Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutZBA_02061996ZONING BOARD OF APPEALS MINUTES FEBRUARY 6,1995 12: 3 c, `,:`r Li,E1TS The Board of Appeals held its regular meeting in the Town Hall, Mansfield, MA, at 7:30 P.M. Present at the hearing were the following members: Eric Butler, Chairman; Leonard Flynn, Clerk; Richard Secher; Peter DeTrolio; Donald Daniels; Duane Frederick, Associate Member; and Jack Vultaggio, Associate Member. The hearing on the application of David Dutra for a Special Permit, per Sections 3.10.A and 6.2.2.13 of the Zoning By -Laws to allow for the extension of a pre- existing, non - conforming single family use, located at 509 West Street in the I -1 Zone began at 7:30 P.M. Mr. Frederick was appointed voting member in place of Mr. Daniels for this hearing. The application was labeled Exhibit "A'; newspaper advertisement as Exhibit "B'; and a Mortgage Inspection Plan dated March 24, 1995 prepared by CADtech Systems, Inc., Plymouth, MA, was labeled as Exhibit "C ". Mr. Flynn read a letter from the Planning Board into the record. "With four (4) members present they voted unanimously to send a positive recommendation on the application. It is the opinion of the Board that the structure was erected in conformance with the then - applicable zoning. The area district was later rezoned during the 1989 Master Plan, making the structure pre - existing non - conforming; therefore, grant of a special permit would not substantially derogate from the intent of the Zoning By- Law." Mr. Butler asked Mr. Dutra to present his case. Mr. Dutra explained that they would like to add a 24'x44' addition to their existing house so that his son and family can move back home with them and help them_ out with expenses. Their son needs a place to live because his landlord is retiring and moving into the house he is now renting. Mr. Dutra further stated that the addition will be one -story, one - family and attached directly to the back of the existing house. The hearing closed at 7:35 P.M. Mr. Daniels arrived a few minutes late for the meeting. Minutes of February 6, 1996 Page 2 of 5 The hearing on the application of Kurt Fristrup for a Variance from Section 4.2.1 of the Zoning By -Laws to allow for the construction of a deck, at 10 Gander Lane, with less than the required size yard setback in the R -1 Zone began at 7:45 P.M. The application was labeled Exhibit "A "; newspaper advertisement as Exhibit "B "; and an As -Built Plan dated November 28, 1988 prepared by Rim Engineering Co., Inc., Mansfield, MA, was labeled as Exhibit "C ". Mr. Flynn read a letter from the Planning Board into the record. "With four (4) members present they voted unanimously to send a positive recommendation on the application. It is the board's understanding that the deck already exists, and the zoning encroachment was only recently uncovered, and the encroachment into the setback is minimal; therefore, grant of a variance would not substantially derogate from the intent of the Zoning By -Law. Mr. Butler asked Mr. Paul Folkman to present his case. Mr. Folkman explained that he is representing Mr. Fristrup since he built this house 7 years ago. The applicant is trying to sell his house and the four foot encroachment on the sideyard was just discovered. This error was made during construction and Mr. Folkman stated that they can either obtain a variance or take down and rebuild the deck. Mr. Flynn read letters from abutters into the record both dated February 3, 1996. "We wish to certify that we are aware of the zoning variance being requested by Kurt Fristrup and Helen Mohrmann of 10 Gander Lane. Specifically, we are aware that one of the posts supporting the deck is bout 4 feet too close to our shared property line. We do not find the deck to be obtrusive or visually offensive. We support the granting of this variance. Signed Jon and Beth Zieselman 14 Gander Lane and Jim and Joanne Donohoe, 6 Gander Lane." The hearing closed at 8:00 P.M. A motion was made by Mr. Secher and seconded by Mr. DeTrolio to grant a variance to Mr. Fristrup. Unanimously granted. 5 -0. Butler, Flynn, Secher, DeTrolio, Daniels. A motion was made by Mr. Flynn and seconded by Mr. DeTrolio to grant .a special permit to Mr. Dutra with conditions. Granted 4 -1 (Yes - Butler, Flynn, DeTrolio, Frederick - No - Secher). Conditions: Single Family - Single Family addition. Minutes of February 6, 1996 Page 3 of 5 The hearing on the application of Dale Paccione and William Richard for a Variance from Section 3, Schedule 3.3.5 of the Zoning By -Laws to allow for a Multiple [3- family] Residence structure located at 25 -27 Pleasant Street in the R -3 Zone began at 8:00 P.M. The application was labeled Exhibit "A'; newspaper advertisement as Exhibit "B'; and a Plan of Land dated December 12, 1995 prepared by Hutchins- Trowbridge Associates, Mansfield, MA, was labeled as Exhibit "C ". Mr. Butler asked Mr. Paccione and Mr. Richard to present their case. Attorney Steven Dean explained that he is representing the applicants. Mr. Dean explained that the structure located at 25 -27 Pleasant Street is a three - family structure which was built and operated as a three - family structure prior to the enactment of the current Zoning By -Law. Apparently, the use was discontinued for a period of a few years which prevents the current applicants from utilizing the structure as a valid pre - existing non - conforming use. Given the zoning status in this neighborhood, the applicants are currently unable to utilize the premises as a three - family structure, despite the fact that they purchased it with the understanding that it was a three - family structure and paid commensurate value therefor. In the structure there are three separate entrances, three separate kitchens, and three self - contained units, which cannot be readily or practicably combined. Mr. Dean further stated that a literal enforcement of the Zoning By -Laws would create a substantial hardship for the applicants in that it would prevent them from recovering sufficient income from the units to service the debt on the property, and it would require them, in the event of a sale, to suffer a substantial loss, in that they would be able to sell the property only as a two - family rather than a three - family. Mr. Flynn stated that there is no proof that this is a three- family house. The deed shows it as a two - family; the assessor's records should it to be a two - family; the Assessor's 1986 Inventory shows this has having two kitchens with a finished attic; and the taxes are paid on a two - family. Mr. Dean further stated that the applicants bought this house as a three- family and it was presented to them as a three - family. They cannot refinance or sell this house until the matter is settled. The hearing closed at 8:30 P.M. Minutes of February 6, 1996 Page 4 of 5 The hearing on the application of Donald Medeiros for a Variance from Section 4.2.1 of the Zoning By -Law, to allow for the construction of a canopy structure, with less than the required front yard setback, at the gas station located at 157 Pratt Street in the R -2 Zone began at 8:30 P.M. The application was labeled Exhibit "A'; newspaper advertisement as Exhibit "B'; a Proposed Site Plan dated January 12, 1996 prepared by Tyree Consulting Co., Westborough, MA, was labeled as Exhibit "C'; and a Canopy and Signage Plan dated November 3, 1995 prepared by Tyree Consulting Co., Westborough, MA, was labeled as Exhibit "D ". Mr. Flynn read a letter from the Planning Board into the record. "With four (4) members present they voted unanimously to send a negative recommendation. It is the opinion that this expansion of a pre - existing non - conforming commercial use in a residential zone has the potential to adversely effect the neighborhood, and would further visually intrude into the residential area, and grant of a variance would substantially derogate from the intent of the Zoning By -Law, which seeks, in part, to protect the integrity of residential neighborhoods." Mr. Butler asked Mr. Medeiros to present his case. Mr. Frank Quigley, Project Manager, introduced himself and presented three letters which were read into the record by Mr. Flynn: (1) Letter dated February 6, 1996 from Lee Azinheira, P.E., Town Engineer, I have reviewed your site plan for the gas station at 157 Pratt Street and I have also visited the site to review the existing conditions. I have no objections to the changes as shown on your site plan dated January 11, 1996. The proposed changes actually improve the current site conditions by reducing the amount of impervious cover, and by changing the concrete pad around the gas pumps so that any spill is contained on the pad rather than running down the street into a catch basin." (2) Letter dated January 17, 1996 from Joseph J. Sarre., Jr., Lt., Fire Prevention, "Please be advised that I have reviewed the plan for a new pump island and canopy at 157 Pratt Street. I found there was no legend that specified that the pump island and canopy met 527 CMR:5. The operation and maintenance of a service station ie: concrete pad for the dispensing devices, signs reading "NO SMOKING" while refueling and "SHUT OFF ENGINE ". The new containment pad must be able to handle any spilling of fuel. The existing pad does not work because it goes with the grade which pitches to the street and flows to a catch basin. This situation must be corrected. If these requirements are met I feel this will improve the safety and environmental conditions for the entire area. (3) Letter dated January 18, 1996 from Arthur O'Neill, Chief of Police, "The Mansfield Police Department reviewed the above - mentioned plans and found no problem with them." Mr. Quigley explained that Mr. and Mrs. Richard O'Brien are the operators of the Gas Station, Minutes of February 6, 1996 Page 5 of 5 and Mr. Kevin Gillis is the owner of the property. They would like to erect an overhead canopy and move the concrete mat back because now when the cars are refueling they are off the property. The mat will also have a spill containment feature. The overhead canopy will serve different purposes: (1) protection in inclement weather; (2) public safety with a fire extinguishing system in the canopy roof, (3) lighting; and (4) all water from the roof will go directly to a drain and not onto the street. Mr. Quigley further explained that a meeting was held and all abutters were notified of these plans and there were no objections. The proposed size of the canopy is 38x24' and 14'6" off the ground. ZBA members expressed concern over the size of the canopy and were told by Mr. Quigley that that each canopy is custom made so they can be made smaller and shorter. The hearing closed at 9:10 P.M. A motion was made by Mr. Flynn and seconded by Mr. Secher to deny a variance to Mr. Paccione and Mr. Richards. Reasons: no demonstrated hardship; always assessed as a two - family; derogates from the intent of the Zoning By -Law; and not in the public interest. A motion was made by Mr. Butler and seconded by Mr. Flynn to continue this hearing until we receive a letter from Town Counsel requesting a review of the Planning Board letter and (1) is this a use variance; and can the Board grant a use variance. A motion was made by Mr. DeTrolio and seconded by Mr. Secher to continue the variance application on the Gas Station until the Board receives plans to make the canopy structure smaller. A motion was made by Mr. Daniels and seconded by Mr. Vultaggio to approve the Minutes of February 6, 1996. at 10:00 P.M.