Holyoke committee continues special-permit hearing after neighbors object to home-accounting business

City of Holyoke development committee members continued to a future meeting a public hearing on a special-permit application from Amanda and Marcos Garcia to operate a remote accounting/home‑occupation business at 25 Bretton (Bridal) Lane.

The committee opened the public hearing March 11 and heard neighbors say the house functions like a commercial site because of daytime vehicle activity. Laurie Tetro of 10 McMahan Drive told the committee the property was remodeled to support a business and said it is “dark and uninhabited on nights, weekends, holidays.” Nicole Mueller of 9 Woodbridge Street said she has observed “between 6 and 8 cars there every day, all day.”

Amanda Garcia, who identified herself as “a full time professor of accounting at Elms College,” said she lives at 25 Bretton Lane and that the accounting and tax work is largely remote. “The only way [clients] would know is if they were in direct communication with me. I don't advertise it anywhere. There's no signage,” she told the committee. The application lists hours of operation as 9 a.m. to 4 p.m.; Garcia said those hours reflect variable days when she is available to meet clients.

Support and opposition were divided. Ralph Webb, a next‑door neighbor at 21 Bretton Lane, said he has “no complaints” and that the Garcias have improved the property. Dennis Barlow, 29 Bretton Lane, submitted a written support letter saying the Garcias cleaned up landscaping and repaired structures. Opponents argued the volume of cars and what they described as multiple nonresident vehicles suggests the site hosts more than a one‑person home occupation and could violate zoning and tax rules.

Council members pressed applicants on specific points. Councilor Devine noted home‑occupation rules usually require the business be unobtrusive and that “there's usually no signage.” Attorney Bissonnette, the city law department representative, explained the zoning code allows some home occupations but that this application requires a special permit because it involves customers coming to the property. Bissonnette said the committee may set conditions such as restricted hours, limits on foot and vehicle traffic, and no signage as part of a special‑permit decision. Councilor Bartley suggested the committee consider tabling the item until the applicants supply additional information about vehicles, other businesses tied to the address, and whether properties associated with the applicants are being used for related business activities.

At the end of the hearing the committee voted to table and continue the public hearing to the DGR meeting on April 8 to allow staff and the applicants to gather further details and for the applicants to notify immediate neighbors.

The committee directed that information to collect include documentation of the number of vehicles regularly associated with the address, clarification whether any other business operations (rental property management or construction work) are being staged from the site, and confirmation of residency (the applicants said they sleep at the Bretton Lane address but also use a second home to assist an elderly relative).