HomeMy WebLinkAboutZBA06212016Town of Mansfield
Zoning Board of Appeals �r.trrr�
June 21, 2016 bU,.ri �s cirulu
The Zoning Board of Appeals held its regular meeting in the Town Hall, Mans?41111, 0 23Qap4- 15@ent at the
hearing were the following members: Elisabeth Garber -Miller, Chair; David Lgc,a, ,Clerk; Darlene Pruitt; Matt
Cummings; Associate Member Aaron Gallagher; Associate Member Eric Correira , `.'� , �' 1 SLD S
1. Meeting opened at 7:30 pm.
2. Sign Designs, 800 South Main Street (Eastport Reservoir — Great Woods Family Medicine, Map 16, Parcel 27
The Chair read the public hearing notice for the application of Sign Designs, Inc. on behalf of Eastport Reservoir, LLC
for a Variance under Section 230-4.7, Signs, of the Zoning By -Law to allow for the installation of a second free-standing
sign at 800 South Main Street (Assessor's Map 16, Parcel 27) in the Planned Business District (PBD)
The following documents were introduced at the public hearing: Application for a Variance, filed with the Town Clerk
December 15, 2015; a copy of the public hearing notice; request to continue the public hearing to February 2, 2016,
request to continue the public hearing to April 5, 2016, request to continue the public hearing to May 24, 2016 and
request to continue the public hearing to June 21, 2016; letter from Eastport Real Estate Services, dated March 18,
2016; "Steward Medical Group", dated July 23, 2015, and revised March 16, 2016, and May 23, 2016, prepared by Sign
Design.
Mr. Gallagher was appointed a voting member for this hearing.
Scott Ferrigno, Sign Design, Inc., representing Steward Medical Group, was present.
Ms. Garber -Miller explained this application for a sign came before the Board in January on behalf of a medical
practice at 800 South Main Street. She said a sign was never installed by the owner to identify the tenants in the two
buildings at this property, making it hard to find the medical practice. She said there is an existing sign for the dental
practice, which was permitted in 2007 without a variance. When the public hearing on this application was opened in
January, the Board said it would consider allowing one sign if the dentist's sign were to be added to the new sign; the
dentist refused. Mr. Ferrigno was then asked to design a sign, incorporating the existing dental sign into the proposed
sign to give the appearance of a single sign. Ms. Garber -Miller noted that the dentist does not own the land upon
which his sign is sited, and does not own any air space rights.
Mr. Ferrigno submitted a revised plan, dated May 23, 2016, showing the two signs combined. He said this will be a 45
square -foot, non -illuminated sign, with the Steward Medical Group sign at the top with smaller panels for other
tenants.
Ms. Pruitt asked if this would be a double -sided sign. Mr. Ferrigno said it would be.
Ms. Garber -Miller said the motion should state if the landlord were to install a full tenant sign, all other signs on the
property would be removed and the new sign is to be placed over the existing dental sign because the plan does not
show the exact location of the new sign.
Mr. Luca made the motion to approve the application of Sign Designs, Inc. on behalf of Eastport Reservoir, LLC for a
Variance under Section 230-4.7, Signs, of the Zoning By -Law to allow for the installation of a second free-standing sign
at 800 South Main Street (Assessor's Map 16, Parcel 27) in the Planned Business District (PBD) with the conditions that
the new sign be placed in the exact location of the existing dental sign as shown on the plan, "Steward Medical
-_' Group', dated July 23, 2015, and revised March 16, 2016, and May 23, 2016, and that any other freestanding signs be
removed. Ms. Pruitt seconded the motion.
Discussion:
Mr. Luca said the new plan complies with everything the board discussed at the previous hearings.
Ms. Garber -Miller said this is a medical practice and patients need to know where it is located; she noted there are
two buildings on this property, which could potentially be confusing to the patients. Ms. Garber -Miller said the owner
of the property should have provided signage.
Motion passed 5-0-0.
Hearing ended at 7:37 pm.
3. Michael Feck, 668 Elm Street, Map 15, Parcel 3.
The Chair read the public hearing notice for the application of Michael Feck for a Variance from Zoning By -Law Section
230-1.5, Lot Width and Schedule 4.2A, Density and Dimensional Regulations, Residential Districts, Frontage, to allow
for the creation of a lot with less than the required lot width and lot frontage at 668 Elm Street (Assessor's Map 15,
Parcel 3) in the Residential 1 (111) zone.
The following documents were introduced at the public hearing: Application for a Variance filed with the Town Clerk
April 28, 2016; a copy of the public hearing notice; "Zoning Plan 668 Elm Street" dated April 7, 2016, prepared by
Hutchins -Trowbridge Associates, Inc., Mansfield, MA.
Mr. Gallagher was appointed a voting member for this hearing
Michael Trowbridge, Hutchins -Trowbridge Associates, and property owner Michael Feck were present
Mr. Trowbridge said Mr. Feck is seeking a variance on lot width and lot frontage to create two lots out of one parcel.
Mr. Trowbridge said Mr. Feck is proposing a driveway to the north of the existing house on Lot 2, which has 80,700
square feet of area, and a new Lot 1, with 80,700 square feet, in the back of the parcel.
Mr. Trowbridge said there is Hodges Brook rverfront area at the rear of the property, requiring a 200 -foot buffer for
new construction, so any work within this area would be closely scrutinized by Conservation; under the Riverfront Act,
no work would be allowed in the 0 -200 -toot area. Mr. Trowbridge said there are no wetlands on the property, but
the land drops significantly towards the Hodges Brook. He said the soils in this area are generally sandy and ground
water is not an issue.
Mr. Trowbridge said this property is very similar to the Murphy property at 670 Elm Street. He said the hardship is the
existing brook and the shape of the lot, which is approximately 3.6 acres. He said a residential compound with a wide
driveway and drainage would require a special permit, which would require a significant amount of money be spent
for design and filing fees, with no assurance of approval.
Gary Egan, 674-678 Elm Street, said the existing lot is already non -conforming and he is strongly against this project
because he said this is not a variance, it is a zone change. He said if the variance is granted, there are 15-20 houses on
this street that could potentially apply for the same variance.
E
Ralph Calderwood, 37 Oak Leaf Drive, asked if a special variance would be required for the septic system. Mr.
Trowbridge said a variance would not be required; under Title 5, a septic system can be installed within 50 feet of
Hodges Brook.
Patricia Calderwood, 37 Oak Leaf Drive, said she was concerned about flooding from Hodges Brook and the drainage
on Oak Leaf Drive. She mentioned there is a lot of debris in the brook that needs to be cleaned up. Mr. Trowbridge
said this project would have to go to the Conservation Commission and roof drains connected to subsurface drainage
would be a requirement for the runoff. He said a stone trench could also be installed along the driveway.
William Arbuckle, 673 Elm Street, asked about the proposed driveway adjacent to the property on the north side of
the parcel. Mr. Trowbridge said the driveway would be located along the property line.
Mr. Trowbridge said Mr. and Mrs. Murphy, 670 Elm Street, also have concerns. Mr. Trowbridge said he met with them
and suggested a 50 -foot no cut restriction be placed on the property to create a vegetated buffer between the
properties. He said the closest point from the new house to the property at 670 Elm Street would be 275+ feet. Ms.
Garber -Miller asked if the new lot's proposed 15.13 foot wide driveway would be wide enough for a fire truck. Mr.
Trowbridge said the driveway would allow for emergency vehicles.
Mr. Gallagher asked who owns the property and if Mr. Feck will be building a house for a family member. Mr.
Trowbridge said Mr. Feck owns the entire parcel. Mr. Feck said he is working on the existing house to either sell or
rent and he plans to live in the proposed new house.
Mr. Arbuckle said he does not have a problem with someone using their land; he said his only concern is that a duplex
would be built on the lot. Mr. Trowbridge said this area used to be zoned for duplexes, but that is no longer an
allowed use.
Mr. Cummings made the motion to approve the application of Michael Feck for a Variance from Zoning By -Law Section
230-1.5, Lot Width and Schedule 4.2A, Density and Dimensional Regulations, Residential Districts, Frontage, to allow
for the creation of a lot with less than the required lot width and lot frontage at 668 Elm Street (Assessor's Map 15,
Parcel 3) in the Residential 1 (131) zone as per the plan, "Zoning Plan 668 Elm Street" dated April 7, 2016, Mr.
Gallagher seconded the motion.
Discussion:
Mr. Gallagher asked if applications to divide one lot into two lots are done often. Ms. Garber -Miller said ordinarily the
board has looked favorably when a lot is divided as long as one of the lots remains compliant, but the Board has had a
more difficult time with proposals that make a conforming lot non-compliant.
Ms. Pruitt said she does not see a hardship.
Motion failed 2-3-0 (Luca & Gallagher in favor; Pruitt, Garber -Miller and Cummings opposed).
Hearing ended at 8:00 pm.
4. Ellen Rosenfeld Trustee, Ellen Realty Trust, West Street, Map 8, Lot 57.
The Chair read the public hearing notice for the application of Ellen Rosenfeld Trustee, Ellen Realty Trust, for Variance
from Section 230, 4.2, Schedule 4.28 of the Zoning By -Law to construct a building on a pre-existing, non -conforming
3
lot with less than the required lot area, lot frontage and lot width at [Map 8, Lot 571 West Street in the Planned
Business District (PBD).
The following documents were introduced at the public hearing: Application for a Variance filed with the Town Clerk
May 20, 2016; a copy of the public hearing notice; letter dated April 21, 2016 from William R. Ross, Town Manager:
Action by Board of Selectmen Regarding Medical Marijuana Dispensary; "West Street Site Plan of Land in Mansfield,
MA" dated May 16, 2016, prepared by Merrikin Engineering, LLP; updated, untitled color building rending.
Mr. Gallagher was appointed a voting member for this hearing.
Attorneys Edward and Matthew Valanzola, Ellen Rosenfeld and Dan Dumus were present.
Attorney Edward Valanzola, representing Ellen Realty Trust, explained a variance granted in 2014 for this property has
lapsed. He said a new plan, similar to the 2014 plan, has been submitted, showing the building size reduced from
10,500 square feet with a front yard setback of 87.0 feet to 6,800 square feet with a front yard setback of 86.5 feet.
Attorney Valanzola said a one-story building is proposed and the applicant is seeking relief from lot area, providing
35,986 square feet where 40,000 square feet is required; lot frontage, providing 120.0 feet where 200 feet is required;
and lot width, providing 119.0 feet where 200 feet is required. Attorney Valanzola said the hardship is the lot's deep,
narrow shape and the variance could be granted without substantially derogating from the intent or purpose of the
Zoning By -Law.
Ms. Garber -Miller said the new building looks very different from the one proposed in 2014, which was to be used for
small businesses; she asked what the smaller proposed building would be used for. Attorney Valanzola said the
proposed building is for a single tenant, a medical marijuana dispensary. He said the applicant is not seeking relief for
the proposed use and will still have to go before the Planning Board for a special permit. Ms. Garber -Miller asked if
this would be considered retail because in the past, the board has not allowed existing businesses to have retail in this
zone. Attorney Valanzola said this is a special permit use.
Attorney Valanzola submitted a letter dated April 21, 2016 from William R. Ross, Town Manager regarding "Action by
Board of Selectmen Regarding Medical Marijuana Dispensary."
Ms. Garber -Miller said the building is fine, but the applicant should get permission for that use first and then come
before the ZBA for a variance to construct the building.
Mr. Luca said in November 2016, the law might change to allow for recreational marijuana. He asked if another
permit would be necessary if the medical dispensary were converted for both uses. Attorney Valanzola said they
would have to come back because the permit is only for a medical dispensary. He said he spoke with Planning Board
Chair Thomas French, who said a variance should be in place before submitting plans to the Planning Board. Attorney
Valanzola said he is not asking the board to approve the use.
Applicant Ellen Rosenfeld said everything done so far has been under CommCan, Inc., a non-profit organization set up
with the Department of Public Health for the manufacture and sale of medical marijuana; she said anything done in
this building would be for medical purposes. She said if they were to come back for recreational marijuana, it would
be under a separate corporation. She said Mr. Ross has added a clause prohibiting co -locating at this location; this
provision and special permit would specify the use and any conditions.
Ms. Garber -Miller said although Mr. Ross certified this area is zoned for a medical marijuana dispensary, there is not a
specific category in the new by-law and asked for an opinion from Town Counsel, saying this is a permitted use in this
4
zone. Attorney Valanzola said the applicant is asking the board to look at the same relief granted in 2014 for lot
frontage, width and lot size; he said the use of the property is not before the board.
Ms. Rosenfeld said if she is not granted the dimensional relief, the proposed project will not go forward. She said the
decision could state the board does not endorse the proposed use of the property.
Mr. Gallagher asked how many vehicles per day would be coming in and out of the dispensary. Dan Dumus of MOM
explained the traffic issues and said there would be approximately 250 vehicle trips per day to the site; 125 in and 125
out.
Mr. Luca asked if the visits would be by appointment only. Ms. Rosenfeld said they would not.
Mr. Luca asked about the notification of abutters. Attorney Valanzola said property owners within 300 feet of the
property were notified.
Mr. Luca asked what else could be done with this property if the variance is not granted. Attorney Valanzola said this
is a difficult site and the client who received a variance in 2014 was unable to market the building.
Mr. Gallagher said if the variance is granted, but the dispensary does not produce economically, what would prevent a
retail establishment from using the site. Attorney Valanzola said the variance would be for the building and any other
use would require a special permit and/or site plan approval.
Attorney Valanzola said the building size has been reduced, the hardship has not changed and the applicant is only
asking for the same relief granted in 2014.
Mr. Gallagher made the motion to approve the application of Ellen Rosenfeld Trustee, Ellen Realty Trust, for Variance
from Section 230, 4.2, Schedule 4.2B of the Zoning By -Law to construct a building on a pre-existing, non -conforming
lot with less than the required lot area, lot frontage and lot width at tMap 8, Lot 571 West Street in the Planned
Business District (PBD), in accordance with the "West Street Site Plan of Land in Mansfield, MA" dated May 16, 2016,
and prepared by Merrikin Engineering, LLP. Mr. Luca seconded the motion.
Discussion:
Mr. Cummings said he would have to agree with the applicant. He noted this property came before the board in 2014
with the same issues and the variance was granted. He said the board is not looking at the use of the property and
this plan is a better fit than what is currently there.
Ms. Pruitt agreed with Mr. Cummings; the board is looking at the dimensions of the building, not the use.
Mr. Luca said the hardship is still the same as it was in 2014. He said notice was given to the abutters of the property
and no one came to the hearing to speak against the proposal.
Motion passed 5-0-0.
Hearing ended at 8:30 pm.
5. New Business:
6. Old Business:
5
Approval of May 24, 2016 minutes: Luca/Cummings Passed 5-0-0.
7. Adjournment:
Motion to adjourn at 8:50 pm: Luca/Cummings. Passed
Next meeting will be July 12, 2016 at 7:30 pm.
Da ' uca;-Clerk Date