2012-06-28CITY OF BEVERLY
PUBLIC MEETING MINUTES
These minutes are not a verbatim transcript of the pubic hearing or public meeting
of the Board of Appeals. Reviews of the Board's Decision or outcome of the public
hearing should include an examination of the Board's Decision for that hearing.
Board: Zoning Board of Appeal
Date: June 28, 2011
Place: Beverly City Hall, Council Chamber, 191 Cabot Street
Board Members Present: Day Ann Kelley, Chairperson
Regular Members:
Scott Ferguson, Joel Margolis and Jane Brusca
Alternate Members:
Pamela Gougian, and John Harden
Others Present: Steve Frederickson — Building Commissioner /Zoning
Officer
Diane Rogers — Clerk for the Board
Absent: Sally Koen and Margaret O'Brien
29 Bates Park Avenue — R -10 Zone — Mark Eng
Request for Section 6 Finding
Mr. Eng spoke on his own behalf. He stated he was requesting to build a two -car garage
with second floor living space, 30 -feet by 30 -feet attached to the existing dwelling which
the setbacks on the dwelling are 17.3 -feet from the street; twenty feet is required by
zoning. The second floor will consist of a master bedroom and full bathroom.
Photographs of the dwelling with First and Second Floor Plans and elevations were
provided to the Board for review. A petition was signed in support of this project by the
residents of 25, 33, and 36 Bates Park Avenue and 8, and 28 Sylvester Avenue.
Chairperson Kelley asked if anyone from the public had any questions or comments
relative to this proposal. An abutter, Michael Reynolds of 14R Garfield Avenue, stated
he had concerns with this proposal. He was of the opinion that the lot was unbuildable.
He added he would like to know how close to the easement on his property would the
garage be located.
Ms. Kelley then asked the Board members for their questions and comments. Ms. Kelley
asked Mr. Frederickson, Building Commissioner, what was the ruling on lots that were
merged. Mr. Frederickson responded that a dwelling could not be built on the second lot
but once merged there would be 1,700 square feet of land and a garage could be built
according to Zoning. He added that the dwelling was conforming, however, the lot did
not have the 20 -feet front yard setback requirement.
Mr. Ferguson asked if there were any other 30'foot tall structures located in this
neighborhood. He is of the opinion this proposal would not be consistent with the
neighborhood. Mr. Ferguson stated this proposal is approximately a 40% increase and he
preferred a smaller 25 %. Ms. Brusca stated most of the neighborhood dwellings were
cape styled design and she was of the opinion this proposal was too large. She asked the
petitioner if he could plan something else. Mr. Margolis concurred and stated the design
should be scaled down. He asked if any trees would be removed. Mr. Harden suggested
the roofline be lowered and to have dormers which would lessen the appearance of the
size of the addition. He also discussed wall fire code requirements. Mr. Eng stated that
he could do that. Ms. Kelley stated that the petitioner did submit abutting neighbors
signatures in support of this proposal. She added the side the addition would be built on
is woodlands and would not impact the neighbors. She commented that she believes the
height of the design does impact the neighbors. Ms. Gougian had concerns with the
roofline height.
Ms. Kelley asked the petitioner if he would like to postpone this hearing to the next
scheduled meeting in July and then present a new plan design. Mr. Eng responded yes,
he would like to postpone his petition. Mr. Ferguson suggested lowering the roof line
and dormers.
Mr. Ferguson made a motion to continue Mr. Eng's proposal to the July 26, 2011
scheduled meeting. A waiver of time was signed. Motion seconded by Mr. Margolis.
Motion carries 5 — 0. (Kelley, Ferguson, Margolis, Brusca, and Harden in favor)
8 Adeline Road — R -6 Zone — Toby Shea
Request for Variance and Section 6 Finding
Mr. Shea spoke on his own behalf. He stated he was requesting to allow a 16 -feet by 20-
feet 1 -inch storage shed to be relocated to approximately 20 -feet from the side. Also, a
Section 6 Finding to exceed the height restriction of 15 -feet allowed by zoning to 16 -feet.
Mr. Shea stated as the structure currently sits, it is unfinished and out of compliance with
both side (10 -feet required) and rear setbacks (25 -feet required). Mr. Shea stated that he
began building this structure without a building permit, which was poor judgment on his
2
part. After discussion with neighbors, it is proposed that the storage structure be moved
to approximately 20 -feet from the side boundary. Mr. Shea stated the lot is
approximately 9,800 square feet and narrows at the front (68 -feet across). He added
given the narrowness of the lot at points and the positioning of the main residence,
compliance with the required setbacks would be difficult to obtain. The Ancillary
Building was intended to replace an existing storage structure that was in disrepair. Mr.
Shea stated he would have desired a garage but he had insufficient land on either side of
the main residence to accommodate such a structure. He commented that this creates a
"hardship" in that assorted lawn items, bicycles, and snow blower must be covered
outside under tarps, which has an adverse affect on the curb appeal of the residence and
the neighborhood.
Mr. Eugene Wood of 6 Adeline Road reviewed the proposed placement of the back yard
shed structure and was in support of the petition.
Chairperson Day Ann Kelley asked if anyone from the public had any questions or
comments relative to this proposal. There being no one present she then asked the Board
members for their questions and comments. Mr. Ferguson asked if the structure was built
on a slab and if electricity would be brought in. Mr. Shea responded that was correct.
Mr. Ferguson asked if the intent was for storage for family accessories not to ever exceed
that of being a shed. Mr. Shea responded yes. Ms. Kelley stated this is the R -6 Zone and
Mr. Shea does not want the shed too close to his dwelling. Ms. Brusca and Mr. Margolis
commented that the structure is already built and is too large and too high. They
suggested adjusting the size. Ms. Kelley stated the lot appeared flat, contained no ledge,
and did not meet the criteria to obtain a variance. Ms. Brusca and Ms. Kelley asked the
Building Commissioner, Steve Frederickson, what the side and rear setbacks would be to
reposition this structure. Mr. Frederickson stated in the R -6 Zone two 10 -foot by 10 -foot
sheds were allowed 5 -feet from the line. If the shed were larger the side setback
requirements would be 10 -feet and the rear setback would be 25 -feet. Mr. Ferguson
suggested Mr. Shea pour another slab closer to the dwelling and reduce the size of the
shed. Ms. Kelley asked if Mr. Shea would like to withdraw without prejudice his
application and return at another date with a smaller designed shed. Mr. Shea stated he
would withdraw without prejudice his proposal. Ms. Kelley asked the building
commissioner if the existing shed would have to be removed. Mr. Frederickson
responded that it had been up for 6 months.
A motion was made by Mr. Ferguson to allow Mr. Shea to withdraw without prejudice
his application for a variance and Section 6 Finding at 8 Adeline Road. Seconded by Mr.
Margolis. Motion carries 5 — 0. (Kelley, Ferguson, Brusca, Margolis and Haden in
favor)
25 School Street — R -6 Zone Kevin Kavlor /Steven M. Kavlor
Section 6 Finding Request
3
Mr. Margolis recused himself from voting
Steven Kaylor spoke on his own behalf. He stated he was requesting to change the "Use"
from a commercial printing business to a dwelling unit and office space. He added this
business has been operating since 1955. The building is a wood frame structure with
3,563 sq. ft. of land and 3,237 sq. ft. of floor space. Mr. Kaylor stated he plans on
replacing windows, repairing siding, and woodwork. The property can park 3 -4 vehicles
on the side of the structure. The new office space will have no stock in trade, unlike the
current use. The hours of operation will be 9:00 a.m. — 5:00 p.m. with 1- 2 employees
generally on site. The two - bedroom one bathroom apartment will be occupied by Mr.
Kevin Kaylor. Mr. Kaylor stated his commercial truck will be parked on the property.
Drawings, elevations and photographs were submitted for the Board to review.
Chairperson Day Ann Kelley asked if anyone from the public had any questions or
comments relative to this proposal. Mrs. Falloni of 9 Porter Street stated all the land
area is sidewalk. She questioned how many offices would occupy the building and how
many employees would be allowed. Mr. Anthony Baltas of 23 School Street stated he
was the closest abutter. He stated this is a very tight area. He voiced his concerns
regarding deliveries, parking, and the safety of children at the bus stop across the street.
Mr. Wesley Slate, Councilor Ward II, spoke in favor of this proposal. He stated that
parking was a very big issue in Ward II. He is of the opinion this proposal will not
impact the neighborhood. He stated that the safety of the children is a concern however,
the bus stop is used only during the day and perhaps it could be moved. Mr. Slate stated
the appearance of the building would be upgraded and an asset to the neighborhood.
Ms. Kelley then asked the Board members for their questions and comments. Ms.
Gougian asked how many windows were going to be replaced in the building. Mr. Kevin
Kaylor responded that one window in the rear would be replaced and one window to the
right of the front door at the front of the building. The left front side space will be for a
stairway. Ms. Gougian asked what type of retail business would be leasing the property.
Mr. Steve Kaylor responded his part time law office would be located in the bottom
common area on the first floor. Mr. Kevin Kaylor's business "Freeman Air Duct
Cleaning, LLC" would also occupy 500 square feet. Ms. Brusca stated if the business
"Use" changed she wanted to make sure the owners would have to return to the Board of
Appeal for approval. Mr. Ferguson asked if the architect's plans were adequate. Mr.
Frederickson responded that they were. Mr. Baltas asked if the hours of operation could
be written in the decision. Ms. Kelley responded yes, the hours would be 9:00 a.m. to
5:00 p.m.
A motion was made by Mr. Harden to grant the Section 6 Finding that the proposed
alteration will not be substantially more detrimental than the existing nonconforming
structure to the neighborhood. That the conditions be that:
(1.) there will be only limited deliveries.
(2.) the hours of operation will be 9:00 a.m. to 5:00 p.m.
(3.) if the "Use" changes the petitioner will have to come back to the Board of
Appeals for approval.
11
Motion seconded by Mr. Ferguson. Motion carries 5 — 0. (Kelley, Ferguson, Harden,
Brusca, and Gougian in favor)
21 Colgate Road — R -10 Zone — Charles Toothaker
Request for a Section 6 Finding
Mr. Toothaker spoke on his own behalf. He stated he was requesting to add a second
floor to the existing nonconforming dwelling. He added the proposed addition would not
extend past the existing nonconforming footprint. Several neighborhood dwellings have
added second levels. This proposed addition would contain two bedrooms, bathroom,
laundry room, and living room with future wet bar.
Andover Renovations Solutions of Woburn, MA provided floor plans and elevations for
the Board to review. Photographs of the property were also provided.
The following neighbors signed letters in support of the proposal: Joanne Gardner of 22
Colgate Road, Amanda Hebenstreit of 19 Colgate Road, and Jeffrey DiLuiso and Dianne
Springer of 23 Colgate Road.
Chairperson Kelley asked if anyone from the public had any questions or comments
relative to this proposal. There being no one present she then asked the Board members
for their questions and comments. Mr. Ferguson stated there were at least (4) other
additions similar to this proposal in the neighborhood. He commented that he believed
this proposal did not impact the neighborhood. Ms. Kelley asked if the existing overhang
would disappear when the new construction was completed. Mr. Toothaker responded
that it would. Mr. Harden discussed the vinyl siding and construction of the new second
level.
Ms. Brusca made a motion to grant the Section 6 Finding at 21 Colgate Road to the
nonconforming dwelling subject to the plans submitted with the application are strictly
complied with, are identified in, and incorporated into, the Board's decision, an the
elevation drawings, to the extent feasible, are recorded with the decision. The Board
finds that the extension/alteration will not be substantially more detrimental than the
existing nonconforming structure to the neighborhood and that neighbors signed in favor
of the proposal. The proposed addition will not extend past the existing nonconforming
footprint. Seconded by Mr. Ferguson. Motion carries 5 — 0. (Kelley, Brusca, Ferguson,
Margolis, and Harden in favor)
Business:
Meeting adjourned at 9:00 p.m.
The month of August 2011 the Board will take off, The month of December 2011 will
tH
hold a meeting on Tuesday, December 13