Zoning Board of Appeals

MINUTES CITY OF TAUNTON ZONING BOARD OF APPEALS January 18, 2018 at 8:00 PM (held at Maxham School, 141 Oak St, Taunton, Ma.) Members Present: Dennis Ackerman, Steven Vieira, Wayne Berube, Michael Staples, George Moniz, Sara Arbour and Bill Egan. Meeting opens at 8:00 PM Case # 3418 Neighborhood of Affordable Housing Inc. 1, 15-31 Main St. A Special Permit from Section 440 Attachment #1 of the Zoning Ordinance for a mixed use development consisting of 38 residential units with commercial use on first floor, on premises situated at 1, 15-31 Main Street, Taunton, Ma. For the Petitioner: Atty. David Gay, P.O. Box 988, Taunton, Ma. Maura Tsongas, Director of Real Estate Development. Philip Giffee, Exec. Dir., NOAH, 143 Border St., E. Boston,Ma. Barry Ganek, Ganek Architects, Inc., One River Rd., Carlisle, Ma. Mark Beaudry, P.E., Meridian Associates, 69 Mike St.,Ste. 302, Westborough,Ma Francisco J. Lovera, P.E., McMahon Transportation Engineers & Planners, 350 Myles Standish Blvd., Ste. 103, Taunton, Ma. In favor: Kevin Shea, Exec. Dir., Community & Economic Development, 45 School St Taunton, Ma. Jonathan Gray, 11 Harrison St., Taunton, Ma. Jay Dorsey, 147 Highland St., Taunton, Ma. Scott Martin, 31 Cardinal Circle, E. Taunton, Ma. David Littlefield,192 Erin Rd., E. Taunton, Ma. Armand Tenkarian, 19 Weir St., Taunton, Ma. Opposed: Atty Joseph deMello, representing Krijo Realty Trust, 69-71 Main St., Taunton, Ma. Atty. Gayle Madeira, 71 Main St., Taunton, Ma. Chairman Ackerman explains before any motion is made he is going to allow each member an opportunity to speak. George stated he has lived downtown for a while and the population is low. There were plenty of businesses downtown, like Pobers, Sealeys, and the parking was the same back then. All the store are now gone. He took a walk downtown and was appalled at what he saw. We need to bring business back to the downtown. He also suggests removing the 1 parking meters, more tax break and more lighting. He lives there so he sees a lot of things. Sara stated she’s in favor of the project and it’s a big investment that will bring people downtown. It will create a vibrant downtown in hopes of less criminal activity. Mike agrees it’s a good project, good management company, and they have tried to provide some of the things we wanted to see like play area/common area and they reduced to 38 units. Bill stated he had 3 issues and the applicant has tried to address them. They added another handicapped space, play/recreation area and have agreed to secure more parking. He wanted to review all of the information that was provided at last meeting to feel comfortable voting on it. He received a lot of e-mails from citizens about this case. He doesn’t want any nuisances created due to the parking situation. Wayne stated he acknowledges this is a big investment and but he would like more parking available for the commercial on the first floor. He stated he did his due diligent and went to tour the site in Middleboro and tour Union Block. He went on the radio to get public input about this project. He stated realistically there isn’t enough parking and in is opinion it has to be addressed. He suggests the Board forward a letter to the Mayor and Council asking for improvements to the existing municipal lots. He stated the applicant would want it to be successful and he thinks it’s a good project for downtown. He stated he would support 36 units (like previous approval) and he would like some sort of area for children to play on each floor. He would like to see the parking fenced in and striped and numbered and a designated area on each floor for play area. He would suggest having them secured 15 parking space designated for “union block only”. He does think the commercial rate tax rate should be lowered. He suggests placing conditions relative to having things completed prior to an issuance of Certificate of Occupancy Permit. Steve stated firstly he admits this public hearing has not been conducted in a professional manner, by both the Board and the applicant with the off-hand comments. He’s glad to move forward and work collectively. Second he understands this project is a priority to the Mayor and Municipal Council who wants to see it happen. He wants to make a smart decision and better understand the project and make an informed decision. He stated he had heard parking is not a problem and its better than a commercial project. The ZBA has to make a determination. He would like to see designated parking, lighting on building, additional parking spaces and have the management company distribute brochure on community clubs, YMCA, Girls Club, applause academy. Chairman Ackerman says he has been in the business for 50 years as a Jr Planner, Asst. Planner and working in New Bedford and Pawtucket and been a Board for 23 years. The applicant filed their application and we had hearing on 11-9-17, 12-21-17, and 1-11-18 and a site visit on 1-8-18 and the meeting on 1-18-18 to vote on the proposal which 2 results in about 70 days. He stated another project took about 1 ½ years so the Board is acting in a timely manner on this proposal but wants to make an informed decision. He stated he asked about prevailing wages because he wanted to make it public knowledge there would be jobs available He would like to see a lower number and he referenced they were approved in 2011 for 36 units but he did not know why it wasn’t started. He would like to see 2 play areas on each floor and 10 extra spaces of parking and fencing around the proposed parking area with it striped and marked. He would also suggest lighting in rear and in front of building to be compatible with the Historic commission. He also suggest after 18th unit the applicant provide confirmation that the off-street parking is still available. He doesn’t want any parking taken from the BaHa Brothers’ parking area. George stated he contacted the Middleboro Police and there have been no arrests in the project there. Motion seconded to approve with the following conditions: 1. There shall no more than 36 residential units. 2. Provide two (2) play/recreation areas (a minimum of 800 square feet) on the second & third floors. Said areas must provide laundry facilities and must remain as play/recreation areas in perpetuity. 3. The applicant is required to secure an additional 15 parking spaces off-site for the non-residential units. 4. Lighting must be on side & rear of the building (compatible to the Historic District style of the building) and lighting shall be aimed at crosswalks on Weir Street and Main Street safety. 5. The 30 parking spaces as shown on plans must be fenced in, striped and numbered with unit numbers. 6. The 8 parking spaces behind the buildings must be striped and numbered. 7. The preferred method of egress/entrance is through the rear of the building. 8. No occupancy permit shall be issued until all items in this decision are completed. 9. After 18 units are completed applicant must prove all parking in condition #3, #5 & #6 are still in compliance to the building department before additional occupancy permits are granted. 10. The management company to provide tenants with brochures listing community clubs in the area, YMCA, Boys & Girls Club, Applause Academy, etc. 11. Provide a copy of the proposed lease to the ZBA Office prior to an Occupancy Permit. Vote: Arbour, Moniz, Berube, Vieira, Ackerman.......Yes Petition Granted Steve made motion to draft letter to the Municipal Council requesting the municipal parking lots be repaired, re-stripped . Seconded by George. Meeting adjourned at 9:00 PM 3 4 Case # 3423 Garcia 64 Floral St. A Variance from Section 440 attachment #3 of the Zoning Ordinance to allow the division of one lot into two lots with Lot 3 having 12,780 sq. ft. of lot area (instead of 15,000 sq. ft.) Letter requesting a continuance. Motion made and seconded to Grant continuance. Vote: Ackerman, Arbour, Moniz, Vieira, Berube....Yes Petition Continued Case # 3426 Woodby 1150 Middleboro Ave. Meeting held on Jan. 11, 2018 For: A Variance from Section 440 Attachment #3 of the Zoning Ordinance to allow a rear setback of 2 feet (instead of 30 feet) for an existing 19.6 x 10’ shed. For the Petitioner: Michael & Heather Woodby, 1150 Middleboro Avenue, E. Taunton, Ma. In favor: None Opposed: None Mr. Woodby sated he put up shed without a building permit because it was under 200 square feet. He went on-line to see if a building permit was needed and it wasn’t. The location is the only logical place because there is a pond and a tremendous slope in the property. He stated he doesn’t have any neighbors who would be affected by this.. There is a landlocked unbuildable piece of property in the rear of which the owners lives out of town. He stated 2 neighbors are in favor. They went to Conservation Commission and received approval. Wayne asked if he thought to call the planning & zoning office to inquire about the rules. Mr. Woodby stated no, he’s a builder not a contractor and he admitted he made a mistake. Chairman Ackerman stated looking at the plans the shed could be moved on the side of the existing driveway. Mr. Woodby stated he really doesn’t want to put his shed in the front yard and the whole sideway slopes. Chairman Ackerman stated the plans don’t indicate any sloping. There was some discussion about the slope and Chairman Ackerman stated he hadn’t had a chance to go out and view property. He suggests a continuance so the Board can see if there is a slope. Sara asked why would be require them to come back if no one is here opposing and they have shown there is a slope and this is the only logical space for a shed. Chairman Ackerman said the Board can ask for certain things, in his opinion, he would like to go out and view property. Mr. Woodby stated he would be ok with continuing to allow Board to go out and look. Steve asked if the plans submitted accurately show what is out there. They asked when the shed was built and Mrs. Woodby answers they stated in May and stopped in July after being told to be the Building Department. They asked if they got a cease and desist order and she said no but was told to get zoning approval. Motion made and seconded to continue to February 8, 2018 Vote: Ackerman, Berube, Vieira, Arbour, Moniz .......... Yes Petition continued. 5 6