May 15 and I will call the Zoning Board of appears meeting order um with me tonight I have Rob Scott Sean Zan John berys H Brian salsy kathern how and myself on the first and the third application um Brian salesy will not be voting on the second application nine Bennett Brian will be voting because I will be recusing myself and and removing myself to the audience and Catherine how will leave that [Music] section so the first item on the agenda is 35 School Street I will open the public hearing for the application of James Gad for a special permit under sections 5.4 for 7.2 and 12.5 with the zoning bylaw and other relief as may be necessary to extend the current encroachment into the setbacks and the variance under sections 5.4 and 12.3.3 of the zoning bylaw and other relief as may be necessary for excess coverage by structures and excess total coverage by structures and impervious surfaces at 35 School Street assessor map number 51 lot number five in District D1 f with town clerk on March 21st 2024 Mr gtis are you going to present the application um can you hear me yes uh Veronica is here and I think I'm Gonna Leave the important stuff to Veronica okay Veronica could you just give us your name and your um relationship to the application my name is Veronica Hobson and my um business is tap rot design I'm the designer for the project at 35 School Street and I can can I share my screen and I can walk everyone through it second you should be all set okay try that again perfect okay so the the property is on the corner of School Street and Brook so school is a a fjor fairly major thoroughfare um in that neighborhood Brook Street is a oneway um turning off of school and um yeah heading where are we East the this is it from the corner here this is the um the existing house today the proposal before the board is to seek a special permit to demolish this structure along with the accessory structures and to construct a new um two family dwelling on this lot that would front Brook Street so the side street this house um which purchased by Jim early um late last year and it was um unfortunately the house is is in great disrepair it was an unfortunate situation I think it was an unfortunate hoarding situation that went on there and the the home as it currently stands is beyond um Salvage and in fact if I take you down um if I take you down Brook Street this um garage shed has already been removed because it was falling in so as a as a safety precaution um and a liability issue since it sits right on the property line uh this section of the prop of the uh structure has already been removed but what we are proposing to do is to take the entire structure down and to construct a two family this is this property is in the D1 residential district it is uh permissible use for this District um it's not inconsistent with other neighboring properties in fact the property right next door on um three Brook Street so this is 35 school right here on the corner this property is already under construction with a two um a two family structure going in you can see as we move down um down Brook and Desmond and North Street and even down School Street we have several um um two family and then even multif family uh structures throughout this neighborhood um the let me take you back sorry I'm going to take you to a Gail survey here so the light blue lines you can see that's the existing structure this is the existing house here with wooden deck and steps that reach down to the property line towards School Street there's a covered porch and a deck off the back that you can see back here and then that is the shed that is almost on the property line that's been removed but um was there at the time of survey the existing structure currently exceeds the front yard setback right at this corner by five and a half feet it exceeds the um the sidey yard setback I think this is the sidey yard setback by 9.4 feet at its tightest corner and then it does move away a little bit where 3.1 feet off um at the front corner and the existing shed was about maybe six inches off of that property line so that also um was over the setback their proposed structure pulls away from the corner just a little bit so we would be um exceeding the front setback by um five feet we've pulled the rear line away from the uh the property line so we would be five feet off of that side Lot line we're conforming here and we're conforming for most of this just in this just it's just this area in that front setback along Brook and school the um going to show you the plan so what we are proposing to do is to construct two modest two family or um a two family home with each unit being a modest 1643 square feet of um living space you can see each unit is a mirror of the other we have an open floor plan on the first floor just up a few steps with um an open living space dining area kitchen and an entry a little half bath and a little mudroom uh pass through to the onecar garage each unit would have a parking space out in front of that garage you go up the stairs and each unit has um three bedrooms and a small office space here and there are two full baths on that upper level the attic is accessible by a um pull down stair this is the new front elevation so we would front this house along Brook Street rather than School Street we have that's where we have the longer um reach with the orientation of the lot it also allows the traffic um not to be the cars not to be backing out onto uh more major road and rather onto this um kind of tertiary Road of Brook with minimizing any kind of traffic disruption along School Street the architecture of the um the structure is taken from the surrounding homes the scale the the material and the uh the language is all taken from homes that are in the area and just to give you a sense of um context here there with sorry keep getting that menu popping up so the property that we're talking about is right here on the corner so this is Brook this is school this is the abing property um and we are just beyond these trees right here you can see that the neighborhood has a mix of Aesthetics but most of these homes are two-story um kind of a colonial es type of um home some of them are older some of them are you know newer some are in disrepair we're the intention is that the architecture here Blends in with the neighborhood the direction of the neighborhood the garage this middle portion is set back significantly so really when you look at the house on the bias it's these two pieces that come forward kind of creating the illusion of two separate structures and then it steps back and you can see how far it steps back here with that light dash line with the garage um kind kind of really push back and we would change the material there to kind of further create a visual break between the two structures we were trying to avoid having this look too large and even from the side this would be the elevation viewed from um School Street we're keeping the proportion of this quite small mean we're doing that for a couple of reasons we're doing that to keep it um in proportion with the existing and um and the existing homes in the area but also the homes that are currently under construction we're also doing this because we we realize that we're working with a small lot and so we're trying to minimize the footprint of the house as much as possible um but yet still create to you know create units that that feel very livable for a young family this would be the elevation um along the back so if I come back to um the Locus it is right here it's the elevation that is between 35 School Street and two Desmond AV and again two Desmond is this structure right here so it already is quite long and we would be backing up to that but this is also the elevation that we're pulling away from the lot line um by five feet even though it's getting longer the current house is is within six inches of um of the lot line this one now gives us 5et to move around the the structure for maintenance construction without violating um lot lines this would be the um the opposite elevation and this is now this elevation between 35 School Street and um three Brook Street and that has um the full 10- foot setback plus plus a few inches between this last elevation and um and that side Lot line so the the driving force of let me just go here the driving force um for this project was to you know design something that was consistent with the neighborhood and that the the direction that the neighborhood is going in in there are as I mentioned earlier there are many many two families um on this on both of these streets Brook and school and then all of the neighboring streets it is within a half a mile of the commuter rail system this is a a great neighborhood to take advantage of that um and I think that's probably it I mean I'm happy to answer I'm sure you have questions so I'm happy to answer any questions that you have but I think that that kind of gives you a good sense of of what where we'd like to head with this let me ask members of the board if they have questions John uh I guess one question is is the plan to have this as a long-term hold or is it to to make it into two condos and then sell them I the the home well Jim has the intention of holding on to one of these units um and then being able to um I believe sell I think I think maybe this is a condo situation Jim can probably answer that better than I can but his intention is to hold on to to one for his own personal use and the um the sale of or the rent generated by the ab budding unit obviously helps um the economics of of you know not selling and keeping the other unit for himself that's correct guys um I I think I'm going to take the one on School Street and I don't know about selling or rent the other unit yet I I I I don't I just don't know the answer to that yet thank you John you have any question no I don't Rob no questions not right now uh no I'm just looking at the uh the cious uh coverage there well well exceeds the uh the allowable there and the coverage by structures also does very concern with the uh theist I that subject to a lot of fting down there or that's the only concern I have at this point can I speak to that briefly please yes please we need you to demonstrate a hardship so Jim and I have have discussed um the impervious um surface and you know we know we're we know we're super close with the with the um the structure coverage but the impervious um surface we talked about the desire to do a I know we have to take out the um driveway by default but that driveway could be a perious surface as would the walkways from the um from each of these porches to the roadway which would help that that percentage that number um so we did talk about kind of foregoing an asphalt type of of drive and doing something that would allow the water to seat through instead um are is there space for cars to park between the garage and Brook Street there are there are let me uh go back to the Locust map um there so we size this to accommodate a vehicle in front of each which is one of the main actually it is the main driver as to where this structure sits relative to this lot line was to make sure that we could in fact fit a car um outside of each of these um the of each of the garages and the garage itself we also kept a fairly minimum depth um I don't know if it's noted on here but it's only 20 feet front to back so it's not 22 24 we kept it really at a minimum to maximize the amount of clearance we have in front of each garage Bay now according to the information in the application the coverage by structures is 45.9% or 40% is allowed um what hardship is there with respect that would require a variance so what hardship is is with respect to the size of the structure well I mean I think that really speaks to the floor plan itself in the first floor um we really are working with a very efficient and tight floor plan um we're also trying to make this livable so even though this I'm I'm not showing Furniture in the floor plans here which would probably help what I'm explain what I'm trying to explain now um these spaces really are minimally sized to accommodate Furniture I mean there's there is no they we're really driven by the lot size the I mean the lot size I know is not necessarily a hardship but that really is the driver we have created a a small footprint for a full three-bedroom home um we have haven't put any extra space on the first floor so everything is going upstairs um but we really have whittel this down to you can even see the the width by the front door we' whittel down all of the spaces as much as we can but still made a livable first floor plan any more questions from the board before I turn it over questions um I'm not sure that I really understood so you're saying the hardship is the lot size well I think it's it's the the shape of the lot is also part of the problem okay um let me come back to Gail's survey um you know I get I get tripped up on what is technically the hardship I mean we have Whitted everything down the the the hardship really is trying to do a two family in this District where we are limited by the shape of the lot and the size of the lot and left with a pretty limited buildable lot area so I mean I think there is no way to further shrink this footprint um without tripping over into um an unmarketable um unit and an unlivable unit on the first floor um we are trying to keep the home consistent with those in the neighborhood so that that's also a strong consideration for this and you know think I mean I really do think that is the hardship is just we're limited by what this lot allows period for a two family so the hardship is you want to put two family there instead of a single family exactly exactly I mean I think that that benefits it suits the neighborhood I think it it benefits the town um and I think it makes this this project project a economically viable project for for Jim yes Sean I know looking at these plans and adding up the figures almost any any structure they put on this whether they do single family or not it's going to be within the setbacks yeah I agree that the setbacks are an issue my concern is the variance required with respect to coverage by structures this is this is in a zone that has the most lenient coverage requirements that we have in the town of Manchester and so I mean I think that the total coverage by structures an impervious surface they can fix with pervious materials on the driveway and the walkways but the coverage by structures you solve that by building a smaller house and I think that you can see I mean really if you look at the floor plan you can see this is not a generous this is not an overly generous house it's it really isn't it is where are we we we are um 24 by 30 that's a very small footprint for a home um we've kept the garage at a single car garage in a short wanted that there is no extra there is no extra space anywhere in this floor plan I mean we we you know we started with one thing and got the survey back and we Whitt down Whittle that plan down as much as we could Force you needed a calculator do that you would too yeah yeah I do I was history numbers don't I mean you could have a 24x 30 with a two-car garage and a single family home and be well within a conforming lot with no issues but but you'd have a single family home right so the hot sh appear is they want to put they want toiv it they want to put right well they want a two family home right and and the the challenge is is that a variance requires have a larger right sorry a variance requires that it's due to circumstances relating to the soil condition shape or topography the land structures um that affects this property not the other I don't see anything in the Varan parameters that reference a lot a smaller lot and this is a non-conforming LEL it's 436,000 which limits what you can do any more questions from the board or should I put it out to the public okay um there seem to be a number of people um I would ask that people speak only once and if you're going to say exactly what somebody else said I prefer that you say you agree with what they've said instead of completely restating um what they've said in order for it not to last all night um and um when you're recognized you'll need to state your name and address um so that we have um okay is there anybody in the room that would like to speak raise your hand yes sir in the doorway uh yeah Tom Henderson 23 Brook Street uh uh the first thing immediately I see about what's what's intended here is you're creating a tremendous safety hazard you're going to have people pulling out onto Brook Street at a corner of an intersection blindly appears there's two structures in front of the little part you're backing out pulling out there is a sidewalk the now as the main commuting grout to delivering kids to school and also kids who walk to school it's an extremely dangerous turn in onto that one way people coming down School Street from essic cut the corner turn in there blindly and people coming up School Street do the exact same thing and if you're coming out of a parking lot that is screened by two wings as I see the thing here you're coming out blindly across the sidewalk and into a one world street but people already travel very fast make that turn extremely fast and besides all the other things I think it's totally ridiculous putting this type of structure on a tiny little lot like that thank you thank you good job anybody else like to speak please raise your hand yes sir to gut 17 Desmond Avenue well in general I favor two family multif family houses and I wish that this were a feasable thing here because in favor of it against taking one family houses and turning them into I taking two family houses and turning them into a single family house in our community but with respect to this I wonder if the I was concerned about where these cars were going to go and think the previous gentleman I agree with the the safety thing uh I wonder if the party that's doing this has considered forget about the garage but the two Living Spaces that maybe do not have a a uh you know living space over the garage but put the two living spaces together make the two family house and just put a uh don't put a garage just put a gravel parking space uh out at the other end there one that moves the backup further away from the cor and would also give you he you know solve the problem of the house having taking up too much improv your space and they still have their two family house thank you um hold on just a moment uh Gail you have your hand raised sorry this is our administrator I need to find out if she's got a problem I was gonna ask you to take the um so I could see who was speaking if if you could take the that thank you that's what I was going to ask thank you okay that was it um I'm sorry yes ma'am uh I'm my name is g masiero seven Brook Street um there has just been so much construction um on Brook Street in Desmond dab and the the unit Welling that they put up there is huge it's I I can't believe that we let that pass I don't know where I I was but I didn't I don't know didn't seem to get that notice three Street three Brook Street right Pepper's old house they well that's the three Brook Street is not I know I know but it has nothing to do with this it's a two family also a condo I just don't know where all these cars are going to park we have a really tight tight issue with parking now and you put in a two families there at least two cars in every family if there's a husband and wife and then there's kids I mean in my house on seven and nine Brook Street there's five cars and we do have a driveway we park end to end in the winter but there's always a problem with parking out there and I mean you can only Park on one side of the street and it is always full I mean our other thing I guess you could park at Brook Street but you can't always park there either so my issue is the parking and and the size of the dwellings I just think it takes up too much space I I love I think it's a beautiful plan but I just think it's too big for the corner there and as Tom said coming around that corner even my nextd door neighbor coming out of her driveway I worry all the time because people come down that street I know it's 20 miles an hour but you know and you're breaking and turning a corner but they speed up down there and I just think it's very dangerous and to it's thickly settled anyway thank you and just to make clear on the parking situation the bylaw requires one and a half parking spaces per unit rounded up so a two family four spaces for a two family exceeds the minimum required of three um and that's what we would be looking at is what's in the bylaw I'm not saying that the bylaw is what people want but if they don't like the bylaw they need to CH the bylaw not expect the Z to change can I just ask another question um on these garages are they are they like there's one in the garage and then one behind it that's what she's saying so that's so there that's four four yeah and that's all on their property yes uh yes ma'am hi my name is Ellen KY I live at 37 School Street um and I hate to St in public um but anyway um we won't bite you okay um I've lived across from that property for a long time it's not supposed to be for two families it's just for one family if you could build a single family home I'm kind of worried he's going to rent or sell part of it and then Airbnb the other part of it because he lives in Beverly um it could be a beautiful property and the other thing too is the parking is so tight I we have to put out cones to trim the bushes because people come down the street and they take the qu typ I get hit almost by bicycles because people come down with their bicycles and then I got the dogs out and they almost take me in the dogs out and then the fire trucks come up and that's a different Corner entirely and I tried to explain that to him because at least I can see up School Street when I pull out of my driveway but I can't see down School Street so it's a 5050 but I'm in better shape than a lot of people on School Street um and there is no parking and everybody wants to park there and it's like it's freaking insane and it doesn't belong to be a two family it's supposed to be a one family it could be a beautiful home if somebody just used that properly right thank you yes sir I don't know if I'm repeating but I'm Sean Williams at eight Brook Street uh and I would only say that lot is 4230 square feet as I know you know and I know you know that three Brook Street is conforming so they have every right to build what they build there but this person bought this property knowing what the size of this lot was went in with full information there were 10 other biders on this property this they shouldn't get to build this this this was a single family home and that's how the lot was sized okay thank you anybody else in the room wish to speak or should I move to the zoom yes ma'am Kina Gates I'm the only person or family excuse me please street address and School Street next door to the place okay I have a question for this lady uh what is the side the the the frontage of School Street because I know it's 38 ft do they have 38t in their plan so we have here can I do a quick screen share again and I can sure that okay so this is School Street here you can see that the the frontage starts on school and then there's a radius that then extends down Brooks so we're 29.99 from this point to the very start of that radius and then we've got um what does it look like about 20 to 22 feet along the radius and then we have um another 85 point um 85 so there's there's oh sorry I'm looking at the wrong thing so we have another um 3135 and 45 so we have total Frontage we've got 12924 feet when 60 excuse me can you ask the lady I asked the front I think it's 29.99 29.9 plus a portion of the radi our home this this property was a mil originally for the owner of our house in the 1800s that's why it has the same foundations like our home our home had four acres five acres all these properties were divided you know when they sold they didn't care for boundaries they divide them where they felt like so anyway I saw the 38 fet on the front and they applied fortition which I knew from our planet was 38 seet there on and I thought how can they fit a structure if they live in the front and school and on the side on Brook they have to in the back if you take the right uh footage that property doesn't have much space except that much that opening there is our and it has all that backro which was the drying the goods and drying the vegetables and everything which we have as a family room it was St the old things inside and under it the owners before this gentleman bought it they were when we bought the house it was caved under they were taking the rocks or the foundation and we've got somebody to cement that's why it's a big cave under there we have to so um it's very close and living I we're the only ones in this case we own our house in 87 we it had six feet six trees this property between them and us it was they were 60 ft tall hemlocks and we had on the pepper side which is the other property we just heard earlier with 11 hamlock they were killed by the hamlock virus we're the only ones who planted trees we planted shrubs to replace what we lost these other two people who own them didn't care about anything so they didn't or they did have grass and planting the street and they did nice job but have I think is going to be evaporate but are we concerned about having we're not yet on the MBTA plan why are we they call this The Village when we mooved there we moved it because we bought the property because of what it was we like the trees we like the in the space now they're putting us in a cage on both sides with two family homes but they don't belong really the size of them it's not what they do with how many it's the size thank you Miss Gates I I think that this is a non-conforming lot and the property owner of a non-conforming lot is allowed to build on a non-conforming lot because there's an existing structure you about the carent C one that we were talking about the there isol 35 school there's a house on the property that the property owner has the right oh yes to rebuild the only thing before us is the coverage of the structures the coverage of the total structures in impervious surface and the special permit for the setbacks I ask where you don't deal with trees or anything like that we had a different kind of living and they are choking us now and we have a right as people who live there to have more than just what others other people buy them to sell compared to the ones who live there okay thank you but that would require a change in the bylaw that's not under the purview of the zba if if the citizens of Manchester want to change the bylaw to require a certain number of trees on each property they can do that if they can get it passed at a town meeting that's that's not our responsib I didn't say that they have to do this but I'm saying what happens and what happen it's relevant thank you so may I may I say continue for one second can I ask you through you that lady what is the backside that is going to be against us this the building how far away from us it's going to be okay so she's asking for the set back from the rear property line so the property line to two Desmond or the property line to three Brook to two Desmond to two Desmond it's F it'll be five feet off the property line the current house is is six uh is six inches off the property line so so because they're they're already in the setback they need a special permit to extend that non-conformity I have to add something here because I know I'm not going to be able to say anything El we have I have with me 37 letters from people who bombard Aller people to sell their homes for gas or whatever to build whatever these are all developers this gentleman I talked to he came to my home who bought it after I met him and he said to me that he was he was going to renovate it he lives in Bly Farms he does renov a to leave himself there is no way he ising to leave himself it's like everybody else findy them to sell they don't care what happens to the people who live there they don't and that's my problem thank and I'm sorry but that's not something before the z i no but that's what is happening yes I understand I have new houses on both side of me so I understand I don't mind the yes sir do two Desmond Avenue what is the acquired setback for construction back up 10 my object to being surrounded by a 5 foot re of building and I think that the to permit special permit required 5 ft should be utterly denied and not allowed to encroach any closer to our property than the existing building did at that particular point where the building used to be or will used to be thank you and six in the ambient of the whole neighborhood is being created in t District the amb I think you should look at and I think the guy should be filing as a developer regardless subject to the development this is in zone D1 which allows two family houses so so because you know anybody can file under the application um having heard from everyone in the room I believe um I will see if there's anybody on Zoom who would like to speak if so please raise your hand and speak and you'll be in zoom and you'll be recognized I do not see anybody raising their hand with that I will turn it back to the board all I get to say is I think it's a great design we voting no discussing discussing um no miss an opportunity to talk so so we have two things to consider one is a special permit which is we with respect to the front and the southide setbacks front setbacks and the front side sets and that has a standard that it will not be substantially more detrimental or injurious to the neighborhood in which it is located than the existing non-conforming strike and then we have the variance with for the coverage by structures and coverage by structures and impervious surface which requires a hardship owing to circumstances relating to the soil condition shape or technography of the world I mean is there really a hardship that's the question right right um I don't know if that question's been answered well that's what we have to determine is whether the applicant has demonstrated a hardship that's for us to DET I don't think so okay I and we've denied people before who come here you know to build investment properties but they can't really show a hardship to us so I I see this as a case like that I I like the design I agree though with with Brian that it is the wrong place for it I am concerned about the the driveway and you know there's about 10t of structure that blocks the driver's uh sight you know line of sight as they're backing out of the driveway um I think the massing is is large especially when you when you look at the the garage structure in the middle with the the level above um just looking at where the existing driveway is now it's over here now you're moving it you know closer to that curb and I'm driving down that street at least four or five times a day and you know with the kids going to school and all that so I know that street very well I'm always on high alert um going down that street there's a lot of kids there um so I would like to see um the the applicant go back to the drawing board and maybe propose something that I'm not adverse the the the concept of a two family but perhaps making that into one structure and then even you know thinking about a freestanding garage off where the existing driveways I don't know but and perhaps you've discussed this when you're going through various Concepts but I just think as it as it's proposed right now this this the scale is just too large so that's my opinion Sean I think with anything if you do anything with the two family here you're going to run into the the amount of footage don't exceed too much even if you combine both of those footprints on push the garage to the back or park into the there still um I think can I offer just one more thought on the um the question of parking yes my my time has ended but if I can just add one other um thing in in response to you know did we consider you know a separate garage structure we absolutely did that um it it doesn't help us in fact it it hurt us because we weren't able to capitalize on the second floor over the garage the other thing that we did consider though was digging down and doing a garage below the structure um and the re and and that would have certainly reduced our footprint but the problem with that was managing water runoff as somebody had mentioned earlier um in the meeting there there is water along that um along that area in that neighborhood and managing Water by putting the garage below the structure just seemed like um like just a recipe for disaster when we're asking for trouble there but that was that was also something we had considered in an effort to reduce the footprint I I thank you I I think that the elimination of the garage would reduce the structure by 480 square feet um which would bring you in to compliance with the coverage by structures um so it seems like there may be opportunities um and ton i' I've taken all questions from the public um I'll give you one chance if you want to ask a question but we closed that off when we went back to the board do you want to speak Anton no okay I just um I want to agree with John which really bothers me um you agree with him is that I think that I mean I don't think any of us is opposed to uh another two families in town you're sely lacking in in housing uh but I think that you have wants and you have needs and I think that you could probably cross the want off the garage all right scale this thing way back and um come back but right now I don't think you need a garage yeah but where you going to put the cars well I think that by moving everything closer together okay we've created a paring field okay but that's their design not mine Catherine do you have I don't I don't really have anything to add I basically feel the same as everyone else I think this is a lovely design I think we need more uh two families I don't have a problem with the two family at this location I just um unfortunately this seems a little oversized for the lot and I am concerned with the blind pull out onto Brook Street I also I'm down there all the time with my kids on bikes and on the way to school and it is a dangerous corner so I think we could I I think something I think a two family could go in here um and I think it would be great I just I not sure this design is going to work on this lot um it's so in excess of the lot coverage and there really hasn't been an articulated hardship unfortunately um this is uh Anton uh I just figured out how to unmute myself if it's still possible to speak I'd appreciate it if not uh so be it very briefly please state your name and address okay it's my name is Anton kis to Bell Court uh two primary things is uh lot coverage which uh from my point of view is more 5050 perious unper and um setbacks all the way around if I look at the property next door I'm not sure exactly what happened there but it seems I looked at it today I can't imagine that that property has it 5050 prvious on perious for this one here I'm not sure how that's going to work and to speak to the others who spoken about safety on the road with where the garages are placed I'm not sure sure that's my those are my thoughts and thank you for permitting me thank you um so it appears Mr Gattis that we do not in order for a successful approval of the application there needs to be four members of the board voting in favor of the application it appears from the conversation of the board that we do not have four members who support the app application as submitted um you do have an O op opportunity to continue the hearing and come back with different designs if you so desire yeah I think that's go I think that's our only option yeah I I think um we would request a continuance at this point please okay um so I'll make a motion um at the request of the applicant to continue um the application of James gtis um for a special perment and variances at 35 School Street to 7 P.M on June 26 2024 and to extend the board's deadline for for filing its decision until September 17th of 2024 do I have a second I second Sean seconds I'll take a vote Catherine yes Brian you're not voting John approved johnan approved Robert yes and Sarah vote Yes Madam chairman can I just say one thing before you close your meeting I would request that they take very carefully the consideration of the safety is you just go down and stand on that corner between 7:30 and 8:30 and you'll see and it's not just pulling out it's backing out blindly thank you thank you okay thank thank I we thank the board for their time thank you okay thank you thank you thank you guys thanks we'll be sending this off for your signature okay thank you you know how people co-host okay um you're up on Zoom okay I've made Mr Co but somebody's going to have to look at my computer to see if people's hands are raised I up I'm I'm on I'm a host do you have zoom up zoom up I you can see raised hands okay good okay um so the next application is nine Bennett Street um since I am a direct a butter to nine Bennett Street I will be recusing myself from participating in this application Catherine how will be running this to of the meeting I will be removing myself to the audience and I do plan to speak as a private citizen with respect to the application with the expectation that the board will understand that my comments are personal and not as a member of the board thank you call start all right guys um bear with me here I don't usually do this part but I'm going to work on it so I am going to open um the public hearing for the application of Jill M rowski Doyle and Timothy P Doyle filed with the town cor on April 22nd 2024 for a special permit under sections 5.4 7.2 and 12.5.1 variance under sections 5.2 and 12.3.3 of the zoning bylaws Andor other relief as may be necessary to demolish the existing two Family Residence and construct a new single family Residence at nine Bennett Street assessor map number 28 Lot number 10 in District day thereby decreasing the existing non-conforming encroachment into the front setback and decreasing the existing non-conforming encroach encroachment in the side setback bordering seven Bennett Street but creating new non-conformities by encroaching into the required side setback bordering 11 benett and exceeding permissible lot coverage by structures and impervious surfaces is there someone present um here to present the application yes I am my name is my office is on 86 Street in Beverly and I'm here tonight represen G kowsky doy and Timothy doy they uh they are the owners of nine Bennett Street that they purchased in September of 2023 if I can share the screen I have a PowerPoint that I'd like to walk through the down oh sorry [Music] Rec so um n Ben street is 1730 it Cur only a two- family home um in the town of Manchester the applicants are looking to um tear it down and build a single family home on the lot it is a very challenging lot for a number of reasons and I'm happy to kind of run through the power with you and then do we go mad chair I did going through our request for special permit variance and covered it perfectly fine um as a part of our application we addressed uh sections 12.52 and all the criteria I'll be happy to run through that at the end if you like this is a a an above view of the property we have a circle here it's a primary residential neighborhood uh with mixed Colonial and it's a new modern homes that have recently drawn up it is this end of Ben street it's kind of a gateway to a much larger neighborhood or community in in Manchester uh it's close to the ocean it is a very narrow street with limited parking one of the uh one of the improvements that we think we have made that is going to benefit everybody is the addition part of the The Proposal is to have a two-car garage that will get some parking out of the driveway off the street should help everybody um presently there's Limited parking we're going to increase that and this lot itself it's a very tricky lot uh my next screen here will show you uh the plan from Gale Smith our engineer um I should mention that my clients are on zoom in attendance here as well as our architect Craig bosor and Craig may be able to answer any questions that you may have as well as we get roll through this you look the lot here um those of you that were at the the site visit uh were able to see it it is a very challenging 3 acre lot it's 13,18 uh the Westerly portion uh that borders 11 Bennett Street is uh a very steep ledge that kind of wraps around the back of it along the back by but this is Tanglewood back here uh it's a very steep slope with a you know visible Ledge in rock properties due to this the shape of if we just look at the shape of the I do I did listen to you are considering hardships so just you know for the hardships that we'd be looking for uh we believe that we do have soil issues we definitely have topography issues with the uh with the slope and the ledge and then the right side the no side of the property here that borders 7 if you follow my arrow here you'll see how we have these very funny jagged lines that kind of follow along that lot line that that makes it a very unique lot and the present structure is actually built around those lines so I think those lines probably were put in after the structure was there when these two houses were done um in any event we we do feel that we cover the hardship pretty pretty easily for shape and topography and soil type the um the real challenge of this lot is sorry I'm going to go back when you look at this lot really the only part of the lot that's buildable is this bottom kind of third portion where the house sits now once you get up to the left side of the lck or the rear of the lot the ledge and the the steepness of it just make it almost unbuildable so that's why in 1730 they position the house where it is so when my clients then worked with their architect came up with their to build the house so this on on your left is the existing structure on the right is the proposed structure with the two car garage it is designed byra Bosworth Bosworth from Bosworth it's a a very nice design well thought of the plan in addition to the design and the plan Mr bwarts and the doy work very very hard to try to eliminate some of the hardship that's caused by it's not the hardship I it's a burden on B proper so if you look here you have the purple lines that that's our dwelling on seven Bennett Street and the orange line here is the current structure there is really very very little room between these properties as they sit right now in fact it's less than a foot right in here so as they worked with their architect to come up with their plan and their design they found it beneficial and they believe it's beneficial for seven benett as well nine Bennett to take the property if you will they pushed it back and they spun it kind of clockwise to create a little bit of a different angle so when they push the property back it increased the front set back so that's good and it gave some much needed relief between N9 bennit Street and seven bennit street so if you if you went there now it's a very narrow Pathway to walk between the houses now we're going to have you know 5 ft on our side of there's a little space there that's that's going to be huge for the people on both sides uh but in Shifting the house clockwise in back it expanded into the left side of the lock which is where we need the relief uh from 11 Bennett we're in those setbacks on that side so it's it's kind of a tradeoff of of a one hardship for what we believe is or one burden which we believe is a lesser burden on on the 11 Ben Street side worthy to knowe in between nine Ben Le benett Street there is a really steep ledge that's almost like a privacy wall that that functions very nice and and provides some some ample protection for the Neighbors so as we come before you tonight we are looking for relas in three years areas uh the the proposed structure will increase non-conforming it will need a special permit or variance as this SP is necessary for the left side setback So currently the left side setback is is inclining uh with the new proposed structure uh we are going to be 13.7 ft from the lot line so our left side is going to go 38 ft to 13 ft we are also going to request we're looking for relief from Lock coverage our lock coverage uh is now 2.3% over so we'll be looking for a little relief there uh lock coverage by structure and imp privious surface is 2% over the allowable amount um we have discussed that um currently there's a paved driveway in the plant we believe that if if it made sense to the board we would be Happ to using perious surface for the driveway and that would get us down below if that was a a request from the board we would like that b for various reasons but we understand that's not going to happen um so when we those are our three relief if we look at it and we look at the dimensions our lot size doesn't change uh Rose floor area is is going to change we're going to go from 1247 to 2287 lot withd is actually an improvement because by spinning by pushing the property back creating a little bit more front set that and turning it clockwise we created a little bit more room at the lot withd which Uh current existing is 87.8 and we're now going to be at 88.4 uh the frontage we still have the same 88 ft of Frontage that we had before our front setback is going to be improved uh we are going from 258 for 224 our side set back on the right side which is where we think is is is the big relief for both these properties presently is is .9 and we are going to have 5.6 uh to the set back there so that's our big Improvement on the left side is is our ask and presently it's 382 and we're going to 13.7 the uh rear setback uh is still compliant presently it's 95.5 and it's going to be 78 we don't need any relief there Building height we're going to stay within the height requirements and then I did mention the uh the lock coverage for the structure as well as the total structures and improv surfaces we're requesting relief from if we look at the next streen um it has the existing structur is in Orange supposed structure is in Gray um again uh and in blue is is the uh privious surface areas so on this plan over here is where we're looking for the relief and then over here is where I believe and we believe strongly that this is where the gain is um and that's a game that's going to help again we believe it's going to help S Pen as much as uh n the if we went around and we did walk around yesterday there was bit of discussion about the proposed porch in the backat and the impact that it may have uh yesterday there was some discussion that for went right up to the fence it does not go right up to the fence it is going to be the 5 ft 6 in off of the fence uh there was questions about the the the impact of that porch on the neighbors uh mature U trees that are there that are valued um in talking with my clients today and with our architect we feel strongly that we can mitigate any risk to those use by putting the back porch on Piers rather than on the slab Foundation as designed so as well as they've already had conversations with the neighbors and they've agreed to work with their arborus to uh take protective measures during the construction of the property to protect those treats their they valuable for for both properties if we run through your basic criteria and and your special permits um I think that this is the kind of structure that's going to really really help uh Manchester in general and the neighborhood in general we do have an email that was sent to I believe chairman melish the police chief at cherdon town where um he he he thinks that it's going to actually help the neighborhood with having the off street parking and does not foresee any public safety issues the uh the new constructions we have a 1730 home here need construction is going to have all the benefits of new code the her ratings the Energy Efficiency a lot of good things for for the environment in the town the uh and pushing the property back adding to the front set backs is going to is going to help everybody uh on both sides of the property and anybody driving down the street as far as visibility goes it's not going to crowd the street as much as the current structure so I would like to then go back to my application just to make sure that we didn't miss anything uh and again I'll close with with the request for the special permit was read off by the chairman and our request I'm happy to answer any questions I also would be happy to run through the criteria that uh you have requested but we detailed it out in our narrative don't know if you really want to use up the board's time reviewing something that presenting to and writing in there thank you um members of the board any questions comments before I open up to public no just uh I am leaning very heavily towards the uh purce driveway where you're on you're on the ledge as it is you're on a hill there going be a lot of storm water wash on that driveway so anything we can do to capture some of that we don't disagree with you initi driveway all prepared to make to agree service I also live on that street um I like how many streets so uh I like the fact that the the proposed hous is more set back than the existing conditions and that it's it's more centered off of you know Donna and CT's property so um and I agree with Brian on the on the driveway I mean when when it rains that street floods downhill and then it becomes icy where the gas station is so for various you know various directions but so I would agree with that comment but I imagine that the neighbors have been talking about um the design and all that so those are my comments okay I will um open this up for public comment now as before um please state your name and address when you make a public comment please raise your hand and wait to be recognized and please try not to repeat what someone else has said um or if you do just say like I agree with what they said um and keep it brief all right uh yes sir in the blue c Bennett Street say yesterday John wasn't there but I see brought up the street all the time so Don and I have lived on benett street for 30 years in this house uh not very good at this process I'm not really good at this so I'm using some notes here to make it a little more adaptable we're generally in support but we have concerns our concerns are glad to see it stream I know the design shows it uh pulling off the house but the section of the house that is getting pulled off is actually not very much hasn't been very much used over the last year so it's it's actually gives us privacy um but so now that's going which is fine I appreciate that the house is moving back um off the property line there but when you move back um where the screened in porch is it's 5.5 ft off the property line and that is actually closer than what the existing house was at that location so it's it's buting back in closer to us further back um you saw our back backyard we love our backyard we live in our backyard having a screen in porch by a preseason lived in screamed in porch five and a half ft off of property we feel is going to uh potentially move into our privacy issues um even though there's notes about maybe building the for on Piers five and a half use that are 35 40 ft off I would think the uh the the roots of those units are going well out path there and even just the construction of Bing for the house which is right puted up to them or or this port going to affect them the trees don't just visually screen to see that they they they sound so we we Le other are where roots been cut on our property and trees have died a couple years down the road we can't afford to have that up in the air because it's it really it creates the whole atmosphere in our backyard our preferences um to push the screen porch back off the property line a little bit so it's not buted up against there so the other piece of the pie is our the whole back of our house is glass so we're going to be sitting in our house looking at a screened in porch and hearing a screened in porch um it' be nice if it was around the corner a little bit out outside the five and a half fo set back with shown I know it's supposed to be 20 I know if this non-conforming issues with where it is today and what it could be going forward but it would seem like we have a large home going in here that's a small change to push the porch off a little bit is not big ass and the other aspect of the screened in porch if if it is a screened in portch we would appreciate having the side towards us be a solid wall so you know that people aren't looking down at us um because it's going to be it's going to be real close to us in that location even if it's around the corner a little bit it's going to be close to us and we're going to hear it so the concept of moving the house away too we we really appreciate moving the house away but I think anybody that's going to build the house it's going bu the house I that's it's for them is as good for them as it is for us I don't think it is done for us um and even in that little bump out place there there's a there's a bulkhead there so it's not as though there's nothing there there is something there still um but the big thing is our our trees that we've had before they're over to me Irreplaceable I don't want to risk or screen thank you Sarah uh Sarah melish 11 Bennett Street um again I'm speaking as a citizen I'm not speaking on of directing my comments to um the application requests three variances normally I don't support variances um first a variance to encroach into the west side setb which ab buts my property the houses at s and n Bennett date back to the 1700s and are currently about 2T part it makes sense to give relief to number seven by moving the house to the West towards number 11 my um since my property is 20 to 25 feet higher than nine Bennett I can accept the encroachment into the West s setback and support his variance second a variance for coverage by structures I find this more problematic since this is necessary due to the size of the house not anything to do with the Topography of the lot the house could be smaller however the south side of Bennett Street is in the General District and the north side of the street is in District Ed one could argue that due to the lot sizes of the first three properties on the north side of Bennett Street they should have been included in the General District which allows greater coverage nevertheless they could make a couple of changes first I believe the existing shed is not even included in the coverage by structures and that easily could be removed second the basement is shown as a finished teens F and there's access to that space from the garage and the mudro off the garage through the house um they could eliminate the bulkhead which is only a couple of feet from the neighbor and I think the neighbors would not be happy if teens are congregating on the bulkhead gain access to a party bement that there those two Chang changes would decrease the coverage a little bit to 16.9% or 15% required and I recommend a condition to limit the coverage by structures to 16.9% finally the variance could almost entirely be eliminated if the depth of the garage is decreased to 24 feet and and the depth of the proposed second floor bump out is extended by 1.5 ft which would not impact the living space on the second floor and if the stream porches Li then it would only exceed coverage the coverage by structures requirement by 4 ft the board may want to consider them third total coverage by structures and impervious surfaces I think that's going to address um that they will switch out some the driveway and other places to make them perious and I suggest that a condition be included to limit total coverage to the maximum am of 30% finally with respect to the special permit to extend the encroachment further back into the East Side setback I think the screen porch could be moved further to the west to decrease the encroachment into the East seta and decrease the noise level for The Neighbors I ask the board to consider that it won't make a difference to me because the screen porch is well below the first floor of my house so the fact that it's closer to my side makes no difference thank you thank you yes ma'am Kina gave SCH stre to De Avenue um this house is in old house is it the uh something that the town does when they have old houses like this they tear them down instead of keeping the outside there is usually a law that says keep it the outside is fine but inside you can do anything you want is there something that no demolition well it's not historic it's not it's not part of it's not designated as a historic building in nobody register it because that's one of the houses back in the 50s and early 60s my mother-in-law safe from being torn down and made in a home restoring thank you is there anyone else in the room yes sir minute um Lely in support thing I think everybody's covered most everything that's come up um just on the driveway issue changing to Stones I so I live at the bottom of the street and I shovel all of the stones that come out of everybody's driveway and go into the gutter um I would much prefer that it would be uh I think CT Don also shovel the stones um so um I'd actually prefer it to be asphalt so that it um and actually those of you who drive down benett actually makes it really dangerous because all of the stones industry kind of gather and make like a skid pad like my son loves to get his bike on it so I'd be Pro of branting a variant if that's just letting them pay their driveway for a couple of cses yeah for the record I was thinking of like like dry laid brick I wasn't a crush Stone yeah like yeah I know we just we've had a lot of people do the perious switch to like the L stuff that just ends down the street thank you yes sir I'm Josh Anderson for Bennett right across the street I am um a fan of no gravel please um and I'm generally in favor of um the petition I think the improvements mentioned I will just ditto and um there you go anyone else in the room before I go to the zoom meeting no is there anyone on Zoom any their hand up if you're on zoom and you'd like to make a public comment please raise your hand on Zoom so we can see you meantime Miss melish U I'm not overly concerned about as long as the police Chief lives on B Street I'm not really concerned about a lot of parties on that street one um sure um one thing I just picked up on in discussion on stated for the proposal was the the ledge on the left hand side of the house created a natural privacy wall and we have a natural privacy wall in side that we're trying to maintain as well so that's I just wanted to kind of note that it was an argument on one side I wanted to make sure that we have that on our side understood okay um I do have one letter to read into the record so I will go ahead and do that um Katherine you have a raised hand too oh okay the architect Mr Bosworth I will go ahead um Mr Bosworth you can go ahead and speak before I the record uh thank you this is Craig Bosworth the architect for the project could I have share screen for a moment please John do you know how to do that uh make the Sham barely drag a red 7 over black eight anybody in the audience don't check your email while you're there um I I don't know what he's under GRE Bosworth C BOS I know we should have a little less I learned during I think you should be able to share your screen now Mr Bosworth yes thank you uh I'd just like to address the porch issue if we could and uh answer any other questions in my come up the the intent of the the floor plan layout um I think Bill did a great job describing some of the hardship with the ledge um the site topography issues that we have um the right hand side here this is where the bulkhead is this is the porch the intent behind this porch is to be the extension of the living room spaces the the goal here as you can see it's a it's a relatively small footprint um you know you do have the two-car garage which does bite quite a bit of the property here a mudroom stare up because we're dealing with difficulty in topography so we do have half a flight that leads up to the main floor main floor would be such that we have a living room kitchen small dining room in the front um more of the front entry with that covered porch but you know this area back here provides my client the opportunity to have that seamless transition the idea of having windows and a see-through fireplace it's kind of a focal point and and lends itself very well to how you would start to utilize patio spaces the see it's somewhat ironic to me that we hear that this is going to be a loud space in all honesty I I think of screen porches as being a privacy barrier you know if if we are grilling and if we are entertaining um the porch typically is just a sitting area and this kind of structure does help to protect some of the acoustic sounds that would go you know if this were all patio space You' be sitting out there and sitting around a fireplace without any kind of enclosure the enclosure in its own right with you know if it had glass panels on in the like would provide an acoustic separation and not only that but you think about light you know if I don't have a screen porch here with down lights lighting the space you know this would in its own right be a structure to start to absorb some of the light that we're going to have out here on the patio you know I'd have a couple down lights in the screen porch and it's relatively clean if if I have to light up this area for outdoor sitting then we're dealing with bigger lights and I don't want to use the word Spotlight but you know you're going to have some fairly bright lights trying to light up this area of the patio space that we would have um so I I do see this ironically as more of a a barrier um to provide some privacy I think both owners want to have privacy they're obviously very close to one another in this location but I wanted to address that um also just while I have the attention I I know that there are some trees that are in question um it it's very simple for us to really get one two three isolated peer points that we could support this screen porch it's only a one story porch uh relatively simple structure uh we we we don't not need to have a slab on grade there'd be some grade beams this is going to be like a deck like material uh maybe some Crush Stone underneath that it's really not meant to um be such that we're digging and creating four foot Frost walls or anything underneath the SC screen porsch so hopefully that with the help of Arbor uh will certainly help um the survival of those trees I think the other questions are in regard to square foot areas and the like um so we would have to address that at a different time um I do appreciate the comments uh but I wanted to address at least the porch here tonight thank you thank you anyone else to make a public comment yes sir jtim G to Desmond Avenue I know in our neighborhood the concom gave permission to a person U be having an existing dwelling to lay down some kind of permeable blocks and that eliminated a gravel [Music] problem these folks seem to have a concern and I'm just fing that out the possible way of resolving that problem thank you okay there's no further comments I'm going to read the one letter I have into the record here um this letter is dated May 9th 2024 it says Manchester zba Donna Dowell and I have lived at seven Bennett street directly abing this property for close to 30 years it would like to offer our input on the application submitted by Jill and Tim Doyle the owners of nine Bennett Street our home was built in 1776 and therefore is unique by today's standards we are generally in support of the project and appreciate the proposed location that maintains the present front setback that said we do have a few areas of concern of which we would like to make you aware we have previously advised the doils of these concerns as well our main concern is maintaining our privacy and screening presently there are three large old growth use and a large Arbor V that are close to the borders of the two properties ensuring the health and vitality of these Irreplaceable trees is very important to maintain this privacy we have been carefully maintaining these trees for many years with the help of our arborist the part of the plan that has the largest impact on the trees is the three season screened in porch that is shown 5T 6 in from the property lines the use are adjacent to the fence between the two properties and having a new structure so close to the property line will cause them much stress the roots of these 30ft tall use no doubt extend into the area where the proposed structure is to be constructed and many major branches will need to be removed to accommodate the porch the long-term health of the trees due to this construction would not be known for many years and we are fearful of the impact if the porch is approved at this location at the very minimum we like to request that it be built on peers without a foundation or slab to ensure minimal effect to the root systems of the used in order to maintain the privacy of our backyard where we spend a lot of time we also request that one wall of the porch facing seven vant Street be solid and closed and not a screen in addition there is a large arborite adjacent to our patio that is current ly under stress as it lost a large limb in a storm this winter similarly protection of the root system for this tree during excavation and construction is very important it appears that the proposed bulkhead is directly adjacent to this we have lived in close proximity to Neighbors at nine Bennett Street for many years it may seem counterintuitive but there are aspects of the present closeness of the structure that give us privacy the part of the house that is closest to us is mostly a stairwell and blocks views into our yard from the nine Bennett backyard in the street this does not mean to imply that we do not appreciate the main parts of the house being moved off the property line but just gives another perspective for your review the new house location will open things up and make existing screening all that more important we can be available during your site visit if there are questions Donna and I also plan on attending the meeting thank you Donna dewal and CT svetka and I'm sorry if I mispronounced your names s Bennett Street um all right I think that's all the public comment so if there's no more public comment I'm going to close the public comment portion of the meeting for board debate all right closing public comment let's go to board comments Rob I like Sarah's um suggestion of moving the house over slightly closer to her property line is that something that's possible in the design do we know it I think that's what's proposed no I mean more so than what's proposed oh the porch not the POR no no no the hole she never suggested I don't think that was porch I don't believe that was suggested wasn't the whole Foundation no just the porch I think that was my understanding unless I I interpreted that wrong then then then I have then I have nothing else to say John I mean the way I see it like the porch offers more privacy than something like a deck or a second story deck off that second floor office which could be proposed but it's not and it sounds like some of these suggestions were um taken into account with the architect tonight I would I would suggest that maybe an AR an arborist is involved during construction um you know to make sure that the neighbors are are happy and that you know in case something does happen with some of these mature trees maybe um in good faith they come to an agreement that they together you know work to rectify that let's say if a few trees die during construction that they could put together a proper screening plan um to keep the neighbors happy uh and that would just be a good faith thing between neighbors Li I don't really have any other concerns uh about the project and I guess I would just add that I do like the idea of that of the of the wall on the neighbor side instead of having it glass I'm talking about the porch if you could just consider that uh I see both uh both arguments on the porch creates a nice flow a living space okay but I don't think that that's a make that should be a make or break deal just by shifting it five feet to the left shortens up the porch I don't know if you have to change I is that a door or is that a window that goes out onto the uh window so I don't know I just I think that we have to be sensitive to the neighbors needs and uh requests uh and I just don't see where shortening up or making the uh scen in porch a little smaller to be uh stumbling BL so you know I we have couple different things that we're considering here right three variances in a special permit and like we talked about on the other application for these variances we need to show hardship right so you know from my perspective I understand the position the repositioning of the house and the encroachment into the setback you know moving it uh closer to 11 Bennett um but a hardship with respect to coverage or imper impious surfaces I'm not I'm not I'm not sure there's a hardship that I've heard a hardship on lot coverage or impervious surfaces so um it I think you could make some compromises to get that down under the um to the requirements um and I'm happy to listen if other people on the board you know feel differently about that but um I'm not sure that I heard a a hardship for those two variances um and I and I do see both sides of the porch issue and I and I think that is is something to consider um especially with the proximity I mean it sounds like some compromises have been made with respect to the trees already and whatnot so it sounds like people are working together um maybe a little bit more cooperation we could get this to a place where most people are happy I don't know what do you guys think about the hardship on the variances with lot coverage yeah I think you you could you could bring that down to to where it needs to be the bhead was Ed you could make that porch smaller easily you know um pretty easy get creative and just trim it down so I mean the reality here is how much of a hardship is going from the 2700 was it the uh 287 build the house that big there not a hard CHP anyway so I think that uh you get rid of the bulkhead shorten up the uh uh porch helps mitigate a lot of those issues there it it would remove the need for two of the three variances if you brought it into compliance on the lot coverage and impervious surfaces you'd only have the variance with the one encroachment um which I think you know due to the lot topography and what not makes sense um and then we'd be voting on one variance and one special permit but I I get the whole thing about the bulkhead but the bulkheads there for a reason because you need it for equipment especially if they're putting their equipment in the basement so you have to have a way to get the equipment in and out you can't go through a door doorway so they have to have a bulad somewhere and looking at this plan that is pretty much the only place to put it so I don't I don't think there really much with that they're going to need to weit in and out of that basement from theide of the house so bu or yeah I mean I'm not saying I know I I'm not an architect I don't I'm not going to dictate a different you could decrease the size of the garage I mean there's lots of different ways you could bring this into compliance absolutely lot coverage and arious well like they said I mean the Topography of the site is a lot of the issue too the way trying to do that stuff that makes sense with respect to the the lot lines um and the encroachment into setbacks I think I'm going on to the porch there on the um on the site visit yesterday I was trying to remember how far back that fence went as I recall it was P it was along those trees that we're we're talking about so that was well within that's you've already got a fence now blocking off that side of where they're talking about their porch that's true so I would wouldn't understand the point of two two walls to block when you've already got something there the other issue there is that uh because the house was AB well that my understanding is that that whole Corner been pretty much abandoned right there's no expectation it's always going to be abandoned okay so uh you enjoy your privacy for a while okay but so uh that's the only other that's the thing that comes mind with me is that the original you can't have an expectation that that's going to be it is that's true that's true but at the same time you know they don't necessarily have the right to rebuild within the setbacks just thr that out yeah totally but I just I question hards right hardships um so Mr do you have any questions this time I I'm actually going to check with my clients because there been few suggestions I can't necessar agree to thank you very much for your comments on the porch I will tell you that the Dos are use from Full neighbors and they value the Privacy as much as anybody so everybody's on the same page there they want the same thing I think get there on the driveway I think there's many different ways that we can get the prvious surface and and not have the Pebbles running down just put a subdivision up the Newberry and they had to put a a block apron at the end of the driveway they probest Key Stone but then they had like some cobblestones at the end when you went in so I kept all the keystones in the driveway and not running out in the street so there's a lot of ways that the dos and architect are going be able work around some of that stuff some of the questions I can't answer without check one my clients is with the bul which I don't think the bulk is really an option to your point I think that that's needed for mechanics and everything else the size of it I have to check with my clients I'm not sure if Craig is still on if Craig has any comments um me one second I'll check with my clients see what they think with the size sure I'm not sure that not having an enclosed porch is like a hardship right right especially when you could put an enclosed porch within a setback you've got plenty of space to do we can only ask for per Mater we can't dictate as to what kind of PR material is going to be I I wasn't asking you to dictate what no no I'm just saying sorry I'm just saying is that uh I think that I don't think we should dictate the material can't no but I think that there's enough um options out there would either faers or whatever directed to the chair we we've closed public comment um did so go ahead we hear you I think we can go back with the architect and we can work a little bit on the sizing to get it down so that we are just looking for the variance on the left side sat back one we continue come back to that that Min issue um I just we just can't commit to it tonight without there's a l there so every time we Shi this and move it away from Seven we end up costing more money because we're getting into more sight and everything else so we just need to take somebody smarter than me needs to take a look at it um continuance yes just so happens just so happens um um okay so um you do you agree to continue the hearing from May 15th 2024 to June 26 2024 and um agreed that the board's deadline for filing the decision be extended to September 17th 2024 yes um I'm gonna do a vote here um I move to continue the application of Jill Ryan Kowski Doyle and Timothy P Doyle at 9 Bennett Street for a special permit and variance um to continue the application from May 15 2024 to June 26 2024 and um agreed that the board's deadline for filing its decision be extended to September 177 2024 um Rob yes sure yes yes yes yes and Catherine is yes so thank you for your time Katherine you need a second on that motion oh y sorry okay second and now it's approved thank you thanks Carol we just wanted to say thank you from the Dos for your time tonight thank you thanks was really impressed Sarah I look I was thinking about it EXC me take that please thank you thank you no problem I will [Music] res as chair for the application yes yeah the engineers are smart for the application of 9 schol street I will open the public hearing for the application of suicide legal Solutions PC on behalf of Deegan Partners LLC for a special permit under Section 4.2 5.4 Mr please um for a special permit under sections 4.2 5.4 and 12.5 of the zoning bylaw and other relief as may be necessary to build an addition and convert an existing non-conforming single family residence into a two Family Residence and a variance under sections 5.4 and 12.3.3 of the zoning bylaw and other El that may be necessary for an encroachment into the front setb by 1.9 ft of an existing porch at 90 School Street assessor map number 41 Lot number 87 in District D2 filed with the town clerk on April 18th 2024 somebody here to present the application the record this my name is Joel paza I'm an attorney at C side legal solution the ners of 123 Main Street a ler we know here the app of Dean Partners LLC the record owners of the property you should be all set okay so as the chair announced we're looking to convert an existing single family home to a two family home um it'll be a un story rear addition constructed to the existing structure via on story connector Corridor you can see on the side plan the existing house area is in the lighter gray lines towards schol Street and the boulder line show the one story connector and the two story each the reader so the Edition is designed to mat architectural design of different structure we are primarily located in the um rd2 District or D2 District um the rear portion of the lot you a lot highlighted in yellow a little bit that green shading um that would be single residence District B the entirety of the existing and the entirety of the proposed structure are within the D2 District there'll be no structure located within the single resid system so we need depending on how the board like to go about this between two and three pieces of relief one is a change of use special permit as you know in this District Two conversions from existing single families are allowed by special permit um we also need a variance and that has nothing to do with the proposed addition or connector it has to do with is when you change from an existing use to a new use any pre-existing non-conforming protection you had for dimensional variances can be considered lost and so we have a front porch in the existing house that is 1.9 ft into this front yard setback so it's 8.1 ft in the street it should be 10 and because we're converting to use the the U the grandfather protection FL by word can get wiped out going be a variance to reallow the existing porch to remain exactly as it is and then the last one um we had it in our application of belt and suspenders would be a special perent to alter and expand I don't think it's actually needed and we'll go through that in a moment because we do the test the existing non-conformity is only that front yard violation of the setback and nothing thing we're doing is going to increase that non-conformity and so when you do not increase the nonc existing non-conformities on a um singular two family there's no need to expand and secondarily because we have to request that variance to the degree that it was a pre-existing nonu formity is actually now becoming a an allowed nonform via the variance relief that being said if the board wish to give a special Cent alter expand we will take it I don't actually think it's necessary however so brief background some of you may remember was brought before you back in 2022 we got as far as a site visit and some concerns were brought up from Neighbors and some board members regarding the proposed uh layout of the parking area uh and so well they went in July of 2023 and actually approval by the DBW to move the entrance to the driveway to the further rear of the lot to make for better access in out of the parking area and make sure they to reconfigure the parking address the concerns that were raised back B usual I have all the plans loaded in I'm happy to go through them or rep back sessions are the Flor plans for the building itself and the elevation drawings and we go back and look at those here's the street view here's the gis from the town There's the gis with satellite from the town and so get right into the standards we have to hit right so to get a special permit to convert from um the single to A2 family basically you have to make a determination that the benefits are not going to outweigh um be outweighed by potential negative impact so you have nine factors to consider but go through as brief as we can but I want to make sure we're record hitting all of them so you have section 3.3 standards again um we're not worried about lighting noise Etc this is a um a second blowing unit on a residential property again it'll match of the existing structure and there's a bonus in that it's going to obviously increase the value of a lot for the property owner but this is uh also New Growth tax revenue which for those of you paying attention in budget season for municipalities is one of the few ways you can get a little additional money into your Levy without violating prop two and a half other conditions social economic Community needs again as uh anyone paying attention to both the town of Manchester specifically or the greater problem with Massachusetts in general we are in dire need of housing units and this will provide a safe new modern building toe compliant housing unit that would be appropriate for a family to live in traffic flow and safety there going be minimal impact on traffic flow and safety this lot fronts of School Street and linoln Avenue linoln Avenue as the way you'll use to get into the driveway um bulaw only requires three spots we've shown three oversized spots and as I'll mention in a moment it could also be four conforming spots we want to make sure all the churning work and that last SP it's a little tight the the back so this area in blue shows the three oversized spaces they are 12 by 18 or only 9 by 18 is required so if you actually add that up that's 36 uh feet in width and you could actually make four 9 foot wide parking spaces in that same area again the issue um we want to make sure that last car can back out in one fell swuit for the purposes of permitting but if this um commission this uh board was more concerned about striping an additional space even though it be you know the minimum the minimum size for narrowness we could do that also wouldn't change that blue rectangle it all still be located basically inside that area um and then the funny thing is that when you have larger projects you have the other standards and just coincidentally trying a little bit of Overkill here this actually meets the standards you apply to larger projects that are not applicable here as far as making sure this turn space and making sure this perimeter plantings um as you can see the area has already been constructed as a show of good faith to show that it doesn't just work on paper it works on the ground this shows the two cars to the existing tenants of the uh existing single family house the garage you see to the right of those two part cars and coming down and the third spot would be partially inside the footprint of that again as you can see how tightly these two um PS Park their cars you can in your head see the two more cars to park to the right but again to think tering we had to show three so we showed three real big ones but from a pragmatic standpoint you know there this no emergency you got to get all the cars off the street there's a lot of room back here especially when you take into account the turnaround area as well um just by way of example um on right outside this building is three 9 by1 18 spaces and so uh we're actually you know exceeding what the town installs for itself on its public property and so again here's a better shot of the turn around area again you'll notice that it's fenced off there are plantings in place um and there's also new plantings and Landscaping that were put along um Lincoln and again they're they're small shrubs now but those will grow up to um a lot of them will exceed the height of your average car so to the degree that um they concerned about having to you know look at a quotequote parking lot with three or four cars and it the screening will uh come up to help and then again there's a new fence on the rear side of the property which also um helps Shield any view of this parking area from abing properties and so going back into the nine standards ACC utilities no issue here neighborhood character and social structure again we are in the D2 District two families are allowed by um social permit when you're expanding they're also Allowed by right if you're just reconfiguring internally and preservation of Scenic views from German public there are no view sheds enjoyed by the public across this property that are being impacted the last three factors uh impacts our environment the Locust is already developed there's no significant impact we admit there's a little bit of loss of green space for the uh parking that's already been um created um but that was again something they were allowed to do as a matter of right to create the parking climate resiliency again this is going to have to meet modern stretch codes and um those uh the hers rating went down again last year was going a Down this year so we meting all those standards as I mentioned a moment ago potential fiscal impact again it's good for the property owner allows them additional rental income to keep up with the cost of maintaining and allow the town of Manchester to slap a whole new assessment on a second unit doesn't exist currently um the other again bit of Overkill I want to go through is even if this was the um bu right conversion inside of structure it also meets those tests it's connected to town sewer the addition appli to the setback sub parking provided so again even though NO3 doesn't apply to thegi concerned about those factors it actually hits all of those also um so again I would submit that the beneficial impact of this far outweighs any detrimental impact that you can find detrimental impact from the creation of this unit the front variance again we have to find that a literal enforcement of bylaw is going to cause substantial hardship but basically require them to tear off the deck or rebuild the deck and the deck itself um is roofed and structurally tied into the property there'll be a hardship there um as far as the harm to public good or nullifying the attentive the bylaw allows the house to remain as is where it is and how it is for a number of years so anyone driving down School Street looking at the house today or looking at the house after this Edition is built won't really notice the difference this appears from school street because the porch is just going to stay the porch um so to say that as far as the variant standards again it's just to allow the thing to exist that's always existed and then again um for that alter expansion test because section 7.2 says a requirement for does not apply to an extension alteration reconstruction or structural change to a single family or two family that does not increase the non-conformity nature of the structure the only nonconformity again is that front yard violation nothing we're doing is non-compliant everything we're doing meets every dimensional requirement lock coverage requirement uh imperor surface requirement parking requirement Etc so I don't think this permit is necessary like the board would like to give one just as just in case we'll certainly take it um and then of course would require you think of finding that whatever degree of increase you find these in nonconformity it's not substantially more detrimental to the neighborhood presently exists and again that only nonconformity is 1.9 penetration into a rer set back um so was kind of quick but hopefully we can all go home at some point tonight so looking for a change of use special permit by 4 23 convert from a single through two I'm hoping for a variance from the front yard to allow that porch to stay as it is and um either determination that there's no increase so we see nonconformities or if we find there is an increase special permit to alter and expand thank you very much I'll take down my screen [Music] share uh questions from the board so the property now is the current investment property yeah outr this have to go to the the planning board as well for the curb cut like how did that end up GW Cur July 23 is still under move jurisdiction there was an appeal of the driveway curb cut the decision was written and the decision was not appealed so that's closed that uh that parking area in the back is that being used to park in the adjacent yeah so there's um the standing on School Street the house one's the left so it's a narrow yellow house um that has additional accessory parking behind it which you cross through the parking area that we showed but none of the parking spaces shown interfere with the ability for people to continue pass these three spaces down into the parking area I put the site plan back up with please so am I correct it there five parking spaces currently for number 84 and 86 yeah 84 86 again which be like the tall narrow yellow house one to the left and the shorter or square yellow house two to the left um there are there have a total of um three units so you need five spaces and they have that between um the spaces located out front on School Street and then again cars do come in this way and then head down into parking the area over here but again none of the blue parking spaces is going to interfere with the ability of those people to get in and out no one will be parking in such a way they can't get to the back lot for the neighboring properties so even with the proposal the neighbor is still going to be using that as a like an access E Yeah Yeah far the what now right that's how they do it exactly now the parking are has been built for those you had a chance to go the side visit or visit it on your own what you see is what will be there only that's missing is actually the the addition to the existing house the parking area is totally built out already couldn't that cause problems in the future these Pro properties sell well so that the parking space my understanding is that that fifth parking space for 84 and 86 so the the the third one for number 86 is physically behind number 86 is that correct yeah so the you on that property yes there there's a parking lot Forest Bas Sun School that you can be used by 84 and 86 to serve the single family requires two the two family requires three and so two of the three required are served by School Street and one of the three required are served by the rear and honestly if you're back there again in kind of a snow Emery stuff like that that house would actually Park two or three cars fully back there without impact parking on the property that's before you and what property is that other parking on it is on uh 84 the 84 comes around the no I'm sorry 86 it's a straight L back straight line back I'm sorry I have the L line let take my annotation off I get yeah just yeah so there's there's four spaces here but then there's one in the back and I'm just asking is the one in the back is Al on for 86 yeah so here there's a much better map to look at so the the parking space is behind 86 are on 86 okay but access is over the subject properties so have to drive through somebody else's property to park in this property in the in the event of a bate of two okay so there going to be right away yeah so again um that would be an issue for 86 right so if if there was something were to happen 86 would all of a sudden become in violation but wouldn't impact only before you was 90 yeah but we're not going to approve something for 90 if the properties at 84 and 86 could go into non-compliance when they're all controlled by the same what I'm saying is that that's how it is right now that's if I wasn't before you today right now 86 complies by having right two in the front and one in the but you are before us now no no no sure what I'm saying is that nothing has changed for 86 currently 86 axis is over 90 they did it yesterday did it today and if we get these permits they'll do it tomorrow and this risk that um you know that there could be a bifurcation of the properties exists regardless of what we're talking about tonight nothing you're doing tonight exacerbates it nothing you're doing tonight um you know changes it right this is solely about do we have enough parking spaces for 90 86 isn't before you and again to the degree that 86 you know has this concern um it would be for it would be any relief 86 would need You' be able to condition that right but to to say that hey um your parking requirements three spaces you've shown three spaces but we're concerned about an entirely separate lot that's not before the board you know you're getting into a kind of Mery territory as far as your jurisdiction of this application is is there an access easement over the property at 90 school for parking at 86 school because that is before us so you cannot have an easement against yourself so as long as properties are held in common ownership you can't put an easement on a property that you own against another property again here's we could do you could put a condition on the relief for 90 that should 90 fall out of common ownership or be conveyed out of common ownership with 86 that in easement must be granted to 86 again doesn't impact the parking in 90 because 90 doesn't this access 86 doesn't impact where these three cars go it's just they're all it's a shared you know pathway right so you want put some sort of condition that say Hey you know 86 isn't before us right now but the way we're going to try and make things better for you know avoid a future problem is that okay well 90 you are for us so 90 you have to agree that if we agree to this parking configuration you've shown us we'll condition that parking configuration on the idea that if you ever separate ownership you will in perpetuity allow you know um that space behind 86 to continue to be accessed so long as they need it right I imagine you could also solve the problem with enhancing parking in front of it there other Solutions but I'm happy to take condition that as long as 86 needs that space back there that 90 or breaks off separately it must provide that access that's okay I want to get I want to start hitting on 86 when 86 isn't filed 86 is a year so to be clear 90 86 and 84 are owned by the same so then aren't they merged like don't aren't they all before us don't it's common ownership of adjacent Lots like I I think that they would merge by operation of law which brings the whole thing before us they don't merge by operation of law the only time the merger Doctrine kicks in is if you own adjacent properties and one of them is vacant so because these are all these are all built upon it's called it's they called the merger Doctrine and it's if you own adjacent so for example I own a 5,000 foot lot and a 6,000 foot District but I also own a blank lot next to it well those are going to merge to cure my non-conformity if I own a 5,000 foot lot with a house on it and a 3,000 foot lot next to it with a house on on it they don't merge because that they're both in sized but they're both improved upon with residences on them it's only when one of the adjacent Lots is vacant that the murderer doctor kicks in to cure it only kicks in to the degree that you need to cure non-conformities and again we don't have any non-conformities relative to a lot area lot coverage demential setbacks Etc there' be no defect um to cure here for is each lot conforming um I don't I don't think that the structures no slot sizes I don't think any of them are conform looking at the pictures that well this um the one before you is conforming I'm sorry I'm talking about the other two get the chart up yeah so we are at about 8568 per square feet in 6,000 we have more than the necessary requisite Frontage um lot with so this lot before you is conforming again um to the degree that any adjacent non-conformity lot would need assistance it wouldn't come from this one because it improved upon what about like a parking plan so let's say this is under construction like where are people going to park if you know because you have you're going to have existing tenants living at 90 you need the other tenants spinning around and then you have contractors uh coming in all day so like have you thought about that yeah so so again there is when you talk about parking spaces we always talk about at least the 9 by8 but you know not tandom not blocking in if you look at um a better AAL shot of this if you look at the area Beyond um Beyond exting garage over in this area there a lot of room for a lot of cars so for example if the two cars the current tenant own if let's say one day's a big delivery you know Building Center shows up or you know with a with a big you know uh pallet Chu to drop off stuff you know and they're in this area there's room back here to get you know plenty of cars right there's also on street parking and this is all temporary right this is only for as long as the addition is under construction but again when we say we've got three spaces look at the space right you could fit a ton of vehicles back here or again you know if you have during construction a lot of pickup trucks right they can all pull on to site right this is you know going to be temporary situation and then again the standard before you is about the final product and making sure that when construction is completed that you have aate parking and as I've been gone through there's more than acate parking for the bylaw and I would say more thanate parking for a pragmatic use of machine family home question just do have a letter that I would like to read into the record dated May 9th 2024 Carolyn Goodall and John F Burke Trustees of 85 School Street Manchester being directly across the street from the applicant at 90 School Street wish to go on record opposed to this application our grounds are that the applicant is a non-resident absentee investor with no apparent hardship that building in their adjacent house are primarily used for short-term rentals to date along with many weeks in their Airbnb program today they have not been used for long-term much needed housing in Manchester in addition the expansion will most likely make it more non-conforming in regard to lock coverage and possibly other zoning requirements the building like the one we own at 85 School Street is easily large enough to convert to a two family in its current structure and we would not object to a conversion per se in the same footprint without the addition the owners have a contentious history with some of the Neighbors in town hall having previously made threats to convert both proper properties to a 40b while that is their right using a threat like that to get something approved should be ignored and actually a 40b that adds several affordable units to town would be better than the way they intend to manage this property other history is the planning board rejected access to 84 86 School Street from the Lincoln Aven entrance to 90 school for parking behind their adjacent property but it looks like they went ahead with that anyway the town's Airbnb regulations I believe require that the building must be owner occupied in order to rent out a portion for short-term rentals I don't believe the owners of record with a financial interest have ever lived there they in the past have tried to say a family member lived there but we've seen no evidence of that if so they may be in violation every time they rent out on a short-term basis under the air Airbnb regulations they historically try for loopholes in order to achieve their objectives basically do something and then ask forgiveness not proper in summary we don't believe a special permit of variance is warranted in this situation sincerely Jack Burke and Carolyn Goodall 16 Ocean Street Trustees of 85 schooling I I think this letter does raise the concern about short-term rentals um and I think that is that respons what is that sponsor [Music] or yeah I just want to add on to this okay um I I think that the purpose of this section of the bylaw is to provide additional reasonably priced housing on a long-term basis um and I think I would have a question of whether you would consider a condition that no short-term rentals are allowed in either of the two units at 90 School Street pursuant to both the town and the state definitions to squash that concern um no I'm not going to agree to that condition on behal of my client one we have discussed it and two again not trying to be combative that's nowhere in the standards before you for a special permit or um the variance again we will absolutely commit to complying with whatever regulations there are in the town of Manchester but I can say is to that letter the tenants that are currently in the building up front are not short-term tenants they're long-term tenants and I can represent to you that in all the conversations I've had with my clients there's been no discussion about short-term renting out the rear portion either the idea is again to create another long-term rental situation um you know I think there's a a big you shortterm rental sound like this nice like shiny thing you can a lot of money do it but it's also a hassle and you get good tenants who live year round pay their rent take care of the place for you um you know sometimes that's worth more than maybe the little bit extra you can get during the summer that sort of thing so I can represent you there's been no intention to anything but rent this out but I would not may be appropriate for this board to require a condition or restriction as to use it is not part of the standards that are being required by the BW a lot of talks been T tonight about what the BW requires and the BW doesn't require and the B does not require any such restriction to convert to a two family if the ciens of Manchester to paraphrase the chair want that they need to go to town meeting and get that approved but as for now it's not for the zba to you know impose additional conditions that aren't part of the bylaw I I think it may go to to the fact that converted two unit structure may not be substantially different in character from the existing building that the it's going to be used to short-term rentals then it's different character I believe that is speaking to the aesthetic design of the building not as to use so making sure that you're not adding you know a hyper modern addition onto a colonial that sort of thing um any more questions from the board or should I move to public comment okay is there anybody on in the room who would like to speak on this application please yes sir please state your name and address James Brady 10 lincol Avenue former member of the zba 2003 to 2006 so I'm familiar with the situation being a neighbor and having had to deal with this applicant in the past uh I can't remember the exact year it was 16 17 they applied for a curb cut to the zva it was fully denied with prejudice and somehow they got through a loophole because the DPW was then allowed somewhere down the line to change the rules and laws in the town allowed DBW Grant curve cuts and that's how they got this curve cut through what you'd like to see if you can put the plan up again Jo uh one thing to say they also put a fence up so that it's not in keeping with the neighborhood one two safety concerns why they were not granted the cut originally because there a lot of traffic that's created they put a fence up here that anyone that comes out of Lincoln app barely can see the right you can't almost hits pedestrians because you have to pull out almost under the street to see right so that fence should come down as a condition of anything ever r one two if you put your parking plant up you know he's showing that there's plenty of parking that's without this structure built they've tried to go for this before one I have a question they're in zoning D we're a single family in zoning B so how are you allowed to utilize uh Zone B to to conform to something in zone D the parking shouldn't be allowed to be helping out a structure that you're trying to build in zone B also if you have a car you're parked in the middle spot any engineer could see that I you can even turn to get into the spot way right now I would have the town DBA have an engineer look at that I do not think you can even actually get into these three parking spaces if you were to build the structure as the plan today so I mean those are just a couple of reasons right there that I think that this should not be passed it's not in keeping with our neighborhood um that's number one on this owning why you're sitting here as a board is it in keeping in kind the neighborhood is it detrimental I feel it's detrimental to the neighborhood I think a lot of the other neighbors would say the same thing and I'll let some of them speak as well thank you um how much space is there between the the rear of the parking spots and the edge of the parking area uh 22 feet the spes are 18 feet deep there's 40 feet from the and again that's more space than the town hall using Spirit three parking spaces at and I see cars pulling in and out trouble-free those that came to the site yesterday saw the tenants cars park there again there was more than enough space and the degree that someone's concerned about engineering we have you know shown the more difficult Auto term was that last that last photo that last plan had more difficult spot showing the car back up and getting back out of nose first so again this more than exceeds the requirements for parking space size access size Etc so from a legal perspective we hit right here and again in town hall as the example from a pragmatic example you can see three spots more narrow than the one we're proposing with left space behind them and people get in and out all the time okay thank you and would anybody else in the room like to speak hi Mt Gibbs n l Avenue um I think you know we've had a lot of conversations as a neighborhood about this you know I'm relatively neutral towards the application but I do think I would like to know did the current B laws address what Mr Brady just raised which can you provide parking in support of a D2 Zone yes suer Med so the answer is yes structure is limited to the B1 Zone can you expand upon that what did you say Sarah the structure needs to be in the B1 Zone but there's nothing that says the parking it's the the parking has to be within the zone the fact that there's nothing that says it doesn't mean even what the fact that it's there's nothing that says that it has to be does it mean that it's allowed well if it's not prohibited under the bylaw it's allowed attorney and I'm not on the zba but I would argue that that that Common Sense would say the intent of zoning districts is to provide designation of use amongst districts D2 is an overlay District it's not a separate zoning District help my lay person brain understand D2 is an overlay zoning District district within 100 feet of School Street okay which allows two family residents what I'm trying to understand is so be wear in B Avenue majority Avenue res and those of us that own homes there make assumptions that that means something no multif family housing parking in the street because you're not in a D2 overlay District but the reality of this property is that a majority of the parking for homes that are in D2 are accessed through b and over you know if you just look at it right there's there's four units and the practicality of the site is that one two three potentially four five six cars will park behind the properties accessing through lincol that's the practicality the parking on the street off of school street is really for 880 C that's that provides enough parking 84 and 86 but it's not 84 84 comes through Street no they do 84 and 86 are on School Street I understand but they don't park on School Street they come down like an Avenue and they drive behind 90 and park another Street my friend lives in the home another street it's another Street that's how they access it and this was what the gentleman here raised about the concern about breaking Park PR again this is not for me to have an opinion on I do believe it's for the board to have an opinion on on whether or not that that is the intention of zoning I mean I personally don't believe that that makes a lot of sense you would have six trying to be fair about this I think it's six maybe it's five parking spots for servicing properties in D2 in B but they're parking on the same property and that's all the bulaw requires and I don't know right I think he's saying they're accessing it through b too is that allowed if you were accessing through D and then parking on B because it led into B from the it's the same it's a property lot parking must be on the same property lot I but I think part of it is okay I'm not going to have a back and forth on this yes if I may just raise a point two point one is that that line of argument suggest well if there's a you know a D2 street at the end of an R Street you can't use the R Street to get to because too much shopp is coming on the R Street to get to the D2 Street secondly if you go to the parking requirements they are uniform in all resid districts so even if this was entirely you know the B District right two units would still only require three spaces the density of parking the required if you want to say well we take the the B District parking requirements and put it on the back half of this lot the back you know third of this lot it would still be three spaces there's no increased requirement for parking and there's no prohibition anywhere in the Bible that says x amount of spaces are your maximum per unit all you have is minimums per unit right someone further down Lincoln Street wanted to own six cars and park them in their driveway and wanted to have you know them their spouse their weekend car and their three high school and college age children all have a car that's all fine in the B District you're allowed to have six cars for a single family if you're want the idea that six cars or five cars spread across these two structures would be problematic I think if uous there's no upper limit the amount of cars someone could put on a lot the only the bylaw is concerned with is making sure you have a minimum number of spaces on the law and as we demonstrated tonight we meet that just can I what a clarification we rebut that at least I I think we've heard your concern talking about down the End of the Street this is the end of the street where every all the cars come in that's the whole point there's congestion there if I have what he's talking about End of the Street It's the End of the Street we're at the beginning of the street where everything bottlenecks and everything traff the driveway entrance was properly approved by the town it was appealed the appeal was denied and it the decision was not appealed so if I may that's not entirely accurate it's not entirely accurate because the the only reason that it was approved was because the authority of the curb cut moved from the planning board which is crazy to to the DPW but it was approved by town meeting it was to the general bylaw it was appealed to the zba the zba denied the appeal and the the zba decision denying the appeal was not appealed so it's closed it's a valid driveway entrance can can I ask a question it's not an opinion it's a question would Zone allow because I think you brought up a good point if at the end of Lincoln Avenue or any Zone B district there was a parcel that just so happened to fall into D2 zoning right a vacant parcel would the development of that parcel be approved by the zba or by Zoning for development so the end of Lincoln Avenue just so happens to2 back there no I understand but that is the situation here not I don't think I don't think we we don't app on hypothetical situations um but I am looking at the accessory uses table Sarah no um and there are a couple of I'm on page page 21 in my version where you know there's garaging or maintaining of more than four automobiles um so it looks like this is within our right you know to Grant a special permit to approve no there's only um three parking spaces on this lot and if you look at 6.1 which it refers to parking yeah um it says required parking shall be either on the same premises as the activity serves which this parking is on 90 School Street or located within 300 feet of the building entrance on a separate parcel yeah so that even allows the parking behind 86 School not separated by a street parking is allowed in any driveway Ser serving a single family or two family residents yes so you know we don't have a lot of restrictions on parking we just require 1.5 per unit anybody else in the room like to yes s linoln app um is that a common driveway application or does it not need to be no okay is there any consideration for like safety issues on the street if there's more density of on street parking So currently it's difficult to back out of my street because if there's cars parked across the Street's pretty narrow so if they're parked across it's difficult for me to pull out and then if there's cars on both sides the street it's difficult for emergency vehicles to get down the street we have almost 20 children on the street so it's a pretty de that you know play area for children so and I would agree like coming out of there it's impossible to see out and get clearance when you're entering the street the other day I was at the stop sign and someone on the street was coming at me on the right hand lane because that fence is there they didn't even see my car at the stop sign and they were coming towards me not even they were just taking it on the left Lan so it's that fence is definitely detrimental and so I guess I wonder like the whole porch fence Frontage of the house is that really in keeping with safety issues for the neighborhood and now we're adding more cars exiting as everyone said before In This Very packed uh School traffic area where there's a school clock crossing right there it's I just think it's a safety issue to have that much activity without a lot of visibility when they're pulling out of that that new driveway they put up a fence so they can't even see left when they're pulling out and seeing if cars are coming down yeah it's just there's not much visibility for this quotequote road now but I think the requirement is they're providing the required off street parking and the town bylaw decided that 1.5 cars per unit was adequate one could argue it isn't but that's what the town did so the fact that there were cars parked in the street is saying to me that there were houses on the street who were parked in the street rather than in off street parking and there's really nothing we can do that property because it's been rented to a number of people so they've had overflow Vehicles as it is that are parking we can't speak to that um like you know if you had five cars at your house we can't speak to that if you have one your husband has one kids have them whatever your family configuration is we can't speak to that I live on Bennett street and the whole side of the street is completely filled with cars from people who have more than two cars put for a single family residence making it back out of our properties now I get it okay um anybody else in the room or should I go to zoom I've got hands up in Zoom okay Frank Simmons hi yes Frank Simmons uh this I'm the uh applicant with Degan Partners relative to 90 School Street and owner of 90 School Street I'd like to particularly address the uh notion of sorry I'd like to particularly address the notion of uh short-term rentals and although that uh that's something that we tried in the uh several years ago it's something that we haven't entertained a short-term rental there in uh over two years maybe or maybe over three years now and I'll say that the idea of short-term rentals is dist as distasteful to us as it is uh to a lot of the folks here in across Manchester so uh the it's neither the intent nor our desire uh nor we be engaging in short-term rentals uh with the exist existing properties uh or the proposed thank you B fmma please state your name and address yes I'm Brian Miller I live in 92 School Street I have two questions number one the drive uh the the driveway cut that was approved was for a driveway only for 90 School Street it wasn't for access to 86 School Street so they should not be allowed to continue to use that driveway to access 86 School Street that particular uh had been denied with prejudice in the past so they didn't ask for access to 86 School Street when they did that or they needed to access for a common driveway number two does the square footage of a lot which is 6,000 feet in in D2 do you get to add the lot size that's in section B to determine how much coverage of the new buildings or the buildings in total will be allowed because if you don't use the the square footage in Lot B even though everything is in lot D2 you come up with 42% of coverage of the building space the um coverage requirements are specified by lot not by zoning District true so which which which number do you get to say is the square footage of of the of the lat where they're putting they're they're proposing to put all this in D2 well D2 is only 6,000 square feet it's not 8,000 whatever 900 square feet it's my understanding it's wherever the largest portion of the yach lot is but you have an exception in the rules for D2 saying that they can't you don't incorporate the size of the lot for for on 3.4.2 that it is accepted from the uh from using the uh the lot coverage to adjoin it to the to the lot in unit D2 zoning bylaw 3.4.2 [Music] this did you find it Sarah yes and it says that when a lot is transacted by a zoning District boundary the regulations of this byw applicable to the larger part of the area of such lot may also be the grant of a special permit from the planning board be deemed to govern the smaller part Beyond such zoning District boundary but only to the extent not more than 30 linear feet in depth Beyond zoning District boundary this provision shall not apply in the residence District D2 so then what does apply in the residence District D2 it's it's the I know that's it's the larger portion of the laot so the majority of this lot is in D2 yep and so they get to include the whole lot in determining the coverage for D2 that's not what that says it's accepted in D2 what it says is that we're not entitled to a special permit from the planning board should we want if we wanted to build the addition into the B district and get those setbacks from the D2 District we would not be allowed to do so which is why the building has been designed and stopped before the B District because this property did not take advantage of that provision is available to other split Lots this has been designed specifically with that in mind again the degree that it helps this entire application was reviewed it was pre submitted weeks in advance to the building inspector to make sure that we are asking for the correct relief and we're not missing anything knowing that it was likely to be contentious here tonight unfortunately May at the end of the day we're trying to create one more unit of housing the addition itself fully conforms to every requirement dimensional or otherwise parking again you know with people complaining that there's too much on street parking and we have other people complaining about there's too many people trying to park back there right so we can't we can't go both ways with it right we could we could say you know okay we only do the three spaces okay we'll do six spaces whatever you whatever you want right if you want them off the street we can do more but then you there too many people it's like it's not trying to kill this project and I guess there may be some bad blood and that's you know unfortunate but before the board tonight is a very reasonable proposal to add an addition to an existing single family and to execute a change in use contemplated and even arguably encouraged by the bylaw which is why they make it this one special permit process with the zba we're not asking for any relief or any excuse or any shortcoming to be looked over with this application we are checking every single box to do this thing and the variance is just about the front porch that fence is there that driveway is there you is there right the only that's not there is this addition we're trying to permit and that addition will again you know allow another family either stay in Manchester or someone's kids to move back to Manchester you know or a new family to you know looking to take access so the things Manchester offer to come in and you know I don't know how many these you get each year but I can imagine given the challenges around this to find one that checks every sing single box dimensionally parking Etc you know already come by certainly the two for us for this heing tonight weren't would you uh consider removing the fence it's come up a few times the neighbors um if I can which fence are we talking about the one along linol the one along linol L it's been there for years yeah again again this is those things where and and the additions in the rear right nothing we're doing touches back come up as an issue by a few people it's it's you know compromise people allowed to put fences any get I know I don't live there though I think that one the concerns is just pulling out of the driveway might be a cosic concern and the picture rather high on the corner or the new one on the back the new one in the back no I don't think that's what they're complaining that're the one school issues both so so so and I've come up with this in other scenarios and a lot of times the very last one of two panels will just be step down will step step down just so people can see would the owner be willing to concede something like that to alleviate some of the issues so the the genuine answer is I don't have you know the authority before me tonight and I I would hate to lose six weeks over he's here he's here could answer that wants to hop on but the only point I want to make before Frank hops back on is that that new fence in the back again this is where we have people arguing or you know whether these are genuine arguments not they're attacking this project in conflicting ways that fence exists because last time one of the complaints was about having to look through the back of the property of this parking lot this fence got built I'm not talking about the whole fence no this is the wrong fence that you're talking about it's the fence on the front you need to be recognized and you need to state your name and address sorry this is Wendy Brady 10 Lincoln Avenue the fence that we are the community the street has the issue with is not the new one that was put up at the back of the property it's the dark brown fence that goes wraps around Lincoln AB into the front of school street so it is blocking your view down School Street towards town somebody coming up that hill or even a pedestrian walking in front of 90 School Street will literally stop in their tracks when our car pulls up to the stop sign as will the vehicle it is that fence that was I hate to say it but put up in um I I'm I'm I'm GNA try to stay positive here I believe it was retaliatory put up in retaliation to some complaints of the neighbors but that is beside the point it is a hazard it is a safety issue that's the issue at hand that fence thank you so the question I think that that Rob has asked is would the owner but that fence is nothing to do with depends but if you come down if you're coming down Lincoln you can't see if you to toward a school you can't see around the corner right we have so now we're going to add more cars into the parking spere field okay coming down Lincoln that's two or three more LOL that's two or three more cars okay so I think what the owner what we're looking for maybe not part of our PR perview but it's certainly worth discussing is suggesting that we have a safety issue here will the owner be willing to compromise in such a way as to make a more safe environment is what Rob suggested and I think that can Point Jim Brady again Lincoln app when I was in the zoning board if we heard things like this going we would say I would be possibly likely to maybe prove this if this condition was added and I know what what you're saying Sarah is the parking we're talking about the parking but parking creates more traffic which creates more issues which creates more safety so the fence becomes more of an issue as a result of the parking I think that's a point that a lot of people you might be making okay thank you I'm going to close off there anyone on is there no one else I think that's that's Rob speaking correct I I just think it's it's offense offense on the lot line which is allowed any place in Manchester and and to say because you're going to add another unit on a street that has eight houses on it I know Sor but we we talk about screening with arbites and other conditions to decisions all I'm saying is that you know if we're going to prove this then as a condition I think that fence could come down as a compromise with the residents in the area it's come up by several people what's the big deal I mean we've done it before it's so it seems like a common sense approach but again that that big fence that was put up in the back if you're trying to pull out of that and somebody's coming down the street complaining about that I'm talking about the fence along I know they're not complain about they don't complain about that yet but that will be the next one it's on the property owners one on one hey I'm not voting I don't okay but I'm looking at it what appears to be a common sense approach which might Garner some favor with your neighbors uh yeah I'm not able to I know Matt I'm sorry I'm not able to it's locked on responding to Veronica Hobson here and I can't respond to your your your text he's asking me if I want to answer answer this question and that was me so yeah it's not it's not your fault it's Zoom setup but um yeah we would consider an alteration to the fence but I don't think as a as a condition to the permit just we' do it as a as a Goodwill gesture and we lower the fence you know either side of that quarter to to increase visibility we're we're happy to do that I don't I don't think there really needs to be uh a condition to the permit nor nor is it like really sometimes these things when they don't when they don't become conditions then they never happen tell you what happen I don't think it's but I don't think it's bearing right to bring it into the the condition S I start Rob brought up the deal earlier where the going across the back of that lot to the the right away or whatever we want to call it right now with the other lot is how like we mentioned if something was ever to happen these properties got sold how how was that conditioned in there and how would that become still be be maintained as a right away so that the what he suggested and what I was going to include as a condition maybe his my wording is not as graceful as his but should the properties of 186 and 90 School Street fall out of common ownership an access easement over 90 School Street must be provided for parking at 86 School is that acceptable I guess um I mean they have any any potential buyer would have to you know have a lawyer work that that out with but if it's a condition in the special permit then it's going to need when they do the title search they're going to see the special permit and they're going to know they need to execute the agreement because it can't be NE executed now because of the common ownership right okay so you want a condition I just think it's the right thing to do it's it's a beautiful single family home and you're adding on to it I I think it's very reasonable just to take down the fence or at least minimize it tog suggest I'm not going to get into details I'm just saying like you know we have to we're remove the fence then you know if it's an issue heard yeah can no I've closed off public comment okay uh how do you write it in such a fashion that doesn't doesn't it just doesn't impede visibility to oncoming traffic if you're sitting in a car you're only you know you're that's the problem all right you drop it to if it's a six foot fence you drop it to four foot it's it's still gonna OB visibility make a stade fence I'm sorry interr I think are you are you okay with uh proposing the number for the blow You' be comfortable with I heard Frank I'm I'm sorry to interrupt yeah what about if we lower the the fence uh you know each either side of that corner and and remove it it's got a you know a panel on either side so basically remove half the things so you can see through the fence uh as well yeah and us it four but the reason offence is there is excuse me who's speaking this is Frank Simmons the applicant Mor McCarthy same oh I'm sorry okay sorry sorry I'm sorry I know sorry about that La McCarthy 90 School Street so we you know people with young children live there and the reason and people with pets and the reason we put that fence up is for safety it gives them nice areas for the children to just go there you know I do feel that if you want us we can cut it down to four feet I think you could easily see over four feet if you want us to take a you know every other panel out if that you feel like that would help but there's that are four feet you know that people can have on the corner and the other thing I and I appreciate that there's this children of there let's just make it four feet and and call it a day that sounds good I even consider that to be honest you know do and every other picket I just I to do that that would look goofy okay Fe expensive I don't it's just a compromise so the have fence 4 feet high and every everyone can see at the corner of School Street Lincoln out at the corner of School Street and Lincoln out now is that going to be I but how far back don't talk about the color okay but how far back is it is it going to be the entire notna go please I just I made my point done talking about it is that the line on the sand yeah there are post on either side of the of the corner you take to the first post and and bring it down so that would be eight feet whatever eight feet on either side you know I mean just make one comment just because like should the they had stated you know the spense is there for a purpose for pet and child safety so we've got to take that into consideration so I don't know well if we if they reduce it to 4 feet high on that um isn't that quote for swimming PS yes okay tell you who's not visiting you how won't be dve okay there um and so the other condition I was going to put in was three parking spaces are provided for 90o Street in addition to the five spaces currently provided for 84 86 School streets which are also in Street adding three spaces for 90 and then taking them away any more thoughts John no no more thoughts see anything over there no no I'm just thinking very intensely yeah no I all good so your condition is to have five parking spaces at 84 and 86 and 3 at 90 yeah so what I'm saying is three parking spaces are provided for 90 School Street which is a requirement yeah in addition to the five spaces currently provided for 84 and 86 School which which are also owned by 90 School Street property owner and then have should the properties of 86 and 90 School Street fall out of common ownership an access easement over 90 School Street must be provided for parking at 86 School Street okay the reason I'm saying 86 is because all the parking for 84 School Street is in front of 84 scho dist I could expand it if you want play okay next so there any more discussion on this application doing about the uh is there going to be a condition on the fence we talked about it it has to be purple we don't even know if it's a keeping street that isign we really haven't seen how it's going to be built we two seconds thrown up on the screen we haven't a chance to even neighborhood plans Sub in 2022 so for plus years at this point is it g to be fully St does it does it match the original style is it St it it's it's a separate it's a separate building connecting connected with a on story Z I don't know part of reement really really not expensive to buy some Arbor little one photos that we planted are not going to grow for a long long time we just the design is not really par public at Point you don't really know what substantially similar to the existing residents but turn the other um Direction the roof goes the other direction we don't speak to materials that's that's not our our area of concern we speak to structure okay I move to close the public hearing and approve the application of Seaside legal Solutions PC on behalf of Degan Partners LLC for a special permit under sections 4.2 5.4 and 12.5 of the zoning bylaw and their other relief may be necessary for a change of use to convert an existing single family residence into a two Family Residence by constructing a two-story Edition with a single story connector structure to the existing structure at 90 School Street assessor map number 41 Lot number [Music] 87 in District [Music] D1 found with a Tong cler on April 18 2024 based on a finding that the proposed use is in harmony with a purpose and intent of the bylaw the proposed expanded structure is appropriate in terms of b shape location on the lot and relationship to AB budding properties and existing structures within the immediate and general neighborhood off street parking requirements under Section 6.1 of the bylaw on that the EXP expanded twoam structure will not be substantially more detrimental or injurious to the neighborhood in which it is located than the existing single family structure and all conditions under section 12.5.2 of the zoning bylaw that the grant of a special permit had been met based on the following conditions the expanded structure is located as depicted on the proposed plot plan prepared by Hancock survey Associates in dated January 25th 2024 the expanded structure is built substantially in accordance with the following plan prepared by Helen fides architect LLC dated 12324 Pages 1 through six first floor second floor North elevation west elevation South elevation East Elevation three parking spaces are provided for 90 School Street in addition to the five spaces currently provided for 84 and 86 School Street which are also owned by 90 School Street property own should the properties of 86 and 90 School Street fall out of common ownership and access easement over 90 School Street must be provided for parking at 86 School Street decrease the height at the corner decrease the height of the fence at the corner of School Street and Lincoln a to four feet high on 85 and on 8 feet on School Street and Lincoln Street on 8T distance from the corner on School Street and Lincoln do I have a second second Rob second any discussion take a vote Rob yes Sean yeah John yeah Catherine yeah and SES I further move to approve the application of Seaside legal Solutions loc on behalf of Degan Partners loc for a variance under sections 5.4 and 12.3.3 of the zoning bylaw and other relief as may be necessary to allow the existing front porch to remain which encroaches 1.9 ft into the front set back based on a finding that owing to circumstances relating to the shape of the land and structure especially affecting such land and structure but not generally affecting the zoning District in which it is located a lital literal enforcement of the provisions of this byaw would involve substantial hardship Financial or otherwise to the applicant by requiring the deconstruction and reconstruction of an existing porch which has existed from many years and that the desired relief may be granted without substantial detriment to the public good without nullifying or substantially derating from the intent or purpose of this bylaw do I have a second second John second any discussion vote Rob yes Johan yes John yes Catherine yes I'll WR it you will who would like to review it I'll review it yeah your situation is you're all set thank you very much okay now we move to administrative matters we'll be really quick correction that's Lincoln a for the fence not Ln thank you oh okay Linn got it yeah thank you so I haven't reviewed any of the minutes yet so we'll put those off to next meeting okay um the only outstanding decision is one I have a 26 Proctor which I'll do soon um the only other issue I wanted to discuss tonight I wanted two things I wanted to discuss number one our next meeting is June 26 which is the fourth Wednesday of the month because June 19th is a holiday so I had to move it from the third week the um and second some terms are expiring on June 30th I to me does my term expire boy so you're going up for another three years ah yes let me think about that okay because now I'm on the school building committee which is gonna that's a yes take a lot time yeah we need John after the I just sorry um SE is your term up or not it's it was in the town report that it was up but I thought you were just reappointed last year I was just for three years right well yeah because I got swapped with okay maybe I was TR not to say it I couldn't come up with another word I'm sorry I turn that's up hey cther really need you no excellent job there's another one up oh mine's up Catherine no do you have to go before the select board ter I don't know I even know what's going on yeah I have to um Catherine your term is up she just should your term is up in 2025 you've indicated a desire to resign prior to that is that true or are you willing to last another year I would really like like to resign prior to that um but I I don't want to leave anyone in a bad position either so um we're advertising for the zba yeah um if anybody knows somebody interested in being on the zbaa do you know somebody are you kidding nobody wants to do this nobody wants to do this especially right now I want out uh oh I'll I'll think about it okay I do we know anyone announce the men's club yeah do that did you sign me up for men's you sign um tomorrow night but we don't have any applications CBA right sign a minut I'll get to the application can he come tomorrow night just going to that June meeting I'm going to be out that week where are you going to be okay out of the country okay where Barcelona oh I I already got um okay probably so have we finished here yeah I think we finished a long I'll take a motion to adjourn second okay all in favor okay thank you didn't really think it needed be all right so I'm going e e e e e e e e