June 4, 2015
Minutes of Meeting
7:00
In attendance: JS, BS, JD, AP, BW and JJ
LR
JS opened the hearing.
New – 4 Beechwood Road – John and Kirsten Fitzgerald
Special Permit Request for a Family Apartment
Sitting In: JS, BS, AP, JS and BW
John and Kirsten Fitzgerald were in attendance to seek a permit for a Family Apartment for Kirsten’s father, John Eric Gulliksen. They explained he has been ill and they can be nearby to help him but he will also keep his independence. The existing property has been in existence since 1999. They presented a plot plan showing the proposed studio apartment with one car garage, which fits within the existing setbacks. The owners will remain in the existing home. Their existing septic system has the capacity for one more bedroom. JS explained that they will have to return in 5 years to renew the permit and there are no rentals allowed. If Mr. Gulliksen moves out the Special Permit is null and void. The owners understood this. There were no questions from
the Public.
AP motion to close the hearing.
BS second
All in favor to close.
AP motion to grant as requested.
BS second.
All in favor to grant the Special Permit as requested. There is a 20-day appeal period.
New – 64 Fox Run Road – Shannon Delaney
Request for a Special Permit for a Family Apartment
Sitting In: Sitting In: JS, BS, AP, JS and BW
The applicant, Sharon Delaney and her Engineer were in attendance. They explained they were seeking the permit for Sharon’s mother, Christine Delaney. She will be moving to the proposed addition to help Sharon with her growing family and for her own financial hardships. They presented a plot plan showing the proposed addition and a floor plan which fits within the existing setbacks. There is no increase in bedrooms. There is a long driveway which can accommodate extra vehicles. The existing home has been in legal occupancy for over 2 years. Eric Vanderwal of 60 Fox Run Road had questions as to the pine trees being removed and the French drains. He was concerned his property would be affected with by their drainage issues. The engineer stated
they would need to go to Conservation Commission and file a notice of intent. He (engineer) felt that this was a small addition and he did not see any issues with drainage but would take his concerns into consideration.
AP motion to close the hearing.
BS second.
All in favor to close the hearing.
AP motion to grant the Special Permit as request.
BS second.
All in favor to grant the Special Permit for a Family Apartment as requested. There is a 20-day appeal period.
Continuance – 57B Mendon Street – Jay Edward Sturm-Hiawatha Properties
Appeal of enforcement by an administrative officer
Sitting In: JS, BS, AP, JS, BW
The applicant, Mr. Jay Sturm and his attorney, Lee Ambler were in attendance. He (Attorney Ambler) began by asking why there was no response to his request to Michael Giampietro (MG), Zoning Enforcement Officer. Mike Giampietro was in attendance. He is the Zoning Enforcement Officer who went on site due to complaints. He issued a cease and desist order on March 3, 2015 due to zoning violations. He stated he did not respond to Attorney Amblers letter as he felt the cease and desist was written in enough detail to understand completely MG stated he was given complaints by the Town Hall that Mr. Sturm was in violation of many items. MG stated he contacted the owner to do a site visit at the property. It was all set up and he arrived to meet at 4:30 PM and stayed until 5:00 PM. No one was around nor did
anyone show up. He did submit his cease & desist on the basis of town records and complaints. He went on to explain his findings. The first complaint was that the owner had a Rooming House due to neighbors seeing several people living there and 2/3 different names on the voter registration at the Town Clerks. Attorney Ambler stated it was a single family home and his client gets one rental check per month from an individual person even though there are a few people living in the home. The other complaints were that there were more uses than allowed at this property; a training & educational use, used car business and an inside area being used to manufacture racing cars. Manufacturing is not allowed in this zone. Town Counsel was in attendance. He stated that it is a B1 zone. If training is being done then a Special Permit is needed, one heavy commercial crane is allowed but 2 or 3 lighter commercial. There may be a need for a
development plan review. Attorney Ambler stated this area is a B1 use and if one business goes out and another one comes in then they should be fine with what is there. MG stated you cannot have a change of use with no Building Permits or sign offs and there are no Building Permits issued. The board asked if these businesses were constructed with no permits. MG stated he couldn’t walk the site and got his information from the street folder. Attorney Ambler stated they have been in existence for over 8 years and that is a building issue and they are here on the appeal for a zoning issue. Town Counsel stated there are no valid Building Permits, there is no statute of limitations, no grandfathering here. Town Counsel suggested a Special Permit under non-exempt educational use if needed.. Attorney Ambler stated he does do repair on cars and trucks there. MG said it appears there is a building in the back and it is still active
under information in the folder. JD stated the board needs verification of what uses are there now. Attorney Ambler stated MG did not go on site so he has no way of knowing what is there and what is not. After continuous debating with no progress the board asked the applicant if he would make and keep an appointment with MG as to clear up these questions. Attorney Ambler stated his client is distressed and feels MG is sabotaging him since he has the same type of business, MA Nail It, which is a conflict of interest. Attorney Ambler stated that Under Section 12 the Building Inspector is the only one that should even be filing complaints. Attorney Ambler stated he wants his clients cease & desist notice be dismissed. JS asked that if they would allow a site visit then it could show exactly what the current uses were. The board felt it would be helpful to allow someone to walk the property with the owner. Mr. Sturm, the
applicant, felt that there is a vendetta against him and the allegations are unfounded. He said they are training in the field with cranes; there are still offices and many buildings. They occasionally meet and sometimes have a class up there. It is not a school by state definitions. It was a business called Blendek, then they (Sturm) moved in and the uses haven’t changed. Mr. Sturm stated he has been there 8 years as business and he also lives there. JD asked for an explanation of the repair work. Mr. Sturm stated they repair cars, trucks and body work. Flat out motor sports occupied the space, they left and he moved his business in. There is no repairing of cranes. JD suggested that Mr. Leclaire, Building Commissioner go and do a site visit. There were abutters in the audience that spoke with concerns of seeing trucks, hearing trucks and different vehicles going in and out. Mr. Sturm’s family members spoke in
his defense saying Mr. Sturm was threatened by MG, so he didn’t keep that appointment with him. The board felt it would be best if Stuart LeClaire, Building Commissioner could have a visit to the site and assess the full situation and then report back to the board. Attorney Ambler and his client agreed that Mr. Leclaire could have access to the property. LR would bring this to Mr. LeClaire’s attention. They requested a continuance to July 2, 2015 to allow time for this to take place.
AP motion to allow to continue to 7/2/15 at 7:00 PM.
BS Second.
All in favor to continue as requested.
Informal Hearing
700 Pulaski Blvd. – The owner of Victory Lane Auto Sales inquired as to what he would need to do to allow a tenant to run a car detail business from his current business. Town Counsel suggested this new business could be a 2nd principal use. It would be a used car business and an auto detail business. It sounds like 2 totally separate businesses. It appears a variance and a special permit may be needed. The board advised consulting legal counsel as this would be a new application.
Executive Session
BS motion to move to Executive Session.
AP second.
All in favor.
9:30 Executive Session Ended
Minutes – March 5, 2015
May 7, 2015
May 7, 2015 Executive Session
AP motion to accept the minutes as amended.
All in favor to accept the above minutes as amended.
Meeting adjourned 10:00 PM Approved 7/2/2015
| 
