CITY OF TAUNTON
ZONING BOARD OF APPEALS
JUNE 10, 2010
Members Present: Chairman Ackerman, Berube, Amaral, Staples. Joyce present at 8:40 PM. M.
Meeting called to order at 6:55 PM
Wayne made motion to accept May 13, 2010 minutes, seconded by Joel. All in favor.
Chairman Ackerman explained the process of which the ZBA conducts its meetings. They listen to the petitioner/Attorney, then opposition or in favor and then back to the petitioner. They do not go back and forth.
Chairman Ackerman informed the petitioner’s there are only 4 members (John will be here later) and they need all 4 votes in the positive to have it approved. He gave each petitioner the option of continue or hear case tonight.
Letter from Atty. Robert Treano – relative to Comp. Permit #1485C – (approved in 1987) Middleboro Avenue – Caswell Grove Housing Complex. Request is to modify language to comply with the US. Housing Act of 1937. Need vote whether it’s minor or major change.
Colleen Doherty, T.H.A. Executive Director and Atty. Robert Treano were invited into the enclosure. They are requesting some change in the language of the existing approval for the comp. permit for Caswell Grove approved in 1987. This was the old site of Caswell School and then it was transferred to the Housing Authority and now it’s Caswell Grove elderly living unit. Atty. Treano stated they thru the Federalization process they needed to show title to the HUD and they were asking for the right of reverter to be removed and they refused. In 1987 The ZBA granted a Comprehensive Permit. They are requesting a change of language “regarding the elderly and fail” in the permit. Atty. Fiore, Asst. City Solicitor stated in his opinion this language change would be minor and not require a public
hearing. Atty. Treano stated a new version dated 6-10-10 is the corrected copy (previous one had typo). The correct language is as follows:
“This property is conveyed on the condition that it be used for public housing under the U.S. Housing Act of 1937, as amended, and at such time as the property ceases to be used for said purpose, it shall automatically revert to the City of Taunton without the City having to exercise its right to entry.” Atty. Treano stated once they get federalization approval they will be eligible for $194,895.000 for renovations. There are currently 59 units in Caswell Grove. Chairman Ackerman asked if they are going to housing for the elderly? Atty. Treano answers yes they biggest projects are state funded and then they transfer to Federalization thru the federal government. There are currently 3 developments that have been gone thru this process. This will
bring additional monies to the City, about $500,000. Wayne asked about the negative factors? Now they all become federal funded? Wayne stated that Atty. Fiore’ s letter indicated that it could be open to anyone of any age could live there? Ms. Doherty stated that’s not true, the Asst. City Solicitor has the wrong interpretation. This will always remain housing for the elderly. They have no intention of changing the population there. Ms. Doherty stated HUD doesn’t recognize the restriction we distinguish them locally. Joe asked if this is the final 3 of the housing complex that will be federalized. Ms. Doherty stated that they are just trying to change the language to be consistent with the U.S. Housing Act of 1937. There will be no changes the population of that complex. Chairman Ackerman stated he doesn’t think it’s a major change and agree with the Asst. City Solicitor’s letter. Wayne asked why didn’t the catch this language before? Ms. Doherty stated while
putting budget together then HUD reviews all documents and they discovered the language. They wanted us to eliminate the revert but we insisted it stay. So instead they wanted the language change to be consistent with the U.S. Housing Act of 1937. Chairman Ackerman stated the Federal Government is always late and they even asked the THA to take property by eminant domain. Wayne’s concern was that the Asst. City Solicitor’s interpretation of the Act of 1937 was suggested that it could be mixed use. Ms. Doherty stated the facility will remain an elderly facility. Ms. Doherty stated this will benefit the residents of Caswel Grove . Letter from the City Planner recommending approval of language change.
Motion made and seconded to find the language change a Minor Change and include it in the approval.
Vote: Staples, Berube, Ackerman, Amaral………Yes.
Cont’d. Case # 3017 Frenette 815 Middleboro Avenue
Letter from Atty. Michael Strojny requesting a continuance until next month and he waives the time frame on which to act on this proposal.
Vote: Ackerman, Berube, Staples, Amaral……Yes
Petition continued.
Case # 3018 Argrew 200 Winthrop St. .
A Special Permit from Section 5.2 of the Taunton Zoning Ordinance to allow a 3-family in an Urban Residential District.
Request to continue until next month.
Vote: Amaral, Staples, Berube and Ackerman…Yes
Petition continued:
Case #3025 DaSilva 12 King St.
A Special Permit from Section 5.3.4 & 5.2 of the Taunton Zoning Ordinance to allow the expansion of a pre-existing non-conforming structure and allowing a 3 family dwelling on a lot having 9,763 sq. ft. (instead of 15,000 sq. ft.)
Request to continue until next month.
Vote: Amaral, Staples, Ackerman, Berube……Yes
Petition Continued:
Case #3019 DK Realty Development Corp. 1050 So. Precinct St.
Hearing held on June 10, 2010
A Variance from Section 6.3 to allow the construction of a single family dwelling on a lot having 25,000 sq. ft. (instead of 60,000 sq. ft.) and having 24,867.5 sq. ft. of dry area (instead of 43,560 sq. ft.) (See case # 2954)
For the Petitioner: Richard Robideaux, 16 Priscilla Dr., Lakeville, Ma.
In Favor: None
Opposition: None
Mr. Robideau stated he purchased this property by tax title from the City. He was in the process of going through the building permit process and then discovered through the City Planner’s office that the variance had expired. He is ready to go and just wishes the Board grant the variance. He is just asking the board to re-affirm the vote and grant the variance. He stated the Board of Health and Conservation Commission has signed off. Letters from the B.O.H., Fire Dept., City Planner, Conservation Commission, Water Dept. and City Engineer was read into the record.
Motion made and seconded to grant as presented with dept comments:
- The lot would need to be able to construct an on-site septic system, with appropriate setback requirements and buffers, and private wells (if municipal water is not available), in accordance with Title 5 regulations. The dwelling must comply with the Minimum Standards of Fitness of Human Habitation, State Sanitary Code, Chapter II.
- The proposed single family dwelling will require hardwired smoke detectors throughout, 780 CMR 9.0. Carbon Monoxide detectors are required, M.G.L. 148 Sec. 26F ½ and 527 CMR 31. A permit for a fire warning must be obtained from the Office of Fire Prevention before a building permit is signed.
- The house at 1050 South Precinct Street had an address out of sequence (even number on the off numbered side of the street) Any new construction on this lot will require a new street address.
VOTE: Amaral, Berube, Staples, Ackerman …….……... Yes
Petition Granted:
Case #3020 Jamins LLC 73 Stevens St.
Hearing held on June 10, 2010
A Variance from Section 5.2 to allow Service Use and/or Office Use in the 9,383 sq. ft. building in an Industrial District.
For the Petitioner: Paul Maggiore, Jamins LLC, 13 Wheeling Ave., Woburn, Ma.
In Favor: None
Opposition: None
Mr. Maggiore stated the Board granted approval for retail for this building and unfortunately they haven’t been able to secure a tenant. They now have tenant who wishes to utilize the building for office purposes. They wish to have the building approved all office or service use. Joe asked if the building is empty? Mr. Maggiore answers yes its vacant. Mr. Maggiore stated half the building will be used for 100% office space. Wayne asked how they would divide? Mr. Maggiore stated they put up wall to separate the building. Right now the building is wide open. Chairman Ackerman stated this is the site they wanted to put the Methadone Clinic and he agrees this is a much better fit in the neighborhood. Mr. Maggiore stated the tenant office, an internet marketing web based
business. Joe asked what if he had tenant for retail can this tenant object? Mr. Maggiore stated they have lease and had some language that protect the tenant. It was asked if this was site of gym? Mr. Maggiore stated that’ s the other building and Work Out World is going in there. Letters from City Planner, Water Dept., B.O.H., Fire Dept. and Conservation Commission. Mr. Maggiore stated it was the City Planner who suggested getting the whole thing approved for office and/or service use so they would not have to come back. No one in favor or opposed. It was stated the whole building could be used for 100% office or Service Use.
Motion made and seconded to grant as presented:
VOTE: Amaral, Berube, Staples, Ackerman …….……... Yes
Petition Granted:
Case #3021 Bastis 22 Russell St.
Hearing held on June 10, 2010
A Variance from Section 6.2 & 6.3 to allow the re-configuration of 3 lots into 2 lots. Lot 1 having an existing 2 family dwelling having 11,043 sq. ft. (instead of 15,000 sq. ft.) 45’ of frontage (instead of 100’) and a sideline setback of 14’6” (instead of 15 ‘). Lot 2 having 45’ of frontage & lot width (instead of 100’) and a shape factor of 40.6 (instead of 35)
For the Petitioner: Robert Bastis, 1401 Center St., Dighton, Ma.
In Favor: None
Opposition: Mark Levesque, 30 Russell St., Taunton, Ma.
Tim & Julie Ramey, 23 Russell St., Taunton, Ma.
Bill DeCouto, 8 Russell St., Taunton, Ma.
Mr. Bastis stated he purchased the property in February 2009 for investment property for his family. He made offer and then BETA came to him asking for some assistance with the existing water problem in the street. The City was looking for easement rights to fit the problem. He closed on the property and helped the city by giving 11,767 sq. ft. of his land for drainage easement. He is hoping to divide the property into two lots and have duplex on back lot. This will be income property for him. Joe asked if the existing home is occupied? Mr. Bastis answers yes. He stated the City only needs access to the subsurface drainage easement on the property.
The hose is a bit run down and has been set on fire when it was empty. Wayne asked if it’s a 2-family? Mr. Bastis stated yes and he has new tenant in. He stated he purchased the property with the intent on splitting up lot for income property. He stated the driveway is 15 feet wide. Wayne stated he is creating his own hardship by splitting up lot? Mr. Bastis admits he is creating his hardship and has done some improvements to the property with plantings, etc. He has even evicted old tenants and have good tenants now and is in the process of getting the troublesome ones out. There was no supervision by previous landlord. Mr.Bastis stated the street was referred to as “Lake Russell” because of the water problem. They said the drainage in the
street could not handle the water coming down the street. He stated that most of the water is gone. Joe asked why duplex? Mr. Bastis stated the house he was proposing would match the house in front. He stated the driveway is long and narrow but there is a lot of room once you get back there. Mark Levesque, 30 Russell St., opposed. He stated the water problem only happened after they separated the water & sewer. They put honey combs in on Marcotte Street and after they wanted to put infiltration on his property. BETA put it in for the City so they created the water problem and now Mr. Bastis agreed to help eliminate it. Mr. Levesque asked why kind of housing will go in there, Section 8? Chairman Ackerman stated the Board cannot discriminate on who lives there. He didn’t mean how that sounded he just doesn’t want a house behind another house? He lives at the last house of left. Julie & Tim Ramey, 23 Russell Street have been tenants since 1999 and they have liked what
Mr. Bastis has done to the property. They would love him for a neighbor. Since he removed old tenants and new one moved in the problems have gone away. Ms. Ramey stated she can attest to “Lake Russell”, the last 4 houses there has been a foot deep of water. They have no opposition to him just want the neighborhood to be quiet like it used to be. They don’t want another absentee landlord like previous. They are worried about illegal activity and devalue of property. Chairman Ackerman asked since the old tenants left has it been quieter? Ms. Ramey answers yes, the police has been there only 2 times in the last 6 months. She stated the water has been horrible and now it’s much better. The last 8 years has been bad with negative behavior, drugs and thieves. They are pleased the property is not abandoned anymore because it was an eyesore. Opposed: Bill DeCouta, 8 Russell Street. He stated the
neighborhood is going down in the dumps. He stated he’s opposed to duplex, would rather see a single family house. He stated Mr. Bastis is a nice guy and a nice single family would be better back there. He noted he has water in back of his house. Mr. Bastis states the concerns stem around the tenants and that has been fixed. He has every intention of keeping property but he understands their concerns. He stated he is putting fencing up to stop 4 wheelers. Chairman Ackerman asked about the front house and number of bedrooms? Mr. Bastis answers each floor has 4 bedrooms equaling about 1,100 sq. ft. Chairman Ackerman stated he suggests if a duplex restricting to 2 bedrooms. Mike asked about the driveway? Mr. Bastis stated there would be no fencing to separate the two driveways. There will be room for emergency vehicles. He plans on paving the existing driveway. Joe’s major concern was the number
of bedrooms and he expected the closets abutters to be here tonight but they are not. He stated if they restrict to 2 bedrooms the house size could be a lot smaller. Letters from the B.O.H., Water Dept., Fire Dept., Con. Comms. And City Planner were read into the record. Wayne stated at first he wasn’t too sure but he was impressed with the applicant’s sincere and honestly. His helping the City with the drainage easement showed good faith. Wayne liked the reduction of the number of bedrooms.
Motion made and seconded to grant as presented with the following conditions:
- Duplex to have a maximum of 2 bedrooms each. Single family dwelling to have a maximum of 4 bedrooms.
- Drive to be paved as presented.
- Proposed 2 family dwelling will require hardwired smoke detectors throughout, 780 CMR 9.0. Carbon Monoxide detectors are required, M.G.L. 148, sec. 26F ½ and 527 CMR 31. A permit for a fire warning must be obtained from the Office of Fire Prevention before a building permit is signed.
- If municipal city sewer and water is not available, the lots would need to be able to construct on-site septic systems, with appropriate setback requirements and buffers, and private wells, in accordance with Title 5 regulations. The dwelling must comply with the Minimum Standards of Fitness for Habitation, State Sanitary Code, Chapter II.
VOTE: Amaral, Berube, Staples, Ackerman …….……... Yes
Petition Granted:
Case #3022 McKenna 521 Tremont St.
Hearing held on June 10, 2010
A Variance from Section 5.2 & 7.9 to allow an accessory dwelling unit (720 sq. ft.) in an RRD.
For the Petitioner: Atty. David Gay, P. O. Box 988, Taunton, Ma.
In Favor: None
Opposition: None
Atty. Gay stated they are here for an accessory dwelling unit. The unit already exists and they are just trying to legalize it. The property has the 4 parking spaces per the zoning ordinance. Wayne asked if the property is under agreement? Atty. Gay answers yes. They are trying to close on this property by the end of this month. The new buyers parents want to move into the accessory dwelling unit. No one in favor or opposed. Letters from the City Planner, Fire Dept., Conservation Commission, B.O.H. was read into the record.
Motion made and seconded to grant as presented:
VOTE: Amaral, Berube, Staples, Ackerman …….……... Yes
Petition Granted:
Case #3023 Costa 51 Summer St.
Hearing held on June 10, 2010
A Variance from Section 7.8 for a dwelling conversion of a single family to a 2-family having 13,651 sq. ft. instead of 15,000 sq. f t.
For the Petitioner: Atty. David Gay, P. O. Box 988, Taunton, Ma.
In Favor: None
Opposition: Ed Smith, 56 Summer St., Taunton, Ma.
Lisa Nates, 54 Summer St., Taunton, Ma.
Dr. Joseph Nates, 54 Summer St., Taunton, Ma.
Steven Wyrosdic, 58 Summer St., Taunton, Ma.
Letter from Patricia M. McSweeney, 43 Summer St., Taunton, Ma.
Atty. Gay stated the petitioner purchased the property and wishes to convert it to a two-family dwelling. Under Section 7.8 of the Zoning Ordinance it states if you have 15,000 sq. ft. you can convert to a use allowed in the district. The City Planner informed them because they don’t have the required lot size they need variance. Atty. Gay stat4ed there will be no alteration outside, just inside and they don’t agree with the City Planner but are here tonight. The house was built in 1814 and is a pre-existing non-confirming house and lot size. He stated in the Zoning Ordinance if there is less than 10% of expansion or alteration they could do as a matter of right. They wish to restore the property in a nice way. This property is 2 houses down from Catholic Middle School
and there are many 3 family dwellings in the area. Atty. Gay stated there are a lot of these larger Victorian style houses located along Dean St., Summer St., Broadway & Winthrop Street. They don’t lend themselves to single family houses. They are actually reducing the number of bedrooms. They have 7 bedrooms and they will make 2 units with 3 bedrooms each. There are large trees covering house and they are proposing improvements to the property. Atty. Gay stated the hardship is based on the lot size and the existing location along a major road going into the downtown area. Wayne stated the house was bought in foreclosure for $117,000. Atty. Gay stated the applicant doesn’t intend to live there and will fix house up and will be spending close to $150,000 totalling about 300,000. Atty. Gay stated he needs to convert in order for him to afford it. Wayne stated why did he buy it if he can’t afford it? Each case
stand on it’s own merits. This will be an absentee landlord house. The house was constructed in the 1800’s and it’s a good size house. Atty. Gay stated it doesn’t lend itself to a single family dwlling, it a large house close to the road. The house is empty and has been for sale form sometime. Joe stated the house is a large Victorian house. The surrounding properties, 49 Summer St. is a 3 family, 57 Summer is a 3 family and 54 Summer St. is a 2 family. Joe stated he didn’t cut up lot creating this and it’s like along Winthrop Street, nice big home but they are not single family. John agrees with Wayne that there is no hardship. He bought the property knowing it was a single family dwelling. The hardship is the difficult market and it won’t market as a single family. Atty. Gay stted he has offer and he advises him to place a contingency on it but he had to
act quick or he would lose out on the deal. Oppose: Ed Smith, 56 Summer St. stated he’s opposed. He stated the financial hardship was created by the petitioner. He stated he has 3 teenage children and having a large house has its benefits. He has lived there for 14 years and this property is located within the Historic District. Prior to meetings the proper procedure was not followed. He stated there are other multifamilies in the neighborhood but there are single families too. John agrees but there is a small market for single family dwelling of this house size. Mr. Smith stated the petitioner agreed it was a risk when he purchased the property. Lisa Nates, 54 Summer St., opposed. She stated there are 5 single family dwellings in close proximity of this house and they are all in the historic district. She stated he appeared before the Historic District Commission because he tore down the
chimney because they said they weren’t working. She has seen the use of those chimneys. The stated this was a income venture for the petitioner. She’s afraid if you allow this one then it will create a dominos effect. She wasn’t sure it the house had 7 bedrooms as previously stated. He was ordered by the Historic District Commission to put chimney back up. Dr. Joseph Nates, 54 Summer St. stated he has lived there for 54 years and it has always been a single family dwelling. He stated there are 3 schools, rooming house, and church in the immediate area. He did say there are multifamily houses but there are also single family dwellings. He doesn’t agree the petitioner has hardship, he purchased the property knowing it was only a single family dwelling. Letters from Patricia McSweeney,43 Summer St. opposed. Steven Wyrosdic, Opposed: 58 Summer St., stated in 2004 he purchased his house
for $400,000 and it’s a single family dwelling. Atty. Gay stated the petitioner own other properties in the city of which he has improved. The Board asked what addresses? Atty. Gay stated 249 Somerset Ave., - 4 family, 57 First St – 4-family, 33 Hodges St., and 2 family at 3 Webster St. He owns a new single family in Frazier Pasture Farms. Atty. Gay stated he took chimney down because it wasn’t safe. He will be putting back up. He stated the house is close to the street, only 12 feet. The property has been on the market for over a year and he will make house looks nice which will benefit the gateway to the City. Chairman Ackerman recommends continuing so they can have documents from the Historic District Commission. Chairman Ackerman would like to see what they said. Letters from the B.O.H., Water Dept., Fire Dept., City Planner and Conservation Commission were read into the
record. Joe stated he would continue. Joe stated he know what he bought. Wayne stated he didn’t’ need to continue.
Motion made and seconded to continue until next month. Have petitioner forward the Historic District communication to the ZBA… Send copy of Historic District communication to the opposition.
Vote: Ackerman, Amaral, Staples, Joyce,….Yes
Berube……………………………………….No
Petition continued until next month.
Case #3026 Hathaway 406 Tremont St.
Hearing held on June 10, 2010
A Variance from Section 5.2 and a Special Permit from Section 5.3.4 for the modification of an existing variance (case #476) and allow the use of existing commercial garage as a welding business and associated vehicles & equipment and some snow removal.
For the Petitioner: Atty. David Gay, Gay Gay & Field, P.C., P. O. Box 988, Taunton, Ma.
Preston Hathway, 406 Tremont St., Taunton, Ma.
In Favor: Jeff Bagge, 387 Tremont St., Taunton, Ma.
Opposition: None
Atty. Gay stated that Mr. Hathaway has owned this property for over 50 years and wishes to retire. He had a man with an asphalt business that wanted to buy the property but the abutters thought it was more of intense business that what was there. Now he has another gentlemen who is interested in the property who has welding business with some snow removal. Currently he is located just down the road at 518 Tremont Street, he leases property from Andy Gravel for over 20 years. He’s a sole proprietor and works alone. Atty. Gay stated this use will be less intense because the work can be done inside and he’s the only worker. Atty. Gay stated that Mr. Hathaway went to the P.B. with a repetitive petitioner and they found it to be a substantial change and allowed him to come back before the ZBA. Atty.
Gay state din 1973 the property received a variance to add a building to store equipment for business. Chairman Ackerman read the City Planner’s letter into the record recommending approval but the board should put hours of operation and number of trucks. Atty. Gay stated Mr. Gunnerson was expected to be here tonight but due to a family emergency isn’t able to. Mr. Hathaway stated that the hours of operation would be Monday – Friday 6:00 AM – 8:00 PM and Saturday half day. No Sunday. It was asked how many trucks does he have? Mr. Hathaway answers he thinks 2 trucks, 2 sanders and welding equipment. The Board wanted to specifically limit the number of trucks allowed on the premises. Atty. Gay stated that now he leases the property down the road at 518 Tremont St. from Andy Gravel. Joe stated he’s gotten phone calls and wanted to know if it would be just one business… Not
2 separate, one for welding and one for snow plowing? Atty. Gay answers no, just one business. In favor: Jeff Bagge, 387 Tremont St., stated he knows Mr. Gunnerson and he’s a nice quiet guy and this would be a good fit for the neighborhood. Letters from the B.O.H., Conservation Commission, Fire Dept. ,Water Dept. were read into the record. John stated he wanted to limit the number of trucks kept on site. He’s not worried about the little trucks. Chairman Ackerman suggested limiting them by weight limit, a maximum of 6 trucks with a weight limit of 26,001 lbs. CDL. Joe has heard the Mr. Gunnerson is a nice guy and he’s a straight shooter. John also said people spoke very highly of him. Wayne stated this would be a good fit for the neighborhood.
Motion made and seconded to grant as presented and with the following conditions:
- The new business must obtain a Hazardous Materials Control Permit from the Board of Health.
- Any construction or repaving may require filing with the Conservation Commission. The snow storage on the property should be at least 100 feet from the wetlands.
- Fire Alarm must conform to new construction requirements, 780 CMR 9.0. Fire alarm drawings must be submitted for review (2 sets) before the Fire Department signs a building permit. Final inspection will be conducted by the Office of Fire Prevention. Fire extinguishers installed throughout 527 CMR 10.02 & NFPA 10. Dumpster permit is required for dumpsters six yards or greater 527 CMR 34.03.
- Hours of Operation: Monday – Saturday 6:00 AM – 6:00 PM for outdoor operation
- Hours of Operation: Monday – Saturday 6:00 AM – 8:00 PM for indoor operation.
- Maximum of 6 trucks with a weight limit of CDL - 26,001 lbs. kept on site.
- Restricted to a Sole Business on property.
VOTE: Amaral, Berube, Joyce, Staples, Ackerman …….……... Yes
Petition Granted:
Case #3024 Daviduk 61 Greystone St.
Hearing held on June 10, 2010
A Variance from Section 6.3 & 7.2 to allow a 30 x 30 garage having a 14’9”front setback (instead of 25 feet)
For the Petitioner: Atty. Edmund Brennan, One Church Green, Taunton, Ma.
In Favor: None
Opposition: None
Atty. Brennan stated this property is located on the corner of Greystone St. and Rogers Avenue, an undeveloped street. However; they are forced to meet the front yard setback on that side because of the road. They are proposing a 30 x 30 garage which will result in a 14’9” front yard setback instead of 25 feet. If the street layout wasn’t here they would meet just be shy of the 15 feet setback. The property does have an elevation of 40 feet and then dips down to an elevation of 22 feet. Atty. Brennan stated it’s highly unlikely that anyone would want to improvement the roadway. The other lots on the other end already have frontage so there would no reason to create any more frontage. Letters from the City Planner, Conservation Commission, Fire Dept. and B.O.H were read
into the record. No one appearing in favor or against petition.
Motion made and seconded to grant as presented:
VOTE: Amaral, Berube, Staples, Joyce, Ackerman …….……... Yes
Petition Granted:
John made motion to go into Executive Session, Seconded by Joe.
No votes were taken in Executive Session.
Meeting adjourned at 10:25 PM.
CITY OF TAUNTON
ZONING BOARD OF APPEALS
JUNE 10, 2010
Members Present: Chairman Ackerman, Berube, Amaral, Staples. Joyce present at 8:40 PM. M.
Meeting called to order at 6:55 PM
Wayne made motion to accept May 13, 2010 minutes, seconded by Joel. All in favor.
Chairman Ackerman explained the process of which the ZBA conducts its meetings. They listen to the petitioner/Attorney, then opposition or in favor and then back to the petitioner. They do not go back and forth.
Chairman Ackerman informed the petitioner’s there are only 4 members (John will be here later) and they need all 4 votes in the positive to have it approved. He gave each petitioner the option of continue or hear case tonight.
Letter from Atty. Robert Treano – relative to Comp. Permit #1485C – (approved in 1987) Middleboro Avenue – Caswell Grove Housing Complex. Request is to modify language to comply with the US. Housing Act of 1937. Need vote whether it’s minor or major change.
Colleen Doherty, T.H.A. Executive Director and Atty. Robert Treano were invited into the enclosure. They are requesting some change in the language of the existing approval for the comp. permit for Caswell Grove approved in 1987. This was the old site of Caswell School and then it was transferred to the Housing Authority and now it’s Caswell Grove elderly living unit. Atty. Treano stated they thru the Federalization process they needed to show title to the HUD and they were asking for the right of reverter to be removed and they refused. In 1987 The ZBA granted a Comprehensive Permit. They are requesting a change of language “regarding the elderly and fail” in the permit. Atty. Fiore, Asst. City Solicitor stated in his opinion this language change would be minor and not require a public
hearing. Atty. Treano stated a new version dated 6-10-10 is the corrected copy (previous one had typo). The correct language is as follows:
“This property is conveyed on the condition that it be used for public housing under the U.S. Housing Act of 1937, as amended, and at such time as the property ceases to be used for said purpose, it shall automatically revert to the City of Taunton without the City having to exercise its right to entry.” Atty. Treano stated once they get federalization approval they will be eligible for $194,895.000 for renovations. There are currently 59 units in Caswell Grove. Chairman Ackerman asked if they are going to housing for the elderly? Atty. Treano answers yes they biggest projects are state funded and then they transfer to Federalization thru the federal government. There are currently 3 developments that have been gone thru this process. This will
bring additional monies to the City, about $500,000. Wayne asked about the negative factors? Now they all become federal funded? Wayne stated that Atty. Fiore’ s letter indicated that it could be open to anyone of any age could live there? Ms. Doherty stated that’s not true, the Asst. City Solicitor has the wrong interpretation. This will always remain housing for the elderly. They have no intention of changing the population there. Ms. Doherty stated HUD doesn’t recognize the restriction we distinguish them locally. Joe asked if this is the final 3 of the housing complex that will be federalized. Ms. Doherty stated that they are just trying to change the language to be consistent with the U.S. Housing Act of 1937. There will be no changes the population of that complex. Chairman Ackerman stated he doesn’t think it’s a major change and agree with the Asst. City Solicitor’s letter. Wayne asked why didn’t the catch this language before? Ms. Doherty stated while
putting budget together then HUD reviews all documents and they discovered the language. They wanted us to eliminate the revert but we insisted it stay. So instead they wanted the language change to be consistent with the U.S. Housing Act of 1937. Chairman Ackerman stated the Federal Government is always late and they even asked the THA to take property by eminant domain. Wayne’s concern was that the Asst. City Solicitor’s interpretation of the Act of 1937 was suggested that it could be mixed use. Ms. Doherty stated the facility will remain an elderly facility. Ms. Doherty stated this will benefit the residents of Caswel Grove . Letter from the City Planner recommending approval of language change.
Motion made and seconded to find the language change a Minor Change and include it in the approval.
Vote: Staples, Berube, Ackerman, Amaral………Yes.
Cont’d. Case # 3017 Frenette 815 Middleboro Avenue
Letter from Atty. Michael Strojny requesting a continuance until next month and he waives the time frame on which to act on this proposal.
Vote: Ackerman, Berube, Staples, Amaral……Yes
Petition continued.
Case # 3018 Argrew 200 Winthrop St. .
A Special Permit from Section 5.2 of the Taunton Zoning Ordinance to allow a 3-family in an Urban Residential District.
Request to continue until next month.
Vote: Amaral, Staples, Berube and Ackerman…Yes
Petition continued:
Case #3025 DaSilva 12 King St.
A Special Permit from Section 5.3.4 & 5.2 of the Taunton Zoning Ordinance to allow the expansion of a pre-existing non-conforming structure and allowing a 3 family dwelling on a lot having 9,763 sq. ft. (instead of 15,000 sq. ft.)
Request to continue until next month.
Vote: Amaral, Staples, Ackerman, Berube……Yes
Petition Continued:
Case #3019 DK Realty Development Corp. 1050 So. Precinct St.
Hearing held on June 10, 2010
A Variance from Section 6.3 to allow the construction of a single family dwelling on a lot having 25,000 sq. ft. (instead of 60,000 sq. ft.) and having 24,867.5 sq. ft. of dry area (instead of 43,560 sq. ft.) (See case # 2954)
For the Petitioner: Richard Robideaux, 16 Priscilla Dr., Lakeville, Ma.
In Favor: None
Opposition: None
Mr. Robideau stated he purchased this property by tax title from the City. He was in the process of going through the building permit process and then discovered through the City Planner’s office that the variance had expired. He is ready to go and just wishes the Board grant the variance. He is just asking the board to re-affirm the vote and grant the variance. He stated the Board of Health and Conservation Commission has signed off. Letters from the B.O.H., Fire Dept., City Planner, Conservation Commission, Water Dept. and City Engineer was read into the record.
Motion made and seconded to grant as presented with dept comments:
- The lot would need to be able to construct an on-site septic system, with appropriate setback requirements and buffers, and private wells (if municipal water is not available), in accordance with Title 5 regulations. The dwelling must comply with the Minimum Standards of Fitness of Human Habitation, State Sanitary Code, Chapter II.
- The proposed single family dwelling will require hardwired smoke detectors throughout, 780 CMR 9.0. Carbon Monoxide detectors are required, M.G.L. 148 Sec. 26F ½ and 527 CMR 31. A permit for a fire warning must be obtained from the Office of Fire Prevention before a building permit is signed.
- The house at 1050 South Precinct Street had an address out of sequence (even number on the off numbered side of the street) Any new construction on this lot will require a new street address.
VOTE: Amaral, Berube, Staples, Ackerman …….……... Yes
Petition Granted:
Case #3020 Jamins LLC 73 Stevens St.
Hearing held on June 10, 2010
A Variance from Section 5.2 to allow Service Use and/or Office Use in the 9,383 sq. ft. building in an Industrial District.
For the Petitioner: Paul Maggiore, Jamins LLC, 13 Wheeling Ave., Woburn, Ma.
In Favor: None
Opposition: None
Mr. Maggiore stated the Board granted approval for retail for this building and unfortunately they haven’t been able to secure a tenant. They now have tenant who wishes to utilize the building for office purposes. They wish to have the building approved all office or service use. Joe asked if the building is empty? Mr. Maggiore answers yes its vacant. Mr. Maggiore stated half the building will be used for 100% office space. Wayne asked how they would divide? Mr. Maggiore stated they put up wall to separate the building. Right now the building is wide open. Chairman Ackerman stated this is the site they wanted to put the Methadone Clinic and he agrees this is a much better fit in the neighborhood. Mr. Maggiore stated the tenant office, an internet marketing web based
business. Joe asked what if he had tenant for retail can this tenant object? Mr. Maggiore stated they have lease and had some language that protect the tenant. It was asked if this was site of gym? Mr. Maggiore stated that’ s the other building and Work Out World is going in there. Letters from City Planner, Water Dept., B.O.H., Fire Dept. and Conservation Commission. Mr. Maggiore stated it was the City Planner who suggested getting the whole thing approved for office and/or service use so they would not have to come back. No one in favor or opposed. It was stated the whole building could be used for 100% office or Service Use.
Motion made and seconded to grant as presented:
VOTE: Amaral, Berube, Staples, Ackerman …….……... Yes
Petition Granted:
Case #3021 Bastis 22 Russell St.
Hearing held on June 10, 2010
A Variance from Section 6.2 & 6.3 to allow the re-configuration of 3 lots into 2 lots. Lot 1 having an existing 2 family dwelling having 11,043 sq. ft. (instead of 15,000 sq. ft.) 45’ of frontage (instead of 100’) and a sideline setback of 14’6” (instead of 15 ‘). Lot 2 having 45’ of frontage & lot width (instead of 100’) and a shape factor of 40.6 (instead of 35)
For the Petitioner: Robert Bastis, 1401 Center St., Dighton, Ma.
In Favor: None
Opposition: Mark Levesque, 30 Russell St., Taunton, Ma.
Tim & Julie Ramey, 23 Russell St., Taunton, Ma.
Bill DeCouto, 8 Russell St., Taunton, Ma.
Mr. Bastis stated he purchased the property in February 2009 for investment property for his family. He made offer and then BETA came to him asking for some assistance with the existing water problem in the street. The City was looking for easement rights to fit the problem. He closed on the property and helped the city by giving 11,767 sq. ft. of his land for drainage easement. He is hoping to divide the property into two lots and have duplex on back lot. This will be income property for him. Joe asked if the existing home is occupied? Mr. Bastis answers yes. He stated the City only needs access to the subsurface drainage easement on the property.
The hose is a bit run down and has been set on fire when it was empty. Wayne asked if it’s a 2-family? Mr. Bastis stated yes and he has new tenant in. He stated he purchased the property with the intent on splitting up lot for income property. He stated the driveway is 15 feet wide. Wayne stated he is creating his own hardship by splitting up lot? Mr. Bastis admits he is creating his hardship and has done some improvements to the property with plantings, etc. He has even evicted old tenants and have good tenants now and is in the process of getting the troublesome ones out. There was no supervision by previous landlord. Mr.Bastis stated the street was referred to as “Lake Russell” because of the water problem. They said the drainage in the
street could not handle the water coming down the street. He stated that most of the water is gone. Joe asked why duplex? Mr. Bastis stated the house he was proposing would match the house in front. He stated the driveway is long and narrow but there is a lot of room once you get back there. Mark Levesque, 30 Russell St., opposed. He stated the water problem only happened after they separated the water & sewer. They put honey combs in on Marcotte Street and after they wanted to put infiltration on his property. BETA put it in for the City so they created the water problem and now Mr. Bastis agreed to help eliminate it. Mr. Levesque asked why kind of housing will go in there, Section 8? Chairman Ackerman stated the Board cannot discriminate on who lives there. He didn’t mean how that sounded he just doesn’t want a house behind another house? He lives at the last house of left. Julie & Tim Ramey, 23 Russell Street have been tenants since 1999 and they have liked what
Mr. Bastis has done to the property. They would love him for a neighbor. Since he removed old tenants and new one moved in the problems have gone away. Ms. Ramey stated she can attest to “Lake Russell”, the last 4 houses there has been a foot deep of water. They have no opposition to him just want the neighborhood to be quiet like it used to be. They don’t want another absentee landlord like previous. They are worried about illegal activity and devalue of property. Chairman Ackerman asked since the old tenants left has it been quieter? Ms. Ramey answers yes, the police has been there only 2 times in the last 6 months. She stated the water has been horrible and now it’s much better. The last 8 years has been bad with negative behavior, drugs and thieves. They are pleased the property is not abandoned anymore because it was an eyesore. Opposed: Bill DeCouta, 8 Russell Street. He stated the
neighborhood is going down in the dumps. He stated he’s opposed to duplex, would rather see a single family house. He stated Mr. Bastis is a nice guy and a nice single family would be better back there. He noted he has water in back of his house. Mr. Bastis states the concerns stem around the tenants and that has been fixed. He has every intention of keeping property but he understands their concerns. He stated he is putting fencing up to stop 4 wheelers. Chairman Ackerman asked about the front house and number of bedrooms? Mr. Bastis answers each floor has 4 bedrooms equaling about 1,100 sq. ft. Chairman Ackerman stated he suggests if a duplex restricting to 2 bedrooms. Mike asked about the driveway? Mr. Bastis stated there would be no fencing to separate the two driveways. There will be room for emergency vehicles. He plans on paving the existing driveway. Joe’s major concern was the number
of bedrooms and he expected the closets abutters to be here tonight but they are not. He stated if they restrict to 2 bedrooms the house size could be a lot smaller. Letters from the B.O.H., Water Dept., Fire Dept., Con. Comms. And City Planner were read into the record. Wayne stated at first he wasn’t too sure but he was impressed with the applicant’s sincere and honestly. His helping the City with the drainage easement showed good faith. Wayne liked the reduction of the number of bedrooms.
Motion made and seconded to grant as presented with the following conditions:
- Duplex to have a maximum of 2 bedrooms each. Single family dwelling to have a maximum of 4 bedrooms.
- Drive to be paved as presented.
- Proposed 2 family dwelling will require hardwired smoke detectors throughout, 780 CMR 9.0. Carbon Monoxide detectors are required, M.G.L. 148, sec. 26F ½ and 527 CMR 31. A permit for a fire warning must be obtained from the Office of Fire Prevention before a building permit is signed.
- If municipal city sewer and water is not available, the lots would need to be able to construct on-site septic systems, with appropriate setback requirements and buffers, and private wells, in accordance with Title 5 regulations. The dwelling must comply with the Minimum Standards of Fitness for Habitation, State Sanitary Code, Chapter II.
VOTE: Amaral, Berube, Staples, Ackerman …….……... Yes
Petition Granted:
Case #3022 McKenna 521 Tremont St.
Hearing held on June 10, 2010
A Variance from Section 5.2 & 7.9 to allow an accessory dwelling unit (720 sq. ft.) in an RRD.
For the Petitioner: Atty. David Gay, P. O. Box 988, Taunton, Ma.
In Favor: None
Opposition: None
Atty. Gay stated they are here for an accessory dwelling unit. The unit already exists and they are just trying to legalize it. The property has the 4 parking spaces per the zoning ordinance. Wayne asked if the property is under agreement? Atty. Gay answers yes. They are trying to close on this property by the end of this month. The new buyers parents want to move into the accessory dwelling unit. No one in favor or opposed. Letters from the City Planner, Fire Dept., Conservation Commission, B.O.H. was read into the record.
Motion made and seconded to grant as presented:
VOTE: Amaral, Berube, Staples, Ackerman …….……... Yes
Petition Granted:
Case #3023 Costa 51 Summer St.
Hearing held on June 10, 2010
A Variance from Section 7.8 for a dwelling conversion of a single family to a 2-family having 13,651 sq. ft. instead of 15,000 sq. f t.
For the Petitioner: Atty. David Gay, P. O. Box 988, Taunton, Ma.
In Favor: None
Opposition: Ed Smith, 56 Summer St., Taunton, Ma.
Lisa Nates, 54 Summer St., Taunton, Ma.
Dr. Joseph Nates, 54 Summer St., Taunton, Ma.
Steven Wyrosdic, 58 Summer St., Taunton, Ma.
Letter from Patricia M. McSweeney, 43 Summer St., Taunton, Ma.
Atty. Gay stated the petitioner purchased the property and wishes to convert it to a two-family dwelling. Under Section 7.8 of the Zoning Ordinance it states if you have 15,000 sq. ft. you can convert to a use allowed in the district. The City Planner informed them because they don’t have the required lot size they need variance. Atty. Gay stat4ed there will be no alteration outside, just inside and they don’t agree with the City Planner but are here tonight. The house was built in 1814 and is a pre-existing non-confirming house and lot size. He stated in the Zoning Ordinance if there is less than 10% of expansion or alteration they could do as a matter of right. They wish to restore the property in a nice way. This property is 2 houses down from Catholic Middle School
and there are many 3 family dwellings in the area. Atty. Gay stated there are a lot of these larger Victorian style houses located along Dean St., Summer St., Broadway & Winthrop Street. They don’t lend themselves to single family houses. They are actually reducing the number of bedrooms. They have 7 bedrooms and they will make 2 units with 3 bedrooms each. There are large trees covering house and they are proposing improvements to the property. Atty. Gay stated the hardship is based on the lot size and the existing location along a major road going into the downtown area. Wayne stated the house was bought in foreclosure for $117,000. Atty. Gay stated the applicant doesn’t intend to live there and will fix house up and will be spending close to $150,000 totalling about 300,000. Atty. Gay stated he needs to convert in order for him to afford it. Wayne stated why did he buy it if he can’t afford it? Each case
stand on it’s own merits. This will be an absentee landlord house. The house was constructed in the 1800’s and it’s a good size house. Atty. Gay stated it doesn’t lend itself to a single family dwlling, it a large house close to the road. The house is empty and has been for sale form sometime. Joe stated the house is a large Victorian house. The surrounding properties, 49 Summer St. is a 3 family, 57 Summer is a 3 family and 54 Summer St. is a 2 family. Joe stated he didn’t cut up lot creating this and it’s like along Winthrop Street, nice big home but they are not single family. John agrees with Wayne that there is no hardship. He bought the property knowing it was a single family dwelling. The hardship is the difficult market and it won’t market as a single family. Atty. Gay stted he has offer and he advises him to place a contingency on it but he had to
act quick or he would lose out on the deal. Oppose: Ed Smith, 56 Summer St. stated he’s opposed. He stated the financial hardship was created by the petitioner. He stated he has 3 teenage children and having a large house has its benefits. He has lived there for 14 years and this property is located within the Historic District. Prior to meetings the proper procedure was not followed. He stated there are other multifamilies in the neighborhood but there are single families too. John agrees but there is a small market for single family dwelling of this house size. Mr. Smith stated the petitioner agreed it was a risk when he purchased the property. Lisa Nates, 54 Summer St., opposed. She stated there are 5 single family dwellings in close proximity of this house and they are all in the historic district. She stated he appeared before the Historic District Commission because he tore down the
chimney because they said they weren’t working. She has seen the use of those chimneys. The stated this was a income venture for the petitioner. She’s afraid if you allow this one then it will create a dominos effect. She wasn’t sure it the house had 7 bedrooms as previously stated. He was ordered by the Historic District Commission to put chimney back up. Dr. Joseph Nates, 54 Summer St. stated he has lived there for 54 years and it has always been a single family dwelling. He stated there are 3 schools, rooming house, and church in the immediate area. He did say there are multifamily houses but there are also single family dwellings. He doesn’t agree the petitioner has hardship, he purchased the property knowing it was only a single family dwelling. Letters from Patricia McSweeney,43 Summer St. opposed. Steven Wyrosdic, Opposed: 58 Summer St., stated in 2004 he purchased his house
for $400,000 and it’s a single family dwelling. Atty. Gay stated the petitioner own other properties in the city of which he has improved. The Board asked what addresses? Atty. Gay stated 249 Somerset Ave., - 4 family, 57 First St – 4-family, 33 Hodges St., and 2 family at 3 Webster St. He owns a new single family in Frazier Pasture Farms. Atty. Gay stated he took chimney down because it wasn’t safe. He will be putting back up. He stated the house is close to the street, only 12 feet. The property has been on the market for over a year and he will make house looks nice which will benefit the gateway to the City. Chairman Ackerman recommends continuing so they can have documents from the Historic District Commission. Chairman Ackerman would like to see what they said. Letters from the B.O.H., Water Dept., Fire Dept., City Planner and Conservation Commission were read into the
record. Joe stated he would continue. Joe stated he know what he bought. Wayne stated he didn’t’ need to continue.
Motion made and seconded to continue until next month. Have petitioner forward the Historic District communication to the ZBA… Send copy of Historic District communication to the opposition.
Vote: Ackerman, Amaral, Staples, Joyce,….Yes
Berube……………………………………….No
Petition continued until next month.
Case #3026 Hathaway 406 Tremont St.
Hearing held on June 10, 2010
A Variance from Section 5.2 and a Special Permit from Section 5.3.4 for the modification of an existing variance (case #476) and allow the use of existing commercial garage as a welding business and associated vehicles & equipment and some snow removal.
For the Petitioner: Atty. David Gay, Gay Gay & Field, P.C., P. O. Box 988, Taunton, Ma.
Preston Hathway, 406 Tremont St., Taunton, Ma.
In Favor: Jeff Bagge, 387 Tremont St., Taunton, Ma.
Opposition: None
Atty. Gay stated that Mr. Hathaway has owned this property for over 50 years and wishes to retire. He had a man with an asphalt business that wanted to buy the property but the abutters thought it was more of intense business that what was there. Now he has another gentlemen who is interested in the property who has welding business with some snow removal. Currently he is located just down the road at 518 Tremont Street, he leases property from Andy Gravel for over 20 years. He’s a sole proprietor and works alone. Atty. Gay stated this use will be less intense because the work can be done inside and he’s the only worker. Atty. Gay stated that Mr. Hathaway went to the P.B. with a repetitive petitioner and they found it to be a substantial change and allowed him to come back before the ZBA. Atty.
Gay state din 1973 the property received a variance to add a building to store equipment for business. Chairman Ackerman read the City Planner’s letter into the record recommending approval but the board should put hours of operation and number of trucks. Atty. Gay stated Mr. Gunnerson was expected to be here tonight but due to a family emergency isn’t able to. Mr. Hathaway stated that the hours of operation would be Monday – Friday 6:00 AM – 8:00 PM and Saturday half day. No Sunday. It was asked how many trucks does he have? Mr. Hathaway answers he thinks 2 trucks, 2 sanders and welding equipment. The Board wanted to specifically limit the number of trucks allowed on the premises. Atty. Gay stated that now he leases the property down the road at 518 Tremont St. from Andy Gravel. Joe stated he’s gotten phone calls and wanted to know if it would be just one business… Not
2 separate, one for welding and one for snow plowing? Atty. Gay answers no, just one business. In favor: Jeff Bagge, 387 Tremont St., stated he knows Mr. Gunnerson and he’s a nice quiet guy and this would be a good fit for the neighborhood. Letters from the B.O.H., Conservation Commission, Fire Dept. ,Water Dept. were read into the record. John stated he wanted to limit the number of trucks kept on site. He’s not worried about the little trucks. Chairman Ackerman suggested limiting them by weight limit, a maximum of 6 trucks with a weight limit of 26,001 lbs. CDL. Joe has heard the Mr. Gunnerson is a nice guy and he’s a straight shooter. John also said people spoke very highly of him. Wayne stated this would be a good fit for the neighborhood.
Motion made and seconded to grant as presented and with the following conditions:
- The new business must obtain a Hazardous Materials Control Permit from the Board of Health.
- Any construction or repaving may require filing with the Conservation Commission. The snow storage on the property should be at least 100 feet from the wetlands.
- Fire Alarm must conform to new construction requirements, 780 CMR 9.0. Fire alarm drawings must be submitted for review (2 sets) before the Fire Department signs a building permit. Final inspection will be conducted by the Office of Fire Prevention. Fire extinguishers installed throughout 527 CMR 10.02 & NFPA 10. Dumpster permit is required for dumpsters six yards or greater 527 CMR 34.03.
- Hours of Operation: Monday – Saturday 6:00 AM – 6:00 PM for outdoor operation
- Hours of Operation: Monday – Saturday 6:00 AM – 8:00 PM for indoor operation.
- Maximum of 6 trucks with a weight limit of CDL - 26,001 lbs. kept on site.
- Restricted to a Sole Business on property.
VOTE: Amaral, Berube, Joyce, Staples, Ackerman …….……... Yes
Petition Granted:
Case #3024 Daviduk 61 Greystone St.
Hearing held on June 10, 2010
A Variance from Section 6.3 & 7.2 to allow a 30 x 30 garage having a 14’9”front setback (instead of 25 feet)
For the Petitioner: Atty. Edmund Brennan, One Church Green, Taunton, Ma.
In Favor: None
Opposition: None
Atty. Brennan stated this property is located on the corner of Greystone St. and Rogers Avenue, an undeveloped street. However; they are forced to meet the front yard setback on that side because of the road. They are proposing a 30 x 30 garage which will result in a 14’9” front yard setback instead of 25 feet. If the street layout wasn’t here they would meet just be shy of the 15 feet setback. The property does have an elevation of 40 feet and then dips down to an elevation of 22 feet. Atty. Brennan stated it’s highly unlikely that anyone would want to improvement the roadway. The other lots on the other end already have frontage so there would no reason to create any more frontage. Letters from the City Planner, Conservation Commission, Fire Dept. and B.O.H were read
into the record. No one appearing in favor or against petition.
Motion made and seconded to grant as presented:
VOTE: Amaral, Berube, Staples, Joyce, Ackerman …….……... Yes
Petition Granted:
John made motion to go into Executive Session, Seconded by Joe.
No votes were taken in Executive Session.
Meeting adjourned at 10:25 PM.
| 
