Zoning Board of Appeals

CITY OF TAUNTON ZONING BOARD OF APPEALS MARCH 9, 2017 – 6:00 pm. (held at Maxham School, 141 Oak St, Taunton, Ma.) Members Present: Dennis Ackerman, Wayne Berube, Steven Vieira, Michael Staples , George Moniz and Joseph Amaral. Meeting opens at 6:03 pm. Steve made motion accept minutes of Feb.16, 2017, seconded by Joe. All in favor. Chairman Ackerman explained the ZBA process. He stated the petitioner presents their case, then they hear in people favor and people opposed. They allow petitioner to address any of the opposition’s concerns. They do not go back and forth. Case #3363 Campbell 503 Dighton Ave. A Special Permit from Section 440-710 of the zoning Ordinance for the Renewal of an Accessory Dwelling Unit . For the Petitioner: Kelly Campbell, 503 Dighton Ave. Taunton, Ma. In favor: None Opposed: None Mrs. Campbell explains they need to renew the Special Permit for the existing accessory dwelling unit. Chairman Ackerman asked if there were any changes and she answers no her mom still lives there. No one opposed or in favor. Chairman Ackerman read letters from the City Planner, Conservation Commission and Board of Health into the record. Motion made and seconded to Grant as Presented: Vote: Berube, Ackerman, Amaral, Correira, Vieira.…..….Yes Petition Granted Case #3371 Horton Cohannet St. (Property I.D. 89-61) A Variance from Section 440 -602 of the Zoning Ordinance to allow the development of a lot having a shape factor of 41.2 (instead of 35) on premises situated on Cohannet Street, Taunton, Ma. known as Property I.D. 89-61. For the Petitioner: Todd & Janine Horton, 1364 Cohannet St., Derek Taylor, 451 Winthrop St., Taunton, Ma. In favor: None Opposed: None 1 Mrs. Horton states they were previously approved by the Board but the variance expired. They went to the Planning Board for the Form J approval and now must make the lot buildable again. She states she didn’t realized the variance expires. Peter Lyons, 1398 Cohannet St., had some questions. He asked if it would be one single family house and she answered yes. No one opposed or in favor. Chairman Ackerman read letters from the City Planner, Conservation Commission and Board of Health into the record. Motion made and seconded to Grant as Presented: Vote: Berube, Ackerman, Amaral, Correira, Vieira.…..….Yes Petition Granted Case #3366 Matthew Realty Trust 70 Weir St. For: A Variance from Section 440-706 of the Zoning Ordinance to allow the replacement of a free-standing sign with a new 290.79” x 84” (169.61 square foot) free-standing sign to advertise various businesses on and off site. For the Petitioner: Atty. John-Paul Thomas, 98 County St., Taunton, Ma. In favor: Jim Dorsey, 147 Highland St., Taunton, Ma. Opposed: None Atty. Thomas states he’s representing Robert Asack who owns 70 – 74 Weir Street. He wishes to put up new sign and allow for various businesses to advertise. The parcel has been vacant for many years with the former use as a hardware store and gym. The petitioner’s owns Bobby’s Place which abuts this property and he wishes to put up new renovated free-standing sign. They are asking for a 169.61 square foot free-standing sign that could accommodate up to 8 tenants. Atty. Thomas states this will benefit the neighboring businesses in back with good advertising. George stated there is no big difference with the sign there now. No one opposed. Jim Dorsey, Jr., 1478 Highland St. was in support of the request. It would be a big benefit for tenants of his building. Chairman Ackerman read letters from the City Planner, Conservation Commission and Board of Health into the record. Motion made and seconded to grant. Vote: Ackerman, Amaral, Berube, Correira, Vieira, ..….Yes Petition Granted Case #3361 Aspen 9 Kilmer Ave. A Variance from Section 440-709 & Section 440-709 of Zoning Ordinance for a conversion of a single family to a 2 family on a lot having 7,5000 sq. ft. (instead of 15,000 sq. ft.) and a waiver of parking from 4 spaces to 0 spaces. For the Petitioner: Atty. John-Paul Thomas, 98 County St., Taunton, Ma. 2 In favor: None Opposed: None Atty. Thomas explains how he is requesting to convert the single family with an old commercial use (store) to a 2-family. He asked for waiver of the parking but he wishes to withdraw that request. He can show 4 parking spaces onsite. Chairman Ackerman stated he was upset to see a request for parking waiver which he is not in favor of granting. He stated he went out to the site and there is plenty of room. Joe asked how many bedrooms in the existing dwelling? Atty. Thomas answers 3 bedrooms. They are proposing the second unit to have 2 bedrooms. It used to be store (retail) and a residence will be a better fit. Atty. Thomas apologized for asking for waiver of parking when indeed there is ample room. No one showing up in opposition or in favor. Chairman Ackerman read letters from the City Planner, Conservation Commission and Board of Health into the record. Motion made and seconded to grant with the following condition: 1. Show 4 parking spaces on plans prior to a building permit being issued. Vote: Berube, Ackerman, Amaral, Staples, Moniz..…..….Yes Petition Granted Case #3364 Taylor 451 Winthrop St. A Variance from Section 440 Attachment #3 & Special Permit from Section 440 Attachment #1 of the Zoning Ordinance to allow a 2-famiy dwelling in an Office District on a lot without frontage on a public street but having access to the lot via a 24 foot paved driveway within an access easement across the lot with 309 feet of frontage on Dean Street, known on Assessor’s Map property I.D. 56-37. For the Petitioner: Derek Taylor, 451 Winthrop St., Taunton, Ma. In favor: None Opposed: None Mr. Taylor states he wishes to turn this commercial building into a residence. He had business in there but was unsuccessful. Chairman asked what size? Mr. Taylor answers 3 bedroom single family dwelling with 1 1’2 bathrooms. Wayne asked what type of business was there and Mr. Taylor answers a Hydro business. He stated the signs are down. Joe stated the building does kind of look like a residence. All abutters are residences. Chairman Ackerman read letters from the City Planner, Conservation Commission, Board of Health into the record. 3 Motion made and seconded to Grant as Presented: Vote: Berube, Ackerman, Amaral, Correira, Vieira.…..….Yes Petition Granted Case #3365 Gaspar 396 Berkley St. A Variance from Section 440 Attachment #2 and# 3 and 440-702 of the Zoning Ordinance to allow a commercial use and storage of materials in an Urban Residential District; a rear yard setback of 6 feet (instead of 20’) for a storage trailer and a waiver of landscaping requirements. For the Petitioner: Karen Patneaude, P.E., Earth Services Corp., 198 Crane Ave. South , Taunton, Ma. Jack Gaspar, 396 Berkley St., Taunton, Ma. In favor: Jason Almeida, 318 Berkley St., Taunton, Ma. Ronald Fasolo, 159 Plain St., Taunton, Ma. Nuno Machado, 368 Berkley St., Taunton, Ma. Jose Rocha, 82 Landing Dr., Taunton, Ma. Opposed: Cathy Rodriguez, 152 Berkley St., Taunton, Ma. Virginia Workman, 180 Berkley St., Taunton, Ma. Karen stated this business has been there for 23 years and he was unaware he needed a business license. The property is set back off the roadway and not even visible from the road. He has 3-4 employees which leave in morning between 7 – 8AM and return no later than 6 pm. There are no customers that come to the site and there is a long driveway about 900 feet from road. The property consists of approximately 18 acres and has been used for the past 23 years for his paving business. He has an older trailer on the property which was constructed 6 feet from the property line. They have already gone to the Conservation Commission and now because of a complaint must get zoning approval after all these years. Wayne asked why all of a sudden after being there for 23 years you need variance. He stated he think there was a complaint. It was stated he doesn’t need a business certificate on the local level because he’s incorporated. He stated you don’t need a permit for paving either in Taunton, he knows other towns require one. He stated you must call for a detail and Dig safe when you dig but not a building permit. Wayne stated technically because the property is in the urban residential district you would need a business certificate. Jack stated he bought the property from Bristol County Savings Bank and it was all farmland. He never wanted to hurt or offend anyone. Jack said someone complained there was sewerage being dumped in the wetlands. He was told by the City Planner and Building Commissioner he needed to go thru this process. In favor: Jason Almeida, 318 Berkley St., was in favor. He has no complains of a few trucks leaving in morning and returning at night. Jose Rocha, 82 Landing Dr. was in favor. Cathy Rodriguez, 152 Berkley St., stated if it causes more traffic she’s opposed. She wants the environment and pond protected. Atty. Berube 4 remembers complaints from neighbors about added traffic but it was noted it was from the former McCabe Sand & Gravel now owned by Lopes. Virginia Workman, 180 Berkley St., also opposed due to the traffic problems, and what kind of materials will be stored on site? Are there hazardous materials and the culvert has been polluted with furniture. The Conservation Commission has issued an Order of Conditions and Jack said he has small pieces of equipment and some pallets, pavers, fieldstone. He said there are no hazardous materials. Chairman Ackerman asked how many trucks does he have? Jack answers 9 plow trucks, which are only used for plowing and sanding, 3 trucks for asphalt, 5-6 rollers and 2 pavers. Chairman Ackerman said he drove down and the road is heavily traveled and he saw about 15 trucks at around 2 pm. His concern is the trucks using this roadway. He suggest having a small traffic study done do determine his business is not impacting the traffic. Joe asked if they were legally registered as farmland. Mr. Gaspar said it was farmland and no he is not assessed for agricultural land. Karen stated there will be no increase in his business, he’s just legalizing what has been there for years. Chairman Ackerman would feel better if they did traffic study/analysis to determine his business isn’t the problem on this street. He suggests checking with SRPEDD to see if they have any information. Motion made and seconded to continue until next month and have applicant conduct a traffic study/analysis to see if this business will affect the existing traffic. Vote: Berube, Staples, Ackerman, Amaral, Correira, .….Yes Petition continued to April 13, 2017 Case #3367 Henkin Burt St. Map 61, Lots 10 & 11 A Variance from Section 440 Attachment #3 & 440-602 of the Zoning Ordinance to allow the division of 2 lots into 3 lots with Lot 1 having 66.4’ of frontage (instead of 150’) 25’ of lot width (instead of 100’) and a shape factor of 46.5 (35 max. allowed) and Lot 2 having 48.7’ of frontage (instead of 150’) 25’of lot width (instead of 100’) and shape factor of 45.9 (35 max. allowed) and lot 3 being a conforming lot on premises situated on the west side of Burt Street, Taunton, Ma known as Assessor’s Map 61, Lot 10 & 11. For the Petitioner: Rich Ricchio, Field Engineering, Co Inc., P. O. Box 1178, Mattapoisett, Ma. Atty. Matthew Costa, representing owner, P. O. Box 988, Taunton, Ma. In favor: None Opposed: Dianna Pike, 320 Burt St., Taunton, Ma. Christopher Campbell, 415 Burt St., Taunton, Ma. Rich submitted revised plans after reviewing the deed. The revised plans shows a change in the frontage. This property is located on the west side of Tremont Street and 5 consists of 17 acres. They are proposing 3 lots with reduced frontage. Rich stated no one was interested in putting a road in so they just want to develop for 3 lot. They have conducted perks before for a 6 lot subdivision but was unsuccessful in selling. Rich stated under the current zoning they could only develop as one lot. They have buyer now and want to do just 3 lots. There are wetlands in back and woods. Wayne asked why are they here before essentially they created the current configuration? Rich stated they were unsuccessful in trying to sell for conventional subdivision. Atty. Matt Costa representing owner, Bruce LaFleur stated in 1985 it was viable to do subdivision? Due to the construction costs and then the zoning changed in`1988 this property sat. They have tried to market it for 6 lot subdivision and could possible do a 40B project. They wish to do something reasonable and think 3 single family dwellings would be compatible with the neighborhood. He thinks it would be less of an impact to neighborhood. Atty. Costa stated he doesn’t agree it is a self created hardship because the lots were created then zoning changed. Joe asked how many lots were on the conceptional plans and he answers 6. Atty. Costa stated if it was a conventional subdivision there would be more traffic and he thinks this is a reasonable request. Chairman Ackerman didn’t know if it had to be re-advertised because the frontage had changed with the revised plans. Atty. Costa stated he thinks as long as you advertise the type of relief being sought it covers you. Opposed: Dianna Pike, 329 Burt St., lives across the street. There is heavy traffic and she is concerned about the wildlife preservation. She asked if they could put no further subdivision. She too asked what is the hardship? Opposed: Christopher Campbell, 415 Burt St., stated the next door neighbor, Mr. Medeiros is in Florida . He asked about putting no cut zone and leave as much trees for buffer. Wayne asked when they got Conservation approval and it was answered several years ago. They know they would need to do a Notice of Intent for Lot 3. Chairman Ackerman read letters from the City Planner, Conservation Commission and Board of Health into the record. Motion made and seconded to approve with the following conditions: 1. Approval based on amended plans date 2-8-17 revised through 3-9-17. 2. A No Cut Zone shall be designated for Lots 1, 2 and 3 starting after a distance of 450 feet back from the front property line unless a septic system must be placed in that area. 3. Maintain a 20 foot wide treed buffer along property I.D. 61-13 (Medeiros) and property I.D. 61-12 (Smith) and property I.D. 61-43 (Campbell) Berube, Staples, Ackerman, Amaral, Correira.....Yes Petition Granted Case #3368 Santos 408 Tremont St. A Variance from Section 440 Attachment #2 of the Zoning Ordinance to allow auto sales in a Rural Residential District. For the Petitioner: Honorato Santos, 13 Randall St., Taunton, Ma. 6 In favor: None Opposed: Georgia Mathew, 1190 East Westchester Dr., Chandler, AZ Mr. Santos states he wants to sell vehicles from his property. He states its basically a hobby but he would be getting a Class II license. He stated there will not be any outdoor display, everything will be inside. He hasn’t gotten his license yet, he needed to get zoning approval first. Joe states he needs to file with the Police and State . He will have a small sign on the building. Chairman Ackerman read letters from George Mathew stating her concern were display of vehicles, any bathroom facilities and outside storage of parts, junk, etc. Mr. Santos answers nothing will be outside. He has shown parking on plans for residence and customers. He re-iterated there will be no repairs, car parts kept outside and it won’t be a junk yard. It was asked hours of operation? He answered on application he put Monday – Friday 8-4 . Chairman Ackerman read letters from the City Planner, Conservation Commission and Board of Health into the record. Motion made and seconded to grant with the following conditions: 1. No more than 5 vehicles for sale at one time 2. All business to be conducted INSIDE the exiting building 3. No auto repair. Ackerman, Amaral, Berube, Correira,Stapless..….Yes Petition Granted Case #3369 LaFrance 3 Goff Ave. A Variance from Section 440 Attachment #3 of the Zoning Ordinance to allow the division of one lot into two lots with lot 1 having 16,504 sq. ft. of lot area & dry area (instead of 30,000 sq. ft. lot area & 22,500 sq ft. dry area) and Zero frontage (instead of 125’ For the Petitioner: Roy DeLano, John DeLano & Associates, 27 Jefferson St., Taunton, Ma. In favor: None Opposed: None Mr. DeLano explains this property has been in the family for some time. The petitioners, Roderick & Melody LaFrance wish to gift lot to son to build house. The lot has been in their grandparents name and previously owned by James Goff. The proposal is to gift lot to son Joshua for his family to live close to his parents. Joshua has 2 children and wants to live closer to parents who help them out with daycare. Mr.DeLano states Goff Ave. is a private unaccepted street but has water and trash service. The proposal is to split the lot into two creating a new lot for son to build house on. There will be an emergency turnaround on lot 2 before it narrows. Lot 1 does need variances for lot area, dry area and frontage but is larger than the properties in the area. Mr. DeLano stated there will be the appropriate deeds giving access. Joe asked about if Lot 3 access from Goff Avenue and they use both Goff Ave and South Street. Mr. 7 DeLano stated 4 Goff Ave goes through the church property. Joe asked about the house print on the lot and Mr. DeLano stated it’s only for illustration purposes. Lot 2 will have on-site septic and lot 3 has one already. They put water in about 10-15 years ago. No one opposed or in favor. Chairman Ackerman read letters from the City Planner, Conservation Commission and Board of Health into the record. Motion made and seconded to grant as Presented: Vote: Ackerman, Amaral, Berube, Correira, Stapless..….Yes Petition Granted Case #3370 Jorgensen & Darius-Hamedani Worcester St. Property I.D. 44-2 A Variance from Section 440 -602 & Section 440 Attachment #3 of the Zoning Ordinance for the construction of a single family home on a lot having no frontage or lot width (instead of 150’frontage & 100’ lot width) but having access via a 15’ wide deed right of way. For the Petitioner: Atty. Matthew Costa, P. O. Box 988, Taunton, Ma. In favor: None Opposed: John Nadar, 27R Worcester St., Taunton, Ma. Margaret Bates, 25 Worcester St., Taunton, Ma. Letter from David & Helen Occhipinti, 27 Worcester St., Taunton, Ma. Atty. Costa states this property has been subject to prior petitions in 1995, 1999, 2007 and 2010. The circumstances changes and now the current owners wish to develop the property. The lot was created in 1960which was originally part of 27 and 27R Worcester Street. There was a deeded right of way kept for this lot. The lots in front were built on and the petitioner purchased this lot in 2010 with the hope of building house for their parents. Atty. Costa stated in 1995 and in 1999 petitions for variances were denied. In 2007 the Board granted variances however after litigation by an abutter the Superior Court annulled the 2007 decision. They are proposing to construct a modest single family dwelling , like a log cabin style home. Atty. Costa stated the petitioner have every right to use the exiting right of way whether or not there is a house on lot or not. A special permit is needed for common driveway is needed because 3 or more people use same driveway. Wayne asked what was their intent when they purchased property? Atty. Costa stated the property became available and they wanted it to have large piece of land. It was suggested going thru the petitioner’s existing driveway to access this lot instead of using the narrow right of way. Atty. Costa stated the petitioner have a right to drive over neighbor’s land to get to theirs. They can’t grant any easement the owners in front house would have to agree. Atty. Costa stated the White divided their lot into two and granted access easement for lot in back. Chairman Ackerman remembers this case well. He stated there is an existing located very close to the right of way. Margaret Bates, 25 Worcester St. spoke in opposition. There are sink holes in the right of way and the garage is very close to the right of way. Her big concerns are speeding, sink holes and the safety of the children. She stated the fence has been hit and taken down. She suggests the petitioners let them 8 drive over their property instead of adding more traffic to this narrow right of way. John Nader, 27R Worcester St. moved their a few month ago. He was intimated by the petitioner and wants to go on record in opposition. He stated he would prefer if he came in another way he wouldn’t have an issue. His primary concern is the over developed area accessed by the narrow right of way. Atty. Costa stated he does not know what went on with his client and Mr. Nader. He stated they need to go before the Planning Board for a special permit common driveway and they might want it paved. They determine what is appropriate for access. Joe asked if his clients were the previous petitioners and Atty. Costa answers no it was Pistolese & Boyle. Joe asked if the new owners knew all the background on this property why did they purchase it? He states there is no hardship. They knew it wasn’t a buildable lot when the bought it. Wayne stated he asked why they bought it earlier and it was answered because the opportunity came up. No one in favor. Chairman Ackerman read letters from the City Planner, Conservation Commission and Board of Health into the record. Motion made and seconded to grant as Presented: Vote: Berube, Staples, Ackerman, Amaral, Correira, .….No Petition Denied Meeting adjourned at 8:45 PM 9 10 11 12 13