Zoning Board of Appeals

Board of APPEALS 166 Boulder ZONING Drive – Suite 108 Fitchburg, Massachusetts MINUTES May 10, 2016 ATTENDANCE: Lauren McNamara-Chair, Michael McLaughlin – Co-Chair, Joseph Byrne Nichols Squailia, Anna Phillips & Anthony Zarrella 1. Call to Order LM Pledge of Allegiance: 2. Communications: Attendance: LM, MM, JB, NS, AP & AZ 3. Hearings 6:00PM ZBA-2014-19 William F. Walsh 1-3 PROSPECT ST Open Hearing: LM – This is a continuance for deliberations from December, 1 and 3 Prospect St. We went over issues that were agreed upon by the owners. Ann Saalbach, owner of 3 Prospect. She was at the meeting and said she would be willing to remove the meters if it was the last obstacle to a resolution. It is not the last, there are more issues that have to be met. It will cost over $3,000 to remove the meters. Don’t think it will make any difference if she does it. LM – Tried to address all of the issues and things that needed to be changed. Other items that effect you? Ann Saabach – media wires, violation for various reasons of the parking. LM – this is a statement, we do not expect you personally to take care of those items. Ann Saalbach – If we are in violation of zoning and I receive a notification stating what I am in violation of, I will then make changes. We are all trying to be cooperative. It seems that there is always something else that must be done. LM – All the issues addressed in the ZBA Decision was to make other departments aware of the issues that need to be addressed, because some of the issues are not under the jurisdiction of the ZBA. Building Commissioner, Robert Lanciani – you ruled to uphold my decision. JB – No 2-family was ever mentioned. This is two single-family condo units. Building Commissioner – By State Building Code, a building that has 2 condominiums in it, the definition is a 2-family home. Speaking with Vincent Pusateri, City Solicitor, this property is in a Residential A-2 District and dimensional requirements for parking do not exist and can be right up to the property line. Any parking they choose on their property is in compliance with zoning. When there are multiple variations in the zoning ordinance we go with the least restrictive. William Walsh – If there are 2 condo units you consider it a 2 family and you are wrong. LM – Recording of the building not being sold as a two-family with the Registry of Deeds. The Building Dept. has not recorded it. It is in the hand of the Law Dept. Referred immediately to legal, do not feel they have as yet something appropriate to be recorded. William Walsh – The recording is redundant, the deed is restrictive. The original deed states that is a single family and the assessment is single family units. LM – The decision has been made and it is in the findings. Will be revisiting this at a meeting this Friday. Would like to have this put out two months and revisit it in July. Lady from the Disability Commission spoke in regard to the lack of visibility crossing from Mechanic to Prospect and she cannot be seen on her scooter. As of July, the Farmer’s Market will be downtown and it is an accident waiting to happen. William Walsh – Some Department should be seeing that the findings should be adhered to. LM – Meeting with the Mayor on Friday to find out who should be addressing the issues mentioned in the findings. JB - Motion on ZBA-2014-19 to continue the deliberations to July 12, 2014 at 6:00PM AZ – Motion Seconded VOTE: 5-0 GRANT of a Continuance 6:15PM ZBA-2015-04 Michael Longley 402 BROAD ST LM – Review of a Special Permit to conduct a construction, excavation and demolition business in the Industrial District. Property looks great. JB – Looks good Conditions were gone over at this time and it was found that the petitioner is adhering to all conditions. LM – Wood pile in the back? Michael Longley uses it to heat the building. Rite of Way has two gates and goes both ways. LM – Are there any conditions that you would like to see adjusted? NS – Have you been in touch with Sebastian in regard to the easement? He has not mentioned it. MM – Actually, Orlando’s on River Street is encroaching onto Kimball Place. Those Seeking Information: None Those Opposed: None Those in Support: None Hearing Closed: Deliberations: Board chose to strike #1 and move up with #11 - Not to be operated as a nuisance (moved to #10 to keep sunset clause in same place at #11). MM – Motion on ZBA-2015-04 to approve the Review of the Special Permit with the amended conditions as previously stated. 1. No outside storage of construction materials/debris/hazardous materials 2. No vehicle repairs to be done outside of the building 3. No storage of unregistered vehicles outside 4. No parking and or loading on the street 5. Repair the remaining barbed wire 6. Remove all debris stored on the property 7. Repair all fence panels 8. All vehicles or heavy equipment to be stored at the rear of the fenced-in area in an orderly fashion 9. Rite of Way – Remove logs/Replace with locked gates on both sides 10. Not to be operated as a nuisance 11. Sunset Clause – Special Permit to expire/terminate upon the sale/transfer of the property and/or change in ownership/operator from Michael Longley JB – Motion Seconded VOTE: 5-0 APPROVE the Review with amended conditions 6:30PM ZBA-2012-23 Fitchburg Public Schools 140 ARN HOW FARM RD LM- Review of a Variance for an electronic reader board sign located in the Rural Residential District. Robert Jokala, Assistant Superintendent of Finance Fitchburg Public Schools, stated that the sign is working great. They have not received any negative comments from the neighborhood. The school is adhering to all of the conditions placed upon the Variance. LM – Now that the sign is up, have the plantings been finished? Robert Jokala – Do not remember anything about plantings. Those Seeking Information: None Those Opposed: None Those In Support: None MM – Great sign. At the last hearing we spoke about no flashing, blinking or video of the sign to be sensitive to the abutters. Would assume if it bothered them, they would have contacted the school or the city. Hearing Closed: Deliberations: Board had no questions: Board wants to strike the review making #7 Not to be operated as a nuisance. MM – Motion on ZBA-2012 to approve the Review with the above stated change JB – Motion Seconded VOTE: 5-0 APPROVE the Review with amended conditions: 1. No flashing/blinking, or video of sign 2. Size and location of sign to be as plan submitted 3. Public Service announcements to be included in the text, such as: time, temp and amber alerts 4. Sign to be maintained in good condition and repair 5. Sign to meet D.O.T. standards 6. Sign to be vandal proof 7. No to be operated as a nuisance 6:45PM ZBA-2012-22 Fitchburg Public Schools 111 GOODRICH ST Robert Jokala - Sign is working well. There has been no problems with the neighbors. This sign is one sided. Board had no questions at this time. Want to keep to the hours of operation. Those Seeking Information: None Those Opposed: None Those in Support: None Board had no concerns with the sign. LM – As long as we are keeping to the hours of operation will have no concerns and keep the neighbors happy. Strike the review and move them up. 1. No flashing, blinking, or video of sign 2. Size and location of sign to remain as the existing sign  3. Public Service announcements to be included in the text, such as: time, temp and amber alerts 4. Sign to be maintained in good condition and repair 5. Sign to meet D.O.T. standards 6. Sign to be vandal proof 7. Not to be operated as a nuisance 8. Hours of Operation: Mon-Thurs 12:00PM-8:00PM Fri. 10:00AM-3:00PM No Weekends MM – Motion on ZBA-2012-22 to Approve the Review of the sign striking #7 for a Review JB – Motion Seconded VOTE: 5-0 APROVE the Review with amended conditions 7:00PM ZBA-2014-13 Carstar Atlantic Auto Body 120 JOHN FITCH HWY LM – We have received a request from Justin Blaisdell, Coo/General Manager Fitchburg, to postpone his hearing to June (Exhibit 1). JB – Moiton on ZBA-2014-13 to continue the hearing to the June 14, 2016 meeting MM – Motion Seconded VOTE: 5-0 GRANT a Continuance of the Review to June 14, 2016 7:15PM ZBA-2015-02 Karen Stroparro 158 AIRPORT RD Karen Stroparro stated that she is making progress now that the weather is better. She has removed an underground 8.000 gal. oil tank. They have been working on the outside grounds and around the wetlands, using regrind asphalt. There are some trees along Airport Rd that she is keeping. When they are in bloom, you do not see much into the yard. She is putting in sprinkler system, handicap bathrooms have been worked on and stucco work in front. She doesn’t want any scrap metal to be seen from the street. Getting the right people to do the work has been a challenge. LM – Would like to put this case on for 6 months to get an update, review in November 22, 2016. Karen Stroparro - Would like her employees to park on the left side and have the drop-offs on the right. Condition #12 that only left hand turns can be made out of the driveway causes trucks leaving to cross traffic on Airport Road. She knows the owner of the mall had a concern with them going by, but trucks travel back and forth on Airport Road all day long. Also, would like to change the location of the scrap and fencing. LM – We will review the plan and consider revising and modifying conditions and review a parking plan at the next meeting, June 14, 2016. MM – Motion on ZBA-2015-02 for a continuance to June 14, 2016 for the review JB- Motion Seconded VOTE: 5-0 GRANT a Continuance 7:30PM ZBA-2013-05 Mark A. Cordio 672 WATER ST LM – Business is going well? Mike Cordio – Yes. LM – Review of the conditions of the Special Permit. #12 – Storage container is not screened, but has been painted to match the building. Petitioner has met the conditions placed upon the Special Permit. Petitioner had no request for changes to any of the conditions at this time. Those Seeking Information: None Those Opposed: None Those in Support: None Hearing Closed: Deliberations: LM – Would strike #8 for a review and #13 MM – Motion on ZBA-2013-05 to Approve the Review of the Special Permit with amended conditions: 1. Sunset Clause - Special Permit will expire/terminate upon the transfer/sale of business and/or change in ownership/operation by Mark A. Cordio 2. No outside storage of auto parts, materials and equipment or inoperable vehicles 3. No drop-off boxes 4. Maximum number of cars for sale – 27, with other spaces provided for employees and customers 5. Mark Line 3’ from City property line 6. No plastic banners or unprofessional signage 7. Hours of Operation: Monday-Saturday 8:00AM-7:00PM Closed Sunday 8. Business not to be operated as a nuisance 9. 10 Plan as submitted on May 12, 2015 10. Dumpster to be kept to the rear of the property 11. Storage container shall be screened by fencing and painted to match the building located on the property JB – Motion Seconded VOTE: 5-0 APPROVE the Review of the Special Permit 7:45PM ZBA-2010-07 Paula Curran/ Camp Curious Canine 245 CRAWFORD ST Paula Curran stated that business is good. She is planning on keeping it small. LM – Reviewing the conditions of the Special Permit the Board found that Camp Curious Canine is in compliance with all of its conditions. Those Seeking Information: None Those Opposed: None Those In Support: None Paula Curran – The biggest complaint from her customers is the trucks going by and the trash along the road. Hearing Closed: Deliberations: LM - With condition #6: Not be operated as a nuisance, the Board will not put this case on for another review.  MM – Motion on ZBA-2010-07 to Approve the Review of the Special Permit 1. No overnight dog care without further relief from the Zoning Board of Appeals 2. Special Permit will expire upon sale/transfer of the business from owner Paula Curran 3. Dumpster will be stored on the property, screened from the public and emptied weekly 4. The 9 parking spaces shown on the plan submitted with the petition will be lined 5. Hours of Operation: 6:30AM-9:00PM Monday-Friday & 9:00AM-12:00PM Saturday 6. Not to be operated as a nuisance JB – Motion Seconded VOTE: 5-0 APPROVE the Review 8:00PM ZBA-2015-18 South Coast Development, LLC 487 PRINCETON RD Dominic Brown stated that they have broken ground and even with the delay, they are still on schedule. They are hoping to be done by the end of July to open for the beginning of August. The lot is shaping up, the foundation is in the ground and he needs another month to complete. Would like to take a site walk with the Board members and any neighbors that would like to attend. He believes that will give everyone a better idea of the appropriate screening necessary. He is trying to be a good neighbor. He has a temporary fence in front of the property and will add one in the back for the abutters. The end result will be adequate screening from the neighbors and the street. LM – You would be willing to come back in June to discuss the progress? Mr. Brown – Yes. NS – Will the basin area change? Mr. Brown – Yes, that will be one of the changes. Thanh Nguyen at 459 Princeton Road – Next door and has concerns about the drainage. The plan showing the retention pond and drainage was reviewed. Mr. Nguyen explained how the water run-off has progressed through the property in the past and now that the land has been built up, he is concerned that this will cause an excessive amount of water to run into his property. Looking at the plan it seems that the pond will be much higher than the grade of his yard. Mr. Brown stated that he will address this issue with his engineer to make sure that this will not cause a problem for the neighbor. LM – Shall we move for a continuance for Mr. Brown to obtain more information from his engineer and for the site walk. MM – Motion on ZBA-2015-18 to continue the hearing to the June 14, 2016 meeting NS – Motion Seconded VOTE: 5-0 GRANT a Continuance 8:15PM ZBA-2016-10 Matthew A . & Janna L. Jewett 40 LOISELLE AV Matthew Jewett stated that there has been no changes made to the accessory apartment and the same occupants are using it. Those Seeking Information: None Those Opposed: None Those In Support: Steven Peters of 1184 Oak Hill Rd – you would never know there was an apartment in the home.  AZ – Cannot tell there is another unit in the structure. NS – Thumbs-up Board had no questions: Hearing Closed: Deliberations: MM – They continue to meet the criteria for the Special Permit under §181.34. JB – Motion to Grant the continued use of an Accessory Apartment with original conditions 1. Property not to be sold/conveyed as a 2-family 2. Special Permit expires in 5 years and must be renewed prior to expiration 3. Special Permit will terminate upon the transfer/sale of the property 4. Dwelling is to be owner occupied 5. Accessory Apartment is to occupied by a relative of the owner 6. In all other respect, use of the accessory apartment shall comply with §181.34 of the City of Fitchburg Zoning Ordinance MM – Motion Seconded VOTE: 5-0 GRANT of the Special Permit with Conditions 8:30PM ZBA-2016-11 Joseph A. Gagne 10 BRANDON AV Attorney James Buchannon stated that the request is within inches of the property line. The existing house is over 125 years old and has a very steep slate roof which is creating a hazardous condition on the steps in the winter. This request is really about safety. The uncovered deck is not in violation, but in order to make it safe a roof needs to be added which will put the request at a .2’+/- to the property line. Those Seeking Information: None Those Opposed: None Those In Support: None AP – Because it is not really changing the distance of the existing deck, making it safer by putting on a roof and will not impede light to the neighbors, I would not have a problem with it. NS – The retaining wall belongs to the neighbors? Mr. Gagne – Yes. NS – Will you be putting on gutters so the water will not run on or into the retaining wall and deteriorate it any further. Mr. Gagne – Gutters do not work very well. MM – Have you thought of changing the roof material? Mr. Gagne – Would like to keep the slate roof, as it lasts forever. To replace it would be over $10,000. MM – Water needs to be kept away from neighbor’s retaining wall. Are the footings going to change? Attorney Buchannon – Only the footprint of the 12” sona tubes that will be holding up the roof. The deck footings are not strong enough to support a roof. JB – We have not received any communication from the neighbors. Hearing Closed: Deliberations: NS – Would be in favor with condition on drainage issue. MM – Under §181.9614 to meet the mandatory findings: Owing to the shape of the existing structure and its pre- existence to zoning and the lack of a roof over the deck and stairs being a safety issue, not granting the variance would be a substantial hardship. The grant of the variance will not derogate from the intent and purpose of this chapter. AZ – In favor with a condition for protective device to divert water from neighbor’s property. JB – Anything for safety. MM – Motion on ZBA-2016-11 to Grant a Variance leaving .2’+/- to the property line with the condition of a gutter to be added to prevent any water from entering the neighbor’s property. JB – Motion Seconded VOTE: 5-0 GRANT of a Variance with condition 8:45PM ZBA-2016-12 Kenneth Krapf 655 WESTMINSTER STREET Ruth and Kenneth Krapf stated that they want to display sheds on their property as displays. There will be 8-10 different styles on display and people with then order their choice and customize it as to windows, doors and roof styles. There will be no permanent structures added to the property. The top level will be renovated with a buffer of cement blocks. The pipes will be removed. The driveway goes into the lower lot then around and up to the upper level. They have owned the property for a long time. They do not feel that this will be detrimental to traffic or safety. Those Seeking Information: None Those Opposed: None Those In Support: None AZ – Having difficulty with the mandatory findings. This was a machine shop originally, but the sheds will only be for display. MM – We could put a sunset clause on the variance. NS – Could put in condition regarding the removal of propane takes and general debris on the property. Ruth Kapf – We will be cleaning up the property anyway or will not be enticing to potential customers. LM – You submitted a plan of the property, but it does not show the proposed location of the sheds or parking and traffic flow. We will need that to be able to make our decision. NS – This is request is a great idea. LM – Need a plan to show the setup, because it will become part of the decision. We can continue the hearing to June 14, 2016 for you to get a plan drawn and submit to us at the meeting. MM – Motion on ZBA-2016-12 to Continue the hearing to June 14, 2016 for further information JB – Motion Seconded VOTE: 5-0 GRANT a Continuance 9:00PM ZBA-2016-13 Steven Peters 1184 OAK HILL RD Melissa & Steven Peters had submitted with their application a certified plot plan showing that the shed would be over 50’ away from the front property line. It will also be on a terrace below the retaining wall which will block the view from the street. There is too much ledge in the rear yard to financially place the shed there. Three sides of the property is woods and he has 175’ of frontage along the road. Neighbors are literally a football field away. The shed is prefab and will arrive on a flatbed trailer and can be installed in about 5 hours. Those Seeking Information: None Those Opposed: None Those In Support: None Hearing Closed: Deliberations: MM - Due to the shape of the lot and the ledge in the rear it meets the criteria. AZ – The combination of ledge in rear and the natural barrier from the neighbors of the trees on 3 sides meets the criteria. Hearing Opened: MM – What will you be storing in the 240sq. ft. shed? Steven Peters – Vintage Mustang, snow thrower and other yard equipment. Hearing Closed: JB – Motion on ZBA-2016-13 to Grant a Variance per the plan submitted NS – Motion Seconded VOTE: 5-0 GRANT of a Variance 9:15PM ZBA-2016-14 Jeffrey Turcotte 129 CASCADE ST Jeffrey Turcotte stated that his front steps need to be replaced and he would like to do something nicer. He has 40’ to the curb, but that isn’t his property line and so he needs a 3’ variance. The kids are grown and out of the house and now it is time for upgrades. The farmer’s porch will be on the front only and will add to the aesthetics of the house. Those Seeking Information: None Those Opposed: None Those In Support: None JB – Think this will be a great project. NS – How will you get to your camper on the side of the property? Jeffrey Turcotte – This will not be a wrap-around porch, only in the front. MM – The development was put in at a certain time and the rest of the neighborhood already existed. You received a variance in 2000 and had this plan done. We may need a new plan for your proposal. Jeffrey Turcotte explained to the Board how he reached at the dimensional request using this plan and the porch will be leaving 23’ to the property line. LM – How long will the project take to start? Jeffrey Turcotte – It will start in the fall with a licensed contractor and should not take very long. Hearing Closed: Deliberations: AZ – The setback requirement is 30’ and the request will be leaving 23’ to the property line. There is an existing buffer between the property line and the street. The request for 7’ of relief seem minimal and literal enforcement of the ordinance would pose an undue hardship. MM – Love the concept. It will look great. The lot has a unique shape. The request will not be a detriment to the neighborhood. Are the vehicles in the rear of the property operable? Jeffrey Turcotte – Yes, operable, titled, but not registered. JB – Motion on ZBA-2016-14 to Grant a Variance to construct a farmers porch that will leave 23’ to the front property line. MM – Motion Seconded VOTE: 5-0 GRANT of the Variance 9:30PM ZBA-2016-04 Carlos B Terrero – Millennium Motors 34 BEMIS RD NS – Recused himself from this hearing Aaron Cosgrove stated that the lighting was one of the questions brought up at the last hearing and they are using the same lighting that had been approved for the previous tenants. At the present time they are only storing cars at this location. The petitioner submitted a plan drawn by McKenzie Engineering showing where the cars are parked. Mr. Cosgrove also argued that the neighborhood has changed from its industrial designation, owing to the fact that there are more commercial businesses and residential than industrial at the present time. This business will cause less traffic than the previous restaurant that had been allowed at this location. He believes it would be better to have a business there than to leave the lot empty. Those Seeking Information: None Those Opposed: None Those In Support: None LM – Sorry that you have put this much of an investment into the property. MM – Applicant is not the property owner and therefore there is no hardship. Applicant should do due diligence. You received a denial letter in November stating that this was not allowed in the Industrial District and you went ahead on your own and rented the space and put vehicles on it before getting the proper approvals. Mr. Cosgrove – This is the same piece of property that Haundai had about 200 cars on, just simple storage. MM – This had been Dickie”s Grillin’ for several years and before that it was a landscaping business. You have 30 of Mr. Terrero’s cars on the lot and we have to look at the intent. Mr. Cosgrove – He is in the process of cleaning out the cars and not one of them is ready for sale. LM – Can you tell us how you meet the criteria for us to be able to grant you a use variance. AZ –Part of the criteria is that you must meet all the conditions for a variance and the use. This lot is not unique in this zone – owing to shape, soil or topography. Your points are well taken and it is not a lack of will on our part to help you, but a lack of ability. The ordinance is very specific in regard to mandatory findings. AP – Would like to be in favor, but cannot see how you could meet the mandatory findings. Hearing Closed: Deliberations: LM – Cannot meet the mandatory findings for uniqueness in regard to soil conditions, shape or topography or hardship. JB – Believe it would fit well into the neighborhood. MM – You made an investment in the property without the proper approvals. It is like residential – “buyer beware”. This lends to there being no true financial hardship. To obtain a use variance there is an extremely strict criteria. We cannot change the zoning district and this use is not allowed in Industrial and unless the mandatory findings are met, we are bound to the guidelines of the zoning ordinance. AP – Agree with JB LM – Michael stated it very well, sorry you came this far and put that large of an investment into this before obtaining your approvals. MM – Motion on ZBA-2016-04 to Grant a variance as requested. AP – Motion Seconded VOTE: 2-3 (AZ MM LM) Motion DENIED 9:45PM ZBA-2016-08 Sebastian Cazard 34 KIMBALL PL Sebastian Cazard submitted a site plan for his proposed construction business. At this time petitioner and the Board went over the plan showing which building would be demolished. The landscaping with trees, and the location of the chain link fence. Outside storage was discussed last month. He has small equipment - 650’s. Kimball Place is in ill repair, but it is a City street. He is waiting for the demo people, but once they begin it will be 3-4 weeks and he will be operable. He will be moving from his other location once the work is done. LM – What are your hours of operation? Mr. Cazard – We leave the yard at 5:00AM and are out all day returning at 5:00PM. There will not be an office at this location, he does the office work in his home. Those Seeking Information: None Those Opposed: None Those In Support: Mary-Jo Bohart of Economic Development, stated that the new use will help to tidy up the property. The demolition will help remove some of the blight. MM – Had a chance to meet with the petitioner and he is making quite an investment in the property. This is a great project and will help in cleaning up the area. Also, this is a Special Permit and not a variance, we should put it on for a review. JB – I know the building and this is a great opportunity. We should bring him back in about 4 months for an update. Sebastian Cazard – That sounds reasonable. Hearing Closed: Deliberations: NS – In favor of the petition. It is too early to put on many conditions. Give him the four months and then we can discuss conditions. MM – This is a true revitalization and we should give him a chance before giving him a list of conditions. AP – I’m on board with this. AZ – Great way to end the night LM – One condition – Review in September MM – Meets the criteria for a Special Permit MM – Motion on ZBA-2016-08 to Grant the Special Permit for the construction business with storage of vehicles and materials with a review September 13, 2016 JB – Motion Seconded VOTE: 5-0 GRANT of the Special Permit with Review 4. MISCELLANEOUS 5. ADJOURNMENT MM – Motion to adjourn AZ – Seconded the motion All those in favor 6-0