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 November 27, 2017 IN ATTENDANCE: Stephen Karll, Chair Michael Calder, Member Michael Ford, 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: 17-34 Petitioner: Carl & Margaret Johnson RE: 1908 Washington Street The petitioner requested the initial public hearing to be continued to December 18, 2017. On a motion made and seconded, the Board voted 3-0 to continue the initial public hearing to December 18, 2017. 2) 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 December 18, 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 December 18, 2017. Town of Braintree ZBA Meeting Minutes November 27, 2017 1 NEW BUSINESS: 1) Petition Number: 17-46 Petitioner: William Wong RE: 18 Ellsworth Street The Board, after discussion regarding the potential impacts of the deck to the rear abutter, the Board asked the petitioner to continue the public hearing to December 18, 2017 to allow time for community support. 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 December 18, 2017. 2) Petition Number: 17-47 Petitioner: Haydar Ali RE: 284-286 Washington Street Haydar Z. Ali, 284 Washington Street, Braintree, MA 02184 for relief from Bylaw requirements under Chapter 135, Sections 135-403 and 701 to modify a two-family structure by constructing four (4) dormers and convert existing attic to living space. 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 284-286 Washington Street, Braintree, MA 02184 and is within a Residence B District Zone, as shown on Assessors Map 2026, Plot 08 and contains a total land area of +/- 9,583 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 November 27, 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 Ernesta Ali, the petitioner Haydar Ali’s wife, explained they are seeking to expand the living area in the attic area by constructing four shed dormers (two dormers on each side). The dormers would be 10 ft. wide. The conversion would provide additional living space by the way of two bedrooms, a bathroom and additional storage space. The existing building is a two- family dwelling. Chairman Karll asked Ms. Ali if they are living or intend to live in the building. Ms. Ali discussed they purchased the building in January 2017 and live in the second floor unit. They highlighted they need additional living space for their growing family. The first floor unit is rented out. Mr. Ford stated he would like to proposed a condition that any conversion of the existing two-family dwelling to a three-family dwelling will need the necessary approvals from the Town of Braintree. Furthermore, the petitioner highlighted the building is very old (circa 1820) and the second floor rooms are very small. Lastly, Ms. Ali stated the proposed dormers will not be overtly large and are appropriately scaled. The petitioner's existing lot is nonconforming, as it contains 9,440 sq. ft., where 15,000 sq. ft. is required. The petitioner's existing two-family dwelling is nonconforming as to the front Town of Braintree ZBA Meeting Minutes November 27, 2017 2 yard setbacks; the structure is located 15.7 ft. from the front yard lot line on Washington Street and 12 ft. from the front yard lot line on School Street West, while the Zoning Bylaw requires a front yard setback of 20 ft. The petitioner's existing two-family dwelling is also nonconforming as to the rear yard setback; the structure is located 11.8 ft. from the rear yard lot line, while the Zoning Bylaw requires a rear yard setback of 30 ft. Furthermore, the petitioners’ existing two- family dwelling is pre-existing nonconforming as to the use as a two-family dwelling in not allowed in a Residence B Zoning District. The proposed dormer additions 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 proposed dormers will not be overtly large and are appropriately scaled. Furthermore, the proposed addition will not expand the existing footprint or create any new zoning non-conformity. As such, the proposed additional living area will not be more detrimental to the neighborhood. The petitioner presented the plot plan entitled "Plan of Land in Braintree, Massachusetts, 284-286 Washington Street”, dated June 5, 2017, and prepared by CS Kelley Land Surveyors of Pembroke, MA. The petitioner also presented architectural and floor plans entitled “Existing Attic Plan, Proposed Attic & Roof Plan”, “Existing Elevations” and “Proposed Elevations”, labeled sheets A1-A3, dated September 20, 2017, and prepared by Ben Lee Architects of Westwood, 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 lot is pre-existing nonconforming in terms of lot area, as noted above. In addition, the Board found that the two-family dwelling is pre-existing nonconforming in terms of the front yard setbacks on Washington Street and School Street West, and the rear yard setback. Also, the Board found the existing two-family dwelling is pre-existing nonconforming in terms of the two-family use. 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 dormers 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 with a condition that any change in use of the two-family dwelling be subject to the necessary approvals/permits required by the Town of Braintree. 3) Petition Number: 17-48 Petitioner: Liberty Bay Credit Union RE: 300 Granite Street Town of Braintree ZBA Meeting Minutes November 27, 2017 3  Liberty Bay Credit Union, 300 Granite Street, Braintree, MA 02184 (Property Owner, Sun Life Assurance Co. of Canada) for relief from Bylaw requirements under Chapter 135, Sections 135-407, 904.2 and 908 to install 47.5” x 73.5” illuminated directory ground sign. The applicant seeks a permit, variance and/or finding that the proposed alteration is not more detrimental to the neighborhood. The property is located 300 Granite Street, Braintree, MA 02184 and is within a Highway Business District Zone, as shown on Assessors Map 2040, Plot 13, and contains a land area of +/- 4.39 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 November 27, 2017 at 7 p.m. Sitting on this case for the Zoning Board of Appeals were: Richard McDonough, Michael Ford and Stephen Sciascia, Members; and Stephen Karll, Alternate. Evidence Attorney Frank Marinelli, representing the petitioners, explained Liberty Bay Credit Union is a tenant at 350 Granite Street, located on the third and fourth floors. To support the petitioners unique location, Attorney Marinelli discussed the petitioners are seeking relief to install a 47.5” x 73.5” illuminated monument-style directory ground sign. Mr. Marinelli added, an existing small monument directional ground sign is located in the middle of the office building’s parking area on the access roadway off of Granite Street. The existing directional ground sign and proposed new sign will not be visible from Granite Street, and barely visible from the access roadway. The petitioners seek the following variances/relief: • Variance from Section 135-904.2 (A)(1)(g) of the Braintree Zoning Bylaw, which 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 seeks to install an additional directory monument sign for Liberty Bay Credit Union. There is an existing, approved, small directory monument on the north side of the building. As grounds for the variances, Attorney Marinelli explained to the Board, the building is uniquely situated. The building, which fronts Granite Street, is accessed off of an unnamed access/service roadway. It is located at a much lower elevation than Granite Street. Also, the petitioner highlights the building is heavily screened by the unmaintained vegetation along Granite Street. The building has many points of entry off of the access/service roadway, and is therefore confusing as to where the front entrance to Liberty Bay Credit Union is located. As such, the additional monument sign will increase visibility and direction to the general public. Furthermore, the proposed sign will be small in size and not visible from Granite Street. Town of Braintree ZBA Meeting Minutes November 27, 2017 4  The petitioners presented signage plans entitled “Liberty Bay Credit Union”, dated September 12, 2017, sheets 01 and 02, and prepared by Sign Design of Brockton, 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 sign, when analyzed in relationship to the building, 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 at a lower elevation than the main roadway. In addition, the Board found that the petitioner had demonstrated the need for relief from the Zoning By-law as the proposed additional monument style directory ground 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 proposed sign would be small and appropriately designed. 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 variances from the Bylaw Section 135-904.1 and 904.6 requirements, pursuant to Bylaw Section 135-407 and 908, in accordance with the plans submitted. 3) Petition Number: 17-49 Petitioner: Shao C. Loke RE: 31 Faxon Street Shao C. Loke, 31 Faxon Street, Braintree, MA 02184 for relief from Bylaw requirements under Chapter 135, Sections 135-403 and 701 to construct a one-story front addition (120 sq. ft.) and convert existing 1-story single family dwelling (1,596 sq. ft. existing building footprint) to a 2-story dwelling. 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 31 Faxon Street, Braintree, MA 02184 and is within a Residence B District Zone, as shown on Assessors Map 3022, Plot 05 and contains a total land area of +/- 7,287 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 November 27, 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 Jim Cheng, the petitioner’s architect, on behalf of the petitioner Shao Loke and her husband, explained they are seeking to construct a full second story addition of approximately Town of Braintree ZBA Meeting Minutes November 27, 2017 5 1,596 gross living sq. ft. and a one-story 128 sq. ft. front addition. The existing dwelling has a building footprint of +/- 1,596 sq. ft. The existing layout provides three bedrooms, living room, dining room, kitchen, mechanical room and two bathrooms. The proposed project will reconfigure the first floor to provide an attached one-car garage, master bedroom/bathroom, an open concept living/dining room/kitchen, bathroom and mechanical room. The new second story would provide two bedrooms, a reading room, bathroom and additional master bedroom/bathroom. There would not be a walk-up attic. There is no basement. Furthermore, Mr. Chen discussed the property is unique as it does not have any official frontage on a public street. 31 Faxon Street has a 15 ft. right of way across the adjacent 35 Faxon Street property. Lastly, the petitioner highlighted the top of the existing first floor is almost at grade along the rear of the property. As such, there are not any windows on the rear of the dwelling, which faces south. Chairman Karll asked the petitioner’s about the staff’s recommendation to reduce the proposed second floor addition width by 12 ft. Mr. Cheng responded that the recommended reduction would cause a decrease to the number of proposed bedrooms. As the petitioner has a growing family, the reduction in living area, namely bedrooms, would negatively impact the proposed addition. Chairman Karll responded he did not have an issue with the proposed addition as it does not front Faxon Street and will be “tucked” away. Mr. Ford expressed he thought the proposed project was “a lot of house” for the small property. After further discussion, the Board member agreed that the property is setback from the street and will not negatively affect the immediate area due to the dwelling’s discrete location. The petitioner's existing lot is nonconforming, as it contains only 7,287 sq. ft., where 15,000 sq. ft. is required, provides only 99.73 ft. of lot width, where 100 ft. is required, provides 0 ft. of lot frontage, where 50 ft. is required, and provides only 75 ft. of lot depth, where 100 ft. is required. The petitioner's existing single family dwelling is nonconforming as to the side yard setbacks; the dwelling is located 1.1 ft. from the left yard lot line and 3 ft. from the right yard lot line, while the Zoning Bylaw requires a side yard setback of 10 ft. The petitioner's dwelling is also nonconforming as to the rear yard setback; the dwelling is located 1.6 ft. from the rear yard lot line, while the Zoning Bylaw requires a rear yard setback of 30 ft. The proposed alteration/additions will 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 proposed addition will mostly be built within the existing, nonconforming building footprint, except for a 128 sq. ft., one-story front addition. Secondly, the petitioner noted the addition will be similar to the existing neighborhood architectural characteristics and be 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, Massachusetts, 31 Faxon Street”, dated September 20, 2017 and revised October 24, 2017, and prepared by CS Kelley Land Surveyors, Pembroke, MA. The petitioner also presented existing and proposed architectural and floor plans, sheets X-1 thru X-3 and A1-A5, dated May 19, 2017, and prepared by JCrchitect of Quincy, 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. Town of Braintree ZBA Meeting Minutes November 27, 2017 6  Findings The Board found that the lot is pre-existing nonconforming in terms of lot area frontage, depth and width, as noted above. In addition, the Board found that the single family dwelling is pre-existing nonconforming in terms of the left, right and rear yard setbacks. 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: 17-51 Petitioner: Heather Dudko RE: 170-180 Pearl Street Heather Dudko, 2 Phoebe Way, Worcester, MA 01605 (Property Owner, Ivory Plaza LTD Partnership) for relief from Bylaw requirements under Chapter 135, Sections 135-407, 904.2 and 908 to install one (1) 233.1 sq. ft. illuminated wall sign, one (1) 2.5 sq. ft. illuminated under canopy sign and two (2) tenant panels on existing directory ground signs for tenant HomeGoods. The applicant seeks a permit, variance and/or finding that the proposed alteration is not more detrimental to the neighborhood. The property is located 180 Pearl Street, Braintree, MA 02184 and is within a Highway Business District Zone, as shown on Assessors Map 1029, Plot 18, and contains a land area of +/- 7.28 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: Michael Ford, Stephen Sciascia and Richard McDonough, Members; and Stephen Karll, Alternate. Evidence Hazel Wood Hopkins, mother and business partner of the petitioner Heather Dudko, explained that HomeGoods is seeking to provide signage for the currently under construction new retail store. Along with TJ Maxx and HomeStyles, HomeGoods will occupy the space utilized by Cardi’s Furniture at Ivory Plaza. Signage for TJ Maxx and HomeStyle are separate petitions. HomeGoods is seeking to install one (1) 233.1 sq. ft. illuminated wall sign, one (1) 2.5 sq. ft. illuminated under canopy sign and two (2) tenant panels on existing directory ground signs for tenant HomeGoods. Chairman Karll and Mr. Ford expressed they did not have an issue with the proposed sizes of the wall signs, as the retail location is unique and not highly visible. In addition, they would like to support Braintree’s existing retail tenants. Furthermore, Mr. Sciascia noted that the former tenant’s signage was larger in terms of height. Town of Braintree ZBA Meeting Minutes November 27, 2017 7  The petitioners seek the following signage variances: • Variance from Section 135-904.2 (A)(5)(a): The Braintree Zoning Bylaw states “No wall sign shall exceed 150 square feet.” The proposed HomeGoods wall sign is 233.1 sq. ft. (6’ x 38’10.25”) • Variance from Section 135-904.2 (A)(5)(b): The Braintree Zoning Bylaw states “No wall sign shall exceed four feet in overall height.” The proposed HomeGoods wall sign is 6 ft. in height. • Variance from Section 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 Petitioner is seeking to add signage on the existing directory ground sign. In this case, both the ground sign facing Pearl Street and the proposed wall sign would be visible to Pearl Street (the “major highway”). • Variance from Section 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 linear feet of the building which faces the access roadway.” The linear frontage of the under construction HomeGoods retail space is +/-94 ft. The aggregate area of the wall sign and hanging directory sign is 235.6 sq. ft. • Variance from Section 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 linear frontage of the under construction HomeGoods retail space is +/-94 ft. The aggregate area of the wall sign and hanging directory sign is 235.6 sq. ft. As grounds for the variances, the petitioner noted the large “brick & mortar” stores are located up on a hill and difficult to see from the major roadway (Pearl Street). The location is also a large distance from Pearl Street. In addition, the proposed signage will not be oriented or be visible to any immediate residential areas. The petitioner discussed the new signage will be scaled appropriately relative to the new proposed facades. Comparatively, past ZBA signage cases for the location have included wall signs that were 6’ and 8’ in height. Also, while the total proposed signage square footage is larger than the linear frontage, the actual font size of all signage is slim in nature, and will be appropriately designed. As evidenced by the prior ZBA approvals noted above, the proposed signage will be consistent with previously granted variances. The petitioner presented signage plans entitled “TJ Maxx/HomeGoods”, dated June 7, 2017, August 2, 2017 and prepared by American Sign, Inc. The Planning Board submitted a recommendation to endorse the staff recommendation of approval with conditions: 1.) No sign illumination from 1am-6am, pursuant to Section 135-905. No one else at the Zoning Board of Appeals spoke in favor of or opposition to the petition. Town of Braintree ZBA Meeting Minutes November 27, 2017 8  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 retail store is uniquely situated higher than the primary roadway and setback significantly. 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 and the condition of no sign illumination from 1am-6am, pursuant to Section 135-905. 5) Petition Number: 17-52 Petitioner: Heather Dudko RE: 170-180 Pearl Street Heather Dudko, 2 Phoebe Way, Worcester, MA 01605 (Property Owner, Ivory Plaza LTD Partnership) for relief from Bylaw requirements under Chapter 135, Sections 135-407, 904.2 and 908 to install one (1) 291.5 sq. ft. illuminated wall sign, one (1) 2.5 sq. ft. illuminated under canopy sign, two (2) 4.6 sq. ft. column signs and two (2) tenant panels on existing directory ground signs for tenant TJ Maxx. The applicant seeks a permit, variance and/or finding that the proposed alteration is not more detrimental to the neighborhood. The property is located 180 Pearl Street, Braintree, MA 02184 and is within a Highway Business District Zone, as shown on Assessors Map 1029, Plot 18, and contains a land area of +/- 7.28 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 November 27, 2017 at 7 p.m. Sitting on this case for the Zoning Board of Appeals were: Michael Ford, Stephen Sciascia and Richard McDonough, Members; and Stephen Karll, Alternate. Evidence Hazel Wood Hopkins, mother and business partner of the petitioner Heather Dudko, explained that TJ Maxx is seeking provide signage for its currently under construction new retail store. Along with HomeGoods and HomeStyles, TJ Maxx will occupy the space utilized by Cardi’s Furniture at Ivory Plaza. Signage for HomeGoods and HomeStyle are separate petitions. TJ Maxx is seeking to install one (1) 291.5 sq. ft. illuminated wall sign, one (1) 2.5 sq. ft. illuminated under canopy sign, two (2) 4.6 sq. ft. column signs and two (2) tenant panels on existing directory pylons. Town of Braintree ZBA Meeting Minutes November 27, 2017 9  Chairman Karll and Mr. Ford expressed they did not have an issue with the proposed sizes of the wall signs as the retail site’s property is location is unique and not highly visible and they would like to support Braintree’s existing retail tenants. They also did not have an issue with the proposed signage on the columns the petitioner has presented. Furthermore, Mr. Sciascia noted that the former tenant’s signage was larger in terms of height. The petitioners seek the following signage variances: • Variance from Section 135-904.2 (A)(5)(a): The Braintree Zoning Bylaw states “No wall sign shall exceed 150 square feet.” The proposed TJ Maxx wall sign is 291.5 sq. ft. (7’10” x 36’10.5”) • Variance from Section 135-904.2 (A)(5)(b): The Braintree Zoning Bylaw states “No wall sign shall exceed four feet in overall height.” The proposed HomeGoods wall sign is 6 ft. in height. • Variance from Section 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 Petitioner is seeking to add signage on the existing directory ground sign. In this case, both the ground sign facing Pearl Street and the proposed wall sign would be visible to Pearl Street (the “major highway”). • Variance from Section 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 linear feet of the building which faces the access roadway.” The linear frontage of the under construction TJ Maxx retail space is +/- 94 ft. The aggregate of all proposed wall signs is 303.2 sq. ft. • Variance from Section 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 proposal includes one (1) wall sign, one (1) hanging directory sign at the front entrance and two (2) column signs. The aggregate of all proposed wall signs is 303.2 sq. ft. As grounds for the variances, the petitioner noted the large “brick & mortar” stores are located up on a hill and difficult to see from the major roadway (Pearl Street). The location is also a large distance from Pearl Street. In addition, the proposed signage will not be oriented or be visible to any immediate residential areas. The petitioner discussed the new signage will be scaled appropriately relative to the new proposed facades. Comparatively, past ZBA signage cases for the location have included wall signs that were 6’ and 8’ in height. Also, while the total proposed signage square footage is larger than the linear frontage, the actual font size of all signage is slim in nature, and will be appropriately designed. As evidenced by the prior ZBA approvals noted above, the proposed signage will be consistent with previously granted variances. The petitioner presented signage plans entitled “TJ Maxx/HomeGoods”, dated June 7, 2017, August 2, 2017, and prepared by American Sign, Inc. The Planning Board submitted a recommendation to endorse the staff recommendation of Town of Braintree ZBA Meeting Minutes November 27, 2017 10 approval with conditions: 1.) No column signs; 2.) Wall sign to not exceed 6 ft. in height; and 3.) No sign illumination from 1am-6am, pursuant to Section 135-905;. 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 retail store is uniquely situated higher than the primary roadway and setback significantly. 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 and the condition of no sign illumination from 1am-6am, pursuant to Section 135-905. 5) Petition Number: 17-53 Petitioner: Manhoman Kumar Deva RE: 27 Howard Street Manmohan Kumar Deva, 131 Lakeside Drive, Braintree, MA 02184 for relief from Bylaw requirements under Chapter 135, Sections 135-403 and 701 to construct a 2.5 story, 60’ x 35’ single family dwelling with two car garage and attached 12’ x 24’ deck/3-season porch. 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 27 Howard Street, Braintree, MA 02184 and is within a Residence B District Zone, as shown on Assessors Map 3059, Plot 20 and contains a total land area of +/- 15,365.79 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 November 27, 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 Manmohan Kumar Deva, the petitioner, explained he is proposing to construct a new single family dwelling on an existing lot that is deficient with regard to lot width. The former single family dwelling, which was damaged by fire in December 2015 and razed, was Town of Braintree ZBA Meeting Minutes November 27, 2017 11 constructed in circa 1900 and had a building footprint of approximately 1,210 sq. ft. Mr. Kumar highlighted the property is entitled to an easement across 29 Howard Street to access the subject property. The new single family dwelling would be a 2.5 story, 60’ x 27’ single family dwelling with two car garage, 12’ x 19’ three-season room and 6’ x 12’ deck. The building footprint would be 2,772 sq. ft. The new dwelling will provide four bedrooms and three bathrooms. A walk-up attic and walk-out basement is proposed. The building height would be 34’3”. Chairman Karll asked the petitioner about the staff’s recommendation to reduce the proposed pitch as a means to decrease the overall height of the dwelling. The petitioner replied the proposed height is aesthetically pleasing and will be meet the building height requirements. Mr. Ford responded that the walk-out basement, which would require a reduction in grade, could negatively impact the overall building height calculation. The petitioner's existing lot is conforming, as the 53 ft. lot width received a variance in 2000 when the property was subdivided to create the adjacent 29 Howard Street property. However, the new single family dwelling will be larger in both building footprint and cubic content than the former single family dwelling. Accordingly, a finding is required pursuant to G.L. Chapter 40A, Section 6. As grounds for the finding, the petitioner noted the new single family dwelling will meet all the current setback, building height and coverage/open space requirements. In addition, the petitioner noted the addition will be similar in size to surrounding homes and not be more detrimental to the neighborhood. The petitioner presented the plan entitled "Existing Conditions Plan Showing Proposed Dwelling, 27 Howard Street, Braintree, Massachusetts”, dated November 6, 2017, and prepared by A.S. Elliott Associates of Hopedale, Massachusetts. The petitioner also presented floor plans and architectural renderings entitled “Design Elevations, Design Plans-First Floor, Design Plans-Second Floor”, labeled Prelim 1-4, dated November 6, 2017 and prepared by EcoModern Architecture LLC of Boston, MA. The Planning Board submitted a recommendation to endorse the staff recommendation of approval. Barbara and Jacek Argasinski, of 33 Howard Street, requested the petition to manage any storm run-off and prevent it from negatively affecting their property. No one else spoke in favor of or opposition to the petition. Findings The Board found that the lot is conforming based on the previous granted relief by the Board. However, the Board found that the new single family dwelling will be larger in both building footprint and cubic content than the former single family dwelling and therefore is subject to a finding. The Board also found that the proposed new single family dwelling will not create any new zoning non-conformity and in fact, meet the current zoning requirements for setbacks, building height and building/lot coverages. The Board further found that the proposed new single family dwelling will be designed appropriately and be comparable in size relative to the existing housing stock. Lastly, the Board found the proposed new dwelling will not be substantially more detrimental to the neighborhood than the former dwelling. Town of Braintree ZBA Meeting Minutes November 27, 2017 12  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 with the condition that the walk-out basement be removed from the proposal. 5) Petition Number: 17-54 Petitioner: FoxRock Properties, LLC RE: 350 Granite Street Foxrock Properties LLC, 150 Newport Avenue Extension, Quincy, MA 02171 for relief from Bylaw requirements under Chapter 135, Sections 135-403, 407, 701 and 806 to realign site entry/driveway, relocate loading docks and construct new courtyard and lobby; proposed changes will not meet the required building coverage and off-street parking requirements. The applicant seeks a permit, variance and/or finding that the proposed alteration is not more detrimental to the neighborhood. The property is located 350 Granite Street, Braintree, MA 02184 and is within a Highway Business District Zone, as shown on Assessors Map 2040, Plot 12, and contains a land area of +/- 7.5 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 November 27, 2017 at 7 p.m. Sitting on this case for the Zoning Board of Appeals were: Stephen Karll, Chairman; Michael Ford and Richard McDonough, Members; and Stephen Sciascia, Alternate. Evidence Attorney Frank Marinelli, on behalf of the petitioner Foxrock Properties, LLC, explained the petitioner is seeking to improve the existing office complex by realigning the site entry/driveway, relocating the loading docks and constructing a new courtyard and lobby. Foxrock Properties owns approximately two million sq. ft. of office/commercial property in the New England area. They purchased the 350 Granite Street property in 2016, which was originally built for New England Telephone. The existing office campus encompasses approximately 163,000 sq. ft. of office space, across two buildings. Attorney Marinelli described the proposed improvements are necessary to improve the desirability of the property. He noted one office building was constructed in approximately 1972 and the other in 1989. As far as the improvements, Mr. Marinelli described the only affected areas will be upgrades to the common areas of the buildings, as they are outdated as compared to other successful office complexes. The proposed new lobby will provide an additional 1,545 sq. ft. of building coverage. The site improvements will increase the amount of open space to 32.7% of the site. Lastly, the proposed realignment of the entry way to the property from the service road will vastly improve the vehicular entrance/egress safety The petitioner's existing structure is nonconforming as to the front yard setbacks; the building is located 38.72 ft. from the front yard lot line, while the Zoning Bylaw requires a front yard setback of 50 ft. The existing structure is also nonconforming as to the maximum building coverage; the building coverage is 28.6%, while the Zoning Bylaw requires a building coverage Town of Braintree ZBA Meeting Minutes November 27, 2017 13 of 25%. Furthermore, the building/property is nonconforming with regard to the off-street parking requirements; the property provides 602 off-street parking spaces, while the Zoning Bylaw requires 679 off-street parking spaces. However, the property has been granted prior variances by the ZBA for the existing nonconformities, namely the front yard, building coverage and off-street parking deficiencies (ZBA Case #07-30, 07-90). As such, the existing nonconformities are deemed conforming. However, variances are required, as the proposed new front lobby/site improvements will not meet the required building coverage requirements pursuant to Section 135-701. As far as the need for a building coverage variance, the proposed front lobby/site improvements will slightly increase the pre-existing nonconforming building coverage condition. The existing building coverage is 28.6% and will be increased to 28.8%. The maximum zoning requirement building coverage is 25%. Furthermore, the proposed improvements will reduce the number of off-street parking spaces from 602 to 591 off-street parking spaces. The Zoning Bylaw requires 679 off-street parking spaces. As grounds for the requested variances, Attorney Marinelli highlighted the 7.5 acre property is unique in nature due to the irregular shape (9 different lot lines). In addition, the petitioner has stated the front yard setback is a pre-existing nonconforming condition. The improvements to the existing office/commercial campus will not be substantially more detrimental, but conversely, the improvements are an upgrade to the business complex. He noted the office complex has had difficulty attracting office tenants due to the lack of typical modern office complex amenities. As such the petitioner is poised to spend a sizeable amount of capital to upgrade the office complex. Mr. Marinelli mentioned the increase to building coverage is di minimis in nature. Furthermore, he discussed the off-street parking deficiency is existing and the property/building has been granted previous ZBA relief. Lastly, the reduction of eleven off-street parking spaces will be negligible as the property continuously has an abundance of off-street parking spaces that are vacant/unused. The petitioner presented the plans entitled "Site Development Plans-350 Granite Street, Braintree, Massachusetts”, numbered C-1, C-1A, C-2, C-2A, C3, C4, L1/2 and L2/2 dated October 12, 2017, and prepared by Tetra Tech of Marlborough, MA. The petitioners also presented site plans and renderings, entitled “Proposed Master Plan & North Courtyard”, undated and prepared by Helicon Design Group Inc. of Boston, 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 hardship with respect to the irregularly- shaped lot. The Board also found the juxtaposition of the substantial buildings upon the irregular-shaped lot, and the proximity of certain wetlands and related buffer zone(s) presented a further hardship. The Board found that by granting the requested relief and variances, the proposed site improvements will significantly enhance the property, resulting in an office complex more aligned with typical office complex amenities. The Board also found that the proposed increase in building coverage due to the improvements were di minimis. The Board also found the existing front yard deficiency will not change as part of the proposed improvements. In addition, due to the proposed landscape improvements, the Board found the overall open space percentage will increased. Furthermore, the Board found the improvements will decrease the amount of off-street parking on the site. However, the Board found that the Town of Braintree ZBA Meeting Minutes November 27, 2017 14 site is highly “over parked” as there are continuously vacant off-street parking spaces and the off-street parking space reduction of 1.8% is not significant. The Board 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. Lastly, the Board also found unanimously that the proposed project is not substantially more detrimental to the neighborhood, but that the proposed project represents an improvement to a commercial site originally constructed in 1972 (west building) and 1989 (east building). Decision On a motion duly made by and seconded, the Board unanimously (3-0) voted to grant requested variances from Bylaw Section 135-701 for building coverage and off-street parking requirements, pursuant to Bylaw Section 135-407, in accordance with the plans submitted. APPROVAL OF MINUTES: On a motion made and seconded, the Board voted 5-0 to accept the October 23, 2017 meeting minutes. The Board adjourned the meeting at 9:00 pm. Town of Braintree ZBA Meeting Minutes November 27, 2017 15