity related to the existing site setbacks and does not propose to add any new conforming elements. We proposed a few of the plans so that the board can see and just seeking relief with regards to the special permit. I know when I did the description, I was working with Dennis on this too as well. The work description was to add a dormitory to this property. That was to stop my narrative and unfortunately I couldn't switch The verbiage in there locked in on me when I sent the, the application, but I know there was some confusion with the, the commissioner and we worked through him and Dennis in order to get some clarity with regard to the scope of the work. But I wanted to appreciate everybody's time in terms of processing this application with me.
[Mike Caldera]: Right. Thank you. So. I would like to see the plans, just so everyone has a shared awareness. So, Attorney O'Keefe, is that something you can share, or Dennis, you could help Attorney O'Keefe share?
[William O'Keefe]: I have them with a file. I'm not sure if... I can bring them up.
[Denis MacDougall]: Which one do you want first, the plot plan or the architectural plans?
[William O'Keefe]: I do the architectural plan. That'll give a big picture in terms of everything that's being done. I'm sure this board's aware of in terms of this area, in terms of the work and the scope that's being done over there. It's been a busy area. Nothing that's going to impede or impact the neighborhood in terms of an architectural design. It would fit in nicely with the current homes that are being developed over there. Um, this is an older home, um, that just needs a little bit modernization and, um, space for, uh, for future families.
[Adam Hurtubise]: All right, great.
[Mike Caldera]: So, it looks like we're currently looking at the existing elevation.
[William O'Keefe]: Yes.
[Mike Caldera]: Right, and here are the proposed elevations. Questions from the board so far? One question I have is, functionally, what's the purpose of the dormers on the half floor up top? It seems a bit unusual to have dormers for attic spaces.
[William O'Keefe]: Yeah, I believe they have the central area. Nelson, I'm not sure if you're on the call, but I know on the other slide, I think it'll show how the layout is for inside the dormer space. I believe that. I can't.
[Mike Caldera]: Yeah, so on the right there, maybe if you could zoom in a little, Dennis. Um, yeah, so it looks like there's HVAC room on one side. It's, yeah, and then the dormer looks like it maybe extends out past that. Yes. Yeah. Okay, so if I'm understanding correctly, you think that maybe the HVAC was a factor, but you're not entirely sure.
[William O'Keefe]: In terms of the design for the attic space, that's my understanding of it. And just for headroom.
[Mike Caldera]: I see, okay. Other questions from the board?
[Andre Leroux]: Mr. Chair, yeah, through you. Just a question. So the four feet additional extension of the house, is that towards the garage? Is that correct? It looks wider, the new version. Looks closer to the garage. I believe so. And is the existing garage staying the same? That is my understanding, yes.
[William O'Keefe]: Same dimensions. Thank you. Yeah.
[Adam Hurtubise]: Okay. Other questions from the board.
[Chris D'Aveta]: Mr. chair. Yeah. If I could, I don't see the building commissioner on here, but I guess, is there a. Thought seven and a half feet was a minimum for the third floor or habitable floor, but perhaps that's something that we could ask Attorney O'Keefe to do.
[William O'Keefe]: Yeah, he was reviewing that. He had a question with regards to that. I know he put something, let me just find out what he wrote, because he had some questions that we answered and I believe he's satisfied. Yeah, he he has something on file here too. Yeah, he just did the narrative of the project, but. Yeah, we're not looking to go above the 2 and a half story structure. So, if the 7 and a half feet is an issue, then. I mean, we can come back and address that when the permits being pulled. So obviously, if it doesn't meet the building code, then we're not seeking relief for that. So we'll have to modify the design to meet that criteria.
[Chris D'Aveta]: Yeah, for sure. That'll be a building code issue, just out of curiosity.
[William O'Keefe]: Yeah, yeah, yeah. I know he mentioned something about the roof line, but we're within the roof line criteria. But I think that might have been something that he also had an issue with.
[Adam Hurtubise]: All right, other questions from the board?
[Mike Caldera]: Not seeing any, so I will open the public portion of the hearing. If you're a member of the public and you'd like to speak on this matter, you may do so now. You can raise your hand on Zoom, turn on your camera and raise your hand, type in the chat, or you can... I'm not seeing any members of the public who would like to speak on this matter. So the chair awaits a motion to close the public portion of the hearing and enter deliberation.
[Adam Hurtubise]: Andre?
[Andre Leroux]: Motion to close the public portion of the hearing and enter deliberations.
[Mike Caldera]: Do I have a second?
[Andre Leroux]: Second.
[Mike Caldera]: All right. Yvette?
[Mike Caldera]: Mary.
[SPEAKER_09]: Aye.
[Mike Caldera]: Chris. Aye. Andre. Aye. Jim. Aye. All right. We're now deliberating. What do you think, folks?
[Mary Lee]: Can I ask why the city is not allowed to add a third floor?
[Mike Caldera]: Um, I'm not sure any of us could say that with certainty, Mary. It's just a long standing dimensional requirement in this district. There's this distinction between a half floor and a full floor and it's measured as whether the, I think the livable space above seven foot in height, whether that is or isn't more than 50% of the gross floor area of the floor below it. And for whatever reason, when that ordinance was put into effect, they said this zone, two and a half is the max and this, this proposal, to be clear, does meet that definition. But yeah, I don't personally know specifically why they said not three stories in this zone.
[William O'Keefe]: If I can, it's about overdevelopment back in the day. That was a concern. But now with the housing crisis and everything taking place, everything's on the drawing board.
[Unidentified]: Thanks.
[Mike Caldera]: Great thoughts from the board.
[Andre Leroux]: I don't think this is out of character with some of the other properties on the street. So I don't think there's any kind of negative public impact of this and doesn't change the the footprint of the house itself, like in terms of being extended back or towards the neighbor on the left side doesn't, uh, doesn't seem to be any impact there.
[Mike Caldera]: So, um, so Andre, just, just to be clear, there is a four foot horizontal expansion of the building footprint.
[Andre Leroux]: Yeah, but it's towards the garage towards the driveway.
[Mike Caldera]: Yeah. Yeah. Okay. All right.
[Chris D'Aveta]: Yeah, I agree.
[Adam Hurtubise]: It's a good, it seems like a good project. Okay. Other thoughts from the board?
[kCdGHg1OaMo_SPEAKER_21]: I also agree with Andre and Chris. I think it's a great project.
[Adam Hurtubise]: All right. Other thoughts from the board?
[Mike Caldera]: So to grant this relief, the standard is a special permit, so we would have to find no substantial detriment to the public good. So if there's no other deliberation, Chair awaits a motion.
[Chris D'Aveta]: Motion to approve the special permit for, I forget the address, 58 Myrtle Street. Do I have a second?
[kCdGHg1OaMo_SPEAKER_21]: I'll second.
[Mike Caldera]: All right. I'm gonna take a roll call. Jim? Aye. Andre? Aye. Chris? Aye. Mary? Aye. Beth? Aye. All right.
[Adam Hurtubise]: You have your special permit.
[William O'Keefe]: I appreciate everybody's time. Thank you so much.
[Denis MacDougall]: And Attorney O'Keefe, so basically deco what I sort of said before, you know, I'll work on the decision. And I mean, if you want, I can send you one to just sort of, if you wanted to do a draft to sort of expedite it a little quicker, I'll get you one in the next day or so, just so you can start in on it. And then that'll sort of move the process on a little quicker. So.
[William O'Keefe]: No, Dennis, I appreciate your time. Thank you so much.
[Adam Hurtubise]: All right. Wonderful. All right. What's next, Dennis?
[Denis MacDougall]: Thanks. 141 Wall Street. Applicant and owner Lucy Siddall at a third floor at 141 Wall Street, which is an existing non-conforming structure in a single family, two zoning district. It's not allowed for the City of Medford zoning ordinance. This will also extend the existing non-conforming front yard setback requiring a special permit for the City of Medford zoning ordinance.
[Mike Caldera]: All right, so we have Lucy Siddall on the call. Hello and welcome.
[SPEAKER_12]: I'm here.
[Mike Caldera]: Hi, welcome.
[SPEAKER_12]: Hi, can you hear me okay?
[Mike Caldera]: Yes, we can hear you.
[SPEAKER_12]: Okay, great. Hi, everyone. Thank you so much for your time. We apply for this. So we're actually a special permit with a zoning variance. So we're doing both. We want to finish our third floor added. Right now it's lined up and not finished. And we want to, the special permit is for the dormers on both sides. One of them is for the stairs. Having a dormer is the only way we can get a flight of stairs up to the third floor. And then the other dorm was to raise the ceiling height to have habitable space. And we wanted to make it a full third floor. We had initially drafted it up to be what we thought was a half of the second floor, but we actually found out that permit for the closets and storage space are also counted as habitable. And so it was actually the building commissioner who proposed the idea of like, hey, you know, go for the full third floor variance just so that you can get the space that you need. Right now, we, you know, my husband and I both work from home. He's a stay at home dad. I work from home full time. We have a kid. So it's, it's getting quite quiet then. Yeah, that's you. And it's, you know, we are also in an undersized lot. We don't really have anywhere else to meaningfully expand to other than like a small mudroom that we'd like to put in that goes into our yard. Um, and we did also speak with our closest to butter, um, on aim street and did get their, uh, approval and support for our project as well. And so, um, we're hopeful that we can move forward with the plan.
[Mike Caldera]: Right. Thank you. And, uh, one question I have upfront, I just want to make sure the board's understanding the space that actually counts per the Medford ordinance on the plans. Maybe it's best to go through it when the plans are up. But yeah, I saw on the actual submission that the calculation was 49.8%. So I'm assuming that must have been before the building commissioner's clarification. Is that right?
[SPEAKER_12]: Correct. Yeah, that was what we, so what we understood, and our architect who had been on sort of other places with the boards, that was his, he wasn't sure, so he sort of didn't count the storage space, and so that was his calculation. And then the building commissioner actually clarified to us via email that he was like, as it is, you're going to require a special permit because any storage space is counted as habitable. If any person is going to be there for any given amount of time, it counts here. And so because of that, we adjusted our plans to try to maximize our attic space to be livable since we were going to have to either wall it all off so we couldn't use it just to be able to just do a special permit, but we would love to be able to use that space for our family, so we went for the variance as well.
[Mike Caldera]: I see, okay. So the plans I'm looking at, they still have low ceilings in the storage areas. Are there new plans with with four?
[SPEAKER_12]: So yeah, our understanding is any storage area is still considered living space. That was what we were told.
[Mike Caldera]: Right, but you just said that you decided, okay, well, we're doing three floors anyway, so we might as well.
[SPEAKER_12]: Yeah, and I apologize for it, but the May 16th plan is our current plan. That is our plan.
[Mike Caldera]: Got it.
[SPEAKER_12]: If you don't have that, I'm happy to share my screen, but that's the plan that we're submitting for the zoning variance as well as a special permit.
[Mike Caldera]: Yeah, the plans I'm seeing are, I think they're dated April 19th.
[SPEAKER_12]: Oh yeah, you're looking at the special permit one for the dorms, but I submitted a more recent one, so I can show it to you if you'd like me to share it. Or I don't know if Dennis, that's something that you do?
[Denis MacDougall]: It can be there if you have it up right now, because I think part of the issue was there were two separate applications. So let me just let you, if you have them handy, I'll just let you do them.
[SPEAKER_12]: Okay. I sent a share request. Oh, here we go.
[Mike Caldera]: By the way, I forgot to say at the beginning, it'll be the same voting members. So I'm not voting.
[SPEAKER_11]: So this is the plan. dated 16th. And this is our attic.
[Mike Caldera]: Okay, great. Yeah, that that does look different. So that's helpful.
[SPEAKER_11]: Yeah.
[SPEAKER_12]: And so yeah, hi, Calvin. Thank you. Sorry. Did you want to go into any other area of the plan?
[Mike Caldera]: Am I correctly understanding it's the third floor where all the work is happening?
[SPEAKER_12]: Yes, the third floor is where all the work is happening that we need permits for. We're doing some remodeling of bedrooms and bathrooms, but that's it.
[Mike Caldera]: I think we can stay zoomed in on there then. Any questions from the board so far?
[Chris D'Aveta]: Mr. Chair, yeah May yeah, just if we could Reduce what it is that the applicant is seeking the variance and the special permit I'm having a little computer issue where I can't pull up.
[Mike Caldera]: Yeah, so essentially So that the house is existing non-conforming and I the even at two and a half floors, due to the position of the house on the lot, it was gonna require a special permit with no substantial detriment standard. And then after the building commissioner clarified that some of the low ceiling height space on the prior plan was still going to count and that it qualified as a third floor anyway, the applicant decided to just make that space more functional. So in this zone, going from two and a half floor to three floor, that requires a dimensional variance. So it's a variance for being three floors and a special permit for extending existing nonconformity.
[Adam Hurtubise]: Thank you. Other questions from the board?
[Mike Caldera]: So one thing I'll say, I just want to make sure we talk about it before the board deliberates. With a variance, the board has to connect something about the shape, topography, or soil conditions of the land or structures that would present a hardship if the zoning ordinance were literally enforced. And so here, for the variance specifically, essentially, without the relief, you'd be limited to, I think it was about, what, like 450 foot, something like that. And so for the variant standard, you need to connect the need for that additional half story to something about The lot or something unusual about the lot or structure. So for example, you could point out that the shape of your lot is unusual because it's kind of at this. Herbie Bend, which contributes to the nonconforming nature of the existing structure, or you could point to how the footprint of the existing structure limits the size of a half story that you could build up there relative to some of your neighbors. But you have to make some argument to connect the hardship to the the structure or the lot. So what's the hardship in this case from your perspective?
[SPEAKER_12]: Yeah, I'm happy to answer that. The hardship is that our lot is undersized for what it was technically supposed to be allotted for. We can't build into our yard without losing a lot of yard to gain substantial space. Our yard's already very small. We're also on a corner. if you could see on our plot map. We can't really build out because then we'd be out onto the sidewalk and that wouldn't work. The only other place where we'd be able to build out to is our driveway, which if we do that, we lose our parking and then we would have to park on the street, which would affect flow of traffic because we're on a corner that actually gets fairly busy. For us really to have appreciable living space that we can make our home long-term, and we would like to stay and make our homework for us, it's to build up. And so that's why we would appreciate the relief from the zoning variants or regulations.
[Mike Caldera]: Okay, thank you. Other questions from the board? All right, I'm not seeing any, so I'll go ahead and open it up to members of the public. If you're a member of the public and would like to speak on this matter, you may do so now. You can raise your hand on Zoom, turn on your camera, raise your hand, you can type in the chat, or you can email Dennis. By the way, the board did get a letter, which is in the public record from the neighbor directly abutting, stating that they have no objection to these plans. Yeah. Lucy, can you stop screen sharing, just so it's easier to see? Thank you. All right, I'm not seeing any members of the public, any other members of the public that would like to speak on this matter. Chair awaits a motion to close the public portion of the hearing and enter deliberation.
[Mary Lee]: Motion.
[Mike Caldera]: Do I have a second?
[kCdGHg1OaMo_SPEAKER_21]: Second.
[Mike Caldera]: All right, we're going to take a roll call. Jim? Aye. Andre? Um, I saw you say I Andre. I think your second thing dropped, but, um, Chris, I, uh, event.
[SPEAKER_09]: Hi.
[Mike Caldera]: Hi. All right. You're now deliberating.
[Mary Lee]: Yeah, I think there is hardship, and then I think that there is a legitimate reason for this build-out. So I would tend to agree with the applicant.
[Adam Hurtubise]: All right. Thank you, Mary. Other thoughts from the board?
[Yvette Velez]: would just add that it's not varying far from the original design. It's upgrading, updating, and looks pretty similar to the surrounding area.
[Chris D'Aveta]: I would say that due to the shape of their lot, there are limited what they can do for expansion or additions. So that satisfies my, I'm satisfied, I should say, I guess, with that criteria.
[Adam Hurtubise]: Thank you. Other thoughts?
[kCdGHg1OaMo_SPEAKER_21]: I agree with my colleagues as well.
[Mike Caldera]: Yeah, just chiming in to say I concur. The lot's certainly unusually shaped. And given the footprint of the structure and its position on the lot, there's not a lot of other options to extend the house. So in this case, I see the hardship and I also don't see a substantial detriment. Certainly comforting to know that the immediate abutters don't object to the plans. All right. Well, If there's nothing else from the board, Chair awaits a motion. So we're going to have to weigh in both on the special permit for extending existing nonconformity and then the variance with respect to the number of floors. So for example, if someone wants to make a motion to approve the variance for number of floors and approve the special permit, that would grant the applicant the relief they're seeking.
[Andre Leroux]: Can you hear me?
[Mike Caldera]: We can hear you now, yes.
[Andre Leroux]: Okay, great. Should we do two separate motions?
[Mike Caldera]: Up to you.
[Andre Leroux]: Okay, I'd like to approve the variance for the third floor for the Myrtle Street project as well as the special permit.
[Mike Caldera]: Do I have a second? I'll second. All right, let's take a roll call. Yvette?
[SPEAKER_09]: Aye.
[Mike Caldera]: Mary?
[SPEAKER_09]: Aye.
[Mike Caldera]: Chris?
[Chris D'Aveta]: Aye.
[Mike Caldera]: Andre? Aye. Aye. And Jim?
[kCdGHg1OaMo_SPEAKER_21]: Aye.
[Mike Caldera]: All right. You have your variance. You have your special permit.
[SPEAKER_12]: Wow, thank you so much. Best news ever. Thank you.
[Denis MacDougall]: All right, and Lucy, I know I've said this already twice, but I'll say it again just because, just to, so what happens is I'll write up the decision and it'll get checked by our legal counsel. And then once it's okay by them, it gets signed by the members of the board members. At that point, it gets filed in the clerk's office. That point there's a 20 day waiting period for an appeal in case an appeal comes in and we can't get anything for them. When the appeals period is over, go down to the clerk's office, you'll get a letter from them, take that to the Middlesex Registry and you just file that and then you can come right back and get your permit that day.
[SPEAKER_12]: Okay, sounds good.
[Denis MacDougall]: And if you have any questions, yeah, yeah. When you're going through this, just don't hesitate to stop by. I'll help you through the process.
[SPEAKER_12]: I'll try to remember all that, but yeah, it sounds like there's about a 20 days at fastest and then there's filings and all that, but yeah, we'll be in touch. No, this is wonderful news. Thank you so, so much. I really appreciate it. Thank you.
[Kathleen Desmond]: Bye.
[SPEAKER_12]: All right.
[Kathleen Desmond]: What's next?
[Denis MacDougall]: 357 Riverside Avenue. Applicant and owner David Beaman to install a new curb cut and driveway in the front yard of the property, which is not allowed for the City of Medford zoning ordinance.
[Mike Caldera]: All right, I see we have David Beaman on the call. Hello and welcome. You're on mute.
[Adam Hurtubise]: You're still on mute.
[SPEAKER_17]: Yeah. Hi, I'm Dave. I, uh, we have no parking at our house. Uh, I can show you a photo if you want, or yeah, that'd be great.
[SPEAKER_14]: Okay. Same day. We'll just give you a verbal and you're all set now.
[SPEAKER_17]: Okay. Okay. What do I just scan it in?
[Denis MacDougall]: I mean, uh, you just, if you have, if you have the photo up on your screen, you can hit share and then images will pop up and you can just share that photo. Or if you want, if I can call up and what I'll call it now is the, uh, yep. Okay. So if you do, uh, on the bottom, there's a little green button says share and.
[SPEAKER_17]: Where's the button again?
[Denis MacDougall]: It's at the bottom of this. It's on the bottom of along the, uh, tools. There's it's a button that says share. You should have it.
[Mike Caldera]: Yeah. On mine, it shows up as a green rectangle with an up arrow.
[SPEAKER_17]: Oh, it's over there. Okay.
[Mike Caldera]: Yeah.
[SPEAKER_17]: Oops. Okay, who do I share it to, though?
[SPEAKER_14]: If you just hit share, it should share it to everybody.
[SPEAKER_17]: Okay, but the share button's on the Zoom.
[SPEAKER_14]: The other thing I could do is if I could just call up on Street View and sort of show it that way, they might give a... I think that'll work.
[SPEAKER_17]: Yeah. Okay. Yeah. I had a picture of my car parked in front. So you can kind of see the problem, but, uh, yeah, I don't see a share button anymore.
[Mike Caldera]: Let me, uh, no worries.
[kCdGHg1OaMo_SPEAKER_21]: Dennis will bring it up on street view.
[SPEAKER_17]: Okay.
[kCdGHg1OaMo_SPEAKER_21]: Sometimes you have to bring the mouse all the way down.
[SPEAKER_17]: Oh, now I see the share button.
[kCdGHg1OaMo_SPEAKER_21]: Okay.
[Mike Caldera]: Feel free to give it a try.
[SPEAKER_17]: What popped up when, once I got rid of the photo, that's, that's weird. OK, share first. See it?
[Mike Caldera]: Yes, we see it.
[SPEAKER_17]: OK. OK, so there's what we're doing to unload groceries and supplies. And as you can see, there's plenty of room in front of the house for a parking spot. There is no room on either side of the house for a driveway. So my plan is to tear down the front porch, put the stairs going sideways to traverse the front of the house, and then put pavers semi-permeable or permeable pavers in front of the house. So I have a place where I can parallel park. And right now it's a real problem, as you can see with, you know, safety and that's our main concern.
[Mike Caldera]: All right.
[SPEAKER_17]: I'll get rid of that. Okay.
[Mike Caldera]: We've, by the way, I forgot to say that's the same coding members. Do you have questions from members of the board?
[SPEAKER_17]: I guess I should say I'm looking for a variance.
[Mike Caldera]: Yeah, that's right. So the proposed parking is in the front yard setback. And so that's not allowed under the ordinance. So a variance is required to put it there.
[SPEAKER_17]: Yeah, I need a variance of about four feet apparently. The front yard's currently set back 15 feet minus the front porch. The new porch is gonna be four feet wide, allowing for a nine foot wide parking spot parallel to the street with a 16 foot curb cut.
[Mike Caldera]: Questions from the board.
[Mary Lee]: Do you have a picture of the plan over the proposed plan? Or is the proposed plan to remove part of the sidewalk?
[SPEAKER_17]: Right, well, the variance is for a curb cut. Here, I'll show you that.
[Denis MacDougall]: I can do that. I got that right now.
[SPEAKER_17]: OK, thanks. Yeah, there it is.
[SPEAKER_14]: Sorry, didn't get too much.
[Mary Lee]: So this was the sidewalk that we saw in the picture?
[SPEAKER_17]: Yeah, that's right. This is a sidewalk right here.
[Mary Lee]: Right here. That's a sidewalk. OK.
[SPEAKER_17]: Yeah. Or right here, actually.
[Mary Lee]: Yeah. And this was the yard? I'm trying to look at the picture.
[SPEAKER_17]: This is the yard right here where you see the car parked?
[Mary Lee]: I don't see that in the photo. I'm looking at the photo on my phone.
[SPEAKER_17]: Oh, that's because there is no yard, really. There's just front steps going down to the sidewalk. I'm going to remove those steps and have a stairway going down the front of the house, parallel to the house, not coming directly at you. And a smaller, a smaller porch around four by six. These are just preliminary plans for the variance. I can submit other plans for how the house is going to look later on if I get the variance.
[Mary Lee]: So this is the porch, right, from looking at the picture. This is the porch, and this looks like a fence.
[SPEAKER_17]: This will be the top of the porch right here. See this little square?
[Mary Lee]: Yeah.
[SPEAKER_17]: These are the steps going down. This will be all pavers made to look nice. And then I'm going to have granite installed around the edges.
[Mary Lee]: So the car will be parallel to the front steps, right? That's the car.
[kCdGHg1OaMo_SPEAKER_21]: Exactly.
[Mary Lee]: So this will be the parking lot. This is the car, yeah. And this will be the entrance will be... And the entrance is right... This is the river.
[SPEAKER_17]: This is the entrance to the house right here. You see my arrow?
[Mary Lee]: Yeah, but I don't see that in the picture. I'm just trying to figure out.
[SPEAKER_17]: Oh, that's because I'm going to take the porch down. I'm going to remove it in the picture. The way it is now, I'm taking that porch down to allow room for the car. and put a smaller porch.
[Mary Lee]: And you're taking the stairs out. And then, so this is Riverside.
[SPEAKER_17]: Yeah, this is Riverside here.
[Mary Lee]: Okay, and then this is the cut to the... That's my side yard right there.
[SPEAKER_17]: And here's the other side yard. It's about three feet on either side.
[Mike Caldera]: Yeah, so Mary, in the picture, there's the car, it's partially on the sidewalk, which now the curb cut in that position. And then in the plot plan, there was kind of a faint outline of a staircase. So there was some landscaping and a staircase and that all gets removed to make room for the car.
[Mary Lee]: Okay. Okay. I see. I see. Thank you.
[Mike Caldera]: Am I correctly understanding the reason for the size of the curb cut is because it's parallel to the house, so if it was a smaller curb cut, it just wouldn't be practical to get in and out?
[SPEAKER_17]: Yeah, it's for ease of coming in and out of the traffic. Originally, I wanted to make it 20 feet, but the building inspector revised that to 16, so there would be point of view, better viewing coming in and out. Apparently, you know, there's, you must have done some, some work on that. To figure it out, but. That. Unfortunately, I have to take down those. Those grapevines, but it's going to have to be done. It's it's really for us. I mean, we're we're both over 70 years of age and we. We're we're doing this for convenience and safety. And so it benefits both us and. And. and cars going by and pedestrians going down the sidewalk. Because as you can see, we're unloading groceries several times a week. Anyway, that's my plea.
[Mike Caldera]: Thank you. Other questions?
[Yvette Velez]: You can't actually physically fit two cars though, right? You can only do the one.
[SPEAKER_17]: It would only be one. Yeah, we only have one car anyway, but yeah. It would be structured in such a way that you couldn't really. Go up vertically, you'd have to go parallel. And the idea is to drive in and then back back up. The whole front yard is going to be paved, so with pavers. It would be a lot better looking than what's there now. I assure you.
[Andre Leroux]: Mr. Beeman, do you anticipate being able to screen the car a little bit when it's parked so that it's not just right next to the sidewalk?
[SPEAKER_17]: Yeah. There's going to be a nine-foot space and the car is only approximately seven foot wide.
[Andre Leroux]: But I mean, will you still have a fence screening part of the car when it's parked?
[SPEAKER_17]: Well, that would be a nice fun. I would do that if I could, because it'd be nice to hide the car. We could plant. The only problem with doing something like that is that it would obscure the view coming in and out. That's the only problem. So now we don't have any plans of building any structures on other than along the sides is going to be some granite work done to allow access to the backyard.
[Adam Hurtubise]: All right, other questions from the board?
[Mike Caldera]: Being done, I will open it up to public comment. If you're a member of the public and would like to speak on this matter, you may do so now. You can raise your hand on Zoom, turn on your camera and raise your hand. You can type in the chat or you can email. not seeing any members of the public who would like to speak on this matter. Uh, so Chair awaits a motion to close the public portion of the hearing and enter deliberation.
[kCdGHg1OaMo_SPEAKER_21]: I moved.
[Mike Caldera]: Oh, second.
[kCdGHg1OaMo_SPEAKER_21]: Second.
[Adam Hurtubise]: All right. We're going to take a roll call. Jim?
[kCdGHg1OaMo_SPEAKER_21]: Aye.
[Mike Caldera]: Andre? Chris? Aye. Mary?
[SPEAKER_09]: Aye.
[Mike Caldera]: Yvette?
[SPEAKER_09]: Aye.
[Mike Caldera]: All right, we're now deliberating.
[Adam Hurtubise]: What do you think, folks?
[Chris D'Aveta]: Well, I think if I could go first, Mr. Chair. I have concerns in that there are a lot of fairly decent sidewalk traffic here. Ironically, placing the, driveway or the car parallel to the road may actually be safer than perpendicular to the road, because the driver would have a clearer view of pedestrians. And pedestrians may or may not have a clearer view of the car coming in and out. But I think they would. So we already have many, if not least a dozen, maybe more parking spaces that are perpendicular and cause some problems with school children walking across the backs of cars that are backing out and anyone else for that matter. So, so it's kind of ironic, but I think the parallel parking in the front is actually an improvement on that. point.
[Adam Hurtubise]: Thank you, Chris. Other thoughts from the board? Andre, go ahead.
[Andre Leroux]: I mean, I'll just, I'll say that I always hate to put parking in the front yard. This property has absolutely no other place to put it. No possibility of putting a car anywhere else. And it's a very busy street. So there's no on street parking option. And even around the corner on the side streets, there's almost no on street parking option. So You know, despite serious reservations, I would be inclined to make an exception so that, you know, this family can stay in their home. but I wish there was enough, there's not even enough room in the front to really even screen the car, which is disappointing. So I guess one other question I have, if it's okay to ask Mr. Beam in this. So there is in the front yard, there's two steps up to the front yard. So are you taking out the retaining wall and regrading it to the level of the sidewalk?
[SPEAKER_17]: It's going to be graded to the appropriate slope, but it's going to be graded all the way up to the house, yeah. It's going to be sloped at, I'm not sure what the angle is, but there's for drainage purposes. Okay, thank you.
[Adam Hurtubise]: All right, other thoughts from the board.
[Yvette Velez]: I'm just going to add that I think it's always good when folks are trying to stay in their homes. And this is like a quality of life. So in addition to it not being detrimental to the neighborhood, because it's not as if they're taking away parking, there's no parking on that street anyway. So he's adding value, if anything, to his home, which I think only helps the neighborhood as a whole. And that's the way it is, and that's in that neighborhood. It's tight, and we have to figure it out the best way possible to live. So I think it makes sense to put a parking spot in that way there.
[Adam Hurtubise]: Thanks for that. Other thoughts from the board?
[Chris D'Aveta]: Mr. Chair, if I could follow up on what Andre just mentioned. I guess now thinking about it, if the slope is too severe, there'll be a problem with the car slipping in snow or something like that. So I'd like to see the building inspector, I don't know if we can condition this, but to make sure that the slope is appropriate for being so close to the sidewalk.
[Mike Caldera]: So we can't condition on some downstream approval. If it triggers something in the building code, then it wouldn't be permittable anyway. I mean, Dennis, is this something you can speak to?
[Denis MacDougall]: Yeah, so all curb cuts are approved by the city engineer. So the city engineer would have to go over these plans and approve them. I have confidence that anything in issues with drainage, I think the other thing is that Mr. Beaman mentioned that they're putting permeable pavers in, which actually will help prevent some of overflow of water. That's what we're always trying to ask folks to put permeable things in in situations like this, which Hopefully also sort of minimize the water going into the streets. We want to try to keep rainwater from going on the street, but I think between the city engineer review of the of the driveway of the curb cut. And, you know, he's not usually in these situations. He's not just going to look at the curb cut. He's going to look at this. Permit has to go through his office anyway, so not just for the curb cut, but the actual. Pretty much all types of these works will get approved by the city engineer. So I think between that and.
[SPEAKER_17]: If I may say something, I'm hiring a general contractor to do the work, so he'll make sure that all of the. Appropriate building codes are up to code and. It's going to look nice too, I guarantee you. I'm going to spend money on this. I'm not going to just pave it like you see elsewhere on Riverside Avenue. I'm going to make it look nice. I've got a hip roof idea for the porch. I think it's going to look really beautiful. It'll actually add to the ambience of Medford Park.
[Chris D'Aveta]: Yeah, Mr. Chair, just to conclude my thought on that. Yeah, I have confidence in the city staff to do that. I guess I was speaking not to the sidewalk or the curb cut, but the actual property that we're, the property bounds that we're discussing. But yes, I guess that that would also apply any runoff and so forth onto the sidewalk. Thank you.
[Mike Caldera]: Great. So I'm not voting, but I'll just chime in to say, yeah, when I first saw the plans, I didn't love them, but this certainly is an unusual lot for the neighborhood, like all of the other houses seem to have driveways either because they have a wider lot with enough space for one or they happen to be on a side street when they have a driveway on the side street. So this one, there really is no other option. It's either a space here or none at all. It's not immediately clear to me what the strategy has been up until this point, not that I need to know, but certainly it does seem like the shape of the lot presents a hardship in this case. All right. Chair awaits a motion on the variance for parking in the front yard. And for the, I guess it's an oversized curb cut as well. Is that right, Dennis?
[Denis MacDougall]: Actually, no, curb cut widths are 20 feet in residential zones. So single family one, single family two, and general residence. And so they're 20 feet.
[Mike Caldera]: So just for parking in the front yard, carry weight to motion on the variance request.
[Mary Lee]: So, Mr. Chair, I have a question if this board's approval will be subject to the city engineers and the building commissioner, right, for this project?
[Mike Caldera]: We technically know from a legal standpoint, so there's no downstream approval that our variance is contingent upon, but this plan to fully execute upon it does require a permit from the city engineer, if that's what you're asking.
[Unidentified]: Okay, great.
[Mike Caldera]: The variance for the parking in the front yard, that one, the city engineer doesn't have any say in where the buck stops here, so to speak.
[Mary Lee]: And what about the curb cut? That's what the city engineers?
[Mike Caldera]: The city engineer has to approve that. So we're not, our variance vote here is not with respect to the curb cut. So if something about that curb cut that doesn't meet the city's standards and expectation, then the city engineer is still, he may not allow it. We're just voting on the parking in the front yard.
[Mary Lee]: Okay, great. Thank you.
[Mike Caldera]: Right. Keeping that in mind, Chair awaits a motion on the variance application.
[Andre Leroux]: I can't hear you. Can you hear me now? Yeah. Okay. Motion to approve the variance for 357 Riverside Ave for the front yard parking. And the way that it is written, it does say curb cut in the application. So I'm going to say that as well.
[Mike Caldera]: Okay. We have a second? I'll second. We're going to take a roll call. Mary?
[SPEAKER_09]: Aye.
[Mike Caldera]: Yvette?
[SPEAKER_09]: Aye.
[Mike Caldera]: Chris? Aye. Jim? Aye. Andre? Aye. All right, variance is approved. So the variance is approved. You have your parking.
[Denis MacDougall]: And Dave, just to reiterate what I sort of said earlier, I'll write up the decision. It'll get approved, checked by our legal counsel, get signed, and then it gets filed in the clerk's office. Once 20 days has passed after it's been in the clerk's office with no appeal, then you just come in, get the letter from them, go to the registry, and they can get your permit. But I can talk you through that. When you come in, if you have any questions, just give me a call. I can help you out with that process when we get to that point. Okay, so you'll let me know when it's... I'll let you know when it's filed, and then that'll start the 20-day clock. And then once those 20 days are over, then you can come on in and I can help you out and show you to the clerk's office and get you the paperwork.
[SPEAKER_17]: Okay, can I deal with my contractor yet or should I hold off?
[Denis MacDougall]: You probably can't get the permit until then, so I would, I mean, if part of the work actually. He's going to file. Yeah, he's going to file this when we get the approval. But I'm thinking something like the porch removal and the adding of the stairs has nothing to do with our permit. So that, I think, can probably get started beforehand. But it all depends if you file. Those are probably going to be separate permits. But have them talk to the building department and sort of see what they can do. But I think they can probably do some of the work initially just to sort of get things started, if that's easier.
[SPEAKER_17]: OK. Great. Thanks, guys. All right, thank you, good night.
[Denis MacDougall]: All right, what's next, Dennis? All right, 54 Murray Street. Applicant and owner, Leanne Morgan, to install in addition to 54 Murray Street, creating a side yard setback and extending existing front yard setback nonconformity, which is not allowed per the City of Medford zoning ordinance. This will also add a parking space in the front yard, which is not allowed per the City of Medford zoning ordinance.
[Mike Caldera]: All right, thank you, and I see we have Leanne Morgan here. Welcome.
[SPEAKER_00]: Yes, and good evening, folks. Could I get my camera reinstated? Oh, sorry about that. No worries. Good evening, everybody. I'm Eric Mayer, counsel for Ms. Morgan, so I'm going to be here to present on the application here. Thank you very much for taking your time on what is a very nice evening after a very hot week to talk about this variance application. So the purpose of this variance application is really twofold. There are two interrelated aspects to it. The first is to build a modest 10 by 24 foot addition to the northerly side of the pre-existing non-conforming residence on the property. Additional aspect of this variance application is to place an additional off street parking space directly in front of where that 10 by 24 foot addition would be located. And as I mentioned, the property has a preexisting nonconforming structure because it is located within the 15 foot front setback. The 10 by 24 foot addition would on the backside encroach slightly by about 0.7 feet within the side setback. And naturally the addition of the parking space would place some parking in the front setback as well. The property is somewhat unique compared to the rest of the neighborhood. It's in the SF2 zoning district. It has 10,776 square feet, and it might be easier to go through this if you could bring up the plot plan. If not, I could bring it up on share screen. I can do that. Would it be easier for you to have the share screen or do you just want to bring it up? Why don't you bring it up? It's a fairly simple one, so I don't think I'll have to circle or point to a tremendous amount. I'm using a touch screen, so it sometimes gets dicey. All right, we'll see it. Yes. Thank you very much, Mr. McDougall. So the property is 10,776 square feet in size. It's oversized for the zoning district, which requires 5,000 square feet. Unlike other similarly sized properties within the zoning district, it's fairly long and narrow, which has impacted how one can actually build out from the existing single family residence. and it's not reflected on the plot plan, but the topography of the lot actually increases as you go toward the rear. And Ms. Morgan is a 20 year resident at this particular residence. Previously, she lived at 60 Marie Street, which is the property to the immediate rear for 30 something years. So she is a 50 plus year resident of this neighborhood. She would tell you that there's a substantial amount of subsurface ledge um, to the rear of this property going into the wooded areas that is affected a lot of the lots in this area and will affect where she can build on this particular lot. Um, the single family dwelling is presently is 9.7 ft from the property's left sideline, 16.8 ft from the property's right sideline and 11.5 ft from the from the front boundary line. Uh, that 11.5 is, uh, what makes the preexisting nonconforming, uh, status where 15 feet is required in this particular zone. Uh, the single family residence is somewhat dated. This is a post-World War II neighborhood. Um, a lot of the residences in it were built, uh, circa 1950s. Uh, this property was built in 1956 to be precise. And so it, while Ms. Morgan has continually improved the residence, there are aspects of it that are dated, and now she's at the point where she can no longer make improvements to make a modern home without altering the structure. She's somewhat limited. So the real purpose behind this addition, Mr. McDougall, if you could bring up the document called Morgan Plans Final, which are the architectural plans. I could also share on my screen as well.
[Denis MacDougall]: Sorry, I just, I renamed them from my files. So I was trying to find what you said, and I just was not finding it, but I've got it now.
[SPEAKER_00]: Okay, thank you for that. And so page A1 of the architectural plans reflect what the property would look like with the addition. You'll see that the area closest to, you'll see the, stamped concrete proposed parking area, the stairway off that the area with the open porch there is the 10 foot by 20 foot 4 foot addition. If you scroll down to page A2, it'll provide a floor plan as to really what's being done here. The present kitchen and dining room area, it could be best described as a galley kitchen, very utility-based, no modern amenities, old wiring, inefficient appliances. The idea is by doing a modest expansion, it opens up for the opportunity for placement of some modern appliances, modern amenities and make the house consistent with modern expectations for residential real estate properties instead of this very small cramped space. The proposed addition of the 240 square feet would increase the footprint of the existing dwelling from 1,189 square feet to 1,429 square feet. What's notable is that the majority of oversized lots in the neighborhood, and how I classify that is those 7,500 square feet and larger, have far larger homes, and this modest addition actually puts it right in line with the average of other homes on oversized lots. Unlike many of these oversized lots, This is one of the narrowest ones there's only two other lots in the entirety of Maurice Street that are of similar size that actually have smaller frontage or smaller width than. Ms. Morgan's property. So what that means is that in order to build off of the existing residence in a way to actually allow for this modest expansion to happen, she would need to encroach into both the front and the side setback. Going into the rear is both cost and ecologically inefficient. It would require probably doing quite a lot more site development and site impact. as opposed to simply building off of the existing structure. I will note that four of Ms. Morgan's neighbors have submitted letters of support for this project. I am not aware of any letters of opposition, but I'm sure if I'm incorrect on that, someone will correct me. So in terms of applying the variance criteria here, we believe that the unique features of this lot are its size, which is again oversized, but it's very narrow width, which limits the areas of expansion even modestly here and precludes building out to the rear, which would avoid needing a variance, but would again be financially inefficient and be more impactful likely requiring some work with shallow bedrock or shallow ledge. To move on to the parking, you'll note if you look at the image in the top right corner there, there is one existing off-street parking space and a subsurface garage. The parking space is approximately between 7 and 8 feet wide. It's extremely narrow, but it actually goes down gradient in order to access the garage and quite sharply. The width of it makes it infeasible for use to store a garage. to store a vehicle within the garage except for smaller sedans. Because of the nature of the steep grade going into the garage, parking within that driveway is actually physically hazardous. It ices up in the wintertime. It is very narrow. Ms. Morgan has had double knee surgery, and so she is worried for her physical safety going up that garage and using that primarily as her parking space. So what she's had to do is utilize off-street parking. For those that know the neighborhood, Maurice Street is very narrow. There's a tremendous amount of use of on-street parking. So she has proposed to add this parking space within the front setback. in order to allow for additional off-street parking, relying less on on-street parking. It also improves visibility beyond what's currently there because instead of backing out and going up gradients where there may be a blind spot, she's now going to be at grade like many of the other driveways in the neighborhood, such that she has better lines of sight when entering onto Maurice Street. Not a lot of properties on this street have subgrade garages. And so we believe that's another unique factor here. Given this, we believe that the grants of the variance would not result in any detriment to the public good. It's not contrary or will not substantially derogate from the intent of the purpose of the zoning ordinance. Again, here, you know, the additional lot coverage from this driveway would only increase the total law coverage to 15%, even if she had a just a bare minimum lot of 5000 square feet. she would actually still be under the 40% coverage requirement. And so we believe we have ample space for this without adversely impacting the neighborhood, adversely impacting folks' access to air and light. It doesn't result in overcrowding, because it's a very, very modest addition on an oversized lot to begin with. And we believe that if the variance requests were to be denied, there'd be a substantial hardship to Ms. Morgan. She wouldn't be able to make a reasonable use of her property by bringing it up to modern standards. She wouldn't be able to give herself a safe parking space to be able to use her property and allow her to really age in the home more effectively and more safely. As she gets older, going up that driveway, and I've gone up it several times, would be hazardous. So with that, I'm going to turn it over to Ms. Morgan to add anything that she might wish to add to this discussion and happy to answer any questions the board has. Thank you.
[SPEAKER_18]: Hi, everybody. Hello. I just wanted to say, as Eric said, I have lived at 54 for the last 20 years and have wanted to redo this kitchen. It is very dated. I think it's the original appliances that the house has in it. And it would be great to be able to modernize and improve the house. Um, as far as the outside, um, everything he said is true. I have not been able to use that driveway for its purpose of a driveway for the last 20 years. Other than on occasion when we have street cleaning and I have no choice, but to use it. And it is so steep. It's almost scary to back out of that driveway. It is very, very narrow. You can't open the door the whole way once you're in it. So you have to kind of squeeze out of the car and try to get out of it. And as he said, it is true, I have had double knee replacements in the last few months. So it is getting harder. And as I get older, it's not going to get any easier. So a nice flat off the road spot would be really nice and safe for me to use. So that's really all I have to add to him. It's basically what he said. Thank you.
[Mike Caldera]: Questions from the board? I just want to double check my understanding. I believe one of the letters of support is the neighbor immediately abutting in the direction you're proposing to build, so 56 Maurice Street says they're in support. Is that right?
[SPEAKER_18]: Yes, James Driscoll. I got letters from either side of my house and two across the street.
[Adam Hurtubise]: Alright, thank you. other questions from the board?
[Mike Caldera]: Seeing none, I'll open it up to members of the public. If you're a member of the public who would like to speak on this matter, you may do so now. You can raise your hand on Zoom, turn on your camera and raise your hand, type in the chat, or you can email Dennis. Not seeing any members of the public who would like to speak on this matter. Chair awaits a motion to close the public portion of the hearing and enter deliberation.
[Mary Lee]: Motion.
[Mike Caldera]: Do I have a second? Second.
[Adam Hurtubise]: I'll second.
[Mike Caldera]: All right. We're going to take a roll call. Yvette? Aye. Mary?
[SPEAKER_09]: Aye.
[Mike Caldera]: Chris?
[SPEAKER_09]: Aye.
[Mike Caldera]: Jim. Aye. Andre. Aye. All right. We're now deliberating. What do you think, folks? Jim, go ahead.
[kCdGHg1OaMo_SPEAKER_21]: I think the plan looks great. And I know what it's like to have a driveway that goes down into the garage. So I like it. It conforms with the neighborhood. It makes it look Very nice. So I just want to let you know, I'm all in favor of that.
[Unidentified]: Right.
[kCdGHg1OaMo_SPEAKER_21]: Thank you, Jim.
[Mike Caldera]: Other thoughts from the board.
[Andre Leroux]: Can you hear me okay?
[Mike Caldera]: Yes.
[SPEAKER_00]: A little bit. Can you speak up just a little bit? I'm having a real hard time for some reason.
[Andre Leroux]: Yeah, I'm having, I've been having audio issues, so I apologize. My, I just want to say thank you for the thorough presentation. And I appreciate that. I think you answered all the questions that I had. I really appreciate you getting the letters of support from all your abutters. And, and thank you. I think I, you know, have to support this.
[Mike Caldera]: All right, other thoughts from the board?
[Chris D'Aveta]: I will add, if I could, Mr. Chair, that I think this is a very reasonable addition and extension, and it makes a lot of sense. And it's actually an improvement on the design and the look of the house.
[Adam Hurtubise]: Thank you, Chris. Other thoughts from the board?
[Mike Caldera]: I can go next. I'm not voting, but I'll just share. So I do agree that the lot is unusual. It's unusual in its very long, relatively narrow shape. It's unusual topography. Sounds like even the soil conditions are a bit unusual in terms of the construction implications. So yeah, I think given the position of the existing structure and its style, there are very limited options to add space to modernize it. And with the neighbor, the most impacted neighbor in support, that seems like a, relatively harmless relief to grant in this case. All right, there's nothing else. Chair awaits a motion on the requested variances for the side yard setback and the parking in the front yard setback.
[Chris D'Aveta]: motion to approve the variances for side yard and front yard setback.
[Mike Caldera]: And then actually, Chris, I apologize. I think that we also need a special permit for extending an existing nonconformity. So if you want to amend the motion, you can include that, too.
[Chris D'Aveta]: OK. To add to the motion, a special permit to extend an existing nonconformity.
[Mike Caldera]: Great.
[Chris D'Aveta]: I'll second.
[Mike Caldera]: All right, we're going to take a roll call vote. Andre?
[Andre Leroux]: Aye.
[Mike Caldera]: Jim? Aye. Chris? Aye. Mary? Aye. Beth?
[SPEAKER_09]: Aye.
[Mike Caldera]: All right, the variances and special permit are approved. Thank you very much, folks.
[SPEAKER_18]: Thank you so much. I appreciate your time.
[Denis MacDougall]: Just to reiterate what I've said a few times before. Actually, I think I think I know it's turning bar you've already kind of seem like just working on a draft decision.
[SPEAKER_00]: Yes, Miss Morgan had told me that it would help you if I put together a draft for you to be able to ship up to legal. No pride of authorship, of course, but if you need anything else from me, I'm happy to give it to you.
[Denis MacDougall]: No, I appreciate that. So then I'll review that and then I'll expedite matters very quickly. But then again, the methodology is the same. Once it's in and filed in the clerk's office, that'll start the 20 days. And then once those 20 days are over, you get a letter of no appeal from the city clerk. And then once you file it in the Milosec South Courthouse in Cambridge, then you can get your building permit and get started. Fantastic.
[SPEAKER_18]: Thank you. Dennis, thank you so much for your help through this process. I appreciate it.
[SPEAKER_14]: You're very welcome. I'm glad to do it. Thank you, folks. Have a great one.
[Mike Caldera]: Thank you. All right, I think that brings us to administrative updates. Is that right, Dennis?
[Denis MacDougall]: Um, we have a couple 1 is that. I know I said, hopefully it was going to be this meeting, but we will have the new member appointed by next meeting that it just. The mayor wanted me to kind of review more candidates because I had someone and she was like, just kind of spread it out a little bit more, which I appreciate, you know, just to try to make sure we can. I'm good solidly, so I, I put some forward to Alicia and. And once Alicia gets the okay, then we're going to put it. Back to the mayor's office, so by the time of the next meeting, we will be in full couple in the 7. Wonderful. Great news. And just one other thing, which it's, I will say this, I forgot to let you know, and we do have time to do this, but in, actually, this is more just a little bit inside stuff, but I've received a phone call from another, it was actually a Town manager out in Western Mass who they apparently have the same marijuana ordinance that Medford does. And within that ordinance, there's a, the special permits are only good for five years and they have to get renewed every five years. The ordinance doesn't actually, all it says is that it'll be renewed by a methodology basically from the special permit granting authority, which is us. So we only did ours, a couple years ago so we have time, some, I'm in speaking with, we have a new city solicitor so I've kind of just broached it with him and we'll come up with some sort of, we're going to find out because I mean, a lot of other towns have that same. It was sort of a boilerplate marijuana ordinance that was created, you know, with help from the marijuana commission. So we're not alone in this because when I was talking to that administrator, he's talked to 4 or 5 other towns. We're all kind of in the same boat. So, you know, we'll try to figure out what we're sort of not sure if it's going to be done administratively. It might just have to be, you know. have it at a hearing just to renew and figure out some sort of methodology to do so. It can be something that's done by the building commissioner. It can be something that can be done by some of the other city people, like maybe get the chief police involved. We're not really sure. But I just wanted to kind of give you a heads up that it's coming. We're going to figure this out. And the actual methodology, we'll have to sort of, I was talking to Scott, the building commissioner, He figures since we're redoing our rules and regs, we can add that to it as part of that and just have it in there. But I was very grateful for the gentleman who told me about this because, I mean, without that, I'm not sure we would have known about it because it's very, it's like, you know, very minuscule language somehow in there that just basically says the permit's good for five years and we're responsible for it, so.
[Mike Caldera]: Okay, all right, thanks for the update. Um, so the, I guess we'll hear next, you'll either just bring it up in a future meeting.
[Denis MacDougall]: And I'll probably put it on the agenda once we actually have some sort of more information, but this was more just to let you know, literally I just found out, I think it was yesterday or the day before.
[Unidentified]: Okay.
[Denis MacDougall]: Great. And the software that I was using to do the meeting minutes, that was, I just didn't realize it was Tracy DuPont's own personal one. So I needed to get my own. So I'm sort of working on that. So that's why I fell a little behind on working on it. So, but, uh, apparently there's a tab in zoom now that can create it. So I'm going to look at that as well for tonight's meeting and sort of see if I can generate them because somebody else in the office has used it and they said they work pretty well. So, okay. Excuse me.
[Mike Caldera]: Thanks for the update, Dennis. All right, well, since we don't have meeting minutes to approve, I think that brings us to the end of our agenda, is that right? That is correct. Okay. Chair awaits a motion to adjourn. I make a motion to adjourn. Do we have a second? Second.
[kCdGHg1OaMo_SPEAKER_21]: Have a great fourth, everyone.
[Mike Caldera]: Thanks, you too. We still need to do a roll call, I think, Jim, but Andre?
[Andre Leroux]: Aye.
[Mike Caldera]: Jim? Aye. Chris. Aye. Mary. Aye. Beth.
[Unidentified]: Aye.
[Mike Caldera]: Mike. Aye. Yeah. Have a great fourth indeed.
[kCdGHg1OaMo_SPEAKER_21]: Stay safe everyone.
|
total time: 4.9 minutes total words: 428 |
|||