Loading...
Mulcahy - Decision Decision on Petition for a Special Permit and a Variance Requested by Thomas M. Mulcahy A public meeting of the Zoning Board of Appeals (the “Board”) was held on Tuesday January 28, 2003 at 7:00 p.m. at Beverly City Hall, 191 Cabot Street, Beverly, Massachusetts. The agenda included a petition by Thomas M. Mulcahy for a special permit to encroach 5 feet plus or minus upon the required 20 feet front yard setback with a 2 feet by 23 feet, two-story addition to an existing ranch and a variance to encroach 4 ½ feet upon the required 15 feet side yard setback with a 12 feet by 21 feet 6 inches plus or minus attached garage addition with a bedroom, bathroom, and den above, regarding the property located at 15 Butterworth Road (the “Parcel”). The property is located in an R- 10 Zoning District. The January 28, 2003 public meeting of the Board was called to order by the Chairman, Scott D. Houseman. The following five members of the Board were present: full members Scott D. Houseman, Margaret O’Brien, Mark Schmidt and Scott Ferguson. Alternate member Joel Margolis assumed a voting position. Alternate member Jane Brusca was in attendance but not voting. The public hearing on this application started with the Zoning Clerk, Diane Rogers, reading the application request to the public and the Board members reviewing the application material. Mr. David Jaquith, Architect, spoke on behalf of the petitioner. He stated that the dwelling is closer to the street than zoning allows, therefore a special permit is needed for the 2 feet by 23 feet addition across the front of the dwelling. He also noted that an error in the application indicated the encroachment of the garage addition would be 4 ½ feet when in reality the encroachment would be 2 ½ feet only. Mr. Jaquith stated that the hardship that necessitates a variance is the shape and topography of the land. Mrs. Mulcahy has recently had twins and needs more living space. Her mother and brother will also reside there. Chairman Houseman questioned if any member of the public would like to comment on this petition. John Caulmare of 13 Butterworth Road, a direct abutter, stated he is concerned that the garage will extend 12 feet from the existing foundation. He is also concerned that water run-off would flow toward his dwelling. He commented that the pipe leading to the storm drain passes into his yard. Mr. Jaquith stated the driveway has a natural pitch toward the road, which would drain the water toward the road. Also, he would be willing to add a perimeter drain around the new addition down to the rear of the property to a drywell. Mr. Jaquith noted that he would inform the contractors that they will be responsible for the city pipe that crosses the abutter’s property if it is damaged. Chairman Houseman asked the Board Members for their questions and comments. Ferguson stated he made a site visit on Sunday, January 26, 2003 and found that regarding the topography of the land, the lot is an odd shape. He commented that the proposal is large compared to other dwellings in the area. He questioned if a two-car garage was necessary. Mr. Jaquith stated that he could make changes to the plan to reduce the size of the addition, however, it would not be as attractive. He added that he needed the base of a two-car garage in order to build a second level above. Ferguson stated the hardship is the shape of the land, which led to the architectural development of the project. Margolis stated that the project was large and that the house would stand out upon the street. O’Brien concurred with Margolis. Ferguson stated that it would be attractive. Mr. Jaquith stated that it will be a large building, but the property is at the end of the road. Also, he predicted that with the high cost of land in Beverly, the City would see more of these large additions. Margolis questioned if the dormers could be dropped so the house would not appear to be as large. Mr. Jaquith responded he could lower them about 1 ½ feet. He added that the attic is not being used. Mr. Houseman stated that he made a site visit on Sunday, January 26, 2003 and he spoke to an abutter who noted that the addition would create the largest house in the neighborhood but that the plans are attractive. Ms. O’Brien asked if the neighbors across the street were in favor of this proposal. Mr. Mulcahay responded that he did receive a note in favor of the petition from William Burke of 22 Oakhurst Road. Another neighbor, Richard Petrykowski of 17 Oakhurst was also in favor. Mr. Jaquith stated the petitioner would like to have the dormers on their dwelling. The Board incorporated its observations as its general findings of fact and made the following specific findings about the proposed addition: (1) that the specific site is an appropriate location for the proposed addition, and that the character of the adjoining uses will not be adversely affected; (2) that no factual evidence is found that the property values in the district will be adversely affected; (3) that no undue traffic, nuisance, or unreasonable hazard will result; (4) that adequate and appropriate facilities such as electricity and city water and sewer currently exist on the parcel; and (5) that there are no valid objections from abutting property owners based on demonstrable fact. The Board also made a Section 6 finding that the expansion of the non-conforming structure will not be more substantially detrimental to the neighborhood than the existing non-conforming structure. Following the questioning and discussion, a motion was made by Schmidt to GRANT the special permit, Seconded by Margolis. The motion carried 4-1 (Houseman, Schmidt, Margolis and Ferguson in favor) (O’Brien opposed). The Board then made the following specific findings about the variance: (1) that special conditions related to the irregular shape of the lot and the topography exist, which are peculiar to the parcel but not affecting generally the zoning district in which it is located; (2) that the request is the minimum one that could be granted and still allow the petitioner reasonable use of the parcel; (3) that the granting of this variance would be in harmony with the general purpose and intent of the zoning bylaw; and (4) that this proposal is not injurious to the neighborhood or otherwise detrimental to the public welfare. A motion was made by Ferguson to GRANT the variance on the condition that a trench drain will be installed beside the foundation to alleviate any water flowing toward the abutter at 13 Butterworth Rd and that the contractor assure the protection of the 18 to 20 inch drain, which is owned and maintained by the City of Beverly. Any damaged city drain must be replaced by the petitioner. Seconded by Margolis. Motion carried 4-1 (O’Brien, Margolis, Houseman, & Ferguson in favor) (Schmidt opposed). Appeals from the Board’s decision on this petition may be filed in accordance with the provisions of M.G.L. Chapter 40A, Section 17, within twenty (20) days of filing of this decision with the City Clerk. This decision shall not be valid unless recorded at the Essex County Registry of Deeds in Salem, Massachusetts after the twenty-day appeal period has passed without an appeal being filed. Respectfully, Scott Houseman Zoning Board Chairman