Zoning Board of Appeals

Department of Planning & Community Development Zoning Board of Appeals 1 JFK Memorial Drive Braintree, MA www.braintreema.gov Joseph. C. Sullivan Mayor Zoning Board of Appeals (ZBA) Meeting Minutes September 25, 2017 IN ATTENDANCE: Stephen Karll, Chair Michael Ford, Member Michael Calder, Member Richard McDonough, Associate Steve Sciascia, Associate ALSO PRESENT: Jeremy Rosenberger, Zoning Administrator Mr. Karll called the meeting to order at 7:00pm. OLD BUSINESS: 1) Petition Number: 17-32 Petitioner: John M. Kelley, Jr., Mary C. Kelley and Stephen Zeboski RE: 0 & 36 Bowditch Street John M. Kelley, Jr., Mary C. Kelley and Stephen Zeboski, under a purchase and sale agreement (“Petitioners”), concerning Assessors Map 3011, Lots 24 and 25. Lot 24 is improved with a dwelling house and Lot 25 is a vacant lot. Lot 24 (9,000 sf) and Lot 25 (10,200 sf) now under common ownership contain a total of 19,200 square feet. Petitioners seek relief pursuant to Zoning Ordinance Chapter 135, Sections 403, 407 and 701; for variance relief and/or finding as deemed appropriate, and to construct a new single family dwelling (32’ x 26’) with attached single car garage (12’ x 24’) on Lot 25 to contain 9,600 square feet. The properties are known as Lot 24 – 36 Bowditch Street and Lot 25 – 0 Bowditch Street and are located in a Residence B District Zone. Town of Braintree ZBA Meeting Minutes September 25, 2017 1  Notice Pursuant to notice duly published in a newspaper in general circulation and posted at Town Hall, and by written notice pursuant to G.L. Chapter 40A, Section 11, mailed to all parties in interest, a public hearing was held by the Zoning Board of Appeals at Town Hall, One JFK Memorial Drive, Braintree, MA on August 28, 2017 and continued by mutual agreement to September 25, 2017 at 7 p.m. Sitting on this case for the Zoning Board of Appeals were: Stephen Karll, Chairman; Michael Calder and Richard McDonough; and Michael Ford, Alternate. Evidence At the initial public hearing on August 28, 2017, the petitioner’s attorney, Carl Johnson, discussed the petitioner’s proposal to reconfigure 36 & 0 Bowditch Street into two 9,600 sq. ft. lots. 36 Bowditch Street currently contains 9,000 sq. ft. and is improved by a single family dwelling. 0 Bowditch is an unimproved 10,200 sq. ft. vacant lot. In addition to the proposed subdivision, the petitioners are seeking to construct a 1,664 sq. ft. dwelling on the 0 Bowditch Street lot that will meet all dimensional density requirements except lot size and width. Attorney Johnson discussed with the Board he is also seeking a determination by the Board as to whether 0 Bowditch qualifies as a “grandfathered” lot pursuant to Braintree Zoning Bylaw Section 135-706. Attorney Johnson expressed both properties validly existed prior to the enactment of the Braintree Zoning Bylaws in May of 1940, and benefitted with the exempting provisions contained in §135-706 of the Braintree Zoning Bylaws until the zoning bylaw changed in 1993. Mr. Johnson provided the Board an overview of history of the lots at 36 & 0 Bowditch, in addition to history of zoning relative to the Town of Braintree. He also discussed relevant case law that may inform the Board as to whether 0 Bowditch can be considered a grandfathered lot. He further discussed, that if the Board finds that 36 & 0 Bowditch are merged for zoning purposes due to common ownership, the petitioners are seeking variances for relief from the minimum lot size and lot width zoning requirements for both subject properties. The proposed relief would re-divide and restore the properties to their original configuration to contain 9600 sf each, consistent with historical subdivision plan of record, dated April 12, 1889 filed as Plan No. 525 in Plan Book 12 of 1889 in Norfolk Deeds (Subdivision Plan). Chairman Karll expressed that the proposed new single family dwelling is comparable in size relative to the existing dwellings on Bowditch Street. Mr. Ford expressed his concern with regard to creating a new non-conforming lot. However, Mr. Ford did highlight 0 Bowditch has always been maintained as a separate lot. Mr. McDonough felt the dwelling would not be more detrimental to the neighborhood. Mr. Calder mentioned that a site visit by ZBA members could be helpful. After discussion with the Board, Chairman Karll requested to continue the hearing to allow Board members to visit the site more thoroughly, Mr. Calder and Mr. McDonough concurred with the Chairman’s request. Attorney Johnson and the Board mutually agreed to continue the public hearing to September 25, 2017. At the continued public hearing on September 25 2017, after a brief summary of the proposal by Attorney Johnson, Chairman Karll expressed he had visited the site and had no issues with the proposal. He discussed the property clearly meets the threshold for the requested variances. Mr. McDonough and Calder agreed. Town of Braintree ZBA Meeting Minutes September 25, 2017 2  With regard to 36 Bowditch Street, variances are required for relief from the lot area and lot width zoning requirements. The existing lot size is 19,200 sq. ft. (due to the fact that both subject properties are under common ownership, the properties are merged for zoning purposes to reduce nonconformities). As a result of the proposed lot reconfiguration, the new lot size will be 9,600 sq. ft., where 15,000 sq. ft. is required. Also, the proposed new lot width will be 80 ft., a decrease from 160 ft., where 100 ft. is required. With regard to 0 Bowditch Street, variances are required for relief from the lot area and lot width zoning requirements. The new lot size will be 9,600 sq. ft., where 15,000 sq. ft. is required. Also, the proposed new lot width will be 80 ft., where 100 ft. is required. As grounds for the variances, Attorney Johnson highlighted both subject properties are severely affected by both soil conditions (ledge) and topographic conditions (sharply declining slope) 0 Bowditch slopes from elevation 67 ft. at Bowditch Street to 50 ft. at the rear lot line. In addition, both lots are impacted by two rear yard easements; a 20 ft. wide drain easement and a 20 ft. wide sewer easement. Attorney Johnson also presented plans depicting evidence of ledge across both properties, with 0 Bowditch more severely impacted. As a result of the ledge conditions, the storm water drain and sewer lines were not able to be placed in Bowditch Street rather at the rear lot line of the homes on the left side of Bowditch Street. In totality, these severe conditions have affected the Kelley's ability to use the vacant lot to build a dwelling house as planned in 1969. Mr. Johnson highlighted the proposed lot changes are consistent with the original lot sizes as laid out in the 1889 subdivision plan for Bowdoin Street. Lastly, the proposed single family dwelling will be similar in size and design as the surround housing stock and meet the required setback and coverage/open space requirements. The petitioners presented a plot plan entitled "Plan of Land”, dated June 12, 2017 and prepared by Hoyt Land Surveying of Weymouth, MA. The petitioners also presented architectural elevations and floor plans entitled “New House Construction”, sheets 1 & 2, dated May 22, 2017 and prepared by Walter A. McKinnon Associates, Inc. of Weymouth, MA. The petitioners also presented a property history analysis, zoning history analysis, topography map and soil analysis map. The Planning Board submitted a recommendation to endorse the staff recommendation of approval. The petitioner submitted a letter of support from four (4) abutters/surrounding residents. No one else at the Zoning Board of Appeals spoke in favor of or opposition to the petition. Findings The Board found the petitioner had presented a unique hardship with respect to the significant sloping topography and extensive ledge located at 0 Bowditch Street. As a result, the unique topography and soil conditions have created a significant hardship with regard to developing the lot for a single family dwelling. The Board further found the petitioner had demonstrated the proposed new single family dwelling at 0 Bowditch would not be more detrimental to the neighborhood as the proposed dwelling would be comparable in design and size relative to the immediate neighborhood. Furthermore, the Board found the requested reconfigured lots will be similar in size as to how the lots were originally laid out in the 19th century. Lastly, the Board found there was no opposition to the proposed relief requested. Therefore, the Board further found that the requested relief could be granted without nullifying or derogating from the purpose and intent of the zoning by-laws. Town of Braintree ZBA Meeting Minutes September 25, 2017 3  Decision On a motion duly made and seconded, the Board unanimously (3-0) voted to grant the requested variances for lot size and lot width at 36 & 0 Bowditch Street, pursuant to Bylaw Section 135-407, in accordance with the plans submitted. 2) Petition Number: 17-34 Petitioner: Carl & Margaret Johnson RE: 1908 Washington Street The petitioner requested the initial public hearing to be continued to October 23, 2017. On a motion made and seconded, the Board voted 3-0 to continue the initial public hearing to October 23, 2017. NEW BUSINESS: 1) Petition Number: 17-33 Petitioner: Bridget & John Fitzgerald RE: 96 Arborway Drive Bridget & John Fitzgerald, 96 Arborway Drive, Braintree, MA 02184 for relief from Bylaw requirements under Chapter 135, Section 135-403 and 701 to convert existing one story single family dwelling to a 2.5 story dwelling; proposed addition to be within the existing building footprint (+/- 904 sq. ft.). The applicant seeks a permit, variance and/or finding that the proposed alteration is not more detrimental to the neighborhood. The property is located at 96 Arborway Drive, Braintree, MA 02184 and is within a Residence B District Zone, as shown on Assessors Map 3039, Plot 138, and contains a land area of +/- 6,446 sq. ft. Notice Pursuant to notice duly published in a newspaper in general circulation and posted at Town Hall, and by written notice pursuant to G.L. Chapter 40A, Section 11, mailed to all parties in interest, a public hearing was to be held on August 28, 2017 by the Zoning Board of Appeals at Town Hall, One JFK Memorial Drive, Braintree, MA and mutually continued to September 25, 2017 at 7 p.m. Sitting on this case for the Zoning Board of Appeals were: Stephen Karll, Chairman; Michael Ford and Michael Calder, Members; and Richard McDonough, Alternate. Evidence John Fitzgerald, the petitioner, explained he is seeking to construct a second story addition to an existing one story, bungalow-style single family dwelling. The dwelling has a building footprint of +/- 904 sq. ft. The proposed addition, all within the existing building footprint, would provide an additional +/- 864 gross living sq. ft. to the existing dwelling. The existing first floor provides a kitchen, dining/living room, two bedrooms and a bathroom. The proposed addition would change one of the bedrooms on the first floor to provide a den and stairs to the second floor. The proposed second floor would provide three bedrooms. The proposed maximum height would be 29’6”. Lastly, Mr. Fitzgerald discussed a small portion of his existing driveway is located on the adjacent 100 Arborway Drive property. He provided evidence of a contract for a lawyer to pursue an easement with Ms. Virginia Arienti, the property Town of Braintree ZBA Meeting Minutes September 25, 2017 4 owner of 100 Arborway Drive. Ms. Arienti spoke that she will work with Mr. Fitzgerald to create the legal easement. Mr. Ford asked if the attic was going to be a walk-up attic. Mr. Fitzgerald responded it is likely to be a pull-down attic as it will be used for storage. Chairman Karll asked if he could move the existing shed to be five (5) feet from the side yard lot line. Mr. Fitzgerald said he could possibly do it. Mr. Ford stated he did not have an issue with the shed, but stated he thought it was a large house for the neighborhood. However, Mr. Ford said the addition would be within the existing building footprint. Mr. Karll stated he did not have an issue with the shed encroachment. The petitioner's existing lot is nonconforming, as it contains 6,440 sq. ft., where 15,000 sq. ft. is required, provides only 40.26 ft. of lot frontage where 50 ft. is required and provides only 40 ft. of lot width, where 100 ft. is required. The petitioner's existing single family dwelling is nonconforming as to the front yard setback; the dwelling is located 10.5 ft. from the front yard lot line, while the Zoning Bylaw requires a front yard setback of 20 ft. The petitioner's existing single family dwelling is nonconforming as to the left side yard setback; the dwelling is located 5.2 ft. from the left side yard lot line, while the Zoning Bylaw requires a side yard setback of 10 ft. Also, the petitioner's existing single family dwelling is nonconforming as to the right side yard setback; the dwelling is located 6 ft. from the right side yard lot line, while the Zoning Bylaw requires a side yard setback of 10 ft. Lastly, the petitioner’s existing detached accessory garage and shed are located +/- 1 ft. from the right side yard lot line, while the Zoning Bylaw requires an accessory structure to be setback 5 ft. from a side or rear yard lot line. The proposed addition will be built within the existing footprint and not create any new zoning nonconformity. Accordingly, a finding is required pursuant to G.L. Chapter 40A, Section 6. As grounds for the finding, the petitioner noted the addition will be within the existing footprint and not generate any new zoning nonconformity. Secondly, the petitioner noted the addition will be similar to the existing neighborhood characteristics and not be more detrimental to the neighborhood. The applicant presented the plan entitled "Plot Plan, 96 Arborway Drive, Braintree, MA”, dated September 9, 2017 and prepared by James E. McGrath, PLS. The applicant also presented existing and proposed floor plans and architectural renderings, titled “2nd Floor Addition”, page number 1-3, undated and prepared by Howard L. Millard, PE., of Westwood, MA. The Planning Board submitted a recommendation supporting the Zoning Administrator’s staff report and recommendation of continuance due to lack of plot plan submitted. Virginia Arienti, of 100 Arborway Drive, spoke in support of the petition. Don Chappell, of 93 Arborway Drive, spoke in support of the petition. Bart Vanaria, of 92 Arborway Drive, spoke in opposition to the proposal due to a potential negative impact with regard to sunlight on his property and potential snow and rainwater runoff issues. No one else spoke in favor of or in opposition to the petition. Findings The Board found that the existing lot is pre-existing nonconforming in terms of lot area, frontage and width, as noted above. In addition, the Board found that the existing dwelling is pre-existing nonconforming in terms of the front, left and right side yard setbacks. The Board also found that the proposed second floor addition will not create any new zoning non- conformity, as it will be constructed within the existing building footprint. The Board further Town of Braintree ZBA Meeting Minutes September 25, 2017 5 found that the proposed addition will be designed appropriately and be comparable in size relative to the existing housing stock. Lastly, the Board found the proposed addition will not be substantially more detrimental to the neighborhood than the existing nonconforming structure. Decision On a motion duly made and seconded, the Board unanimously (3-0) voted to grant the requested finding, pursuant to Bylaw Section 135-403, in accordance with the plans submitted, and subject to the following condition: 1.) Prior to the start of any construction, the petitioner shall address the existing driveway encroachment either by removal or providing the Planning and Community Development Department with a copy of an easement if removal will not occur. 2) Petition Number: 17-36 Petitioner: Rita Veneau RE: 16 Aspinwall Road Rita L. Veneau, 16 Aspinwall Road, Braintree, MA 02184 for relief from Bylaw requirements under Chapter 135, Sections 135-403, 407, 609 and 701 to combine +/-947 sq. ft. of land from 22 Aspinwall Road; proposed new reconfigured lot does not meet the minimum lot area and width regulations. The applicant seeks a permit, variance and/or finding that the proposed project is not more detrimental to the neighborhood. The property is located at 16 Aspinwall Road, Braintree, MA 02184 and is within a Watershed Residence B District Zone, as shown on Assessors Map 1095, Plot 105 and contains a total land area of +/- 16,852 sq. ft. Notice Pursuant to notice duly published in a newspaper in general circulation and posted at Town Hall, and by written notice pursuant to G.L. Chapter 40A, Section 11, mailed to all parties in interest, a public hearing was held by the Zoning Board of Appeals at Town Hall, One JFK Memorial Drive, Braintree, MA on September 25, 2017 at 7 p.m. Sitting on this case for the Zoning Board of Appeals were: Michael Ford, Stephen Sciascia and Michael Calder; and Richard McDonough, Alternate. Evidence Jon Veneau, the petitioner’s son and resident of 22 Aspinwall Road, explained his mother (the petitioner) is seeking to reconfigure the lots at 16 and 22 Aspinwall Road. 16 Aspinwall Road is currently 16,852 sq. ft. and 22 Aspinwall Road is 15,947 sq. ft. The proposed reconfiguration would establish 16 Aspinwall Road as a 17,798 sq. ft. lot and 22 Aspinwall Road as a 15,000 sq. ft. lot. Mr. Veneau explained the reason for the proposed reconfiguration is to more adequately “split” the existing common driveway between the two properties. Currently, the property boundary runs diagonally thru the existing shared driveway for 16 & 22 Aspinwall Road. The proposed reconfiguration would bisect the driveway more evenly. Variances are required for relief from the lot area and lot width zoning requirements. The existing 16 Aspinwall Road lot area is 16,852 sq. ft. As a result of the proposed lot reconfiguration, the new lot area will be 17,798 sq. ft., where 43,560 sq. ft. is required. Also, the proposed new lot width will be 66.55 ft., a decrease from 85 ft., where 100 ft. is required. Town of Braintree ZBA Meeting Minutes September 25, 2017 6  As grounds for the variance, the petitioners highlighted the lots are highly irregularly- shaped parcels. As such, the existing common driveway is not evenly split between the two properties. Furthermore, the petitioners state the existing nonconforming side yard setback at 22 Aspinwall Road will become conforming due to the proposed lot reconfiguration. The petitioner presented the plan entitled "Plan of Land, 16 and 22 Aspinwall Road, Braintree, Massachusetts”, dated July 7, 2017, and prepared by Hoyt Land Surveying of Weymouth, MA. The Planning Board submitted a recommendation to endorse the staff recommendation of approval. No one else spoke in favor of or opposition to the petition. Findings The Board found the petitioner had presented a unique hardship with respect to the highly irregular shape of the property. As a result, the Board found the irregular lot shape adversely impacts the use of 16 and 22 Aspinwall Road, specifically the shared driveway. The Board further found the desired relief would establish more symmetrical lot shapes/sizes and would not negatively affect the surrounding neighborhood. Therefore, the Board further found that the requested relief could be granted without nullifying or derogating from the purpose and intent of the zoning by-laws, and will be appropriately designed. Decision On a motion duly made and seconded, the Board unanimously (3-0) voted to grant the requested lot area and width variances, pursuant to Bylaw Section 135-407, in accordance with the plans submitted. 3) Petition Number: 17-37 Petitioner: Rita Veneau RE: 22 Aspinwall Road Rita L. Veneau, 16 Aspinwall Road, Braintree, MA 02184 for relief from Bylaw requirements under Chapter 135, Sections 135-403, 407, 609 and 701 to allocate +/-947 sq. ft. of land from subject property to 16 Aspinwall Road; proposed new reconfigured lot does not meet the minimum lot area and width regulations. The applicant seeks a permit, variance and/or finding that the proposed project is not more detrimental to the neighborhood. The property is located at 22 Aspinwall Road, Braintree, MA 02184 and is within a Watershed Residence B District Zone, as shown on Assessors Map 1095, Plot 105B and contains a total land area of +/- 15,947 sq. ft. Notice Pursuant to notice duly published in a newspaper in general circulation and posted at Town Hall, and by written notice pursuant to G.L. Chapter 40A, Section 11, mailed to all parties in interest, a public hearing was held by the Zoning Board of Appeals at Town Hall, One JFK Memorial Drive, Braintree, MA on September 25, 2017 at 7 p.m. Sitting on this case for the Zoning Board of Appeals were: Michael Ford, Stephen Sciascia and Michael Calder; and Richard McDonough, Alternate. Evidence Town of Braintree ZBA Meeting Minutes September 25, 2017 7  Jon Veneau, the petitioner’s son and resident of 22 Aspinwall Road, explained the petitioner is seeking to reconfigure the lots at 16 and 22 Aspinwall Road. 16 Aspinwall Road is currently 16,852 sq. ft. and 22 Aspinwall Road is 15,947 sq. ft. The proposed reconfiguration would establish 16 Aspinwall Road as a 17,798 sq. ft. lot and 22 Aspinwall Road as a 15,000 sq. ft. lot. Mr. Veneau explained the reason for the proposed reconfiguration is to more adequately “split” the existing common driveway between the two properties. Currently, the property boundary runs diagonally thru the existing shared driveway for 16 & 22 Aspinwall Road. The proposed reconfiguration would bisect the driveway more evenly. Variances are required for relief from the lot area and lot width zoning requirements. The existing 22 Aspinwall Road lot area is 15,947 sq. ft. As a result of the proposed lot reconfiguration, the new lot area will be 15,000 sq. ft., where 43,560 sq. ft. is required. Also, the proposed new lot width will be 83.97 ft., an increase from 75.8 ft., where 100 ft. is required. Of note, the existing nonconforming side yard setback of 3.9 ft. will be remedied. The proposed reconfiguration would create a conforming side yard setback of 20.4 ft. As grounds for the variance, the petitioners highlighted the lots are highly irregularly- shaped parcels. As such, the existing common driveway is not evenly split between the two properties. Furthermore, the petitioners state the existing nonconforming side yard setback at 22 Aspinwall Road will become conforming due to the proposed lot reconfiguration. The petitioner presented the plan entitled "Plan of Land, 16 and 22 Aspinwall Road, Braintree, Massachusetts”, dated July 7, 2017, and prepared by Hoyt Land Surveying of Weymouth, MA. The Planning Board submitted a recommendation to endorse the staff recommendation of approval. No one else spoke in favor of or opposition to the petition. Findings The Board found the petitioner had presented a unique hardship with respect to the highly irregular shape of the property. As a result, the Board found the irregular lot lines adversely impact the use of 16 and 22 Aspinwall Road, specifically the shared driveway. The Board further found the desired relief would establish more symmetrical lot shapes/sizes and would not negatively affect the surrounding neighborhood. Therefore, the Board further found that the requested relief could be granted without nullifying or derogating from the purpose and intent of the zoning by-laws, and will be appropriately designed. Decision On a motion duly made and seconded, the Board unanimously (3-0) voted to grant the requested lot area and width variances, pursuant to Bylaw Section 135-407, in accordance with the plans submitted. 4) Petition Number: 17-38 Petitioner: Christin Harriman RE: 26 Watson Street Christin Harriman, 26 Watson Street, Braintree, MA 02184 for relief from Bylaw requirements under Chapter 135, Section 135-403 and 701 to convert existing one story single Town of Braintree ZBA Meeting Minutes September 25, 2017 8 family dwelling to a 2 story dwelling; all construction/additions to be within the existing building footprint (+/- 1,216 sq. ft.). The applicant seeks a permit, variance and/or finding that the proposed alteration is not more detrimental to the neighborhood. The property is located at 26 Watson Street, Braintree, MA 02184 and is within a Residence B District Zone, as shown on Assessors Map 2011, Plot 66, and contains a land area of +/- 6,250 sq. ft. Notice Pursuant to notice duly published in a newspaper in general circulation and posted at Town Hall, and by written notice pursuant to G.L. Chapter 40A, Section 11, mailed to all parties in interest, a public hearing was held by the Zoning Board of Appeals at Town Hall, One JFK Memorial Drive, Braintree, MA on September 25, 2017 at 7 p.m. Sitting on this case for the Zoning Board of Appeals were: Michael Ford, Michael Calder and Richard McDonough; and Stephen Sciascia, Alternate Evidence Christin Harriman, the petitioner, explained she is seeking to construct a full second story within the existing one-story, single family dwelling’s building footprint. The dwelling has a building footprint of +/- 1,216 sq. ft. The existing single family dwelling is 9.1 ft. from the left side yard lot line where 10 ft. is required. The existing first floor provides a kitchen, dining, living room, two bedrooms and a bathroom. The proposed second floor would provide an additional two bedrooms, two bathrooms and laundry room. An attic would be also constructed, with access via the second floor ceiling. Lastly, the proposed building height would be 29.5 ft. The petitioner's existing lot is nonconforming, as it contains only 6,250 sq. ft., where 15,000 sq. ft. is required, and provides only 62.50 ft. of lot width, where 100 ft. is required. The petitioner's existing single family dwelling is nonconforming as to the left side yard setback; the dwelling is located 9.1 ft. from the left yard lot line, while the Zoning Bylaw requires a left yard setback of 10 ft. The proposed alteration will be within the existing building footprint and not create any new zoning nonconformity. Accordingly, a finding is required pursuant to G.L. Chapter 40A, Section 6. As grounds for the finding, the petitioner noted the addition will be within the existing building footprint and not generate any new zoning nonconformity. Secondly, the petitioner noted the addition will be similar to the existing neighborhood architectural characteristics and well designed. Therefore, the proposed project will not be more detrimental to the neighborhood. The petitioner presented the plot plan entitled "Plan of Land in Braintree, MA”, dated August 1, 2017, and prepared by CS Kelley Land Surveyors, Pembroke, MA. The petitioner also presented architectural and floor plans entitled “Second Floor Addition”, Sheet No. 1-4, dated June 21, 2017, and prepared by Walter A. McKinnon Associates, Inc. of Weymouth, MA. The Planning Board submitted a recommendation to endorse the staff recommendation of approval. The petitioner submitted a letter of support from nine (9) abutters/surrounding residents. Liz McCue, of 30 Watson Street, spoke in support of the petition. Heather Zaporetsky, of 22 Watson Street, spoke in support of the petition. John and Donna Newcomb, of 29 Watson Street, spoke in support of the petition. Kevin and Jessica Cook, of 40 Watson Street, spoke in support of the petition. No one else at the Zoning Board of Appeals spoke in favor of or opposition to the petition. Town of Braintree ZBA Meeting Minutes September 25, 2017 9  Findings The Board found that the existing lot is pre-existing nonconforming in terms of lot area and width, as noted above. In addition, the Board found that the existing dwelling is pre-existing nonconforming in terms of the left side yard setback The Board also found that the proposed addition would not create any new zoning nonconformity. The Board further found that the proposed project will be designed appropriately and be comparable in size relative to the existing housing stock. Lastly, the Board found the proposed addition will not be substantially more detrimental to the neighborhood than the existing nonconforming structure. Decision On a motion duly made and seconded, the Board unanimously (3-0) voted to grant the requested finding, pursuant to Bylaw Section 135-403, in accordance with the plans submitted. 4) Petition Number: 17-39 Petitioner: Widowmaker Brewing RE: 220 Wood Road Widowmaker Brewing, 220 Wood Road, Unit C, Braintree, MA 02184 (Owner, WASA LLC) for relief from Bylaw requirements under Chapter 135, Sections 135-407, 904.1, 904.6 and 908 to install four (4) non-illuminated “Widowmaker” wall signs totaling 37.6 sq. ft. The applicant seeks variances and/or findings that the proposed signs will not be more detrimental to the neighborhood. The property is located at 220 Wood Road, Unit C, Braintree, MA 02184 and is within a Highway Business District Zone, as shown on Assessors Map 2053B, Plot 1F and contains a total land area of 2 acres. Notice Pursuant to notice duly published in a newspaper in general circulation and posted at Town Hall, and by written notice pursuant to G.L. Chapter 40A, Section 11, mailed to all parties in interest, a public hearing was held by the Zoning Board of Appeals at Town Hall, One JFK Memorial Drive, Braintree, MA on September 25, 2017 at 7 p.m. Sitting on this case for the Zoning Board of Appeals were: Stephen Karll, Chairman; Michael Calder and Michael Ford, Members; and Richard McDonough, Alternate. Evidence Ryan Lavery, representing the petitioners and co-owner of the brewery, explained Widowmaker Brewery is seeking the necessary relief to provide signage for the brewery. To support the petitioner’s new location, they are seeking relief to install four wall signs totaling 37.6 sq. ft., one of which is allowed by right. The petitioners seek the following signage variance: • 135-904.2 (A)(5)(g): The Braintree Zoning Bylaw states “No more than one wall sign for each store or business occupying a building shall be permitted. The aggregate total of all signage allowed shall not exceed 150 square feet in area. Sign permit may be issued only after written permission for said signs is authorized by the Zoning Board of Appeals.” The petitioner is seeking relief for four (4) additional signs, with an aggregate signage total of 37.6 sq. ft. Town of Braintree ZBA Meeting Minutes September 25, 2017 10  As grounds for the variances, the petitioners discussed the location of the brewery and the customer entrance is uniquely situated. The brewery entrance is not visible from Wood Road, but is accessed by driving to the back of the building, facing the highway. As far as the number of signs, Mr. Lavery highlighted, due to the lack of visibility to the main access road (Wood Road), appropriate signage is necessary to direct customers safely and effectively to the brewery’s main entrance. Of note, the petitioner originally sought to have the proposed signs made out of wood materials. However, the excessive cost, coupled with the longevity was a concern to the petitioners. As such, the petitioner was able to mimic the look and feel of a wood sign, in addition to increasing the durability, by selecting custom urethane based signs. The petitioners presented signage plans entitled “Signage Plans”, dated August 1, 2017, and prepared by Colin Foley of Weymouth, MA. The Planning Board submitted a favorable recommendation. No one else at the Zoning Board of Appeals spoke in favor of or opposition to the petition. Findings The Board found that the proposed signage, when analyzed in relationship to the building and previous tenant signage, is appropriate in design, size and scale. The Board found the location of the brewery is uniquely situated at the back of the existing building. In addition, the Board found that the petitioner had demonstrated the need for relief from the Zoning By-law as the proposed wall signs are necessary to identify the location of the business and for the traveling public to be safely directed to the businesses. Lastly, the Board found that the wall signs would be well designed, appropriate in terms of size and consistent with the architectural style of the existing building. As a result, the Board found relief can be granted without resulting in a substantial detriment to the public good and will not nullify the intent of the Zoning By-law. Decision On a motion duly made and seconded, the Board unanimously (3-0) voted to grant the requested variance from Bylaw Section 135-904.2, pursuant to Bylaw Section 135-407 and 908, in accordance with the plans submitted. 4) Petition Number: 17-40 Petitioner: Ricky Zeng (New CC Sign, Inc.) RE: 695-727A Granite Street Ricky Zeng (New CC Sign, Inc.), 70 Old Colony Avenue, Dorchester, MA 02127 (Owner, Granite Plaza Limited) for relief from Bylaw requirements under Chapter 135, Sections 135-407, 904.2 and 908 to install a +/- 58.75 sq. ft. illuminated “Kiddosland” wall sign. The applicant seeks a variance and/or findings that the proposed sign will not be more detrimental to the neighborhood. The property is located at 695-727A Granite Street, Braintree, MA 02184 and is within a Watershed Highway Business District Zone, as shown on Assessors Map 2048, Plot 32, Map 1032, Plots 1 and 1 L and contains a total land area of +/- 13.13 acres. Notice Town of Braintree ZBA Meeting Minutes September 25, 2017 11  Pursuant to notice duly published in a newspaper in general circulation and posted at Town Hall, and by written notice pursuant to G.L. Chapter 40A, Section 11, mailed to all parties in interest, a public hearing was held by the Zoning Board of Appeals at Town Hall, One JFK Memorial Drive, Braintree, MA on September 25, 2017 at 7 p.m. Sitting on this case for the Zoning Board of Appeals were: Michael Ford, Michael Calder and Richard McDonough; and Stephen Sciascia, Alternate. Evidence Rickey Zeng, of New CC Sign, Inc., explained the proposal is to provide signage for “Kiddosland” daycare center. They are locating to a second floor office space located in the Granite Plaza shopping center. The proposed signage would involve one internally illuminate wall sign (58.75 sq. ft.) that requires a variance. The Granite Plaza shopping center does have a ground/directory sign, but the petitioner has stated there is no room on the sign for the business. The petitioners seek the following signage variance: • 135-904.2 (A)(5)(f): The Braintree Zoning Bylaw states “Wall signs for businesses occupying other than the first floor may be permitted by the Zoning Board of Appeals. Said permit shall require the written permission of the owner of the property. Secondary wall signs shall not exceed 48 square feet in area. No more than two such secondary wall signs shall be allowed for any building.” Kiddosland will lease space on the second floor and has received permission from the owner of the property to pursue signage relief. As grounds for the variances, the petitioner states the building is uniquely situated. The building and business location, which front Granite Street, are setback a large distance from the roadway. In addition, the petitioners state a 58.75 sq. ft. sign will be similar in size to the former tenant signage (Comcast). Furthermore, the proposed signage on the second floor is necessary to identify to customers and patrons that the business is located on the second floor. Lastly, as far as the scale of the sign, the proposed signage is almost half of the linear frontage of the business (112 ft.). The petitioner presented signage plans, untitled, dated July 10, 2017, and prepared by New CC Sign Inc. of Boston, MA. The petitioner also provided a supplementary locus map and location imagery. The Planning Board submitted a recommendation to endorse the staff recommendation of approval. No one else at the Zoning Board of Appeals spoke in favor of or opposition to the petition. Findings The Board found that the proposed signage, when analyzed in relationship to the building and previous tenant signage, is appropriate in design, size and scale. The Board found the location of the building is uniquely situated on the property, as the building is located far from the main entrance to the shopping plaza. In addition, the Board found that the petitioner had demonstrated the need for relief from the Zoning By-law as the proposed wall sign is necessary to identify the location of the business and for the traveling public to be safely directed to the businesses. Lastly, the Board found that the wall sign would be consistent with Town of Braintree ZBA Meeting Minutes September 25, 2017 12 the architectural style of the existing building. As a result, the Board found relief can be granted without resulting in a substantial detriment to the public good and will not nullify the intent of the Zoning By-law. Decision On a motion duly made and seconded, the Board unanimously (3-0) voted to grant the requested variance from Bylaw Section 135-904.2, pursuant to Bylaw Section 135-407 and 908, in accordance with the plans submitted. 5) Petition Number: 17-41 Petitioner: Robert Arruda (Button Down Cleaners) RE: 238-310 Grove Street Robert Arruda (Button Down Cleaners), 155 Webster Street, Suite D, Hanover, MA 02339 (Owner, TRT Braintree II LLC) for relief from Bylaw requirements under Chapter 135, Sections 135-407, 904.1 and 908 to install a 27.9 sq. ft. illuminated “Button Down-Value Dry Cleaners” wall sign. The applicant seeks a variance and/or findings that the proposed sign will not be more detrimental to the neighborhood. The property is located at 238-310 Grove Street, Braintree, MA 02184 and is within a General Business District Zone, as shown on Assessors Map 1084, Plot 10 and contains a total land area of +/- 16.48 acres. Notice Pursuant to notice duly published in a newspaper in general circulation and posted at Town Hall, and by written notice pursuant to G.L. Chapter 40A, Section 11, mailed to all parties in interest, a public hearing was held by the Zoning Board of Appeals at Town Hall, One JFK Memorial Drive, Braintree, MA on September 25, 2017 at 7 p.m. Sitting on this case for the Zoning Board of Appeals were: Stephen Karll, Chairman; Michael Ford and Stephen Sciascia; and Richard McDonough, Alternate. Evidence The petitioner, Robert Arruda, explained the proposal is to provide signage for Button Down Dry Cleaners. The location was formerly occupied by Lapels Dry Cleaning. The existing linear frontage of the business is approximately 15 ft. The proposed illuminated signage is 27.9 sq. ft. Therefore, the proposed signage requires a variance. The petitioners seek the following signage variance: • 135-904.1 (A)(5)(a): The Braintree Zoning Bylaw states “No wall sign shall be more than four feet overall in height and a wall sign shall not exceed the lesser of 150 square feet or one square foot in area for each linear foot of frontage for each business.” The linear frontage of the business is approximately 15 ft. and the proposed front elevation wall sign is 27.9 sq. ft. in area. As grounds for the variances, the petitioner states the location of the business is uniquely situated. The business is located a far distance from the shopping center’s main entrance on Grove Street. In addition, the proposed sign will be smaller than the former sign in terms of the length (143.22 in. vs. 178 in.). As such, the petitioners feel a 15 sq. ft. sign would be much too small for the large building and significantly reduce visibility and direction to the Town of Braintree ZBA Meeting Minutes September 25, 2017 13 general public. Furthermore, the petitioner states the proposed sign is consistent with the existing tenants/signage at the shopping center. The petitioner presented signage plans, untitled, dated August 10, 2017, and preparer unknown of Boston, MA. The Planning Board submitted a recommendation to endorse the staff recommendation of approval. No one else at the Zoning Board of Appeals spoke in favor of or opposition to the petition. Findings The Board found that the proposed signage, when analyzed in relationship to the building and previous tenant signage, is appropriate in design, size and scale. The Board found the location of the building is uniquely situated on the property as the building is located far from any entrance to the shopping plaza. In addition, the Board found that the petitioner had demonstrated the need for relief from the Zoning By-law as the proposed wall signs are necessary to identify the location of the business and for the traveling public to be safely directed to the businesses. Lastly, the Board found that the wall sign would be consistent with the architectural style of the existing building. As a result, the Board found relief can be granted without resulting in a substantial detriment to the public good and will not nullify the intent of the Zoning By-law. Decision On a motion duly made and seconded, the Board unanimously (3-0) voted to grant the requested variance from Bylaw Section 135-904.1, pursuant to Bylaw Section 135-407 and 908, in accordance with the plans submitted. 6) Petition Number: 17-42 Petitioner: I.D. Sign Group Inc. RE: 190 Wood Road I.D. Sign Group Inc., 9 Bristol Drive, South Easton, MA 02375 (Owner, RSA Realty Inc./Wood Road Hotel) for relief from Bylaw requirements under Chapter 135, Sections 135-407, 904.2 and 908 to Install 91.56 sq. ft. and 57.9 sq. ft. illuminated wall signs, 55.4 sq. ft. illuminated ground sign and reface 233.125 sq. ft. existing ground sign. The applicant seeks variances and/or findings that the proposed signs will not be more detrimental to the neighborhood. The property is located at 190 Wood Road, Braintree, MA 02184 and is within a Highway Business District Zone, as shown on Assessors Map 2053B, Plot 1E and contains a total land area of +/- 1.69 acres. Notice Pursuant to notice duly published in a newspaper in general circulation and posted at Town Hall, and by written notice pursuant to G.L. Chapter 40A, Section 11, mailed to all parties in interest, a public hearing was held by the Zoning Board of Appeals at Town Hall, One JFK Memorial Drive, Braintree, MA on September 25, 2017 at 7 p.m. Sitting on this case for the Zoning Board of Appeals were: Stephen Karll, Chairman; Michael Calder and Michael Ford, Members; and Richard McDonough, Alternate. Town of Braintree ZBA Meeting Minutes September 25, 2017 14  Evidence Tim Fisher of I.D. Sign Group, Inc., explained the property owners are seeking to provide signage for the rebranding of the current Beantown Inn (formerly Holiday Inn Express) to a Best Western. The building formerly had two Holiday Inn wall signs, a ground sign facing Wood Road and a large ground sign facing the highway. The Holiday Inn related signage was recently removed and replace with temporary banners advertising the “Beantown Inn”. Chairman Karll expressed he did not have an issue with the proposed sizes of the wall signs as they would be a reduction in size as compared to the former Holiday Inn Express signage. Mr. Ford and Mr. Karll acknowledged that while they would like to see the existing billboard reduced or removed, it was properly permitted. The petitioners seek the following signage variances: • 135-904.2 (A)(1)(a): The Braintree Zoning Bylaw states “No ground sign shall exceed 150 square feet.” The proposed reface of the large ground sign facing the highway is 233.125 sq. ft. (30’ x 93.25”). The ground sign received a building permit in 1974. • 135-904.2 (A)(1)(e): The Braintree Zoning Bylaw states “A sign visible to the major artery shall contain the name and address of the user of the property and contain no other advertising material or any commercial message unless specifically authorized by the Zoning Board of Appeals.” The proposed reface of the large ground sign states “…With FREE Internet & Breakfast”. • 135-904.2 (A)(1)(g): The Braintree Zoning Bylaw states “One secondary ground sign may be permitted by the Zoning Board of Appeals if it determines that the nature of the use of the premises, the architecture of the building, or the location with reference to the street or way is such that additional ground signs should be granted in the public interest. The total of all ground signs visible to the access road shall not exceed 150 square feet in area.” The proposal includes replacement of the existing Wood Road ground sign and a refacing of the ground sign facing the highway, resulting in an aggregate signage total of 288.4 sq. ft. The existing Wood Road ground sign did not go before the ZBA. The existing ground sign facing the highway will not be changed in terms of size. • 135-904.2 (A)(5)(b): The Braintree Zoning Bylaw states “No wall sign shall exceed four feet in overall height.” The proposed north facing “Best Western” sign is 6 ft. 3 in. in overall height. The proposed east facing “Best Western” sign is 5 ft. in overall height. The excessive height of both wall signs is caused by the large proposed “BM” logo/emblems. The proposed “Best Western” lettering is 30” on the north and 24” on the east facing wall sign. • 135-904.2 (A)(5)(c): The Braintree Zoning Bylaw states “No wall sign shall be visible to the major highway, if a ground sign has been permitted.” The proposed east & north facing “Best Western” signs are visible to the highway. • 135-904.2 (A)(5)(e): The Braintree Zoning Bylaw states “Sign area is further limited to one square foot of signage per linear foot of frontage. Said frontage shall be the Town of Braintree ZBA Meeting Minutes September 25, 2017 15  linear feet of the building which faces the access roadway.” The linear feet of the building facing Wood Road is 57.2 ft., where the total sq. ft. of wall signage is 149.26 sq. ft. The aggregate of all wall signs and ground signs is 439 sq. ft. As grounds for the variances, the petitioner discussed the building is uniquely situated and positioned. The building does not directly face the main access road (Wood Road) and is located at a much higher elevation than the adjacent highway. The proposed signage will be smaller in size and scale than the previous Holiday Inn Express signage. Namely, the proposed Wood Road ground sign will be smaller and the proposed wall signs will be smaller. The petitioner presented signage plans entitled “Best Western”, sheets 1-3, dated May 22, 2016, and prepared by Cummings. The petitioner also presented a signage plan for the rear ground sign, prepared by I.D. Sign Group of Easton, MA. The Planning Board submitted a recommendation to endorse the staff recommendation of approval with conditions: 1.) Proposed “Best Western” wall sign logos/emblems to not exceed 5 ft. in height; and 2.) Prior to the issuance of a final occupancy permit for the Best Western, petitioner shall remove all shipping/storage containers from the property. No one else at the Zoning Board of Appeals spoke in favor of or opposition to the petition. Findings The Board found that the proposed signage, when analyzed in relationship to the building and previous tenant signage, is appropriate in design, size and scale. The Board found the location of the hotel is uniquely situated as the front entrance to the hotel is perpendicular to the access roadway. In addition, the Board found that the petitioner had demonstrated the need for relief from the Zoning By-law as the proposed wall signs are necessary to identify the location of the business and for the traveling public to be safely directed to the businesses. Lastly, the Board found that the wall signs would be well designed, appropriate in terms of size and consistent with the architectural style of the existing building. As a result, the Board found relief can be granted without resulting in a substantial detriment to the public good and will not nullify the intent of the Zoning By-law. Decision On a motion duly made and seconded, the Board unanimously (3-0) voted to grant the requested variance from Bylaw Section 135-904.2, pursuant to Bylaw Section 135-407 and 908, in accordance with the plans submitted. 7) Petition Number: 17-43 Petitioner: K. Ingber, Tr. Wood Road Nominee Trust and Wood Road Realty LLD RE: 290 Wood Road The Board, after discussion regarding the petitioners pending application for a Special Permit for a digital billboard through the Planning Board, asked the petitioner to continue the public hearing to November 27, 2017. The petitioner agreed to the public hearing extension. On a motion made and seconded, the Board voted 3-0 to continue the public hearing to November 27, 2017. Town of Braintree ZBA Meeting Minutes September 25, 2017 16 APPROVAL OF MINUTES: On a motion made and seconded, the Board voted 5-0 to accept the September 25, 2017 meeting minutes. The Board adjourned the meeting at 9:30 pm. Town of Braintree ZBA Meeting Minutes September 25, 2017 17