Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutZBA_03161999ZONING BOARD OF APPEALS MINUTES MARCH 16,1999 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: Richard Devine, Chairman; Leonard Flynn, Clerk; Eric Butler; Richard Secher; Donald Daniels; Jack Vultaggio, Associate Member; and Olivier Kozlowski, Associate Member. The hearing on the application of Bohler Engineering for a Variance from Section 4.7.1.1 of the Zoning By -Law to allow for installation of wall signs larger than allowed at the Sunoco Gas Station located at 70 Copeland Drive in the B -3 Zone began at 7:30 P.M. The application was labeled as Exhibit "A"; a newspaper advertisement was labeled as Exhibit "B "; and a Sign Plan Proposed Improvements for Sun Refining & Marketing Company, Facilities & Distribution Department, Philadelphia, PA dated 11/18/98 and prepared by Bohler Engineering, P.C., 9 Otis Street, Westborough, MA, was labeled as Exhibit "C ". Mr. Flynn read a letter from the Planning Board into the record. "With seven (7) members present, they voted unanimously to send a negative recommendation on the application. The Planning Board is concerned about sign pollution in that area and noted that other businesses in the area have signs that conform to zoning. It was also noted that the business borders residential property." Mr. Devine asked the applicant to present his case. Mr. Carl J. Adamo, Project Manager, explained that he was representing the applicant. As part of a nation -wide re- imaging program, Sunoco, Inc. wishes to provide new signage at the existing Sunoco Service Station, located at 70 Copeland Drive. Sunoco wishes to install new wall signage on their existing "A plus" Convenience Store. The existing 12'x40' building is situated under the existing canopy and is perpendicular to Copeland Drive, which is considered the main frontage roadway. The existing site is actually fronted by two additional roadways, Creedon Street to the north and Henry Street to the west. The 12' width of the building is actually fronting Copeland Drive thereby allowing only 12 square feet of allowable wall sign per Section 4.7.1.1 of the Zoning By -Laws. The actual building length is 40' and has two (2) doorway entrances along both lengths. Minutes of March 16, 1999 Page 2 of 7 Sunoco wishes to install a 3.5 internally illuminated A -Plus Arch Sigh over each of the two doorways at 19.2 square feet each. In addition, Sunoco would like to install a non - illuminated vinyl A -Plus sign along the 12' width fronting Copeland Drive at 12.0 square feet. The total wall signage proposed on the existing convenience store building is 50.4 square feet. Since the existing building fronts more than one roadway, the Zoning Board may find it in their power to- allow this proposed 50.4 square feet of wall signage, given that the 12' and 40' length of building combined would result in a total allowable wall sign area of 52 square feet. The gasoline and retail sales area appropriate uses in this B3 Zone. Clear identification of services on a commercial property to passing motorists is of benefit to the public in terms of traffic safety. It is extremely important that approaching motorists be able to clearly identify services available at the site as early as possible to allow proper time to signal and prepare to enter the site as early as possible to allow proper time to signal and prepare to enter the site in a safe fashion. Also, advertising and clear product identification are critical elements in the gasoline and retail food businesses. The inability to display gasoline process and multiple services on the site creates a hardship for the property owner. The Board members requested colored pictures of the proposed signs and what is the purpose of making a sign out of a building. The Board was also concerned with the amount of signs, the lighting and the fact that the applicant abuts a residential neighborhood. Mr. Adamo showed the board pictures of the proposed signage and explained that the signs are important to identify the building for gasoline and the convenient store. Also, Mr. Adamo stated that the hardship to this application is the unique shape of the lot. An abutter, Mr. Duncan, 155 Chauncy Street, stated that the freestanding lights are over 6 feet tall and now the Sunoco sign can be seen from the Honey Dew Donut Shop. An abutter, Cameron MacNeill, 52 Henry Street, stated that it is already very bright, and there is no reason to add more signage. An abutter, Walter Robinson, 50 Creedon Street, was opposed to having the canopy illuminated and suggested not having any graphics on the Henry Street side of the canopy. Mr. Flynn stated that if there were roads on all sides of the applicants property he could see a reason for more signs. but because of the unique shape of this lot, there should be less signs; and ( considered this gross overkill. Minutes of March 16, 1999 Page 3 of 7 The Board requested from Mr. Adamo if there is any way to control the harsh lights and keep the lights from interfering with the neighborhood and also, to get a lighting expert to attend the next meeting. The Board also requested that the applicant talk to Wendy's because they had the lighting deflected away from the neighbors. The applicant agreed to revise the plans and minimize the lights. The applicant put a request for a continuance in writing. A motion was made by Mr. Flynn and seconded by Mr. Secher to continue this hearing until April 6, 1999. Unanimously approved. (Devine, Flynn, Secher, Butler, Daniels, Vultaggio and Kozlowski - present). The hearing closed at 8:20 P.M. The hearing on the application of Richard Rys for a Finding per Section 3.10.4,B of the Zoning By -Law to allow for the alteration [garage and office addition] to a pre - existing, non - conforming single family home, said property located at 1 Cherry Street in the R -2 Zone began at 8:20 P.M. The application as labeled as Exhibit "A'; a newspaper advertisement was labeled as Exhibit "B "; and a Proposed Addition to Hse. No. 1 Cherry Street in Mansfield, MA, dated February 12, 1999 and prepared by Rim Engineering Co., Inc., 150 North Main Street, Mansfield, MA, was labeled as Exhibit "C ". Flynn read a letter from the Planning Board into the record. "With seven (7) members present they voted unanimously to send a positive recommendation on the application. It is the opinion of the Board that the applicant has scaled down his plan considerably and granting the finding will not be detrimental to the neighborhood." Mr. Devine asked the applications to present her case. Mr. Rys explained that his request for a variance was denied in February, 1999. They have scaled down the new plans and are now requesting a finding. The family is in great need to replace the garage and office area that was lost in the fire. The family is currently living in 900 square feet of heated living space (the existing sunroom is not heated). The new plans do not infringe on the 15 foot sideyard setback. A finding is required because the house, like most houses on the East Common, is non - conforming regarding the front -yard setback. The new plans lower the roof peak 2 feet, reducing the width about 2 feet and reduce the depth slightly compared to the old plans. Minutes of March 16, 1999 Page 4 of 7 Mr. Rys further explained that he purchased the house 20 years ago, which was built in 1795. Since the foundation was against grade level, the house was torn down, they poured a new foundation and made the new house look like the old house. When the house was damaged in the August 28, 1998 fire they were forced to move out for about a month. The family with consists of five family members is now living in 875 square feet of living space since losing the garage and office area which consisted of an additional 900 square feet of living space. Mr. Flynn read letters of support from abutters: Letters were from Mark Lawton and Marcia Reddington; Joan and Edward Bezarro; Stephen and Linda Makris; William and Phyliss Handle; Robert and Jane Bean; John and Beth Polutchko; Marth Flint; Norma and Robert Weir; Mary and Wilbur Birman; Bruce and Elaine Flowman; Jeane Faria; Linda and Keith Flanagan; Anne and Jay Santos; Debra Freelander and Michael Gerfaughty; Daniel and John Harris; and Jerry and Rick Coffey. The hearing closed at 8:35 P.M. The hearing on the application of South Main Street (875) Realty Trust for a Variance from Section 4.3.8.A & B & C & D of the Zoning By -Law to allow for an off - street parking area, located at 875 South Main Street (1 -1 Zone), with no internal landscaping islands began at 8:40 P.M. The application as labeled as Exhibit "A; a newspaper advertisement was labeled as Exhibit 'B "; and a Parking Lot Circulation Plan prepared by Gillon Associates, 3 Old Farm Road, Norwood, MA, was labeled as Exhibit "C ". Flynn read a letter from the Planning Board into the record. "With six (6) members present, they vote unanimously to send a negative recommendation. It is the opinion of the Planning Board that landscaping is needed for the cooling foliage, the recharge - ing of the site, aesthetics, and other reasons, and that the Zoning By -Law should be adhered to. It is further noted that there is no hardship and the request is simply for a matter of convenience." Mr. Flynn read a memorandum dated February 1, 1999 to Michael Trowbridge from John T. Gillon, P.E., Gillon Associates. "At your request, I have reviewed the parking lot owned and operated by Karl Clemmey on Route 140 in Mansfield, MA. This particular lot is unique in that it does not operate as either a shopping center or commuter parking lot. Since it is utilized solely as a special event parking facility it has special operational features. The lot is used by event attendees who are going to the Great Woods Concert next to the lot. People arrive randomly but leave almost simultaneously at the end of the concert. This practice requires the operator to optimize safety have having all traffic arrive and turn around facing the street. The parking lot is Minutes of March 16, 1999 Page 5 of 7 filled from front to rear allowing the first to arrive being the first to leave. Vehicles leaving the lot funnel toward the front in an orderly fashion. Obviously traffic islands would not be conducive to this operation and may in fact introduce an obstacle which would have to be maneuvered around. However, such a wide open parking lot would also require special perimeter landscaping since this type of lot would be less attractive than a lot with interior landscape features. Therefore, - intensive buffer planting should be either offered or required in order to optimize safety while at the same time recognizing the need to be a good and aesthetically pleasing neighbor. Mr. Devine asked the applications to present her case. Michael Trowbridge explained that he is representing the applicant. This is a very unique parking lot because people area arriving at different times but everyone is leaving together with the concerts are over. Placing islands in this parking lot would block the traffic flow. Mr. Trowbridge introduced Mr. Jack Gillon, a Traffic Engineer for 25 years. Mr. Gillon explained that this is a unique parking lot because it is not like a commuter, employee or shopping parking lot. This lot is just for Great Woods Performing Arts Center. People arrive at different times but leave all together. The lot works in a sweeping motion. As cars enter they are all turned to face the same direction, and when they leave they are funneled out. The Board was concerned with the safety and wondered if it was safer to channel the traffic with islands. Also, what would it take for it to meet the existing By -Laws. The Board also brought up the possibility of have this lot used for Great Waves and the Golf Course if that were to go in this area. The Board stated that any other use would have to have site plan review. Mr. Gillon explained that his traffic study doesn't not apply to anything except for the use of Great Woods. Mr. Trowbridge stated that he would put together new plans showing islands and buffers and present that at the next meeting. A motion was made by Mr. Secher and seconded by Mr. Butler to continue this hearing until April 6, 1999. Unanimously approved. The hearing closed at 9:00 Minutes of March 16, 1999 Page 6 of 7 The application of Linda Souza which was continued from March 2, 1999 was discussed. (Devine, Secher, Flynn Butler, Vultaggio) Mrs. Souza presented a Certified Plot Plan of Land in Mansfield, MA dated March 15, 1999 and prepared by RIM Engineering Co., Inc., Mansfield, MA. The Plan showed that the deck is approximately 2' from the lot line. The direct abutter who this deck effects the most, Linda Brady, 19 Liberty Street, was concerned with what the correct lot line is and how do you determine where the house is if you don't know exactly where the property line is. The Board informed Ms. Brady that the only way to get to the bottom of this matter is to hire a surveyor to survey the property, which is very expensive The hearing closed at 9:25 P.M. The hearing on Jeffrey Coffman (CVS) which was continued from March 2, 1999 was continued at 9:25 P.M. Attorney Susan Bernstein explained that they were seeking a Special Permit regarding relief from the landscaping and buffer provision. New Plans were submitted showing the building sliding forward five feet to give a 10 foot buffer in the front thereby preserving the existing trees in the rear. The landscaping problem is created because this lot is bordered by streets on three sides. Mr. Flynn wanted to know why the building could not be made small and this would eliminate all the problems. Attorney Bernstein explained that this is the size building that the applicant needs. Attorney Ed Valanzola, attorney for the sellers of the land, stated that the size of the building is allowed and they are in full compliance in all other areas. The hearing closed at 9:50 P.M. The Board reviewed new plans submitted by Mr. Boehm (Fredric Lane) showing the wetlands on his property. A motion was made by Mr. Butler and seconded by Mr. Flynn to grant a Finding to Mr. Rys (Cherry Street). Unanimously granted. Does not increase the degree of non - conformity. (Devine, Flynn, Secher, Butler, Daniels). A motion was made by Mr. Butler and seconded by Mr. Daniels to grant a variance to Mrs. Souza with a two -foot sideyard setback for an open deck with no vertical appendages. Motion granted 4 -0 (Yes: Devine, Secher, Butler, Vultaggio) (No: Flynn). Minutes of March 16, 1999 Page 7 o f 7 A motion was made by Mr. Vultaggio and seconded by Mr. Butler to grant a variance to Mr. Boehm (Fredric Lane). Unanimously granted. (5 -0) (Devine, Secher, Flynn, Butler, Vultaggio). A motion was made by Mr. Secher and seconded by Mr. Butler to grant a variance to Mr. - Coffman (CVS). Unanimously granted (5 -0) (Butler, Secher, Devine, Flynn, Kozlowski). A motion was made by Mr. Secher and seconded by Mr. Kozlowski to approve the Minutes of March 2, 1999. Unanimously approved. The meeting adjourned at 10:30 P.M. � I Respec ly submitted, L n� /,V�' Clerk