Skip Navigation
This table is used for column layout.
Zoning Board of Appeals Minutes 08/09/12
Minutes of Meeting— August 9, 2012
The Hudson Board of Appeals met in the Selectmen’s Hearing Room, Town Hall, Hudson, Massachusetts.  At 7:00 p.m., Lawrence Norris called the meeting to order.
Present:        Lawrence Norris, Joseph Peznola, Todd Pietrasiak, Jim Smith, Jill Schafer, Jennifer Burke, Planning Director and Teresa Vickery, Clerk.

10 Technology Drive,  Variance
Present were:   Keith Hague, Edens & Avant
                Christina Morrow, Agnoli Sign Co.

Lawrence Norris convened the public hearing.

Joe Peznola read the Right of Appeal.

The applicant is seeking a variance under section to install a sign that exceeds the 20 foot allowable height in the M-6 Industrial District.  

Mr. Hague informed the Board that the need for this variance is due to the changes to the road because of the widening of Washington Street.  The Department of Transportation (DOT) is installing a retaining wall and a fence directly in front of the existing sign.  Therefore, the applicant needs to move the sign in order to maintain visibility of the signage for the tenants.  

The new sign is a double sided illuminated sign.  

James Smith, seconded by Todd Petrasiak, made a motion to go into deliberative session.

Vote: 5-0-0, Unanimous

The Board unanimously agreed that this petition meets all the variance requirements.

Lawrence Norris, seconded by James Smith, moved to grant a Variance under Section to install a sign that exceeds the 20 foot allowable height based on the following findings:

  • The Petitioner has standing to bring the Petition, and;
  • The subject property is located in the M-6 Industrial District, and;
  • That owing to circumstances relating to the soil conditions, shape and topography affect this land but not generally affecting the rest of the zoning district, and;
  • A literal enforcement of the zoning by-law would involve substantial hardship to the developer in the Route 85 reconstruction project causing a taking of land and complying with the required setback will cause conforming interior travel lanes to become nonconforming, and;
  • Relief may be granted without substantial detriment to the public good and without substantially derogating from the intent and purpose of the by-law.
Vote: 5-0-0, Unanimous

Lawrence Norris, seconded by James Smith, made a motion to come out of deliberative session.

89 Warner Street,  Special Permit
Present were: Joseph & Lorrain Lavign, Applicants
                Michael Maroney, Engineer

Lawrence Norris convened the public hearing.

Joe Peznola read the Right of Appeal.

The applicant is seeking a special permit under section 5.2.6 to build an Accessory Dwelling Unit (ADU) in the SA-8 Single Family District.  

Mr. Norris read a memo dated July 27, 2012 from Jeff Wood into the record noting comments and concerns regarding this petition.  His concerns are as follows:
  • The building does not have 5 feet of open space on all sides of the property.  
  • The addition will make this pre-existing non-conforming structure more so at the rear property line.
  • The second floor does not have a legal means of egress.
  • No construction details on the plans to determine if the structure meets the state building codes.
  • Stacking of vehicles in existing driveway.
Mr. Maroney informed the Board that the applicant is proposing to build a second floor above an existing two car garage and extend the second floor out into the rear year.  The area under the extension will create a car port with parking for two cars.  There are a set of stairs from the outside to provide an egress.  There is a second set on the inside coming down into the garage.  There is an existing door out of the garage which is not shown on the plans.  Mr. Maroney stated that if he is mistaken and there is no garage door then one will be cut into the garage to provide another aggress.  

The Board would like the door added to the plans.  

Mr. Peznola noted that he is concerned that there in not a five foot open space barrier around the structure, which is required of any detached ADU building.  Mr. Maroney is willing to take down the non-conforming wall move it to comply with this requirement.

Another concern Mr. Peznola had is with the parking, as you cannot stack parking for two separate dwellings.  Mr. Maroney noted that there is sufficient space in the front of the house to put a driveway. He agreed to back and rework the parking.  Mr. Peznola would like the plans to show more detail in regard to the parking plan.  

Mr. Maroney explained that the plans were lacking the construction detail due to his advice to his client to try to save on costs but he will add all the detail to the plans.  

Jill Campbell, 78 Lincoln Street asked for clarification regarding how the structure will look from the back.  She also asked if it would possible to plant trees to create a natural barrier to block some of the view.  Ms. Lavign noted that they have recently taken a large tree and is not willing to replant any.  The Board did not feel this was necessary as the majority of the dwellings in the area are two stories.

The Board would like a continuance so the applicant’s engineer will have time to address all the issue that arose during the meeting.  

Mr. Norris, seconded by James Smith, made a motion to continue the public hearing for 89 Warner Street until September 13, 2012 at 7PM.

Vote: 5-0-0, Unanimous


Jim Smith, seconded by Joe Peznola, made a motion to accept the minutes of July 12, 2012, as written.

Vote: 5-0-0, Unanimous


At 7:50 PM, Lawrence Norris, seconded by Jim Smith, moved to adjourn.

Vote: 5-0-0, Unanimous  

Document List August 9, 2012

Variance application for 10 Technology Drive
Planning Office
ADU application 89 Warner Street
Planning Office
Minutes of July 12, 2012
Planning Office