Marine‑service tenant withdraws permit application after neighbors raise noise, deliveries and hazardous‑materials concerns

A request to formalize a marine service business operating out of a four‑bay garage at 16 Pacheco Path was withdrawn without prejudice after neighbors and board members questioned whether the use qualifies as a home‑based service business or instead is a commercial contractor’s operation requiring different zoning.

The application identified the property owner as Garrity and Doherty Properties LLC and described storage and limited mobile marine services. The applicant, Brendan Garrity, said tenants use the garage for trucks and occasional storage; one tenant — a partner in the marine business — lives in one of the on‑site rental units. Zoning staff noted the home‑based service definition requires that the single‑family residence be the domicile of the resident owner‑operator and that the business employ no more than two non‑family members.

Abutters told the board they had filed complaints after higher‑volume deliveries and frequent worker arrivals. Longtime neighbor Fred Leach summarized multiple on‑site deliveries and said he had texted the operator about early‑morning deliveries by Kellogg Marine Supply. Leach said some deliveries arrive as early as 5:45 a.m. and that the deliveries can involve a large commercial truck with a liftgate that makes substantial noise. He also described concerns about hazardous materials and boat‑repair activities and said the operation appeared larger than what a home‑based business would allow.

Several public commenters said the property had been cleaned up since a previous owner left debris, and one supporter said the current property owner “has done a great job of cleaning that place up.” But other neighbors described ongoing concerns about truck traffic, trailers and the potential storage of paint, fiberglass and other materials that could trigger Board of Health regulation.

Board members and the zoning administrator asked for clearer information about the business: who owns it, how many employees work on site, whether services are performed inside the bays, lengths of trailers, and whether the operator had Board of Health approvals for marine‑service materials. The board concluded the application was incomplete for a home‑occupation permit and that the facts presented suggested the use more nearly resembled a contractor/yard or commercial use.

The applicant withdrew the application without prejudice. The board advised neighbors that enforcement concerns should be pursued with the zoning enforcement officer; board members said a new or amended application should include the operator’s testimony, clearer ownership/tenant documentation and answers to the building department’s and zoning administrator’s questions.