2026-10-13 - Zoning Board of Appeals

00:01[music]

00:07[music]

00:11[music]

00:15It is 7:31 p.m. on October 13th, 2026.

00:20Good evening. My name is Christian

00:22Klein. I'm the chair of the Arlington

00:23Zoning Board of Appeals, and I'm calling

00:25this meeting of the board to order.

00:27First, I'd like to confirm that all

00:29members and anticipated officials are

00:31present. Uh, from the zoning board of

00:32appeals, we have Roger Dupont

00:35>> here,

00:36>> and Patrick Hanlin

00:38>> here,

00:39>> and Veneti

00:40>> here,

00:41>> and Adam Lank

00:43>> here.

00:44>> Good to have you all. Uh, Nick

00:46Rosenberg, our associate, is unavailable

00:48to join us this evening. On behalf of

00:50the town, we have Colleen Rston, our

00:52clerk and zoning assistant

00:54>> here. Good to have you with us. Um, and

00:58then appearing for docket 391315 Beck

01:01Road, we have uh Peter Maradianos

01:06here and Mary Win Stanley Okconor is

01:09here as well.

01:11>> Good to have you both with us. And then

01:13for dock at 391453 Park Street, we have

01:16uh Daniel Cameron.

01:18>> I'm here.

01:19>> Good to have you as well.

01:22So tonight's meeting of the Arlington

01:23Zoning Board of Appeals is being

01:24conducted remotely consistent with the

01:26bill signed by Governor Healey on March

01:2828th, 2025, which extended temporary

01:31provisions pertaining to the open

01:32meeting law to June 30th, 2027. The

01:35extension of these provisions allows

01:36public bodies to hold their meetings

01:38remotely by providing live adequate

01:40alternative means of public access to

01:41the deliberations. This meeting is being

01:44recorded and will be broadcast by ACMI.

01:46Members of the public who are

01:47participating via Zoom and who wish to

01:49offer public comment should be aware

01:50they will be asked to provide their full

01:52name and address so that a complete

01:54public record of the meeting can be

01:55taken in accordance with state law. All

01:58participants of this meeting are advised

01:59that people may be listening to the

02:00meeting without identifying themselves

02:02without excuse me without offering

02:03public comment and those people are not

02:05required to identify themselves. Any

02:07votes that are taken this evening will

02:09be conducted by roll call vote. All

02:11supporting materials that have been

02:12provided to members of this body are

02:14available on the town's website unless

02:15otherwise noted. The public is

02:17encouraged to follow along using the

02:18posted agenda and as chair I reserve the

02:21right to take items out of order in the

02:23interest of promoting an orderly

02:24meeting. As the board will be taking up

02:26new business at this meeting as chair I

02:28make the following land acknowledgement.

02:31Whereas the zoning board of appeals for

02:33the town of Arlington, Massachusetts,

02:34discusses and arbitrates the use of land

02:36in Arlington, formerly known as

02:38monotamy, an algangquin word meaning

02:39swift waters, the board hereby

02:41acknowledges that the town of Arlington

02:43is located on the ancestral lands of the

02:44Massachusett tribe, the tribe of

02:46indigenous peoples from whom the colony,

02:48province, and commonwealth have taken

02:49their names. We pay our respects to the

02:51ancestral bloodline of the Massachusett

02:53tribe and their descendants who still

02:55inhabit historic Massachusetts

02:56territories today.

02:59So moving to our agenda. Um the first uh

03:04up are our administrative items. Um so

03:06item number one is the uh a vote to

03:10approve the meeting minutes from our

03:12September 22nd, 2026 meeting. Uh these

03:15are minutes that were prepared by Miss

03:17Rston, distributed to the board for

03:18questions or comments and final versions

03:20posted back to the board. Um actually I

03:23believe ahead of our September 29th

03:24meeting um where we did not vote on

03:27them. So, are there any additional

03:29questions or comments as they relate to

03:30the September 22nd minutes?

03:35Seeing none, I move the zoning board of

03:36appeals for the town of Arlington

03:38approve the minutes for the September

03:3922nd, 2026 meeting of the board.

03:42>> Second.

03:43>> Thank you, Mr. Hanlin. So, roll call

03:46vote of those present. Mr. Dupont,

03:48>> yes.

03:49>> Mr. Hanland,

03:50>> yes.

03:50>> Mr. Holly,

03:52>> yes.

03:52>> Mr. Leank,

03:53>> yes.

03:54>> And the chair votes yes. Those are

03:56approved. That brings us to item two on

03:57our agenda, which is the meeting minutes

03:59from September 29th. Uh this is a

04:02meeting um a very brief public portion

04:05of a meeting which then led directly

04:06into um executive session related to um

04:10pending litigation before the board. So

04:13uh those minutes were prepared by Miss

04:15Rston, distributed to the board for

04:16questions and comments and final version

04:18posted back today. Are there any

04:20additional questions or comments as they

04:21relate to the minutes from September

04:2329th?

04:25Seeing none, I'll move that the zoning

04:27board of appeals for the town of

04:28Arlington approve the minutes from the

04:29September 29, 2026 meeting of the board.

04:32>> Second.

04:33>> Thank you, Mr. Hanland. It's a roll call

04:34vote to approve. Mr. Hanland,

04:38>> yes.

04:39>> Mr. Holly,

04:40>> yes.

04:41>> Mr. Leblanc,

04:42>> yes.

04:43>> And the chair votes yes. Those are

04:45approved. Uh, brings us to item three on

04:47our agenda, which is the adoption of the

04:49ZBA meeting minutes from November 19th,

04:522019. Uh this is the second in a series

04:55of um sort of catch-up meeting minute

04:57approvals uh for minutes that were not

05:00posted at the time of the meeting. And

05:03so this was uh prepared by Miss Rston

05:06based on uh available documentation of

05:09the meeting and a final version posted

05:11back to the board today. Are there any

05:13additional questions or comments as they

05:15relate to the minutes for November 19th,

05:182019?

05:20Seeing none, um I move that the zoning

05:23board of appeals for the town of

05:24Arlington adopt the minutes from the

05:27November 19, 2019 meeting of the board.

05:31>> Second.

05:32>> Thank you, Mr. Hanlin. So, roll call

05:35vote to adopt these minutes. Uh Mr.

05:37Dupont,

05:38>> yes.

05:39>> Mr. Hanlin,

05:40>> yes.

05:41>> Mr. Holly,

05:42>> yes.

05:43>> Mr. Leblanc,

05:44>> yes.

05:45>> Chair votes yes. Those are adopted. So,

05:47that brings to a conclusion the

05:49administrative section of our meeting.

05:51Um, before opening tonight's meeting for

05:53public hearings, here are some ground

05:55rules for clear and effective conduct of

05:56tonight's business. After I announce

05:59each agenda item, I will ask the

06:00applicant to introduce themselves or

06:02themselves and to make their

06:03presentation to the board. I will then

06:05request that the members of the board

06:06ask what questions they have on the

06:08proposal. And after the board's

06:10questions have been answered, I will

06:11open the meeting for public comment. At

06:12the conclusion of public comment, the

06:14board will deliberate and vote to either

06:16continue or to close the public hearing.

06:18All votes will be conducted by roll call

06:20vote. The final vote on any matter

06:22before the board will be taken at a

06:23subsequent meeting once the written

06:25decision has been drafted and provided

06:26to the board. After the decision has

06:28been adopted inside, the decision will

06:30be filed with the town clerk starting

06:31the 20-day appeal period under state

06:33law. After that time, the applicant may

06:35proceed with their building permit.

06:37However, under state law, no decision

06:39granted by this board shall take effect

06:41until a certified copy of the final

06:43decision has been filed with and

06:45recorded at the Middle Sex South

06:46Registry of Deeds in Cambridge by the

06:49applicant.

06:50So, with that, um item four on our

06:53agenda is docket 39315 Beck Road. Uh

06:57this is a continuation from a prior

06:59hearing, um which was on August 25th.

07:04And with that, I will uh recognize uh

07:08Mary Oconor, the uh attorney for the

07:10applicant to um bring us up to speed on

07:13where they are today.

07:14>> Thank you, Chairman Klein, members of

07:15the board. Thank you for putting this on

07:17for this evening. Um when we appeared, I

07:20have to say I was under the

07:22misapprehension uh when uh my client had

07:24told me there was going to be a change

07:26in use. I had assumed that the entire

07:29use was changing for this particular

07:31property. when I sent him the special

07:33conditions the board asked me to prepare

07:36and which I think you all have a copy of

07:38uh at this point it then be my client

07:41called and said no no no I'm not

07:42changing um the use I'm going to

07:44continue to use it in part as storage

07:47I'm only going to use 100 square feet uh

07:49for the uh purpose for which this

07:51special permit is requested so it was a

07:54an additional non-conforming use that

07:57would have been more artful way to put

07:58it so what we're looking to do is and

08:01he's prov provided uh Mr. Maradanos has

08:04provided a sketch. He is going to uh

08:07close off approximately 100 square feet

08:10of the garage to be used um for this uh

08:13business that he proposes. And I believe

08:16that Chairman Klein, you actually um

08:18spoke with the police chief who had no

08:20objection and thought this was actually

08:22in the nature of a public service type

08:24business.

08:26>> That is correct. I uh have

08:27correspondences in the record uh from

08:29both from the chief of police and from

08:32the chief of the fire department stating

08:34that they have no objections to the

08:35proposed use.

08:37>> So this would be um totally uh closed

08:39off from the um warehouse use, the

08:42storage use that 15 Beck Road is

08:44primarily used for. My client really

08:46needs to continue to use it for that

08:48because it is a source of income for him

08:51um uh and help sustain the property.

08:55if you have any questions of him

08:57>> or me.

08:58>> Okay, let me go ahead. Um,

09:02there it is. I was going to go ahead and

09:04share that plan you had referenced.

09:07[sighs] Um, share.

09:15So, this is the plan that was offered.

09:17Um,

09:19it's obviously Beck Road at the bottom.

09:21It's the twocar garage and the um

09:27plan shows a small desk, small office

09:32here directly adjacent to the door. Um

09:36so as hopefully not to interfere with

09:38the uh with access from the garage door.

09:41Um

09:44so Miss Okconor had referenced 100

09:46square feet.

09:48So, uh, I just wanted to ask the

09:50applicant,

09:52are you, is that saying that this area

09:54here is 10 ft by 10 feet? Is that what

09:56you're implying or

10:00>> Hi, good evening. Uh, good evening, Mr.

10:02Chair. So, yeah. So, um, I'm either

10:04going to do about roughly 10 by 10 or

10:07maybe reduce it just a little bit, maybe

10:08go a little wider. So, and where the

10:11space is from that area to the main

10:14garage door on that um on the front uh

10:17left side down by where your cursor is,

10:19um there is plenty of room there. And I

10:21only need an area for one little small

10:23desk. That's why um when I noticed all

10:26this, I'm like, I don't need this whole

10:28building just to do what I need to do. I

10:30just need one little area for an office.

10:33>> Okay. Um have you had any conversations

10:35with the building department about about

10:37this project?

10:39Absolutely. And um they have no problem

10:42with uh what I want to do.

10:44>> Okay.

10:45>> In fact, M. Chairman Klein, Mr. Champa

10:47said, you just need to um go to the

10:49zoning board for this relief.

10:51>> Okay. Okay. I just was it one of the

10:55things that the board is, should the

10:56board vote to approve, um the board

10:59would be referencing a stated plan for

11:02the size of the space that is is being

11:05allocated for this use. Um and so just

11:09with the you know we have this sketch

11:11here is the only piece we have to go by.

11:13So I just want to sort of make sure that

11:17should the board be making an approval

11:19that we have the information available

11:22to you know properly documented in such

11:24decisions such that um you know it can

11:27be uh it can be legally binding and

11:30hold. So I just wanted to try to get a

11:32little more information about that.

11:34>> Sure. uh whatever Peter can provide. Um

11:40>> any additional information, Peter?

11:42>> Yes. So, the garage itself is very bare

11:44bones. There's only a very thin dividing

11:48wall where the fir um where the very

11:52middle of the garage is down the middle.

11:54It otherwise it's just an open space

11:56garage. There's there's nothing else in

11:59there. And um there's like a couple of

12:02areas where a couple of shelves are, but

12:04otherwise it's a cinder block bareb

12:06blown uh garage and I'll be able to

12:09frame up a nice wall um around the uh

12:12the office area, you know, all with, you

12:15know, commercial grade, you know,

12:17construction material. So that way my

12:19tenant or whoever, you know, won't see

12:22me, I won't see them. And and I've

12:23always been very respectful of my

12:25tenants. And I've been I've had tenants

12:27for 12 years. and um and it's always

12:30worked out quite well.

12:32>> Okay. Um so effectively you're saying

12:35that the currently the space is divided

12:37into two. So one garage door per bay. Um

12:42and then each side has a a swing door

12:45for for exit. So and you're showing your

12:48office off to the side of the exit door.

12:50So that door can be used both by the

12:52office you're proposing and by the

12:53garage bay.

12:55>> Correct. And uh if the and if the tenant

12:57needs to be able to have access, there's

12:59two points of egress on either side of

13:01the building plus the two garage doors.

13:04So, it's a very open uh floor plan. And

13:07this would be a very simple, easy way of

13:09uh just cutting off a little spot for me

13:11for my uh desk area.

13:14>> Okay.

13:15Um then the other document I wanted to

13:18open

13:24Is it

13:31this one? Yes, the letter from Miss

13:34Okconor. Um, so we had talked a little

13:37bit about uh possible conditions at the

13:39prior session. Um, I miss Okconor had

13:42agreed to put together a list of uh

13:44potential conditions which u we can go

13:47about and discuss and I'm I'm sure the

13:50applicant has a few adjustments. um on

13:53some things to talk about. I know that I

13:54do as well. But before we went any

13:57further, I wanted to go ahead and um ask

13:59if there were other if there were

14:01questions from other members of the

14:03board that they would like to bring

14:04forward at this time.

14:08>> Mr. Chairman,

14:09>> Mr. Hanland,

14:11>> um do I understand Mr. Connor, do I

14:13understand

14:15correctly that um

14:19that

14:21>> actually Mr. H just one second. Um just

14:24for the record um Mr. Hanland was not

14:27present at the prior session but has

14:29fully reviewed the trans uh not the

14:32transcript but the uh recorded video of

14:34the prior session and has file filed an

14:37affidavit with them as a under the

14:40Mullen rule and so is eligible to speak

14:42at this hearing. Sorry, Mr. Han, please

14:43proceed.

14:44>> Okay. I I actually reviewed both

14:46[laughter]

14:48>> the uh but not the audio. Uh so uh

14:54condition number two uh

14:58is there was a discussion before about

15:00whether there would be firearms on site

15:03and um Mr. Moradanos said that in

15:07general he would go out and u and meet

15:11the people who his be his clients

15:14offsite. Uh, and in that case, I

15:17understood it to mean that there would

15:19then never be an occasion for the

15:21firearm to be on site, but that

15:23sometimes the uh client would come to

15:28the um the office. uh and under those

15:32circumstances we didn't go into any

15:34detail but I assumed the second sentence

15:36here uh car covers that situation where

15:40it says the however the applicant shall

15:42be permitted to process the necessary

15:44documents with the firearm on site and

15:46in his exclusive possession custody and

15:49control at all times is is that

15:52[clears throat] fair to say so there

15:53will be some occasions where you have

15:55firearms on site

15:56>> yes Mr. to handle. But if you look at

15:57number three, he will not do any

16:00transfers. He will not have people,

16:02clients come on site and transfer. He

16:04would take the firearm in, you know,

16:06write out the fire ID numbers and uh

16:08process all the paperwork and then take

16:10it and store it. He has a storage uh

16:12place offsite to store the firearm.

16:14trans the transfer here refers to

16:20in other words do I understand then that

16:22he would never have a situation where

16:24the client would come on site with the

16:28firearm and give it to Mr. Marianos.

16:32Is that correct? That will not happen.

16:35>> That's correct. Correct, Peter.

16:37The the client will not come on the site

16:39and give you the firearm. You will bring

16:41it to the site.

16:43>> Correct.

16:44>> Okay. Um so beyond this it's also seems

16:48to me that the

16:51we started off at the hearing and we

16:53were talking large in terms of an office

16:55use that was that was essentially the

16:58use and the business that was discussed

17:01at that hearing. Um the

17:05conditions are written to cover not only

17:08that but as I read them any possible

17:11other office use. Uh I'm not even sure

17:15that it would exclude professional

17:17office use and that um

17:21uh the and if you used if it was some

17:25office use that didn't involve firearms,

17:27the conditions related to firearms

17:29wouldn't have any force and effect. Um

17:32but in general, we're talking about not

17:34just this limited use, but any office

17:37use, whatever you might have, but it

17:40would still be limited to this 100

17:41square feet, right?

17:43>> Yes. But you know, one of the concerns

17:45was um how many um times people would be

17:49coming to and from the site and what

17:50hours. So we um wrote these special

17:54conditions to address both uses so that

17:57um there would be limitations on the

17:58number of visits to and from the site

18:00because of the neighborhood.

18:03>> Okay. So So could you direct me to where

18:05that is?

18:06>> Um uh let's see. Um if you look at um

18:11number six, it talks about the size of

18:13vehicles accessing the site. Number

18:16seven, the number of people employed.

18:18Number eight, the number of vehicle

18:19trips in connection with the commercial

18:21use of the property.

18:23>> Um

18:24uh that type of

18:26>> mine mine is numbered slightly

18:28differently from yours.

18:30>> They are. Oh, don't don't you have the

18:31revised one, Christian?

18:32>> Um this is the one letter dated October

18:365th. Am I looking at the wrong document?

18:38>> Yeah, there's a later one on

18:40>> look at the wrong one. All right, let me

18:41go ahead stop the share and get that one

18:43and come back with that.

18:51But, uh, Mr. Hanlin, in my opinion, if

18:54my client was to change the

18:56non-conforming use, say the commercial

18:59storage use, he would have to come back

19:01to the board. He couldn't just put

19:02another use in there.

19:06there would there would still be

19:09suppose he just decided that that that

19:12the future consisted of of toting up the

19:16amount of energy that would be used by a

19:18data center and he did that. Um and from

19:22time to time utility executives would

19:24come on site or somebody. Um does this

19:27sort of just cover anything like that?

19:30>> No. I if if you're asking me if if it's

19:33something different than the storage uh

19:36commercial storage and

19:37>> yeah I'm think really I'm assuming the

19:39commercial storage would continue

19:41although I'm not quite sure how this

19:42works but in terms of the conditions but

19:44I'm thinking about other office uses

19:46that are not related to the firearms

19:49business that have been discussed and I

19:52mean suppose it was a lawyer's office.

19:54>> Yeah I I never really thought about it

19:56that way candidly. Um, I think you're

20:00giving him uh if you approve this,

20:02you're giving him the right to add an

20:05additional u non-conforming use with

20:07this specific for this specific purpose.

20:10>> Okay. So at one point it it u

20:15with respect to signage you say that

20:17there's be no exterior signage for this

20:20particular use but it would not preclude

20:23exterior signage in the event the office

20:26use subsequently changes. Any signage

20:29shall be approved by the planning

20:31department. And it's that business about

20:33the office use changing that I'm trying

20:35to figure out whether we're being asked

20:38to give a general permission for any

20:40office use but certain specific uh

20:43conditions related if it's this

20:45particular one or if we're offering

20:49we're being we're approving the specific

20:51thing before us and you'd have to come

20:53in again if you wanted to change the

20:55nature of the office use. I

20:57>> I think number 10 addresses that Mr.

20:59Hanland, this special permit is is for

21:02this particular for this particular use

21:04shall be in effect until the property is

21:06transferred or sold by the applicant.

21:08>> Um, so I don't it's this particular use.

21:12>> I see.

21:13>> Notwithstanding the above, the applicant

21:15may seek to amend the special permit in

21:17the event of a change of business use.

21:20So it is this particular use.

21:23>> Okay, I get it. So we we might want to

21:25make that clear without talking I mean

21:27changing the signing to be a little more

21:29consistent with that but that's Mr.

21:32Chairman that's that's what I have for

21:33right now. I was just a little bit

21:36unsure as as to how the conditions would

21:39be applied. Thanks.

21:40>> Okay. Thank you Mr. Hanland. Are there

21:42other members of the board with

21:43questions at this time?

21:48>> Seeing none I'm going to go ahead and

21:49stop the share. Um

21:56so I will now be opening the meeting for

21:58public comment. Uh public questions and

22:00comments are to be taken as they relate

22:02to the matter at hand and should be

22:03directed to the board for the purpose of

22:05informing its decision. Members of the

22:07public will be granted time to ask

22:08questions and make comments. Those who

22:10wish to address the board should

22:11digitally raise their hand using the

22:13button on the react tab in the Zoom

22:14application. Those calling in by phone,

22:17please dial star 9 to indicate you would

22:18like to speak. You'll be called upon by

22:20the chair. be asked to give your name,

22:22your full name and address for the

22:23record and be given time for your

22:25questions and comments. All questions

22:27are to be addressed through the chair.

22:28Please remember to speak clearly and

22:30once all public questions and comments

22:32have been addressed or a designated

22:33period of time has elapsed, the public

22:35comment period will be closed. So with

22:37that, are there any members of the

22:38public who would like to address this

22:40application? Um, again, this is docket

22:43391315

22:45Beck Road. Uh, so with that, I see Mr.

22:48Steve Moore has his hand raised. Mr.

22:50more.

22:51>> Yes. Thank you, Mr. Chair. Steve Moore,

22:53Pedmont Street. Um, I spoke I had

22:57comments at the previous hearing version

23:02and uh my questions

23:05still are out there. Um, the questions

23:07at the time, Mr. Chair, were related to

23:11the process that the applicant will

23:13follow in dealing with

23:17uh this firearms transfer business.

23:20Um I I'm at the at the risk of

23:24repetition. I'm going to ask again that

23:27we talk a little bit about um the

23:30process that will go through this

23:32transfer. I can see that very clearly

23:34the applicant has stated that um that

23:38that firearms will not be brought by the

23:41seller or the previous owner or how

23:44whatever we call those people who are

23:46transferring the firearms to the

23:47applicant will not be bringing those

23:50firearms to this site or at least not to

23:54this office. It sounds like the transfer

23:57that's been described by the applicant

23:59and the applicant's representation

24:02uh will happen somewhere else. I don't

24:04know if it will happen in Arlington. I

24:06don't know where that will occur. Um

24:11I I believe that we're talking about

24:14transferring ownership of firearms,

24:16which is why I've got such specific

24:18questions and concerns here. It's not so

24:20much that what the applicant wants to do

24:24is is unusual. It is unfortunate and not

24:28unfortunate. It is because we're dealing

24:30with firearms that I've got a lot of

24:32additional concerns. Um since firearms

24:35represent a dangerous a dangerous fire,

24:39possibly dangerous use.

24:41Um

24:44so I would like either the applicant or

24:47the representative to again describe the

24:49process of what he is doing and how this

24:51office is involved in that.

24:52>> Okay.

24:53>> I I I will re I will say it again and I

24:56think it's set out in the special

24:57conditions. Um Mr. Martian will meet the

25:02client at the client's home or the

25:04transfer of the firearm at their home or

25:05at some other location. Um we'll take

25:08custody of the firearm.

25:10um will bring it back to 15 Beck Road to

25:13do the necessary paperwork and then it

25:15will be stored in an offsite locked

25:18facility that he cannot give the address

25:20of for security purposes. And I think

25:23that's exactly what was said um at the

25:26um last hearing as he explained it. Um,

25:30in fact, this is, um, as the police

25:33chief noted, this is a service that, um,

25:36he's providing, taking firearms off of

25:38the street and out of the hands of

25:40perhaps people who inherited them are

25:42not necessarily qualified to handle

25:44them.

25:46>> Thank you, Mr. Mr. Moore.

25:48>> Yes. Thank you, Mr. Chair. Thanks, uh,

25:51Mr. Standler Conor. I appreciate

25:53>> I appreciate that. Um uh my and I I've

25:57read the police chief's uh input here

26:00and I've quickly read over the

26:02conditions uh as they were shared by the

26:04chair. Um

26:07so I'm assuming that the uh applicant is

26:11taking not just possession and custody

26:13well taking ownership of the firearms

26:16somewhere else and then owning them

26:19bringing them to the office. Is that

26:21correct Mr. Chair?

26:23>> Uh Mr. So Connor, I think that I don't

26:26when at what point does ownership

26:28transfer occur?

26:29>> Well, probably when all the paperwork is

26:31completed.

26:32>> Okay.

26:33>> So he has custody.

26:34>> So he has custody and then ownership

26:37would only be once all the paperwork has

26:38been processed and approved.

26:40>> That's correct.

26:41>> Great. Thank you.

26:42>> Okay. Thank Thank you, Mr. Chair. That's

26:43helpful. Um, so he's basically in

26:47custody of a firearm which he's bringing

26:49to his office without the applicant, I

26:53mean without the uh the owner coming to

26:55the office.

26:57>> Um, and filling out the paperwork uh

27:01with the firearm because ID numbers and

27:03stuff all matter and and then taking the

27:05firearm somewhere else after that's all

27:07done and I guess electronically filed in

27:10the office. Is that correct? I I don't

27:13know if it's electronically filed, but

27:15um that's the process. Mr. Marian,

27:18>> yes, the uh paperwork is all done

27:20electronically and then once it's

27:22processed, then I leave with said

27:24weapons and then bring them to the

27:26secured safe storage.

27:29>> Okay. Thank you, Mr. That's also quite

27:31helpful. Um um I noticed from the sketch

27:35of the garage

27:37I I guess

27:40I'm wanting to make sure just and and

27:43that's what I'm why I'm asking these

27:45questions uh from from the applicant or

27:49the applicant's representative.

27:51I want to make sure that there's no

27:54potential here for misststepping or

27:58misusing or or or mis uh uh um uh

28:03affecting a transfer

28:06that can happen with this arrangement.

28:08And again, it's because we're talking

28:10firearms. That's my only concern here.

28:12Um,

28:14clearly this is a garage and it's a

28:17garage that can be driven into and the

28:19office space is accessible from the

28:21garage bays once the garage doors are

28:22closed and whatever.

28:24Um, and the applicant is is living with

28:28the conditions that again no transfer

28:31will occur at this site even though that

28:34certainly is a possibility based on the

28:37way this site is arranged since you can

28:38access this office from the garage.

28:43a a a a better a boots and sus I'm sorry

28:46a belt and suspenders approach to this

28:49might be designing a separate space

28:53within that garage that is only access

28:55to the outside not to these garage bays.

28:59And my again my concern is to make sure

29:03that no use of this special permit goes

29:07unfortunately beyond what it's construed

29:10to be doing at this application stage.

29:14Uh I would suggest that perhaps is a a

29:17good thing to add

29:20and I would

29:22uh

29:23I guess suggest that to the board. Um,

29:27but I also uh I just I just lost my

29:31train of thought relative to this

29:33transfer of of firearms uh deal.

29:37>> Chair uh say a couple things.

29:40>> Um just one second, Mr. Mio. Uh Mr.

29:42Moore, did you have any further

29:45questions about the space before I can

29:48address those questions? just just to to

29:50make sure there's not interaction

29:52between the garage bays and the office

29:53space and also I believe the conditions

29:56talked about four employees why would

29:58the applicant up [clears throat] to four

30:00employees

30:02>> okay um so I believe the four employees

30:04implies the entire structure that's

30:06correct and not just the

30:08>> applicant's business but the the

30:10>> the structure as a whole um so Mr.

30:14Can you um explain a little bit about

30:15sort of what security measures there are

30:17for the weapons when they're in transit?

30:19And then um is there is the intention to

30:22have like a a full separation between

30:25the office and the garage like a you

30:28know like there's a there's a locked

30:29door that you would be working behind or

30:31something like that if you

30:32>> let me uh bring uh let me try to cover

30:35all the bases to bring uh some

30:38appeasement here. Um, so first and

30:40foremost, and anyone can drive whatever

30:43vehicle they want into my building.

30:44There is nothing in there of value,

30:46nothing that can be used to harm anybody

30:48other than the vehicle driving into the

30:49building. Okay. Um, the amount of time

30:52I'll probably be in there with the uh,

30:54weapons during recording is going to be

30:57no more than an hour, two tops. And also

31:01I do want to keep the area open because

31:04I got to I must have at least two means

31:06of egress of the building for a tenant

31:09in case there's a fire. If I block off

31:11one area now I don't have two means of

31:13egress, right? So and also I will be in

31:18there during hours of when it's

31:21convenient for me typically in the

31:23evening. All the doors and garage doors

31:26are locked. Nobody is coming in there

31:28but me and only me. I have surveillance

31:31all around the building 24 hours a day

31:33always recording. And the only time

31:37where I would say I guess I would be

31:39vulnerable if you will would be in there

31:42during that short amount of time in

31:44which I have my security cameras

31:46watching at every moment. And it's not

31:49and it's not like I have a big sign

31:51outside that says, "Hey, guess what? I'm

31:52in here with guns right now. Everyone

31:54come watch." I'm very discreet, very

31:57professional. I've got many, many years

31:59of firearm safety training and

32:02experience. So, that's why I feel that I

32:05am a good fit for this type of business

32:07because I've facilitated and helped many

32:09families in this situation. And I'm just

32:12trying to continue to promote firearm

32:14safety by doing this.

32:16>> Thank you, Mr. Uh, Mr. Moore. Um,

32:21yeah, I'm I I'm just about done, Mr.

32:23Chair. I I appreciate I appreciate that

32:25insight and input. Um I I just because

32:29as far as I'm I'm concerned and uh uh

32:33garage doors don't offer egress. I don't

32:36quite follow that, but it has

32:38>> they're not a swing door you have to

32:39stop and unlock and raise and it's a

32:41fire hazard. Yeah.

32:42>> All right. I understand. Uh okay. Well,

32:45Mr. Chair, you've heard my concerns. I I

32:47get it and it sounds like you've got

32:49most of the bases covered. I assumed

32:50also you could protect yourself if there

32:53was any problem. I mean the applicant

32:55could protect himself if there was any

32:56problem. So thank you Mr. Chairman.

32:58>> Thank you Mr. Mark.

33:00>> Are there any members of the public who

33:02would like to address this application?

33:08Seeing none, I'm going to go ahead and

33:09close the public comment period for this

33:11hearing. Um

33:14so what we have before us uh so this is

33:17an existing non-conforming

33:19uh use um in a non-conforming structure

33:23in a residential district uh it's on

33:25Beck Road which is a small private way

33:28um running between Ryder and Forest and

33:32uh the building has been used for an

33:35extended period of time um as a rental

33:37storage garage for various businesses um

33:41and The applicant who's the owner of the

33:43building is seeking to construct an

33:45office within the building of about

33:47approximately 100 square feet to be used

33:50um as a as an office to uh conduct his

33:55business which would be uh the uh the

33:58transfer of firearms

34:00uh from uh people who are seeking to uh

34:04get rid of a firearm that has come into

34:05their possession and are looking for the

34:08the legal and proper means for disposing

34:10of said weapons.

34:12Um the

34:15uh the transfer would not take place on

34:17site. The transfer will take place

34:18offsite. However, the the applicant

34:20would be bringing the weapon on site for

34:22the purpose of uh documentation

34:25and u those applications uh would then

34:28be filed by the applicant with the I'm

34:31assuming the state and possibly the

34:32federal authorities. And then at that

34:34time um the weapon will be brought off

34:37site to another facility in an

34:39undisclosed location for uh for storage

34:42and uh I'm either transfer I'm assuming

34:46transfer for disposal is that the on

34:49that point

34:51>> they would be trans to

34:53>> sorry they would be transferred to other

34:55uh federal firearms uh licensed dealers.

34:58But also I just wanted to add one extra

34:59thing to Mr. Moore because he did touch

35:01up on this. Um the building will be

35:03inspected yearly by both the ATF and the

35:07Arlington Police Department.

35:09>> Okay. Oh, thank you for that, Mr. M. Um

35:14so the the reason the board is involved

35:16in this question is because um this is

35:18an existing non-conforming structure and

35:20a non-conforming use. Um

35:23so this falls uh

35:27uh under section 8 in our zoning code

35:29which deals with non-conforming uses and

35:32structures. Um

35:35there were a couple of questions that I

35:37had um come up with. Uh one is the

35:41obviously whatever you're proposing to

35:43do, you'll still need to get a building

35:45permit and be subject to the state

35:47building code and whatnot. So um we the

35:51the granting of a permit by this

35:53authority does not automatically mean

35:55you get to build. You still have to get

35:56all the the requisite permits from the

35:58building department. Um

36:02the

36:04currently you had noted that there are

36:06uh several parking spaces um in the

36:10vicinity of the building but you also

36:11note that you're not going to be uh

36:13people won't be coming with you into

36:14this space. the space is is solely for

36:16your use and as such um you know visitor

36:19parking would not be required for this

36:21use. Um

36:24we we'll get back to the uh conditions

36:27in a minute but the questions about

36:28signage I believe are addressed in there

36:30the conditions. Um

36:34so there's one question that I had had

36:37for Miss O' Conor. So in looking through

36:40this our zoning bylaw

36:43um

36:44so I believe this falls under section

36:47811 which um pre-existing non-conforming

36:51structures or uses may be extended or

36:53altered provided that no such extension

36:55or alteration shall be permitted unless

36:58there's a finding of the board of

36:59appeals that such change extension or

37:00alteration shall not be substantially

37:02more detrimental than the existing

37:04non-conforming structure or use to the

37:06neighborhood.

37:07So, uh I believe that's the section that

37:10we are consulting.

37:13But I did want to raise a question

37:15because section

37:17um

37:20812B

37:22about non-conforming uses

37:25um talks about non-conforming use of a

37:28uh board of appeals finds the new use is

37:31not substantially different and not more

37:33detrimental. And I'm believe that the

37:38first clause in section 812 which states

37:41unless the board of appeals has made a

37:42finding provided for in general law 48

37:45chap uh chapter 6 section six excuse me

37:48in section 811 above. So would you agree

37:52that the determination the board needs

37:55to make and I would ask Mr. handling the

37:56same question um specifically just

38:00relates to uh whether the uh change

38:04extension or alteration is more

38:06detrimental and not to a question of

38:09whether the new use is substantially

38:12different from the current use. I

38:13>> I agree with that and I think that I

38:15provided you with a memorandum on that

38:17as well.

38:18>> Yeah.

38:20And I would suggest to you that this use

38:23um we're talking about 100 square feet

38:25is not substantially more detrimental

38:27and actually provides a public service.

38:30>> Great. Thank you for that. Um

38:34are there any other questions for the uh

38:36for the applicant before I proceed to

38:39looking at the conditions proposed by

38:42Miss Okconor?

38:44>> Mr. Chairman,

38:45>> Mr. Hanland,

38:47>> we haven't really had it much. the

38:50conditions that have been proposed and

38:51that we have before us deal some of them

38:55deal just with the commercial non-office

38:57use um and

39:01and I'm wondering

39:04what it is why it is that we are doing

39:06that I mean it's all nice to regulate

39:09things but but it's not clear that but

39:12that those are really properly before us

39:16>> and uh you know something and then some

39:19things got lost. Like for example, the

39:21applicant uh last time told us he would

39:24be the only employee on site. I'm

39:27assuming that the word employee is broad

39:29enough to refer to the owner. Um but

39:33actually the [clears throat] on the the

39:36conditions say for employees and I

39:39assume that's to take into consideration

39:41any employees that might be uh there for

39:44the commercial use. Um anyway, we

39:47haven't really gone into any of that and

39:50I was just wondering what the reasons

39:54were why it is that we are reaching out

39:56to regulate the existing non-conforming

39:59use in addition to the particular use

40:01that is being proposed by the applicant.

40:04>> M Connor,

40:05>> um yes. Well, when I talked to Chairman

40:08Klein, there was a concern that um since

40:10we were ex, for lack of a better word,

40:12expanding the non-conforming use that

40:14perhaps there should be things in place

40:17to address the entire use of the

40:20property, so many vehicles during such

40:22and such time period so that um the

40:25residential character, the neighborhood

40:27would not be significantly impacted or

40:29impacted at all. Do we know uh I mean do

40:35we are assuming from what from the

40:37hearing that that little or no uh coming

40:41on site will be done by people who are

40:43the Mr. the clients for the this

40:46particular use. Um do we know what the c

40:50what currently is the uh um the number

40:54of people who come on site or the the

40:56structures that the the kinds of trucks

40:58or any of that sort of thing on the

41:00existing use?

41:02>> Yes, Mr. Maradiana had um provided

41:05information at the last hearing about

41:07that that it is infrequent trips uh by

41:10people you know accessing the uh the

41:13storage items on site.

41:16And my recollection is it's mostly it's

41:18commercial companies that are renting

41:20the site. It's not personal storage.

41:22>> That's correct. It's not personal

41:23storage. It's contractors and things

41:26like that.

41:28>> Okay. I I think I I think I see that

41:35>> that that answers my question, Mr.

41:37Chairman.

41:38>> Okay. Thank you, Mr. Hanland. Um

41:43so then um

41:50so there are required findings that the

41:52board will need to make. But before we

41:53look at that um should the board be

41:58inclined to approve there are standards

42:00conditions that would apply and then

42:02there the special conditions that were

42:04proposed by

42:06um by Miss Okconor. So the I just want

42:09to quickly go through the standard

42:11conditions and then we can move on to

42:12the special conditions. So the standard

42:14conditions um the first is that the

42:17plans and specifications approved by the

42:19board for the special permit shall be

42:20the final plans and specifications

42:22submitted to the building inspector of

42:24the town of Arlington connection with

42:25this application for zoning relief be no

42:27deviation during construction from

42:28approved plans and specifications

42:30without the expressed written approval

42:31of the Arlington zoning board of

42:33appeals. The second is the building

42:35inspectors hereby notified there to

42:36monitor the site should proceed with

42:37appropriate enforcement procedures that

42:38anytime they determine that violations

42:40are present. Building inspector shall

42:41proceed under section 3.1 of the zoning

42:43bylaw under the provisions of chapter 40

42:45section 21D of the Massachusetts general

42:47laws and institute noncriminal

42:49complaints. If necessary, the building

42:51inspector may also approve and institute

42:52appropriate criminal action also in

42:54accordance with section 3.1. And the

42:56third is the board shall maintain

42:57continuing jurisdiction with respect to

42:59the special permit grant. Um we'll note

43:02that the the standard condition number

43:03one is a little challenging in this case

43:05because we don't really have um

43:09really a set of of documents in such a

43:12state that the uh building inspector

43:14would be able to make a determination

43:17um whether or not it's in compliance

43:19with the approved documents. I think the

43:22board will should discuss as a part of

43:24when we're going through the additional

43:25conditions uh is can the board at this

43:29time uh put together a list of uh

43:32conditions that the board feels provide

43:34sign uh sufficient direction to the

43:38building department in order to

43:40determine whether what is being proposed

43:42in a building permit meets the terms of

43:44what is approved in the uh under this

43:48special permit. That's something we'll

43:50have to get to. Um, but first I want to

43:53go through the special conditions. Uh,

43:55so as noted by Mr. Connor, number one,

43:58the addition to the present

44:00non-conforming use of the property as a

44:01storage facility, the applicant shall

44:03also be permitted to use 100 square ft

44:05of the building for the use detailed

44:09in the within special permit

44:10application. Um,

44:15so that

44:22I think that gives us sufficient

44:24information as to exactly what the what

44:26the use is. We'll just need to make sure

44:28that we

44:30um include a copy of that with the with

44:33the decision.

44:34>> Mr. Chairman,

44:35>> Mr. Hanland.

44:36>> Um, this sort of relates to the question

44:39you raised earlier about the standard

44:41condition one, but um, at least I read

44:44this read the first condition as saying,

44:48uh, to use 100 square ft of the building

44:50for the use detailed within the special

44:52permit application as meaning that it

44:57would be the specific 100 ft that Mr.

44:59Radanos

45:01included on his sketch. And

45:04>> I think that if that if it's something

45:06other than that um that we need to be a

45:10little more clear here as to um as as to

45:14what proposed special condition number

45:17one

45:19>> means. I took some comfort actually from

45:22the fact that that we it was not a very

45:24sophisticated drawing. wasn't certified

45:27by an architect or anybody, but but it

45:29was it was pretty clear and and it was

45:32with the testimony that Mr. Mariano's

45:35gave earlier about what he was intending

45:37and and the way he intended that to be

45:40interpreted, it seemed to me that that

45:42was

45:43intended to and did sort of commit him

45:45to basically do that and not do

45:48somewhere else. And and you know, the

45:50discussion we had with Mr. more also

45:52settled a lot on where that 100 ft would

45:55be. So it seems to me that that sketch

45:58is more than doodling. It it we it is it

46:02in some ways is part of the regulation

46:03we're trying to do.

46:06>> Okay. Um

46:09Miss Okconor, was your intention with

46:10this condition number one to just

46:13condition the space or was it also to

46:15condition the use? um we can uh

46:19condition the space as well now that

46:21he's given you when I did these special

46:23conditions um we there hadn't been a

46:25drawing so if it gives the board more

46:28comfort to say you know he's committed

46:30to putting it in that location I'm fine

46:32with that I'm sure he's fine with that

46:34>> I just wasn't sure if this so one of the

46:37things we're we've been discussing is

46:38that the special permit would related

46:40specifically to this use and I just

46:42wanted to make sure that that whatever

46:44this use is is

46:47designated somewhere in the

46:49>> that that's fine. That's fine.

46:52>> Okay.

46:53>> I can send you this document in Word if

46:54you want it.

46:56>> I can I can just scan it. That's no

46:58problem.

46:58>> Okay. [snorts]

47:00>> Um

47:02so condition number two is that the

47:03applicant has agreed there should be no

47:04firearms stored at 15 Beck Road,

47:06Arlington, Massachusetts, the property.

47:08However, the applicant shall be

47:10permitted to process unnecessary

47:11documentation with the firearm on site

47:13in his exclusive possession, custody,

47:16and control at all times.

47:20Um, the third is that any transfer of

47:23firearms shall not occur on the

47:24property, but shall be arranged by the

47:26applicant to occur off site.

47:30Uh, the fourth is the applicant is

47:31represented. There will be no exterior

47:33signage for this particular office use,

47:36sale transfer or disposal of firearms.

47:39However, this shall not preclude

47:41exterior signage in the event the office

47:43use subsequently changes. Any signage

47:45shall comply with the sub with the

47:47zoning bylaw will be subject to review

47:49by the Arlington Department of Planning

47:51and Community Development.

47:53>> Mr. I'm sorry.

47:55>> No, I you you should finish what you

47:57were going to say. This is this is

47:58something I wanted to talk about, but I

47:59didn't I wanted you to finish first.

48:02>> Okay. Um the only thing I wouldn't

48:05uh note is um if that second I'm not

48:08sure the second sentence is necessary

48:10because if there's a change in the

48:13office use, it's going to require a new

48:16special permit. Anyways,

48:18um that was the only thing I was going

48:20to mention, but Mr. Hanland, did you

48:21have something further?

48:22>> Well, yeah, I was I would do it. I mean

48:24I it's essentially the same point. Um

48:28instead of saying the applicant has

48:29represented that I just delete that and

48:32say that the sentence says there will be

48:34no exterior signage for this particular

48:36office use the sale transfer andor

48:38disposal of firearms because we've been

48:40using the word particular office used to

48:43involve the particular build building

48:44that Mr. Meridianos uh uh uh had

48:48described and then I would delete the

48:50whole rest of it

48:52>> because there isn't going to be a

48:55subsequent the office use isn't going to

48:57change to a you know to at le certainly

49:00to a subsequent office use which is the

49:01way I originally read it and it seems to

49:05be that that that however sentence

49:08doesn't really add anything and and the

49:11statement that any signage shall comply

49:13with the zoning bylaw of course it

49:14should we don't really need to say that.

49:16So, this this goes to the point I made

49:2020 minutes ago. I guess

49:22>> that this is what suggested to me

49:24originally that the applicant was

49:26seeking something other than this

49:29particular office use, but some

49:31different office use as well. And and I

49:34think that uh that we don't really need

49:37to deal with that if we are not imposing

49:39a condition that's other than what the

49:41zoning bylaw would require anyway. Okay.

49:45Um, and number five, the applicant shall

49:48obtain any licenses or certifications

49:50for the use proposed.

49:53That is likely fine as is. Um,

49:57commercial activities are limited to the

49:59hours noted in the town's noise

50:00abatement bylaw as it may be amended

50:03from time to time. So, um

50:08I think this the intent here is that

50:11this would apply to all uses of the of

50:14the garage and not just the the use

50:16proposed um under this special permit.

50:20Um

50:22>> that's correct. Yeah.

50:23>> Okay. I think

50:26maybe as we're um drafting a a um a

50:31decision, we might want to try to

50:32clarify that in some fashion um because

50:35I think there's several that will have

50:36that same issue. Uh number seven, the

50:39size of vehicles accessing the site in

50:41connection with the commercial use is

50:42limited to the DOT classes one through

50:44three. Um all loading must take place on

50:48site. Loading of vehicles on the street

50:49is prohibited. I will note that I I

50:52believe the the model for this came from

50:54a a different hearing that was before

50:56the board that actually had um a place

50:59on site to load vehicles. And I would

51:01note that there is very little distance

51:04between the front of the garage and the

51:06street. And I don't know that loading

51:09can actually take place off streetet in

51:11this site. Um

51:14and so I would actually

51:17>> if I may ch Mr. Chair, there is actually

51:20>> Yes, sir. Sorry to interrupt. There is

51:22>> there is sufficient room to uh back a

51:25vehicle up to the garage door um off off

51:29of the road. I have plenty of room.

51:31>> Oh, you do? Okay.

51:32>> Oh, I do. I have plenty of room now.

51:34>> Okay. Yeah. In visiting the site, it

51:37looked like it it's sort of difficult to

51:39tell where the lot ends and the street

51:41begins. So, it was not entirely certain

51:43where that where that point was.

51:46Um

51:48uh number eight was at no point at no

51:51time shall more than four people be

51:52employed at this location. Um I think

51:55where it is I think the confusion that

51:57came up is that you know the people who

51:59are storing goods there are not employed

52:01at this location. They're just coming

52:02through. So I think um

52:06either we should change this to uh you

52:10know no

52:12I think we want to say something that

52:14the that there will be no employees of

52:17the propo of the proposed office use

52:20that or that you know other than the the

52:22owner. I think that's and then

52:25>> that's fine.

52:26>> Okay.

52:28>> Okay. So we can modify that. Uh number

52:30nine, the number of vehicle trips in

52:32connection with the commercial use of

52:34the property is not to exceed 10 trips

52:36per day Monday through Friday and six

52:38trips per day Saturday, Sunday. Um I

52:41think that also comes from model

52:42language from a prior hearing we had. Um

52:46I think I would in this I would just

52:48change commercial to storage uh just to

52:51clarify which use it is. um as long as

52:55those those numbers are acceptable to

52:58the applicant.

53:01Um

53:03and number 10, this decision shall be

53:05recorded with mils south registry of

53:07deeds within 60 days after certification

53:10of

53:11no appeal and a true photocopy of this

53:13of said recording shall be submitted to

53:15the zoning board of appeals. Failure to

53:17do so shall render the special permit

53:18null invoid upon recording with the

53:20registry of the special permit. the

53:21special permit shall supersede all

53:22previous grants of authority to use the

53:24property for business purposes. Um at

53:26this point we're unaware of any um

53:29agreements that were available for prior

53:31non-conforming use of the lot. So this

53:34will just in case there is this will

53:36become the one that that is current. Um

53:40uh 11. The special permit for this

53:41particular use shall be in effect until

53:43the property is transferred or sold by

53:44the applicant is rented for another type

53:46use or is destroyed or becomes

53:48uninhabitable. Notwithstanding the

53:49above, the applicant may seek to amend

53:51the special permit in the event of a

53:53change of business use by the applicant

53:55sale of the property or rental pursuant

53:57to uh MJL4A and the zoning by loan

53:59effect at that time.

54:02So the we would be approving the uses as

54:04they are uh proposed but any changes

54:08would require a return to the zoning

54:10board. Uh, number 12, complaints

54:12regarding the operation of the property

54:13are to be submitted to the inspector of

54:15buildings per section 3.1 of the zoning

54:17bylaw. If in the inspector's opinion,

54:18the conditions of the permit are not

54:20being followed, the permit may be

54:21reviewed, revised, or revoked by the

54:22board. Um,

54:25that's effectively very similar to

54:28what's going on under uh standard

54:30condition number two, but this relates

54:32more to the operation rather than during

54:34the construction period. Uh and then

54:36number 13, inspector of buildings is

54:37hereby notified that to monitor the site

54:39that uh is our special condition number

54:43two. So we'll go ahead um and strike

54:46that one.

54:48Uh and then number 14 is our special

54:50condition number three. So I think we're

54:52good there as well. Um

54:56so then the proposal for the board would

54:58be accepting um condition special

55:02conditions 1 through 12 um as discussed

55:06uh this evening and with the

55:08modifications as uh as discussed. Are

55:12there any questions in regards to the

55:15proposed conditions for this uh proposed

55:18use?

55:19>> Mr. Chairman,

55:21>> Mr. Hanland.

55:22>> Um, can we go back to the standard

55:25condition number one? I'm not quite sure

55:28what we've now decided what what what

55:30you just said mean with respect to that

55:33because you indicated that that was

55:34there was some problem in applying that.

55:36We had a little bit of a discussion

55:38about what it might mean and and then we

55:41moved on and and I'm not quite sure

55:42whether you're suggesting that that

55:45standard condition is going to be

55:46deleted or whether we're going to keep

55:48it.

55:49Okay, let me quickly return um bring

55:54that up

56:00There's paper.

56:22Okay. So, this is our our three standard

56:25conditions. Um,

56:28the plans and specifications approved by

56:30the board for the special permit shall

56:32be the final plans and specifications

56:33submitted to the building inspector of

56:35the town of Arlington in connection with

56:36its application for zoning relief. There

56:38should be no deviation during

56:39construction from approved plans and

56:40specifications without the express

56:42written approval of the Arlington zoning

56:43board of appeals. So,

56:46I was going to recommend a few

56:48additional

56:50um conditions which I think would be

56:54helpful in terms of um

56:58of this because obviously this one

57:01provides some guidance based on the the

57:03sketch that was provided by the

57:05applicant but isn't very specific about

57:08uh some aspects of it. Um,

57:13so I would want to

57:17uh if I can go back to the special

57:20conditions

57:25this one.

57:28So I think to the first condition um in

57:31addition to the present non-conforming

57:32use of the property of the storage

57:33facility, the applicant shall also be

57:35permitted to use 100 square ft of the I

57:38would change that to existing building

57:40uh for the use detailed within the

57:42special permit application. And then I

57:46would want to note that the the off the

57:50office use um shall be separated from

57:53the remainder of the garage

57:56uh with the full height partition on all

57:59sides with a door

58:03uh with an with a with a door separate

58:07from the with a door separating the

58:09office from the garage. So effectively

58:12the garage the door from the side that

58:15is still open can be used for egress

58:17from for the uh people who happen to be

58:20in the garage but there will be a

58:22separate door for the office that is

58:24locked and separate from that door so

58:26that um the uh the applicant while

58:30working in that room is secure from the

58:33the garage should some you know the

58:35garage door open and somebody else be

58:36using the garage that they're not just

58:37out there in the open.

58:45So, Mr. Hamlin, that was sort of what I

58:47was thinking of in terms of changes.

58:49>> That sounds fine to me.

58:51>> Okay.

58:53Are there any other comments on

58:55conditions from members of the board?

59:02Hearing none, I'm going to go ahead and

59:03stop the share. Um

59:06so as we noted this is uh coming to us

59:09under section 818A

59:12as an extension or alteration of an

59:14existing structure or use. Um

59:18so extension or alteration of existing

59:20structure or use shall not be

59:21substantially more detrimental than the

59:23existing non-conforming structure or use

59:26to the neighborhood is the standard that

59:28the board needs to find. Um, in

59:31evaluating that, the board has

59:33traditionally used the tests uh under

59:37section 333 for special permits, but not

59:40the overall determination that needs to

59:42be made for a special permit that but

59:45the rather the one that is required

59:47under uh about uh being substantially

59:50more detrimental.

59:53So with that um

59:56we the first of these um and these were

1:00:01addressed I believe by the applicant in

1:00:02their um application. Uh so uh first the

1:00:07requested use is allowed or allowed by

1:00:09special permit within the district. Um

1:00:11as we noted under section um 811A

1:00:16uh a non-conforming

1:00:18uh use can be approved by the zoning

1:00:20board of appeals and a finding that it

1:00:21is not substantially more detrimental.

1:00:24Uh the second is requested use why the

1:00:27requested use is essential or desirable

1:00:29to public convenience or welfare. Um, as

1:00:31has been noted by the applicant, this is

1:00:34um the the inheritance or the coming

1:00:39into possession of a firearm is often

1:00:40something that happens um where the the

1:00:44person who becomes the owner of doesn't

1:00:46really know how to address it or to what

1:00:48to do about it. Um I know this has

1:00:51happened within my family at a time in

1:00:53the past. Um and walking into the police

1:00:56station does not necessarily seem like

1:00:58the best idea. And so having this kind

1:01:01of a a situation um having this the kind

1:01:06of a service available to uh to people

1:01:09to find to have a safe and legal means

1:01:12of disposing of firearms is something

1:01:14that would be beneficial to the

1:01:16neighborhood rather than um them trying

1:01:18to figure out how to dispose of it on

1:01:20their own. Uh the third is the requested

1:01:23use will not create undue traffic

1:01:25congestion or impair pedestrian safety.

1:01:27Um, as have been noted by the applicant,

1:01:29this is not a location where members of

1:01:31the public will be joining him on site.

1:01:33Uh, this is a location where it's just

1:01:35he himself working in an enclosed space.

1:01:37And the reason that he has to have an

1:01:38enclosed office is that's a requirement

1:01:40of the license uh and the procedures for

1:01:43this operation. Um, and so it will not

1:01:46create undue traffic uh because the

1:01:49applicant is also resident on the

1:01:50property and uh will not impair

1:01:53pedestrian safety. Uh this will you know

1:01:56Beck Road is a private way. It does not

1:01:58have sidewalks at the moment. Um but I

1:02:02don't think it's a a strong a heavily

1:02:04used pedestrian route. Um most people

1:02:06who are in this area are either on

1:02:08forest street or they're on rider

1:02:09heading towards the bike path or over to

1:02:11the um to across the bike path. So I

1:02:14don't believe this would impair

1:02:15pedestrian safety. Um requested use will

1:02:19not overload any public system. Um, this

1:02:21doesn't really add to any systems uh

1:02:23that aren't already available um and in

1:02:26use on site. Uh, the special regulations

1:02:29for the requested use are fulfilled. Um,

1:02:32this is not a use uh that has a special

1:02:34regulation within the uh within the

1:02:36confines of the zoning bylaw. Um,

1:02:40the requested use will not impair the

1:02:42character or integrity of the district.

1:02:44Um, I think there was a lot of concern

1:02:46about the sort of this use and bringing

1:02:49this this use and this activity to the

1:02:51neighborhood. But I think the the

1:02:52applicant has made a strong case that

1:02:54this is really not this will be a very

1:02:56much an invisible uh use within the

1:02:59facility. It's not something that's

1:03:00going to be advertised. It's not

1:03:01something that's going to be on signage.

1:03:03Um, and it's not something that's

1:03:04bringing people to site. It will just be

1:03:06the the applicant working in this area

1:03:09um of the existing building.

1:03:12uh the requested use will not be

1:03:13detrimental to public health or welfare.

1:03:16U again there were some questions raised

1:03:18uh some concerns about um the the

1:03:22bringing of firearms to the site. I

1:03:23think the applicant is um you know noted

1:03:26that they're you know they are trained

1:03:28uh to do this and they have specific

1:03:29licensing and there's other procedures

1:03:32to make sure that the the the rules and

1:03:34regulations for this are are followed

1:03:37and that uh in fact this does provide a

1:03:40as noted before that this is a service

1:03:42that um is helping to uh reduce the

1:03:45amount of unwanted uh firearms that are

1:03:48out in the public and as such would be a

1:03:49a public benefit. Uh and the last is

1:03:52that the requested use will not cause an

1:03:54excess of use detrimental to the

1:03:56neighborhood. As far as I know, this is

1:03:57unique and so by definition there is no

1:04:00excess um being this unique instance.

1:04:04Are there any questions or comments as

1:04:07regards to those uh seven findings as

1:04:11just stated them?

1:04:15So with seeing none with those findings,

1:04:18I think that the board would be able to

1:04:20find uh that the alteration of the

1:04:24existing non-conforming use shall not be

1:04:27substantially more detrimental than the

1:04:29existing non-conforming structure or use

1:04:31in the neighborhood. Um I would and then

1:04:36I think that is further protected by the

1:04:38conditions that the board has discussed

1:04:39prior. And um with that I would ask Mr.

1:04:44Hanland if he would be prepared to uh

1:04:47direct the drafting of a decision in

1:04:50favor of approval.

1:04:52>> Mr. Chairman, I would.

1:04:54>> Thank you, Mr. Hanland. Um,

1:04:59are there any uh final questions or

1:05:02comments from members of the board?

1:05:08Seeing none,

1:05:11I will move that the zoning board of

1:05:14appeals for the town of Arlington close

1:05:19the public hearing for docket 391315

1:05:21Beck Road.

1:05:23>> Second.

1:05:24>> Thank Mr. Hanland.

1:05:27>> So, roll call vote of uh members of the

1:05:31board in favor of closure. Uh Mr.

1:05:34Dupant,

1:05:35>> yes.

1:05:35>> Mr. Hanland,

1:05:36>> yes.

1:05:37>> Mr. Mr. Holly,

1:05:38>> yes.

1:05:39>> Uh, Mr. Leblanc,

1:05:41>> yes.

1:05:42>> And the chair votes yes. Uh, we are

1:05:45closed on 15 Beck Road.

1:05:49>> So, thank you very much for coming

1:05:50before us this evening. We will draft

1:05:52the decision uh that will be voted by

1:05:55the board at our next meeting

1:05:58uh whose date is October 27th.

1:06:02>> Thank you, Mr. Chairman, and thank you

1:06:04members of the board for your

1:06:05consideration. Have a good evening. Very

1:06:07welcome. Thank you very much.

1:06:08>> Thank you very much.

1:06:09>> You're quite welcome. Take care.

1:06:11>> You too.

1:06:13>> So, with that, I'll go back to our uh

1:06:17agenda. So, this brings item five on our

1:06:19agenda, which is docket 3914 53 Park

1:06:22Street. Um I would ask the applicant to

1:06:26introduce themselves and tell us what

1:06:29they are

1:06:31trying to remedy, I guess, is the proper

1:06:33way to put it.

1:06:34>> That's correct. [clears throat]

1:06:36Good evening, Mr. Chair Preston and

1:06:38members of the board. My name is Dan

1:06:40Cameron and I'm with DNA Survey

1:06:43Associates out of Reading,

1:06:44Massachusetts. Um, so yes,

1:06:47[clears throat] this is an interesting

1:06:49property uh at 51 to 53 uh Park Street.

1:06:54And a little bit of history, um, this

1:06:57was [clears throat] purchased um by the

1:07:01current owner on in August of this year.

1:07:04And the prior owner uh had owned it uh

1:07:07from 1999

1:07:09until this until this August. So approx

1:07:12approximately 20 27 years. And um so the

1:07:16property

1:07:18is actually listed on the property

1:07:21record card which you know does it it is

1:07:24unofficial but it is listed as a five

1:07:26unit fiveunit building. And um so and if

1:07:31you walk through the building um it

1:07:34clearly is five separate units. Uh there

1:07:37are two two units on the first floor um

1:07:41and then along with the third unit which

1:07:43I'll get into in a minute um in the in

1:07:45the rear and then two units on the

1:07:47second floor. So the history on uh what

1:07:50happened here the the original house the

1:07:53uh was the first floor and second floor

1:07:55were built was built in 1855

1:07:59and then in 1988 there was a building

1:08:02permit taken out for an addition and we

1:08:05do have a copy of that permit is it is

1:08:07up on the portal and uh at the time the

1:08:11addition was constructed it did conform

1:08:13to the dimensional requirements uh that

1:08:16were in place at the time And

1:08:18coincidentally it it it does conform to

1:08:20today's reg uh dimensional requirements

1:08:22as well in terms of you know setback

1:08:24requirements. Um the permit does not

1:08:27state exactly what the the use of the

1:08:29addition was for. Um but what it turned

1:08:32out to be was an additional unit. Um

1:08:36there is no access to this what I call

1:08:39fifth unit as you can see from the plot

1:08:41plans I mean from the floor plan uh from

1:08:44the existing building. So, it's clearly

1:08:46built as a a separate unit um that has

1:08:50all the proper egress and and so forth.

1:08:54And so, um we met with uh the building

1:08:56department

1:08:58because the the current owner in current

1:09:01owner's intention is to do some um

1:09:04slight renovation, you know, kind of

1:09:06update the kitchens and baths and that

1:09:08sort of thing inside. Um virtually no

1:09:11nothing to the outside. It will not be

1:09:12added to or or anything. And the common

1:09:15owner wants the these the past history

1:09:18on this property has been rental

1:09:20apartments. The current owner wants to

1:09:22convert these uh to occupied uh

1:09:25ownership to converting to condominiums.

1:09:28And you know the market price on these

1:09:31units will certainly be you know what

1:09:33one would agree would be the starter

1:09:35market uh particularly you know as as

1:09:38real estate prices go in the town of

1:09:39Arlington. Um, so when we met, of

1:09:42course, if you're going to sell this

1:09:43these uh this these units as individual

1:09:46units, you want to make sure that it is

1:09:48a legal um five unit building. So, we

1:09:52met with uh Mr. Champ, [clears throat]

1:09:54the building commissioner, and the their

1:09:58records, which they use a a map, which

1:10:01we have up on the portal as well. Uh

1:10:05it's kind of like an assessor's map. It

1:10:06listed as a four family. It says 4F. So

1:10:09he had no really no evidence that he

1:10:13could really say it was a legal five

1:10:15family. And that's when he suggested

1:10:17that we should go before the uh zoning

1:10:20board of appeals for a special permit to

1:10:22to to uh legalize uh this this structure

1:10:25as a as a as a five unit building. So

1:10:28this is where we are. Um you know we do

1:10:30have a I don't know if you had a chance

1:10:32to take a look at the floor plans.

1:10:34There's also a plot plan which shows

1:10:36that there is adequate parking um as

1:10:38required by the town of Wellington. Um I

1:10:42did have the the opportunity um to

1:10:46uh speak to Mr. Steven Allessie who was

1:10:49the uh the previous owner

1:10:52from 1999 until August of this year. and

1:10:55by he has been doing a lot of traveling

1:10:58but by virtue of an email he gave me

1:11:00permission um uh to read a uh I guess a

1:11:04letter if I could read that uh Mr.

1:11:06Chairman.

1:11:07>> Sure. Um and if if it's not already in

1:11:10the record, if you could also just uh

1:11:11forward a copy to Miss Rston to include

1:11:14in the record.

1:11:14>> Okay. And I'll forward you a copy of the

1:11:16email that he sent that he you know is

1:11:18in agreement with what I'm about to say.

1:11:20uh to whom it may be concerned. I own

1:11:22the property at 51 to 53 Park Street in

1:11:25Arlington, Massachusetts from May 6th,

1:11:271999 through August 10th, 2026.

1:11:31When I purchased it, the building had

1:11:33five units, two on the first floor, two

1:11:36on the second floor in the front portion

1:11:37of the building along with the fifth

1:11:39singlestory unit at the rear. Apart from

1:11:42you, routine maintenance, no major

1:11:45interior alterations were made during my

1:11:47ownership. The previous owner also told

1:11:50me that an addition had been built in

1:11:52the late 1980s and used as the fifth

1:11:55unit. Sincerely, um, Stephen L. Allesie,

1:11:59who like I said was the owner, um, you

1:12:02know, during that time period. So, so

1:12:04here we are, um, asking the board to

1:12:07legalize this. And again, we want to

1:12:09reiterate that uh, you know, the intent

1:12:11here is to do is not to do any major

1:12:13renovation. obviously just some updating

1:12:16and so forth and then sell these as five

1:12:17indivi individual condominiums and so um

1:12:22in filing with the application

1:12:24you know there's a there's a few points

1:12:26I want to bring up and that you know and

1:12:28address some of the concerns uh that are

1:12:31that are uh as far in the application

1:12:34and uh number one would be you know the

1:12:36granting of this special per would not

1:12:38overload u the municipal system such as

1:12:41water sewer and drain because obviously

1:12:43is, you know, if you add the um the

1:12:46total years since this addition has been

1:12:49built, it's been 38 years. All right. Um

1:12:51it would have no impact on on pedestrian

1:12:54safety. Um [clears throat] and um it

1:12:58would not impair the uh integrity of the

1:13:01neighborhood, not nor would it be

1:13:02detrimental. Uh and in terms of the use

1:13:06um there is adjacent to this uh to this

1:13:10property on the south side on the right

1:13:11side a seven unit building. So um it

1:13:15there already is a multi

1:13:17units that are greater than two family

1:13:19in this area as well. So, um, with that,

1:13:23you know, we would, um, respectfully

1:13:26request that the board, um, grant a

1:13:28special permit to legalize this, um,

1:13:32structure as a five unit building and

1:13:35certainly be would entertain any

1:13:37questions the board or anyone might

1:13:39have.

1:13:40>> Thank you, Mr. Cameron. Um, so I'm going

1:13:43to go ahead and share some of those

1:13:44documents that he had just referenced.

1:13:49>> Mr. Mr. Chairman.

1:13:50>> Yes, Mr. Hanland.

1:13:52>> Just wondering [clears throat]

1:13:53um this is such an unusual

1:13:57situation really. Um but my

1:14:00understanding just just to orient us in

1:14:03terms of what the bylaw requires. My

1:14:06understanding is that there are two

1:14:08potentially applicable pro two

1:14:11[clears throat] applicable provisions.

1:14:13One is in 8.1A

1:14:16which says pre-existing non-conforming

1:14:19structures or uses may be extended or

1:14:21altered provided that no extension or

1:14:24alteration shall be permitted unless

1:14:26there is a finding by the board of

1:14:27appeals that such change extension or

1:14:30alteration shall not be substantially

1:14:32more detrimental than the existing

1:14:34non-conforming structure or use to the

1:14:36neighborhood. And then if you go down to

1:14:408.1.2b 2B. It says any non-conforming

1:14:44principal use of a structure shall not

1:14:47be extended. However, any non-conforming

1:14:50use of a structure may be changed to

1:14:51another non-conforming use by special

1:14:54permit, provided that the board of

1:14:56appeals finds that the new use is not a

1:14:58substantially different use and not more

1:15:01detrimental to the neighborhood than the

1:15:03existing use. And when I read those two

1:15:06things together, it seems to me that

1:15:08that

1:15:10without being absolutely certain, but in

1:15:13general, it looks to me as if the tests

1:15:15that we that those are the applicable

1:15:17bylaw, applicable provisions of the

1:15:19bylaw, and both of them come back to the

1:15:22substantially more detrimental

1:15:24uh tests. So, that's what we're looking

1:15:26at. And I wonder if the applicant agrees

1:15:28with that with that view,

1:15:31>> Mr. Cameron.

1:15:33Um I I believe so. Was that was that a

1:15:37that a question as to whether

1:15:39>> so yeah so basically similar to the to

1:15:42the prior hearing this is because this

1:15:44is a question about uh approving a a

1:15:46non-conforming use rather than this

1:15:49being a standard special permit. Um this

1:15:52is actually a it's a determination that

1:15:55whatever is being proposed is not

1:15:57substantially more detrimental and that

1:15:58that's the level of review that's

1:16:01required. And so we're just confirming

1:16:03with you that that's your understanding.

1:16:06>> Yes.

1:16:07>> Okay.

1:16:09Is there anything further, Mr. Hanland?

1:16:11>> Nope. That I just wanted to sort of

1:16:13focus where we were. So we Okay.

1:16:15>> to make the questions a little bit I

1:16:17mean to make it a little clear where we

1:16:18had to go.

1:16:19>> Okay.

1:16:22Okay. So this uh plan here, this is the

1:16:27uh proposed site plan at the time of the

1:16:29addition. Uh so it gives the the outline

1:16:33of what was proposed to be built at that

1:16:35time.

1:16:37Um this is the current site plan. So you

1:16:39can see the similar shape of the

1:16:41addition and the existing building. Um

1:16:44this building does have uh driveways to

1:16:47both sides. Um

1:16:51and the there are shown on here seven uh

1:16:55parking spaces. Um where the Mr.

1:16:59Cameron, where this is proposed to be um

1:17:03a condominium, are the spaces

1:17:07going to be specifically assigned to the

1:17:09residents? How what is the proposal for

1:17:11that?

1:17:12>> Yeah. Yes, they would be. So, you would

1:17:14um you know, you we obviously have five

1:17:19uh uh rows, if you will. So, three three

1:17:22of the units would get one space and

1:17:24then two of the units would would get

1:17:26two spaces each. Okay. The reason I ask

1:17:30is just that looking at the at the

1:17:33parking um

1:17:35through uh through like Google Street

1:17:38View, it the current parking looks more

1:17:41like it's sort of angled parking facing

1:17:43the properties immediately to the to the

1:17:45south here. And I just wanted to confirm

1:17:48that that was not the intended because

1:17:50there's c there's not enough space to

1:17:52accommodate parking in that manner. So I

1:17:54just wanted to make sure that this was

1:17:56the what was intended.

1:17:58That is what is intended. Yes. Okay.

1:18:00That's as shown in the on this on the

1:18:02plot plan.

1:18:03>> Okay. Um are there any exterior

1:18:06improvements that are proposed for this

1:18:09or is it really all just interior?

1:18:11>> Just all interior and and nothing major

1:18:14on the interior. No structural moving or

1:18:16walls that you know the the bathrooms

1:18:18and kitchens could use some updating,

1:18:20some painting. Uh the floors are in

1:18:22really good shape. Uh hardwood floors.

1:18:24Um the rear unit of the unit in question

1:18:28um obviously either looks new or it is

1:18:30newer. Um really nothing to be done in

1:18:32that unit at all other maybe paint the

1:18:36walls.

1:18:37>> Okay.

1:18:39Um this is the the plan that the

1:18:43building inspector had referenced that

1:18:44indicates 4F that's a four family unit.

1:18:47So that was the the impetus for this

1:18:50action. Um and then there are some

1:18:53interior plans that were provided. Uh so

1:18:55first floor plan

1:18:58dividing up the middle. So the this is

1:19:01unit number two. This is unit number one

1:19:05and at the rear

1:19:07uh this is unit number three

1:19:10as at the first floor. And then on the

1:19:12upper floor again subdivided effectively

1:19:15down the middle. Um this is unit number

1:19:19five. unit number four. And then at the

1:19:23back there's a common hallway leading to

1:19:26the second means of egress with a

1:19:28laundry room in a common storage area.

1:19:33And then the last thing to share this is

1:19:35just the the seller the basement level.

1:19:38Um so showing the unfinished areas that

1:19:41are associated with the the four prop

1:19:44the four proposed units.

1:19:51Okay. Are there Go ahead. Stop the

1:19:54share. Are there any questions or

1:19:56comments regards to this application

1:19:58from members of the board? Members of

1:19:59the public, excuse me, members of the

1:20:01board first.

1:20:03>> Chairman,

1:20:04>> Mr. Dupont. So [clears throat] when I

1:20:08was looking at this, I was also looking

1:20:11at uh 8.1.1A

1:20:14and 8.12B

1:20:17uh as Mr. Hanland had just suggested.

1:20:20I I'm though trying to frame this in my

1:20:24mind as as far as what it is we're

1:20:28actually

1:20:29um being tasked with here. It strikes me

1:20:32that what we have is something that's

1:20:35currently a four family

1:20:38uh in a two family zone.

1:20:41>> Um and so you know and I want to say

1:20:45right off the bat I don't have any

1:20:46problem with the result of this. Uh it's

1:20:50a double lot for one thing and it's

1:20:52consistent with a property next door

1:20:54that has I don't know how many units

1:20:56maybe five or six uh to the one side.

1:21:01So, I don't think it's out of keeping

1:21:02with the neighborhood. I'm just a little

1:21:05puzzled as far as how we arrive at that

1:21:09result. Um

1:21:12because if what we're being asked to do

1:21:15is to essentially sanction the

1:21:18conversion of this formally from a four

1:21:21family to a five family, that seems to

1:21:25be quite a a a leap. Um,

1:21:30and when I read the language in 8.1A

1:21:35where it's pre-existing non-conforming

1:21:38structures or uses may be extended or

1:21:40altered.

1:21:42I mean, are we to look at that to say

1:21:45that the pre-existing nonconforming use

1:21:49as a four family

1:21:52is going to be extended to a five

1:21:55family?

1:21:56uh is that maybe one way of looking at

1:21:59it. Uh the in down in 8.1.2b

1:22:04um it says the uh principal use shall

1:22:07not be extended

1:22:09um although it may be changed to another

1:22:11non-conforming use. Are are we saying

1:22:15it's a for family non-conforming use and

1:22:18it can be um changed to another

1:22:21non-conforming use which is a five

1:22:23family non-conforming use. I feel like,

1:22:25you know, we're trying to sort of twist

1:22:28this in a way that comes uh to the

1:22:31outcome that's being uh desired or or or

1:22:36requested. And again, I don't have a

1:22:38problem with it. It's there. Um but I

1:22:41just don't know how we get there. And so

1:22:44interested to know what other members of

1:22:46the board

1:22:47>> think about this because I I think in

1:22:50some ways this seems more like a

1:22:53variance request although I'm not sure

1:22:55variance would also would would work. Um

1:22:59but I do want to be careful because I

1:23:01think we're in this transition period as

1:23:03we know from the change of all of the

1:23:05rules including those with regard to

1:23:08non-conforming uses and structures. And

1:23:11so I don't want to open up the

1:23:13floodgates to have a sort of a

1:23:16willy-nilly approach to well whatever

1:23:19changes are being sought are fine

1:23:21because you know we have this broad

1:23:22mandate to increase the number of

1:23:24housing units. So I'm sympathetic to the

1:23:28request. I just want to make sure that

1:23:30however we get there we get there in a

1:23:33manner that is supportable based on the

1:23:36language that we're working with in the

1:23:37bylaw.

1:23:39>> Okay. So my understanding the it from

1:23:43all appearances the four family is a

1:23:45non-conforming use but it's a use that

1:23:47is accepted by the town because it it's

1:23:49within the town's documentation at the

1:23:51building department. Um and as such

1:23:54because it's a building containing four

1:23:56or more dwelling units is considered a

1:23:58multif family dwelling. Um the proposed

1:24:02use is still as a multif family

1:24:04dwelling. It doesn't change that

1:24:06underlying use. It's just changing the

1:24:08intensity of that use. Um,

1:24:12and

1:24:14my my sense is that

1:24:18because it's because it's

1:24:20non-conforming, there are certain

1:24:22rights, certain vested rights that come

1:24:24along with that. Um, which certainly if

1:24:27this was a two family and if they were

1:24:29requesting five units on it, that would

1:24:32be a very very different matter. Um and

1:24:34even if it was a two family and they

1:24:35were requesting to go to a three family,

1:24:37it' be a very different matter because

1:24:38it would no longer um it would be

1:24:41changing from conforming to

1:24:42non-conforming in which case a variance

1:24:45would absolutely be required. Um where

1:24:48this is already a non-conforming use and

1:24:50they're not really changing to a

1:24:52different use, but it's more changing of

1:24:54the intensity of the use. I think that's

1:24:57why it's considered an extension of a

1:24:59non-conforming use because it's the four

1:25:02units is being extended technically to a

1:25:04fifth unit. Um

1:25:09just sort of as an aside there it's a

1:25:12common strangeness in the town that the

1:25:15building department and the assessor's

1:25:16department have different

1:25:17interpretations on the number of units

1:25:19that exist in various buildings. Um

1:25:23certainly the assessor's department and

1:25:25I unfortunately the it's difficult to

1:25:27determine at what point the assessor's

1:25:28department decided there were five units

1:25:30as opposed to only four but the

1:25:32assessors department has been well aware

1:25:34of this being a a five-unit building and

1:25:36has been taxing it appropriately. Um and

1:25:39so this is whereas the building

1:25:41department was unaware that it was five

1:25:43units. Um and as Mr. Cameron had noted,

1:25:45you know, we don't know the specifics of

1:25:47some of the building permit as to

1:25:49whether it was permitted to be a

1:25:50separate unit or if it was permitted to

1:25:53be additional space for all four units

1:25:55and at some point was converted to being

1:25:57a a separate unit. Um, but I think at

1:26:01this point in time it it is functioning

1:26:03as a multif family dwelling. It will

1:26:05continue to be a as four units and it

1:26:08will be ai a multif family dwelling at

1:26:10five units. It's just a more um

1:26:14expansive use of the same use that's

1:26:18non-conforming.

1:26:20>> So, one final question then. So, from

1:26:22the uh beginning when this was

1:26:25constructed, it has always had bedrooms

1:26:28and kitchen and bathroom as far as we

1:26:31know. So, it's been a living unit. It

1:26:34hasn't just been an additional space

1:26:36that was used for something else

1:26:39>> as best as we know. And with the letter

1:26:41that was uh read by Mr. Cameron, it

1:26:43sounds like it has been such at least

1:26:46for the last 10 years

1:26:49um and under section 7 under chapter 48,

1:26:53any um non-approved

1:26:57change to a a structure is considered

1:27:00non-conforming after a period of 10

1:27:02years.

1:27:03>> Right.

1:27:05>> Okay. Thank you.

1:27:07>> Thank you. Um

1:27:10just briefly going through the uh the

1:27:13dimensional parking information that was

1:27:14provided by the applicant. There were

1:27:15very there were a few nonconformities

1:27:18for the structure itself which I just

1:27:19want to make sure um we note. Uh one is

1:27:22that the minimum front yard which is

1:27:25supposed to be 20 ft in this district is

1:27:27only 2.6 ft. So it's very close on the

1:27:29front. Um the maximum height is noted to

1:27:34be 38.1 feet where the maximum for the

1:27:36district is 35 feet. Um

1:27:41and then it was also noted that the

1:27:44usable open space is um 801 square ft

1:27:50which would mean the uh usable open

1:27:53space is only 12.4%.

1:27:55Um, I think that number might actually

1:27:57be higher than there may be more usable

1:28:00open space and that is specifically

1:28:02identified here, but it's not really

1:28:04because we're not changing the gross

1:28:06floor area of the building at all. It's

1:28:07not really affecting um the way the

1:28:10board would review the application. But

1:28:13I would just note that to the to

1:28:15[snorts] the applicant that I I think

1:28:16you have more usable open space than you

1:28:18think you do.

1:28:20Um, are there any other questions or

1:28:23comments from the board at this time?

1:28:29Seeing none, I'm going to go ahead and

1:28:31open this hearing for public comment.

1:28:33Again, public comments taken as it

1:28:35relates to the matter at hand should be

1:28:36directed to the board for the purpose of

1:28:37informing its decision. Members of the

1:28:39public are granted time to ask questions

1:28:41and make comments. Those wishing to

1:28:43address the board should raise the hand

1:28:44using the button on the react tab in the

1:28:46Zoom application. Those calling in by

1:28:47phone, please dial star 9 to indicate

1:28:49you'd like to speak. Called upon that

1:28:50you'll be called upon by the chair as to

1:28:52give your name and address for the

1:28:53record. Given time for your questions

1:28:54and comments. All questions are to be

1:28:56addressed through the chair. And once

1:28:58all questions and comments have been

1:28:59addressed, the comment period will be

1:29:01closed. So with that, are there any

1:29:03members of the public who would like to

1:29:04address this application? Um again, this

1:29:07is docket 391451-53

1:29:10Park Street.

1:29:16I see one hand raised. We have Mr.

1:29:18Moore.

1:29:19>> Yes. Thank you, Mr. Chair. Steve Moore,

1:29:21Pedmont Street. Um, I wasn't going to

1:29:23speak on this, but I just wanted to

1:29:25thank the chair for the context that he

1:29:28provided just now because it helps

1:29:30people like me who are not as

1:29:31well-versed in how this stuff works as

1:29:34uh history unfolds relative to the rules

1:29:37that are supposed to guide the way

1:29:40things are now. Um, and also I I wanted

1:29:43to uh thank Mr. Dupont. I wanted to

1:29:46applaud his thoughtfulness and care in

1:29:49in proceeding in this sort of area

1:29:52because I agreed that he's correct that

1:29:54there's a lot of change going on and one

1:29:57should step carefully when it comes to

1:29:59making those sorts of determinations and

1:30:01changes. So, I just wanted to thank him

1:30:04for that. Thank you, Mr. Chairman.

1:30:05>> Thank you, Mr. Moore.

1:30:08Are there any other members of the

1:30:09public who would like to address this

1:30:11application?

1:30:15Seeing none, I'm going to go ahead and

1:30:16close the public comment period for this

1:30:18application. Um,

1:30:21so what the board has before us, um,

1:30:23this is an existing, uh, multif family

1:30:26dwelling of four that is designated as

1:30:28four units by the inspectional services

1:30:30department, but in reality has five

1:30:32units. Um, as confirmed in the

1:30:35assessor's report, uh, the applicant is

1:30:37before us because, uh, the current owner

1:30:40of the property is seeking to make

1:30:42improvements to the property and the

1:30:43building inspector has requested the

1:30:45owner to come back before to come to the

1:30:47board for, um, a determination as to

1:30:51whether or not the fifth unit um, can be

1:30:54appropriately incorporated and and used

1:30:57on the property. Um, as the board has

1:31:01identified, this is uh something that

1:31:03because it's a change from one

1:31:04non-conforming use to to was it was in

1:31:08effect an extension of the existing

1:31:09non-conforming use. This is something

1:31:11that falls under section 811A of the

1:31:13zoning bylaw and can be approved by the

1:31:16board with a finding that the uh

1:31:19proposed condition is not substantially

1:31:20more detrimental than the current

1:31:23condition. Um, and the

1:31:28the way that the board typically

1:31:30addresses this is to use the uh required

1:31:33sum findings under section 333 uh which

1:31:38are uh the subsidiary findings that are

1:31:40required for a special permit. In this

1:31:42case, we are not leading towards the

1:31:44determination of um whether the proposed

1:31:48use will outweigh its beneficial

1:31:50impacts, which is the test for a special

1:31:51permit, but we are rather using the the

1:31:54test for um under section 811A, which is

1:31:58that the proposed shall not be

1:32:01substantially more detrimental than the

1:32:03existing.

1:32:04Um

1:32:06so with that um the applicant has

1:32:08already addressed some of the these uh

1:32:11subsidiary findings. Uh the first would

1:32:13is that the requested use is allowed or

1:32:15allowed by special permit. Um as we

1:32:17noted that under section 811A this is an

1:32:20extension of an existing non-conforming

1:32:22use and that's something that the board

1:32:23can act upon. Uh the second is the

1:32:26requested use is essential or desirable

1:32:28to the public convenience or welfare. Um

1:32:31the addition of housing in Arlington is

1:32:35uh something that we are in need of.

1:32:36This is a kind of a unique situation

1:32:38because it's more the preservation of

1:32:39the existing housing uh and not

1:32:42requiring the removal of a unit. Um but

1:32:46in either case, it's uh desirable to

1:32:49have the the fifth unit, especially

1:32:51where the the neighborhood has been um

1:32:56aware of this unit for I believe as the

1:32:58applicant said in excess of 20 years. So

1:33:00it's uh something that will not create a

1:33:04an issue. Uh the requested use will not

1:33:06create undue traffic congestion or

1:33:08impair pedestrian safety. There should

1:33:09be no change in either uh due to the

1:33:13there really being no change in the the

1:33:15number of units within the building. Uh

1:33:19the requested use will not overload any

1:33:21public system. As the applicant noted,

1:33:23there's no changes to uh any of the

1:33:26public systems uh as it's all been in

1:33:29this condition for a period of time. Uh

1:33:32the next is special regulations for the

1:33:33requested user fulfilled. Uh there are

1:33:35no specific uh special regulations uh

1:33:38for this use. The requested use will not

1:33:41impair the character or integrity of the

1:33:42district. Uh there will be no outward

1:33:44change and effectively no inward change

1:33:47of the of the building by acknowledging

1:33:49the existence of the fifth unit. Uh the

1:33:52requested use will not be detrimental to

1:33:54public health or welfare. um it should

1:33:58not have any discernable impact to uh to

1:34:00the neighborhood at all by the

1:34:02acknowledgement of the fifth unit and

1:34:04the requested use will not cause an

1:34:06excess of use detrimental to the

1:34:07neighborhood. Um

1:34:11this is uh it's kind of unusual in a an

1:34:14R2 to have multif family dwellings. As

1:34:16the applicant noted, there is another

1:34:18multif family dwelling which might

1:34:19actually be a townhouse dwelling next

1:34:21door. I can't quite remember how it's

1:34:23set up. Um, but Mr. Hanland could let me

1:34:26know. Is a resident nearby.

1:34:29[laughter]

1:34:31>> Um, but it should not uh this use will

1:34:35not be an excess that would in all be

1:34:37detrimental to the neighborhood.

1:34:39>> Mr. Chairman,

1:34:40>> Mr. failing.

1:34:41>> Uh so about 120 years ago, uh there was

1:34:46a market garden on the other side on

1:34:48this side of Park Street that extended

1:34:50down towards Rosson Street and then

1:34:52beyond there to what is now Bait Street.

1:34:55And the housing that was built upon this

1:34:57side of Park Street was originally built

1:34:59and the long condos that with that next

1:35:03to this parcel were built as worker

1:35:05housing for the market gardens. That's

1:35:07where people who were employed by the

1:35:09market garden um were provided a place

1:35:12to live. And that is true of the houses

1:35:15on Park Street Extension um which at the

1:35:18time was called Exodus Street Extension.

1:35:20So when all of that was built uh it was

1:35:23built at a higher density than than what

1:35:26came to be true later on and was true on

1:35:28the other side of the street.

1:35:30>> Fantastic. Thank you for that.

1:35:36Um

1:35:38so with those uh subsidiary findings I

1:35:41think that the I would re recommend that

1:35:44the board uh is able to find that the

1:35:48alteration of the existing structure or

1:35:50use shall not be substantially more

1:35:52detrimental than the existing

1:35:53non-conforming structure or use to the

1:35:55neighborhood. Um,

1:35:58in support of that, uh, there are three

1:36:02standard conditions, uh, that were read

1:36:03into the record on the prior hearing.

1:36:05So, I will wave reading them again, but

1:36:07I would recommend those three. Um,

1:36:11the applicant had noted that the parking

1:36:14uh shall conform to the provided site

1:36:16plan.

1:36:18was trying to decide if that should be a

1:36:20a condition or not, but I think that the

1:36:23the applicant attesting to that and the

1:36:25hearing is sufficient to um to cover

1:36:29that situation. Are there any additional

1:36:33conditions that members of the board

1:36:34feel would be appropriate for this uh

1:36:37request?

1:36:42Seeing none, I would ask Mr. Hanland, if

1:36:46you would be willing to direct the uh

1:36:48drafting of a decision in favor of

1:36:51approval.

1:36:52>> I would, Mr. Chairman.

1:36:54>> Thank you for that. Um, are there any

1:36:58last questions or comments in relation

1:36:59to this application from the board?

1:37:03Seeing none, I will move that the zoning

1:37:04board of appeals for the town of

1:37:06Arlington close the public hearing for

1:37:07dock at 391453 Park Street.

1:37:12>> Second.

1:37:12>> Thank you, Mr. Handlin.

1:37:14So, as I noted on the prior hearing, uh

1:37:16the board will uh prepare a draft

1:37:18decision um that will be voted upon at

1:37:21our subsequent meeting whose date is

1:37:26October 27th.

1:37:29So, a vote of the board to close this

1:37:31public hearing. Mr. Dupont,

1:37:33>> yes.

1:37:34>> Mr. Hanland.

1:37:38>> Oh, we lost Mr. Hanland.

1:37:40Mr. Holly,

1:37:42>> yes.

1:37:42>> Mr. Blank.

1:37:44>> Yes.

1:37:45>> Uh Mr. Rosenberg is not present. Uh and

1:37:48the chair votes yes. Um

1:37:52I will go ahead and close this public

1:37:54hearing and just note for the record

1:37:56that Mr. Hanland is present this evening

1:37:58but just not voting. Um [clears throat]

1:38:01and with that um we are both on this

1:38:05item. So um thank you Mr. Cameron for

1:38:09appearing before us this evening.

1:38:11>> Okay. Thank you Mr. Chairman. Thank you

1:38:13uh to the rest of the board. Appreciate

1:38:15it. Have a good evening.

1:38:16>> Very welcome.

1:38:17>> Um so next we would usually move on

1:38:20hopefully to an open session, but

1:38:23unfortunately it's not on our agenda

1:38:24this evening. Um

1:38:27so we won't open that up. But I would

1:38:29just note um

1:38:32uh

1:38:34uh to the to the board. So um the board

1:38:37works with a variety of of lawyers uh

1:38:40for applicants over the years. Um, and I

1:38:44just wanted to note uh the passing of uh

1:38:47Baba Nessie who had appeared before this

1:38:49board numerous times um going back

1:38:52decades from my understanding far before

1:38:54I came along. Um it was a was a a great

1:38:59servant to the to the town and really

1:39:01helpful in terms of uh crafting some of

1:39:03the the zoning uh decisions and

1:39:06discussions that happened over time. So

1:39:09um yeah, so Mr. Nessie passed away

1:39:13uh earlier this week uh and the his

1:39:16obituary is available online. U there's

1:39:20uh calling hours coming up. I just

1:39:21wanted to note that for the for those

1:39:24who are involved in zoning in town that

1:39:26um that he's you know was a prominent

1:39:28figure that we all knew and we uh give

1:39:31our condolences to his family.

1:39:34>> Mr. Chairman,

1:39:35>> Mr. Hanland,

1:39:36>> just wanted to underscore there was

1:39:39there came a time when we were

1:39:41attempting to figure out what the status

1:39:43of of certain property was way back in

1:39:46the future, much more than 20 years or

1:39:4940 years. Um, and Mr. Enessie said that

1:39:53that he began practicing before this

1:39:55board in 1965, I believe.

1:39:58>> Wow.

1:40:00>> [laughter]

1:40:01>> and I was still in college then just to

1:40:11so the next uh meetings of our board we

1:40:13are meeting on October 27th. Uh we'll

1:40:16have a couple of decisions to review at

1:40:18that time and a set of minutes. Uh Miss

1:40:21Rston, are there any other items on our

1:40:23agenda for the 27th?

1:40:26I have two applications that are just

1:40:28waiting for a few dockets documents and

1:40:31if they get them in then we'll have two

1:40:33more for the 27th.

1:40:36>> Great.

1:40:38>> M Mr. Chairman,

1:40:39>> Mr. Hanland,

1:40:40>> um I just wanted to apologize to the

1:40:42board for I had to step away for a

1:40:43moment and I had my uh I had audio

1:40:47blocked and I wasn't able to reach over

1:40:50and fix that in time to vote on that

1:40:53last uh closing. So I apologize for

1:40:55that.

1:40:56>> No worries. No worries. We we did note

1:40:59that you were present. So that uh

1:41:01>> I was present in spirit.

1:41:03>> Absolutely.

1:41:06Okay. So with nothing further this

1:41:09evening, I would like to thank you all

1:41:11for your participation in tonight's

1:41:12meeting of the Arlington Zone Board of

1:41:13Appeals. I appreciate everyone's

1:41:15patience throughout the meeting. I'd

1:41:16especially like to thank Colleen Rston

1:41:18and Mike Champa for their assistance in

1:41:20preparing for and hosting our online

1:41:22meeting. Please note the purpose of the

1:41:24board's recording of the meeting is to

1:41:25ensure the creation of an accurate

1:41:26record of its proceedings. It's our

1:41:28understanding the recording made by ACMI

1:41:30will be available on demand at acmi.tv

1:41:32within the coming days. Arlington

1:41:34Community Media is dedicated to

1:41:36providing an electronic forum for the

1:41:37free exchange of information and ideas

1:41:38which reflect the talent, skills,

1:41:40interests, concerns, and diversity of

1:41:41the Arlington community. Please visit

1:41:43acmi.tv to learn how to support this

1:41:45valuable public resource. If anyone has

1:41:48comments or recommendations, please send

1:41:49them via email to zbagtown. lington.mma.

1:41:53us. That email address is also listed on

1:41:55the zoning board of appeals website. And

1:41:57so to conclude tonight's meeting, I

1:41:58would ask for a motion to adjurnn.

1:42:00>> So moved, Mr. Chairman.

1:42:01>> Mr. Second. Thank you, Mr. Dupont.

1:42:06So roll call vote to the board. Mr.

1:42:09Dupont,

1:42:09>> yes.

1:42:10>> Mr. Hanland,

1:42:11>> yes.

1:42:12>> Mr. Holly,

1:42:13>> yes.

1:42:14>> Mr. Leblanc,

1:42:15>> yes.

1:42:16>> And the chair votes yes. The board is

1:42:18adjourned. Thank you all so very much.

1:42:20>> Good night, everyone. Thank you. Good

1:42:21night everyone. See you in a couple

1:42:23weeks.

1:42:23>> Good night everyone.

1:42:23>> Good night.

1:42:25[music]

1:42:31[music]