Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutminofzba04272010 TOWN OF MANSFIELD ZONING BOARD OF APPEALS iJ '.-- I ('E ; ;- i.......,. ; (~ " I": 112 -" "f MINUTES APRIL 27. 2010 The Zoning 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: Jack Vultaggio, Chairman; Elisabeth Garber-Miller, Clerk; Peter DeTrolio; Jeff Garr; and Philip Shannon, Associate Member. The hearing of Todor Petrov, 64 Pattys Road, was continued at 7:30 p.m. The contractor passed out new plans to the Board and explained that the proposed garage addition with be 22'x26' leaving 10 feet to the side yard setback where 25 feet is required. The porch was already there when the purchased the house and is within the 25 foot yard setback. Most of the houses in the neighborhood have two car garages. There were no abutters present. The Board was concerned with the exits and if there were any stairs coming off of this addition, which there are not Ms. Garber-Miller stated that she would have liked to receive these new plans before the meeting because it has been a few weeks and she would have liked to see the property again to refresh her memory. Ms. Garber-Miller read a letter from an abutter into the record dated 4/24/2010. "To Whom it May Concern: The following neighbors of Todor Petrov agree with his application for a Variance to build a two-car garage attached to his house at 64 Patty's Road, Mansfield, MA 02048." Christopher M. Shannon, 60 Pattys Road and Mr. & Mrs. Richard Loomer, 68 Patty's Road." The hearing closed at 7:40 p.m. Mrs. Garber-Miller was concerned with how really tight this would be to the lot line. Mr. Vultaggio explained that a couple of things where there like the hardship and shape of lot. Based on zoning if this should be allowed it would be more than de minimus and not a great hardship case, but they have the neighbor's approval. Further, there is concern that this is less than 10 feet and all the neighborhood can come in if this sets a precedent. Mr. OeTrolio explained that this goes against Zoning because it is too close and it needs 25 feet and it will have less than 10 feet. MINUTES OF APRIL 27. 2010 Pa2e 2 of 4 The Board stated that if the applicant has another plan or design or if they substantially change the plan, they can come back before the Board in less than the required 2 years. A motion was made by Mr. Shannon to approve the variance and seconded by Mr. Garr. All in favor: Vultaggio, Garr, Shannon; All opposed: OeTrolio, Garber-Miller - Motion Failed 3-2. The continuation of Adam Genovese of 37 Donald Allen Drive was continued at 7:55 p.m. Mr. Genovese presented new plans that were requested by the Board. The proposed size was increased and RIM added stairs on the plans. Mr. Genovese stated that they spoke with an architect and added an extra 5 feet out to the left and 6 feet 1 inch to the front which was a farmer's porch. Mr. Vultaggio stated that he had a problem with the Plan. The applicant went from 19.5 to the side yard setback and is now 13 feet to the setback and the stairs weren't there at all and that encroaches by 5 feet as well. Also the overhang might encroach more than what is actually on the plan. Also Mr. Vultaggio felt that the applicant is pushing this by making the porch larger. That is an additional encroachment and he is comfortable with 15 feet but not more than that. Further, they need an entrance to the house and they originally wanted a garage but they don't have enough room for this bigger addition. The applicant further explained that there are wetlands on the side and the land slopes and drops off. Ms. Garber-Miller remember what it looked like and explained that she doesn't like the plans delivered to the board just before the hearing instead of submitted in a more timely manner. Mr. Vultaggio noted that the Board has a standing agreement that if any member of the Board is not completely happy and would like a continuance to review something; that is what should be done. The applicant requested a continuance in writing and the hearing was continued at 7:45 P.M. until the May 18th meeting. The continuation on the application of Sign Design, Inc., for a Variance from Section 4.7.1.2 of the Zoning By-Law for the construction of a new pylon sign with more than the required sign area and sign height; and less than the required minimum setback at 131 Copeland Drive in the B-3 Zone began at 7:45 p.m. ~ MINUTES OF APRIL 27. 2010 Pa!!e 3 of 4 The application was labeled as Exhibit "A"; a newspaper advertisement was labeled as Exhibit "Boo; a Proposed Sign Plan of 131 Copeland Drive Mansfield, Massachusetts prepared for Sign Design, Inc., dated 8/17/09 and prepared by J.K. Holmgren Engineering Inc., Registered Professional Engineers and Land Surveyors 942 West Chestnut Street, Brockton, MA 02301, was labeled as Exhibit "C"; a New Pylon Sign Design for Harbor One Credit Union dated 7/17/09, Project No. 51723 and prepared by Sign Design, 170 Liberty Street, Brockton, MA 02301, was labeled as Exhibit "D"; and a Side Profile Elevation of 131 Copeland Drive, Sign Scale Drawing, was labeled as Exhibit "E". Mr. Valanzola introduced himself and passed out new plans and drawings. He explained that he now represents Harbor One Credit Union. He introduced Allan Fidero and Maureen Wilkinson who represent Harbor One. He further explained that he just came into this project. This property was originally a restaurant and he understands that the landscaping has been a problem. There were three variances requested on this property. They have withdrawn one and only need two, one for the height and one for the area. They would like to soften up the front of the building. The yellow posts were removed and there are two handicapped parking spots. They are surrounded by the old school building next door, a small home on other side and Dominos Pizza across the street. Across the street from the traffic lights are all businesses. The Planning Department reviewed the plans and they are happy to see the improvement to this location. The sign height allowed is 15 feet and they are asking for 17 feet. It is a prototype sign and the Town is pro business and encourages businesses in this town. Heritage Bank did not survive there and they merged with Harbor One. Mr. DeTrolio stated that he feels the sign is too big and he absolutely detests when applicants come in and says they need a sign because that is a load of bologna. Ms. Garber-Miller stated that when she hears that a signs is a prototype her eyes glaze over immediately. She stated that there are two issues here; one, the prototype argument; and two, that everyone is going to want a bigger sign for their business. If a business comes into Mansfield, they have to comply with Mansfield by-laws and merely stating that all signs were the same is not a sufficient reason to disregard the by-laws. Mr. Vultaggio states that Ms. Garber-Miller is right and when they want it their way it is the only way. Mr. Vultaggio explained that he does not want this to be an adversarial proceeding, nor do they deserve preferential treatment. He wants to look at this and try to come to common ground and not chastise them. MINUTES OF APRIL 27. 2010 Pa2e 4 of 4 Mr. Valanzola stated that it is important to this business and this is a great building. The are proposing landscaping that they were not required to do and if the Board gives them a positive vote and no one is going to drive by and say what the Zoning Board did. He further stated that they will take the height of the pole down two feet to meet the 15 feet height requirement and now they only need one variance for the area Ms. Garber-Miller stated that the total sign area allowed is 16 square feet per side and if they limit it to 72 square feet that would be acceptable with the 15 feet in height. Hearing closed at 8:40 p.m. Ms. Garber-Miller made a motion to grant a variance from Section 4.7.1.2 for the construction of a new pylon sign which is not to exceed 72 square feet per side, calculated per the by-laws. The motion was seconded by Mr. Garr. All in favor - grant 5-0 (Vultaggio, Garber-Miller, DeTrolio, Garr, Shannon). The Board members asked the Secretary, Karen Lawlor, to check with Nick Riccio to see if the School Street Cell Tower was given permission to move 50 feet because it is built, but they never came before the Board for a hearing on the change. The Board members asked the Secretary, Karen Lawlor, to create a form for a continuance, which states that 100 days begins at the completion of last meeting. A Motion to adjourn was made by Ms. Garber-Miller and seconded by Mr. Shannon. The meeting was adjourned at 9:00 p.m. Respectfull y submitted, ~~~ Elisabeth Garber-Miller, Clerk