Zoning Board of Appeals

MINUTES ZONING BOARD OF APPEALS July 23, 2020 at 6:00 PM (held virtually via Zoom) Members Present roll call:: Dennis Ackerman, Wayne Berube, Steve Vieira, Michael Staples, Craig Faria, and Scott Rodrigues. Meeting opens at 6:00 PM Motion made and seconded to approve the June 25, 2020 minutes. All in favor. Chairman Ackerman read statement: “Tonight’s Zoning Board of Appeals” meeting is being conducted remotely consistent with Gov. Bakers Exec. Orders due to the current State of Emergency in the CW. In order to mitigate the transmission of the COVID-19 virus, we have been advised and directed by the CW to suspend public gatherings, and as such, the meetings in a publicly accessible physical location. Accommodations for public access have been made via livestreaming, and this meeting is also being recorded. This evening there is also a public hearing. Anyone wishing to make a public comments can call 774-406-5261 when we get to that portion of the hearing.” Cont’d. Case #3543 Fils 6 West Summer St. For: A Variance from Section 440 Attachment #3 of the Zoning Ordinance for the conversion of an existing 2-family dwelling to a 4-family dwelling on a lot having 42,397 sq. ft. of lot area & dry area (instead of 43,560 sq. ft. of lot area & dry area) For the Petitioner: Atty. Daniel deAbreu, Brennan & Recupero, LLC, One Church Green, Taunton, Ma. In favor: None Opposed: None Atty. deAbreu stated they continued from last month to provide the previously approved variances which he has submitted. They are requesting to go to a 4 family and need variances for lot size and min. dry area. If approved they do need to go to the Municipal Council for Special Permit for the use. Wayne stated the only reason he wanted a continuance is to get the previous approval and now they have submitted it showing it was approved prior for a 4 family but never exercised. He’s satisfied. Public Input: No one in favor or opposed. 1 Motion made and seconded to grant as Presented: Vote: Rodrigues, Berube, Vieira, Faria, Ackerman……Yes Petition Granted Case #3544 Carvalho 21 Whitehill St. A Variance from Section 440-709 of the Zoning Ordinance for the dwelling conversion of a 2-family dwelling to a 3 family dwelling on a lot having 13,862 sq. ft. (instead of 15,000 sq. ft.) For the Petitioner: Atty. Danilo Avalon, 612 Columbia Rd., Boston, Ma. Dainna Carvalho, 21 Whitehill St., Taunton, Ma In favor: None Opposed: None Atty. Avalon stated they are here tonight to present a new parking plan from the previous one submitted. He stated the idea when the petitioner purchased the property in 2018 was to move in but her mom took ill and she moved in with her to care for her. Her intent was to move into the 3rd unit to have it owner occupied. Wayne has concerns with the configuration of the old plan and he doesn’t think the garage can fit 2 cars. His major concern is you drive into the driveway, take a sharp left around the house and then another sharp right to the parking area in back. He’s not comfortable with the new plans. Steve has major concerns with the layout of the property and he learned the listing agent that the 3rd floor wasn’t even 50% completed when he list he and it was testified last month that all they had to do is put a toilet in? So it appears testimony was untrue or not accurate. Atty. Avalon stated they submitted revised plans showing 10 spaces and he agrees the garage is tight for 2 cars. He has been there and if you consider 1 space for each unit there is enough parking. It was noted the requirement is 2 spaces per unit. Chairman Ackerman stated the petitioner was instructed to go to the City Council and Safety office to inquire about No Parking on both or one side of the street. The Board expressed their views and the petitioner didn’t follow through. He voiced his opposition to the request. Atty. Avalon stated they paid close attention to the Board’s concerns and spoke to Lighthouse Engineering to change the plans. Chairman Ackerman stated they instructed them to go to the council not their engineer. Atty. Avalon stated they thought if they changed the parking to eliminate any problems in the neighborhood they would not need to go out Council for no parking . Scott asked Ms. Carvalho if all she had to do was install a toilet and the apartment would be done? Dainnna said without a toilet you can’t call it an apartment. It was used by the 2nd floor tenants. Steve stated the functionality of the site is not safe. Chairman Ackerman stated at the last meeting the petitioner agreed to procure no parking on Whitehill Street by going to Council and they didn’t’ follow through. Wayne had big concerns with the parking and the functionality of the site. He thinks it’s too tight and unsafe and thinks it should stay a 2 family. Motion made and seconded to grant as Presented: Ackerman, Vieira, Berube, Faria……..No Rodrigues……………………………..Yes Petition Denied 2 Case #3545 MacDonald 318 County St. For: A Special Permit from Section 440-503 of the Zoning Ordinance for a change of use from Gas Station/Convenience Store to Laundromat. For the Petitioner: Atty. Frederick Casavant, 2 Batterymach Park Ste. 302, Quincy, Ma. Ed McDonald, 60 Robbins Rd., Unit 6, Plymouth, Ma. Scott Faria, P.E., J.K. Holmgren Engineering, 1024 Pearl St., Brockton, Ma. David Cabral, rep. petitioner on traffic In favor: None Opposed: Shawn & Carolyn Mulhern, 14 Johnson St., Taunton, Ma. Patti Santos, 294 County St., Taunton, Ma. Gerald Peterson, 20 Johnson St., Taunton, Ma. Matthew Andrade, owns 169 School St., 119 Winthrop St. Taunton, Ma. Michel Binda, owns 424 County St., Taunton, Ma. Peter Thomas, Taunton, Ma. Brian Carvalho, Taunton, Ma. Atty. Casavant stated they provided updated plans and support memo requesting a change of use from the former Cumberland Farms Convenience store with gas to a laundromat. There is no change in the square footage and he suggest a laundromat is less detrimental than the former use as a convenience store with gas. The former use generated more traffic plus deliveries. The Board had concerns with the parking layout and the in/out access in the previous submission so they changed it. They reduced the parking spaces from 19 spaces to 13 spaces and one curb cut on Route 140 was closed to allow better traffic flow on Route 140. Chairman Ackerman stated he didn’t like the previous plan and now that you cut off County Street access the new plan is a total disaster. He stated there will be a lot of changes to this area when the Casino goes in. He referenced the Dept. of Justice and if the decision isn’t challenged it could be built. They have to go through with the assumption that the casino will be there and the traffic is bad. Scott stated Chairman Ackerman’s statement is not accurate regarding the casino. Chairman Ackerman stated the traffic is a nightmare and it’s buyer beware because he noticed in the P&S there are restrictions. The petitioner should have been aware of what he was buying. Chairman Ackerman stated there were letters from previous case which should be included in the case. Wayne stated it would not be inappropriate to include those letter from original filing. Wayne made motion to include letters from previous filing, seconded by Steve. All in favor. Scott Faria, P.E. stated the biggest issues was traffic flow and they have closed off the northern access of County Street. There will be new curbing along the new road. They re-worked the traffic flow and removed some parking, reduce it to 13 parking spaces. Scott thinks it’s a much better plan and thinks this use will not generate as much traffic as 3 Cumberland Farms. He said it made the most sense to block off one of the County Street accesses. Steve said Cumberland Farms moved for a reason. He said he knows there is a neighborhood concerns from Johnson Street residents. He said they should have had a traffic sturdy. The entrance has been there for 35 years. Mr. MacDonald stated he thought he was giving the City what they wanted in putting in a less detrimental use and he spoke with immediate abutters and they are on board. Opposition letters: Scott & Carolyn Mulhern, and dept. letters were read into the record from Water, City Planner, Conservation Commission, Engineer, and B.OH. which were placed on file. David Cabral, traffic state they estimate 25-35 customer during the week. This type of business is typically busy Thursday – Sunday. A busy weekend would consist of 40- 50 customers. Typically on Sunday between 10 AM – 1 pm. You might have 145 – 20 customers but it’s not usual. At any one time you could have 8-10 customers and they are there between 1 hour or more with 30 minutes wash and 35 dryer time and folding. He stated the customers drive in for an hour or so and leave which would be considerable less than the previous use (store with gas) Steve asked Dave how he compiled his information? Dave answers he takes the industry average with the combined demographics of the area and square mile radius (3 mile radius) and that is the average. He stated this area is not densely populated but it’s still viable for a laundromat. It was asked the hours of operation? He noted the liquor store down the road is open till 10 pm. So they would like 6 am – 10 pm. He understands that Cumberland Farms has been there for 35 years and there has been a lot of problems but he feels this will be less congestive with traffic that Cumberland Farms was. He thinks this proposal will be a good fit with the neighborhood which consists of hair salons, liquor store, and a super market. Public Input: Patti Santos, 294 County St. called in t voiced her concerns. She runs a hair salon out of her house and she traffic coming from Johnson Street doesn’t stop at the stop sign. It’s a tough intersection and just this past Sunday there was an accident. Wayne asked if the lighting being proposed will not affect neighboring properties? Lighting will be on a timer and not interfere with neighboring properties and there will be 24 hour surveillance. They will add irrigation to the grassy area and will be re-doing the exterior of the building. Mr. MacDonald stated the 2 immediate abutters are in favor. Mike states it’s a good project and they did a good job with the updated plans. Motion made and seconded to grant with the following conditions: 1. Hours of Operation : 6 AM – 10 PM daily 2. Lighting shall not illuminate onto abutting properties. Vote: Ackerman, Vieira, Berube,……No Faria, Staples…….. .…………Yes Petition Denied 4 Cont’d. Case # 3546 Partners Choice Prop. LLC 170 Hart St. A variance from Section 440 Attachment # 3 of the Zoning Ordinance for the construction of two new duplex buildings on a lot having 31,679 sq. ft. of lot area & dry area (instead of 43,560 sq. ft. of lot area & dry area) with a side line setback of 11.3’ (instead of 15 feet ) Request to continue to August meeting Motion made and seconded to grant a continuance to next month and he extends the time frame on which to act on this proposal. Vote: Ackerman, Vieira, Faria, Staples, Berube….Yes Petition continued. Case #3547 Binda 60 Old Colony Ave. & Prop. I.D. 96-29, 96-30 and 93-31 A Variance from Section 440 Attachment #3 & 440-602 of the Zoning Ordinance for the re-configuration of 3 lots into 2 lots. Lot A having 14,035 sq. ft. (instead of 30,000 sq. ft.) with 10,147 sq. ft. dry area (instead of 22,500 sq. ft.) with 70.24’of frontage (instead of 125’) lot width of 66’ (instead of 100’) and a shape factor of 39 (instead of 35) Lot B having 12,018 sq. ft. & dry area (instead of 30,000 sq. ft. & 22,500 sq. ft. dry area) 70 ‘of frontage (instead of 125’) and 68’ of lot width (instead of 100’) on premises situated at 60 Old Colony Avenue 96-29, and property I.D. 96-30 and property I.D. 96-31. Request to continue to September meeting.. Motion made and seconded to grant continuance to September and he extends the time frame on which to act on this proposal. Vote: Ackerman ,Berube, Faria, Staples, Vieira…Yes Petition continued to September. Case #3548 Bourdeau Davis St. prop. I.D. 53, lots 302 & 313 For: A Variance from Section 440 Attachment #3 of the Zoning Ordinance to allow 2 lots not serviced by municipal water & sewer: Lot A having 120’ of frontage (instead of 125) with 14,400 sq. ft. of lot area & dry area (instead of 30,000 sq. ft. lot area & 22,500 sq. ft. dry area) and Lot B having 120 of frontage (instead of 125’) and 15,531 sq. ft. of lot area & dry area (instead of 30,000 sq. ft. lot area & 22,500 sq. ft. dry area) for property located on the east side of Tremont Avenue and west side of Davis Street known as Assessors Map 53, lots 302 & 313. For the Petitioner: Brad Fitzgerald, P.E., SFG Associates, Inc., 28 Main St., Lakeville, Ma. In favor: petition signed by 9 abutters in favor. Opposed: None Brad explains both lots are owned by same owner and the wish to divide to have one lot fronting on Davis St. and one lot fronting on Tremont Ave. All the property is try and 5 each lot will have their own septic system. The reason they are here is because the lots will not be serviced by municipal water & sewer so they have to meet the suburban residential district requirements. Brad says they can easily fit a septic system on the lots and he say the lots will be fit into the neighborhood. The majority of the neighborhood doesn’t have 30,000 sq. ft. There will be no traffic concerns. They are proposing a single family house on each lot. Wayne says given the size of the lot where is the hardship? Brad answers they have a 1899 plans showing it being separate lots. Wayne stated things change and they have been using it as one lot. He states it’s not realistic. It’s zoned Suburban residential. Brad said it’s actually in the Urban Residential District but due to the fact they are not connecting to city sewer & water they are now required to comply with Suburban Residential District. Brad stated the proposed lot sizes matches the neighborhood. Chairman Ackerman read dept. letters from the Water Dept., City Planner, Conservation Commission, Eng. And B.O.H. Motion made and seconded to grant as presented: Wayne stated he hadn’t got out to look at the property and if he was were to vote tonight it would be a negative vote. He asks if they would consider continuing if the applicant was agreeable? Scott withdrew his motion to grant as presented, seconded by Mike. Steve made motion to grant the applicants request for a continuance, seconded by Wayne. All in favor. Vote: Ackerman, Vieira, Berube, Faria, Staples.……Yes Petition continued Case #3549 Tavares 137 Dunbar St .& Prop I.D. 45-143 For: A Variance from Section 440 Attachment #3 of the Zoning Ordinance to allow Lot A having 54,108 sq. ft. lot area (instead of 60,000 sq. ft.) and 26,746 sq. ft. dry area (instead of 43,560 sq. ft.) ; Lot B having 48,908 sq. ft. lot area (instead of 60,000 sq. ft.) and 22,362 sq. ft. dry area (instead of 43,560 sq. ft.) and Lot C having 49,420 sq. ft. lot area (instead of 60,000 sq .ft.) with 36,901 sq .ft. of dry area (instead of 43,560 sq. ft.) on premise situated at 137 Dunbar Street and property I.D. 45-143, Taunton, Ma For the Petitioner: Brad Fitzgerald, P.E. SFG Associates, 28 Main St., Taunton, Ma. In favor: None Opposed: Jason Ladino, 41 Dunbar St., Taunton, Ma. Youngmi O’Brien, 28 Dunbar St. Taunton, Ma. Francisco Melo, 78 Dunbar St., Taunton, Ma. Mary Camara, 128 Dunbar St., Taunton, Ma. WilliamWatson, 178 Dunbar St., Taunton, Ma. Jose Narciso, 106 Dunbar St. , Taunton, Ma. Frederick R. Martin, IV, 71 Dunbar St. Taunton, Ma. 6  Marcia Mota, 149 Dunbar St. Taunton, Ma. . Brad stated they are here tonight for 3 lots and asking for variances for lot area, dry area, frontage, and setbacks. He stated the hardship is that the wetlands cut across the property. They are proposing 2 more new houses on each lot having a little over an acre each. He stated due to the wetlands on lots they will have septic system and city water. Wayne asked if this was the same request in 2015 and it was denied? He stated he didn’t’ see any change and he thinks its no appropriate. Wayne remembers this because it was near the mobile home park. Brad stated the petitioner had a land swap to create the southerly property line and the it was added to his property. Chairman Ackerman read dept. letters from the City Planner, Water, Conservation Commission Engineer and B.O.H. Also letter of opposition from Jason Ladino, 41 Dunbar St.and 8 abutters signed petition. Brad pointed out that the neighboring properties do not have the required lot area. They are proposing more than an acre lots. Public Input: Maria Mota, 149 Dunbar St. stated the wetland affect her house. Jason Ladino, 41 Dunbar St. stated 3 lots is too much he would not mind seeing 2 lots. Brad stated his client is not present to see what he would want to do. Steve stated he’s not in favor of the current proposal. Wayne stated he would not be in favor of this request. He suggests making the petitioner aware and perhaps they can withdraw. Brad stated he would like to continue to next month. Motion made and seconded to grant a continuance to next month. Ackerman, Vieira, Berube, Vieira, Faria……..Yes Petition Continued Case #3550 Fontes 791 Staples St. and prop. I.D. 134-96 A Variance from Section 440 Attachment #2 of the Zoning Ordinance to allow a commercial use for the production of baked goods in a single family home and a variance from section 440-702 for the required commercial parking on premises situated at 791 Staples Street and property I.D. 134-96. For the Petitioner: Amber Fontes, 791 Staples St., E. Taunton, Ma. In favor: Michael & Patricia House, P. O. Box 581,E. Taunton, Ma. Opposed: Jim & Joanne Hooper, 20 Holloway St., E. Taunton, Ma. She is requesting to have a commercial kitchen in her house to allow her to cook from home and allow her to be home with her children. She has a degree in Business Administration and has all food safety and sanitation certifications and is a licensed exam proctor for Servesafe. There will be no construction occurring on site and the B.O.H will need to do an inspection. She will be baking and traveling to farmer’s markets also doing wedding cakes. She will be strictly wholesale and she will delivery her goods (wholesome sweets home bakery) She has well water and it gets tested 2 times a year. Letters from John & Jim Hooper, opposed and brought up some activities that have been going on in the neighborhood. Letter from Pat & Mike House who ae in favor now after petitioner will be conducting her business. She addressed the concerns in the letter from 7 the Hoopers and said she is aware of someone in the neighborhood who burns and she states she’s not even outside that late because of her children. Letters from the City Planner, Conservation commission, Engineer and Water were read into the record. Wayne asked if there will be any employees and she answers no. She stated there won’t even be deliveries because she goes to Restaurant Depot to get her supplies. Amber said she spoke to one neighbor and left note on other neighbor’s door. It was asked what hours was she planning on and she said she has to submit that to the Board of Health but most likely Thurs – Sunday 6 AM – 12. It’s hard to say exactly because it’s per order only that she will be working. It was suggested leaving the hours up to the Board of Health. The Board was satisfied there will be no customer come to the property and no deliveries. Motion made and seconded to grant with the following conditions: 1. There shall be no customers coming to the site and no employees that do not live on the premises 2. Lighting shall not illuminate onto abutting properties. Vote: Ackerman, Berube, Vieira, Faria, Staples…….Yes Petition Granted Case #3551 MRH Holdings LLC 13 Cherry St. & (47-405 & 47-406) For: A for a Variance from Section 440 Attachment #3 of the Zoning Ordinance to allow the division of one lot into two lots with lot 1 meeting all requirements and lot 2 having 8,604 sf of lot area and dry area instead of the required 15,000 sq. ft. of lot area and 11,250 sf min dry area on premises situated at 13 Cherry Street and property I.D. 47- 406. For the Petitioner: Atty. Brianna Correira, 123 Broadway, Taunton, Ma. In favor: None Opposed: Louis Borges, 54 Cherry St., Taunton, Ma. Lisa Hebert, 21 Cherry St., Taunton, Ma. Kelley Gildea, 17 Cherry St., Taunton, Ma. Atty. Correira stated the properties have merged for zoning purposed and the request is to divide them into two lots. One lot will be a conforming lot and the other will be non- conforming lot. The hardship is the shape of lot. The proposal is to construct a single family or duplex dwelling on new lot. There are several multi-families in the neighborhood so a single or duplex will be compatible. She stated this will have a positive effect on the neighborhood and bring in revenue to the City and not a significant amount of traffic generated from the development of this lot. Chairman Ackerman read dept. letters from the City Planner, B.O.H, Engineer, Water Dept., Conservation Commission, and letter from Kelly Gildea, 17 Cherry St. in opposition. Public Input: Louis Borges, 54 Cherry St. stated the property is located on the corner and it’s a bad 8 corner and people park on the street. He stated there is a 2 family there now and they can’t fit 4 cars there now. Lisa Hebert, 21 Cherry St. also said it’s a dangerous area and she agrees with Mr. Borges. Motion made and seconded to grant with the following conditions: 1. Parking plan approved by City Engineer prior to occupancy permit is issued 2. Restricted to single family or 2 family (duplex). No triplex allowed. Vote: Ackerman, Berube, Vieira, Faria, Staples…….Yes Petition Granted Meeting adjourned at 8:33 PM 9