Hudson Board of Appeals
Town Hall
Hudson, Massachusetts 01749
Minutes of Meeting— March 9, 2006 page 1
Minutes of Meeting— March 9, 2006
The Hudson Board of Appeals met in the Selectmen’s Hearing Room, Town Hall, Hudson, Massachusetts. At 7:30 p.m., Chairman Lawrence Norris called the meeting to order.
Present: Lawrence Norris, James Smith, Joe Peznola, Alan Herzog and Dorothy Risser
Jennifer Burke, Town Planner
Petition 2006-01: 4 Johnson Avenue
Mr. Taylor updated the Board on the status of the petition.
The applicant questioned existing zoning requirement of a 10 foot set back and told the Board that if the lot was grandfathered, he could have constructed the garage. The applicant told the Board that he had plans drawn with the Boards' suggestions from the last meeting which showed moving the garage back on the lot. The applicant told the Board that the plans had been turned down by the building inspector and he was here to discuss other options with the Board. Mr. Taylor said one option he thought of was to lease a 6 foot piece of land from a neighbor that would allow the construction of the proposed garage however the board said that wasn’t an option because it would make the neighbors lot non-conforming. A discussion took place between Mr. Norris and the applicant regarding hardship. Mr. Norris told the applicant that hardship can’t be self-imposed.
The applicant ask to withdraw the petition without prejudice.
Joe Peznola, seconded by James Smith, moved to allow the applicant to withdraw Petition 2006-01 without prejudice.
Vote: 5-0-0, Unanimous
Petition 2006-02: Lots 1 & 2 Coolidge Street
Present: Steve Poole, Consolidated Design Group
Todd Marsh
Lawrence Norris convened the public hearing.
Alan Herzog read the Right of Appeal.
Mr. Poole presented the petition to the Board. The Applicant would like to construct a retail building and associated infrastructure.
Mr. Norris read letters from:
§ A letter from the Fire Chief regarding a porous product for the proposed road.
§ A letter from Tony Marques addressing sewer, groundwater and snow storage.
§ A letter from the Conservation Commission regarding the Order of Conditions which was pending until March 16, 2006 regarding the use of asphalt on the fire lane.
§ Consolidated Design Group seeking to file amendment to include variance regarding retail parking at 22 feet rather than the required 31’.
Jennifer Burke stated that she had cleared up the issue between the Fire Department and Conservation Commission regarding fire lane construction. The fire lane will be paved.
Mr. Poole reviewed the various requests and discussed their merrit.
The Board and the Applicant discussed options for moving construction out of the Watershed Protection Area and the possibility of moving the building or decreasing the square foot of the proposed building. Mr. Peznola told the applicant that the Board will have a hard time finding hardship as presented since the hardship is self imposed by trying to maximize lot. Mr. Peznola told the applicant that the square foot of the building could be decreased as well as the parking area. The applicant disagreed and told the Board that decreasing the size of the building and parking would make the project infeasible. Mr. Peznola told the applicant that the Board would like a sketch of a compliant plan and a narrative outline of the financial hardship.
The Board and applicant discussed whether the entrance would provide enough room for trucks to enter; the applicant indicated that it would. The Board also discussed with the applicant whether the stormwater meets wetland guidelines.
Applicant requested that the Board continue public meeting to April 13th.
Joe Peznola, seconded by James Smith, moved to continue Petition 2006-02 to April 13, 2006 at 7:30 pm.
Vote: 5-0-0, Unanimous
Petition 2006-03: 35 School Street
Present: Steve Poole, Consolidated Design Group
Todd Marsh
Lawrence Norris convened the public hearing.
Alan Herzog read the Right of Appeal.
Mr. Poole presented the petition to the Board. The Applicant would like to demolish the existing building and construct four multifamily units.
The applicant told the Board that the new plans addressed the concerns by the Planning Board of the retaining wall, slope and drainage. The project will be served by Town water, sewer and gas. The existing stockade fence will be removed.
Mr. Norris asked the applicant about the retaining wall. The applicant said the plans showed the retaining wall and indicated that a structural engineer was still working on the design.
Mr. Penzola questioned section 5.3.2.1 which applies the requirements of 5.2.4 which requires 6,000 square feet per unit. The proposal does not meet that requirement. The Board and applicant discussed the square footage and setbacks for the proposed condominiums. The Board and applicant discussed the necessary findings of a variance. The Applicant argued that if the project was built with less than four units it would be uneconomic.
The Board would like to see a compliant plan and a narrative proving hardship.
Joe Peznola, seconded by James Smith, moved to continue Petition 2006-03 to April 13, 2006 at 7:30 pm.
Vote: 5-0-0, Unanimous
Minutes
James Smith, seconded by Alan Herzog moved to approve the minutes of February 9, 2006 as written.
Vote: 5-0-0, Unanimous
Adjournment:
At 9:00 p.m., Dottie Risser, seconded by Jim Smith, moved to adjourn.
Vote: 5-0-0, Unanimous.
| 
