Zoning Board of Appeals

MINUTES ZONING BOARD OF APPEALS September 28, 2023 at 6:00 PM at 15 Summer St- City Hall Members Present: Dennis Ackerman, Seth Turner, Steve Vieira, Craig Faria, George Moniz, Scott Rodrigues and John Joyce. Meeting opens at 6:03PM Chairman Ackerman asked for a moment of silence and sending healing thoughts to the 5 police officer insured in the line of duty on Tuesday. Chairman Ackerman explains the ZBA process. They hear presentation from petitioner, hear opposition and in favor and then go back to petitioner to answer any questions. They do not go back and forth. Chairman Ackerman stated he would be asking if any board member has any conflict on any cases. Case # 3740 O P Real Estate LLC 176 Highland St. & prop. I.D. 76-369 For: A Variance from Section 440-602, Section 440 Attachment # 3 and a Special Permit from Section 440 Attachment #1 of the Zoning Ordinance to allow the addition of 4 condo units behind the existing home resulting in 5 residential units on a lot having 33,662 sq. ft. of lot area & dry area (instead of 43,560 sq. ft. dry area & lot area) and 80 feet of frontage & lot width (instead of 100 feet) For the Petitioner: Atty. Robert Pellegrini, PK Boston Law, 63 Main St ., Ste. 1, Bridgewater, Ma. Evan Watson, 27 Jefferson St.. Taunton, Ma. In favor: None Opposed: Jenna Lach, 263 Winthrop St., Taunton, Ma. Ronald Leitao, 14 Laurel St.,Taunton, Ma. Todd Leitao, 10 Laurel St, Taunton, Ma. Atty. Pellegrini stated he represents petitioner Flavio Ferreira who is teaming up with a friend for this proposal. Flavio lives in front wishes to add 4 more units in back resulting in a total of 5 units. The lot is irregular shaped in it being long and narrow. They have provided 11 parking spaces and a dumpster pad. They have provided updated plans showing adequate fire access. They have provided a 24 foot wide driveway with 9 x 18 parking spaces and a turnaround. They did a fire truck analysis. They are proposing 3 bedroom units (or 2 Bedroom with office) They are proposing the same architect with similar gable. They will be providing much needed housing. They think this will transition good to the neighboring condo developments. The new buildings wont’ be 1 seen from the street. Atty. Pellegrini stated the petitioner is struggling with mortgage so this will help. These additional units will generate revenue to help with this financial situation. They have provide enough parking, family oriented outdoor area. Chairman Ackerman pointed out the fact that it would be difficult to sell leads him to believe the petitioner will be moving. Atty. Pellegrini answers the petitioner is having issues with money and trying to stay if he brings money in. Chairman Ackerman states they would do a duplex by right but would need approval for 2 houses on one lot. The City recently changes the rules on 3 family by right in Urban Residential District. Steve sympathizes with the petitioner but he stated finance is not a hardship . He asked about the percentage of lot coverage? Evan answers there is 14% structure coverage. Steve asked about snow storage and it was answered they way they positioned parking there is plenty of room. George asked what happens when the snow melts? Evan stated they would have to do test pits and provide drainage. George asked about the dumpster and it was answered it would be enclosed with fence. Evan stated there won’t be much added traffic, maybe 3- 4 trips in morning and night. They are providing parking on site. George has received a few calls and he would like maybe to see only one duplex. It’s a small lot and he would have no issue with one duplex. John stated you are proposing 5 units with 3 bedrooms you will have more people with vehicles and there is no parking on Highland St. John stated they are constantly there with major issue and his fear with having 3 bedrooms it will put cars on Highland St. George asked what the hardship is and it was answered financial and the shape of the lot. John stated your argument was having a large apartment building next door this proposal will be the ideal transition but he doesn’t agree. Scott asked about sewer and they said they would tie into sewer. Public Input: Ronald Leitao, 14 Laurel St. asked about what kind of fence will be put up and where is snow going? His concerns is drainage runoff. Who’s is responsible for the driveway and it was answered they are. How often will the dumpster be emptied and hopefully won’t attract rats. Evan answered they can put up 7 foot fence and the next stop is P.B. with detailed drainage, utilities. He stated the driveway will be the responsibility of the owner, They will have homeowner’s association to take care of plow, dumpster, etc. He state the dumpster will most likely be emptied once a week between 8-4 pm .He stated they could consider one duplex only. Dept. comments were read into the record from the City Planner, Conservation Commission, Engineer, Water Dept., B.O.H and Fire Dept. Letter of opposition from Jen Lach, 263 Winthrop St. was also read into the record. George said they will probably sell for $479,000. Atty. Pellegrini stated they will consider one duplex and asks for a continuance and he waives the time frame on which to act on the proposal. Motion made and seconded to grant a continuance and acknowledge the time frame has been waived. Have updated plans showing one duplex, show fencing and parking. . Vote: Turner, Ackerman, Faria, Vieira, Moniz …Yes Petition continued to Oct. 26, 2023 Documents used as part of the hearing were: Dept. comments from City Planner, Conservation Commission, Engineer, Water Dept., B.O.H and Fire Dept. Letter of opposition from Jen Lach, 263 Winthrop St., plans 2 Case # 3367 – mod. Eastside Prop. Dev. Burt St. Map 61,Lot 11 For: A modification of Case # 3367 to remove Lot 3 from condition #2 - relative to the No Cut Zone starting at a distance of 450 feet back from the front property line unless a septic system must be placed in that area on premises situated on Burt St., Map 61, Lot 11 For the Petitioner: Marc Mason, 620 Burt St., Taunton, Ma. Peter Lavoie, Eng.,D&L Design Group, 115 Water St., Milford, Ma. In favor: None Opposed: None Peter says they have an existing lot on Burt Street on the Tremont St. side. The lot is 11.66 acres but has a no cut zone at 450 feet back. Unfortunately they were unaware of this. They are trying to remove the no cut zone in order for them to develop the site. The lot has 524 feet of frontage and 424 feet of the frontage is wet so they are trying to put a common driveway to access 3 lots. They have filed with the Conservation Commission and an ANF (Form A) with the Planning Board. There are wetlands on the property and it’s in the floodplain. They are asking that the no cut zone be removed on this conforming lot. The 2 other lots have been built on. The no cut zone was put on the 2017 approval and they don’t know what the rationale was. Chairman Ackerman stated the petitioner purchased the lot and did title search and should have been made aware of this. He stated they need to convince him. Someone didn’t’ do their homework in regard to the no cut zone being on the approval. Steve has never seen a no cut zone waived. He stated the property is in the RRD and generally overall a rural district and the density should be less. He sated the reason for the no cut zone could because of the wetlands. Peter stated they could modify the no cut zone, perhaps 600 feet instead of the 450 feet. John asked why the common driveway? They are proposing one driveway to minimize the wetland disturbance, one curb cut. He’s not in favor of stuffing houses in and one driveway servicing multiply houses. Scott agrees with John he’s not a fan of common driveways. Seth is in favor of the 600 foot no cut zone and all the lots are conforming lots and they are still preserving 9.66 acres. It was suggested continuing to show new plans with a 600 foot no cut zone. Public Input: No one in favor or opposed. Dept. comments were read into the record from City Planner, Fire, Water, Conservation Commission, and B.O.H. Peter requests a continuance and waives the time frame. Motion made and seconded to grant to continue to next month. Documents used as part of the hearing were: dept. letters from Dept. comments were read into the record from City Planner, Fire, Water, Conservation Commission, and B.O.H., plans submitted by D&L Design Group Civil Eng. & Land Surveying. 3 Case # 3472 Cabral 210 Weir St. For: A Variance from Section 440-502 (Section 440 Attachment # 2 ) of the Zoning Ordinance to allow a take-out only restaurant with drive-thru window in a pre-existing non-conforming structure in the Urban Residential District. For the Petitioner: Atty. Daniel deAbreu, 174 Dean St. Unit B, Taunton, Ma. In favor: Nelson Matos, owns 220 Weir St. Taunton, Ma. Opposed: None Atty. deAbreu stated they are here for a use variance to allow a takeout restaurant. The building is pre-existing structure that was a bakery, coffee show for many years. The business closed due to a fire and covid so now need variance to allow business to go back in. The cooks at DeSa Fish Market want to re-locate here because DeSa will be closing. They will be serving primary Portuguese food and they have a popular following. This property had a take-out window with no speaker. Steve asked the square footage of building and Atty. deAbreu didn’t know the exact square footage but it’s the same as the bakery was. It was stated DeSa closing will be a loss. George stated he never had any issued with this site and looks like a good restaurant is going in there. It has been empty now and he supports the petition. Public Input: Nelson Matos, owns 220 Weir St. is in support. It will be great to see it open again. Dept. letters from the City Planner, Conservation Commission, Fire Dept., Water and B.O.H were read into the record. It was asked what are the hours of operation? The petitioner stated 10 Am – 8 ? It was suggested 8 – 9 daily and they could close earlier if they wanted. Motion made and seconded to grant as presented: Vote: Moniz, Turner, Ackerman, …Yes Faria,Vieira…………………..NO Petition Denied Steve stated the reason he voted no was for safety. Documents used as part of the hearing were: Dept. letters from the City Planner, Conservation Commission, Fire Dept., Water B.O.H and plans submitted by John W. Delano & Assoc. Inc. Case # 3743 DND Realty LLC 210 School St. For: A Special Permit from Section 440- 503 of the Zoning Ordinance to change a legal non-conforming use from auto parts repair/service with accessory retail to Light Industrial /manufacturing use with accessory retail/or wholesale in an Urban Residential District. 4 For the Petitioner: Atty. Daniel deAbreu, 174 Dean St. Unit B, Taunton, Ma. David DeMoranville, 4 Heritage Dr., Berkley, Ma. In favor: None Opposed: None Atty. deAbreu stated they are here tonight for a change of use from machine cutting shop to wood shop. The applicant wishes to have a custom cabinet woodworking business occupy the space. The property has been used for many years as a auto part machine. Atty. deAbreu stated they will be operating by appointment only but most customer will be off site. Chairman Ackerman stated basically it’s the same use? Atty. deAbreu stated in was the determination of the City Planner it needed a change of use. Chairman Ackerman stated they had 2 option, to either appeal of the City Planner’s determination or go for ZBA approval. This is much cleaner instead of overturning the determination and create hard feelings. Dept. comments from City Planner, Conservation Commission, Water, Eng., Fire and B.O.H were read into the record. Public Input: No one in favor or opposed Motion made and seconded to grant as presented: Vote: Turner, Ackerman, Faria, Vieira, Moniz,…Yes Petition granted Documents used as part of the hearing were Dept. comments from City Planner, Conservation Commission, Water, Eng., Fire, B.O.H and plans submitted by John R. Gonzals, Surveyor Case # 3745 Leonetti Woodlawn St. – prop.I.D. 109-104 For: A Variance from Section 440-602 & Section 440 Attachment #3 of the Zoning Ordinance for a lot having 90 feet of frontage and lot width (instead of 125’frontage & 100’ of lot width) and 13,000 sq. ft. of lot area (instead of 25,000 sq. ft. lot area and 13,000 sq. ft. dry area) in a Suburban Residential District. For the Petitioner: Atty. William Manganiello, 311 Somerset Ave., Taunton, Ma. Christopher & Alexa Leonetti, 19 Evelyn’s Path, Middleboro, Ma. In favor: None Opposed: Maria Vazquez, 9 Woodlawn St., E. Taunton, Ma. Jacqueline Holdsworth, 9 Woodlawn St., E. Taunton, Ma. Kevin Lizotte, 11 Woodlawn St., E. Taunton, Ma. Richard Murray, 10 Woodlawn St., E. Taunton, Ma. Joanne Peresluha, 8 Woodlawn St., E. Taunton, Ma. 5  Matt Houley, 9 Woodlawn St., E. Taunton, Ma. Atty. Manganiello stated he’s here tonight to ask for a variance on lot 2 Woodlawn St.. They received zoning approval in 2015 but the variance was never exercised. The lot is in the Suburban Residential District and the only difference from last approval is the house. The previous approval for for a single story ranch style house and the new proposal is a smaller footprint 2-story house. This lot fits in with the neighborhood. Atty. Manganiello stated there was a small issue with the assessor’s reference. The abutters reports was certified and then the assessor’s office change the parcel number. Now the lot is known as 109-104 ( it was 109-103 with 9 woodlawn street attached to it) The current owner of 9 Woodlawn Street did not get notified because they bought property in July 2023 so it went to previous owner. However they are here so they are notified. Steve stated in 2015 variance was a granted to split lot so wasn’t the variance exercised? Atty Manganiello stated they property was conveyed to a Trust but after so the variance had expired. Chairman Ackerman stated the previous approval was in 2015 when he had knee surgery so he missed meeting. George stated the new house plans are small and asked if that is big enough Mr. Leonetti stated he’s recently married and the house size is sufficient for them. Steve stated he appreciated a smaller house on lot. Dept. comments were read into the record from the City Planner, Fire Dept., Water, Conservation Commission, Engineer. Public Input: Maria Vazquez, 9 Woodlawn St. purchase property in July 2023 and she is concerned about the rural feel of the neighborhood, along with environmental impact, drainage and changes the neighborhood with squeezing in house on small lot. She asked if the big tree will be coming down because that will impact drainage. She was not notified of meeting. Kevin Lizotte, 11 Woodlawn St. also opposed. He feels the house is being boxed in, too cramped and shoehorned in. Jacqueline Holdsworth, 9 Woodlawn St. purchased house in July 2023 and she wants to know where septic system is going? If they remove the hill it will have impact. Richard Murray, 10 Woodlawn St. opposed. He says there is no hardship and owner just wants to make money. He stated there are rules for a reason. Joanne Peresluha, 8 Woodlawn St. also opposed. She asks what are the markings on the street? It seems they are out there doing work before getting approval. She comments on various lines in the streets marking out something. She stated she gave permission to Mr. Stevenson for a single story single family house in 2015. John stated the Gas company could be updated the lines in reference to the markings on the street. Chairman Ackerman stated they are required to have engineered plans so that could be why people were out there. Matt Houley, 9 Woodlawn St. also opposed. He stated a finance hardship is not a hardship under the zba rules. George stated he measured the houses lot and this fits right in with the neighborhood. The house is not sitting right on street. The septic will most likely be in front but needs to be determined by test pits. Atty. Manganiello stated they were proposing trees along 11 Woodlawn St. It was suggested putting fencing in to buffer 11 Woodlawn St. maybe a little after house location and leave it up to parties involved. Chairman Ackerman stated the City Engineer has to ensure there is no additional runoff from construction of new house. He reviews all plans during the building permit process. They have to prove they are managing all stormwater runoff. Atty. Manganiello stated the property was sold in July 2023 and that is why the new owner wasn’t notified. However’ the fact that they are here tonight constitutes 6 notice has been given. Steve asked in 2015 the only change is the house size and it being 2 stories. Chairman Ackerman state she drives to E. Taunton a lot and he says this is a nice neighborhood. He stated there has been a lot of construction in the City but that is due to smaller lot sizes which was approved by the City Council. He would like it changed back. He also addressed when a petitioner comes into the ZBA they are asking for relief to comply with the rules & regs. That is our role to grant or deny relief. Steve suggests having the Board place condition relative to fence as opposed to leaving it up to neighbors. Motion made and seconded to grant as presented with the following: 1. Single family dwelling only. 2. Erect a 6 foot stockade fence along the property line of 11 Woodlawn Street starting at a distance of 25 feet from front property line and ending at rear property line. Vote: Turner, Ackerman, Faria, Vieira, Moniz .….…Yes Petition granted Documents used as part of the hearing were: Dept. comments from City Planner, Conservation Commission, Water, Eng., Fire, B.O.H , plans submitted by GM2 Associates, email and GIS map showing parcel I.D. as 109-103) and documentation from Assessor’s office changing parcel I.D.t 109-104. Case # 3746 Keyes 455 Norton Ave For: A Variance from Section 440-602 & Section 440 Attachment #3 of the Zoning Ordinance for a lot having 22.85 feet of frontage and 30 feet of lot width (instead of 75 feet of frontage & lot width) and a 2 foot right sideline setback (instead of 15 feet) For the Petitioner: Heather Keyes, 455 Norton Ave., Taunton, Ma. In favor: Justin Audette, 461 Norton Ave., Taunton, Ma. Opposed: None Heather stated she bought the property a little over a year ago and it was marketed with having a barn so she thought it was approved for it. She stated it’s her fault she should done her research. Heather stated she has moved the paddock and shed/barn and the closet neighbor is 155 feet away. She made paddock smaller and she does follow strict odor control. She stated you can’t see the shed/barn from the road. She stated the horse is 21 years old and is a registered emotional support animal for her husband who is a veteran. It was asked what kind of horse it is and she answered an appendix,it’s a small pony. She stated the horse is always around kids. Chairman Ackerman said he drove by because he lives hereby and he always wants to help veterans. Steve thanked her husband for his service. George stated he was talking to some other veterans who were 7 being evicted from a hotel so the illegals can stay there. George states we should take care of our veterans and thanks her husband for his service. It was asked about waste and she answers there are BOH rules they must comply with. Public Input: Justin Audette, 461 Norton Ave. lives adjacent and since she has moved the shed/barn a little further back is in support as long as she complies to the odor control rules. Dept. letters from the Conservation Commission, City Planner, Fire, Water, Eng. and B.O.H. were read into the record Motion made and seconded to grant as presented: Vote: Turner, Ackerman, Faria, Vieira, Moniz….…Yes Petition granted Documents used as part of the hearing were Dept. comments from City Planner, Conservation Commission, Water, Eng., Fire, B.O.H. and plans submitted by GM2 Associates Case # 3747 Salem 289 Broadway For: A Variance from Section 440-706 of the Zoning Ordinance to allow a free-standing sign with a changeable sign face to be over 50% of the allowed square footage for the sign and a second free-standing sign (30 sq. ft. proposed for auto sales) For the Petitioner: Nafez Salem, 289 Broadway, Taunton, Ma. Eddie Oulbacha, 289 Broadway, Taunton, Ma. In favor: None Opposed: None Eddie explains they are here for a permission to put a new sign and a second free- standing sign. The property has 2 buildings on it and people come to the wrong place. If each building and business had it’s own sign it would be helpful in directing patrons to the correct place. They want to put up a new free-standing in front of the convenience store gas station. It would be an electronic sign and they will display operating hours, community events, etc. Dept. comments were read into the record from City Planner, Engineer, Fire, Water and B.O.H. Chairman Ackerman stated he has a history of being opposed to multiply signs but he thinks safety is more important that his philosophy in this case. He agrees with the City Planner it would be much safer. John asked how high it would be? Eddie answers the new sign will be same height at old one. It will be high to not cause any site distance issues. John has concern with those LED signs because they distract motorists from roadway. He thinks it’s a bad mix. Nick stated the business has been there 20 years and he just wishes to make it a safer place and direct patrons to the correct business. He want to eliminate the clutter. No one in favor or opposed. Motion made and seconded to grant as presented: Vote: Turner, Ackerman, Faria, Vieira, Moniz ………Yes 8 Petition granted Documents used as part of the hearing were: Dept. comments from City Planner, Conservation Commission, Water, Eng., Fire, B.O.H and plans submitted by GM2 Associates. Case # 3744 Hawthorne Dev. Co Cranesbill Rd. & Cornell Ave. Prop. I.D. 105-130 For: A Variance from Section 440-602 & Section 440 Attachment #3 of the Zoning Ordinance for a lot having 22.85 feet of frontage and 30 feet of lot width (instead of 75 feet of frontage & lot width) and a 2 foot right sideline setback (instead of 15 feet) For the Petitioner: John Garanito, 174 Dean St, Unit C, Taunton, Ma. In favor: Angel Cruz, 36 Cranesbill Rd., Taunton, Ma. Opposed: None John stated the lot is off Rte. 138 and it abuts 36 Cranesbill Rd. He has frontage on Cornell Road but due to the extensive wetlands they cannot develop that road. There is a big drop in topography which creates hardship. The only access is along Cranesbill Road. He submitted new plans showing 10 foot side setback and 15 foot side setback. He pointed out the 10 foot side setback is more in line of where the houses are located. The 15 foot bring the house further back and looks out of place. The closes house is 36 Cranesbill Road on other side of which that setback is met. John stated he met with Mr. Cruz and he wishes put fence along property line. Chairman Ackerman stated he would prefer the 10 foot side setback, 2 feet of really pushing it. John stated the contour of the lot is tricky. The proposal is for a single family house with sewer and water. Dept. comments from City Planner, Conservation Commission, Water, Eng., Fire and B.O.H were read into the record. Public Input: Angel Cruz, 36 Cranesbill Rd. was in favor. He stated John has made the neighborhood looks and he stands by his word. Several board members liked the 10 foot side setback Motion made and seconded to grant as presented with the following conditions: 1. House to have a 10 foot side setback (right side) 2. Single Family only. 3. House must be serviced by municipal water & sewer Vote: Turner, Ackerman, Faria, Joyce, Moniz …Yes Petition granted Documents used as part of the hearing were: Dept. comments from City Planner, Conservation Commission, Water, Eng., Fire, B.O.H. and plans submitted by Northeast Engineers & Consultants, Inc., 9 Other Business: Discussion on Waiver/reduction of filing fees Chairman Ackerman asked to have this removed from agenda. Meeting adjourned at: 9:00 PM 10