Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutZBA 12/17/2024;gpEC1NCt:���' ASA0�`'44 II OFFICE q 1,jj ' 12, 24 T4feefing-Minutes Doefl).WMM24 S Town of Mansfield f Zoning Board of Appeals Meeting Held in Person in Meeting Room 3A/B and Virtually Using GoToWebinar Platform Present: Darlene Pruitt, Chair; Matthew Cummings, Clerk; Eric Correira; Ryan Maxwell; Edward Valanzola. Associate Sarah Raposa, Director of Planning and Development Paula Perry, Administrative Assistant Darlene Pruitt, Chair, read the public notice into the record. Public hearing regarding the application of Matthew and Regina Leary for a Variance from Zoning Bylaw 230-5.7.B.2 Residential Compounds for a distance between structures of 36'2" where 40' is required. The Property is owned by Matthew and Regina Leary and located at 14 Fram Drive; Assessor's Map/Parcel 039/413 in the Residential 1 (RI) Zone. Ms. Raposa started by making a comment for the record that the application came in as a variance, but after a review, it was decided that this was also an appeal of the Building Inspector's decision to not issue a building permit. She asked for a formal acceptance of the modification of the application to include the appeal of the building inspector's decision. The application is the same as a variance, and there is no change in the scope of the application. Motion to approve the modification of the application to include the appeal made by Mr. Cummings and seconded by Mr. Maxwell. Vote 5 in favor, PASSED Applicant Mr. Matt Leary was in attendance. He said that he was looking to add a third garage and put a room over it to house his wife's parents. The side setback at Fram Drive is 15 feet. ZBA Meeting Minutes 12/17/24 Page 1 of 13 There is a notation on the subdivision plot plan indicating that there needs to be a 40-foot minimum between structures. Currently, the proposed construction is 36'2" from his neighbor's garage. Mr. Leary has submitted signed letters from 5 of the abutters of the property, and none are opposed. Mr. Leary said that he has been in discussion with the Planning Board Chair, Mr. Feck, and Mr. Feck believes that the notation on the plan would not be enforceable by law, and that the court would not uphold the 40-foot requirement. Ms. Raposa clarified that there was a cluster special permit, and there was a notation on the plan of record stating that there should be a 40-foot separation between structures. Research, however, has not yielded any record of there being a requirement for a 40-foot separation between structures in any version of the cluster residential special permit zoning bylaw. There is a requirement like this in the residential compound special permit. Ms. Raposa said that she believes the notation might be a mistake on the plan. There is no record of any vote or bylaw requiring a 40-foot separation. Because the zoning bylaw does not exist, it would not be possible to grant any relief. With the appeal of the building comrnissioner's decision, the board can either uphold his decision or ask him to issue a permit. Mr. Valanzola said he was confused by what authority the ZBA has because it is not part of the bylaw dimensional requirement, so the board would be voting on the building inspector's decision. He believes that the applicant would need to go to the Planning Board to modify the special permit so that he can come within 40 feet. Ms. Raposa pointed out that the notation on the plan is what is preventing the building inspector from issuing the permit. Ms. Raposa said that the applicant started the process last spring. She clarified that the board would be voting on whether the building inspector should issue a permit. Mr. Correira thought that maybe the hearing should be continued. Mr. Valanzola suggested that if the Planning Board modified the special permit, the applicant would not need the ZBA. Mr. Maxwell asked if there was a letter from the building inspector denying the permit. Ms. Raposa said there was not. Ms. Raposa noted that the applicant needs the board to instruct the Building inspector. Mr. Valanzola said he did not want to hold up the applicant, but he needed to know what the board was voting on. Mr. Valanzola suggested that the application be continued until after the next Planning Board meeting. Ms. Raposa reiterated that a 40-foot building separation was not listed as a condition of approval. Mr. Correira said that the plamiing board could change that, not the ZBA. Ms. Raposa said the notation on the plan is seemingly unfounded. Mr. Maxwell agreed that the notation on the plan seems to be a typo. Mr. Valanzola suggested to the applicant that he continue the ZBA hearing until the February meeting. In the meantime, he should go to the Planning Board for modification of the Special Permit. If the Planning Board does modify the special permit, then the applicant could withdraw the request for continuance. ZBA Meeting Minutes 12/17/2024 Page 2 of 13 Motion: To continue the hearing until the February 25, 2025 ZBA Meeting. By Matthew Cummins Seconded by Ryan Maxwell Vote: (Aye) 5 (Nay) (Abstain) PASSED Darlene Pruitt, Chair, read the public notice into the record. Public hearing regarding the application of Kevin Fallon for a Variance from Zoning Bylaw 230- 4.2A for a side yard setback of 21.6' where 25' is required. The Property is owned by The Jeanne H M Fallon Living Trust and located at 1108 School Street; Assessor's Map/Parcel 006/133 in the Residential 1 (RI) Zone. Ryan Maxwell recused himself from the hearing. The applicant was reminded that there would only be four voting members on the board, and the decision would need to be unanimous. The applicant said that they were aware of this and okay with it. Ms. Raposa stated that the applicants were contacted before the meeting to let them know about the 4-member board, and they agreed to move forward. Mr. Valanzola stated that he would not need to recuse himself but wanted it on record that he looked at this property years ago regarding changes to the site that do not pertain to what was before the board. Kevin Fallon and his contractor Tom George were present. Mr. Fallon said they were asking for a variance of 3 feet for an awning that protects a walkway for the children to enter and exit the building. Ms. Pruitt asked if the awning was facing the parking lot. Mr. Fallon confirmed this. Ms. Jeanne Fallon was also present. She said the property was purchased in 1986. They have been providing daycare since 1981. The addition is to provide office and classroom space. Mr. George said that the addition itself meets all the requirements, but the new roof covering the walkway encroaches the setback by 3.4 feet. Mr. Valanzola said that he believes this is a "de minimus" request, and he has no problem with it. Mr. Correira noted that the lot is oddly shaped. ZBA Meeting Minutes 12/17/2024 Page 3 of 13 Motion: To grant the variance from zoning bylaw section 230-4.2a for a side yard setback of 21.6' where 25' is required for the property owned by Jeanne H. Fallon Living Trust and located at 1108 School Street. By Matthew Cummings Seconded by Edward V alanzola Vote: (Aye) __A_(Nay) (Abstain) PASSED Public hearing regarding the application of GE Supply, LLC for a Variance from Zoning Bylaw 230-1.5 "Accessory Use" (definition) for the addition of a propane filling station. The Property is owned by Westport CD Realty, LLC and located at 65 Copeland Drive; Assessor's Map/Parcel 021/110 in the Business 4 (114) Zone. Mr. Valanzola stated that he represents the owners of Ace Hardware as well as the owners of the Plaza, so he recused himself. Ms. Pruitt clarified that the owners had been informed that there would only be 4 voting members and that the decision would need to be unanimous. Attorney Roderick Oreste was present representing his clients GE Supply LLC and Westport CD Realty LLC. He pointed out that Glenn Finkelstein, manager of Ace Hardware, was in the audience. The applicant is seeking a variance for a propane filling station. This is an accessory use permitted by right in the B4 zone, but the site has constraints that present a hardship. The filling station cannot be located in the back or sides of the principal building because it does not meet the 10-foot setback from the building itself. It is also an odd -shaped lot, and there are abutters in the rear. The propane tank will be underground, and protected by concrete bollards, and surrounded by a wrought iron fence for aesthetics. Ace Hardware operates 13 stores in Massachusetts, and the propane filling station is an integral part of their business. The best spot for the station is between the building and the street itself. It will benefit the public and the neighborhood, as it does not impair the purpose of the zoning bylaw. John Holmes and Jeff Tufts were present to address any questions about the filling station. Mr. Maxwell asked where the relief was needed. Mr. Oreste said that the filling station is permitted by right, but not allowed in the front yard, and should be in the side or the back. ZBA Meeting Minutes 12/17/2024 Page 4 of 13 Ms. Raposa said it could not be granted during the administrative site plan approval process, so the applicant had to come to the ZBA. Ms. Raposa also said that the Fire Department has reviewed the plans, and they are ok with it. Ms. Pruitt asked about how many parking spots this would take away. It was clarified that the adjacent parking spots would be safe. Public Comments: Marc Clamage, 142 Central Street Mr. Clamage said that his property is directly behind the empty lot next to Ace Hardware and inquired about safety precautions. Mr. Oreste called up Mr. Holmes and Mr. Tufts (Devaney Energy, Inc.) to offer detailed safety information. Mr. Tufts said that the only above ground exposure is a pipe. It is similar to any natural gas meter in the rest of the town. There are bollards around the site to protect it. There is training provided to the operators of the pump. Ms. Pruitt asked how often it will be serviced. Mr. Tufts said that the driver needs to check the tank every time he accesses it, and that can be one, two or three times a week. They also do a mandatory service once a year. Mr. Cummings said that he thought the placement of the tank would be safer in the front than it would be in the back. Mr. Maxwell agreed that the only option would be the front yard. Mr. Correira asked if it should be farther from the entrance. Mr. Maxwell said he was relying on the consultation with the Fire Department, and that they chose the location. Motion: To approve the application for a variance of GE Supply LLC from zoning bylaw section 230-1.5 "Accessory Use" (definition) for the addition of a propane filling station for the property owned by Westport CD Realty LLC at 65 Copeland Drive. By Matthew Cummings Seconded by Ran Maxwell Vote: (Aye) 4 (Nay) (Abstain) PASSED Public hearing regarding the application of Paul Jodice for a Variance from Zoning Bylaw 230- 4.2A Density and Dimensional Regulations for relief of Scenic Road front yard setback of 63.8 ZBA Meeting Minutes 12/17/2024 Page 5 of 23 feet where 75 feet is required (footnote 2) and relief of side yard setback of 19.1 feet where 25 feet is required. The Property is owned by Stephen Huftalen and located at 296 Balcom Street; Assessor's Map/Parcel 003/093 in the Residential 1 (RI) Zone. Mr. Jodice of Jodice and Sons and homeowner Tasha Huftalen were present. They acknowledge that they do not have a literal hardship about soil given the wetlands to the left of the property. They believe that what they are doing won't take away from the neighborhood. Most houses in the neighborhood have a 15-foot setback, but his applicant has a 25-foot setback. Mr. Jodice presented a GPS map showing that most of the homes in the neighborhood have a 15- foot setback, not 25 feet. As for the scenic road, the project will not touch any trees or stone walls. Mr. Jodice presented a rendering of the proposed home and said that it would improve and benefit the neighborhood. The house will move 12 feet toward the street, but it will not be noticeable. Mr. Valanzola asked when the road was designated a scenic road. Ms. Raposa said it was in 1977. Mr. Jodice said the home was built in 1984. Mr. Jodice stated that in 1975 the zoning was changed. The 15-foot setback remained in place for homeowners, but new homeowners had to adhere to the new 25-foot setback. Mr. Correira asked why they wouldn't put the garage on the other side. Mr. Jodice said that the wetlands are there, and the bedrooms are on the left-hand side. The septic is right behind the house. Mr. Jodice distributed the floor plan. Mr. Maxwell said that he believes the wetlands present a hardship. Mr. Jodice said the wetland line was made in 2019 when the pool was put in. He said the 100-foot buffer runs through the house. Motion: Approve the application for a variance from zoning bylaw section 230-4.2A Density and Dimensional Regulations for relief of Scenic Road front yard setback of 63.8 feet where 75 feet is required and relief of side yard setback of 19.1 feet where 25 feet is required at 296 Balcom Street. By Matthew Cummings Seconded by Ran Maxwell Vote: (Aye) 5 (Nay) (Abstain) PASSED ZBA Meeting Minutes 12/17/2024 Page 6 of 13 Public hearing regarding the application of Future Foam, Inc. for a Finding from Zoning Bylaw Section 230-4.2(B) Minimum Open Space Plan; Plan Change within the scope of existing decision dated, January 12, 2015, to create a new driveway and additional loading zone. The Property is owned by Future Foam, Inc. and located at 47 Maple Street; Assessor's Map/Parcel 030/037 in the Industrial 2 (I2) Zone. Attorney Karla Chaffee (Nixon Peabody) and Brian French (GM, Future Foam) attended in person. William Buckley from the Bay Colony Group attended remotely. Ms. Chaffee stated that in 2015, a finding was granted for a pre-existing, non -conforming building in the I2 district and an addition/extension was added to the facility at that time. Ms. Chaffee said that what they were looking for today was that Future Foam add a new entry off of Maple Street and create an L-shaped turning area for trucks. Trucks would turn in and back up. This is needed to increase employee safety and plant efficiency. Ms. Chaffee said the 2015 decision granted two forms of relief. The one at issue today is the percentage of Open Space where 35 % is required. They are currently at 29%, and with the additional driveway, they would go down to 27% Open Space. Ms. Chaffee said this was just a plan change, and she doesn't believe it requires a new finding. She also said that Paul Thomsen, an abutter, reached out to them. They were able to give him a tour of the facility and answer some of his questions. Ms. Chaffee informed the board that this business is a one -shift operation, so there is no overnight shift creating headlights, idling, or nighttime noise. Mr. Valanzola asked if there would be 3 curb cuts on Maple Street. Mr. French confirmed that they use 2 now, and one more would be added.Mr. French said the project would involve constructing two new loading docks into to the building. This is for safety reasons. The new loading docks would be closer to where the product is produced so it wouldn't need to be transported through the building. NIr. Valanzola asked about the existing bays (there are 6) and the 2 new bays. There would be activity at both loading sites. Mr. Buckley addressed the Board with a general description of the new bays. Mr. Maxwell asked if this should go to the Planning Board. Ms. Raposa said that it will require administrative site plan approval. Ms. Chaffee said that because the building area is not more than 5000 sf or more than 15 parking spaces, it would still be within administrative review. Ms. Chaffee said that the planning board approved the plan in 2015 with conditions (e.g. 10 pm- 7 am there will be no use of yard tractors, shut down by 11, etc.). Ms. Chaffee said they are also willing to remove the fence and add arborvitaes to make it more appealing to the neighborhood. Mr. Valanzola asked if there were any restrictions on when the trucks come in. Mr. French said there were currently no restrictions. Mr. French said there would be 15 trucks a day coming into the warehouse. The new bays would add 4-6 more trucks per day. Mr. Valanzola asked if Mr. French would be willing to restrict the hours for the benefit of the abutters. Mr. French answered that they are a business, and things happen that are out of their control, but they would be willing to limit the hours of operation. ZBA Meeting Minutes 12/17/2024 Page 7 of 13 Ms. Chaffee said that they were within the bounds of the original decision but for the need to substitute the plan. Given the industrial district, she believes that businesses need to operate. Mr. French added that they were a one -shift operation, but if they got busy, things could change. Mr. Valanzola asked if the L shape was new and, therefore, a change to the layout. Ms. Chaffee said that if a finding was needed, it would not be detrimental to the community. She said they are only seeking approval within the confines of what has already been approved. Mr. Valanzola said the open space change is minor, but the actual change to the site plan is not minor. Ms. Chaffee said that any restrictions might not be beneficial to the future of the business. Ms. Pruitt asked if it would be an increase in business, or just moving a particular product processing to another side of the warehouse. Mr. French confirmed this, and that it would be beneficial to employees from a safety and efficiency standpoint. Mr. Valanzola said the bays do not look that far apart and asked for a floor plan. Mr. French said they didn't have a floor plan, but showed the board on the diagram how it would be much more efficient to use the new bays. Mr. Maxwell asked if it would be possible to put the new bays on the rear of the building, and Mr. French said it was not possible. Public Comments Paul Thomsen, 40 Maple Street Mr. Thomsen confirmed that he has met with Mr. French and had a tour of the facility. He stated that they have been very accommodating and very nice, He thinks that they could not have chosen a more disruptive location for their proposed project. Mr. Thomsen said that even though they say there will be no night traffic, he knows that at some point there will be a cab in his driveway trying to back into the loading dock. Mr. Thomsen said he missed the approval in 2015, and recognizes that he may not be able to stop it, but asks that his position be considered. He knows he lives in an I2 zone, but he has some concerns. He believes the project will negatively impact his property value. The things he spoke of with Future Foam were: • Truck traffic on Maple Street • Truck activity at night. He has been watching and there has been idling and headlights at night. • 4-6 trucks per day • Idling not being allowed • Focused lighting on the docks (fully shielded, downward facing light) • Landscaping • General training of drivers about being a good neighbor Mr. Thomsen said his driveway is directly lined up with the new truck entry. Mr. French said that the new bays will not be open to third party drivers. Only their drivers will be using the bays, so there won't be problems. They intend to conform to any requests by the abutters. ZBA Meeting Minutes 12/17/2024 Page 8 of 13 Ms. Raposa stated that she was looking for clarification in the event that this would be part of the administrative site approval. Mr. Maxwell asked if there would only be lighting on the bays, not on the entryway and Mr. French confirmed that that would be the case. Mr. Cummings asked if there was still a fence, and if so would they be open to putting up a gate. Mr. French thought a gate would be problematic because the driver would need to idle on Maple Street and open the gate to enter. Ms. Chaffee said they are thinking of removing the fence to add more screening along where the turnaround would be. Mr. Maxwell asked if the administrative site plan review would include the full engineering review. Ms. Raposa said that key department heads do the review, so the whole team grants it. Mr. Buckley noted that drainage should be no issue. The water will be pitched toward the building, and they plan to install an infiltration system. Mr. Valanzola asked why the applicant thinks that this is not more detrimental to the neighborhood as it will be right in front of the four houses and it will eliminate green space. Ms. Chaffee said that the administrative site plan might be outside of the purview of the ZBA. Mr. Valanzola said that if the applicant had enough open space, they wouldn't be at the meeting and they would just be going for site plan approval. Mr. Valanzola said that this plan is a material change in the layout of what looks like a plan designed to put green space along the front. Ms. Chaffee stated that they intend to address all of the abutter concerns. Ms. Raposa noted that there will be a place for a "modification" application on the new application. Mr. Thomsen returned to the podium. He wonders what will happen if Future Foam closes its doors, will the next owner use the bays for 40 trucks per day. Ms. Chaffee said that it would be possible to condition the decision to be specific to this property owner. Mr. Valanzola made a motion: To grant the relief requested that the change modification of this property and structure is not significantly more detrimental to the neighborhood than the current preexisting, nonconforming structure. It was seconded by Ryan Maxwell. Nh•. Valanzola said he made the motion in the affirmative because he did not want to make a motion to deny. He is pro -business, but the changes here are substantially more detrimental to the neighborhood. The original Site Plan was done to preserve green space and to screen the residential properties. Mr. Maxwell agrees that the new bays are in a terrible location, but thinks that the idea is that it will only be Future Foam using these new bays, and the drivers can be trained. There will not be third -party trucks using the new bays. Mr. Cummings said it is only 2 bays as opposed to the 6 on the other side. He would like to see some compromise with the neighbors. ZBA Meeting Minutes 12/17/2024 Page 9 of 13 Mr. Correira asked Ms. Raposa if they were just looking at whether the plan could be modified. Ms. Raposa said that in 2015, the board approved a 25% open space plan. Future Foam thought that by going from 29% to 27%, they could make the changes by right. However, the plan associated with the 25% is not the plan they want to do now, it would require a modification. Mr. Correira asked Ms. Raposa if she thought the board could approve the change of plan, and she responded that it was in the board's power to approve the plan because the variance applies to the property as it was granted. Mr. Correira asked what the standard was for approving the plan. Ms. Raposa said that there are no criteria. Ivh•. Valanzola asked the Chair if she would reopen the hearing to allow Ms. Chaffee to respond. The hearing was reopened. Ms. Chaffee said that if the board felt a finding was required, that would be the standard. There is no standard in 40A and standards are not laid out well in case law. Other towns she works with allow a plan change to be handled administratively. Ms. Raposa clarified that Mansfield does not have zoning administrative powers adopted. You scale back but not make it more in practice. Ms. Chaffee said the relief that was already granted is a finding on open space and would imply a reasonableness standard as it is reasonable to substitute the plan that were in the relief already granted. The ZBA's job is to make findings where required for deviation from the zoning code for a pre-existing non -conforming use. She said that they are within the bounds of the original finding. She also said that there is case law that says if there is a plan referenced in a decision that, that plan cannot change without there being an amendment or a change of plan. Therefore, the standard is less than the original finding; not substantially more detrimental to the neighborhood. They are seeking to change the plan of record. Mr. Valanzola stated that whether it is a reasonable standard or more detrimental, he felt that it was "a problem with the layout. He felt that the layout was not reasonable, and that it is more detrimental. Ms. Chaffee said that they would be willing to limit the hours of operation. Mr. Valanzola referenced the proposed a gate, which the applicant was hesitant on, and inquired who would enforce the time limits of the gate. Mr. French said they would agree to a gate if it was part of the conditions for approval, and suggested hours of 7:00 am to 5:00 pm for the gate. Ms. Chaffee said that she felt it was unreasonable to hold the applicant to a non -legal standard. Mr. French said they have abided by every condition levied in the 2015 hearing. Mr. French said they have never received any complaints about their activity. Mr. Maxwell expressed that the conditions (lighting, hours of operation, screening along the property line, turnarounds to no later than 5:00 pnr) would mitigate the concerns. It is an industrial zone. Ms. Chaffee said there are no current issues on Maple Street and that the heaviest truck traffic will utilize the existing turning and bays. She urged the Board to consider that it is an industrial neighborhood. Mr. Correira said that in 2015, the Board approved a plan and this plan is different from the one that was approved. Mr. Correira said he thinks 6 bays should be plenty for the amount of trucks going in and out. Mr. Valanzola believes that the plan is very different and that the Board needs to consider the residents. Ms. Chaffee expressed that it is the safety of the operations in the interior to the building that the changes have been made for. ZBA Meeting Minutes 12/17/2024 Page 10 of 13 Ms. Pruitt called for a motion to close the hearing. Mr. Valanzola made a motion to close the hearing. Ms. Pruitt seconded the motion. Vote 5 in favor, PASSED Mr. Maxwell made a motion to amend the motion on the table to include hours of operation restricted from 7:00 am to 5:00 pm, screening along the turnaround area and fully shielded downward -facing -lighting to avoid light spillage off the property. Mr. Cummings seconded the motion to amend the motion. The vote was 3 to amend, and 2 not to amend. Ms. Chaffee and Ms. Raposa noted that only a simple majority is required to amend a motion, therefore the motion to amend would carry. The amended motion, as follows, was put to a vote. Motion: To grant the relief requested that the change modification of this property and structure is not significantly more detrimental to the neighborhood than the current preexisting, nonconforming structure. This will be granted with conditions including hours of operation restricted from 7:00 am to 5:00 pin, screening along the turnaround area and fully shielded, downward lighting to avoid light spillage off the property. By Ran Maxwell Seconded by Matthew Cummings Vote: (Aye) ____I_(Nay) 2 (Abstain) PASS Ms. Chaffee asked if the motion was for a plan change or for a new finding. Mr. Valanzola said his motion was that the change/modification was not significantly more detrimental to the neighborhood than the current pre-existing non -conforming structure, Ms. Raposa asked if they wanted to make a very direct motion to approve the plan modification or not. Motion: To approve the plan modification as submitted by the applicant. By Edward Valanzola Seconded by Matthew Cummings Vote: (Aye) 3 (Nay) 2 (Abstain) PASS There was some discussion about whether the votes required a supermajority. Ms, Raposa said she would consult town counsel about this and get back to Ms. Chaffee and the Board. ZBA Meeting Minutes 12/17/2024 Page 11 of 13 Motion: To approve the minutes of November 19, 2024 By Ryan Maxwell Seconded by Matthew Cumminas Vote: (Aye) __A(Nay) (Abstain) PASSED Motion: To adjourn at.10:00 pm. By Matthew Cummings Seconded by Ryan Maxwell Vote: (Aye) 5 (Nay) (Abstain) PASSED The next Zoning Board of Appeals Meeting ivill be on January 21, 2024, at 7: 30 p. m. ,J61hllhAffio4z5 CPP Matthew Cummings, C rk Date of Approval Documents Submitted for the Meetina Meeting Notice/Agenda/Legal Ads for 14 Fram Dr, 1108 School St, 65 Copeland Dr, 296 Balcom St and 47 Maple St Meeting Minutes DRAFT of November 19, 2024 Sarah Raposa, Director of Planning and Development memo dated 12/3/2024 Application, 14 Fram Dr Received 11/18/24 SP Decision PB 8/15/96 Fram Drive Abutter letters (5) Leary Email, rcvd 12/11/24 14 Fram Dr, Updated Site Plan dated 11/18/24 Fram Estates Def Lot Layout BCRD dated 10/4/96 ZBA Meeting Minutes 12/17/2024 Page 12 of 13 George Frain Estates, Dead End Waiver dated 10/3/96 Planning Board Minutes Dated 6/26/96 Planning Board Minutes Dated 7/17/96 1108 School St, Site Plan dated 11/4/24 1108 School St Application, Received 11/18/24 1108 School St., Application Addendum Received 12/6/2024 65 Copeland Drive, Application, Received 11/18/24 Ace Hardware Plans & Elevation with iron fence 12/13/24 Ace Hardware Plans & Elevations Ace Hardware 65 Copeland Drive ZBA 2 Sheets, Received 11/19/24 296 Balcom St Proposed Addition Rcvd 12/17/24 Google Earth, 296 Balcom St, Rcvd 12/17/24 Proposed Addition Rcvd 12/17/24 Town of Mansfield GIS Balcom St Area, Rcvd 12/17/24 Variance pursuant to Mansfield Zoning, Rcvd 12/17/24 296 Balcom St Application, Received 11/19/24 Huftalen 296 Balcom St Mansfield ZBA Plan, dated 11/14/24 47 Maple St Application, Received 10/30/2014 47 Maple St Filed application Received 11/19/24 Maple St, 47 2015 Site Plans dated 10/28/2014 Email from 47 Maple Abutter, Paul Thomsen Dated 12/4/24 14-0178-ZBA_Rendered, Rcvd 12/17/24 ZBA App Update with Rules and Regulations Document 8/20/24 ZBA Meeting Minutes 12/17/2024 Page 13 of 13