Loading...
2010-11-29CITY OF BEVERLY PUBLIC MEETING MINUTES These minutes are not a verbatim transcript of the public 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: Monday, November 29, 2010 Place: Beverly City Hall, Council Chamber, 191 Cabot Street Board Members Present: Day Ann Kelley, Chairperson Regular Members: Scott Ferguson, Margaret O'Brien and Joel Margolis. Alternate Members: Sally Koen and John Harden Others Present: Steven Frederickson — Building Commissioner /Zoning Officer and Diane Rogers — Clerk for the Board Absent: Jane Brusca and Pamela Gougian Chairperson Day Ann Kelley opened the meeting to the public at 7:00 p.m. She announced that there were three cases continued from the October 26, 2010 meeting; the first to be heard was regarding the property located at 26 R Michael Road. 26 R Michael Road — R -10 — Zone — Gilbert A. Norwood, Trustee Variance Request Attorney Thomas Alexander spoke on behalf of the petitioner Norwood Realty Trust. He stated a Definitive Subdivision Plan went before the Planning Board Committee on November 16, 2010 and was approved. The Michael Road Extension will create accessible frontage for an existing 10,000 sq. ft. parcel in the R -10 Zoning District. The petitioner will pave 100 feet of frontage, not the 51 -feet as proposed at last months Board of Appeal meeting. Atty. Alexander requested this case be continued to the next scheduled meeting of the ZBA. He added he would dismiss the proposal at that time if no appeal was made on the Planning Board decision. A Motion was made by Mr. Ferguson to continue the proposal to the January 25, 2011 scheduled meeting. Seconded by Ms. O'Brien. Motion carries 5 — 0. (Kelley, Margolis, Ferguson, O'Brien and Koen voting in favor) 9 Otis Road — IR Zone — Redgate Realty Inc. /T. Alexander, Esq. Variance Request Atty. Thomas Alexander spoke on behalf of the petitioner. He stated that the applicant REDGATE REALTY INC. respectfully withdraws without prejudice its application. A Motion was made by Mr. Ferguson to allow the petitioner to withdraw without prejudice the proposal to allow the use of the third floor of the premises of each unit for living quarters as an accessory use to the allowed use of the premises for a "Contractors' or Craftsmen Shops." Seconded by Mr. Margolis. Motion carries 5 — 0. (Kelley, Ferguson, O'Brien, Margolis, and Koen in favor) 22 Fosters Point — R -10 Zone — Donna M. McMahon Variance Reauest CONTINUED. ASKED TO SCALE DOWN PROPOSED NEW DWELLING WAIVER SIGNED Mr. Thomas Mannetta, Engineer spoke on the petitioner's behalf. He stated he was requesting to demolish an existing one -story nonconforming dwelling and construct a new two -story single - family structure closer to the rear yard than the existing. The property was acquired May 15, 2002. He stated the existing parcel is an extremely irregular shape is as narrow as 16 feet at its frontage. It is further burdened by the location of the jurisdictional coastal bank at the rear of the property as well as the elevation of the flood plain. The proposed plan provides more flexibility of floor space and there will be an additional bedroom within the footprint of the proposed dwelling, which will increase the property from a two - bedroom home to a three- bedroom home. The largest dimensional increase is the proposed porch and deck area, which are at the rear of the property and hidden by proposed structure from the street view. Ms. Mc Mahon commented they have been planning and saving to construct a new dwelling for several years. A site plan by Vernon LeBlanc, Professional Land Surveyor was submitted to the Board for review as well as photographs of the existing dwelling and elevation drawings. Chairperson Day Ann Kelley asked if any member of the public had questions or comments relative to this proposal. They're being no one present she then asked the Board members for their questions and comments. Ms. Kelley stated this is a nonconforming use, to help the Board would you please give the encroachments of the existing and the proposed dwelling. Mr. Mannetta replied the 2 rear setback (which is the Danvers River) is 29 -feet and the proposed will be 21 -feet. . The existing setback on the left side is 8.6 -feet and the proposed will be 9 -feet. The existing right side setback is 8.6 -feet and the proposed will be 11.1 -feet. Ms. Kelley asked for the Engineer to explain the hardship criteria on the existing dwelling. Mr. Mannetta replied the dwelling does not meet the needs of the owners anymore as a family. They need more space and another bedroom. He added that the shape of the lot restricted the petitioner to what could be done. Ms. Kelley asked the dimensions of the new proposed dwelling and the existing. Mr. Mannetta responded that the proposed dwelling is 34 -feet in width and 37 -feet long. The existing dwelling is 30 -38 -feet wide and 36 -feet long. He added that there is a small room located within a jog of the corner of the dwelling. Ms. Kelley stated in the petition it stated 36 -feet long. She added the request was for a proposed 2 -story dwelling and that according to the plan it appears to have a bedroom upon the third floor. A deck with a screened porch is located on the second story. Mr. Mannetta replied there is an enclosed porch on the second story 8 -feet off grade. Mr. O'Brien asked how big is the proposed dwelling in comparison to the dwelling on the left side. Mr. Mannetta replied the dwellings are similar in size. The roof on the new dwelling will have a higher pitch. Mr. Margolis asked what was going to be built on the third floor. Mr. Mannetta responded that the 3 rd floor of the new dwelling would be a master bedroom and bathroom. Mr. Ferguson commented that the master bedroom and bath on the third floor were good size. Ms. Kelley stated this was a beautiful lot, had a lovely back yard, but the dwelling was very close to the house at 20 Fosters Point. She suggested the dwelling be rotated /moved away from that neighbor. She added the dwelling on the opposite side was further away. Mr. Harden suggested the large proposed deck be scaled down and the dwelling could then be moved. Mr. Mannetta responded he did not want to move the dwelling closer to the Flood Plan Bank. Ms. Koen asked if the petitioners spoke to their neighbors. Mr. Mannetta confirmed that they had spoken to the abutters. Mr. Margolis asked if any letters in favor of the proposal were to be presented to the Board. Mr. Mannetta stated he did not acquire any letters. Mr. Ferguson stated that a foundation would had to be built and perhaps the dwelling could be scaled down, be rotated, and be moved away from the Mc Neils dwelling. He commented that he did not think that would be an economic hardship at all. Ms. Kelley stated the Board would rather see a regular roof with an attic room. She added this is a nonconforming lot, which is very narrow. She suggested scaling down the plans so as not to impact the abutters. She concurred with Mr. Ferguson, letters from neighbors in favor of the new dwelling proposal be submitted to the Board for review. Mr. Ferguson made a motion to continue this proposal to the January 25, 2010 meeting, subject to a waiver of time being signed. Second by Ms. O'Brien. Motion carried 5 — 0. (Kelley, O'Brien, Ferguson, Koen, and Margolis in favor) 28 Beckford Street — RMD Zone — Darlene Nunez Section 6 Finding Request Continued from the October 26, 2010 Meeting Ms. Nunez spoke on her own behalf. She stated there had been a fire at her dwelling and her brother presented plans for a third floor addition at the October 26, 2010 meeting. 3 The Board requested the hearing be continued and a clearer set of plans presented including elevation drawings. She submitted the new drawings including west, north, east, and south elevations. Four 3 -D photographs of the proposed finished dwelling were also submitted for the Board to review. Chairperson Day Ann Kelley asked what the height was after the 3 rd floor addition was completed. Looking at the plans, Mr. Ferguson stated the height was 34 -feet 2- inches from the ground. Chairperson Kelley asked if anyone from the public had any questions or comments relative to this proposal. They're being no one present she then asked the Board members for their questions and comments. Mr. Ferguson stated the design definitely fits into the neighborhood. Chairperson Kelley stated the dwelling is narrow and there is not much land around it. Mr. Margolis asked what other work had been done on the dwelling. Ms. Nunez responded windows and siding had been completed. Mr. Margolis asked how long this proposal would take to complete. Ms. Nunez responded that the project would be done in 5 or 6 months including replacing the flat rubber roof with a peaked roof. Ms. O'Brien stated the new plans submitted are much better and clearer than the previous ones. A Motion was made by Mr. Ferguson to grant the Section 6 Finding at 28 Beckford Street that the proposed extension or alteration will not be substantially more detrimental than the existing nonconforming structure to the neighborhood but in fact will be an addition of quality to the neighborhood. Having considered the special permit criteria set out in the Beverly Zoning Ordinance per Section 29 -27 C(2) (a) — (f) excluding (b) the Board finds those criteria are satisfied. The Board shall grant the proposed application Subject to the following conditions: that the plans submitted with the application tonight are strictly complied with, are identified in, and incorporated into, the Board's decision, and the elevation drawings, to the extent feasible, are recorded with the decision. Seconded by Ms. O'Brien. Motion granted 4 — 0. ( Margolis, Ferguson, O'Brien and Sally Koen in favor) 4 Longview Drive — R -10 Zone — Philip Haefner Continuation from October 26, 2010 Board of Appeal Meeting Atty. O'Hare spoke on behalf of the petitioner. He stated the Board had requested the proposed garage be scaled down in size. The new plans indicating a smaller size and new designed garage were submitted to the Board for review. Chairperson Kelley asked what the new dimensions of the proposed garage were. Atty. O'Hare responded that the first proposed garage was 17 -feet by 36 -feet which the petitioner reduced to 15 -feet by 24 -feet based on the Boards comments. 11 Chairperson Kelley asked if anyone from the public had any questions or comments relative to this proposal. They're being no one present she then asked the Board for their questions and comments. Mr. Margolis stated he was in favor of the revised plans. Ms. Kelley stated she believed the width of 24 -feet is amply to park a vehicle and also have room for storage. Mr. Ferguson stated this size garage does go with the neighborhood. He asked Mr. O'Hare to discuss the hardship on the proposed plans. Mr. O'Hare responded there was a former variance on this property. He stated because of the position of the dwelling on the lot and the closeness to Cabot Street was a hardship to the owners. He added there were no objections from neighbors and it was a minimum relief requested. He commented that the proposed garage complements the dwelling. Ms. O'Brian made a Motion to grant the variance at 4 Longview Drive where there are special circumstances applying to the small lot, the position of the dwelling on the lot, it will not affect generally the zoning district in which it is located and it would deprive the applicant of a reasonable use of the property. This specific variance as granted by the Board is the minimum variance that will grant reasonable relief to the owner and is necessary for a reasonable use of the land or building. The granting of the variance will be in harmony with the general purpose and intent and will not be injurious to the neighborhood or otherwise detrimental to the public welfare. This will be subject to the revised plans submitted on November 29, 2010 indicating the garage size will be 15 -feet by 24 -feet. Seconded by Mr. Margolis. Motion carries 4 — 0. (O'Brien, Ferguson, Margolis, and Koen in favor) 117 Elliott Street — IG Zone — Thomas Alexander, Esq. for Mr. Kaminski Variance Request Units 5 and 6 Thomas Alexander, Esq. spoke on behalf of the applicant Mr. Kaminski. He stated the request was to allow periodic auctions to complement the existing warehouse /storage use at Units 5 and 6. Currently the premises are used for warehouse /storage for the Petitioner's antiques and previously owned items business. Atty. Alexander stated that the soils contain contaminants due to the prior use as a machine shop and manufacturing facility. The soil contamination, building configuration, and changes in the regional economy limit the uses of the property. Atty. Alexander stated that the DEP has been monitoring the site for years. The proposed use for auctions will only be occasional (6 -7 times a month) the primary use of the Premises 77% of the time. Atty. Alexander stated the specific variance if granted is the minimum that will grant reasonable relief to the owner. He added the variance will be in harmony with the general purpose and intent of this Chapter, and will not be injurious to the to the neighborhood or otherwise detrimental to the public welfare. Chairperson Day Ann Kelley asked if anyone from the public had any questions or comments relative to this proposal. Ms. Cohen , a direct abutter , located at 115 Elliott Street stated she had concerns. She is concerned about vehicles coming and going on the site for the auction. She wanted specific times Mr. Kaminski could hold these auctions. 5 She commented that her chain link fence was taken down by Mr. Kaminski and replaced with a white plastic one. Atty. Alexander stated the old chain link fence had deteriorated and Mr. Kaminski had it replaced with a white vinyl fence to match the other fence on the property. He added they were willing to install another chain link fence if that was what Ms. Cohen wanted. Ms. Cohen responded that she wanted her old fence back. Chairperson Kelley then asked the Board members for their questions and comments. Ms. Koen stated she thought this was a clean use and would not cause allot of noise. Mr. Ferguson stated for the record that Mr. Kaminski is willing to install a new chain link fence for Ms. Cohen to replace the new white vinyl if this would satisfy her concerns. Ms. Kelley asked what was actually being sold at the auction. Atty. Alexander responded that antiques and furnishings would be sold at the auction. Ms. Kelley asked if vehicles would be sold and Mr. Kaminski responded no. Mr. Kaminski stated week - nights from 3:00/4:00 p.m. to 9:00 p.m. would be his hours. On Saturdays and Sundays it would probably be 10:00a.m. — 7:00 p.m. Mr. Ferguson asked if there were any complaints on the working hours for his auction site at 565 Cabot Street. Mr. Kaminski replied that there were no complaints. Mr. Margolis observed that Mr. Kaminski ran a first class operation. He then discussed the soil containments in the ground and DEP activity the past 20 years with Atty. Alexander. Ms. Kelley stated her observations were that this is a unique site with contaminated land. The property is adjacent to the railroad tracks in the rear with a parking lot in front and one residential dwelling (the Cohen's). She believes this is a much lesser use that is allowed by right under the zoning ordinance. Ms. Kelley does not believe there should be any restrictions on times of operation for the auctions. A Motion was made by Ms. Koen to approve the Variance at 117 Elliott Street in the IG Zoning District to allow periodic auctions to compliment the existing warehouse /storage use at Units 5 and 6. The granting of the variance will be in harmony with the general purpose and intent of this Chapter, and will not be injurious to the neighborhood or otherwise detrimental to the public welfare. Seconded by Mr. Ferguson. Motion carries 5 — 0. (Kelley, Ferguson, O'Brien, Margolis, and Koen in favor) At the Beginning of the hearing Mr. Margolis recused himself Alternate member John Harden will voted instead. Beverly Commerce Park — 181 Elliott Street — Edward Juralewicz Agent Variance Requests for Si2nne (& 500 and 100 Buildings Mr. Edward Juralewicz spoke on behalf of Cummings Park. He stated he is requesting to allow two signs to be placed higher than allowed. One sign to be placed above the third floor window on the north facade of the 500 Bldg. and one sign to be placed above the third floor windows on the east facade of the 100 building. Ms. Kelley suggests the 2 signs be reviewed and the Board vote on each item separately. 31 Mr. Juralewicz introduced Jason Parisella part owner of Keller Williams and Stephen Drohosky Vice President and General Manager of Cummings Properties. The existing sign at the 500 Building is at the first floor level and the visibility was poor from the street. Mr. Juralewicz stated he was requesting to raise the sign up to the third story level. He added the new proposed LED sign uses 10% less lighting. Ms. Kelley asked the size of the existing sign and the size of the proposed new sign. Mr. Drohosky responded the size of the existing sign is 23 or 24 -feet wide with 15 -inch letters and the proposed new sign is 26 -feet in width with 22 -inch letters. Ms Kelley asked how that compares to the Merrill Lynch sign. Mr. Drohosky responded that there are two signs, 26 — feet long and 31- inches tall. Ms. Kelley stated the Medicine Center sign seemed much smaller. Mr. Drohosky stated that the sign was 21.3- inches tall and 37 -feet long. Mr. Ferguson stated the proposed Keller Williams Sign will balance the building and make it look better. Ms. Kelley asked "once removed, will another sign be installed" at the first floor location. Mr. Drohosky replied no sign will be erected there. Ms. Kelley asked if the lights are on a timer. Mr. Drohosky responded the lights are on a timer that goes off at 9:00 p.m. Ms. Kelley stated the proposed size of the sign seems not too large and does balance the appearance of the building, as Mr. Ferguson stated. No one from the public appeared in favor or in opposition of this proposal. A Motion was made by Mr. Ferguson to approve the Variance for the Keller Williams new sign to be placed above the third floor window on the north facade of the 500 building. The hardship being the visibility of the existing sign does not meet the needs of the Petitioner. Distance and size of the current sign is too close to the ground and the sign is obscured. Seconded by Ms. O'Brien. Motion carries 5 — 0. (Kelley, Ferguson, O'Brien, Koen, and Harden in favor) SECOND PROPOSED SIGN to be placed above the third floor windows on the east facade of the 100 building. Mr. Edward Juralewicz of United Sign Co., Inc. spoke on behalf of the Cummings Center. He stated he was requesting a proposed Cummings Center Sign, Raceway Mounted Channel Letter Sign, Option B -1 with overall size 50- inches by 436- inches. Letters and rule to be white faces with black trim cap and returns. Logo to be white face with stencil cut translucent blue vinyl with black trim cap and returns. Mr. Juralewicz stated the proposed sign for the Cummings Center is to identify the east side of the 100 building. Mr. Steve Drohosky, Vice President and Manager of Cummings Center stated people have no idea that they can enter the Cummings Center from Balch Street. Mr. Ferguson stated if people were aware of that fact, traffic on Rte. 62 would not be so heavy. Chairperson Kelley asked if this application was asking for an amendment to the 1998 Variance that allowed nine wall signs that shall be limited to (14) locations. Mr. Drohosky responded yes. He added that in August 2004 another variance was granted to allow wall signs to use other colors in addition to the color white. (red, white, 7 or blue only) Ms. Kelley asked the hardship of this proposal to be explained. Mr. Drohosky responded the hardship remains the same as when Atty. Alexander stated it in 1998: The sheer size of the Parcel, at almost 80 acres, is unique in the city's downtown IG zoning district, configuration of the complex of buildings on the Parcel; are factors which constitute a hardship. Mr. Drohosky stated the signs were then increased to 12 in 17 locations. He added it has been 13 years since they asked for another sign to be added to the third floor location. He commented that the center is 470 -feet from Rte IA. The larger Cummings Sign is strictly for identification on the building. Ms. Koen stated there are other signs on that building but they are not visible from Rte. 1 -A. Ms. Kelley asked if the proposed sign and emblem has to be that large. Mr. Drohosky responded because of the distance to the building from Rte. IA the size is right. Kelley stated the hardship being the size of the parcel, layout, and trying to reach the site, does meet criteria. She is of the opinion the sign is for directional purposes only. She asked if the sign would be on a timer. Mr. Drohosky stated the light would go on approximately at 4:30 p.m. and turn off at 9:00 p.m. Ms. O'Brien made a Motion to approve the Variance to allow a sign to be placed above the third floor windows on the east facade of the 100 building with the hardship being visibility and size of the site and the uniqueness of it. This amendment to the sustained approval of the June 16, 1998 Decision. Seconded by John Harden. Motion carries 5 — 0. (Kelley, Ferguson, O'Brien, Koen, and Harden in favor) Administrative Business Ms. O'Brien made a motion to approve the ZBA minutes for July, (no meeting in August) September, and October (2010). Mr. Ferguson seconded the minutes and the motion carries unanimously. Chairperson Kelley stated she does not mind reviewing the minutes. She indicated that she would e -mail them to the board members if they wished. Ms. O'Brien and Mr. Margolis concurred. Meeting adjourned 9:00 p. m.