Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutZBA 06/20/2023J Zoning Board of Appeals Minutes RECEIVED June 20, 2023 1 O0i CLERKS OFFICE' Meeting Held in Person in Meeting Roont 3AM nO�3d AUG I l P I2� OO Virtually Using GoToWebinar Platform 1M N S F I E L D rMASSACHUSETTS Present: Darlene Pruitt, Chair; Matthew Cumming, Clerk, Eric Correira, Matthew List, ward Valanzola and Michael Reed Nadine DePillo, Administrative Secretary, Sarah Raposa, Director of Planning and Development Absent: Ryan Maxwell Darlene Pruitt, Chair read public notice into the record. Application of Amy and Michael Feck for a Variance from Zoning Bylaw Schedule 4.2A, for relief from the lot frontage requirement and §230-1.5 Definitions, for Lot Width to allow for the creation of a new lot to construct a new single-family home at 668 Elm Street; (Assessor's Map/Parcel 015/003) in the Residential (RI) zone. Ms. Pruitt appointed Michael Reed as a voting member for the hearing. Applicant Michael Feck was present for the meeting, who currently resides at 668 Elm Street. Mr. Feck stated that they are seeking a variance for lot frontage and width, in order to construct and build a new single-family home. The other option would be tearing down the structure that currently exists and constructing a road to create two new single-family lots under the Residential Compound process. Mr. Feck stated the proposed plans present visuals of what the roads would look like versus the variance. Mr. Feck reviewed the specific circumstances for the grounds of the variance request. Mr. Feck stated according to the plans submitted the lot is oddly shaped and narrow in the front and wider in the rear of the property which would create a need to construct a road due to the odd shape of the lot. Mr. Feck also stated that the construction of a new road to create access to the rear of the property would need the proper amount of land to accommodate two lots. Mi•. Feck also stated that the land is directly abutting resource areas of Hodges Brook and wetlands in the rear and constructing a road would remove the resource area and any natural buffers that the abutters currently enjoy. Mr. Feck is proposing to guarantee there will be no impact on the property and ZBA Meeting Minutes —June 20, 2023 no touch buffer strips on the rear of 668 Elm Street by keeping the natural privacy for the abutters and this would increase the neighborhood's home values. Mr. Feck stated according to the Zoning Bylaws it is unnecessary to raise an existing home. Mr. Feck also stated that the residential compound bylaw states that the number of lots are determined by taking the land area and dividing it by 80,000 square feet and a minimum of 50 feet of frontage. Mr. Feck also stated similar applications were presented to the board where two other properties received variances such as the Galanti Farm located on Otis Street. Mr. Feck stated the tract of land received two separate variances to create two non -conforming lots. Mr. Feck stated that the difference is that the Galanti's property did not have enough frontage to construct a roadway, and therefore could never under the bylaw be a single-family lot. Mr. Feck further stated that the property of Geddes land on South Main Street created two lots with one house behind the other instead of building a road to service the two homes. Mr. Feck further stated the main difference would be to create two new lots and have the hardship of an existing home in the middle of a proposed road. Mi. Feck stated that the variance request conforms to the residential compound bylaw by leaving the existing house. Mr. Feck farther indicated that currently, the existing house is within 40 feet of any boundary lines. Mr. Feck also stated that the variance request could be granted without any detriment to the surrounding area, and it would match the existing homes in the neighborhood which are single-family homes that are set behind pre-existing non -conforming duplexes. Mr. Feck also stated that the variance would not nullify the intent of the purpose of the Bylaw as it could already be two lots under the Bylaw, it is not gaining anything different than what it now. By granting the variance the board would also be upholding the stated purpose of the residential compound bylaw which is to impact the natural land less and preserve the existing look of the neighborhood. Mr. Feck further stated that currently there is a shortage of homes in the Town of Mansfield. Mr. Feck also stated that purchasing a home in Mansfield is extremely expensive and would like to opportunity to build on the land of 668 Elm Street. Board Comments: Ms. Pruitt had concerns about whether the first approved variance for the property was divided into two separate parcels with a house on each lot. Ms. Pruitt asked if the property could be subdivided. Mr. Feck stated that in 1980 the approval for a variance for the property was divided into separate parcels. Mr. Feck further stated that in 1980, 668 Elm Street should not have been included in the petition which remained with the required frontage land area, and at that time no variance was required. ZBA Meeting Minutes —June 20, 2023 Mr. Feck also stated in Condition 2 of the provisions of the 1980 decision states that the conditions were never meant to be a part of 668 Elm Street because it was already existing and Condition 2 states that no dwelling should be within 60 feet of the lot line and years later the houses were constructed within 60 feet. Mr. Feck stated that 668 Elm Street already existed and possibly conformed to Condition 2 of the 1980 Decision. Mr. Feck responded to Ms. Pruitt regarding the Decision that there were no references to further subdivisions. Mr. Feck stated that on the plans submitted that the other two lots were non- conforming and stated further it would be difficult to resub divide a non -conforming lot that does not have enough frontage for a roadway. Mr. Feck stated according to the proposed plans Lot A still has the required frontage and required land area and could have been subdivided if the house was torn down in the 1980's. Mr. List asked if the variance was to build a new home further back and then sell one of the two homes. Mr. Feck stated that he would rather sell the properties because the mortgage payments would be too excessive, and he would also like to sell the property to someone from the Town of Mansfield. Mr. Valanzola asked for clarification regarding the proposed plans submitted to the Zoning Board of Appeals regarding the frontage setback of 25 feet where 40 feet is required and then filed a revised plan for the frontage of 18.84 feet what was the reasoning behind the change in square footage. Mr. Feck explained in the first proposed plans the side yard setback was too close to the existing house near the driveway. Mr. Feck further stated that there was a minimum of 25 feet for the driveway and the newly revised plans were adjusted to 19 feet which does not need a request for relief for a variance for a side yard setback to the existing house. Mr. Valanzola expressed concerns regarding the 18.84 feet for frontage and asked what the width of the driveway is. Mr. Valatzola asked if there is existing land around the property line. Mr. Valanzola asked if a screen buffer could be added to the proposed plans. Mz. Feck stated that the driveway's width is approximately 12 feet. Mr. Feck further stated he will add a screen buffer to the proposed plans where needed. Public Comment: Mr. Eagan lives at 674-678 Elm Street which abuts 668 Elm Street. Mr. Eagan stated that there were no issues with subdividing the property but said the property should be subdivided by constructing two new homes. Mr. Eagan farther stated that currently 668 Elm Street is too close to the street with a 120-foot frontage and requesting a variance for a proposed addition in constructing a single-family home the 120-foot frontage will no longer be conforming. Mr. Egan stated that many homes have similar lots with issues involving adding more homes. ZBA Meeting Minutes —June 20, 2023 Mr. Peck expressed concerns with Mr. Eagan's continent that by building a road would be more detrimental to the neighborhood and there would be a lot more land clearing involved, and the abutters would prefer to have more privacy. Discussions: Mr. Reed stated that it would be better for the Town of Mansfield to agree for the homeowner to put in a long driveway where the homeowner is responsible than adding another road for two houses and having the Town of Mansfield be liable. Mr. List expressed concerns that the odd -shaped lot is non -conforming and creating a variance for another lot that does not conform. Mr. List stated that the two non -conforming lots only have 200 feet of frontage and according to the proposed plans, 4 lots would be sharing the same amount of frontage with 120 feet between the three (3) lots. Mr. List also stated the lots were sizable. Mr. Cummings stated that the prior variance issued the lot size for fiontage was 200 feet and now it is currently 120 feet between the lots. Mr. Valanzola stated the two lot sizes are 64,000 square feet and the other lot size is 96,000 square feet, which is large enough to build a home. Mr. Valanzola stated that a residential compound would cost a lot to build two new homes. Mr. Valanzola stated that building a one - family home on a 96,000 square foot lot could fit comfortably. Mr. Valanzola stated that this variance is based on frontage and not the lot size. Mr. Correira stated a road could be added but the variance request for frontage will still have to follow the Zoning By-laws. Ivlr. Valanzola stated that 99% of all variances will not meet the technical requirements of the statute. Mr. Valanzola stated that according to the application submitted for a variance the applicant proves that square footage is not the issue because there is enough land to build a residential compound. Mr. Valanzola stated that the variance meets the requirements of soil, shape, and topography for 668 Elm Street. Mr. Valanzola stated that there are other homes in the area that have been granted variances with the same issues. Mr. Valanzola stated the cost to change the variance to create the rear road would not be cost-effective. Mr. List expressed concerns that we are not substantially derogating from the intent of the Bylaw with Residential compounds which is pant of the Bylaw. Mr. List further stated that the right mechanism is to get the special permit but then the issue would be that the home would have to be torn down. Mr. List further asked if the hardship would be the home being torn down. Mr. Correira stated that the public continent from the abutter Gary Eagan stated that the property line is close to the street and asked how far is the property line from the street. ZBA Meeting Minutes —June 20, 2023 Mr. List stated that 668 Elm Street is non -conforming because it is less than 40 feet from the street. Mr. Feck stated that the property line is approximately 15 feet from the street. Ms. Pruitt asked what the hardship was for the variance. Mr. Cummings stated that there is a lake in the middle of the proposed plans for 668 Elm Street. Mr. Cummings also stated that according to the proposed plans, it shows wetlands on the property. Mr. Cununings fin then stated that if Mr. Feck created the two lots further back and build the road. What would be the hardship? Motion: To grant the Variance from Zoning By -Law Schedule Section 4.2A, for relief from the lot frontage requirement and §230-1.5 Definitions, for Lot Width to allow for the creation of a new lot to construct a new single-family home at 668 Elm Street (Assessor's Map/Parcel 015/003) (Reed/List) Three (3) in favor, Two (2) opposed, Zero (0) abstained. Motion to approve failed to pass by the required 4/5'h vote and is therefore denied Darlene Pruitt, Chair read the public notice into the record for a Continuance for 0 Plain Street. Application of Tiffany Pham for a Variance from Zoning Bylaw Section 230-1.5, Definition of Lot Width and Schedule 4.2A for Lot Area to construct a single-family residence at 0 Plain Street. (Assessor's Map/Parcel 004/086 & 087) in the Residential (RI) zone. Ms. Pruitt appointed Edward Valanzola as a voting member for the hearing. Board Comment There were no board comments. Public Comment There were no public comments. Discussion There were no discussions. ZBA Meeting Minutes —June 20, 2023 Motion: To continue the hearing to July 18, 2023, at 7:30 p.m. for a Variance from Zoning Bylaw Section 230-1.5, Definition of Lot Width and Schedule 4.2A for Lot Area to construct a single-family residence at 0 Plain Street. (Assessor's Map/Parcel 004/086 & 087) in the Residential (RI) zone. (ListNalanzola) Five (5) in favor, Zero (0) opposed, Zero (0) abstained PASSES Application of Frank & Keith Signoriello Ltd. Partnership & Benjamin for an extension for a Variance requested from Schedule Section 4.2A Density and Dimensional Regulations Note 2. Scenic Road Front Yard Setback 75 feet; to raze and build a new house within the required minimum Front Yard Setback of 52 and 53 feet where 75 feet is required at 881-889 Maple Street (Assessor's Map/Parcel 40/91&171 in Residential 1 (RI) zone. Ms. Pruitt appointed Michael Reed as a voting member for the request. Attorney Nicholas J. Riccio of the Law Office of Nicholas J. Riccio who represents applicants Frank Signoriello and Keith Signoriello of C&S Insurance Company on Chauncey Street, Mansfield. Attorney Riccio stated that on July 19, 2022, the applicants for 881 & 889 were granted two variances for a scenic road setback of 52 and 53 feet where 75 feet is required. Attorney Riccio stated that the property has a lot of resource areas with wetland areas for both lots. Attorney Riccio stated that he is currently working with William Buckley of Bay Colony Group surveyors and Katelyn Gonyer, from the Conversation department to create an action plan to obtain the necessary building permits for 881 & 889 Maple Street lots. Attorney Riccio is requesting a six-month extension for the variance according to the Massachusetts General Law Chapter 40A Section 10. Motion: To approve the requested six-month extension for the existing variance at 881 & 889 Maple Street. (Assessor's Map/Parcel 40/91&171 in Residential 1 (RI) zone to expire on January 19, 2024 for the purpose of pursuing permitting with the Conservation Commission. (Reed/Cummings) ZBA Meeting Minutes —June 20, 2023 Motion: To adjourn at 9:20 pm (Cummings /List) Five (5) in favor, Zero (0) opposed, Zero (0) abstained PASSES Signature of Clerk ZBA Meeting Minutes —June 20, 2023 S a3 I atd of Approval