CITY OF TAUNTON
ZONING BOARD OF APPEALS
MARCH 13, 2008
Members Present: Chairman Ackerman, Wasylow, Amaral, Medeiros and
Berube.
Meeting called to order at 6:50 PM
Peter made motion to accept minutes of February14, 2008, seconded by Wayne. All in favor.
Case # 2906 Arista Yarmouth LLC Broadway & Washington St.
A Variance from Section 6.3, 7.3, 7.1.1, 4.4 and a Special Permit from Section 5.2 of the Zoning Ordinance to allow the construction of a 54,530 sq. ft. building to be used as a Pharmacy with Drive Thru without having the required 30 foot rear setback for the canopy (proposed 24 feet) and the location of an access curb cut to be 19 feet from the intersection of Washington Street & Broadway (instead of the req’d. 70 feet) and to allow the entire parcel (and an extra 11,816 sq. ft.) for Highway Business purposes (instead of the 10,000 sq. ft. allowed) to allow the reduction of the landscaped buffer areas to 7.5 feet (instead of 15 feet) and 5 feet (instead of 10 feet) and a Special Permit to allow the Drive Thru on premises situated on the corner of Washington Street & Broadway, Taunton, Ma and is known as 226
Broadway, 310, 312, 316 Washington Street, Taunton, Ma.
Atty. David Gay requesting a continuance until May meeting. Also Atty. Gay waives the time frame on which to act on this proposal.
Vote: Ackerman, Wayslow, Berube, Medeiros, Amaral……..…Yes
Petition continued until May 8th meeting.
Case #2902 Caramelo 77 Scaddings St.
Hearing held on March 13, 2008
A Variance from Section 6.2 & 6.3 of the Zoning Ordinance to allow the division of one lot into two lots. Lot 1 containing the existing single family dwelling with 14,979 sq. ft. (instead of 30,000 sq. ft.) and 14,979 sq. ft. of dry area (instead of 22,500 sq. ft.). Lot 2 to contain 9,979 sq. ft. (instead of 30 000 sq. ft.) with 9,979 sq. ft. of dry area (instead of 22,500 sq. ft) 90 feet of lot width (instead of 100’) for the construction of a single family dwelling .
For the Petitioner: Atty. David Gay, P. O. Box 988, Taunton, Ma.
In favor: None
Opposed: None
Atty. Gay stated petitioner is seeking to divide an existing parcel into two parcels. The parcel is located on the corner of Scaddings Street, Hillside Drive. The property is bounded by street on 3 sides. The petitioner is a teacher and recently divorced. The property is of a large lot and they wish to divide and use the income to pay for daughter’s college. Atty. Gay stated the property was laid out on a subdivision plan and was recorded with the Reg. of Deeds in 1941. Atty. Gay stated that over time the construction of houses occurred on lots that have been combined. Some houses are on smaller lots though. Atty. Gay stated that the lot in back is perfect for single family dwelling. Atty. Gay points out it looks like an empty lot. At this time Joe disclosed that his parents are
Godparents to the petitioner’s children and excuses himself from the case. Atty. Gay states this proposal is a combination of 5 separate lots. Atty. Gay states there is a hardship relating to this property. The hardship is the placement of the existing house, frontage on 3 sides. All
Page 2 of 7 – ZBA Minutes – 3-13-08
setbacks will be met and water & sewer is available. Atty. Gay states he would need clarification from the Water Dept. in regards to their letter in regards to the 6” to a 8” line. Atty. Gay stated they have no problem paying their share of the upgrade. Atty. Gay stated that petitioner is considering retiring in the future and this will pay for daughter’s education. Wayne asked what size house are they proposing? Atty. Gay stated it all depends on who will purchase the property but they are not asking for any setback variance so they will have to be met. Wayne asked what the hardship was? Atty. Gay answers the placement of the house and the fact that the property has frontage on 3 sides. Atty. Gay stated they didn’t create the hardship. No opposition.
Letters from the Conservation Commission, Water Dept., B.O.H., City Planner and Fire Dept. were read into the record. Troy asked about the Water Department letter in regards to the upgrade to an 8 inch main? Troy agreed with Atty. Gay that it would be unfair to make petitioner pay the whole expense of upgrading to 8 inch main. Atty. Gay stated there may be an alternative, perhaps an easement? John agrees with Atty. Gay in regards to her not responsible for upgrading the whole street. He too pointed out it does looks like an empty lot. John points out there is a hardship relating to this lot, it’s small, topography with being called Hillside Dr. and the fact that it has frontage on 3 sides. Peter stated it’s not the Board’s concerns with the water? However; John stated the lot will wit in nicely with the neighborhood. Peter stated the City Planner’s letter indicated there is no hardship. John
stated the City Planner is an advisory of the Board but we vote. Wayne stated he thinks the lot 2 is too small. He recognizes the fact that the petitioner is a dedicated teacher and there is a financial hardship. Atty. Gay stated proposal is better than the “norm” for residential purposes. The Board didn’t want to make a condition to tie into municipal water if the petitioner would be required to upgrade the whole street. After some more discussion it was the concensus of the Board to have City Water & Sewer. Atty. Gay stated they will tie in if they have to.
Motion made and seconded to grant with the following condition:
1. Lot must be serviced by Municipal Water & Sewer.
Vote: Ackerman, Berube, Wasylow, Medeiros, Joyce …..………….Yes
Petition Granted:
2903 Campanirio 110 North Walker St.
Hearing held on March 13, 2008
A Variance from Section 6.2 & 6.3 of the Zoning Ordinance to allow the division of one lot into two lots with Lot 2 having no frontage (150 feet required) & no lot width (100 feet required) on an accepted street but having access over an existing passage way with an existing mobile home located on it.
For the Petitioner: Atty. David Gay, P. O. Box 988, Taunton, Ma.
Leo Campanirio, 110 North Walker St., Taunton, Ma.
In favor: None
Opposed: Janice Lawlor, 106 North Walker St., Taunton, Ma.
Sally Pelosi, 111 North Walker St., Taunton, Ma.
David Plant, 111 North Walker St. Taunton, Ma.
Page 3 of 7 – ZBA Minutes – 3-13-08
Atty. Gay states this property has been in the petitioner’s family for many years. They received variance some time ago to allow a mobile home/trailer on the property for mother. The trailer has been there since 1979 and has been used regularly and consistently. The access to the trailer is over a passageway that has been used for access to their property for 60 years. Atty. Gay stated there has been title search conducted by Atty. Craig Martin and it indicated the passageway was owned by Melo Investment Trust who owns abutting land in rear. Atty. Wm. Rosa stated he submitted letter stating Mr. Mello has no opposition to this request before the Board tonight. Atty. Gay stated that the petitioner has had access over this passage way for well over 20 years but hasn’t go to court to prove adverse
possession. Atty. Gay stated they are proposing to divide the exiting lot into two resulting in the trailer being on it’s own lot. The existing house lot meets all the district requirements. Atty. Gay stated some aspects of the exiting building might need relief like the pool being 12.9 feet from sideline. It was noted the pool only had to be 10 feet from property line. Atty. Gay stated that the reason for this request is so that the petitioner and her husband can rehab trailer/mobile home and/or put single family house to reside. Her husband has been very sick but is doing better now and it would be easier for him to reside in a single level house and possibly sell existing house for medical bills. Atty. Gay stated the mobile home has been occupied by family and both the existing house and mobile home is serviced by municipal water and both have septic systems. They would be able to tie into sewer from
the neighboring development by Melo Investment. Atty. Gay stated the unusual shape and topography which used to be part of a farm is unique and warrants the granting of the variance. Atty. Gay stated they have no technical frontage but the access has been used since 1979 and can continue to be used for a single family lot. Currently there are 2 residences on one lot and the granting of the variance would allow for each residence to be on their own lot. Atty. Gay stated they may have the opportunity to sell the house in front and pay medical bills for Mr. Campanirio. Atty. Gay stated the situation will remain the same, just mobile home on its own lot. It was asked if Mrs. Campanirio’s son every occupied the mobile home. It was answerd yes. Wayne asked if Lot 1 would be put on the market right away? Mrs. Campanirio answers it needs repairs inside, like painting, cleaning up and she thinks next year. Wayne asked
about the passage way is more like a dirt driveway? You don’t know it’s even there. Wayne asked about the owner of the passage way? After research the title established it was owned by Melo Investment Company. Atty. Gay stated they may be able to get deeded easement if they go to land court. It was suggested getting a recorded easement, otherwise it’s a problem waiting to happen. John asked if this passage way was the access to the development also? Atty. Gay answers no they have access on North Walker Street. Peter asked how wide is this passageway? It was answers about 22 feet wide. Atty. Gay stated the neighbor, Mrs. Lawlor has been using it for many years. After a title search from Atty. Craig Martin and Bill Rosa it was concluded it was owned by Melo Investment Co. Janice Lawlor, 106 North Walker St., opposed to the request. She stated the mobile home and septic systems were
put in the middle of the night with no permits being pulled. She stated she is not blaming Leo Campanirio for that. Mrs. Lawlor explained the property is in the Estate of Leisha Walker and she pays tax bills. She stated just recently she received a separate tax bill and a late notice of taxes and she isn’t quite sure for what property? She stated the passageway is about 9 feet wide and there is a stone wall and there is a glacier boulder in the way. She stated the stone wall was destroyed when the trailer went in and there was a law suit for the shared access. She stated the oil truck wouldn’t go down to deliver oil to the mobile home. She stated the boulder is attached to the ledge and no emergency vehicles can fit through there? She is concerned with the septic trucks tipping over. She stated when the tenants moved out the oil man wouldn’t come down to deliver oil, they hand carried the barrels to the mobile home. The boulder is attached to the ledge. She stated the
driveway is not capable of handling trucks. She has lived there for 70 years and see feels sorry for some wrongs over the years. Joe asked if she was more concerned about the trailer being there or the passage way? Mrs. Lawlor answers the only curb cut is for her driveway and the stone wall has been hit many times.
Page 4 of 7 – ZBA Minutes – 3-13-08
Her main concern is safety. Wayne asked if the passageway was the only driveway? Mrs. Lawlor answers yes and the rock is pertruding out and attached to the ledge. Peter asked if she has been getting tax bill for the existing passage way? She has been getting one since 1980. It was asked if the boulder wasn’t there would there be room for trucks to go by? Mrs. Lawlor answers yes. But she stated the oil truck didn’t go down because of unsafe conditions. John asked if she was upset over the mobile home or would she prefer a new single family dwelling? Mrs. Lawlor answers her issues are safety with the access as a result of the passage way. John stated the property has 75,000 sq. ft. and suggests creating access somewhere else? It was suggested
re-configuring the lot and creating access on the right hand side of house which would eliminate whole problem with access. Mrs. Lawlor stated she wouldn’t have a problem with that. It was noted you would need another curb cut. Sally Pelosi, 111 North Walker St. opposed. She stated he has the historic information and has one reasonable question. She asked if this would be the petitioner’s permanent legal address? Mrs. Campanirio answers yes. She stated Lot 2 does have mobile home on it and if it doesn’t have access the maybe it shouldn’t be a lot. She suggested they have their own driveway. Mrs. Pelosi stated area was re-zoned to Rural Residential and this is the only parcel that is Suburban Residential and in 1988 the reasons given at the zoning change were not met. David Plant, 111 North Walker Street was in favor of petition. He stated the petitioner’s have
maintained their existing house and will the new house. He did suggest straightening out the passageway. Atty. Gay stated a variance was granted allowing the mobile home to be on the property and was recorded at the Reg. of Deeds in 1979. There was a public hearing for a zoning change with the Municipal Council relative to the zoning district. Atty. Gay stated that Mrs. Lawlor never owned the property of the passageway after a title search by Atty. Craig Martin’s office. Atty. Gay addressed John’s suggestion in re-located access to the right of house and the only problem would be that would require 3 curb cuts. There is a driveway that goes to the exiting house at 110 North Walker Street. Atty. Gay stated Mrs. Campanirio testified she can get in and out easily. He stated the passage way is about 12 feet wide and there was a new oil man and he refused to go down, however; the old oil man has been going down to deliver
oil. It was asked if there was any way they can remove boulder in middle and perhaps take down stone wall and get another 10 feet? Leo Campanirio, 110 North Walker St., stated the driveway could be widened. He is willing to improve whole driveway, clean out and make wider. It was noted the access has been plowed by the Campanirios. Mr. Campanirio stated they could have contractor cut it out but they don’t have right to it? Wayne asked why hasn’t the legality of this been addressed before tonight? After some discussion it was suggested continuing to get better detail of easement. It was noted Atty. Gay won’t be able to make the April meeting and he ask for a continuance until May meeting. Atty. Gay waives the time frame on which to act on this.
Motion made and seconded to continue until May meeting. Petitioner to provide and submit a revised plan of the access easement to be utilized for a portion of the property.
Vote: Ackerman, Berube, Wasylow, Amaral, Medeiros .………….Yes
Petition continued:
Case #2904 Dion 46 Jackson St.
Hearing held on March 13, 2008
A Special Permit from Section 5.3.4 of the Zoning Ordinance to allow a 40.4’ x 22.8’ addition having a 6.8 foot sideline setback instead of the req’d. 15 feet.
For the Petitioner: Scott Dion, 46 Jackson St., Taunton, Ma.
In favor: None
Page 5 of 7 – ZBA Minutes – 3/13/08
Opposed: None
Mr. Dion stated he has an older house and they intend on razing a portion of it and putting addition. They existing house does not meet the sideline setback. They are not going to be any closer than the existing house already is. Mr. Dion stated he will bring everything up to the building code. Joe stated basically you are taking down a portion and re-building? Mr. Dion answers yes. Letters from the City Planner, B.O.H., Water Dept., City Planner and Fire Dept. were read into the record. No opposition.
Motion made and seconded to grant as Presented:
Vote: Ackerman, Berube, Wasylow, Amaral, Medeiros .………….Yes
Petition Granted:
Case #2905 Cedarwood Dev. Inc. 438 Broadway
Hearing held on March 13, 2008
A Variance from Section 6.3, 7.1.1 of the Zoning Ordinance to allow the construction of a 6,124 sq. ft. retail building with a waiver of the landscaping buffer from 15 feet to 3 feet and a rear setback of 20.5’ instead of 30 feet.
For the Petitioner: Josh Sperling, P.E., Bohler Engineering.
In favor: None
Opposed: None
Mr. Sperling stated the property currently has house, garage and shed located on it. They propose to erect the buildings and construct a 6,124 sq. ft. building to be used for retail, Advanced Auto Store. There will be a lot of improvements to site. They are asking for a waiver of the rear yard setback and the landscaped buffer due to the wetlands on the property. They are trying to stay away from the wetlands per the Conservation Commission. John asked where on Rte. 138 is this site? Mr. Sperling explains it next to the Taunton/Raynham line, next to W.H. Riley Oil Company. Peter asked if they would be pulling in and the backing up to loading dock in front of building? The front entrance is actually on the side? Dennis stated he would not vote for loading dock facing Broadway.
The overhead doors, 23 x 15 is really a concrete pad. There will be one man door and one overhead door. Mr. Sperling stated the deliveries are made off peak hours. He understands their concerns but due to the wetlands they are restricted. He stated the trucks will NOT go thru the landscaped buffer. He has tried several different ways of placing building. Peter stated that an accident will happen with how they are proposing. Joe stated that Rte. 138 is very busy. It was suggested moving the building towards Raynham? It was the concensus of the Board to have the building moved? Peter stated the lot is too small for the size of the building. Mr. Sperling stated he could possibly remove a few parking spaces. Peter’s main concern is backing up when there are cars there. Joe suggested eliminating some parking and make an exit only. Chairman Ackerman
stated they can’t come out and go towards Taunton because of the heavy traffic. He didn’t want any backing up and running along loading dock. Mr. Sperling asked the Board if he can demonstrate there is safe access will it be acceptable? John stated it’s not the engineer’s fault if someone back up and doesn’t see the cars? It was suggesting reducing the size of the building? Mr. Sperling stated they have already reduced the size of the building. Wayne asked if they could submit information on when the deliveries are made and the frequency of them? Chairman Ackerman stated this business will bring jobs to the
Page 6 of 7 – ZBA Minutes – 3-13-08
city but doesn’t want it to be a safety hazard. Mr. Sperling asked if the Board could vote contingent upon address their concerns at the DIRB process? Chairman Ackerman stated he would like to see that information prior to voting, but he’s just one vote. It was suggested continuing until next month to get information. Also to check with the office to see if additional advertising will be needed if proposal changes? Mr. Sperling waives the time frame on which to act on this proposal.
Motion made and seconded to continue until next meeting.
Vote: Ackerman, Joyce, Berube, Wasylow, Amaral .………….Yes
Petition Granted:
OTHER BUSINESS:
Powhattan Estates & The Settlement - Letter from Municipal Council – requesting recommendation from the ZBA’s Outside Engineer confirming the Pumping Station was building in accordance with plans.
Chairman Ackerman read letter from Vine Associates recommending of the Pump station for Powhattan Estates only at this time, contingent upon doing the remaining items in a timely fashion. Letter will be sent to the Municipal Council recommending acceptance of pump station for “Powhattan Estates”.
Pineridge Condos – Letter from Vine Associate Inc., - Relative to additional work being done without inspections.
Chairman Ackerman read letter from the City Planner in regards to violations at Pineridge Condos. Letter from Vine Associates recommending remedy.
Motion made and seconded to adopt Vine Associates and notify the developer by certified mail asking for a time-frame with 2 weeks of receipt of letter. .
Joe received a phone call from an abutter informing him of an excavator tipper over.
Meeting adjourn at 9:24 PM.
OLD BUSINESS:
| 
