Zoning Board of Appeals

12-8-11 mins. CITY OF TAUNTON ZONING BOARD OF APPEALS MINUTES (Held at Maxham School, 141 Oak St.) DECEMBER 8, 2011 at 5:30 PM Members Present: Chairman Ackerman, Berube, Wasylow, Joyce,Amaral.and Staples. Meeting called to order at 5:37 Pm. Peter made motion to accept minutes of 11-10 11 and 11-17-11, seconded by Wayne. All in favor. Chairman Ackerman explained how the meeting is run. The petitioner makes their presentation and then the opposition or in favor may speak. Then it goes back to the petitioner to allow response. The opposition doesn’t have the opportunity to speak again. The board will either vote or continue case. Case # 3047 – 228 Tremont St. – Requesting 6-month extension. Motion made and seconded to Grant 6-month continuance. Vote: Wasylow, Ackerman, Joyce , Berube, Amaral……Yes Petition granted 6-month extension Cont’d. Case # 3094 Apex Ventures LLC 802 Bay St. A Special Permit from Section 5.3.4 of the Zoning Ordinance to allow the extension/alteration of a pre-existing non-conforming use by allowing the addition of take-out pizza place to the existing retail use. Letter from Atty. Gay requesting to withdraw without prejudice. Motion made and seconded to allow petition to withdraw without prejudice. Vote: Ackerman, Berube, Wasylow, Joyce,Aamaral…..Yes Petition withdrawn without prejudice. Case # 3103 – Cabral – 390 Washington St. & 12 Jackson St. has been re-scheduled to January 12, 2012 meeting. Case # 3105 Moniz 39 Plain St. A Variance from Section6.3 of the Zoning Ordinance for the division of one lot into two without the required lot area, dry area and front, rear setbacks. Lot 203 having 4,583 sq ft. of lot area & dry area (instead of 15,000 sq. ft. and 11,250 sq. ft. dry area) Lot 203A having 4,333 sq. ft. of lot area & dry area (instead of 15,000 sq. ft. and 11,250 sq. ft. dry area) with a front yard setback of Atty. Gay requests a continuance until next month. Motion made and seconded to grant continuance. Vote: Berube, Ackerman, Wasylow, Amaral.Joyce…..Yes. Petition continued until January 12, 2012 meeting. Case #3104 Bliss 57R Worcester St. Hearing held on December 8, 2011 A Variance from Section 7.1.6 for an Agricultural structure setback from 300 feet to 150 feet. For the Petitioner: Craig Bliss, 57R Worcester St, Taunton, Ma. In favor: None Opposed: Peter & Laurinda Camara, 57 Worcester St., Taunton, Ma. Ryan Murphy, 62 Indian Trail, Taunton, Ma. Mike Stacey, 22 Short St., Taunton, Ma. Gilbert Wrigley, 53 ½ Worcester St., Taunton, Ma. Leo Murphy, 30 Feather Run, Taunton, Ma. John Medeiros, 14 Short St., Taunton, Ma. Cynthia Hudson, 57A Worcester St., Taunton, Ma. Mr. Bliss explains he wants to put horse barn with fenced area to the rear of his lot. He stated his proposal for the barn and fenced area to be 150 feet matching B.O.H. rules. He has 5 acre lot and he will b e 150 feet to the nearest house and 220 from the actual barn. He stated the manure will be stored to the right of the paddock area which is edge of 300 feet. The board asked how many horses? He stated between 2 -6. The barn could house 4 horses maximum. Wayne asked the size of the ban is 24’ x 25’ and he asked if there is enough room for 4 horses? Mr. Bliss answers yes, 4 12 x 12 stalls. The doors will be on the exterior and he also has to comply with building code. Mr. Bliss stated he doesn’t have any horses on site now. Wayne asked if the horses are for personal use and Mr. Bliss answers yes. Joe stated he received phone calls from neighbors with concerns. He asked if the entire site was wooded? Mr. Bliss answers from Short Street to barn is wooded. The paddock area is underbrush, more like a yard. Opposed: Peter Camara, 57 Worcester Street stated he hasn’t seen plans but he thinks 4 horses is excessive. He stated the petitioner’s dog comes over and they have had bad experience with horse in past. He wanted to know if he would be using the 20 foot ROW to walk horses? Opposed: Cynthia Hudson, 57A Worcester St. stated the ROW is in bad shape and Mr. Camara helps her maintain the ROW. She has gotten no help from petitioner. Her concerns were horseflies, upkeep of ROW and odor and will the horses run free like the dog? She has been there for a number of years and when her husband was alive the ROW was kept up. She was told when she bought property the upkeep of the ROW was hers. She stated it’s very tough to get fire truck down there. Wayne asked if Benevides used ROW? Mr. Hudson answers no, only her, Bliss and Camara use it. She cannot block them from using it. Wayne asked who had horse in past? She stated the owners of 61 Worcester St. abuts 57B Worcester St, 2 houses over in 1995. Opposed: Gilbert Wrigley, 53 ½ Worcester St., agrees with previous opposition. Opposed: Leo Murphy, 30 Feather Run also opposed. Opposed: John Medeiros, 14 Short St. stated he’s an abutter and has lived there for 50 years. He stated this property has been before the ZBA 3 times Case # 489 in 1973, Case # 1840, in 19921 and # 1886 in 1992. He brought to the Board’s attention in 1995 there was a deed correction in Bk. 476 Page 105 and he was wondering what changed? He was never notified of deed change? He referenced plan together with ROW? He suggested the title could be in question. He stated the old plans show ROW with 2 houses on it. The Board denied 2 requests to split lot into future lots. Wayne stated the ZBA in their previous decisions determined there is no frontage on Short Street. At this time Chairman Ackerman suggested the Board ask for stamped plans? He stated the petitioner had permission to submit unstamped plans but was informed the Board can request stamped plans if deemed necessary. Wayne stated the evidence by Ms. Hudson using the ROW and Mr. Medeiros commented on using 11 feet on Short Street. Wayne stated petitioner doesn’t have the authority to use Short Street. John asked Mr. Medeiros what his opposition was aside from the deed being corrected? Mr. Medeiros stated his concerns were the size of the barn, horses running wild and whose responsibility is it if they catch horse? Is the Board going to require fencing and this property is located on “dead man’s curve”. Peter wondered if the deed was changed should they have notified the ZB A? Wayne stated deeds are corrected all the time, some for clerical errors, etc. Wayne stated, after reading deed, the purpose of the amendment was to change the name of the Trust. Wayne stated the ZBA has historically denied access from Short Street in their previous decisions. Wayne stated they couldn’t create driveway on Short Street. Chairman Ackerman stated the plans looks official but the only thing missing is a stamp. Joe stated the 11 feet of Short Street is not supposed to be used as access. Opposed: Laurinda Camara, 57B Worcester Street stated her concerns were odor, horseflies, wetland, and plans? Opposed: Ryan Murphy, 62 Indian Trail, also stated there is standing water in back. Opposed: Mike Stacey, 22 Short St. asked the number of animals? Mr. Bliss stated he has 2 ROW’s, one across Hudson property and another in back (prop. I.D. 35-125) access to an old cranberry bog none out to Short Street. He drew plans himself according to the Reg. of Deeds docs and GIS. Wayne asked about fencing around paddock? Mr. Bliss stated he’s proposing a 5 foot wood top rail fence and 3 ‘ steel vinyl cable. The entrance to paddock will be from barn. He plans on cleaning and disposing of manure week and keeping it in sealed metal containers, per the BOH regs. John stated he heard testimony that dog runs loose ? Mr. Bliss answers he has 5 acre parcel and he had medium sized dogn and he lets out to relieve and comes back with a few minutes. Mr. Bliss states he has helped with maintenance of ROW, he snowblows it if it hasn’t been plowed. He stated what the neighbors said was not true. Mr. Bliss stated the horses will NOT be ridden on the ROW. Letters from the City Planner, Cons. Comm, B.O.H. and Water Dept. were read into the record. Motion made and seconded to grant with the following conditions:  The fencing, barn, and animals must meet all regulations of the City of Taunton Animal and Bird Regulation. As the plan reads it is in compliance with the Board of Health Setback requirements. It is required that all encampments must be at least 10 feet from all property lines and 150 feet from any dwelling. All feed must be stored in rodent proof containers and sit at least 2 feet above the ground. The exercise area shall be at least 1000 sq. ft. per animal. All waste and manure must be removed from the site at least once a week, no stockpiling will be allowed.  Maximum of 2 horse/ponies. Vote: Ackerman, Amaral, Wasylow, Berube, Joyce.....................No Petition Denied: Case #3106 DaSilva 85 Oak St. Hearing held on December 8, 2011 For: A Variance from Section 6.3 of the Zoning Ordinance for the division of one lot into two without the required frontage, lot area, lot width, dry area and front & side setbacks. Lot 1 having 5,739 sq. ft. lot area & dry area (instead of 15,000 sq. ft. lot area and 11,250 sq. ft. of dry area with 86.95 feet of frontage & lot width (instead of 100’); Lot 2 having 4,161 sq. ft. of lot area & dry area (instead of 15,000 sq. ft. & 11,250 sq. ft. dry area) 63.05 feet of frontage & lot width (instead of 100’) with a 9 & 10 foot front setback (instead of 25’) and 2 side setbacks of 9 feet (instead of 15’) and a rear setback of 16 feet (instead of 20’) For the Petitioner: Paul Patneaude, P.E., 198 Crane Ave., South, Taunton, Ma. In favor: Daniel & Elizabeth Costa, 5 Hern Ave., Taunton, Ma. Opposed: James Moran, 83 Oak St., Taunton, Ma. had some concerns. Paul stated the family has owned this property for over 20 years and they wish to build house for daughter to live after she gets out of college. The existing 3 family shows the required 6 parking spaces. Chairman Ackerman stated are you taking away some green space for parking? Paul answers yes the rectangular shape is all useable and the proposed lot will be access from Hern Ave. Chairman Ackerman stated he drove by and the lot is very small. Paul stated there are multifamilies in the area and this lot is just right after the Oak Street fire station. They are proposing a 26 x 44 ranch style house and if the water table doesn’t allow they will build a raised ranch. Paul submitted letter in favor from Daniel Costa, 5 Hern Ave. Chairman Ackerman asked how many bedrooms are they proposing? Paul answers 3 bedroom. Wayne stated plans show the 3 family with driveway off Hern Ave? Paul states this is correct, there are no markings for driveway. Chairman Ackerman asked what the makeup was for the 3 family? Ms. DaSilva answers first floor has 3 bedrooms, 2nd & 3rd floor has 2 bedrooms. James Moran, 83 Oak St., stated he had some concerns relative to the water, and the unknown land abutting this property. He was asking if there were going to be some kind of buffer along the parking area. He also wanted to know if the lot area included the land unknown? Paul answers no, the land they claimed does not include the 14 foot wide unknown “court” . Paul stated they did extensive research and cannot find the rightful owner. They did ask for a side & front setback variance to be safe. Peter asked Mr. Moran how they park now? Mr. Moran stated they turn right onto Hern Ave and go in from there. Peter asked how wide is the proposed driveway? Mike asked how’s the water and Mr. Moran answers not real bad. Mr.Moran stated he’s not again them using their land he just wants to protect his. He stated they are proposing large home and are they proposing any buffers? Peter stated now is the time to ask for buffer? Mr. Moran stated he would be happy with some fencing. Mr. Moran was also concerned with the height of the house? It was stated the City Engineer will make sure the water flow doesn’t change or add anymore water to Mr. Morans property. Paul suggested planting arbovytes instead of fencing along property line. Paul stated the proposed driveway is 20 feet wide by 19 feet deep, 2 standard parking spaces. Wayne asked if they intend on paving spaces on 3 family and Paul said they will pave & stripe. Letters from the City Planner, Cons. Comm, B.O.H. Motion made and seconded to Grant with the following conditions:  House to be no higher than 28 feet.  Petitioner shall plant arborvytes beginning at a distance of 15 feet from Oak street along the property line of James Moran & Katherine Hern (property I.D. 65-594) Vote: Ackerman, Amaral, Wasylow, Berube, Joyce........................No. Petition Denied: Case #3107 Shani 350 ½ Winthrop St. Hearing held on December 8, 2011 A Variance from Section 6.3 & 7.1 of the Zoning Ordinance for a mixed use development (single family & auto repair use) in a Highway Business District on a lot having 110 feet of frontage (instead of 150’) and a rear setback of 21 feet (instead of 30 feet) and a reduction of landscaped buffer requirement from 25 feet to 0 feet along a portion of the side & rear property lines. For the Petitioner: Paul Patneaude, P.E., 198 Crane Ave., South, Taunton, Ma. In favor: None Opposed: None Mr. Patneaude stated the site has a pre-existing non-conforming structure located on it. The owner, Tony Bairos received building permit several years ago for garage and began building garage. Mr Shani wants to re-locate his auto repair business from Raynham to this site. He has P& S on property. John requested a copy of the P&S for the file. Paul state since they want to use the site for commercial purposes they need to comply with different zoning requirement relative to frontage & setbacks. Chairman Ackerman stated the petitioner will also need a SP from Council and Paul stated he’s aware of that. Paul stated the Fire Inspector made inspection and everything passed. Peter stated he saw sight and it’s a perfect set up. Paul stated the existing house in front will remain. Paul stated there is fencing all around property so there is no need to plant landscaping buffer. Joe asked how many trees were you required to plant? There are 17 trees shown on plans? Paul stated there is a certain width of landscaping buffer as well as density. There was discussion on whether or not the Board can waive the landscaping. Chairman Ackerman stated the Board can only grant what they asked for and as shown on plans. Some members wanted to give relief for all landscaping and the Secretary informed they can only approve as presented. The Chairman informed the Board that the Departmental Site Plan Review Board can request landscaping even though we gave variance for it. Several Board members did not agree with that. Letter from the City Planner, Cons. Comm, B.O.H. and Water Dept. were read into the record. Motion made and seconded to Grant as Presented: Vote: Ackerman, Amaral, Wasylow, Berube, Joyce......................Yes Petition Granted: The Board wished everyone Happy Holidays. Chairman Ackerman received letter from Committee on Zoning relative to the Departmental Site Plan review process and their referrals. Peter made motion to forward letter requesting the ZBA to be included in future meetings for input. Seconded by Wayne. All in favor. Next meeting: January 12, 2012 at 5:30 PM to be held at Maxham Sch