Loading...
ZBA 9-25-24 CITY of BEVERLY Zoning Board of Appeals September 25, 2024 at 7:00 pm These minutes are not a verbatim transcript of the public hearing of the Board of Appeals. Reviews of these Minutes or outcome of the public hearing should include an examination of the Board's decision for that hearing. Members Present: Kevin Andrews, Chairperson, Will Cosmas, Cory Farinella, and alternate member Michael Barone, Jr. Member Absent: Kellie Rivera, Laura Meisenhelter Others Present: Jinn Butler, Building Commissioner Location: Council Chambers City Hall, 191 Cabot Street, Beverly Kevin Andrews, Chairperson began the meeting and introduced the Board members present. Mr. Andrews explained that since there are only four voting members present that applications would need to receive a unanimous vote to proceed. I. MODIFICATION REQUEST Beverly Commerce Park LLP Original Request February: requests a Special Permit to construct subsidized elderly housing building (as defined in Beverly Zoning Ordinance ("BZO") 300-5)pursuant to BZO 300-43(C)(1)(a) and a Variance from BZO Section 300-43(D)(6) to construct a subsidized elderly housing building in excess of the allowed 35'in height(proposed approx. 50'in height). The property is located at 181 Elliott Street in the IG zoning district. Michael Aveni, (Architect) addressed the Board and stated that on February 28, 2024 they received a Special Permit permitting elderly housing units in the IG zoning district and also a height Variance. They are requesting to modify the Variance of 49.6'. Mr.Aveni stated that as they work up there, they don't have as much material as they thought they had. They have engaged a marketing consultant and determined that some of the units were too large. They also discussed that the ground floor units have no concrete sill and so they discussed eliminating the berm which by definition raises the height of the building. Mathematically, they are at almost 52', however,they are requesting 53'to be safe. Mr.Aveni stated that the roof elevation is not changing. Mr. Cosmas asked if the berm performed any drainage function and Mr.Aveni stated that it did not. Mr. Barone stated that he understands the impact the 2'will have on the exterior but he does not understand the impact on the inside. Mr.Aveni stated that they will be able to put taller windows on the bottom floor like that upper floors have. Mr.Aveni stated that they needed a Special Permit for 50 elderly subsidized units in the IG district. They have been tweaking things and dialing in the units. They have removed the giant end units and they have brought in some 1-bedroom units so they are up to 59 units which adds one more affordable unit to the stock. There will now be 9 affordable units. No one spoke in favor or against. Mr. Barone asked if they have an updated traffic study and Mr.Aveni stated that they do and it will add two am and two pm peak hour trips. The updated traffic report was not submitted to the Board. Mr. Andrews stated that he thinks these are minor modification requests. Mr. Cosmas stated that he appreciates them adding the additional affordable unit. Mr. Farinella asked if by removing the berms is more space created and Mr.Aveni stated that it creates useable green space. MOTION: Mr. Barone moved to close the public hearing. Mr. Farinella seconded the Motion. Votes in favor: 4-0 (Andrews, Cosmas, Farinella, Barone) Motion carries. MOTION: Mr.Andrews moved to find this modification request is Minor and to permit the modification of the Variance granted at 181 Elliot Street to change the height from 51.6'to 53'based on the topography of the lot creating a hardship, subject to the plans submitted. Mr. Cosmas seconded the Motion. Votes in favor: 4-0 (Andrews, Cosmas, Farinella, Barone) Motion carries. Mr. Barone stated that he doesn't feel as though adding 9-units to a 50-unit building is a minor modification, especially since there were significant concerns about traffic. That is almost a 20% increase. Mr. Barone stated he thinks it should go before the full Board who voted for the application. Mr. Barone stated that he would like more information regarding the impact to the community. Mr.Andrews stated that although the number of units are increasing, the space isn't and so it may result in less occupants. Mr.Aveni suggested that if the Board is ok with everything else that has been presented that they could condition their approval and have the applicant go back before the Parking &Traffic Commission. Mr. Barone stated that he thinks that would satisfy his concern. Page 2 of 9 Steve Drohosky (Cummings Center) stated that they had gone before the Board to receive a Special Permit to create elderly housing in an IG district. The number of units was secondary to the request and so they felt this revised housing plan was a minor modification. It is the same size pie,they are just slicing it up differently. They were advised by their realtor that 3-bedroom units are not in demand. Mr. Farinella stated that he is okay with the plans as submitted especially since they are adding 9 units to the affordable unit housing stock. MOTION: Mr. Cosmas moved to determine the Modification request to the Special Permit at 181 Cabot Street is minor and to permit the change in the number of units from 50 to 59, subject to the plans submitted and also under the condition that the petitioner goes back before the Parking and Traffic Commission regarding the increased number of units. Mr. Farinella seconded the Motion. Votes in favor: 4-0 (Andrews, Cosmas, Farinella, Barone) Motion carries. II. NEW PUBLIC HEARINGS Wayne and Anne Shreffler request a Variance in accordance with Section 300-35D (8) of the Zoning Ordinance to construct a single story addition 11.9' into the required 25' rear yard setback. The property is located at 47 Essex Street in the R6 zoning district. Joseph Luna (Architect) addressed the Board and stated that this single family home is on a preexisting nonconforming lot both in the front yard setback and the rear yard setback. The applicant's plan is to add a small 380 sq. ft. addition off of the rear of the house and also to add a second floor rear shed dormer. The small lot and the lot's shape create a hardship. No one spoke in favor or against. Mr. Cosmas asked what is behind the house now and Mr. Luna stated just a yard and a bulk head. Mr. Barone stated that this is one of just a handful of houses that are not directly on the street, it has frontage. Mr. Barone stated that he does not think this is an unreasonable request. The applicants do not want to take down the garage. Mr. Luna stated that both 50 Essex Street and 42 Charnock Street, who would be most affected, were both in favor of the application. Mr.Andrews stated that from the street all that will be seen is the roof and a slight part on the side. The architect stated that the garage screens the addition on Charnock Street. Mr.Andrews stated that it looks like nice architecture and that it matches the existing peak of the house. Page 3 of 9 MOTION: Mr. Cosmas moved to close the public hearing. Mr. Barone seconded the Motion. Votes in favor: 4-0 (Andrews, Cosmas,Farinella, Barone) Motion carries. MOTION: Mr. Barone moved to GRANT the Variance at 47 Essex Street in accordance with Section 300-35D (8) of the Zoning Ordinance to construct a single story addition 11.9' into the required 25' rear yard setback due to the size and shape of the lot creating a hardship, subject to the plans submitted. Mr. Farinella seconded the Motion Votes in favor: 4-0 (Andrews, Cosmas, Farinella, Barone) Motion carries. Melissa More requests a Special Permit in accordance with Section 300-34C (j}to construct an attached accessory dwelling unit. The property is located at 24 Putnam Street in the RIO zoning district. Abby Ellis (Savoie Nolan) addressed the Board and stated that the applicant would like to add a small 700 sq. ft. addition to accommodate her elderly mother. The existing 11/2 story home is nonconforming in the front and the side. The proposed addition will not create any new nonconformities. The lot is oversized and can easily accommodate a small 1- story addition. Ms. Ellis stated that the addition will blend in with the existing home and that it will continue to look like a single-family home. Mr.Andrews stated that Ms. More needs a Special Permit because the existing structure is too close to the front and side lot lines. Ms. Ellis stated that an interior door combining the two units is not permitted and so they submitted updated plans to L. Harris that show the interior door has been removed from the plans. No one spoke in favor against. MOTION: Mr. Barone moved to close the public hearing. Mr. Farinella seconded the Motion. Votes in favor: 4-0 (Andrews, Cosmas,Farinella, Barone) Motion carries. Mr. Cosmas stated that he is sympathetic to the reason for the ADU and that they have been thoughtful about the plans. Mr. Cosmas asked if there has there been any outreach to the neighbors and Ms. Ellis stated that they have received support from neighbors. Mr. Barone stated that this is in line with what the City Council was looking to achieve with this ordinance. It is a very functional space within the building envelope. It's an appropriate size. Page 4 of 9 MOTION: Mr. Barone moved to GRANT a Special Permit at 24 Putnam Street in accordance with Section 300-34C 6)to construct an attached accessory dwelling unit, subject to the plans submitted. Mr. Cosmas seconded the Motion. Votes in favor: 4-0 (Andrews, Cosmas, Farinella, Barone) Motion carries. Glovsky& Glovsky olblo Stephen M. Galante and William S. Pluckhahn requests a Variance in accordance with Section 300-84 of the Zoning Ordinance to authorize the reduction of the existing nonconforming frontage along Haskell Street for the property located at 676R Hale Street from 43.74` to 20.99' so as to allow for a reconfiguration of the property division line. The property is located at 676R Hale Street in the R-15 zoning district. Conor Walsh, Esq. (Glovsky & Glovsky) addressed the Board and stated that he is here on behalf of the applicants, as well as the owner of 31 Haskell Street which is the adjacent property. They are seeking a Variance to allow a reduction of the existing nonconforming frontage at 676R Hale Street from 43'to 21'. The property is located in the R15 zoning district which requires 150' of frontage. It is accessed from Hale Street via a shared driveway. The applicants are seeking a variance to convey a narrow strip of land to Mr. Williams. The unique shape of this narrow strip has no real utility for the current owners. Many of the abutters have signed a petition in favor. No one spoke in favor or against. Mr. Barone stated that from the photos submitted, it looks like the frontage is blocked off with fencing and is heavily wooded with a sidewalk with no curb cuts. Atty. Walsh confirmed. Mr. Barone stated it looks as though any means of egress granted is through the common driveway. Atty. Walsh stated the ANR plan from the 1990s was coupled with many things, the property has always derived access from Hale Street. Mr. Barone asked if the common driveway is accessed through an easement and Atty. Walsh confirmed. Mr. Cosmas asked for confirmation that they want to purchase the strip of land to expand their property and Atty. Walsh confirmed. Mr.Andrews stated that it does not look like the fire department would have an issue with it since there aren't any curb cuts now. Mr, Cosmas asked what the hardship would be and Atty. Walsh stated it would be financial in this circumstance, it would deprive them from benefitting from that property. MOTION: Mr. Farinella moved to close the public hearing. Mr. Barone seconded the Motion. Votes in favor: 4-0 (Andrews, Cosmas, Farinella, Barone) Motion carries. Page 5 of 9 Mr.Andrews stated that he thinks it is a reasonable request that will help another property become more conforming. Mr. Barone stated that he thinks this is a really unique situation, it's a textbook pork chop lot, it is fenced off and there is no curb cut, they have access via a recorded easement. This is one of those issues where it is form over function. MOTION: Mr. Farinella moved to GRANT a Variance at 676R Hale Street in accordance with Section 300-84 of the Zoning Ordinance to authorize the reduction of the existing nonconforming frontage along Haskell Street for the property located at 676R Hale Street from 43.74'to 20.99' as to allow for a reconfiguration of the property division line, subject to the plans submitted.A literal enforcement of the Zoning Ordinance would cause a financial hardship and deprive the owners of reasonable use of the property. Mr. Barone seconded the Motion. Votes in favor: 4-0 (Andrews, Cosmas, Farinella, Barone) Motion carries. Alexander& Femino alb/o William F. and Joyce M.Howard,Trustees requests a Variance in accordance with Sections 300-34D (1) and(2) of the Zoning Ordinance to divide the existing property which consists of 3 lots under the original recorded subdivision plan for this neighborhood into 2 lots, I having 102.80 of frontage and 11,859 sq. ft. of area and the other having 53.67 feet of frontage and 5,300 sq. ft of area where zoning requires 100' of frontage and 10,000 sq, ft. of area. The property is located at 2 Sylvester Avenue in the R10 zoning district. Tom Alexander, Esq. (Alexander& Femino) addressed the Board on behalf of the applicant and stated that the owners are long time Beverly residents. The property was originally 3 lots in a subdivision created in 1905. The applicants bought an additional lot in 1956 which is fairly similar to their request. The new lot would be slightly larger with 53' of frontage. It is a very large lot in this area. It is one of the largest lots in a neighborhood with a lot of 5,000 sq. ft. lots. Atty.Alexander stated that there are 101 lots with houses on them that are at the size they are proposing and smaller. This request keeps with this neighborhood. This new house would conform with the zoning ordinance setback requirements. The proposed house would be 1,860 sq. ft. This lot has frontage on both Bates Park Ave. and Sylvester Ave. The existing house is pushed to the very end of the lot and so there is a large amount of open space in the rear of the house. Atty.Alexander stated that a literal enforcement of the zoning ordinance would deprive the owner's use of the property. Atty.Alexander stated that the immediate abutters are in favor of the proposal and he provided to the Board a printout with the abutters who have signed in favor and where they are located on the area map. Page 6 of 9 Atty.Alexander stated that the request would conform with the zoning ordinance and with the neighborhood. Mr. Cosmas stated that the Board did receive a very emphatic letter in opposition to this project. Mr.Andrews stated that it is an anonymous letter and so he doesn't know how much weight it can hold. They don't know who wrote it or where it came from. Dan Fleming, 24 Bates Park Avenue stated that he is the immediate neighbor next to the proposed new property. Mr. Fleming stated that he did sign the petition but that saying that he is favorable to the project is generous. Mr. Fleming stated that he doesn't really like the idea and that he has enjoyed the benefit of the empty space. Building a 2-story home would take away from the visual appeal. Also, the street is also pretty packed with cars parking on the street. Mr. Barone stated that he thinks at the end of the day if the Board approves this request that they will still need an area Variance for lot size. Mr. Barone stated that he is concerned that they would be allowing a nonconforming lot to be created. Mr. Barone stated that he is also concerned that they would be furthering a situation where they know the hardship is self-created. Atty.Alexander stated that there are a number of homes in Ryal side where they have done the same thing in the last few years. There have been at least five in the Ryal Side area where this has been done. It is not unusual as most of Ryal side has lots of this size. This would not set a precedent. Mr. Cosmas stated that unfortunately the lots have merged and it is all one conforming lot. The facts are the facts, they purchased an adjacent lot without it being properly explained to them. Mr.Andrews stated that he would be in favor of the subdivision and that he thinks part of the job of the Board is to look at the Ordinance to see where it is working for people and in cases where it came out after the fact. Mr.Andrews stated that he doesn't think previous decisions were incorrect that they are looking at things a case by case. Mr. Cosmas stated that the fact is that the Board is supposed to apply the law. The owner's created the hardship themselves. Mr. Barone stated that they also have to determine if the request is in derogation of the code. Mr.Andrews stated that in the next decade or two they are going to have to see how they can get more housing in the area. Atty.Alexander requested the public hearing not be closed and that they continue the application to the next meeting when more Board members are present. MOTION: Mr. Cosmas moved to grant a continuance to the October 30, 2024 meeting, subject to signing the Waiver and Agreement. Mr. Farinella seconded the Motion. Votes in favor: 4-0 (Andrews, Cosmas, Farinella, Barone) Motion carries. Page 7 of 9 Alexander&Femino o!b/o Louis E. and Karen R. Occhi inti requests a Special Permit in accordance with Section 300-34(C)O) and a Variance in accordance with Section 300-55B(6)(a) to build an accessory dwelling unit(ADU)by building a 550 sq. ft. one story addition and connecting it to the existing second floor resulting in 1,174 sq. ft. unit known as unit B to be occupied by the Owner/Applicant's son and his wife. The remaining 943 sq. ft. on the first floor will constitute Unit A and be occupied by the Owner/Applicant. The Special Permit is required because the existing house is nonconforming since it has a 12.5' front yard setback where 20' is required. The Variance is required since the ADU ordinance requires the lesser of 1,000 sq. ft. or 50% of the principal building gross floor area and Unit B has 74.9% and Unit A has 60.2% of the existing building area. The property is located at 13 Rowell Avenue in the R10 zoning district. Tom Alexander, Esq. (Alexander& Femino) addressed the Board and stated that the applicants have lived there since 1988. It's a 20,295 sq. ft. lot which is twice as large as the required 10,000 sq. ft. in the R10 zoning district. The lot is odd shaped with hilly topography. The applicants are requesting a Special Permit because the existing house is 12.3' from the front lot line and present zoning calls for 20'. They are also seeking a Variance because they would like to put a 550 sq. ft. 1-story addition with an internal staircase leading from that 550 sq. ft. addition up to the second floor of the existing house. The ADU would occupy the second floor of the existing property. The applicants would downsize to the first floor in a 943 sq. ft. unit. Atty.Alexander stated that the doorway shown on the original plans has been removed and revised plans have been submitted. It does have two egresses and all stairways are internal. The Zoning Ordinance for ADU states it has to be the less than 50% of the square footage of the existing building or 1,000 sq. ft. One unit is less than 1,000 sq. ft. Atty.Alexander provided a map and petition signed by the neighbors in support. Mr. Cosmas asked why the ADU has to be attached to their house. Atty.Alexander stated that the lot itself makes it difficult to build a second separate dwelling and it would be more destructive to the neighborhood. This is a fairly minimal 23'x26' addition. Stan stated that he lives next door and stated that he is in favor of their desire to create an ADU. He is an affordable housing advocate. Stan requested to see the plan. Dan Stevens, 14 Rowell Avenue stated that he is in favor of the project and that it is good for the neighborhood, they are good neighbors. MOTION: Mr. Cosmas moved to close the public hearing. Mr. Farinella seconded the Motion. Votes in favor: 4-0 (Andrews, Cosmas, Farinella, Barone) Motion carries. Page 8 of 9 Mr. Cosmas stated that he thinks the plans fit with what the Ordinance is trying to do. Mr. Barone and Mr. Farinella agreed. MOTION: Mr. Barone moved to GRANT a Special Permit at 13 Rowell Avenue in accordance with Section 300-34(C)O) to build an accessory dwelling unit(ADU)by building a 550 sq. ft. one story addition and connecting it to the existing second floor resulting in 1,174 sq. ft. unit known as unit B to be occupied by the Owner/Applicant's son and his wife. The remaining 943 sq. ft. on the first floor will constitute Unit A and be occupied by the Owner/Applicant, subject to the plans submitted. Mr. Farinella seconded the Motion. Votes in favor: 4-0 (Andrews, Cosmas, Farinella, Barone) Motion carries. MOTION: Mr.Andrews moved to GRANT a Variance at 13 Rowell Avenue in accordance with Section 300-55B(6)(a) due to the ADU ordinance requiring the lesser of 1,000 sq. ft. or 50% of the principal building gross floor area and Unit B has 74.9% and Unit A has 60.2%of the existing building, subject to the plans submitted. Mr. Farinella seconded the Motion. Votes in favor: 4-0 (Andrews, Cosmas, Farinella, Barone) Motion carries. OTHER BUSINESS A. Approval of July 31, 2024 Meeting Minutes (Andrews) MOTION: Mr.Andrews moved to approve the Minutes, as written, from the July 31, 2024 Meeting. Mr. Barone seconded the Motion. Votes in favor: 4-0 (Andrews, Cosmas, Farinella, Barone) Motion carries. B. Approval of August 28, 2024 Meeting Minutes (Barone) (HELD) MOTION: Mr.Andrews moved to adjourn the meeting. Mr. Cosmas seconded the Motion. All in favor. Motion carries. Leanna Harris, Administrative Assistant Board of Appeals of the Zoning Ordinance Page 9 of 9