Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutZBA_081412MANSFIELD ZONING BOARD OF APPEALS AUGUST 14, 2012 E ;� MINUTES The Zoning Board of Appeals held its regular meeting in the Town Hall, Mansfield, MA at 7:30 pm. Present at the hearing were the following members: Jack Vultaggio; Chairman; Elisabeth Garber - Miller, Clerk; Kevin Mackie; David Luca; Philip Shannon; Associate Member John McKenna, 1. Meeting opened at 7:30 pm. 2. Michele and Donna DeSantis, 62 York Road, Map 2, Parcel 289. The application is for a Variance from Section 4.2.1, Side Yard Setback, of the Zoning By -law for the construction of an attached garage with less than the required side yard setback at 62 York Road in the Residential 1 (111) Zone. The application was labeled as Exhibit "A ", a newspaper advertisement was labeled as Exhibit "B" and the plan, "Proposed House Addition at HSE. No. 62 York Road in Mansfield, MA, dated June 26, 2012, signed and stamped by Craig E. Cygawnoski, P.L.S, RIM Engineering Co., Inc., 150 North Main Street, Mansfield, MA 02048, was labeled at Exhibit "C ". There was no letter from the Planning Board. Mr. and Mrs. DeSantis were present. They are requesting a Variance from Section 4.2.1, Side Yard Setback, to construct a 24.5'x26.0' attached garage, 16.0 feet from the side yard property line. Mr. DeSantis said the house was built in 1991 and they have owned the house for one year. There is a ten - foot wide drainage easement on the property. Mr. DeSantis explained the existing garage is under the house and is extremely difficult, especially in the winter, to enter and exit. He said the entrance for the proposed garage would face the street and the location of the driveway would not change, but minor changes would have to be made to the driveway. He said the proposed garage would also enhance the house while conforming to the surrounding homes in the neighborhood. Mr. Luca asked if Mr. DeSantis had considered a smaller garage. Mr. DeSantis said a one -car garage would not conform to the other homes in the neighborhood. Mr. Vultaggio said the other house lots in the area are larger and when built, had space for the attached garage, but because of the size of this lot, the garage was built under the house. He said at the time the house was built, an attached garage would not have been in compliance. Mrs. DeSantis said she has spoken with her neighbors and all are in favor of the project. She said because of the difficulty getting in and out of the garage, they do not use the garage. Mr. Mackie said all but a small portion of the house is in the 100 -foot wetland buffer. He also noted that the property slopes down at the edge of the driveway and, because of the wetland issues, it would be impossible to fill in this area. Mr. DeSantis said the lot drops off approximately 15 -20 feet from the garage. Mr. Luca asked if the driveway could be widened, making it easier to enter and exit the existing garage. Mr. DeSantis said because of the easement, the lack of lawn and the wetland issues in this area, it would not be possible. Hearing ended at 7:42 pm. Mr. Mackie made the motion to grant the Variance from Section 4.2.1, Side Yard Setback, for the construction of an attached garage with less than the required side yard setback at 62 York Road as shown on the plan "Proposed House Addition at Hse. No. 62 York Road in Mansfield, MA ", dated June 26, 2012. Mr. Shannon seconded the motion. Discussion: Mr. Mackie said it is not practical to use the garage; the owners have a garage but it is of no use to them. Because the area cannot be filled in due to wetland issues and because of the way the lot slopes, he feels there is a hardship. Mr. Luca said the proposed garage would conform to the neighborhood but he was concerned there would be very little lawn left on the side of the house. He said there are no other houses in the neighborhood that are that close to the property line Ms. Garber - Miller said the house has been there twenty years and there have been no issues with the garage. She questioned whether there were less intrusive alternatives such as a small retaining wall built at the point where the land slopes instead of the proposed garage to allow the widening of the driveway. Mr. Vultaggio said the house was built with the garage underneath specifically to fit on this lot. He said because of the wetland area and the topography of the property, there is not enough space for the proposed garage. Motion denied 1 -4 -0. 3. Peter and Diane McCarron, 56 Branch Street, Map 32, Parcel 11. The application is for a Variance from Section 4.2.1, Front Yard Setback, of the Zoning By -Law to construct a roof over the existing front stairs at 56 Branch Street in the Residential 1 (111) Zone. The application was labeled as Exhibit "A ", a newspaper advertisement was labeled as Exhibit "B" and the plan, "Certified Plot Plan of Land in Mansfield, MA ", dated June 18, 2012 and revised May 24, 2012, signed and stamped by Craig E. Cygawnoski, P.L.S, RIM Engineering Co., Inc., 150 North Main Street, Mansfield, MA 02048, was labeled at Exhibit "C ". There was no letter from the Planning Board. Mr. McCarron told the board the house was built in 1968 and he has owned the house for 14 years. For safety reasons, he said he would like to construct a roof over the front door and stairs to keep rain, snow and ice off the entrance way. He said the front yard setback will not change. 2 Mr. Vultaggio said this is a pre- existing, non - conforming structure and the application should have been for a Finding because the house already encroaches into the front and side yard setbacks by a substantial amount. He said the new construction may not encroach further into the front yard setback more than what currently exists, 27.6 feet. Mr. McCarron has already started the work; he did not realize a permit was required. Hearing ended at 7:52 pm. Ms. Garber - Miller made the motion to amend the application for 56 Branch Street from a Variance to a Finding and that the proposed change will be an increase to the pre- existing, non - conforming condition. Mr. Luca seconded the motion. Motion passed 5 -0 -0. Ms. Garber - Miller made the motion that the proposed increase to the pre- existing, non - conforming condition will be no more detrimental to the surrounding area than the existing condition. Mr. Luca seconded the motion. Discussion: Mr. Vultaggio said the project would not detract from the neighborhood. Motion passed 5 -0 -0. 4. JAB Construction, 47 High Street, Map 21, Parcel 139. The application is for a Finding from Section 3.3.2, Two - Family Dwelling, of the Zoning By -Law for the conversion of a pre- existing, non - conforming, structure to a two - family residence at 47 High Street in the Residential 3 (113) Zone. Kate Gower, the owner of the property, was present She asked that the hearing be continued to September 18, 2012. She told the board she is still researching the property with the Light Department, Town Clerk and the Historic Society to verify prior use of the property before the church owned the site. Ms. Garber - Miller made the motion to accept the request to continue the hearing for 47 High Street until the September 18, 2012 meeting. Mr. Mackie seconded the motion. Motion passed 5 -0 -0. S. Melissa & Russell Rapoza, 175 Gilbert Street, Map 3, Parcel 116. The application is for a Variance from Section 4.2.1, Side Yard and Rear Yard Setbacks, of the Zoning By- Law for the construction of a breezeway to attach the existing house to the existing garage, which will result in less than the required side and rear yard setbacks at 175 Gilbert Street in the Residential 1 (111) Zone. The application was labeled as Exhibit "A ", a newspaper advertisement was labeled as Exhibit "B" and the plan, "Zoning Plan 175 Gilbert Street" , dated June 19, 2012, signed and stamped byMichael 3 Trowbridge, Hutchins Trowbridge Associates, Inc., 200 Chauncy Street, Mansfield, MA 02048, was labeled at Exhibit "C ". There was no letter from the Planning Board. Russell Rapoza was present. He told the board the house was built in 1955 and he has owned the house for 16 years. He said he would like to attach the existing house to the garage by adding a breezeway, which will have a roof only. The board discussed other variances and building permits for this property but had no issues with the application. Mr. Mackie made the motion to grant a Variance from Section 4.2.1, Side Yard and Rear Yard Setbacks, for a breezeway between the existing house and garage at 175 Gilbert Street as shown on the plan "Zoning Plan 175 Gilbert Street ", dated June 19, 2012. Mr. Shannon seconded the motion. Discussion: Mr. Luca said the proposed breezeway is fairly de minimis compared to the scope of development on the property. He said there is a minimal hardship because of the position of the house on the lot and the angle of the property lines. He said the project is not any more detrimental to the neighborhood because the lot is surrounded by trees and a fence. Mr. Mackie said the garage is already there and is quite a distance from the neighboring properties. He said he does not have any issues with the project. Mr. Vultaggio said the buffer is built in because on the affected side of the property, the abutter has a 150 foot easement and nothing can be built in this area. Ms. Garber - Miller said the easement is 150 feet wide and the lot to the left of the property is zoned Industrial. Motion passed 5 -0 -0. 6. Benjamin F. Cavallo and Keith Signoriello, 190 Chauncy Street, Map 21, Parcel 287, 289, 303, 304, 378. The application is for a Variance from Section 4.2.2, Front Yard setback; Section 4.3.6 B.1.a, Landscaped Buffer Strip; Section 4.3.6 B.1.b, Landscaped Buffer Strip; Section 4.3.9, Landscaping Adjacent to Buildings; Section 4.4.2, Off - Street Loading and Section 4.4.4.7, Loading Spaces, of the Zoning By -Law for the construction of a two -story office building at 190 Chauncy Street, (Map 21, Parcels 287, 289, 303, 304 and 378) in the Business 3 (63) and the Residential 3 (3) Zone. The application was labeled as Exhibit "A ", a newspaper advertisement was labeled as Exhibit "B" and the plan, "Cavallo &Signoriello, Proposed Site Plan and Existing Site Plan ", dated July 20, 2012, signed and stamped by Douglas R. Annino, Registered Architect, 125 North Washington Street, North Attleboro, MA, was labeled at Exhibit "C ". There was no letter from the Planning Board. Richard Peterson, Annino Incorporated, Keith Signoriello and Benjamin Cavallo were present. Mr. Cavallo told the board they presently occupy a one -story building that they have owned since 1959. The existing commercial land is located at an intersection of Chauncy and Central Streets. The rear of the parcel borders Bella Vista Avenue. The parcel is zoned B3 and also contains a motorcycle shop and a private residential lot, zoned R3, a residential lot adjacent to the business lot. He said the company has acquired the residential lots next to the business, for a total of five lots, and the lots are split between residential and business zoning. Mr. Peterson said the line of trees shown on the plan is the boundary between the three zones on the property. Mr. Cavallo said they would like to expand their insurance business on the lot. The existing building is too small and they are currently renting two spaces in Mansfield, for an additional 5,000 square feet. He said there is not enough parking for the building and entering and exiting the parking area is dangerous. The property has frontage on three streets. The existing insurance building, motorcycle shop and private residence would be removed. Mr. Peterson told the board the owners would like to construct a two -story office building on the site. The building would provide much needed office space for the agency and the additional space would be leased for small service type businesses, such as a lawyer and /or real estate office to complement their business. Mr. Peterson said the vacant residential parcel abutting the B3 lot would not be developed and will add to the buffer between the existing residential and the commercial property. He said there are no plans to provide access on Bella Vista Avenue. Mr. Peterson told the board they will be providing two areas for parking; a small parking area off Chauncy Street and a larger area in the rear of the building off Central Street. Mr. Peterson reviewed the requested relief from the by -law: the owner is request a variance from front yard setback (Section 4.2.2) from Central Street; 50 feet is required and the applicant is asking for 15 feet; a variance from the Landscaped Buffer strip, Section 4.3.6 B.1. a, minimum of 15 feet in depth from Chauncy Street, applicant is asking for five feet of landscaping; a variance from Landscaped Buffer Strip, 4.3.6 B.1.b 15 in depth abutting residential district, so the dumpster enclosure can be located in this area; a variance from Section 4.3.9 Landscaping adjacent to buildings, 10 ft. depth required, due to the tight configuration of the lot the sidewalks will abut the building. Landscaping will be provided in the parking lot and the perimeter of the building lot; a variance from Section 4.4.2, Off - Street Loading and Section 4.4.4.7, Loading Spaces. Due to the tight lot, the nature of the business and the adequate onsite parking areas, loading can be accomplished on site without hampering circulation on the streets. An abutter to the vacant lot who did not identify himself asked how the lot would be used. Mr. Signoriello told him the lot will not be developed, only landscaped. Mr. Signoriello told him if he had any questions or would like to review the plans, to come to the office. Mr. Vultaggio asked Mr. Peterson if he would be able to do the project without the requested variances if he could use the buffer between the existing building and the adjacent lots. Mr. Vultaggio said if the buffer was moved to the residential area, more space would be available for the building and parking area. He said there is nothing in the by -law that states you can't landscape these lots. Mr. Vultaggio said there is no reason the building cannot be put on the lot line. There would not be a setback requirement as long as there is not a business use or parking in this area that is zoned residential. He said this is a better use of the property. Ms. Garber - Miller said all the lots are under the same owner and can be merged into one lot. Mr. Vultaggio suggested the applicant consider moving the building closer to Chauncy Street. He said he was concerned about the parking in the front of the building, especially the handicapped parking, as far as entering from and exiting onto Chauncey Street. He said the handicapped parking spaces should be in the back of the building not in front. This would still allow for the required parking spaces and, by eliminating this parking area, the applicant could then add a sidewalk to this area. Mr. Mackie asked about the parking. Mr. Peterson said there will be a total of thirty -nine spaces, the required number for a 7,800 square foot building. Included are eight or nine compact spaces. Mr. Vultaggio suggested the hearing be continued to September 18, 2012 to give the applicant time to develop a new plan. Ms. Garber - Miller made the motion to continue the hearing for 190 Chauncy Street to September 18, 2012. Mr. Luca seconded the motion. Motion passed 5 -0 -0. Hearing ended at 9:05 pm. 7. Old Business: Mr. Luca made the motion to approve the July 17, 2012 minutes as written. Mr. Shannon seconded the motion. Motion passed 5 -0 -0. The board signed the 101 -103 North Main Street (Variance) decision. B. Adjournment Motion to adjourn at 9:20 pm (Luca /Mackie). Motion passed 5 -0 -0. Next meeting will be September 18, 2012 at 7:30 pm. Elisabeth Garber - Miller, Clerk Date 0