Hudson Board of Appeals
Town Hall
Hudson, Massachusetts 01749
Minutes of Meeting— August 10, 2006 page 1
Minutes of Meeting— September 14, 2006
The Hudson Board of Appeals met in the Selectmen’s Hearing Room, Town Hall, Hudson, Massachusetts. At 7:30 p.m., Acting Chairman Joseph Peznola called the meeting to order.
Present: James Smith, Joe Peznola, Alan Herzog, Dorothy Risser, Darja Nevits, Sara LaFleur and Town Planner Jennifer Burke.
Petition 2006-6: 6 Loring Street
Present: Paul Giannetti, Atty. at Law
Doug Hyde, Test Devices
The Board is in receipt of a letter from the Applicant and two plans depicting the proposed work. The first plan shows replacing and removing the guardrail. Tony Marques sign it. The second plan includes the noise abatement measures.
The letter notes that Test Devices is now looking to relocate its facilities. Atty. Giannetti indicated that they are asking the Board to approve the Variance with the condition that if the company remains at this location the sound attenuation will be installed.
Ms. Risser asked if a Variance was needed for the fence. There is no variance needed but the fence is in the right of way so Tony Marques should give his approval.
It was noted that all work in the right of way should be approved by DPW. They should oversee the work as well.
There was no input from the public.
James Smith, seconded by Dorothy Risser, moved to go into deliberative session.
Vote: 5-0-0, Unanimous
Joseph Peznola, seconded by Dorothy Risser, moved to approve Petition 2006-06 and grant a Variance under Section 6.2.2.1 to allow the placement of two existing compressors and tanks within the front yard setback based on the following findings:
The Petitioner has standing to bring the Petition, and;
The subject property is located in the SB Single Family District, and;
That due to conditions relating to the shape of the lot in that the lot has frontage on both Vila do Porto Blvd. and Loring Street that make it unique in the district and the location of the recorded right of way, a hardship would be created if the Zoning Bylaw were literally enforced, and;
No substantial detriment to the public good was identified, due to the fact that the Applicant will implement mitigation and protection with the installation of curbing, etc. as outlined on the plan by Thomas Land Surveyors dated April 14, 2006 last revised August 10, 2006 and that the Applicant is willing to attenuate any adverse effect of the noise as further conditioned herein, and;
Relief may be granted without derogating from the intent and purpose of the Zoning Bylaw.
And with the following condition:
That within one year from grant of the variance either the sound attenuation barrier be installed or the two compressors to the NE of the existing building are removed.
Vote: 5-0-0, Unanimous
James Smith, seconded by Alan Herzog, moved to come out of deliberative session.
Vote: 5-0-0, Unanimous
Petition 2006-7: 85 Fort Meadow Drive
Present: Christopher Flood, Atty. at Law
Bruce E. LaFreniere
Joseph Peznola convened the public hearing.
Alan Herzog read the Right of Appeal.
Atty. Flood presented the petition to the Board. This is an Administrative Appeal of the Building Commissioner’s decision. He stated that the Building Commissioner denied the permit based on the Applicant building a two family house. Atty. Flood argued that this is not intended to be a two family house. He stated that the kitchen in the existing house will be removed. He also noted that the existing house will be connected to the addition by a concourse with a gym and a garage.
Mr. Peznola and Ms. Risser noted that the plans still show a kitchen. Mr. LaFreniere stated that he did not know why that was left on the plans. Atty. Flood asked if the Board can condition the decision to restrict the use to single family use with new plans showing no second kitchen.
Mr. Peznola stated that Administrative Appeals can not be conditioned. He read two letters into the record one from Mrs. Edward Fortmiller, 72 Fort Meadow Drive and on from Frank Maypother, 87 Fort Meadow Drive.
Mr. Peznola asked if the concourse will have doors that can be locked to obstruct access from the existing house to the addition. He was told no. Ms. Nevits asked how much garage space will there be. She was told enough for five vehicles.
Peter Murphy, 83 Fort Meadow Drive, asked if a garage door was on the right side of the addition. He was told yes. He noted that the Applicant use Mr. Murphy’s property for access. He has a concern that this will increase if the garage door is put in. The B0oard explained that if the Applicant is trespassing, the police should be called. Mr. Murphy also noted that the applicant operates his business from the house. Atty. Flood stated that Mr. La Freniere has a business location in Marlboro. Mr. Peznola noted that Jeff Wood would enforce any zoning violations including operating a business from the home. Mr. Murphy also stated the addition is out of character with the neighborhood and will eliminate his privacy.
Ms. Nevits noted that the Board has to act on the plans as submitted because it is an Administrative Appeal. If new plans are submitted, the Building Commissioner may be able to approve the permit.
Atty. Flood asked the Board to allow a withdrawal without prejudice.
Darja Nevits, seconded by Dorothy Risser, moved to allow the Applicant to withdraw Petition 2006-07 without prejudice.
Vote: 5-0-0, Unanimous
Petition 2006-8: Highland Commons, Coolidge Street
Present: Peter Tamm, Atty. at Law
Dan Bradanini & Jack Thornton, Sullivan Hayes
Bill Hoffman, Deluca Hoffman
Randy Hart, VHB
Joseph Peznola convened the public hearing.
Alan Herzog read the Right of Appeal.
Atty. Tamm reviewed the history and process so far. He then indicated he would take each request separately and review the reasons for the request.
Cell Tower
The existing tower will be relocated and reconstructed on top of the new water tank. Due to the site work required, the grade will be significantly lowered. To maintain the same elevation as the existing tower, the extra height is needed. The new tower will provide the same level of service. All findings required in the by-law are demonstrated.
Mr. Peznola noted a discrepancy on the plans regarding the height of the existing water tank. There are two heights noted 467 vs. 470. Mr. Hoffman noted that was due to the camber of the tank. Mr. Peznola also asked if the antennae height of 535 feet was the top of rays. He was told yes and that the possible number of colocators with a 10-foot separation would be six. It was also confirmed that all additional equipment areas can be located inside the perimeter fence.
Signs
The pylon signs are considered off premise signs due to the ANR plan. This causes tighter restrictions. Mr. Peznola asked about the Outside Advertising Board, Atty. Tamm indicated that they have no jurisdiction.
The building signs will be over twenty feet due to the size of the buildings. Atty. Tamm proposed standards to be meet upon permit application including an overall size limit of 9% of the building wall, signs can not face the residential district, signs can not exceed the architectural features of the buildings. Ms. Risser asked if there could be a maximum height. Maybe 55 feet would be OK.
They are also proposing a sign on the water tank. Atty. Tamm noted that the Executive Assistant’s office has agreed with the concept as long as the Town gets equal billing. It was noted that visibility may be an issue. The Board discussed conditioning that the sign not directly face a residential district and not allowing lighting or illumination.
Outdoor Sales & Storage
The plans show small seasonal areas for outdoor storage and sales. Any sidewalk displays can not impede pedestrian movement.
Setback
Atty. Tamm noted that the setback request relates to the Berlin side of property and all of the abutting land is under the control of the developer.
Mr. Peznola asked why not include a 30-foot strip of land to allow for the buffer. Atty. Tamm stated that they are seeking the variance at Jeff Wood’s request. Mr. Peznola indicated that there should be a condition requiring the 30-foot buffer if the land is ever sold.
Floodplain
There is limited work proposed in the floodplain for the main site driveway. There is the potential for 7,000 cf of lost storage. Mr. Hoffman reviewed the measures for gaining double storage capacity. There was brief discussion regarding process in that the other departments have 30 days to respond with comments.
Loading
The plan is 35 loading docks short from the required amount. The docks shown meet the in tent of the bylaw and the tenant needs. There was a discussion regarding if the building was ever converted to warehouse space more loading would be required. It was noted that any change of use from Commercial to Industrial requires new Site Plan Review.
Parking
Atty. Tamm reviewed the table presented with the petition. He noted that the Town’s by-law does not consider mixed uses. He stated that the developer had considered structured parking, but it is financially not feasible. The proposed parking meets the ITE standards for peak demand.
There was a general discussion about the practical parking need and the identified users needs. It was also noted that the MEPA reviewer commented that the developer did not overpark the site. There is a condition of the Planning Board approval that the site will be reviewed in regard to parking 1 year after occupancy.
The developer noted that there is a reserve area for 70 spaces for the hotel, if that becomes a problem. The developer also agreed to a condition that no restaurants/taverns can be in the retail side of the site.
Mr. Hoffman reviewed how they calculated the square feet in order to come up with the number of spaces. Mr. Hart reviewed the use categories and what the standards consider as peak conditions. He also reviewed how the layout of the spaces helps with meeting the demand.
Mr. Peznola asked if there will be conference facilities in the hotel. He was told yes. He also asked about the parking management plan. Mr. Hart review the possible pieces of the parking management plan including a valet system and designated employee parking with a shuttle bus.
Parking Stops
Parking stops can cause a pedestrian hazard. They make it difficult to clean the parking lot and remove snow. Also removing them allows for easier traffic flows.
Tony Ferrechia, A & D, LLC, noted that he has seen this parking in other locations and feels that it works.
Paul Willworth, 144 Gates Pond Road, Berlin, expressed concern with the cell tower height. Mr. Peznola indicated that he will visit the site to understand what is visible now. He also expressed concern regarding the 7-foot setback and lighting.
Dorothy Risser, seconded by James Smith, moved to close the public hearing for Petition 2006-08.
Vote: 5-0-0, Unanimous
The Board will meet on Monday September 25, 2006 at 7:30 p.m. to issue the decision.
Adjournment:
At 11:00 p.m., Dorothy Risser, seconded by Joseph Peznola, moved to adjourn.
Vote: 6-0-0, Unanimous
| 
