City of Taunton, MA - 10-13-11 mins.

10-13-11 mins.


	CITY OF TAUNTON ZONING BOARD OF APPEALS MINUTES (Held at Maxham School, 141 Oak St.) OCTOBER 13, 2011 at 5:30 PM Members Present: Chairman Ackerman, Berube, Wasylow, Joyce and Medeiros. Staples, and Amaral . Meeting called to order at 5:30 PM Wayne made motion to accept minutes of September 8, 2011. Peter stated the minutes mistakenly had Amaral twice and no Wasylow being present. Motion to approve with correction, seconded by Peter. . Chairman Ackerman explained how the meeting is run. The petitioner makes their presentation and then the opposition or in favor may speak. Then it goes back to the petitioner to allow response. The opposition doesn’t have the opportunity to speak again. The board will either vote or continue case. Cont’d Case # 3017 Frenette 815 Middleboro Ave. A Variance from Section 6.3 to allow the division of one lot into 6 lots having 0 frontage on a public street (instead of 150 feet) but having access via Wetscoat Drive, a private Way. Letter requesting a continuance and waiving time frame. Motion made and seconded to continue to November… Vote: Ackerman, Wasylow, Berube, Medeiros, Amaral…..Yes Petition continued: Cont’d. Case # 3094 Apex Ventures LLC 802 Bay St. A Special Permit from Section 5.3.4 of the Zoning Ordinance to allow the extension/alteration of a pre-existing non-conforming use by allowing the addition of take-out pizza place to the existing retail use. Letter from Atty. Gay requesting a continuance until next month. Motion made and seconded to Grant continuance. Vote: Berube, Wasylow, Medeiros, Ackerman, Amaral……Yes. Petition continued until Powhattan Estates – Reduction of Surety- Joseph Malloch was invited into the enclosure. He stated Vine Associates has submitted estimate showing $7,000 completion cost. Chairman Ackerman read Vine’s letter into the record. Wayne made motion to reduce surety to $7,000 (per vine’s estimate) and release remaining monies to Bruce LLC. Seconded by Troy. All in favor. Case #3098 Kirylo 1 Lynne St. Hearing held on October 13, 2011 For: A Variance from Section 7.1.6 for agricultural setback from 300 feet to 126 feet. For the Petitioner: Louis & Lori Kirylo, One Lynne St., Taunton, Ma. In favor: James & Mary Strojny, 11 Holyoke St., Taunton, Ma. Opposed: Elaine Coppinger, 96 Danforth St., Unit 12, Taunton, Ma. Susan Tucker-Coelho, 96 Danforth St., Unit 22, Taunton, Ma. Lianne Erickson, 96 Danforth St. Unit 49, Taunton, Ma. Solveigh Vinchesi, 96 Danforth St. Unit 19, Taunton, Ma. Bruce Pelletier, 96 Danforth St., Unit 44, Taunton, Ma. Dalene Colageo, 96 Danforth St., Unit 24, Taunton, Ma. Mrs. Kirylo stated they are here tonight for permission to put horse barn in the corner of their lot. They have one horse and may possibly get another. Troy asked where this property was located? She answered behind Taunton State Hospital. Chairman Ackerman stated the placement of the barn in way to the rear and there are condos abutting. Joe asked the number of horses? Mr. Kirylo answers they have one and may want just one more. She is not planning on having more than 2 horses and the proposed barn will have 2 stalls and tack room off the side. Wayne asked if she would be using the large empty spot around barn to exercise horses and she answered yes. It was asked how far the condo development was from her? She didn’t know but the closest abutter is 126 that why they are here tonight. Wayne asked where do they access from? She answers she accesses her property from Holyoke Street. Letter in favor from James & Mary Strojny, 11 Holyoke St. Opposed: Elaine Coppinger, Silver Glen Condos Trust. She stated the barn is going to be 15 feet from property line? There are 26 town homes in Silver Glen Condos and she is concerned with the smell. She too didn’t know the distance from the condos to the barn. She did point out they were going to construct another condo building back there but they didn’t. Chairman stated most likely they are 300 feet away or at the very least more than the 126 feet. Ms. Coppinger asked why the condos got notice? Chairman Ackerman explained that every property that falls within the 300 foot radius get notification. She is concerned with the placement of the barn and the smell that it will cause. She wanted to know how often the manure will be picked up and dumped? She also wanted to know if they are planning on having other animals? Troy asked how close and again she didn’t know. She stated there are 5 buildings total. Troy disclosed that he has a relative who lives in development and he would be excusing himself. John Joyce will vote on this case . Opposed: Susan Tucker-Coelho, 96 Danforth St. Unit 22 . In her opinion, the barn is too close and they will smell horse manure on the down draft and his neighborhood is not rural for horses. She wanted to know the how often will they dispose waste? This will, in her opinion, devaluate her property. Joe brought to her attention that the minimum setback to property line is 15 feet . Joe asked what is she opposed to, the horses, smell if may cause or all of it. Chairman Ackerman explained to the audience that everyone who comes before the Board is asking for relief from the ordinance. Ms. Tucke-Coelho stated, in her opinion, the whole neighborhood is overcrowded, and she doesn’t want any more building. Opposed: Lianne Erickson, 96 Danforth St. Unit 49, she wanted to know where the paddock was going and didn’t want the smell to affect her. If approved she asked would the Board put a maximum of 2 horses. Opposed: Darlene Colageo, 96 Danforth St. Unit 24, (renter possible buyer) Solveigh Vinchesi, 96 Danforth St. Unit 19, and Bruce Pelletier, 96 Danforth St., Unit 44 wanted to know if they will have other animals. Mrs. Kirylo stated the waste will removed by her and depends on how much how often. She is not planning on getting other animals, she does have dog. Chairman Ackerman asked where the paddock would be and she stated around barn. Joe asked what would she be storing manure in? She answered big trash barrels. The Board stated they key is how frequently they will be emptied to avoid odor. She stated there are 3 horses and they have 10 barrel where her horse is housed now. She did state there will be an electric fencing around paddock. Letter from the City Planner, Conservation Commission were read and placed on file. John stated he lives next to farm and he did occasionally get odor but he lives in the rural part of the City. This is very close to downtown and there are small lots. Joe stated this is Reed & Barton area and the lots are tight there. Wayne stated during his childhood he had horses on less land and this is a pretty good sized lot but he sympathizes with the neighbors’ concerns with the odor. However; he thinks the petitioner will be diligent in emptying the waste. Chairman Ackerman stated its almost an acre and the petitioner is wants to provides horses for family enjoyment. Mike stated the lot is big and there are wood surrounding it. Motion made and seconded to Grant with the following conditions: A maximum of two (2) horses/ponies allowed on property. All barrels storing manure must be kept inside. Vote: Ackerman, Amaral, Berube,Wasylow........Yes. Joyce…………………………………………………..No Petition Granted: Case #3095 Wells ½ Third Ave. Hearing held on October 13, 2011 For: A Variance from Section 6.3 to allow a front yard setback of 23.1 feet instead of 30 feet. For the Petitioner: Atty. Michael Strojny, 1470 New State Highway, Raynham, Ma. In favor: None Opposed: None Atty. Strojny stated a variance was granted several years ago and the dwelling was constructed and it was discovered the front steps didn’t meet the setback. Atty. Strojny stated the neighbors at 192, 196 Whittenton Street and 4 Lawrence St. were spoken to and they are in favor. Chairman Ackerman stated the petitioner is a developer and he has built several houses and he should be aware of the requirements. He stated hopefully he will learn from this and avoid this in the future Atty. Strojny stated the mistake was caught on the as-built for the Cert. of Occupancy. No opposition. Letters from the City Planner and Conservation Commission were read into the record. Motion made and seconded to Grant as Presented: Vote: Ackerman, Wasylow, Amaral, Berube, Medeiros, ......................Yes. Petition Granted: Case #3097 Nadeau 94 Libby Lane Hearing held on October 13, 2011 For: A Variance from Section 6.3 for a 22.91 foot rear setback instead of 30 feet. For the Petitioner: Atty. William Manganiello, 219 Winthrop St., Taunton, Ma. In favor: Joseph DaRosa, 108 Libby Lane, Taunton, Ma. Arthur Cabral, 72 Libby Lane, Taunton, Ma. Opposed: None Atty. Manganiello stated he’s requesting a variance for a rear yard setback. The lot is unique in that this would, on a standard lot, be a side yard setback but because of the unique configuration the petitioner is forced to meet a rear setback. There is an existing retaining wall and trees that separate the two properties. The abutter signed letter in favor. Atty. Manganiello stated the closest abutter is about 1,000 feet away. No one in opposition. Letters from the Conservation Commissioner and City Planner Motion made and seconded to Grant as Presented: Vote: Ackerman, Wasylow, Amaral, Berube, Medeiros, ......................Yes. Case #3096 Frangakis 491 Weir St. Hearing held on October 13, 2011 For: A Variance from Section 5.2 for a restaurant use with drive-thru in an Urban Residential District. For the Petitioner: Atty. John-Paul Thomas, 98 County St., Taunton, Ma. Babar M. Khan, P.E, Concord Eng. Group. P.A., 23 Osgood St., Windham, N.H. In favor: None Opposed: Atty. Edward Roster, representing Father Driscoll, St. Anthony Apostle Church, 31 First St. Taunton, Ma. Herbert Ferreira, 7 Fay St. Taunton, Ma. Atty. Thomas they are here tonight for a Variance to allow a restaurant with a drive-thru at the former daycare center that has been closed for about 3 years. They have submitted plans showing stacking of 13 cars and they are not proposing any big changes to the building itself. Chairman Ackerman stated the layout is tight and he suggests some changes. He suggests changing the traffic route for delivery trucks, moving dumpster to the south portion of property which will give better swing for delivery trucks eliminating cluster/ congestion. It was brought to their attention there may be a light pole that needs moving because it’s right in the entrance. Mr. Khan stated there is an existing front door and side door. Chairman asked about the striped area behind building and if that for better swinging for truck and Mr. Khan answers yes. Chairman Ackerman stated they will still comply with the parking requirements if they make his suggested changes. No one in favor. Opposition: Atty. Ed Roster, Roster & Antine, 63 Winthrop St., Taunton, Ma. representing Father Driscoll, St Anthony’s Apostle Church, 31 First St., Taunton, Ma. This property is located in the Urban Residential District and under the Zoning Ordinance you must find a hardship directly relating to the size, shape, or topography of the lot. He has not heard any hardship by the petitioner. He stated the only thing they stated is the blacktop parking lot is breaking up. Atty. Roster stated this use is not appropriate for this area. This type of business brings traffic, noise, and trash. They will be open from about 5:00AM to night and to add this type of business traffic to this area would be a detriment to the area. Wayne stated this building is in the Urban Residential District but the previous uses have been a bank and daycare center. Troy agrees the previous uses have been commercial. He stated the church generates their own traffic by funerals and having mass. He thinks, in his opinion, its hypocritical of the church to say this will generate more traffic when they also create traffic. Mike pointed out that there are all business in the immediate area of this property. Atty. Roster re-iterated that under the ordinance the Board has to determine if a hardship exists relative to shape, size and or topography of the lot in order for a variance to be granted for use. John pointed out that shape is odd in that there are railroad tracks abutting it and realistically no one would put residential use there. You have to look at whole area and uses. On paper it’s located in the Urban Residential District but by all means a residence would not be conducive to the surrounding uses. Opposed: Herbert Ferreira, 7 Fay St., Taunton, Ma. stated he has lived there for 52 years and he stated the previous uses were a bank, daycare and now it’s vacant. The entrance is very small and he’s doest’ think it’s a fair to compare Dunkin Donuts traffic to church traffic. He stated the roadway is a speedway and he anticipates traffic backup. His concerns include trash, noise and this site is a bus stop for 3 school buses. He stated the church doesn’t cause traffic everyday like a Dunkin Donuts. He stated, in his opinion, a house would be better than this use. Chairman Ackerman suggests continuance and have them looks at widening entrance. Atty. Thomas addressed the oppositions’ comments. He stated the property is an Urban Residential District but also directly abuts the Business District. The lot is unique in that historically has been used commercially and all surrounding uses are commercial. There are no other lots in the area that this use can go. Under Section 3.3 of the Zoning Ordinance there is a financial hardship to petitioners in that they would not be able to use this property if relief were not granted. He stated there is already traffic at this section of the City and this use will generate foot traffic more than anything. He stated he has submitted plans showing more than adequate stacking of vehicles. The peak hours are in the early morning and late afternoon, and traffic is going through anyway. He stated the dumpster will be fenced and emptied every 2 weeks. Troy asked if dumpster pick up would be regulated? It was answered yes they could. Troy stated in his opinion this use would not cause more traffic. Chairman Ackerman suggested opening entrance to accommodate 18 wheelers. Mr. Khan stated there is room to expand entrance. It was asked how wide entrance is because plans didn’t have distances on them? Mr. Khan answered entrance is about 20 feet wide and they could widen to about 27 feet. After some discussion relative to the submitted plans several Board members thought the plans needed updating. John stated they could change plans per our approval. Chairman Ackerman thought it would be in their best interest to update plans with our suggested changes and then the board can see how the site will operate. Peter agreed he would likes to see distances on plans and our suggestions on plans. Chairman Ackerman thought this would be best since there is opposition. He would like the Board to see accurate plans so they know what they are voting on. Motion made and seconded to Grant to continue until next month for updated plans: Vote: Ackerman, Amaral, Berube, ......................Yes. Medeiros Joyce…………………………….No Vote passed, petition continued. OTHER BUSINESS: Green Pine Town Homes – Request to modify the existing decision by adding 7 additional units. The modified decisions PROHIBITS this. Condition #2 allows for a 49^th Unit only. Chairman Ackerman stated per the applicant’s written request the Board must vote on 49^th unit. He stated the previous decisions states ”a 49^th unit shall be authorized’ proving the applicant put an application for it. Wayne made motion to find this request to be a minor change and allow the 49^th unit, resulting in 13 total affordable units, seconded by Peter. All in favor. The plans submitted show the 49^th unit right next to #48. Meeting adjourned at 8:05 PM.