Zoning Board of Appeals

CITY OF TAUNTON ZONING BOARD OF APPEALS JULY 21, 2016 at 6:00 PM (Meeting held at Maxham School, 141 Oak St., Taunton, Ma) Members Present: Chairman Ackerman, Berube, Staples Correira, Vieira, and Moniz. Meeting called to order at 6:02 PM Wayne made motion to accept June 9, 2016 minutes, seconded by Steve. All in favor. Chairman Ackerman explained the process of which the ZBA conducts its meetings. They listen to the petitioner/Attorney, then opposition or in favor and then back to the petitioner. They do not go back and forth. Joe Amaral present at 6:05 PM. Cont’d. Case # 3327 Cruz/Zeigle 124 Highland St. & Prop. I.D 91-284 (Pinehurst St.) A Variance from Section 6.2 & 6.3 of the Zoning Ordinance to allow the re- configuration of 6 lots into 4 without having the required frontage, lot width, lot area, upland and side setbacks. Lot 2A being a conforming lot with the existing house located in the Urban Residential District. Lots 2B, 2C & 2D having 66.67 feet of frontage & lot width (instead of 125’ of frontage & 100’ of lot width) and Lots 2B & 2C having 9,200 sq. ft. of lot area & upland (instead of 30,000 sq. ft. & 22,500 sq. ft. upland); Lot 2D having 9,200 sq. ft. of lot area & 8,855 sq. ft. of upland (instead of 30,000 sq. ft. lot area & 22,500 sq. ft. of upland) and Lots 2B, 2C, & 2D having an 11 foot side setback (instead of 15’) in Suburban Residential District on premises situated 124 Highland Street, and also property I.D. 91-284 (Pinehurst Street) Letter from Atty. William Rounds requesting to withdraw without prejudice. Wayne made motion to allow the withdrawal, seconded by Steve. All in favor. Petition Withdrawn without prejudice. Cont’d. Case # 3328 Big Red Properties LLC Duffy Dr. (Prop. I.D. 68-41-0) A Variance from Section 6.3 of the Zoning Ordinance to allow the construction of a single family dwelling on a lot having 13,648 sq. ft. (instead of 15,000 sq. ft.) with 8,498 sq. ft. of upland (instead of 11,250 sq. ft.) and a 10 foot front setback for stairs (instead of 25 feet) Letter from Atty. Zajac requesting a continued until next month. Wayne made motion to grant continuance, seconded by Steve. All in favor. Petition continued to September 15, 2016 meeting. 1 Case #3329 Hayes 988 Crane Ave. South For: A special Permit from section 440 Attachment #2 – Table of Use of the Zoning Ordinance to allow the mezzanine area to be used as Offices (506 sq. ft.) in an Industrial District. . For the Petitioner: John DeSousa, SeaCoast Consulting, LLC, 4 Court St., Taunton, Ma. In favor: None Opposed: None John stated his client wishes to expand his office space by make the mezzanine space office space. Wayne asked what type of business is there? The space will be used for office for auto cad. No one in favor or opposed. Chairman Ackerman read letters from B.O.H., Conservation Commission and City Planner into the record. Motion made and seconded to grant as Presented: Vote: Correia, Amaral, Ackerman, Berube,Vieira ….Yes Petition Granted Case #3054-Mod. (2016) Hinton 342 Winthrop St. For: A special Permit from section 440 Attachment #2 – Table of Use of the Zoning Ordinance to allow a convenience store with re-fueling and associated storage of petroleum in a Highway Business District. . For the Petitioner: John DeSousa, SeaCoast Consulting LLC, 4 Court St., Taunton, Ma. In favor: None Opposed: None John stated the Board previously approved this site for a gas station, restaurant with drive-thru and convenience store. Since then they have removed the restaurant and drive-thru. Chairman Ackerman asked if the gas would be a brand name and he answers yes. John the Planning Board approved the changes with a new Site Plan Review. No one in favor or opposed. Chairman Ackerman read letters from B.O.H., Conservation Commission and City Planner into the record. Motion made and seconded to grant with the following conditions (from original approval) 1. All lighting shall not illuminate onto abutting properties. 2. Provide fencing on both sides of property and place fencing on the rear of the property line as approved by the Conservation Commission. 2  Vote: Ackerman, Amaral, Correira,Vieira, Berube ….Yes Petition Granted Case #3330 Reardon 73 Village Circle For: A special Permit from section 440 Attachment #1 – Table of Use of the Zoning Ordinance to allow an accessory dwelling unit in a Rural Residential District. . . For the Petitioner: Roy DeLano, P.E., 27 Jefferson St., Taunton, Ma. John Reardon, 73 Village Circle, Taunton, Ma. In favor: None Opposed: None Roy states they are here tonight to construct an accessory dwelling unit for the petitioners daughter ,son-in-law and granddaughter to reside. Chairman Ackerman asked if they were approved this must be renewed every 5 years and they stated they knew that. Chairman Ackerman stated the renewal fee is $100 plus advertising. Roy stated the accessory unit will be 838 square feet (max is 850 sq.ft.) 27% of the habitable floor area (30 % max) The existing dwelling is on a large lot and there is ample room for the addition. He stated on the right side there ae existing trees which acts as buffer. He stated the floor plans show a hall way for the egress. Roy asked if the hallway had to be built now? There was some discussion about how the accessory unit will be connected to the dwelling. The upper floor will have a connecting hallway to the accessory dwelling. Mr. Reardon stated he talked to Kevin about this and the secretary informed the Board that he must build hallway now so that it connects properly. Steve stated the accessory dwelling unit can’t be connected to the garage, it has be to connected the main house. There was some more discussion and it was decided the upper floor must connect to the main house per the zoning ordinance. No one in favor or opposed. Chairman Ackerman read letters from B.O.H., Conservation Commission and City Planner into the record. Motion made and seconded to grant with the following condition 1. The applicant must comply with the Zoning Ordinance relative to how the accessory dwelling unit will be connected to the principal unit. Vote: Ackerman, Amaral,Correira,Vieira, Berube ….Yes Case #3331 Rose-Nixon 80 Woodbine St. For: A variance from section 440 Attachment #3 – Intensity of Use Regulations of the Zoning Ordinance to allow a lot to be created for the existing house at 80 Woodbine Street without having the required 100 feet 3 o of frontage said lot having 0 feet of frontage but having the existing access from Vinson Street. For the Petitioner: Atty. Thomas Gay, Jr., Gay & Gay, P.C., P. O. Box 988, Taunton, Ma. In favor: None Opposed: None Atty. Gay stated they are here for a variance for frontage. The proposed house #80 is being separated from the bigger parcel. They have access from Vinson Street and that will continue. The larger lot is 9.7 acres and is part of a different approval. The lot does have frontage on Woodbine Street but it’s the part that is not developed. Joe asked is only to carve out 80 Woodbine Street and there will be no new house. Chairman Ackerman stated there are no other changes and their access will remain from Vinson Street. No one in favor or opposed. Chairman Ackerman read letters from B.O.H., Conservation Commission and City Planner into the record. Motion made and seconded to grant as presented: Vote: Correira, Vieira, Berube, Ackerman, Amaral…..….Yes Petition Granted Case #3332 Jones 519 Weir St. For: A Variance from section 440 Attachment #2 – Business Use Regulations of the Zoning Ordinance to allow a tattoo studio and art gallery in the Business District. For the Petitioner: Ryan Jones, 54 Scadding St., Taunton, Ma. In favor: Letter from Thomas Hoy, Jr., Tom and Jimmy’s Realty, 24 Weir Ave., Taunton, Ma. Opposed: None Mr. Jones states he is here tonight for a Variance to be able to put a tattoo business and art studio at 519 Weir Street. The front part will be the reception area and the tattoo part will be closed off. He will comply with all Board of Health regulations. The hours of operation will be Tuesday – Saturday 12 – 7 PM Sunday, 12 – 5 PM. and closed on Monday. There is on street parking and they have agreement with the building next door (Weir Fruit) to use their parking lot. Mr. Jones states his clients are by appointment only and he will be the only artist. The sign will comply with the sign ordinance. Wayne asked if he has copy of the agreement with the neighbor relative to parking. Mr. Jones submits agreement to the Board. Chairman Ackerman checked the zoning ordinance and he thinks 4 5 or 6 parking spaces are required for this use. Chairman Ackerman asked the Secretary why the City Planner didn’t say they need a parking variance? The Secretary answers she did not know and perhaps he doesn’t need one. She asked if the Chairman contacted the City Planner about this and he answered no. Chairman Ackerman stated he thinks Weir Fruit needs 13 parking spaces and there is only 18 spaces so there won’t be enough for all the businesses. He states if Weir Fruit is going to allow you to use their parking it might put them in jeopardy and they may need variance for parking. Chairman Ackerman they may have to amend their zoning approval. He cited an old variance in 1987 (Case # 1374) which required this building to be razed.. Chairman Ackerman stated he blames the ZBA and the Building Dept. because the building wasn’t razed. However, in Case # 2016 the ZBA in 1994 approved this building to remain. Chairman Ackerman states “use variances” under the ordinance, you have to show the site cannot be used for anything else. He stated it would have to be proven that there are no other areas in the City that this use can go. He stated this use is allowed by SP in the Highway Business District and Industrial District. Chairman Ackerman stated he could go on Main Street, County St., Weir and Broadway. Mike stated he didn’t think he could go downtown on Main Street (that is zoned CBD) Joe remembers someone wanted to go in on Winthrop Street. Letter from Tom Hoye, Jr., Tom & Jimmys Realty, 24 Weir Ave, in support. Joe asked if he’s the only tattoo artist will it be open while he’s not there or out of town. Mr. Jones answers he may close but the art gallery will be open to sell artwork. Mr. Jones stated he will most likely have 1 client a day. Joe asked if he will be doing body piercing and Mr. Jones answers no and he doesn’t intent to. Joe asked if he would be ok with restriction of NO body piercing and Mr. Jones agreed. Wayne asked if the owners were present and Mr. Tom George got up to the podium. Wayne asked what the last use there? Mr. George stated he had a retail use (Vitamin Store) Mr. George stated they have made some improvement to the site including new roof. Wayne asked if he been marketing the building? Mr. George stated he had sign in window and he has had some interest for a hair salon, barbershop, retail but he thought this use would be better fit because it would less parking and by appointment only. Wayne stated you had interest for uses that wanted to go in but yet you want a tattoo business which requires a variance for use. Wayne stated that’s contrary to the zoning ordinance because, in his opinion, there is no hardship because the place can support other business uses. His other concern is parking. Chairman Ackerman thinks they need a variance for parking because they would be taking spaces from Weir Fruit. It was mentioned there is a municipal parking lot next to Weir Pizza. It was stated the retail use is about 400 square feet. Chairman Ackerman suggests getting determination from the City Planner. Chairman Ackerman stated he based it on 1480 square feet and if so it would require between 5 & 6 parking spaces. The secretary asked the Chairman if he was determining the parking based on the whole building as retail because the retail portion is only about 400 square feet. Chairman Ackerman stated if the applicant finds a different location that requires ZBA approval the fee would be waived for the next 6 months. There was some discussion about if you can count off-street parking. 5 Motion made and seconded to continue and request determination from the City Planner inquiring how many parking spaces is required based on the proposed uses and square footages. The petitioner submitted letter waiving the time frame on which to act on this proposal. Motion made and seconded to grant a continued. Vote: Correira, Berube, Ackerman, Staples, Amaral…..….Yes Petition Continued Meeting adjourned at 7:03 PM. Next meeting is September 15, 2016 (due to State Primary on September 8, 2016) 6 Meeting adjourned at: 6:57 PM. Next meeting is September 15, 2016 7 8