Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutZBA05242016Town of Mansfield Zoning Board of Appeals May 24, 2016 The Zoning Board of Appeals held its regular meeting in the Town Hall, Mansfield, MA at 7:30 pm. Present: Elisabeth Garber - Miller, Chair; David Luca, Clerk; Philip Shannon; Darlene Pruitt; Matthew Cummings; Associate Member Eric Correira. 1. Meeting opened at 7:30 pm. 2. Signs by Tomorrow, Edgewood Church, 26 Edgewood Street, Map 34, Parcel 70. The Chair read the public hearing notice for the application of Jim Quinn, Signs by Tomorrow, on behalf of Edgewood Church for a Special Permit /Variance from Zoning By -Law, Section 230 -7.2 (2), Special Permits and Section 230 -4.7 D (1), Permitted Signs, to allow for an approximately 49.5 square foot wall sign at 26 Edgewood Street, (Assessor's Map 34, Parcel 70) in the Residential 2 (112) zone. The following documents were introduced at the public hearing: Application for a Variance, filed with the Town .Clerk March 23, 2016; a copy of the public hearing notice; Three pages of undated plans prepared by Signs by Tomorrow. Jim Quinn, Signs by Tomorrow, said because the building is set too far back from the road, the church would like to put a sign on the front of the building. Ms. Pruitt said there are already two signs on the property. Mr. Quinn said there is a ground sign in front of the building, which will be removed, and a directional sign by the roadway. He said people do not see the street sign, which is illuminated by spotlights. Sean Sylva, 363 South Main Street and Joseph Zelic, 64 Smiley Avenue, were shown the plans and said they have no issues with the proposed sign. Mr. Quinn said the sign will be 3.5 square feet with 16" lettering. Ms. Pruitt asked if the sign closest to the street would be removed. Mr. Quinn the sign in front of the building will be removed but the road sign will remain. Ms. Garber - Miller noted this is a residential zone and there are houses nearby. She said if the church is having concerns about identifying the building, it should upgrade the existing street sign, which would be far less intrusive to the neighborhood than a 50 square -foot sign with red LED lighting. Mr. Quinn said the church would like a sign on the building so it will be visible from the road. He asked if the sign could have the lettering but not be illuminated. Mr. Luca said his concerned is the LED lighting in a residential neighborhood but said if the existing sign is removed, he does not have a problem with the lettering on the building. Mr. Shannon said he does not have a problem with the sign. 1 Mr. Cummings said he has an issue with the sign being illuminated and said he thinks having a clearer sign at the front of the property is more important than having an LED sign farther back from the road. Ms. Garber - Miller said she thinks the wall sign with lettering can remain as proposed if it is not illuminated and the sign closest to the church is removed. Mr. Luca noted other churches and buildings in town use spotlights for illumination and asked whether a wall sign illuminated by spotlights would be considered an illuminated sign. Ms. Garber - Miller said usually the concern is with internally illuminated signs. She said when the church is unoccupied, the lights would be off. Mr. Luca made the motion to approve the application of Jim Quinn, Signs by Tomorrow, on behalf of Edgewood Church for a Variance from the Zoning By -Law, Section 230 -4.7 D (1), Permitted Signs, to allow for an approximately 49.5 square foot wall sign at 26 Edgewood Street, (Assessor's Map 34, Parcel 70) in the Residential 2 (132) zone, as shown on the three pages of undated plans prepared by Signs by Tomorrow, with the condition the sign not be internally illuminated and the existing freestanding sign at the front of the church be removed. Mr. Cummings seconded the motion. Motion passed 5 -0 -0. Hearing ended at 7:43 pm. 3. The Green Family Irrevocable Trust, 15 Wagonwheel Way, Map 32, Parcel 86. The Chair read the public hearing notice for the application of The Green Family Irrev. Trust for a Variance from the Zoning By -Law Section 230, Schedule 4.2A, Side Yard Setback, for a deck and stairs with a 19.2 foot rear yard setback where 25 feet is required at 15 Wagonwheel Way (Map 32, Parcel 86) in the Residential 1 (111) zone. The following documents were introduced at the public hearing: Application for a Variance, filed with the Town Clerk March 23, 2016; a copy of the public hearing notice; Plan, "Zoning Plan 15 Wagonwheel Way" dated March 10, 2016, prepared by Hutchins - Trowbridge Associates, Inc. Michael Trowbridge, Hutchins - Trowbridge Associates, Inc., representing the Green Family, explained there is an existing 10'x18'deck with stairs, and to make it easier for the Greens to use the deck, the homeowners would like to make the deck two feet deeper. Mr. Trowbridge said this subdivision was approved as a cluster residential special permit with 25 -foot setbacks. He said the proposal will not affect any abutters; the closest house behind this property is 194 feet away. The encroachment will be less than two feet beyond what is currently there and will be on the side facing the open space. Ms. Garber - Miller said it appears the original deck also encroaches on the setback and asked if there was a variance for the deck. Mr. Trowbridge said there was no variance; the house was built ten years ago and the deck was probably added at a later date. Stan Gildea, 18 Wagonwheel Way, said he was concerned about the wetlands in this area and wanted to be sure the property boundaries are well defined during construction. Mr. Trowbridge noted an approval by the Zoning Board of Appeals does not relieve an applicant from having to seek approval 2 from the Conservation Commission. Ms. Garber - Miller said conservation issues are not within the authority of the Zoning Board of Appeals, and if the applicant is going to do any work within certain parameters of the wetlands, they will have to go before the Conservation Commission. Mr. Trowbridge said the Conservation Agent reviews all building permits to determine if a filing is necessary. Mr. Shannon made the motion to approve the application of The Green Family Irrevocable Trust for a Variance from the Zoning By -Law Section 230, Schedule 4.2A, Side Yard Setback, for a deck and stairs with a 19.2 foot rear yard setback where 25 feet is required at 15 Wagonwheel Way (Map 32, Parcel 86) in the Residential 1 (131) zone, in accordance with the plan dated March 10, 2016, prepared by Hutchins - Trowbridge Associates, Inc. Mr. Luca seconded the motion. Discussion: Mr. Luca said this is an odd - shaped lot, creating a hardship. He said the existing deck is already 20 feet from the property line and the additional two feet is de minimis and will not be detrimental to the neighborhood. Motion passed 5 -0 -0. Hearing ended at 7:51 pm. 4. VB Realty Trust, Jennifer Drive, Map 39, Parcel 2. The Chair read the public hearing notice for the application of VB Realty Trust for a Variance from Zoning By -Law Section 230, 4.2A, Frontage and Lot Width, for the construction of two single - family dwellings on two proposed lots with less than the required lot frontage and lot width, with the lots having frontage on Jennifer Drive (Map 39, Parcel 2) in the Residential 1 (111) zone. The following documents were submitted: Application for a Variance, filed with the Town Clerk's Office on March 28, 2016; a copy of the public hearing notice; "Zoning Board Plan 18 & 19 Jennifer Drive" dated March 22, 2016, prepared by Hutchins - Trowbridge Associates, Inc. Michael Trowbridge, Hutchins - Trowbridge Associates, Inc., explained this is the same proposal that came before the Zoning Board of Appeals in 2004. He said this property had a lot of issues with wetlands, flood zone, a river and wildlife habitat areas. This property was one 34 -acre lot, which was the remaining land from the Jennifer Drive subdivision. Mr. Trowbridge said the proposal is to construct two houses on Lots 2 and 3, with Lot 1, the remaining 30 acres, to be donated to the Conservation Commission or the Natural Resources Trust (NRT). The land provides a green belt along the Canoe River and abuts Town of Foxboro open space, as well as Mansfield conservation land. Mr. Trowbridge said by the time all the permitting was completed for the 2004 plan, there was a downturn in the economy and the applicant decided not to finish the subdivision. The applicant also had a Form A plan endorsed by the Planning Board, but it was never recorded. He said the conditions and the lot configurations are the same, will allow the town to acquire open space and there will be no roadway for the town to maintain. 3 Mr. Luca said the grant of the variance can be contingent on the deeding of the land to the town or NRT. He asked if Lot 1 is unbuildable. Mr. Trowbridge said it is not a buildable lot and the applicant would not have an issue with a condition that no further building would be allowed on that portion of the property. Ms. Garber - Miller said because of the narrow frontage, with only 14.21 feet, she was concerned emergency vehicles would be unable to enter the property. Mr. Trowbridge said the entrance immediately expands out to the two driveways. Dennis Corning, 15 Jennifer Drive, asked if there is a stipulation for a buffer between the driveways and asked why a split driveway is proposed. Mr. Trowbridge said it is preferable to have two separate driveways to minimize the impact. Mr. Correira noted the application states this is a better alternative and asked what the new roadway would look like. Mr. Trowbridge said the cul -de -sac would have to be extended, increasing the amount of impervious area. Mr. Cummings made the motion to approve the application of VB Realty Trust for a Variance from Zoning By -Law Section 230, 4.2A, Frontage and Lot Width, for the construction of two single - family dwellings on two proposed lots with less than the required lot frontage and lot width, with the lots having frontage on Jennifer Drive (Map 39, Parcel 2) in the Residential 1 (111) zone, in accordance with the plan, "Zoning Board Plan 18 & 19 Jennifer Drive" dated March 22, 2016, prepared by Hutchins - Trowbridge Associates, Inc. Mr. Luca seconded the motion. Discussion: Mr. Luca said while the shape of the lot is odd, this is a large parcel of over 30 acres. He said with the wetland and easement issues, there are limited options for locating the house. He agreed the proximity of the two driveways is not ideal, but said this is the best possible plan and use of the space and is less detrimental than building a roadway. At 80,426 square feet and 75,167 square feet, Lots 2 and 3 exceed the required area of 60,000 square feet. Mr. Luca said there is a hardship based on the topography and wetlands. He noted there are other houses on this street with long narrow driveways. Motion passed 5 -0 -0 Hearing ended at 8:11 pm. 5. Desmond and Julie Doyle, 25 Davis Street, Map 27, Parcel 9. The Chair read the public hearing notice for the application of Desmond and Julie Doyle for a Finding /Variance from Zoning By -Law Sections 230 -3.10 and 230 - 7.2(4) of the Zoning By -Law for the change, extension, alteration or reconstruction of a pre- existing, non - conforming structure for an addition at 25 Davis Street (Assessor's Map 27, Parcel 9) in the Residential 3 (133) zone. 4 The following documents were submitted: Application for a Variance, filed with the Town Clerk's Office on March 30, 2016; a copy of the public hearing notice; "Proposed House Addition Plan on Hse. No. 25 Davis Street in Mansfield, MA" dated March 25, 2016, prepared by RIM Engineering Co., Inc. Homeowners Julie and Desmond Doyle were present. Ms. Doyle explained this is an older house on an oddly- shaped lot; with their family getting older, they would like to remove the existing 15'x18' deck and utilize this space by adding a room. Mr. Shannon asked if the addition would be a single or double floor. Ms. Doyle said it would be a one - story, single room. Ms. Pruitt asked if there would be a change in the dimensions. Ms. Doyle said the addition will be longer than the original deck, but will not encroach on the rear yard setback, which will still have 106.8 feet to the property line where 30 feet is required. Mr. Cummings made the motion that the request for a Finding at 25 Davis Street is an increase in a pre- existing, non - conforming condition. Mr. Luca seconded the motion. Motion passed 5 -0 -0. Mr. Cummings made the motion that the increase in the pre- existing, non - conforming condition per the plan, "Proposed House Addition Plan on Hse. No. 25 Davis Street in Mansfield, MA" dated March 25, 2016, prepared by RIM Engineering Co., Inc., is no more detrimental to the neighborhood than the current condition. Mr. Luca seconded the motion. Discussion: Mr. Luca said the addition will be located within the same footprint and have the same 11.2 -foot side yard setback as the existing deck. With the addition of a couple of feet to the back of the house, there will still be 106.8 feet to the rear lot line, where 30 feet is required. Motion passed 5 -0 -0. Hearing ended at 8:18 pm. 6. Anna Haluch, 50 Woods Avenue, Map 20, Parcel 124. The Chair read the public hearing notice for the application of Anna Haluch on behalf of All American Self Storage for a Variance from Section 230 -4.7 A(1), Wall Sign, of the Zoning By -Law to allow for four wall signs larger than allowed: one 86.4 square foot wall sign facing Chauncy Street; one 100.6 square foot wall sign facing Chauncy Street; one 86.4 square foot sign facing Wood Avenue; and one 100.6 square foot wall sign facing Wood Avenue at 50 Wood Avenue (Assessor's Map 20, Parcel 124) in the Business 4 (64) zone. The following documents were submitted: Application for a Variance, filed with the Town Clerk's Office on April 5, 2016; a copy of the public hearing notice; six pages of undated plans, prepared by Pro Sign Graphics. 5 Applicant Anna Haluch, Pro Sign Graphics and Jim Haluch, representing All American Self Storage, were present. Mr. Haluch said there are four proposed signs, but the overall size of the signs has been reduced to less than 60 square -feet. He said all the signs will be internally illuminated with LEDs and at this time, they are also requesting to install an LED border to outline the upper edge of the building. Mr. Haluch submitted updated renditions of the signs. Mr. Haluch said the signs are now less than one square -foot per linear foot of the building frontage; he said because of the location of the building, frontage could be on both Chauncy Street and Wood Avenue. Ms. Garber - Miller said the building actually is not on Chauncy Street. Owner Raj Malhotra said there is a right -of -way with access from Chauncy Street but there is no frontage on this street. Ms. Garber - Miller asked about the LED border; Mr. Haluch said it is red LED lighting around the perimeter of the building; it serves no purpose but to accent the building outline. Ms. Garber - Miller asked whether the building would be accessible and the signage illuminated 24 hours a day. Mr. Malhotra said the building would not be opened 24 hours a day. Mr. Haluch said the signs would be on a timer and will automatically turn on when it starts to get dark. He said they will follow whatever the town by -law requires regarding when the illumination has to be turned off. Stacie Hooper, a direct abutter at 73 Campbell Street, said the building towers over her house and she is concerned about the sign lighting, especially on the Wood Avenue side, as well as the parking and security lighting. She said during the winter, the lights will be highly visible. She questioned the need for signage on Wood Avenue, Mr. Luca asked if she was concerned with the illuminated signs on Routes 106 and 140, or only the signs on Wood Avenue. He asked Ms. Hooper if she would have any concerns if the signage were not illuminated. Ms. Hooper asked if the lighting could be toned down. Shelly Roberts, 76 Creeden Street, said she does not have a problem with the signs on Chauncy Street or Route 140, but her main concern is the illumination of the signs on Wood Avenue. She said the size of the two illuminated signs on Wood Avenue would definitely impact her street and asked what a sign of that size would accomplish on Wood Avenue. Ms. Garber - Miller said there are no signs proposed on the Route 140 side. Tom Hamilton, 44 Wood Avenue, said he was aware of the proposed project but did not know the magnitude of the building. He said the dust and noise from the construction has been a tremendous problem for his tenants and he is concerned with the signage proposed for Wood Avenue. Michael Healey, 18 Casa Drive, said even though he lives across Route 140, he has been affected by the construction of the building construction. He noted he can see the top two floors of the building, especially in the winter, and is concerned about the illuminated signage. He said he is concerned about the proposed border lighting on the top of the building and said it would be inappropriate. Mr. Luca asked if the border lighting would be considered a sign. Mr. Haluch said he does not consider it a sign, but it is part of what the applicant is asking for. 0 Ms. Hooper asked if there were any laws regarding when the lights can be on. Ms. Garber - Miller said typically the Board would specify the hours for the site lighting. Mr. Luca said they are allowed 160 square feet of signage and are requesting relief for 240 square feet, 33% more than allowed. He said this would be more detrimental to the neighborhood. He said he thinks 160 square feet is sufficient and they do not need additional signage facing existing residential neighborhoods. Ms. Garber - Miller discussed the border lighting. She said this is a large building that can be seen from Chauncy Street, Wood Avenue and Route 140, and said she does not think there is a need or any purpose for lighting the top of the building. Mr. Luca asked if the border lighting would be considered a sign. Ms. Garber - Miller said she will check with the Building Inspector. Ms. Pruitt said she has the same concerns with the signage for Wood Avenue. Mr. Luca said he is less concerned with the actual signage than with the proposed 33% increase in illuminated signage on a three -story building facing a residential neighborhood. Mr. Luca made the motion to approve the application of Anna Haluch on behalf of All American Self Storage for a Variance from Section 230 -4.7 A(1), Wall Sign, of the Zoning By -Law to allow for four wall signs larger than allowed: one 86.4 square foot wall sign facing Chauncy Street; one 100.6 square foot wall sign facing Chauncy Street; one 86.4 square foot sign facing Wood Avenue; and one 100.6 square foot wall sign facing Wood Avenue at 50 Wood Avenue (Assessor's Map 20, Parcel 124) in the Business 4 (134) zone, as per the application. Mr. Shannon seconded the motion. Discussion: Mr. Shannon said he is concerned for the neighbors. Ms. Garber - Miller said the concerns of the neighbors are entirely justified given the scale of the building. Mr. Luca said he did not hear a hardship or anything under the statute that would allow the grant of the variance. He said the proposed signage would be more detrimental to the neighborhood. Motion failed 0 -5 -0. Hearing ended at 9:21 pm. 7. Jacob Bolin, 131 Union Street, Map 26, Parcel 69. The Chair read the public hearing notice for the application of Jacob Bolin for a Variance from Zoning By- Law Section 230, Schedule 4.2A, Front Yard Setback and Side Yard Setback, for the construction of a front porch resulting in a 19.7 foot front yard setback where 30 feet is required and a 10.5 foot side yard setback where 15 feet is required at 131 Union Street (Map, Parcel 69) in the Residential 3 (113) zone. VA The following documents were submitted: Application for a Variance filed with the Town Clerk's Office on April 11, 2016; a copy of the public hearing notice; "Proposed House Addition at No. 131 Union Street in Mansfield" dated April 7, 2016, prepared by RIM Engineering Co., Inc. Homeowner Jacob Bolin explained they have just finished renovating the entire house and would like to add a farmer's porch, leaving a front yard setback of 19.7', where 30 feet is required. The side yard setback to the left of the house will be 26.5', a decrease of two inches. The side yard setback to the right of the house will be 10.7', a two -inch increase. Mr. Bolin noted there are neighboring homes which have front porches with the same front yard setbacks. Mr. Luca asked if the existing front steps are included in the proposed 19.7' front yard setback, and how much closer the proposed steps will be to the property line. Mr. Luca made the motion that the request for a Finding at 131 Union Street is an extension of a pre- existing, non - conforming condition with regards to the front yard setback. Mr. Cummings seconded the motion. Discussion: Ms. Garber - Miller said the proposed farmer's porch is definitely consistent with the neighborhood; there are a number of other houses with porches, all relatively close to the street. Motion passed 5 -0 -0. Mr. Luca made the motion that the increase in the pre- existing, non - conforming condition per the plan dated April 7, 2016, at 131 Union Street is no more detrimental to the neighborhood than the current condition. Mr. Cummings seconded the motion. Motion passed 5 -0 -0. Hearing ended at 9:01 pm. 8. 440 Forbes Boulevard The Chair read the public hearing notice for the application of Pattison Sign Group /Advanced Sign on behalf of Toyota Motor USA, Inc. for a Variance from Section 230 -4.7 D(3), Off -Site Directional Signs, of the Zoning By -Law to allow for an 8- square foot directional sign where a 3- square foot sign is allowed at 440 Forbes Boulevard (Assessor's Map 44, Parcel 620) in the Planned Business District (PBD). The following documents were submitted: Application for a Variance, filed with the Town Clerk's Office on April 19, 2016; a copy of the public hearing notice; "LD1 -3303A Ground" plan dated October 19, 2015 and "LD1 -3303A Site Plan" dated October 19, 2015, prepared by Pattison Sign Group; and photograph of existing directional sign, Toyota Motors, 440 Forbes Blvd., Mansfield, MA. Carolyn Parker, Pattison Sign /Advanced Signs, representing Toyota Motor USA, Inc., said there is an existing sign on the site that is hard to see because of landscaping. She explained Toyota is reimaging all their signage and wants to install a new eight square -foot directional sign. She said this area is an H. entrance for employee training, not a main entrance, and Toyota wants to make the sign more visible for the people who are not familiar with the area. Mr. Luca said this is in the Planned Business District (PBD) and 230 -4.7 Section D(3) of the Zoning By- Law allows for two directional signs per establishment, provided they do not exceed three square feet in area and are not located within the public right -of -way. He said directional signs are not allowed to be illuminated. Ms. Garber - Miller said the sign will be on Norfolk Street and her concern is there is an existing "Toyota Shipping/ Receiving" sign on the other side of this parking lot. Ms. Parker said the technical training would most likely be done during the day, so the sign can be turned off at night. Ms. Parker asked if the lettering could be illuminated, with the rest of the sign opaque. Ms. Garber - Miller said a condition could be to limit the illumination to the lettering. Ms. Parker said the lettering would be illuminated internally by LED modules. Mr. Luca noted the by -law states the sign cannot be illuminated. Mr. Cummings asked what the hardship is. Ms. Parker said the main hardship is that a three square -foot sign would not be large enough to direct people who are unfamiliar with the parking area to the training entrance. Ms. Garber - Miller said the Board could specify the hours the sign could be illuminated. Ms. Pruitt made to the motion to approve the application of Pattison Sign Group /Advanced Sign on behalf of Toyota Motor USA, Inc. for a Variance from Section 230 -4.7 D(3), Off -Site Directional Signs, of the Zoning By -Law to allow for an 8- square foot directional sign where a 3- square foot sign is allowed at 440 Forbes Boulevard (Assessor's Map 44, Parcel 620) in the Planned Business District (PBD), in accordance with "LD1 -3303A Ground" plan dated October 19, 2015 and "LD1 -3303A Site Plan" dated October 19, 2015, prepared by Pattison Sign Group; and photograph of existing directional sign, Toyota Motors, 440 Forbes Blvd., Mansfield, MA. Mr. Shannon seconded the motion. Discussion: Mr. Luca said this sign will be no more detrimental to the neighborhood than the existing sign, but approval could be setting a precedent for other sign applications. He said when comparing the proposed sign to the existing sign, it is probably a de minimis change and will be an improvement. Mr. Cummings said the hardship is the fact the people coming to the training facility are probably not familiar with the area. He said this is a very large sign compared with what the by -law allows. Ms. Garber - Miller said the sign is considerably larger than the existing sign, but she is concerned with the safety of people coming to the training center because of the truck traffic in this area. Mr. Luca said it is an oddly- shaped lot with parking on various sides of the property with frontage in multiple areas. 0 Ms, Garber - Miller asked if the Board should specify the proposed sign is to replace the existing sign in the same location, because there was no plan submitted showing the exact sign location. Mr. Luca said the materials presented with the application indicate the new sign would replace the existing sign. Ms. Parker said the proposed sign will be 5.0' high, with a 10.0' setback. Motion passed 4 -1 -0 (Cummings opposed). Hearing ended at 9:21 pm. 9. Ronald and Susan Quintiliani, 41 Lakeview Avenue, Map 4, Parcel 53. The Chair read the public hearing notice for the application of Ronald and Susan Quintiliani for a Variance from Zoning By -Law Section 230, Schedule 4.2.A, Side yard Setback, for the construction of a new house on the footprint of the existing house, with an attached garage with less than the required side yard setback, at 41 Lakeview Avenue (Assessor's Map 4, Parcel 53) in the Residential 1(131) zone, The following documents were submitted: Application for a Variance, filed with the Town Clerk's Office on March 4, 2016; a copy of the public hearing notice; "Proposed House Addition at Hse. No, 41 Lakeview Avenue in Mansfield, MA" dated April 15, 2016, prepared by RIM Engineering Co., Inc. Hearing continued from April 5, 2016. Craig Cygawnoski, RIM Engineering, Co., Inc., representing homeowners Mr. and Mrs. Quintiliani, said the April hearing was continued to revise the plan to relocate the proposed house and garage on the property to eliminate issues with the right side yard setback. He said the proposed house has now been moved to the center of the property, with the attached garage on the left, creating a 15.1 -foot side yard setback on both sides where 15 feet is required, Mr. Cygawnoski said the existing deck is 8.5' from the lake retaining wall and the new deck will be 11.0 feet from the wall. Mr. Cygawnoski said the Building Inspector is happy with the plan and they are now waiting for architectural design plans showing the actual location of the house /garage. Ms. Garber - Miller said this property is in a Residential 1 zone but pre -dates zoning. Mr. Luca said everything about the existing house is pre- existing, non - conforming except for the left side boundary, which has a setback of 29.0 feet. The proposed house, which has now been moved to the left of the property, is still non - conforming. Mr. Cygawnoski said the house, which was built in the 1950s in an agricultural zone, falls under the exemption that any house built prior to 1974 would require 30 -foot front and rear yard setbacks and 15- foot side yard setbacks. Mr. Luca said he would consider a Variance for the left side of the property, with an existing setback of 29 feet, where 15.1 is proposed and a Finding for all other boundaries. 10 Mr. Luca made the motion to grant a Variance for the application of Ronald and Susan Quintiliani for a Variance from Zoning By -Law Section 230, Schedule 4.2.A, Side yard Setback, for the construction of a new house on the footprint of the existing house, with an attached garage with less than the required side yard setback, at 41 Lakeview Avenue (Assessor's Map 4, Parcel 53) in the Residential 1(R1) zone, in accordance with the plan, "Proposed House Addition at Hse. No. 41 Lakeview Avenue in Mansfield, MA" dated April 15, 2016. Ms. Pruitt seconded the motion. Discussion: Mr. Luca said the shape and topography of the lot would create a hardship and the new plan, as proposed, is a benefit and no further detriment to the neighborhood than to the existing structure. Ms. Garber - Miller said moving the house to the center of the property is aesthetically more pleasing and will alleviate the concerns about the house being too close to the abutting property. Mr. Luca noted at the April hearing, there were concerns from the neighbor, but no one has spoken against the revised proposal. Motion passed 5 -0 -0. Mr. Luca made the motion that the Finding at 41 Lakeview Avenue is an increase in a pre- existing, non- conforming condition. Mr. Cummings seconded the motion. Motion passed 5 -0 -0. Discussion: Ms. Garber - Miller said the house has been moved to the center of the property, which is a better option. Mr. Luca made the motion that the increase in the pre- existing, non - conforming conditions at 41 Lakeview Avenue is no more detrimental to the neighborhood than the current condition. Ms. Pruitt seconded the motion. Motion passed 5 -0 -0. Hearing ended at 9:58 pm. New Business: C97154111111.1for,=— Christopher McNamara, Little Mac Realty LLC: Letter dated April 12, 2016, requesting a six month extension for the variance filed with the Town Clerk on June 12, 2015 for the construction of a duplex at 119 Chauncy Street. 11 Mr. Shannon made the motion to approve the request for a six month extension of the variance for the construction of a duplex at 119 Chauncy Street; new expiration date is January 3, 2017. Mr. Cummings seconded the motion. Motion passed 5 -0 -0. James Lazzara, Grove Building Realty Trust: Letter dated May 10, 2016, requesting a six month extension for the variance filed with the Town Clerk on April 30, 2015 for the construction of a twelve- unit building at 130 Spring Street. Mr. Luca made the motion to approve the request for a six month extension of the variance for the construction of a twelve -unit building at 130 Spring Street; new expiration date is November 21, 2016. Mr. Cummings seconded the motion. Motion passed 5 -0 -0. Approval of April 5, 2016 minutes with Ms. Pruitt's change. (Luca /Cummings) Passed 5 -0 -0. Adjournment: Motion to adjourn at 10:15 pm (Pruitt /Cummings) Passed 5 -0 -0. Next meeting_will_be March 1, 2016 at 7:30 pm. vid ca, Clerk Date 12