Loading...
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