HomeMy WebLinkAboutZBA_101612j _IJ
r f 4
Ui FICE
MANSFIELD ZONING BOARD OF APPEAL „ ,
MINUTES '. €t _ +, -� 2
OCTOBER 16. 2012
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; David Luca; Philip Shannon; Associate Member James Rathbun; Associate Member John McKenna.
1. Meeting opened at 7.30 pm.
2. David Oberlander, 29 Mill Street, Map 35, Parcel 26.
The application is for a Finding /Variance from 4.2.1, Front Yard Setback, of the Zoning By -law to
construct an addition to the pre- existing, non - conforming house at 29 Mill Street in the Residential 2 (R2)
Zone.
The following documents were submitted: Application for Finding, filed with the Town Clerk's Office on
September 12, 2012; Copy of the public hearing notice; Site Plan for Reconstruction of Existing Dwelling
at 29 Mill Street, Mansfield, MA, Map 35, Lot 26 ", dated June 9, 2012, revised July 11, 2012, August 8
and August 28, 2012, prepared by David Oberlander, P.E., BDO Engineering, 47 -A Wilson Place,
Mansfield, MA; Planning Board letter dated October 11, 2012
Associate Member John McKenna was appointed a voting member for this hearing.
Ms Garber - Miller read the Planning Board letter dated October 11, 2012. On October 10, 2012, the
Planning Board, with seven (7) members present voted six (6) in favor with one (1) opposed to send a
positive recommendation on the application of David Oberlander for a Finding because of the hardship
caused by the odd shape of the lot and the wetland areas at the back of the site. The proposed
alterations will decrease the existing encroachment into the setback and avoid additional work in the
wetland buffer area.
Mr. Oberlander explained the existing house was constructed in 1850 and the Weir family has owned the
property for 51 years. He said the existing house is approximately nine feet from the front property line,
20 feet from the wetlands and parking is non - existent.
Mr. Oberlander explained the Conservation Commission questioned whether the project would be
considered new or old construction and asked Town Councel to clarify what constitutes new or existing
construction. Town Councel's opinion was that the complete razing of an existing single - family residence
and construction of a new single - family residence that will not use any part of the existing residence does
not constitute normal maintenance, repair, replacement or improvement to an existing private residential
property or component. By tearing down the existing house, the project would be considered new
construction and be held to the Mansfield Wetland Protection By -law's 50 -ft. no touch zone.
Mr. Oberlander said because the majority of the 72,397 square foot, oddly- shaped parcel is wetlands, the
project would require work in the 25 -ft. no touch zone. The Conservation Commission would not allow
Mr. Oberlander to remove the existing house to construct a new dwelling so the northern wing of the
original house will be incorporated into the addition and the southern portion of the house will be
removed. Mr. Oberlander told the board the addition will be approximately 5 feet further from the road
than the existing house. A new driveway will eliminate parking on the street.
Mr. Vultaggio asked if the project meets all of the zoning requirements. Mr. Oberlander said he is asking
for relief only from the front yard setback where a minimum of 30 feet is required. The plan shows the
property line is 8.7 feet from the existing foundation and 6.7 feet from the bottom front step. The
property line is 18 feet from the foundation of the proposed addition and 12 feet from the bottom step of
the new stairs.
Mr. Shannon asked if the addition is as far back as possible from the front property line. Mr. Oberlander
said the wetland issues prevent setting the addition further back on the property. Mr. Shannon said the
proposed plan is an improvement to the property
Mr. Rathbun asked if the existing sheds on the property will be removed. Mr. Oberlander said the two
sheds closest to the house will remain, but the third shed, which is in the wetlands, will be removed.
Ms. Garber - Miller said it is very hard to read the plan. She asked Mr. Oberlander to submit a new plan
showing only the setbacks and wetland line.
Hearing ended at 7:45 pm.
Ms. Garber - Miller made the motion that the proposed addition for 29 Mill Street is an increase in the pre-
existing, non - conforming condition. Mr. Shannon seconded the motion. Motion passed 5 -0 -0.
Ms. Garber - Miller made the motion that the proposed increase in the non - conformity is not more
detrimental to the neighborhood than the existing non - conformity. Mr. Luca seconded the motion.
Discussion:
All board members agreed the project is an improvement to the existing conditions of the property.
Motion approved 5 -0 -0.
3. Old and New Business
The board signed the following decisions: Corner of Fowler & Henry Streets — Assessor's Map 20, Parcel
69 (Variance); 190 Chauncy Street (Variance); 47 High Street (Variance).
Mr. Rathbun made the motion to approve the minutes of August 14, 2012 as written. Mr. Luca seconded
the motion. Motion passed 5 -0 -0.
Mr. Shannon made the motion to approve the minutes of September 18, 2012 as written. Mr. McKenna
seconded the motion. Motion passed 5 -0 -0.
4. Adjournment
Motion to adjourn at 8:15 pm: Luca /Rathbun. Passed
Nextt meting will be November 20,0,,y201122..
L . l 2 - • /�
Elisabeth Garber - Miller, Clerk Date