 Perfect, so it is Tuesday, September 13, 2022, 731 p.m. Good evening. My name is Christian Klein and I am the chair of the Arlington zoning Board of Appeals and I'm calling this meeting at the board to order. Like to confirm all members and anticipated officials are present members of the zoning Board of Appeals Roger Dupont here. Patrick Hanlon here. Kevin Mills. Here. Daniel Rickidelli. Here. Lane Hoffman. Here. And then get Holly. There. Welcome to you all glad to have you all here. On behalf of the town, Rick Valarelli our board's administrator. Good evening, Mr chairman. Evens rally rally and assisting him, Vincent Lee from inspectional services. I think he'll be joining us. So sooner than later. Okay, perfect. So we're going to be appearing on behalf of 82 winter street with the James Boyle. I let him in. There's here a minute ago I'm sure he'll try to join back in again. Is there anyone else here on behalf of 82 winter street. No, okay, we'll come back to him. Then on behalf of nine, is there anyone here for 956 Massachusetts Avenue. I specifically asked about 956 mass ab is that one is going to be withdrawn. So if there's anyone who is here specifically for 956 Massachusetts Avenue, we will not be hearing that this evening. Mr chairman, I have a formal request to withdraw that request. Perfect, thank you. So will this open meeting of the Arlington zoning board of appeals is being conducted remotely consistent with an act relative to extending certain state of emergency accommodations signed into law on July 16, 2022. This act includes an extension until March 31, 2023 of the remote meeting provisions of Governor Baker's March 12 2020 executive order suspending certain provisions of the open meeting law, which suspended the requirement to hold all meetings and a publicly accessible location. Public bodies may continue holding meetings remotely without a forum of the public body physically present at a meeting location so long as they provide adequate alternative access to remote meetings. Public bodies may meet remotely so long as reasonable public access is afforded to the public can follow along with the deliberations of the meeting and opportunity for public participation will be provided during the public comment period, during each public hearing. For this meeting the Arlington zoning board of appeals has convened a video conference via the zoom application with online and telephone access as listed on the agenda posted to the town's website identifying how the public may join this meeting is being recorded and it will be broadcast by ACMI. Please be aware that attendees are participating by a variety of means, some attendees are participating by video conference. Others are participating by computer audio or by telephone. Recordingly, please be aware that other folks may be able to see you your screen name or another identifier. Please take care to not share personal information. Anything you broadcast may be captured by the recording. We ask you to please maintain decorum during the meeting, including displaying an appropriate background. All supporting materials that have been provided members of this body are available on the town's website unless otherwise noted. The book is encouraged to follow along using the posted agenda. This chair has served the right to take items out of order in the interest of promoting an orderly meeting. As the board will be taking up. New business at this meeting as chair I make the following land acknowledgement. Whereas the zoning board of appeals for the town of Arlington, Massachusetts discusses and arbitrates the use of land in Arlington, formerly known as monotomy and Algonquin word meetings with waters. The tribe acknowledges the down of Arlington is located on the ancestral lands of the Massachusetts tribe, the tribe of indigenous peoples from whom the colony province and Commonwealth have taken their names. We pair respects to the ancestral bloodline of the Massachusetts tribe and their descendants who still have an historic Massachusetts territories today. So we have several items on our agenda this evening I'm going to quickly start with the administrative items. The operation of the board miss such be conducted without input from the general public board will not take up any new business on prior hearings nor will there be the introduction of any new information on matters previously brought before the board. After introducing each item I will invite members of the board to provide any comments or questions they may have any members wish to engage in a discussion with other members please remember to do so through the chair taking care to identify yourself for the record. So that item number two on our agenda is the approval of the meeting minutes from August 30, 2022. So these minutes were prepared by Mr Valerelli distributed to the board for comment. With that, are there any additional comments or questions in regards to the minutes from August 30 being none may I have a motion to approve the minutes from August 30, 2022. Thank you, Mr Hanlon have a second. Second. Thank you, Mr DuPont. The roll call vote of the board for approval of the minutes from August 30, 2022. Mr DuPont. Hi, Mr Hanlon. Hi, Mr Mills. Hi, Mr Riccardelli. This often. Hi, Mr Holly. This is a very complex decision written very well by our own Mr Hanlon. It was distributed to the board for questions and comments and then a final version was posted to the board again this afternoon are there any further questions or comments in regards to the written decision for 24 grant the road. Seeing none. May I have a motion to approve the written decision for 24 grand view wrote. Mr Chairman so moved. I in second. Second. Mr DuPont track. So roll call vote of the board. Mr DuPont. Hi, Mr Hanlon. Hi, Mr Mills. Hi, Mr Riccardelli. Hi, Mr Chair votes. I that decision for 24 grand view wrote. It brings us to item four on our agenda, which is the approval of the decision for 49 Valentine road 49 Valentine road was a decision also ably written by our own Mr Hanlon distributed to the board for questions and comments, and then a final version posted to the board this afternoon. Are there any further questions or comments in regards to the written decision for 49 Valentine road. In regards to the written decision for 49 Valentine road. Seeing none. May I have a motion to approve the written decision for 49 Valentine road. Mr Chairman. Mr Hanlon. So moved. Thank you, Mr Hanlon. Am I have a second. Thank you, Mr DuPont. We'll call vote of those voting on the original hearing Mr DuPont. Hi, Mr Hanlon. Hi, Mr Mills. Hi, Mr Riccardelli. Mr Chair votes I so the written decision for 49 Valentine road is approved which brings us to item five on our agenda approval of the written decision for 3335 Varnum road this was well written by our own Mr DuPont and distributed to the board for questions and comments and the final version was posted this afternoon. Are there any further questions or comments in regards to the written decision for 3335 Varnum road. Seeing none. May I have a motion to approve the written decision for 3335 Varnum road. So I thought I'd let Mr. Mr DuPont shot at this one. So moved. Thank you. So vote of those voting on the original decision for 3335 Varnum street. Mr DuPont. Hi, Mr Hanlon. Hi, Mr Mills. Hi, Mr Riccardelli. And the chair votes I that decision is approved for 3335 Varnum street, which brings us to item number six on our agenda to vote the approval of the decision for 101 Robbins road. This was a decision that I wrote distributed to the board for questions and comments and posted a final version to the board this afternoon are there any further questions or comments in regards to the written decision for 101 Robbins road. Seeing none may I have a motion to approve the written decision for 101 Robbins road to chairman. So moved. Thank you. Thank you. Mr DuPont. Vote of the board to approve the written decision for 101 Robbins road. Mr DuPont. Hi, Hanlon. Hi, Mills. Hi, Mr Riccardelli. Hi. And the chair votes I. So that is a written decision for 101 Robbins road is approved. And concludes the administrative items portion of tonight's agenda. I'll just reiterate for people who may have joined the meeting. After the very start, the hearing for 756 Massachusetts Avenue will be withdrawn the application is withdrawing because it the application actually needs to run through the ARB and not the ZDA. Only be voting tonight to accept the withdrawal. So that was the only reason you're on tonight's meeting. I can feel free to to log off. So now turning to the public hearings on tonight's agenda. Here's some ground rules for effective and clear conduct of tonight's business after I announce the agenda item I will ask the applicants to introduce themselves for themselves and make their presentation to the board. I can request that members of the board asked what questions they have on the proposal and after the board's questions have been answered. I will open the meeting for public comment and at the conclusion of public comment the board will deliberate and vote on the matter. That brings us to item seven on our agenda this evening which is docket number three seven one three 82 winter street. So I would ask the applicant to please introduce themselves and tell us what they would like to do. Hi. Hi, what do you need from me. So if you could just give us a brief introduction to what you would like to do and if there's anyone else representing you on the on the meeting this evening. I'm representing myself, no one else. The reason being convert the accessory drawing, which was my garage into a ground level living space area due to a number of health issues, hot condition condition. Several other conditions. That is the real reason you want to do this to move into the garage as a single level, because I'm unable to go up and down 1717 steps every day to set the floor level of my current home. That's the big reason why I have to do it. You know, I want to be in place in Allington, I've been there for a lot of years. So, there's something wrong. No. No, I'm just, I'm showing the application that you file. This is the application. So it's a request for a special permit to create an accessory dwelling unit in an existing garage. Yes, property. This is an existing building structure that's been there since, you know, since I owned the property. The picture you're seeing right now is what it's going to look like at the front. And as you can see in this drawing, where the garage is located. The real setback inside the setback. It's like I really tell you, I didn't read it myself right now. So focus in a little bit. Yeah. So this is the garage here. Yes, the property residential properties on two sides, the commercial property here, and there's apartments across winter street. Well, as you can see the structure itself. It's a lot building, and it's been there since the house was built back in 1825. So, you know, I'm not adding on to it. I'm not taking away from it. I just want to convert to have a living space for myself because it helps. And the. So as a part of the accessory dwelling unit by law, the excessive dwelling is the building in what is the current house in single ownership or is it condo. No, which would build on a lot foundation. Is there a single owner for both units in the current house or. Yeah, so on with the whole property. Got it. Okay. There's no mortgage or nothing on it. This is a proposed plan. Yeah, that's what it looks like inside layout furnished. And this is the property in the opposite direction but very similar existing house in the existing garage. So this falls under. The accessory dwelling units, which is a section of the zoning by law that was adopted in 2021. And it sets up a series of requirements for an accessory dwelling unit. In particular to us is what five, which allows for the an accessory dwelling unit to be within essentially an accessory to what building provided that such accessory building is located within six feet of a lot line. The accessory dwelling unit shall be allowed only if the board of appeals acting pursuant to six section 3.3 grants a special permit upon its finding that the creation of such an accessory dwelling unit is not substantially more detrimental to the neighborhood, and the use of such accessory building as a private garage or other allowed use. So that is the determination that the board is requested. Make this evening. And then in the way. There's a separate section. Which is 813 ease. Does not increase or affect the non conforming nature of said existing dwelling or accessory building and shall not cause such dwelling or accessory building to become non conforming or result in any additional dimensional requirements with respect to such dwelling or accessory building provided that such creation or addition of an accessory dwelling unit night in neither expands the footprint, nor the height of said dwelling or accessory building. In this case, except one for the change is necessary to provide for required egress or other modifications to meet the building code or state fire code to for any projects allowed under 539 which is the section we've section that involves additions in setbacks, and then section three to the extent authorized by a special permit issued pursuant to clause three of section five nine to be one the fifth bullet which was what we had read prior. So those are the relevant sections of the bylaw. And then the applicant, there are a couple of additional. I couldn't say came forward. Put that. That one, not that one. Memorandum. You've seen them memorandum right now. This is the memo that was issued by the Department of Planning and Community Development. In regards to this application. I was looking for this is this. This is additional information that we were asked to include. So one was a color rendering showing. On completion of the work. So this is the existing garage. Basically, with the existing garage or removed and the front side redone. And then there are elevations. So left and front. Rear and right. And again, this is the floor plan is shown. Which is the directions. With that. Are there questions from the board in regards to this application. Do I have any questions? Oh, is it members of the members of the board have questions for you. I really don't understand what you're saying in the question. Mr. Boyle, I was asking if there were members of the zoning board who had questions, they had wanted to ask of you. Oh, okay. Where I'm at. So, okay. So if there are no direct questions at this time from members of the board, I will go ahead and open the meeting for public comment. I'm going to remind the comment that public questions and comments are taken as they relate to the matter of hand and should be directed to the board for the purpose of informing our decision. Members of public will be granted time to ask questions and make comments. The chair asked those waving those wishing to address the board a second time during any particular hearing to please be patient and allow those wishing to speak for the first time to go ahead of them. Members of public who wish to speak should digitally raise their hand using the button on the participant tab in the zoom application. Please dial star nine to indicate you would like to speak. You'll be called upon by the meeting host, you'll be asked to give your name and address and you'll be given time for your questions and comments. All questions and comments are to be addressed through the chair and please remember to speak clearly. Once all public questions and comments have been addressed. The public comment period will be closed and I will do my best to show any documents requested. As we go forward. So with that, we have. Mr. Moore. Yes, thank you, Mr. Chair, Steve Moore, Piedmont Street. Relative to parking. I know that I'm just, this is probably my ignorance. I'm not sure how the, the ADU. Bylaw and regulations. Sparking issues. I know this is a two family home. A dwelling unit could potentially. Three family home. And I, I'm wondering what about. Working that might be increased. It's, it's more an educational question. Absolutely. So the. The bylaw of that authorizes accessory dwelling units. I'm just trying to find the right portion of it. It does not require the creation of a parking space for the accessory dwelling unit. Apologize. I don't know this. Well, actually, that kind of answers my question. Even though, even though there'll be decreasing. The removal of the garage space. You know, maybe you don't have to increase parking. Mr. Chairman. Mr. Hamlin. I just wanted to note for the record. When you go by the property, the driveway is actually fairly ample. We don't have the front. And the building is actually quite close to the street. We don't have the problem of parking in a front yard that vexed us last time. So there is, there is room there for. Austria parking and, and so that could some of that considerable amount of that is being used as things stand now. So regardless of what. The bylaw says it's also, it's also true that you're not dealing with a property that is so filled up that there's no place to park with the front, front yard. Great. Thank you, Mr. Thank you, Mr. Hamlin. Thank you, Mr. Moore. And Mr. Hamlin. Are there any other members of the public who wish to address this hearing? This being the hearing in regards to 8082 winter street. Going once. Going twice. The public comment period for this hearing is now closed. So we're going to go back to that. With that, we return back to. The question before us. So what we have is an application to convert an existing garage into an accessory dwelling unit. This is sort of the first. One of, we sort of had something similar to this recently, but this is the first sort of true application for an accessory dwelling unit in an accessory building. So we're going to go back to that. So we're going to sort of carefully go through the bylaw to make sure that we're covering all our bases with this. So I'll go ahead. It's up. So this is the section five, nine, two. The principal section for accessory dwelling units. So under requirements. In any residential or business district, we have a two-story complex dwelling. If all of the following conditions are met. We do have in this case, this is an existing two family on the property. So it would be allowed. And it's within the residential district. So the first bullet point. Okay. So Mr. Valarelli, in this case. Would the floor area. Relate to the. Entire building that it's adjacent to, or does it, is it just to one floor of the building adjacent to it? The entire building to the best of my knowledge, Mr. Jim. And so this is new territory for all of us. But it seems that Mr. Boyle is requesting. The floor area of the building. So the existing. Growth floor area of the. Building is listed as 4,672. And the proposed gross floor area. Of the accessory dwelling unit is 306 square feet. So obviously it is well below. Below that. That's how I see it as well, Mr. Chairman. Right. Thank you, Mr. Valarelli. Thank you. So the. Bullet point number two is any alteration, causing an expansion or an addition to a building. In connection with an accessory dwelling unit. So that does not apply. Bullet number three. Accessory dwelling unit shall maintain a separate entrance. Either directly from the outside or through an entry hall or shared board or. So this has a, it's own separate entrance doors. We saw that's on the front facing the street. bullet point number four no more than one accessory dwelling unit is allowed per principal dwelling unit so currently there are two principal dwelling units because it's a two family and this will be the first 80 you on the property so that condition is met um then the boat five accessory dwelling unit can be located in number three an accessory building which is a which accessory building shall not constitute a principal or main building by the corporation of the accessory dwelling unit which is true provided that if such accessory building is located within six feet of a lotline then such accessory dwelling unit shall be allowed only if the board of appeals acting first went to section six excuse me section three three grants a special permit upon its finding that the creation of such accessory dwelling unit is not substantially more detrimental neighborhood than the use of such accessory building as a private garage or allowed use so that is a determination that we will have to meet bullet six the accessory dwelling unit shall not be used as short term rental in accordance with title five article 18 section three of the bylaws and as the applicant stated that it is it is there is an occupant who will be taking a long term residence so this is not a condition this is not an issue um and then bullet seven the accessory dwelling unit shall be subject to all applicable requirements of the state building code and state fire code including any such requirements if and as applicable which prohibit openings including windows and exterior walls of dwellings located within a certain distance from the property line uh so this is something that the inspectional services department will evaluate and rule on when they do their their building code review um and then to those are the conditions so we will need to decide that we have like it appears that all the conditions have been met with the only question is art is number five which we should discuss further um and then the other parts are um less for are not a part of those requirements um so the accessory dwelling unit shall not change the zoning classification that is just this will remain in a two family building even though there's a third unit on the plot uh number three no off street parking spaces are required as we discussed earlier uh number four accessory dwelling unit shall not be owned separately from the principal dwelling unit um so it cannot be sold off as a separate condominium and for the administration portion um is not uh for us the administrative portion is for inspectional services um it's administrative are there any questions in regards to um the requirements as put forward in the zoning bylaw mr chairman so i actually um would like to go back up to a one the purpose and i'm only doing it because it's so new and i think that context is important and i know that we'll be dealing with more of these as time goes on and so i just want to make sure that i i have it um in in the correct perspective so i i know it starts up by saying you know allowing property owners with an opportunity to age in place which is i think exactly what the applicant is is saying and then it references elderly and disabled etc and he may also qualify under those terms as well um but i have an interest in knowing because once you look at that and i think that would cover mr boil um but once you go down and i realize that c1 is really an administrative issue with the uh with the building department but um just because it's so new again is the only statement that an applicant has to make that he or she is going to reside in the accessory dwelling unit and are we ever making any inquiry whatsoever into the rest of the building and the reason i'm asking is assuming that you have a building where you're living in the main building and then you decide for whatever set of reasons that comport with a one that you want to move into the accessory dwelling unit do we care do we inquire as to who's going to be in the portion of the main building that you're vacating and i guess that's really just you know for perspective again because obviously we need to make sure that the purpose that's uh recited in a one is actually being met and in this case i think but are we ever if somebody moves into the accessory dwelling unit do we ever look to see who's going to be in the rest of the building that's being uh vacated no um so i don't know if mr hanlon wants to comment on this too uh during the discussion at town meeting very clearly the intent is that the resident can live in the main house and rent out the accessory dwelling unit to support their income or the main resident can live in the accessory dwelling unit and rent out the remainder of the house for income or other purposes so it doesn't really matter which who lives in which as long as they're in common ownership and the owner is in one of the units and so what this what this will mean is that specifically for this property if in the future this property is sold and a new owner decides they would like to condo the building and sell off the main units separately they can do that but upon doing so they have to designate the accessory dwelling unit to one of the two units and whoever purchases it has to reside there um in either the main unit or that accessory dwelling unit but as soon as the property is subdivided that unit has to be one of the units well the reason again i'm asking is when i look at c1 and this maybe is not a discussion that affects the current application but it does say that the affidavit has to state that the owner or a family member the owner is going to reside in the principle dwelling unit or accessory unit and i know that the discussion we had on the prior case involved uh you know the people who lived in the home wanting to have one of their parents move in so that seemed to be tailor made for that but there does seem to at least in the first instance be a requirement that it is going to either be a family member or or the owner residing there and and i know you know i know this would be the angels on the head of a pen and i'm not i don't want to make this longer than it needs to be but i just want to make sure they're going forward i have an understanding of what the requirements are so you're saying mr chairman that the as long as the owner lives in the accessory dwelling unit we're not really going to inquire beyond mr chairman mr handlin so it's going to be clear from what the chair said before is that the owner has to live in one or the other uh an owner who has no connection with the tenant in the in the affordable dwelling unit other than collecting rent that's still fine and that's actually one of the purposes that's listed uh up above in a one what this is aimed at is attempting to kind of create avoid creating a kind of a market in affordable dwelling units so that people are speculating in this and building them in the hope of having someone in where there's no relationship necessarily whatever to either of the units on the part of the people who are doing the work but at this point the only thing that really matters and it isn't really our problem particularly because most of these cases are going to be done by right but it's mr chompa needs to have an affidavit of this kind before issuing a building permit you also notice that it's before issuing a building permit so that the statute does not really address what happens later on after that affidavit is filed and i'm assuming it's accurate but times change there isn't an ongoing requirement even of the ownership of one of the of one of the two units so it's it's an effort it wasn't it was a compromise to begin with and it's an effort to sort of try to take this outside the general area of commerce and turn it into sort of ordinary relations between people without unduly burdening the ability to to do all this through a number of other proposals that were made and rejected by top meeting okay thank you thank you mr dubon there's further questions from the board none i will revert back to the um planning department memo let's see i can figure out which one it is so there's a memorandum prepared by the planning department to assist the board in sort of interpreting the zoning bylaw and one of the things they do is they review the special permit criteria under section three three three which is a requirement for the board to do for this application in addition to finding that that the creation of the accessory dwelling unit is not substantially more detrimental to the neighborhood than the use of the accessory building as a private garage or other allowed use so as we had we had reviewed the other requirements before so this was both five so i just want to go through these criteria so criterion number one the requested use uh requested use is permitted through a special permit in the r2 zoning district since the existing accessory structure is located less than six feet from the property line but we are in our two district it's a two-family house the accessory dwelling unit is allowed up to two accessory dwelling units and because it is in an accessory building and within six feet of the property line that special permit is required in order for it to be approved so it can be approved Mr. Chairman yes Mr. Mr. I wonder this is this is a convenient way of addressing something that I think it's important for us to be clear on um and that is it's it's only because the existing structure is located less than six feet from the property line uh that the applicant has to come to us at all um that this is not this is not really an 8.1.3 issue there is no extension of a nonconformity here uh because section 8.1.3e says so explicitly so the only source of any of the obligations that the that that the applicant is solving by coming to us is 5.9.2 the fifth bullet that we read with both requires a special permit and requires a uh a finding of of that of not substantially more detrimental so all of this you don't need to go outside the framework of 5.9.2 and you shouldn't be actually because there's no real difference in treatment between a new garage and one that already exists from the point of view of of of that section if you'll remember when we dealt with the earlier case the first case that came up came up here our big problem was that it wasn't an accessory building uh but an attempt but to build an addition too close to the line and one of the solutions that we explored in the hearing at that point was why well couldn't you make it an accessory building uh and that's what would happen if the applicant here didn't already have a garage but was planning to build one um so just because this is the first time it's really clear to get your doctrinal basis right and I think that the discussion of article 1.0 even though it doesn't in substance lead to a different conclusion the discussion of 8.1.3 might be a little bit confusing and I I think we should be clear that that's not where we're looking we're looking at 5.9.2 instead. Thank you Mr. Handler. It's all Mr. Handler said 5.9.2 specifically references meeting their criteria of section 333 so that's what we're reviewing now we've done criteria 1 so criterion number 2 um there's a public convenience and welfare so this proposal would provide an accessory dwelling unit to allow the owners to age in place um so this unit Mr. Handler. Mr. Chairman at the risk of I as far as I'm concerned what Mr. DuPont pointed out to begin with the statutory policy in favor of fostering ADUs is is applicable here and it's applicable regardless of why the owner wants it so I'm quite sympathetic to the idea of aging in place I'm doing a lot of aging and I'm spending a lot of time in place myself so I feel a great deal of sympathy with that but uh the fact is that if the answer was it would provide an ADU to allow the owners to collect rent from college students to support their house that would be just the same it doesn't the the the statute doesn't distinguish among this or that use and say one is a good use and the other is not so the important thing here is that the statute for lots of reasons furthers that and there's nothing going on here that is inconsistent with the uh statement of purpose that Mr. DuPont pointed out all right thank you Mr. Handler. Uh criteria number three undue traffic congestion and impairment of public safety uh there would not be an undue increase in traffic congestion or impairment to public safety uh this is essentially an existing branch structure there is a possibility this might increase the count of vehicles by one should the resident have a the resident of the accessory dwelling unit have a vehicle um but that is a a small increase on a you know in a large street especially one that has a commercial operation on one side and an apartment complex on the other side um criteria number four undue burden on municipal systems would not be an undue burden on municipal systems this would be the addition of essentially one restroom and uh one bathroom and one kitchen and would not be an undue burden um brings it to criteria number five the special regulations so if granted the special permit proposal would either require conditions of ad use uh in 592 b1 so we had reviewed these earlier which is the the bullet points for the fire section uh criteria number six uh the integrity character of the district detrimental to health morals and welfare um so as written by the um by the planning department while the accessory building excuse me is located less than six feet from the abutting properties proposal decree navy u is not substantially more detrimental to the neighborhood than the existing use as a garage or another allowed use the property about the b4 zoning district vehicular oriented business to the north and excuse me the cross the street from apartments in the r5 zoning district additionally three family homes are located in the r3 zoning district to the northeast accessory building is located entirely in the rear yard of the property that the sod improvements are designed to complement the style of the primary dwelling and adjacent homes in the neighborhood additional window details and new egress improve the compatibility of the structure with the surrounding neighborhood and staff know the proposed elevation and plans are not consistent however overall this proposal would not determine the impact of neighborhood care for the district or joining districts nor will be detrimental to the health morals or welfare of the neighbors the property um and what the what they were pointing out with in terms of the drawing inconsistency is the color image of the front of the building shows a window to the right of the entry door where there is not a window in the plan um and i the board would just need to discuss how they think we would need to condition um that should we choose to vote this evening um and the criteria seven uh detrimental excess in particular use this would not be any detrimental excesses this would effectively be the first accessory dwelling unit in an accessory building in the entire town so um would not be in excess those are the criteria are there any questions in regards to those or um question as to whether the board if there's any specific feelings about whether this accessory dwelling unit by by Grandavid's location would be substantially more detrimental to the neighborhood than the use of the private garage mr chairman mr handlin i wonder if the chair could inquire of mr boil which of the two proposals uh in terms of the windows is what he actually proposes to submit to us the actual window or not go ahead and bring that up so that this is the plan um which has two windows on the front in a door it's hard to see there's a window shown here um in yellow because it's a it's a half height window up high uh and then there's a window on the rear but if we so this is the right side view with that window the rear view with the front view with the door and the two windows but the image had shown three windows on the front on one side and one on the other so i just so mr boil the question is um is the arrangement of doors and windows as shown on these elevations that were submitted on the 8th of september is that what your intention is actually uh we're still undecided i think we're going to go with the two windows in the door and that's it okay is it from my perspective there are too many windows um but the window in the bedroom will be a uh emergency exit window okay and then on the kitchen side there'll be a uh just basically for sunlight on the other side of the house okay it's pretty much okay so the so the revised images that we were shared um that are dated nine eight we can reference those specifically as being the that would be the choice thank you um was one other thing i had wanted to just recommend to the applicant um oops sorry so in this so currently the way it's laid out um the entry door overlaps the refrigerator yes and just thinking longer term um should your mobility be restricted and you're uh in a wheelchair it might be difficult to navigate around the corner of the fridge i don't know if you would consider moving the door over slightly to give yourself a little bit more of a straight access to the door oh it's going to be long term i mean everything the handicap accessible uh given up to my leg twice already i know it's like trying to get around a wheelchair and crutches so everything would be outdoors would be a handicap requirement so this here is going to need to be tweaked a little bit uh i already spoke to the architect about it so he's willing to work with me on the interior thank you are there other questions from the board mr sure may i ask one question mr rick it out please i just wonder um if the applicant could uh confirm that that the height of the building isn't changing i know i know the extent of the garage are remaining the same i just wonder uh ceiling needed to be raised in order to accommodate mr boil is there any change in the height of the building no no there will be no changes at all to the exterior of the building other than with the window down it's perfect anything that's going to change right thank you any further questions from the board i have no questions i mean i'm here to answer the whatever you need okay so um so for the zoning board so if we when we approve if we were to vote to approve um there are conditions that we would apply um for the first the three standard conditions which i'll go ahead and and read now and we'll we can sort of address this um so number one is the plans and specifications approved by the board for the special permit shall be the final plans and specifications submitted to the building inspector of the town of harlington in connection with this application for zoning relief should be no deviation during construction from approved plans and specifications without the express written approval of the arlington zoning board of appeals condition number two the building inspector is hereby notified that he is to monitor the site and should proceed with appropriate enforcement procedures at any time he deems the violations are present the building inspector shall proceed under section three point one of the zoning bylaw and under the provisions of chapter 40 section 21 d of the massachusetts general laws and institute non-criminal complaints if necessary the building inspector may also approve and institute appropriate criminal action also one of the section three one and number three the board shall maintain continuing jurisdiction with respect to the special permit grant um so our standard number one sort of indicates that the the plan submitted are the final plans um but as the as was noted by the um there were some questions about exactly what the plans included um by the planning department so i'm wondering if we want to just include the statement that the the plan and elevations that were submitted to the board on september 8 will be the the guiding documents for and exterior elevations dated september 8 2022 shall be the plan for the project mr chairman handlin so i have a question the suggestion that the peer made earlier about some rearrangements inside uh with the inside layout of rooms and and refrigerators and so on in order to uh make sure that that this is accessible as one's mobility gets less um the applicant indicated that he needed a certain amount of flexibility to make that work that those are not final but i've never really interpreted the final plans requirement that we usually use as binding applicants to a particular arrangement of the rooms inside the house except in so far as that may have to do with the half story requirement uh in in some occasions uh and i assume that that you know if the applicant wanted to move the refrigerator that he could do that um i guess the question is whether there's enough flexibility for him to move the door a little bit to give himself some extra room and what we need to say in order to allow him to do that without necessarily having to rendezvous with us again um so when i was looking at the plans that the location of the doors and windows is not dimensioned and so sort of in my mind as long as you know they're still in the relative positions they're in keeping with the plans um okay does that sit well with folks to me it does it helps are there other conditions that uh thank you mr melz are there other conditions the board would consider trying to think if there's anything specifically related to dwelling units that we would want to include as a condition but it's nothing that comes to mind mr chairman the the statute itself has got quite a lot in it and doesn't need our help i guess uh all of those things will have to be observed okay all right so with that uh are there any last questions or comments from the board okay uh then i would ask for a motion um on this hearing mr chairman mr handlin i move that the application be approved subject to the standard conditions and the uh revision that the chair proceeded to keep mentioned before and read into the record second so what the board has before it is a motion to approve the special permit for 82 i guess it's 80-82 winter street with four conditions those being three standard plus the one additional so any questions from the board about the nature of the vote saying none i'll do a roll call vote of the board mr dupont hi mr handlin hi mr melz hi mr rickard ellie hi and the chair votes i the special permit for 80 82 winter street is approved with the four conditions thank you very much for your application mr boyle you um are approved you will need to follow up with mr valorelli and the board will uh vote on a the written decision for your application at the next meeting mr chairman mr handlin um when is the next meeting actually do we have one another one in september or are we waiting until october so um oh mr valorelli now we're just talking about this right before the call so there are two items which were which we believe were advertised for the 27th um mr valorelli does not believe that the applicants are actually ready to present and so that is being evaluated by um by him and if he feels they're ready then we will um we will hear those on the 27th if not we will still need to meet on the 27th if only to continue them to believe october 11th is the following day i see so that means that we'll probably if we're going to meet this will take very little time i think to actually vote on the opinion the administration usually don't so basically we should be counting on being able to take action and let let mr boyle go forward on the 27th that is correct so that brings us up to our next item on our agenda which is number eight which is docket 3714 956 massachusetts avenue uh so as i alluded to earlier um so this is an application to change graphics on a sign and replace a sign uh when the zoning bylaw was revised back i think it was in 2020 with the new signed bylaws a part of the zoning bylaws that um all sign applications would go initially to the planning department where they would be issued uh where they would either be administratively approved or if there were issues that needed to be resolved then it would go and be referred to the redevelopment board and not to the zoning board of appeals and the reasoning at the time was that it made much more sense for one board in town to be hearing all of the signed applications rather than some being heard by one board and some being heard by another uh and so in when this application was uh provided to us um i inquired back with the plane department and with inspectional services and uh we are all in agreement that this really should be going through the redevelopment board and so therefore mr valarelli asked the applicant if they would uh agree to withdraw without prejudice um and so this is their email requesting uh withdrawal for the application without prejudice um are there any questions from the board in regards to this if that may i have a motion to accept the withdrawal the withdrawal of the application for 956 massachusetts avenue without prejudice so moved thank you mr hanan a second second thank you duPont so a roll call vote of the board mr duPont aye mr hanlon aye melz aye ricka deli aye the chair votes aye so that uh application is withdrawn thank you for that um so that is the last item on our agenda this evening as we discussed briefly before um there are two cases that might come before us on the 27th of of september but at this time we're not sure if those applications will are will be prepared in time with that in mind um they would then be moved to october 11th otherwise uh we will be hearing them on the 27th we'll have on the 27th we will have to meet to continue those and we will probably vote on minutes and vote on the decision for winter street and then the only other bit of non well i guess non news at this point is the comprehensive permit application for 10 21 10 27 massachusetts avenue has still not been filed so we gained a little bit more time on that um but i anticipate that they will be filing at some point soon what's that that's all the business we have for this evening so i'd like to thank you all for your participation in tonight's meeting of the yarlington zoning board of appeals appreciate everyone's patience throughout the meeting and i especially would like to thank rick dollarelli vincent lee kelly linema and marissa lau for their assistance in preparing for and hosting this online meeting please note the purpose of the board's recording of the meeting is to ensure the creation of an accurate record of its proceedings and as our understanding the recording made by acmi will be available on demand at acmi dot tv within the coming days and if anyone has comments or recommendations please send them via email to zba at town dot arlington dot ma dot us that email address is also listed on the zoning board of appeals website and to conclude tonight's meeting i would ask for a motion to adjourn mr chairman oops oh mr more are you adjourned i just want to make one comment please mr more please i want to congratulate the board for the first successful sort of standard ad application and approval process oh thank you i've your long call for the town and the first one so i just want to give you a hand if i could thank you very much appreciate that so with that i will take a motion to adjourn so moved thank you mr handlin and a second second thank mr dupont we'll call vote at the full board mr dupont hi mr handlin hi mr mills hi dr gidelly hi this hoffman hi mr hulley hi and the chair votes i we are adjourned thank you also very much thank you thank you guys good night see you soon