Zoning Board of Appeals

CITY OF EASTHAMPTON ZONING BO ARD O F APPEALS 50 Payson Avenue, Easthampton, MA 01027 Meeting Minutes Wednesday, August 24, 2022 Board ✓ John Lindsie ✓ Matthew Tim Garceau Members: Atwater Alterkun Waugh ✓ (associate (chair) member) ✓ Steven ✓ Anthony ✓ Lisa Jaffe Lytwyn Karella (remote) (associate member) City officials: Jeff Bagg, City Planner, Eli Bloch, Assistant Planner; Other attendees: Ken Shapiro, Robin Cole, Logan Shapiro, Jessie Cole-Glod, Jeffrey Squire Meeting commenced at 6:00pm. Administrative Items  Correspondence/Requests for comment from other boards, committees, officials, etc.  No comments were received.  Public Comments / Public Speak   Meeting Minutes: 1/26/2022  Member Karella made a motion to approve the minutes, Member Lytwyn seconded. All voted in favor to approve the minutes. Public Hearings  1. Matthew Gawle - seeking to renew an expired variance to the side-yard setbacks for a non- residential structure in accordance with Section 13.1 of the Easthampton Zoning Ordinance. Subject property is located at 118 Union Street (parcel ID 53-22) and zoned Downtown Business (DB). Matthew Gawle the applicant was present representing himself. Chair Atwater gave an overview of the application, explaining that it was originally approved in February 2020 and recently expired. Chair Atwater asked the applicant if there were any changes from the previously approved variance and special permit. The applicant said that there were no changes to the site plan. Member Karella made a motion to approve the variance and special permit with the same conditions as the one previously granted. Member Waugh seconded. All voted in favor. Chair Atwater asked if there was anyone on the Board or members of the public who wished to speak on the matter. Seeing no, one, the Board proceeded to vote. All voted in favor. 1 of 4 Zoning Board of Appeals In favor Opposed Abstained Absent John Atwater ✓ Matt Waugh ✓ Lindsie Alterkun ✓ Anthony Karella ✓ Steven Lytwyn ✓ Lisa Jaffe (assosciate ✓ member) Tim Garaceau - (associate member)  2. Ken Shapiro - seeking a special permit and variance to modify and extend a pre-existing nonconforming commercial structure’s front and rear setbacks in accordance with Sections 11.13 & 13.1 of the Easthampton Zoning Ordinance. Subject property is located at 150 Northampton Street (parcel ID 128-100) and zoned Highway Business (HB). The Shapiro family including the applicant Ken, Robin, Logan, and other kid were present at the meeting. Jeff Squire of Berskhire Design Group was also present on behalf of the applicant. Jeff Squire began the presentation explaining the following:  The site is pre-existing non-conforming as the building already exceeds front and rear setbacks. That both setbacks are required to be 30’ but the existing rear setback is 16.3’, and the existing front setback is 18.5’.  The site previously hosted the national carpet and flooring business.  There are other revisions to the site including removing some impervious area to landscaping and garden space.  The project will also go to the Planning Board and to the Department of Transportation (DOT) for additional permits. Chair Atwater explained that if this were a residential project than this application would not require a variance or special permit as they were not increasing the non-conformity. Chair Atwater also explained that this permit was for just the building not for the use or other elements of the site plan. Chair Atwater read through the criteria for a special permit under section 11.13 of the zoning ordinance:  That the proposed alteration, extension or change complies with the zoning ordinance standards or has received a variance for such proposed alteration, extension or change from the ZBA;  That the proposed alteration, extension, or change will not be substantially more detrimental to the neighborhood than the existing nonconforming structure(s). Chair Atwater also stated that in order to issue a variance the Board would need to find that:  The variance is related to a particular existing building.  There must be circumstances relating to the soil conditions, shape or topography especially affecting such land or structure, but not affecting generally the zoning district in which it is located.  Literal enforcement of the ordinance would involve substantial hardship, financial or otherwise, to the petitioner or appellant. 2 of 4 Zoning Board of Appeals  Desirable relief may be granted if there will not be substantial detriment to the public good, or nullification or substantial derogation from the intent and purpose of this ordinance. Public Speak: Gwynne Morrisey the chair of the Economic Development and Industrial Commission (EDIC) stated that anything that could be done to support new businesses coming into town and whatever they need to do to those buildings to make sure that can sustain themselves and thrive in Easthampton is a good thing. She also stated that the rest of the EDIC is very much in favor. Member Garaceau asked about if the east elevation faced the street. Jeff Squire replied that it was the back of the building where there are several service entrances. Member Lytwyn asked if the applicant could provide an overview of what type of business this would be. Ken Shapiro provided the following information:  East Heaven first opned in Northampton in 1981.  They offered indoor and outdoor hot tubs, massage, and aesthetic treatments.  They have served over 1.25 million people.  There was a fire in their previous location due to a faulty gas heater.  They would like to do most of their hot tub business on the rooftop.  They never received a health code or noise complaint. Member Lytwn asked about a snack area, banquets, and events. Ken Shapiro stated:  They sold pre-packaged drinks.  While they have considered providing light fare, they are focused on re-opening the spa business.  They have not considered banquets.  They have considered possibly hosting conferences or small events like bridal showers.  Most parties that come to Eastheaven are 2-4 people. Chair Atwater read through the findings required for a variance and gave his opinion for why the application met each criteria including that:  The variance is in respect to a particular parcel.  There are unique circumstances related to the shape of the land.  The building pre-dates zoning and sets the precedent for the setback.  Desirable relief will not result in derogation or the intent of the ordinance. No other Board members spoke on the subject. Motion to Approve the Variance Member Karella made a motion to approve the variance. Member Lytwyn seconded. All voted in favor and the variance passed. In favor Opposed Abstained Absent John Atwater ✓ Matt Waugh ✓ Lindsie Alterkun ✓ Anthony Karella ✓ Steven Lytwyn ✓ Lisa Jaffe (assosciate ✓ member) 3 of 4 Zoning Board of Appeals Tim Garaceau - (associate member) Motion to Approve the Special Permit Member Karella made a motion to approve the special permit. Member Jaffe seconded. All voted in favor and the variance passed. In favor Opposed Abstained Absent John Atwater ✓ Matt Waugh ✓ Lindsie Alterkun ✓ Anthony Karella ✓ Steven Lytwyn ✓ Lisa Jaffe (assosciate ✓ member) Tim Garaceau - (associate member) Announcements & Discussion of the Board None. Member Karella made a motion to adjourn the meeting. Member Garaceau seconded. All voted in favor and the meeting adjourned at 6:32 PM. Next meeting September 28, 2022 4 of 4