CITY OF TAUNTON
ZONING BOARD OF APPEALS
FEBRUARY 11, 2016 – 6:00 pm.
(held at Maxham School, 141 Oak St, Taunton, Ma.)
Members Present: Dennis Ackerman, Wayne Berube, Steven Vieira, Joseph Amaral, Colby Correira, Michael Staples and George Moniz.
Meeting opens at 6:02 PM
Wayne made Motion to accept minutes of January 14, 2016 meeting, seconded by Joe. All in favor
Chairman Ackerman explained the ZBA process. He stated the petitioner presents their case, then they hear in people favor and people opposed. They allow petitioner to address any of the opposition’s concerns. They do not go back and forth
Case #3308 Coute Pinehurst St. (Lot #3)
For: A Variance from Section 6.3 of the Zoning Ordinance for the construction of a house having an 11 foot front yard setback (instead of 25’) on premises situated on the southwesterly side of Pinehurst Street, Taunton, Ma. known on Assessor’s Reference Map 91, Parcel 288 (Lot 3).
For the Petitioner: Christophe Moniz, representing Christopher Coute, 17 Oxford St., Taunton, Ma.
In favor: None
Opposed: None
Mr. Moniz explains these were approved a few months ago and when they placed house on lot they realized they need front setback because of corner lot. They are not asking for anymore lots, just front setback. This was discovered when the Engineer made plans and we then noticed we have to meet front setback not a side because it’s on the corner. No one in favor or opposed. Letters from the City Planner, Board of Health, Conservation Commission and Fire Dept. were read into the record.
Motion made and seconded to grant as Presented:
Vote: Amaral, Moniz, Correira, Staples
Petition Granted
Case #3313 Messler 10 Winter Ave.
For: A Special Permit from Section 5.2 of the Zoning Ordinance to allow an accessory dwelling unit and a Variance from Section 7.9 to allow parking in front yard and a lot size of 14,680 sq. ft. (instead of 15,000 sq. ft.)
For the Petitioner: Janet Messler & Melanie Marathas, 10 Winter Ave., Taunton, Ma.
In favor: None
Opposed: None
Melanie stated they are here tonight to make an accessory dwelling unit for her mom. The previous owner used the basement for a beauty salon so there is some work that has been done. They would make few improvements. Chairman Ackerman asked who would live in house and Melanie answers she would and her mom would live in accessory dwelling. No one in favor or opposed. Letters from the City Planner, B.O.H., Conservation Commission were read into the record.
Motion made and seconded to grant as Presented.
Vote: Ackerman, Amaral, Berube, Correira, Staples
Petition Granted
Case #3309 Saxonis John Street (Prop. I.D. 47-653)
For: A Special Permit from Section 5.2 of the Zoning Ordinance to allow a 3 family in an Urban Residential District.
For the Petitioner: Atty. James Rudser, 88 Black Falcon Ave., Ste. 204, Boston, Ma.
In favor: None
Opposed: Robert & Mary Lynch, 170 Broadway, Taunton, Ma.
Edward Annunziato, 160 Broadway, Taunton, Ma.
Dina Rocha, 164 Broadway, Taunton, Ma.
Atty. Rudser stated they are requesting a Special Permit for a 3 family on a lot in the Urban Residential District. The property is currently vacant and they expect some opposition because the lot has been vacant for some time. Atty. Rudser stated they are seeking a Special Permit not a variance. Chairman Ackerman stated they can do duplex by right because it’s allowed in this district. Atty. Rudser stated a 3 family is allowed by a Special Permit from this Board. He states a 3 family will remain in harmony with the neighborhood which consisst of single, multifamily and businesses. Joe asked how many bedrooms and Atty. Rudser answers 3 bedrooms. Joe didn’t think there was any room for a backyard. Wayne drove by and he thinks it’s terribly crowded. He stated there
is a steep slope and the building will be right on John Street. He doesn’t even think a duplex would fit in. He thinks its overkill of the property. Atty. Rudser stated they meet all the zoning requirements and he thinks it will be minimal impact. Joe stated even though you meet all the setbacks we have to look at the lot to see if it would accommodate a 3 family. He stated the lot is more of a triangular shape and has a steep slope. Chairman Ackerman stated an old fashion 3 family (3 stories high) would be a better fit. No one in favor: Opposed Robert Lynch, 170 Broadway stated it’s too crowded. The have unbelievable traffic from Hong Kong Restaurant and this is jamming in 3 families. Chairman Ackerman suggests perhaps reducing to 2 bedrooms? Atty. Rudser stated they would prefer 3 bedrooms. Joe remembers they had similar case and was denied and the put up a huge duplex. Opposed: Ed
Annunziato, a160 Broadway also thinks it’s too much. The road was just accepted last year by City. They recently did some improvements to the road. There is no room for parking, snow plowing and the development of this lot is problematic. There is no topcoat on the road yet. Opposed: Dina Rocha, 164 Broadway, had some concerns with congestion and she would be more acceptable to 2 family with 3 bedrooms. John Street is very narrow and to add another 3 families on it would result in overcrowding. Opposed: Mary Lynch, 170 Broadway, has owned the beauty salon for 30 years and she had to make parking on her lot for her business. There were “No parking signs” up on John Street but since they did some improvement they took down and never put back up. There is no room for emergency vehicles because people park on road. She states this was all owned by Roseland but through the years they have
divided it. Letters from the City Planner, B.O.H., Conservation Commission, Fire Dept. were read into the record. Atty. Stated the main issue is the traffic on John Street and the fact the City accepted it. They are not asking for a variance for parking, they can provide parking on their lot. He thinks the abutters are sorry it’s going to be developed but they have a right to develop it. Chairman Ackerman stated this Board can ask for more parking, landscaping, fencing, etc. if they choose. Chairman Ackerman again stated the old fashion 3 decker would be more suited in this neighborhood. Mike suggested having 2 bedrooms instead of 3 bedrooms but Atty. Rudser stated they weighed it out and it would be a disservice to his client for 2 bedrooms. George asked how wide is building? He was suggesting reducing size to gain more room on lot. It was noted they could build the same size building as a duplex. Atty.
Rudser said the biggest concern here is the street and that can’t be fixed. He was on the opinion the abutters were more opposed because the City accepted street. Joe stated the property has been vacant for all these years and now because the city accepted street and did improvements it now is eligible for development, within reason. Atty. Rudser reminded the Board this is a Special Permit not a variance. Chairman Ackerman stated they are an elected Board and he votes what’s in the best interest of the City. Wayne stated it just doesn’t fit here and the petitioner is maximizing the lot. The property is located in a small neighborhood and it would be more detriment to the neighborhood. Colby stated a 3 family on a 15,000 square foot lot doesn’t fit, in his opinion. There is no backyard and there is a steep hill. He would prefer a duplex.
Motion made and seconded to grant as Presented:
Vote: Ackerman, Amaral, Berube, Correira, Staples ….No
Petition Denied
Case #3310 Fadlallah 182 Broadway
For: A Special Permit from Section 5.2 of the Zoning Ordinance to allow an Auto Repair Business in a Highway Business District and a Variance from Section 7.1 to allow the reduction in the sideline landscape buffer width from 25 feet to 6.5 feet (right side only) and a reduction in the rear landscape buffer width from 25 feet to 0 feet (fencing will be provided)
For the Petitioner: John Barbour, representing Ghazi Fadlallah, 93 Green St., Rockland, Ma.
In favor: None
Opposed: None
Mr. Barbour stated this is the former gas station and former JN Phillips Glass Company building. They want to put auto sales with repair of their vehicles. They submitted plans by Earth Services and they will be going to the DIRB. Chairman Ackerman asked how did come up with the number of vehicles for sale? Mr. Barbour answered the engineers placed them on plan. Joe asked who determines how many vehicles can be on site? Mr. Barbour did not know who determines number. He stated the City Planner wants rear landscaping but they are fencing around entire site for security. Chairman Ackerman would like to see a rear buffer also. He suggests removing row of vehicles and put landscaping buffer. George comments on the number of vehicles on the site. Mike
asked if they would have junk parts outside and they answered No. Wayne stated they are requesting a Class II license and will display vehicles for sale and some repair. Mr. Barbour answers yes about 75% of the business is sales and they will service a few. They will service mainly the cars they sell. Wayne asked about the entrance and if it’s a one-way in. The plans show 24 foot wide entrance and there is not much room for displaying vehicles. Wayne realizes you are maximizing the site for the sales of vehicles but he wants it to look nice. He suggests eliminate a few spaces because it a little congested. It was asked how many employees? Mr. Fadlallah answers 3 employees. It was noted there is no room for customer parking. Chairman Ackerman suggests making the whole right side employee and customer parking. Joe asked the spot where the service vehicles are kept make those spaces 9 x 18.
Right now there are 46 spaces they suggests reducing to 40 spaces. Letters from the Fire Dept., City Planner, B.O.H., and Conservation Commission was read into the record. No one in favor or opposed.
Motion made and seconded to grant with the following conditions:
- Eliminate one row of parking in the rear to provide 7 ½ foot landscaping buffer.
- Left side shall be display spaces.
- Right side shall be customer spaces and reduce one space and make all spaces 9’ x 18’.
- No vehicle parts stored outside
- No outside repair of any kind
Vote: Ackerman, Amaral, Berube, Correira, Staples ….Yes
Petition Granted
Case #3311 McCollum 618 Crane Ave. South
For: A Variance from Section 6.3 of the Zoning Ordinance for the division of one lot into 2 lots. Lot 1 having 49,435 sq. ft. (instead of 60, 000 sq. ft.) with 41,495 sq. ft. dry area (instead of 43,560 sq. ft.) and Lot 2 having 44, 012 sq. ft. (instead of 60,000 sq. ft.) with 39,605 sq. ft. of dry area (instead of 43,560 sq. ft.
For the Petitioner: Roy DeLano, John Delano & Associates, 27 Jefferson St.,Taunton, Ma.
In favor: None
Opposed: Fatima Barbara, 588 Crane Ave. So. Taunton, Ma.
Mr. DeLano explains the petitioner has owned this house for 20 years and recently lost his wife. He put house on market and has no interest. They plan on dividing property which gives him the option for him & daughter to build house and sell other house. Mr. DeLano explains the property was zoned Suburban Residential but now is zoned Rural Residential. They need variance for square footage and dry area. Letters from the City Planner, Board of Health, Conservation Commission and Fire Dept. were read into the record. Opposed: Fatima Barbara, 588 Crane Ave.So. stated there is not enough room. The Board showed her the plans. Joe stated he will be meeting all setbacks. She stated it’s a narrow road. Chairman Ackerman suggested having bigger setback on her side. It was
suggested perhaps having a No cut zone. After viewing the plans it was brought to her attention that there is 85 feet from proposed house to her house.
Motion made and seconded to grant with the following condition:
- 25 foot No Cute Zone along the property line at 588 Crane Avenue South.
Vote: Ackerman, Amaral, Berube, Correira, Staples
Petition Granted
George Moniz excused at 7:30 pm.
Case #3312 Taunton Green LLC 49 Taunton Green
For: A Special Permit from Section 5.3.4 of the Zoning Ordinance to allow the increase of residential units from 12 to 13 units and reduction of commercial space from 3,734 to 2,771 sq. ft.
For the Petitioner: Dennis Colwell, Architect, 58 Burt St., Norton, Ma.
In favor: None
Opposed: None
Mr. Colwell explains how they want to increase the residential unit from 12 to 13 for the building at 49 Taunton Green. The property has been vacant for some time and this will result in less commercial space. They are proposing a 3 bedroom unit. The location of this unit doesn’t lend itself to commercial use. Letter s from the City Planner, B.O.H., Conservation Commission were read into the record. No one in favor or opposed.
Joe asked if this is where the barbershop is? Mr. Colwell answers yes barbershop is on first floor. The pawn shop will remain and this is in the basement level which has been vacant. There is 12 apartments with 1 bedroom and this will be 3 bedrooms which will attract younger family.
Motion made and seconded to grant as Presented.
Vote: Ackerman, Amaral, Berube, Correira, Staples
Petition Granted
Case #3314 T.M.L.P. 500 West Water St.
For: A Special Permit from Section 13.8 of the Zoning Ordinance to allow the construction of four (4) generators on concrete pads as well as construction of service drive, subsurface utilities and associated grading and landscaping in a Special Flood Hazard District.
For the Petitioner: Peter Botelho, TMLP, 55 Weir St., Taunton, Ma.
Thomas Nunno, LSP, The Vertex Companies, One Congress St., Boston, Ma.
In favor: None
Opposed: Steven Dutra, 103 E. Water St., Taunton, Ma.
Peter stated they are here tonight because they need Special Permit because they are in Special Flood Hazard District. The property is the existing power plant established in 1902 with limited access. They want to put 4 generators on the 3.7 acre parcel. The elevation is 13 feet above the 100 year flood. There will be minimal traffic to this site only about 8 trips per month. The noise level will be between 1-5 decimels which is very low considering the State standard is 10 decimels. This will allow the TMLP to save money and pass it on to their customers. Letters from the Fire Dept., Conservation Commission, B.O.H. and City Planner were read into the record. No one in favor. Opposed: Steve Dutra, 103 E Water Street stated he lives across the
river. His concerns were height of the smoke stacks, noise level, lack of landscaping. He asked why this site why no other TMLP sites? They just took down FB Rogers and now the noise will be worse. Peter stated they are going to put landscaping. Their next step is DIRB and Planning Board for their Site Plan Review. He stated there will be four 40 foot smoke stacks. Due to the back pressure they are needed per DEP requirements. The Board asked if they were planning on doing any improvement to the old building on site. Peter answers they have put new windows and roof. Joe commended the wonderful job TMLP does.
Motion made and seconded to grant as Presented:
Vote: Ackerman, Amaral, Berube, Correira, Staples ….Yes
Petition Granted
Case #2468-C – Mod - 2016 Green Pine Town Homes, LLC 171 Hart St.
For: A Modification of a Comprehensive Permit (entitled “Green Pine Town Homes) - located at 165R Hart Street (property I.D. 94-169) pursuant to General Laws, Chapter 40B, Section 20-23 – Modification is for the remaining 47 units to be separated with 5-7 feet of landscaping.
For the Petitioner: Dino Connolly, Exit Realty, 136 Hart St., Taunton, Ma.
Shawn Telsi, 73 Truman Rd. Newton, Ma.
In favor: None
Opposed: Letter from Peter & Janet Andrade, 18 Briarwood Dr., Taunton, Ma.
Peggy Marshall, 185 Hart St., Taunton, Ma. had some concerns.
Mr. Connolly stated he has been working with the petitioner about 6 weeks and he has 2 developers interested in the project. They are both in favor of separating the units like duplexes. The seller wishes to wash his hand from this project and let the new owners move forward. He spoke with the Chairman and he understands he needs P&S some other items and submit to the Board. Mr .Connolly stated they will be withdrawing their request because of the Fire Dept. letter relative to the problematic and too costly to separate units as Mr. Telsi has requested on plans. Mr. Connolly stated he is aware any new owner would need to submit new plans, proforma and documentation that they are aware of all the conditions set forth in all decisions. Mr. Connolly state the two interested
developers are Bill Brandon and Scott Flannery both have done work in Taunton. Mr.Connolly stated his client, Mr.Telsi has had a lot of problems with this project and wishes to just walk away from it, he was unaware of what he purchased. Joe reminded all they the abutters have been dealing with this project for at least 7 years. Joe stated most recently the sewer pump station alarm went on 2 straight nights and this is what the abutters have to live with. Mr. Connolly stated the 2 developers are very interested and he asked the Board if they would vote for changes to duplex style homes? Chairman Ackerman stated they cannot give you any guarantee tonight. They would need to see the proposal. Chairman Ackerman stated they must submit a P&S Agreement, letter stating they are aware of all conditions of approval and any changes will have to be submitted to the Board for review. They assume Mr. Telsi did not know what he
bought. Shawn Telsi stated the plans have some duplex style buildings. Mr. Telsi stated he does have approval to build another building because it was been released. There was some discussion as to whether or not the request to separate units was being withdrawn. Mr. Telsi stated he would like an answer just in case the deal doesn’t go through. Peggy Marshall, 185 Hart St. just wanted the Board and all prospective buyers to be aware that in each P&S and deed it should be noted there is an active construction company next door. Joe stated that is part of the original decision and MUST be complied with. Chairman Ackerman read letter from Peter Andrade in opposition. Mr. Telsi became argumentative at this time and did not think the Board needed to have new plans. Joe stated Mr. Connolly was going to withdraw the request? The Board was confused. Mr. Telsi kept interrupting the Board stating the new developer doesn’t
have to submit new plans because the original plans show some of the buildings duplex style. The Chairman stated that is true but are also about half the buildings that need to be separated and that will need to be shown on the plans to see the layout and to see if they move closer to wetlands, etc. Chairman Ackerman read letter from the Fire Dept., City Planner and Conservation Commission. At this time Board was trying to explain to Mr. Telsi what the process is for 40B projects. Mr. Telsi referenced a letter from the Building Dept. The Secretary stated she received an email from Shawn and an attachment of a building code. He kept referring to a letter from the Building dept. but there was no letter. The Board asked Mr. Connolly what he wants to to? Mr. Connolly wishes to move forward with this but it’s up to Mr. Telsi because he is owner. Mr. Telsi said he will comply with the fire dept. letter
is he wants to. Wayne stated it’s the Board’s decision to make vote on any changes, not his. The Board stated the Fire Dept. rules & regs are state rules. Mr. Telsi asked to continue and Mr. Ackerman stated the department comments are not going to change in one month. Mr. Telsi was still argumentative and the Board pressed for vote.
Wayne made motion to grant as presented, seconded by Joe.
Vote: Ackerman, Amaral, Berube, Correira, Staples ….No
Petition Denied
Meeting adjourned at 8:26 PM
| 
