MINUTES
CITY OF TAUNTON
ZONING BOARD OF APPEALS
MAY 10, 2012 at 5:30 PM
Members Present were: Joseph Amaral, Peter Wasylow, Estele Borges, and Wayne Berube., and Dennis Ackerman.
Meeting opens at 5:50 pm.
Wayne made motion to accept minutes of April 12,2012 with changes as discussed with the Secretary. seconded by Estele. All in favor.
Chairman Ackerman explains the ZBA process. The petitioner present their case then they hear from anyone in favor or opposed then they go back to the petitioner to address any of the oppositions concerns. They don’t go back and forth.
OTHER BUSINESS:
Letter from CHAP A – informing ZBA of the 61 Sakonet Ave - Intent to Sell an affordable unit. –
Chairman Ackerman read letter from Chapa informing the ZBA 61 Sakonet Ave intent to sell (affordable units in Powhattan Estates approved under 40B )
Peter made motion to place on file and forward to the Mayor’s office (it was noted it was sent to the Mayor already.) Seconded by Joe. All in favor.
Proposed Zoning Changes – Site Plan Review Process – Need to refer to the Public Hearing process.
Chairman Ackerman stated the City Planner has forward some zoning changes to us so that we may refer it out to the public hearing process of which the Municipal Council & P.B. need to hold public hearings. Chairman Ackerman stated he addressed the ZBA ‘s concerns relative to the DSPR process and what triggers it. For Example, if you go to the ZBA for a variance it automatically triggers a DSPR, the changes will not require that if there are no changes t the site, building, parking, etc. He has eliminated them to public meetings as opposed to public hearings therefore eliminating the cost of a legal ad. Chairman Ackerman stated this is the city’s way of reaching out and helping lowers the costs to the applicant. He stated certain things will trigger DSPR . He thinks it’s a
major step forward in working with the Mayor in mainstreaming the permitting process. Wayne asked about St. Germain’s property and if that would have triggers a DSPR? Chairman Ackerman stated that some will trigger it and it all depends on the changes. He stated he is also proposing to move a lot of SP from Council to ZBA. He also has some changes relative to reduction of landscaping, frontage requirements, intensity of use requirements. Wayne asked if he would come to meeting to explain changes? He would feel more comfortable asking for his rationale behind the changes? Wayne wanted the City Planner to come to meeting and explain the reason for these changes. He asked if we have a right to ask for changes? Chairman Ackerman stated the P.B. & Municipal Council must have public hearings. Joe stated there are a lot of changes relative to landscaping. Wayne & Peter agree the City Planner should
be present to explain changes. Chairman Ackerman read the City Planner’s letter and Mayor Hoye’s letter. Wayne stated he’s a private businessman and he does not want to impede business in the City.
Motion made and seconded to refer the zoning changes to the public hearing process and invite the City Planner to our June meeting for brief presentation. All in favor.
Cont’d. Case # 3112 Whittenton Mills Redev. LLC 437 Whittenton St.
A Special Permit from Section 5.2 and a Variance from Section 7.4 to allow the modification of existing mill buildings for use as an Assisted Living Facility in a Business District with a maximum height of 56 feet and 4 stories (instead of 40’
maximum & 3 stories)
Atty. Gay stated the taxes are 2/3 paid and the fire detail was also paid. There are still some outstanding taxes and even though the Board can vote to proceed he will ask for another continuance to resolve this issue. Chairman Ackerman stated they have, in the past on one case, proceeded because the applicant was in payment plan with City. He thinks the case could be heard and continue but it’s up to the Board. He wants to move forward but he’ s only one member. Joe asked how much did they pay? Atty. Gay answers $200,000taxes and $20,000 fire detail. How much is still outstanding? Atty. Gay answers about $113,000 and Wayne stated the other case was heard because of the circumstances and there wasn’t much in outstanding taxes. It was for a non-profit
and he thinks this is a substantial amount of money owed. He’s not content with hearing case with all that outstanding taxes. Chairman Ackerman was suggesting opening case but not taking action on it, because he’ s going to be looking for information that hasn’t been submitted. Atty. Gay requests for another continuance. Chairman Ackerman stated he would not support another continuance if it ends up being during the summer months. Wayne stated we have to meet if we have to?
Joe made motion to grant another continuance and acknowledges the time frame has been extended. Seconded by Estele All in favor.
Petition Continued to June 14, 2012
Case # 3128 McClellan 17 Greylock Ave.
Hearing held on May 10, 2012
For: A Variance from Section 6.3 of the Zoning Ordinance to allow the division of one lot into two lots without having the required lot area & dry area. Lot 1 having 7,629 sq. ft of lot area dry area (instead of 15,000 sq. ft. lot area & 11,250 sq. ft. dry area) and Lot 2 having 10,850 sq. ft. of lot area & dry area (instead of 15,000 sq. ft. lot area & 11,250 sq. ft. dry area)
For the petitioner: Atty. David Gay, P. O. Box 988, Taunton, Ma.
Opposed: None
In favor: Frank Pagliuca, 98 Highland Ave. Taunton, Ma.
Atty. Gay stated they are trying to split the lot into 2 lots. The area in question is substantially smaller than the ordinance requires but is the norm in this neighborhood. The adjacent lots are 9,000 sq. ft., 5,000 sq. ft., 6,500 sq. ft. The petitioner has a corner lot and is all dry and will meet all the setbacks requirements. This is a nice residential community and this lot will be consistent with the area. The structure’s location provides room for the division. In order to keep the property the petitioner will sell new lot if approved. The new lot will be 8,479 square feet and will be actually larger than those in the area. Chairman Ackerman suggested making lot bigger by moving lot lines to be more equal. The shed will be removed. Joe asked if Mr. McClellan lived there and
Atty. Gay answers not it’s rented and he intends on selling new lot. Wayne asked where’s the hardship and the lot is very small. What size house were you proposing? Atty. Gay stated whatever house they choose will meet all the requirements. Atty. Gay stated this is not the classic case but the ZBA can vote due to the location of the house creates a hardship. Peter asked if there is sewer? Atty. Gay explains the sewer now goes to Souza property. There is sewer and water from Greylock Avenue. Estele drove by and stated there are a lot of small house lots. She would entertain the condition to move the lot line. In favor: Frank Pagliuca, 98 Highland Ave. stated there is a stone wall that goes all around the house. After talking to Atty. Gay it was discovered that Mr. Pagliuca was thinking of his other property he owns. He has no opposition to this request. Letters from the City Planner,
B.O.H., Conservation Commission and Fire Dept. Wayne thinks the lot is incredible too small and even after moving the lot line. Estele agrees but like the idea of making lot bigger.
Motion made and seconded to Grant with the following conditions:
- New house on Lot 1 to face Vinson Street.
- Add 15 feet from Lot 2 to Lot 1 resulting in larger lot.
- Any construction plans will need to be sent to the Natural Heritage Endangered Species Program as this property is within both Priority Habitat of Rare Species and Estimated Habitat of Rare Wildlife.
Vote: Ackerman, Amaral, Borges ................Yes
Berube,Wasylow……………………………..No
Petition Denied:
Case # 3129 Conway Lot 6 Barry Dr.(Prop. I.D. 37-95)
Hearing held on May 10, 2012
For : A Variance from Section 6.2 & 6.3 of the Zoning Ordinance to allow the re-configuration of a lot resulting in having less than the required frontage (having 73.65’ instead of 150’) & lot width (having 84.47’ (instead of 100’)
For the petitioner: Brian Conway, 154 School St., Rehoboth, Ma.
Opposed: None
In favor: Loretta Goldrick, 194 Fremont St., Taunton, Ma. had some questions.
Mr. Conway explains how he’s requesting to re-adjust the lot line between Lot 6 & lot 7 in Conway Estates. The frontage for lot 7 is in front of Lot 6. The original subdivision was laid out nicely and the City Planner asked for a 40 foot ROW for future connection to Willis Pond Road if needed. As a result of that the lot lines were adjusted to meet all the requirements. Mr. Conway stated everyone who looks at the lot doesn’t want their frontage in front of someone else’s house. Joe asked if there is a house on lot yet? Mr. Conway answers no but they do have someone looking at it. The little piece taken from Lot 6 will be added to lot 7. The actual lot width was shown in error. The engineer made a mistake and the actual lot width on Barry Drive is 95 feet. And if the Right of Way is
developed there will about 240’ of lot width. Wayne asked if this was raw land and Mr. Conway answers yes. Mr. Conway stated there are 4 houses built out of 8 lots. Loretta Goldrick, 194 Fremont St. wanted to know if this would create another lot. Mr. Conway told her no and the board stated the subdivision will still have only 8 lots. After looking at plans Mrs. Goldrick has no issues with it. No one in favor or opposed. Letters from the City Planner, B.O.H., Fire Dept., City Engineer, and Conservation Commission were read into the record. Mr. Conway mentioned the people interested in the lot is interested in putting an in-law for grandmother. Chairman Ackerman informed him he would need to apply for a Special Permit from ZBA. It was asked if the lot will be serviced by municipal water & sewer and he answered yes.
Motion made and seconded to Grant as Presented:
Vote: Ackerman, Amaral, Wasylow, Borges Berube................Yes
Petition Granted:
Case # 3130 Shurtleff 537 County St.
Hearing held on May 10, 2012
A Variance from Section 7.5.3.2 of the Zoning Ordinance to allow roof top signs.
For the petitioner: Atty. William Rosa, Wynne & Wynn, 90 New State Highway, Raynham, Ma.
Opposed: None
In favor: None
Atty. Rosa stated he’s requesting a variance to allow roof top signs. This property was renovated a few years back and the owner actually received a permit for sign and then was informed by the building department it was issued in error. The existing liquor store is located on the roof and that’s grandfathered. Since they took other signs down they need variance to put back up. Atty. Rosa stated due to the pitch of the roof there is no other place to put sign but roof. Currently there is a subway, Ediable Arrangements and one other tenant that will have sign. Each sign will conform with all building codes. No one in favor or opposed. Letters from the City Planner, B.O.H., Fire Dept., and Conservation Commission were read into the record.
Motion made and seconded to Grant as Presented:
Vote: Ackerman, Amaral, Wasylow, Borges Berube................Yes
Petition Granted:
Case # 3131 Rose & Monteiro 3 & 5 Alegi Ave Hearing held on May 10, 2012
For: A Variance from Section 6.3 of the Zoning Ordinance to allow the re-configuration of a 2 lots resulting 5 Alegi Ave. having 79 feet of frontage (instead of 100’) and a 5’ side & rear setback for a proposed garage (instead of 15’ side & 20’ rear setback) for property located at 3 & 5 Alegi Avenue, Taunton, Ma.
For the petitioner: Debra Rose, 5 Alegi Avenue, Taunton, Ma.
Mark Monteiro, 3 Alegi Avenue, Taunton, Ma.
Opposed: None
In favor: None
Ms. Rose & Mr. Monteiro wish to re-adjust the property lines to square off property. The driveway one one property is on the other’s neighbor’s property. Chairman Ackerman states its simply 2 property owners straightening out the property lines. No one in favor or opposed. Letters from the City Planner, B.O.H., Cons. Comm. And Fire Dept were read into the record.
Motion made and seconded to Grant with the following conditions:
- Vote: Ackerman, Amaral, Borges, Wasylow, Berube…Yes
Petition Granted:
Meeting adjourned at 7:11 pm.
| 
