Zoning Board of Appeals

MINUTES ZONING BOARD OF APPEALS November, 19, 2020 at 6:00 PM (held virtually via Zoom at 15 Summer St) Members Present roll call:: Dennis Ackerman, Wayne Berube, Craig Faria, George Moniz, Steve Vieira, Michael Staples, and Scott Rodrigues, Meeting opens at 6:01 PM 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.” Motion made and seconded to accept Sept. 24, 2020 minutes, All in favor. Chairman Ackerman suggesting cancelling December meeting due to no cases received and have the next meeting in January. Motion made and seconded to have the next meeting on January 28, 2021. Cont’d. Case #3552 Cabral 83 First St. For: A Special Permit from Section 440-503 of the Zoning Ordinance for the expansion of a pre-existing non-conforming structure by allowing the proposed addition to be 7.2 feet (instead of 15 feet) & a Variance from Section 440 Attachment #3 for a side setback of 11 feet (instead of 15 feet) for the proposed garage. Letter requesting a continuance. Motion made and seconded to grant continuance. Vote: Berube, Vieira, Moniz, Faria, Ackerman….Yes Petition continued to January 28, 2021. Case #3555 Pereira 4 Couch St. A variance from Section 440-602 & Section 440 attachment #3 of the Zoning Ordinance to allow two dwellings on one lot; having 85 feet of frontage & lot width (instead of 100’) and 10 foot side setback (instead of 15’) for the proposed 24’ x 28’ detached garage with apartment above. 1 Request to withdraw petition. Motion made and seconded to allow the petition to be withdrawn. Vote: Ackerman, Faria, Berube, Vieira, Moniz….yes Petition withdrawn. Case # 3565 Sanson 980 Bay St. For: A Variance from Section 440 attachment 3 of the Zoning Ordinance for the division of one lot into two lots with one lot having 21,229 sq. ft. of lot area (instead of 30,000 sq. ft) with 18,688 sq. ft. dry area (instead of 22,500 sq. ft.) For the Petitioner: Atty. Daniel deAbreu 174 Dean St., Taunton, Ma Richard Reid, P.E., Lighthouse Land Surveying Co. 27 Jefferson St., Taunton, Ma. In favor: None Opposed: None Atty. deAbreu started they are here again because they received approval from the Planning Board by the Repetitive Petition which allowes this case back to the ZBA. The change from the original is now they are proposing one conforming lot and one non- conforming lot which needs zoning relief. The prior submittal that was denied had both lots requiring zoning relief. Atty. deAbreu explains the property is along Bay Street and Whittenton Street. Wayne asked why did they choose to make Lot 1 non-conforming. He’s happy there is at least one conforming lot. Atty. deAbreu state they chose lot 2 to be the conforming lot so there will be plenty of room for new house. Wayne stated the City Planner recommends adding 500 square feet from the conforming lot to the non- conforming lot and it was asked if they considered that? Atty. deAbreu stated they could look at that. Wayne asked what the hardship was and Atty. deAbreu answers the fact that the Mill River is right in back and they have lost some square footage because of the river. Steve asked if they would be agreeable l to a single family and it was answered yes. Dennis stated during the repetitive petition with the P.B. it was suggested they tie into sewer so he just wanted to state that to the board. Chairman Ackerman read dept. comments to the Conservation Commission, Water Dept., Engineer and City Planner into the record. Public Input: No one in favor or opposed Motion made and seconded to grant as Presented with the following conditions: 1. Both lots be single family and tie into municipal sewer and water. Vote: Ackerman, Vieira, Berube, Faria, Moniz…..Yes Petition granted Case # 3566 Alves 464 Weir St. For: A Variance from Section 440 Attachment 3 of the Zoning Ordinance to allow a 3 family dwelling on a lot having 10,007 sq. ft. (instead of 15,000 sq. ft.) 2 For the Petitioner: Inacio Alves, 464 Weir St., Taunton, Ma. In favor: None Opposed: None Mr. Alves states the house is set up as a 3 family but unfortunately its only legally listed as a two-family with the building department. He stated but they have been taxed as a 3 family since 2005. George asked if this was across the street from the dunkin donuts on Weir Street and it was answered yes. George said he might have to sprinkle the property and Mr. Alves said he might appeal. Chairman Ackerman read dept. comments from the Conservation Commission, Water, Engineer, B.O.H., and City Planner which were placed on file. Chairman Ackerman asked if he knew he need SP with P.B. and he said yes he’s aware of that. Public Input: no one in favor or opposed. Motion made and seconded to grant as Presented: Vote: Berube, Faria, Moniz, Vieira, Ackerman……Yes Petition granted Case # 3567 Myette 965 Rocky Woods St. For: A Variance from Section 440 Attachment #3 of the Zoning Ordinance for the division of one lot into two lots with Lot A having 53,724 sq. ft. of lot area (instead of 60,000 sq. ft.) and 22,700 sq. ft. dry area (instead of 43,560 sq. ft.) Lot B having 31,380 sq. ft. dry area (instead of 43,560 sq. ft.) For the Petitioner: Karen Patneaude, P.E., Earth Services Corp., 198 Crane Ave. So. Taunton, Ma In favor: None Opposed: None Karen explains they are proposing the division of one lot into two lots resulting in one conforming lot and the other needed zoning relief. The parcel is large and there is a significant amount of wetlands on it. The petitioner is currently out of work due to the pandemic. She stated someone has expressed interest in the property and they have spent a lot of money on plans. They will need to move the well which is another expense. They will go to the B.O.H to see about their comments. They might need variance from B.O.H. Karen said they have the support from abutter across the street. Wayne asked if there is sewer and Karen says no they will do perk test for septic system. Chairman Ackerman reads dept. letters from the B.O.H., Engineer, City Planner, and Water dept. into the record. Public Input: no one in favor or opposed. Motion made and seconded to grant as Presented: Vote; Berube, Faria, Moniz, Vieira, Ackerman….Yes Petition granted 3 Case # 3568 Semedo 5 Purchase St For: A Special Permit from Section 440-502 f the Zoning Ordinance for the extension of a non-conforming structure by allowing a roof over the existing deck having an 1.8’ sideline setback. For the Petitioner: Estele Borges representing applicant Jose Semedo, 5 Purchase St., Taunton, Ma. In favor: Petition signed by 30 residents in support Opposed: Brenda Fonseca, 178 School St., Taunton, Ma. Dr. Paul Jacques, 180 School St., Taunton, Ma. Ethan Jacques, 180 School St., Tautnon, Ma. Estele stated they they purchased the house in 2011 they was a deck there and in 2019 they put a new deck in and they most recently put a roof over it. They have spent $5,000 and were unaware they need to get plans and permits. She stated she submitted a petition signed by many residents in favor. She is aware there are several neighbors in opposition and have even submitted photos. She in one phot there is a balloon of which they refer to as a “disco ball”. The petitioner had a graduation party for daughter and it was outsid and they also had some balloons. They have been good neighbors. She stated the opposition had called DEP for an “alleged” oil spill and the petitioner had to then spend $7,000 for an environmental study to remove an oil tank. The incident is a result from one particular person. Estele stated she remembers this house growing up as the “Ventura” home and stated the deck has been there. There was no change in size. Wayne aksed if he applied for building permit and Estele answers no. She stated he was unaware he needed a permit since the deck was there and he only put a roof over it. He was then informed by the Building Department to stop. They stopped and had to have land surveyed to file with ZBA. Steve stated a petition was submitted with about 30 residents in favor. Chairman Ackerman stated the original deck was there. Scott asked if the roof was already there and did they add walls? Estele answers the direct abutters who would b most affected is in favor. Chairman Ackerman stated he looked at it and it’ s not walled in. He stated it has been testified the original deck was there. Chairman Ackerman read dept. comments from the Conservation Commission, Water, City Planner, Engineer and B.O.H. were placed on file. Estele stated she was told they had a graduation party in August and they did have cars parked along the street but she doesn’t’ believe there are any police reports. Public Input: Dr. Paul Jacques, 180 School St. stated he directly abuts the property and Ms. Borges’s testimony on it being the Ventura home is inaccurate. They did not buy it from the Ventura. He stated the structure went up in the spring of this year and he sent in pictures showing walls on the west & north sides. The roof is attached to the house and they have parties there every weekend. They have been inconsiderate neighbors. He said the police have been called multiple times and they use this as a party place. There a pattern that exists and they have no regard for the neighbors. He stated the structure is an eyesore and he thinks it should be taken down. He also sent in letter to the Board which was read into the record. Wayne stated the pictures show a lot of rubbish and asked when were they taken? Mr. Jacques 4 answers within the past 2 weeks. Letter from Brenda Fonseca, 178 School St. was read into the record. She agrees Ms. Borges testimony is off and she has attended many cookouts and the deck was 1/3 the size. She also pointed out there was a wedding about a month ago and the party went on to 2 AM with lights & music. She stated she was the victim of the oil spill. Estele stated she mistakenly said the work was done in June of 2019 and it was June of 2020. She stated there are no walls and the rubbish is from the small family wedding they had about a month ago. Opposed: Ethan Jacques, 180 School Street stated he’ s a renter and it’s very frustrating of how they party late at night with no regards for neighbors. He stated on Nov. 17th the police were called because the wedding was over the gathering limit and 5 police cars in July because of another party. They have a 55’inch tv out there for sporting events. Estele stated the direct abutters all signed petition in support. She did say they had small family wedding and when she was there the place on clean. Paul Jacques said he’s an abutter too. Estlee showed the accessor’s map showing where Mr. Jacques lives. Steve suggested continuing to see if see if any permits were pulled prior to their ownership. Was the roof top added recently and was the deck their prior to their ownership? Estele comments on her comment about the “Ventura” house because she grew up in the area and it then owned by the Ventura family. Estele stated she reached out the broker who listed the property to see about pictures but have not received a call back. It was asked if they would waive the time frame on which to act on this proposal and they agreed. Motion made and seconded to grant to continue to January 28, 2021 meeting and request report from Police Dept. to see if there were any incidents, calls within the last year. Vote; Berube, Faria, Moniz, Vieira, Ackerman….Yes Petition continued to Jan. 28, 2021 Case # 3569 Rose 5 Alegi Ave For: A Variance from Section 440 Attachment #3 of the Zoning Ordinance for an garage extension to have a 1.8’ side setback (instead of 15 feet) and 6.1’ rear setback (instead of 20 feet) For the Petitioner: Debra Rose, 5 Alegi Ave., Taunton, Ma. In favor: None Opposed: Mark Monteiro, 3 Alegi Ave., Taunton, Ma. Ms. Rose explains how they had the foundation poured for her garage and found out that due to an error the foundation is closer that what was allowed from the previous variance (5 feet) now it’s about 1.8 from side. She unfortunately did not have the foundation staked and now is asking for additional relief. Chairman Ackerman read letter from the Water, Conservation Commission, City Planner, Engineer and B.O.H were placed on file. Letter from Mark Monteiro, 3 Alegi Ave. asking if approved to incorporate his recommendations into the decision. Ms. Rose agree to neighbor’s requests. Steve asked what the height is of the garage and she answered they reduced the garage size to 20 x 18 5 with a second floor for storage only. Public input: no one in favor to opposed. Wayne suggests incorporating the neighbor’s recommendations into the decision. Motion made and seconded to grant with the following conditions: 1. No one shall enter onto 3 Alegi Avenue to perform any work for 5 Alegi Ave. 2. No construction equipment shall enter 3 Alegi Ave. for access or to perform any work for 5 Alegi Ave. 3. Petitioner is required to erect a fence prior to construction to ensure no trespass occurs onto 3 Alegi Avenue. 4. Petitioner to remove the fence that crosses the property line of 3 Alegi Ave. prior to any work on the garage. Vote; Berube, Faria, Staples. Vieira, Ackerman….Yes Petition granted Case # 3570 Mountain Dog Operating LLC 425 Constitution Dr. For: A Variance from Section 440-603 of the Zoning Ordinance for a reduction of the rear setback from 50 feet to 40 feet in an Industrial District. For the Petitioner: Ken Motta, Project Manager, Field Engineering Co., P.O. Box P. O. Box 1178, Mattapoisett, Ma. In favor: None Opposed: None Ken explains how they are expanding the business and they are adding 3 additions to the existing building and need zoning relief for the rear setback from 50 feet to 40 feet. The building was constructed in 2006 and they will be doing some improvements to the site and this relief will allow them to move forward. They have met preliminary with the Conservation Commission and have no issues. Chairman Ackerman reads dept. comments from the Conservation commission, City Planner, Engineer, B.O.H., and water dept. which were placed on file. Public Input: no one in favor or opposed. Wayne stated he’s happy the business has been so successful and he sees these improvements to be a positive. Steve states the business is an asset to the City. Motion made and seconded to grant as Presented: Vote; Berube, Faria, Staples, Vieira, Ackerman….Yes Petition granted 6 Case # 3571 Louro Blue Jay Lane Lot 71 – prop. I.D. 120-81 For: A Variance from Section 440 Attachment #3 of the Zoning Ordinance for the development of a lot having 31,469 sq. ft. of lot area & dry area (instead of 60,000 sq. ft. lot area & 43,560 sq. ft. dry area) For the Petitioner: Atty. Melinda Kwart, Percy Law Group, 4 Court St., Taunton, Ma. In favor: None Opposed: None Atty. Kwart stated they are here tonight to seek zoning relief for this left over lot from Tiffany Gardens. The subdivision was approved when the lot size was 25,000 s.f with and now it required 60,000 sq. ft. with 43,560 sq. ft. dry area. It was asked what kind of house will it be and Atty. Kwart stated she didn’t know Mr. Louro just wants to sell the lot to help subside his retirement. She pointed out the lot is no different than others in the area the only thing is this lot wasn’t development within the time frame of the approval. He has been paying taxes on this for the last 20 years. Chairman Ackerman asked about the 50 ROW on plans and she answers that is gone, it’s no longer in affect. Steve asked why this lot isn’t grandfathered? The secretary informed the Board that you have 8 years after a subdivision is approved to build, after that you must comply with the current zoning requirements. Chairman Ackerman read dept. comments from the City Planner, Conservation Commission, B.O.H., and Water Dept. Wayne asked if the developer would be building on the lot and Atty. Kwart answered no he’s an elderly man now and will be selling lot. Motion made and seconded to grant with the following condition: 1. Lot must be serviced by municipal water & sewer if available. Vote; Berube, Faria, Moniz, Vieira, Ackerman….Yes Petition granted George Moniz excused from meeting. Case # 3572 Barros 9 & 9 ½ Plain St. For: A Variance from Section 440 Attachment #3 of the Zoning Ordinance for a rear yard setback of 8.6’ (instead of 20’) and side yard setbacks of 6.4’ and 7.7’ (instead of 15’) For the Petitioner: Roy DeLano, P.E., Lighthouse Land Surveying Co., 27 Jefferson St., Taunton, Ma. In favor: None Opposed: None The petitioner purchased the house in April 2019 as a two family dwelling. He rents out 9 Plain Street and lives at 9 ½ Plain Street. He wants his parents to live with him and 7 they hired a builder to obtain building permit for addition. Because of the language barrier he relied on the builder to do the proper thing and unfortunately he did not obtain the permits. He received notice to stop and seek zoning relief. The small addition is just about completed and they need setbacks variances. The addition is basically a bedroom for parents. The property is very thickly settle area with lots of homes. The smaller lots are not out of harmony with the neighborhood. Wayne stated they are basically added an in-law and it was stated no just a bedroom for parents. Chairman Ackerman read dept. comments from the City Planner, Engineer, Conservation Commission, Water and B.O.H. into the record. Steve stated the parcel already has an 2 family dwelling located on it and they just want to expand it a little. It was asked if they obtained a building permit and it was stated they need variance first. It was stated they just need to add a door or window and the addition is done. There is no one living there yet. Public Input: no one in favor or against. Motion made and seconded to grant as Presented: Vote; Berube, Faria, Staples, Vieira, Ackerman….Yes Petition granted Case # 3573 75 Wales Street Realty Trust Wales St., Parcel I.D. 65-395 For: A Variance from Section 440-602 and 440- Attachment # 3 of the Zoning Ordinance to allow the construction of a 2-family dwelling on a lot that has merged for zoning purposes with 75 Wales Street (Assessor’s parcel 65-394) Assessor’s parcel 65-395 having 7,802 sq. ft. of lot area & dry area (instead of 15,000 sq. ft. of lot area & 11,250 sq. ft. dry area) with 59.85 feet of frontage & lot width (instead of 100 feet) and a side yard setback of 12.7 feet (instead of 15 feet) . For the Petitioner: Atty. Daniel deAbreu, 174 Dean St., Taunton, Ma. Azu Etonino, P.E., E.T. Engineering Enterprises Inc., 481 Bedford St., Bridgewater, Ma. In favor: None Opposed: None The property has a 2 family located on it and it has been taxed as two lots. 75 Wales Street has been renovated with new roof and as soon as next week it will be getting siding. Atty. deAbreu states a two family dwelling will fit in nice with the neighborhood. Wayne asked the hardship is mainly based on the fact that these lots were treated as two lots? Atty. deAbreu stated it used to have a home located on it. Wayne didn’t agree with his hardship. Wayne stated the house was purchased in Aug. 2020 and they have merged for zoning purposes. Both lots are too small. Atty. deAbreu stated they would be proposing and up/down two family as opposed to side by side. Chairman Ackerman read dept. letters from the Conservation Commission, Water, City Planner and Engineer into the record. Public Input: no one in favor or opposed. Wayne stated he didn’t see any hardship. Motion made and seconded to grant as Presented: 8 Vote; Berube, Vieira, Faria, Ackerman….No Staples…………………………Yes Petition Denied: Case # 3574 Donovan 12 Edson St. For: A Variance from Section 440 Attachment #3 of the Zoning Ordinance for a 13.5’ front yard setback (instead of 25’) from Edson Street and Hoover Street. For the Petitioner: Roy DeLano, P.E., Lighthouse Land Surveying Co., 27 Jefferson St., Taunton, Ma. In favor: Robin Moore, 10 Edson St., Taunton ,Ma. Barbara Gagne, 11 Edson St., Taunton, Ma. Pat Sylvester, 39 Hoover St., Taunton, Ma. Opposed: None Roy explains the petitioner purchased the property in June 2020 and has since razed the building. The property is on a corner lot and therefore has 2 front & 2 side yard setbacks. The lots were created in the 1920s and the layout for the street is 50 feet wide but the actual pavement width is about 17 feet wide. There are very few homes on this dead end street. This lot will be compatible with the surrounding properties. Letters of support from neighbors who want the house to be located in line with the existing houses. Chairman Ackerman read dept. letters from Conservation Commission, Engineer, City Planner, and B.O.H and 3 letters of support. Wayne said the applicant just purchased the property in June 2020 for $58,000. It was a really dilapidated building and they tore it down and Wayne assume the petitioner will live there? It was answered petitioner will live in new home. Public Input: No one In favor or opposed. Motion made and seconded to as presented with the following condition: 1. Must tie into city water & sewer. Vote: Berube, Faria, Staples ,Vieira, Ackerman….Yes Petition granted Case # 3575 Braga 38 Fairview Ave. For: A Special Permit from Section 440-503 of the Zoning Ordinance to allow the extension of a pre-existing non-conforming garage resulting in a 1.8’side setback. For the Petitioner: Jeffrey Braga, 38 Fairview Ave., Taunton, Ma. 9 In favor: None Opposed: None Mr. Braga explained how he extended his garage without the proper permits. He extended the garage to provide storage space forhis father’s antique cars. Chairman Ackerman read dept. comments from the Conservation Commission, City Planner, B.O.H and Engineer which were placed on file. Public Input: no one in favor or opposed. Motion made and seconded to grant as Presented: Vote; Berube, Faria, Staples, Vieira, Ackerman…..….Yes Petition granted Case # 3576 Thomas 9 Lanes Ave. For: A Variance from Section 440-602 & Section 440 Attachment #3 of the Zoning Ordinance for the division of one lot into two lots. Both lots having 76.05’ of frontage on Lanes Ave and 74.87’ of frontage on Blinn’s Court (instead of 100 feet) 9,056 sq. ft. lot area & dry area (instead of 15,000 sq. ft. of lot area & 11,250 sq. ft. dry area) Lot 1 having 76.59’ of lot width & lot 2 having 75.02’ of lot width (instead of 100’) For the Petitioner: Roy DeLano, P.E., Lighthouse Land Surveying Co. 27 Jefferson St., Taunton, Ma. In favor: None Opposed: Cheryl Woods, 13 Blinn’s Court , Taunton, Ma. George & Maria Chaves, 17 Blinn’s Court, Taunton, Ma. Serafina deSousa, 20 Blinn’s Court, Taunton, Ma. Roy stated the petitioner purchased the property in 2017 hoping to build on it for additional income. He stated he and his son currently reside in the existing 2 family house. There is an open grass area and they wish to build on that lot and they have provided 4 parking spaces. Roy explains the neighborhood consists of smaller lots and putting a duplex on the lot will remain in harmony with the neighborhood. Blinn’s Court is a dead end and if developed there will be little impact to traffic. The layout of the lot looks like a house should be placed there, it sticks out because it’s vacant. He stated he would be helpful to have son live with him to keep eye out for him. Roy points out the lots have ample frontage but it’s on two streets. He stated they could put a 3 family on the property but they would be out of character. Chairman Ackerman read dept. letters from the City Planner, Conservation Commission, Engineer and B.O.H. Opposed: letters from Cheryl Woods, Maria Chaves and Serafina deSousa. It was brought to the Board’s attention by Ms. deSousa’s letter that this property has been before the Board twice and denied twice. Public Input: Estele Borges representing Serafina deSousa stating the lot size has not changes, they just re-configured it different. It’s still too small. Wayne stated he read both denials and feels there is no hardship and they are using the property as a two-family now. Roy points out in 2005 there were 17 abutters in favor and 3 in 10 favor in 2003. It was stated they could put a 3 family in and Dennis reminded them they would need to go the Planning Board for a Special Permit and that Board determines it fits in they can approve. Roy stated they could put a large single family or a duplex. It was asked why didn’t’ the get the support of the neighborhood? Motion made and seconded to grant as Presented: Vote: Faria, Staples………………..Yes Berube, Vieira, Ackerman…...No Petition Denied Meeting adjourned at 8:36 PM Next meeting January 28, 2021 at 6 PM 11