Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutZBA08232016MANSFIELD ZONING BOARD OF APPEALS MINUTES D AUGUST 232016 -g'� }4 RECEIVED The Zoning Board of Appeals held its regular meeting in the Town Hall, Mansfield, MA at 7:30 pm. Present at the hearing wd'rthe following members: Elisabeth Garber - Miller, Chair; David Luca, Clerk; Matt Cummings; DarlerMur, ilss c atedvte bqx Qaron Gallagher. j 1. Meeting opened at 7:30 pm. 7 ` `' ,a 2. Discussion of Potential Changes to 119 Chauncy Street. Christopher McNamara, Little Mac Realty LLC and Sajjad Shah were present. [The application of Christopher McNamara, Little Mac Realty LLC, was submitted for a Variance from Section 4.2.1, Side Yard Setback and Lot Area, for the construction of a two -story duplex with two bedrooms per unit with a 10 -foot side yard setback where 15 is required on a 12,455 square foot lot where 15,000 square feet is required at 119 Chauncy Street (Map 21, Parcel 322) in the Residential 3 (R3) zone —the request for a side yard setback variance was withdrawn] Mr. McNamara said changes would be made to the interior only, changing from two bedrooms to three bedrooms per unit; there will be no increase in the building envelope. Mr. Gallagher made the motion to accept the revised interior drawing for 119 Chauncy Street. Ms. Pruitt seconded the motion. Motion passed 5 -0 -0. 3. Pickett & Barrett, LLC, 754 East Street, Map 41, Parcel 33 The Chair read the public hearing notice for the application of Pickett & Barrett, LLC, for a Variance under Zoning By -Law Section 230 -4.2A, Density & Dimensional Regulations, to allow a 31 -foot front yard setback where 40 feet is required; and a Special Permit /Finding under Zoning By -Law Section 230 -7.2 (B) (2), Board of Appeals, Special Permits, to reconstruct a pre- existing, non- conforming use at 754 East Street in the Residential 1 (R1) zone. The following documents were introduced at the public hearing: Application for Variance /Special Permit /Finding, filed with the Town Clerk's office July 11, 2016; a copy of the public hearing notice; "Zoning Plan 754 East Street" dated July 6, 2016, prepared by Hutchins - Trowbridge Associates, Inc.; copy of June 1982 Massachusetts Historical Commission "Form B - Building" Inventory Form. Associate Member Aaron Gallaher was appointed a voting memberfor this public hearing. Michael Trowbridge, Hutchins - Trowbridge Associates, Inc., representing homeowner Brenda Barrett, explained the existing two - family dwelling, built in 1832, (per the Assessor's) would be very difficult and costly to repair. The proposed two - family dwelling would be moved 31 feet back from East Street, but cannot be located further back because there is an existing school on the property, requiring a 10 -foot separation from the new dwelling. Ms. Garber - Miller asked how a school was allowed on a residential lot. Mr. Trowbridge explained schools are exempt from zoning. Mr. Cummings made the motion to approve the application for a Variance from Zoning By -Law Section 230 -4.2A, Density & Dimensional Regulations, to allow a 31 -foot front yard setback where 40 feet is required at 754 East Street, in accordance with "Zoning Plan 754 East Street" dated July 6, 2016, prepared by Hutchins - Trowbridge Associates, Inc. Mr. Gallagher seconded the motion. Discussion: Mr. Luca noted the existing house is very close to the road and with a school already on the property this is a much better situation. Motion passed 5 -0 -0. Mr. Cummings made the motion to approve the request for a Special Permit under Zoning By -Law Section 230 -7.2 (B) (2), Board of Appeals, Special Permits, to reconstruct a pre- existing, non - conforming structure at 754 East Street in the Residential 1(R1) zone, in accordance with the "Zoning Plan 754 East Street" dated July 6, 2016, prepared by Hutchins - Trowbridge Associates, Inc. Mr. Gallagher seconded the motion. Discussion: Ms. Garber - Miller said the distance between the school and the proposed dwelling would be 16 feet, where 10 feet is required. Motion passed 5 -0 -0. Hearing ended at 7:55 pm. 4. Allen L. Willis, Jr., 242 and 250 Willow Street, Map 28, Parcels 5 and 160 The Chair read the public hearing notice for the application of Allen L. Willis, Jr. for a Variance from Zoning By -Law Section 230 -1.5, Lot Width, to allow for the creation of a lot with less than the required lot width at 242 and 250 Willow Street (Assessor's Map 28, Parcels 5 and 160) in the Residential 2 (112) zone. The following documents were introduced at the public hearing: Application for a Variance, filed with the Town Clerk July 12, 2016; a copy of the public hearing notice; "Plan of Land at 242 -250 Willow Street in Mansfield, MA" dated June 29, 2016, prepared by RIM Engineering Co., Inc. Associate Member Aaron Gallaher was appointed a voting member for this public hearing. Craig Cygawnoski, RIM Engineering Co., Inc., representing owner Allen Willis, explained the parcel of land was divided into two lots by Mr. Willis in 1992, with the existing house (Lot 1) at 242 Willow Street and a vacant, non - conforming lot (Lot 2) at 250 Willow Street. Lot 2 does not have sufficient lot width. Mr. Cygawnoski said 150 feet of frontage is proposed for Lot 2, with 32,035 square feet of area and 15 -foot side yard setbacks. The proposed lot width is 123.3 feet where 150 is required and Mr. Cygawnoski said a typical single - family house will fit on the lot. Mr. Cygawnoski said Lot 2 at 250 Willow Street will be comprised of Parcels A, B and C, as shown on the June 29, 2016 plan. He said Mr. Willis owns Parcels B and C; Parcel A is owned by 315 School Street Nominee Trust, of which Mr. Willis is the beneficiary. Mr. Luca made the motion to approve the application of Allen L. Willis, Jr. for a Variance from Zoning By -Law Section 230 -1.5, Lot Width, to allow for the creation of a lot with less than the required lot width at 250 Willow Street (Assessor's Map 28, Parcels 5 and 160) in the Residential 2 (132) zone. Mr. Cummings seconded the motion. Discussion: Mr. Luca said the existing lot has a unique shape, which presents a hardship. He said they have done a great job incorporating new land to the existing lot to bring it further into compliance. Ms. Garber - Miller said the new house lot is very close to being compliant. Motion passed 5 -0 -0. Hearing ended at 8:05 pm. 5. Joseph Rollins, Black & Veatch, on behalf of Air Liquide Advanced Technologies U.S. LLC, 377 Chauncy Street, Map 17, Parcel 23. The Chair read the public hearing notice for the application of Joseph Rollins, Black & Veatch (on behalf of Air Liquide Advanced Technologies U5, LLC) for a Special Permit under Zoning By -Law Section 230 -7.2 (B) (2), Board of Appeals, Special Permits, to expand, extend or alter a pre - existing, non - conforming use at 377 Chauncy Street (Stop & Shop) in the Planned Business District (PBD), The following documents were introduced at the public hearing: Application for a Special Permit, filed with the Town Clerk July 22, 2016; a copy of the public hearing notice; "MA -AL001 Mansfield 377 Chauncy Street Mansfield, MA 02048 Sheet Title Overall Site Plan" dated July 12, 2016, Sheets T -1, ZN -1, Z -1 -17, LS -1 and LS -2 of "Air Liquide Hydrogen Fueling Station Mansfield MA -AL001 377 Chauncy Street Mansfield, MA 02048" dated July 12, 2016, prepared by Black & Veatch; Undated Photographic Simulation, prepared by Black & Veatch; August 5, 2016 and August 18, 2016 memos from Capt. Marc Guyette, Mansfield Fire Department, Fire Prevention Division; August 4, 2016 memorandum from Katelyn M. Gonyer, Conservation and Environmental Planner to Shaun P. 2 Burke, Director of Planning and Development; August 9, 2016 memorandum from Shaun P. Burke, Director of Planning and Development to Robert 1. Blackman, Inspector of Buildings /Zoning Enforcement Officer. Associate Member Aaron Gallaher was appointed a voting member for this public hearing. Joseph Rollins, Black & Veatch, on behalf of Air Liquide Advanced Technologies US LLC, explained the proposed addition to the pre- existing, non - con - forming use gas station operated by Stop and Shop Supermarket Company LLC at 377 Chauncy Street. He said Air Liquide and Stop and Shop are working together to create the infrastructure at this location for the first hydrogen fueling station in the northeast. Ms. Garber - Miller asked if there are cars being manufactured that will use hydrogen. Mr. Rollins said the Toyota, Honda and Hyundai are going to be releasing hydrogen cars. He said the cars are essentially electric cars with a hydrogen cell; the car is plugged in and hydrogen is released under pressure. Mr. Luca asked if there are any other hydrogen fueling stations already in place or planned in Massachusetts. Mr. Rollins said they are in the process of reaching out to Newton, Lexington and Braintree. Ms. Garber - Miller asked how many dispensers would be constructed. Mr. Rollins said there would be one dispenser. Mr. Cummings made the motion that the request for a Special Permit under Zoning By -Law Section 230 -7.2 (B) (2), Board of Appeals, Special Permits, to expand, extend or alter a pre- existing, non - conforming use at 377 Chauncy Street (Stop & Shop) in the Planned Business District (PBD) be granted in accordance with the plan, "MA -AL001 Mansfield 377 Chauncy Street Mansfield, MA 02048 Sheet Title Overall Site Plan" dated July 12, 2016, prepared by Black & Veatch, and in accordance with all department head comments (attached). Mr. Gallagher seconded the motion. Discussion: Mr. Cummings said the dispenser would be good for the town. Ms. Garber - Miller said everything is separated and there is only one pump. Mr. Luca noted there is already a gas station located there and, as the language in the by -law states, the proposed project outweighs the detrimental effects. Motion passed 5 -0 -0. Hearing ended at 8:20 pm. 6. Peter F. Sturtevant, 10 Cedar Ridge Lane, Map 37, Parcel 271 The Chair read the public hearing notice for the application of Peter F. Sturtevant for a Variance from Section 230, Schedule 4.2.A, Side Yard Setback, of the Zoning By -Law for the construction of an addition with less than the required rear yard setback at 10 Cedar Ridge Lane (Assessor's Map 37, Parcel 271) in the Residential 1 (R3) zone. The following documents were introduced at the public hearing: Application for a Variance, filed with the Town Clerk July 15, 2016; a copy of the public hearing notice; "Proposed House Addition at Hse. No. 10 Cedar Ridge Lane in Mansfield, MA" dated July 12, 2016, prepared by RIM Engineering Co., Inc. Associate Member Aaron Gallaher was appointed a voting member for this public hearing. Homeowners Peter and Cindy Sturtevant were present. Mr. Sturtevant explained their 4- bedroom Colonial home with an attached garage was built in 1996, and a second, detached garage was constructed in 2006. They are proposing to build a 1,000- square -foot addition, which will be attached to the house and the detached garage. He said the proposed addition will be for his parents, and because all the existing home's bedrooms are on the second floor, the proposed addition will be at ground level and handicapped accessible. He noted the addition would be 32.2 feet from the rear yard setback, but attaching it to the currently conforming detached garage would make the structure non- conforming. He said the property abuts a densely wooded area and he has talked with his neighbors. Ms. Garber - Miller said the setback would no longer be 32.2 feet because once the addition is attached to the existing detached garage, the setback at the closet point would be 7.9 feet; she asked why the addition would need to be attached to the garage. Mr. Sturtevant said the house and detached garage are 17 feet apart where 15 feet would be required, making it difficult to construct the addition more than 15 feet away from the detached garage. He is using the same architect and contractor who did the previous work on the property, so the house and addition will have a consistent look. Edward Resnick, 1 Cedar Ridge Lane, said he is aware of the situation Mr. Sturtevant has with his parents and supports the addition to the home. He said he has spoken with the neighbors and everyone is in agreement that from the neighborhood's perspective, the addition would be a benefit for the homeowner and his parents. Mr. Luca asked if Mr. Sturtevant had considered other options that would not require relief, such as locating the addition on the other side of the house. Mr. Sturtevant said they would not want the addition at the front of the house, and there is a deck at the back of the house along with elevation challenges. He said the land between the house and the detached garage is relatively flat, with only an eight -inch elevation change. He said the addition will be attached to the detached garage so his parents will have direct access from their living space to the garage. A ramp will also be built from the addition to the existing house so his parents will have full access to the first floor of the house through the garage. Mr. Luca asked if the size of the addition could be reduced or moved over 15 feet; Mr. Sturtevant said he does not want the addition to be significantly smaller than his parents' current living space. He said the property slopes off to the right by the deck and it would be more challenging to move the addition to the right because of the site's topography. Mr. Luca said he certainly is sympathetic about the need for the addition, but he is concerned about the proposal not meeting zoning requirements for the grant of a variance, which is why he suggested other options. Mr. Sturtevant said he wants his parents to have access to their cars directly from their living space. He said the lot behind his property is heavily wooded with no wetlands, so it will not Interfere with the neighbors. He said the bordering property is a landlocked, unbuildable parcel of land. Mr. Cummings made the motion to approve the application of Peter F. Sturtevant for a Variance for the construction of an addition with less than the required rear yard setback at 10 Cedar Ridge Lane (Assessor's Map 37, Parcel 271) in the Residential 1 (R1) zone, as per the plan, "Proposed House Addition at Hse. No, 10 Cedar Ridge Lane in Mansfield, MA" dated July 12, 2016, prepared by RIM Engineering Co., Inc. Mr. Gallagher seconded the motion. Discussion: Mr. Gallagher said the closest structure to the property line is the detached garage, which will not change, but because the addition would be attached to both the house and the detached garage, it would become one structure. He said the detached garage would not become more obtrusive and the addition would not be more detrimental to the neighborhood. Mr. Gallagher noted Mr. Sturtevant has stated there is a topographical reason for the proposed location of the addition, which would meet the hardship requirement. Mr. Cummings said he has concerns about setting a possible precedent by granting a variance like this. Ms. Garber - Miller said this would not set a precedent because each applicant would have to demonstrate a hardship to their lot. She said in this case, the applicant said it would be more difficult to locate the addition on the right side of the property because of the slope and because his parents need to have access to the detached garage. Mr. Luca said because there are other options, he does not believe there is a hardship. He said the detached garage has been there only ten years and noted the board has seen applicants who incrementally added to their property over the years until they are too close to the property line. Ms. Pruitt said this is a personal hardship and asked if Mr. Sturtevant would consider presenting another plan with a smaller addition. Mr. Sturtevant said they could look at options, but his preference would be to attach the addition to the detached garage so his parents would have access to the garage through their living space. Motion failed 1 -4 -0. Gallagher in favor; Garber - Miller, Pruitt, Luca, Cummings opposed Hearing ended at 8:50 pm. 7. Glen Peterson, 104 Plain Street, Map 4, Parcel 56, 59 & 134. The Chair read the public hearing notice for the application of Glen Peterson for a Variance from Zoning By -Law Section 230- 1.5.17, Lot Width and 230 -4.2A, Density and Dimensional Regulations, Residential Districts, Lot Frontage and Lot Area, to allow for the creation of a lot with less than the required lot width, lot area and lot frontage at 104 Plain Street (Assessor's Map 4, Parcel 56, 59 & 134) in the Residential 1 (111) zone. The following documents were introduced at the public hearing: Application for a Variance, filed with the Town Clerk July 15, 2016; a copy of the public hearing notice; "Zoning Plan 104 Plain Street" dated July 13, 2016, prepared by Hutchins - Trowbridge Associates, Inc. Associate Member Aaron Gallaher was appointed a voting member for this public hearing Michael Trowbridge, Hutchins - Trowbridge Associates, Inc., representing homeowner Glen Peterson, explained the applicant is requesting approval to build a single - family dwelling on Lot C, which is a vacant lot created in 1983 on land the Peterson family has owned for 55 years. Mr. Trowbridge said Lot C was actually created as a Form A lot when the property was zoned "Residential A ". Mr. Trowbridge said the proposed house has been turned sideways on the lot to create as little impact as possible. He said the lot size is comparable to other lots in this area and is larger than most house lots along the lake. He said he does not believe the proposed house lot would be detrimental to the area and said if anyone in the neighborhood actually has any concerns, he would be willing to discuss some type of buffering. Stephen Vannewkirk, 98 Plain Street, asked if there is a minimum distance requirement between a house and a septic system, because the proposed house appears to be 30 feet from his property line and 50 feet from his septic system. Mr. Trowbridge said the septic system has to be 20 feet from a full foundation and 10 feet from a slab. Mr. Vannewkirk said he has privacy concerns with the location of the house because his back yard would face the proposed house and asked if the house could be moved. Mr. Trowbridge said the proposed house would be located at the top of the property, but the house could be moved over 20 feet, which would result in a distance of 50 feet from Mr. Vannewkirk's property line. Mr. Trowbridge said if the variance is approved, the board can stipulate the proposed house must be located 50 feet from Mr. Vannewkirk's property line. Mr. Gallagher clarified the proposed house would be moved 20 feet to the easterly side of the property. Mr. Luca made the motion to approve the application of Glen Peterson for a Variance from Zoning By -Law Section 230- 1.5.17, Lot Width and 230 -4.2A, Density and Dimensional Regulations, Residential Districts, Lot Frontage and Lot Area, to allow forthe creation of a lot with less than the required lot width, lot area and lot frontage at Lot C, 104 Plain Street (Assessor's Map 4, Parcel 56, 59 & 134) in the Residential 1(111) zone, subject to the condition that any structure built on the property remain at least 50 feet from the easterly boundary with 98 Plain Street, in accordance with the "Zoning Plan 104 Plain Street" dated July 13, 2016 [and revised August 31, 2016], prepared by Hutchins - Trowbridge Associates, Inc. Mr. Gallagher seconded the motion. Discussion Mr. Gallagher said he does not have an issue with the application. Mr. Luca said Mr. Peterson has owned the property since 1961 and in 1983 the lot was subdivided prior to the current zoning by- law. He said when taken together, the lots are certainly uniquely shaped and noted this is not a situation where a conforming lot was purchased and the owner is now trying to make two non - conforming lots; it is all pre- existing. Motion passed 5 -0 -0. Hearing ended at 9:00 pm. 8. Earl and Ethel Willcott, Map 43, Parcel 46 Mill Street The Chair read the public hearing notice of Earl and Ethel Willcott for a Variance from Zoning By -Law Section 230 -4.2, Schedule 4.28, to allow for the creation of a lot with 146.61 feet of frontage where 200 feet is required and 141.31 feet of lot width where 200 feet is required at Map 43, Parcel 46 Mill Street (Assessor's Map 43, Parcel 46) in the Residential 1 (111) zone. The following documents were introduced at the public hearing: Application for a Variance filed with the Town Clerk July 22, 2016; a copy of the public hearing notice; "Plan of Proposed Lot on Mill Street in Mansfield, MA" dated June 3, 2016, prepared by Yarworth Engineering Company, Inc. Associate Member Aaron Gallaher was appointed a voting member for this public hearing Attorney Edward Valanzola and homeowner Earl Willcott were present. Attorney Valanzola said this parcel of land on Mill Street borders the Mansfield /Norton town line. He explained the applicant is seeking relief from the lot frontage requirement, with 146.61 feet where 200 feet is required and the lot width requirement, with 141.31 feet where 200 feet is required. Mr. Luca asked if the property line is also the town line; Attorney Valanzola said it is. Attorney Valanzola said the applicant owns approximately 39 acres of land in Mansfield and Norton; he said there will be two by- right lots in Norton on approximately 36 acres. He said the lot in Mansfield is approximately three acres. Attorney Valanzola said years ago 50 feet of frontage was taken by the Town along MITI Street to access a well, which was never installed. Mr. Willcott received nominal compensation for the land because at the time, it did not affect Mr. Willcott's ability to build on the land. Attorney Valanzola said the obvious hardship is the fact that this lot complied with zoning, but became non - conforming when the Town took 50 feet of frontage, which runs the entire length of the property. Attorney Valanzola said relief can be granted without derogating from the intent or purpose of the Zoning By -Law. He said this lot would be one of the larger lots in the neighborhood and noted land cannot be taken from the adjacent parcel in Norton to provide more frontage for the proposed lot. Ms. Garber - Miller asked when the Town took the land; Mr. Willcott said he purchased the land in 1975 and the Town took the land in 1977. Attorney Valanzola said an alternative would be to build a subdivision with several lots, but he said Mr. Willcott wants to continue to live in his existing house and create two new house lots, one in Mansfield and one in Norton, which would comply with all aspects of zoning. Robert Goldman, 7 Van Gernert Drive, said he wanted to be sure the land could not be subdivided in the future to create additional lots and asked where the proposed house would be located. Attorney Valanzola explained the building envelope is shown on the plan, and said the house would have to comply with front, side, and rear setbacks. He said if granted, the variance would be for one house lot and the applicant would have to come back for any additional lots. Ms. Garber - Miller asked about the power line on the property. Attorney Valanzola said the power line is not in a location that would affect the ability to build on the land. Mr. Willcott said the utility line services the barn. Mr. Luca made the motion to approve the application of Earl and Ethel Willcott for a Variance from Zoning By -Law Section230- 4.2,Schedule 4.26, to allow for the creation of a lot with 146.61 feet of frontage where 200 feet is required and 141.31 feet of lot width where 200 feet is required at Map 43, Parcel 46 Mill Street (Assessor's Map 43, Parcel 46) In the Residential 1 (111) zone, in accordance with the "Plan of Proposed Lot on Mill Street In Mansfield, MA" dated June 3, 2016, prepared by Yarworth Engineering Company, Inc. Mr. Cummings seconded the motion. Discussion: Mr. Cummings said this is a unique lot and the land taking occurred after Mr. Willcott purchased the property. Mr. Luca said this is a unique circumstance where someone owned a conforming property and through no fault of their own, the lot was changed and became non - conforming. He said Mr. Willcott still owns all the abutting properties. Ms. Garber - Miller said it would be fundamentally unfair to expect Mr. Willcott to create a non - conforming lot in Norton to bring the Mansfield lot into compliance. Mr. Luca said when the Town took the 50 -foot strip of land the lot remained conforming, which affected the amount of compensation. However, he said if the taking occurred today and a non - conforming lot were created, the Town would probably have to take the entire property. Motion passed 5 -0 -0. Hearing ended at 9 :15 pm. 9. Carl and Sally Nelson, Map 2, Parcel 62 Williams Street The Chair read the public hearing notice for the applicant of Carl and Sally Nelson for a Variance from Zoning By -Law Section 230- 4.2, Schedule 4.28, to allow for the creation of a lot with 20 feet of frontage where 200 feet is required and with 20 feet of lot width where 200 feet is required at Map 2, Parcel 62 Williams Street (Assessor's Map 2, Parcel 62) in the Residential 1 (111) zone. The following documents were introduced at the public hearing: Application for a Variance filed with the Town Clerk July 22, 2016; a copy of the public hearing notice; "Plan of Land at 284 Williams Street in Mansfield, MA" dated July 8, 2016, prepared by RIM Engineering Co., Inc.: Petition Summary and Background and Action Petition, submitted by Vincent Kelly to deny request for a variance from abutting landowners. Associate Member Aaron Gallaher was appointed a voting member for this public hearing. Attorney Edward Valanzola and Attorney Matthew A. Valanzola were present. Attorney Valanzola said Matthew Valanzola is the applicant and has an agreement to purchase the property if the relief requested is granted. He said Matthew grew up in Mansfield and hopes to move back to town. Attorney Valanzola said this is an oddly- shaped lot with almost three acres and there are similar lots in the neighborhood, with the houses set back and narrow frontage. He said this lot would still be one of the larger lots in the area. The plan shows a buffer area for the two abutters on either side of the driveway. Attorney Valanzola said Matthew approached one of the abutters to find out what their thoughts and concerns would be; the seconded abutter was not at home. Attorney Valanzola said they have positioned the house on the lot in an area they feel would be the best location for the new homeowner, as well as the abutters, including buffering with a berm and /or arborvitae or trees; he said they would work with the neighbors about the positioning the house, screening or anything that might alleviate their concerns. Attorney Valanzola said their research shows the lot was created around the time the Zoning Act was adopted and the lot never satisfied the 50 feet of frontage, with only 20 feet of frontage. He said at some point, the Town used the lot to access the Wading River bridge to make repairs, which disturbed the area. As a result, a replication area was created on the lot, which Attorney Valanzola said would not affect their ability to locate a house on the lot. Attorney Valanzola said he met with Conservation Agent Katelyn Gonyer to discuss the properties wetland issues. Attorney Valanzola said there is a permanent water line easement (shown on the plan) at the rear left side of the property, running along the driveway, which would have to be maintained. He said the applicant would create an easement or access area over the 20 -foot strip to the Wading River for future access to the bridge. He said this lot has almost three acres and the applicant believes this variance can be granted, as other variances have been granted for similar house lots with narrow frontage. Vincent Kelly, 268 Williams Street, submitted a petition signed by the abutters in opposition to the proposal, along with a petition summary and background with maps dated 1903, 1986, 1987, 1989 and 2000. Mr. Luca read the action petition into the record, and a copy of the petition summary and background information was added to the file. Attorney Valanzola asked what Mr. Kelly's objection is to the proposed project and if it will affect his property or sight lines. Mr. Kelly said one of the reasons they purchased a house in this area was because they were told this parcel of land could not be built on; he said he does not want to see a house from his back yard. Mr. Kelly asked about the location of the septic system because of the proximity to the Wading River. Ms. Garber - Miller said this would be a Conservation Commission issue. Attorney Valanzola said when he spoke with Ms. Gonyer, she said she was not sure the replication area was functional; he said the area will be flagged and if the replication area is functioning, the applicant would still be able to locate the house on the lot. As far as the easement area, Attorney Valanzola said the 20 feet is sufficient for town vehicles to maintain the bridge. He said whatever restrictions are on this site, the applicant would still have to go to Conservation and other town departments. Frank Goffredo, 256 Williams Street, said the Nelsons owned 43 acres and made a business decision many years ago to subdivide the land to maximize the number of house lots for the property, for a total of 35 lots. Michelle Haley, 242 Williams Street, said the water easement is on her property, which she purchased 2003. She said she is concerned because there is wildlife in this area. Chris McCluskie, 265 Williams Street, asked how close the house would be to the wetland replication area and if the driveway would be widened. Attorney Valanzola said the applicant would have to comply with Conservation requirements and he believes the house can be positioned as presented to the board tonight. Mr. McCluskie said the proposed house would have to be 100 feet away from the replication area. Attorney Valanzola said the driveway will be 20 feet wide, and 150 feet long; he said trees and brush have been planted in the 20 -foot strip and the applicant will work with abutters to keep as much of a buffer as possible. Mr. McCluskie said if the driveway is only 8 feet wide, emergency vehicles will not be able to access the property. Ms. Garber - Miller said if the owner of the property actually owns 20 feet, the driveway will be 20 feet wide. Linda Kelly, 268 Williams Street, asked the board to consider the fact that the grant of a variance would create a hardship; she said she does not believe there is an existing hardship. She noted when the permanent easement was taken by the Town, over 100 trees were planted within the easement. Anthony Pellegrini, 292 Williams Street, said the law was changed to not allow 20 feet of frontage. Ms. Garber - Miller said that is why applicants come to the Zoning Board of Appeals — to request permission to do something outside the by -law. Attorney Valanzola said this is a unique situation where there are almost 3 acres of land. Mr. Kelly said this Is not a three -acre lot because two acres cannot be touched and nothing can be built on the 70,000 -foot area of the permanent easement. Ms. Garber - Miller said the bounds of the parcel are three acres, whether they are buildable or not. Attorney Valanzola said the board would not be creating a lot, but would be granting dimensional relief for lot width and frontage. He said any other challenges, such as easements or right -of -way issues, adverse possession, or wetland issues would be the applicant's responsibility to address. Mr. Gallagher asked who granted the permanent easement in the 20 -foot strip. Attorney Valanzola said the easement was granted to allow the water line to be installed. Mr. Gallagher said the applicant is asking the board to grant the same relief that was denied in 2000. Ms. Garber - Miller said petitions were submitted by abutters with the 2000 filing, which noted an application for a variance, filed in August 1995, was denied on October 3, 1995. She said nothing has changed on the lot. Ms. Garber - Miller said her biggest issue, besides the fact the application has been consistently denied over the past 20 years, is that while the board has allowed a lot to be created with less frontage than required, she can unequivocally state the board has never allow a lot where the 20 feet of frontage goes back 150 feet. Mr. Luca said this is a parcel of land, intentionally subdivided in a way that resulted in the creation of a non - conforming lot; he said the subdivision lots could have been made bigger and this lot would not have been created. Mr. Gallagher said the board is looking at the dimensional relief, not whether the project will adversely affect the abutters. He said he had an issue with the 150 -foot long driveway. Mr. Cummings said the owner designed smaller loti stead of larger ones to have wooded lots. He said he also has concerns with the 150 -foot long driveway. Mr. Cummings made the motion to approve the applicant of Matthew Valanzola for a Variance from Zoning By -Law Section 230- 4.2, Schedule 4.28, to allow for the creation of a lot with 20 feet of frontage where 200 feet is required and with 20 feet of lot width where 200 feet is required at 284 Williams Street (Assessor's Map 2, Parcel 62) in the Residential 1 (R1) zone, as per the plan presented, "Plan of Land at 284 Williams Street in Mansfield, MA" dated July 8, 2016, prepared by RIM Engineering Co., Inc. Mr. Luca seconded the motion. Discussion: Mr. Gallagher said the lot has not changed and the same application has been denied before. Mr. Luca said the applicant has the right to return to the board with an application, but there have been no substantial changes. Mr. Cummings noted the 2000 application was denied 5 -0. Mr. Luca said this is an oddly- shaped lot, but it was created by the original developer as a non - conforming lot. Motion failed 0 -5 -0. Hearing ended at 10:15 pm. 10. Correspondence: 11. New Business: 12. Old Business: June 21, 2016 and July 12, 2016 minutes Motion to approve the June 21, 2016 minutes, subject to the correction on page 5 (spelling error) — Luca /Cummings. Motion passed 5 -0 -0. Motion to approve the July 12, 2016 minutes — Pruitt /Cummings. Motion passed 3- 0- 2(Gallagher and Luca abstained) 13. Adjournment: Motion to adjourn at 10:30— Gallagher /Luca. Motion passed. Next meeting will be September 27, 2016 at 7:30 pm. David Luca, Clerk Date 0