Skip Navigation
This table is used for column layout.
 
Planning Board Minutes 4/9/15
Planning Board minutes for Thursday April 9, 2015

Members present: Pat Salomon, Larry Klein, Roger Tryon, Stephen Enoch, co-chair, and Maggie Leonard, co-chair.

Enoch called the meeting to order. Leonard agreed to take the minutes. The board reviewed the application for a special permit submitted by Pat Salomon and Julio Rodriguez for their home at 10 Sylvan Rd. Pat Salomon was asked to recuse herself from board action or voting on the application, to which she agreed.

The home at 10 Sylvan Road is in the lakeshore district and is non-conforming due to its encroachment into the 40-foot setback area from Lake Garfield. The zoning bylaws specify that no structures except fences, docks or stairs may be located in the 40’ setback around Lake Garfield. There is a deck on the single family dwelling that is 33’ from the mean high water line of the lake. The applicants are requesting to, essentially, enclose the deck that is currently in the setback from Lake Garfield. The existing piers from the deck will be used and no new footprint will be created. There is also a proposal to expand the deck on the easterly side of the house, where there are no setback issues, and to construct a 7X10’ mudroom entry at the existing entryway door. The easterly deck expansion does not encroach into the side setback or the 40’ setback from Lake Garfield.

The Planning Board referred to the Zoning Bylaws 5.1.6 Nonconforming Single and Two Family Residential Structures, which states that nonconforming houses that do not meet the setback requirements must seek a special permit. The zoning bylaw states that a special permit may be granted “provided the Zoning Board of Appeals finds that such change would not increase the nonconforming nature of the structure, lot, and/or use.” The board also referred to section 5.1.3 Nonconforming Uses, which states, “such change or extension shall not be substantially more detrimental than the existing nonconforming use to the neighborhood.”

The questions before the Planning Board:
1). Does the proposed project increase the nonconforming nature? And
2). Will the change or extension of use be substantially more detrimental to the neighborhood?

There will be no increase in the footprint of the house and no increase in the height of the house. There was discussion about the increase in runoff to the lake due to the increase in roof area (impervious surface) in the setback. In the end a majority of members believed the affect to be minimal and that the proposed construction would not be “substantially more detrimental to the neighborhood.” Three board members voted that there was no impediment in the zoning bylaws to approve the special permit and one member abstained.



ADU’s
The board reviewed the public hearing on ADU’s that was held on March 12th. The board received a letter from Micky Jervas voicing her opposition to ADU’s. The board reviewed the list of comments that was compiled from the minutes of the public hearing:
1. Increase the maximum square footage to 1000’ square feet to make the dwellings large enough to accommodate a handicap-accessible bathroom? Yes.
2. Change language to from “square footage” to “gross floor area” which would include basements and mezzanines? Ask Don Torrico re: GFA and basements (finished, unfinished)?
3. Change language as per Building Commissioner from ADU to Secondary Dwelling Unit? Use both?
4. Question: what is the build-out potential if every property that could build an ADU under this bylaw proposal built one?
a). How many lots are 2+ acres and 200’ of frontage?
b). How many 2 acre lots?
c). How many lots are 2-4 acres?
Board agreed to query the Assessors.

The board noted that the ADU bylaw proposal would also impact the current zoning bylaws section on multifamily dwellings 7.3.6 Conversion of Single Family Dwelling. We need to read the section to see what the impact would be and change accordingly.

The board opened the mail.

At 9:15 Klein motioned to adjourn and was seconded by Leonard and adjourning was unanimously approved.

Respectfully Submitted,
Maggie Leonard, co-chair