Loading...
2010-10-26CITY 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: October 26, 2010 Place: Beverly City Hall, Council Chamber, 191 Cabot Street Board Members Present: Margaret O'Brien, Acting Chairperson, Scott Ferguson, Jane Brusca, and Joel Margolis Alternate Members: Sally Koen Others Present: Diane Rogers — Clerk for the Board Absent: Day Ann Kelley, Chairperson, Alternate Members Pamela Gougian and John Harden. Building Commissioner /Zoning Officer — Steve Frederickson Acting Chairperson Margaret O'Brien opened the meeting to the public at 7:00 p.m. She announced that the first case would be a continuance from the July 27, 2010 meeting regarding property located at 26R Michael Road. 26 R Michael Road — R -10 Zone — Gilbert A. Norwood, Trustee Variance Request (Voting on this case July 27, 2010 was Sally Koen) Attorney Thomas Alexander stated on July 27, 2010 he continued this proposal until tonight's meeting. He had asked if the street was paved 100 -feet rather than the 51 -feet that he had proposed, would the neighbors approve this proposal for the portion of the street that had not been paved. Attorney Alexander stated he was requesting a continuance on this proposal until the next scheduled meeting because the case was going before the Planning Boards Sub Division. Mr. Ferguson made a motion to continue the public meeting to the November 29, 2010, regular meeting of the Board on the above - referenced request, regarding property located at 26R Michael Road. Seconded by Mr. Margolis. Motion carries 5 — 0. (O'Brien, Ferguson, Margolis, Brusca, and Koen voted in favor) 16 Overlook Avenue — R -10 Zone — Daniel J. Duggan Section 6 Finding Request David M. Halotis, AIA spoke on behalf of the Duggan's. He stated he was requesting to place /build a second floor on the existing foundation on a nonconforming dwelling. The addition is to contain (3) bedrooms, bath, and laundry. Mr. Duggan stated the proposed plan would provide more living space. He added that the footprint would remain the same. Photographs of the dwelling were submitted to the Board to review. A petition was submitted with 13 neighbors signatures stating they were in favor of this proposal. Acting Chairperson Margaret O'Brien asked if anyone in the public had any questions or comments regarding this proposal. No members of the public spoke in favor or opposition to this petition. Ms. O'Brien asked the Board Members for their questions and comments. Ms. Brusca asked where the 2 -foot overhang was located. Mr. Halotis discussed the drawings that were provided to the Board for review. Mr. Ferguson asked if there were any two -story dwellings in the neighborhood? Mr. Duggan responded that there were 2 -story structures in the rear of this property. Mr. Margolis stated he did not have any concerns regarding this proposal. Acting Chairperson, Margaret O'Brien stated she had made a site visit and believed this proposal was appropriate and would not be substantially more detrimental than the existing nonconforming structure to the neighborhood. A motion was made by Mr. Margolis to grant the Section 6 Finding to the Duggan's at 16 Overlook Avenue subject that the plans submitted with the application 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. Brusca. Motion carries 5 — 0. (O'Brien, Ferguson, Margolis, Brusca, and Koen in favor) 215 Hart Street — R -45 Zone — Larry C. Kenna Variance Request Mr. Kenna spoke on his own behalf. He stated he was requesting to extend existing screened in portion of back deck/porch approximately 12 -feet by 14 -feet over existing open portion of back deck/porch and to roof over new portion with a flat roof and appropriate railings. Access to the flat roof will be from a door installed in the existing dwelling structure. He added a variance was obtained October, 1994 because of the 5- feet encroachment upon the rear yard setback. If this request is granted the existing 2 open portion of the rear deck/porch will be screened. Mr. Kenna stated the proposed work would not involve any additional encroachment or substantial change in use. He added that a tree had fallen upon the deck and the family decided to extend the screen porch. Acting Chairperson Margaret O'Brien asked if anyone in the public had any questions or comments regarding this proposal. No members of the public spoke in favor or opposition to this petition. Ms. O'Brien then asked the Board members for their questions and comments. Ms. Brusca discussed the drawing design with the petitioner. Mr. Ferguson asked if the existing deck has sono tubes. Mr. Kenna stated the deck did not have a foundation. Mr. Ferguson asked if the proposed screened porch would be heated and have electricity. Mr. Kenna responded that there would be no insulation but that he might have some electrical plugs. Ms. O'Brien asked that the hardship associated with the variance be discussed. Mr. Kenna stated there was a slight drop off on his property line and there was also ledge. He added he obtained a variance in 1994 for a 5 -feet encroachment upon the rear yard setback. Mr. Margolis stated he had no concerns as long as the proposed addition was not enclosed and heated. A Motion was made by Mr. Ferguson to continue the hardship in the 1994 Decision that the Board finds that owing to conditions affecting this parcel of land, but not affecting the Zoning District generally in which it is located, a liberal enforcement of the provisions of the Zoning Bylaws will involve substantial hardship to the applicant and the desired relief may be granted without substantial detriment to the public good and without substantially derogating from the intent and purpose of the Zoning Ordinance. Also, because of the hardship of ledge upon the property which makes this the only location to place the proposed addition where it is with the following two conditions: 1. This is to remain a one -story screen porch and not to be winterized. 2. The volume not to be increased in height or depth. Seconded by Mr. Margolis. Motion carries 5 — 0. (O'Brien, Ferguson, Margolis, Brusca, and Koen in favor) 4 Longview Drive — R -10 Zone — Philip D. Haefner, III Variance Request Attorney Wm. O'Hare spoke on behalf of the Haefner's. He stated he was requesting to reduce the side yard setback requirement from 15 -feet to 3 -feet to build an attached one - car garage (17 -feet by 36 -feet) to the left side of the existing structure. No other reductions to the setback requirement are sought. Atty. O'Hare stated that most of the dwellings on the street have attached garages. He added that petitioner is nearing retirement and needs the security and safety of an enclosed garage. Atty. O'Hare stated 3 the hardship associated with this variance request is that there is no other place to locate a garage on this 6,500 square foot lot. Photographs of the dwelling were provided for the Board to review. Robert Landers, 11 Eagle Ct., Ipswich, MA, drew elevation drawings, first floor plan, and foundation plans. A letter in support of the proposal from direct abutting neighbor Mrs. Constance S. Wayman of 567 Cabot Street was submitted to the Board. Acting Chairperson Margaret O'Brien asked if anyone from the public had questions or comments regarding this petition. No members of the public spoke in favor or opposition to this petition. She then asked the Board members for their questions and comments. Ms. Koen stated she does not see any problems with this proposal especially where the closest neighbor wrote a letter in support. Mr. Margolis commented that the depth of the structure is larger than a one -car garage. He added he was of the opinion that there was enough space to park two vehicles. Mr. Margolis asked if the large tree in the yard would be cut down. Mr. Haefner responded that that tree would have to be cut down but that he would plant another. Mr. Ferguson stated the existing dwelling was 38 '/z by 24 '/2 which, would be approximately 747 square feet. The new proposal would be 17 -feet by 36 -feet which would double the footprint. He questioned what the hardship was. Atty. O'Hare responded the Haefners had no place to park their vehicles and they are so close to Cabot Street. Mr. Ferguson responded that he did not feel that was a hardship. He stated he had a problem with the depth, which is too long. He added this proposal is a large addition upon a small lot. Ms. Brusca concurred. She added it appeared there would be a second floor on the proposed garage whether they use it for storage or not, she had no idea. She believed the vehicles could be parked in the rear of the yard or a one -car garage could be built in the rear of the property. She stated she was not in favor of this proposal. Attorney O'Hare stated it was clear to him that the plan submitted would have to be modified. Ms. O'Brien stated the architect could modify the plan and speak to the Building Commissioner if needed. Ms. Brusca stated this in a nonconforming lot, which could be a hardship. Attorney O'Hare requested to continue the proposal until the next scheduled meeting. A motion was made by Mr. Ferguson to continue and modify this garage proposal at 4 Longview Drive until the next schedule meeting November 29, 2010. Seconded by Brusca. Motion carries 5 — 0. (O'Brien, Ferguson, Brusca, Margolis, and Koen in favor). 36 Lexington Drive - R -10 Zone — James and Andrea Trefry Special Permit/Finding Request Mr. Trefry spoke on his own behalf. He stated he was requesting to add a second floor to the existing 1' /z story nonconforming cape style dwelling 24 -feet by 32 -feet w/ two 0 dormers to increase size of bedrooms and bath for his two daughters. Mr. Trefry added that several of the neighboring dwellings have expanded to have full second floors. He stated the contractor will work during the appropriate hours, a dumpster will be located in the driveway, and that there was plenty of parking spaces in front of the dwelling and in the driveway for workers. Mr. Trefry stated the addition would remain on the same footprint. Acting Chairperson Margaret O'Brien asked if anyone in the public had comments or questions regarding this petition. No members of the public spoke in favor or opposition to this petition. Ms. O'Brien then asked the Board members for their comments and questions. Ms. Brusca asked if the plans presented to the Board were adequate to obtain a building permit. Ms. O'Brien stated she made a site visit and found that there is a 3 -story colonial designed dwelling next door to this property. She added that the shape of the lot and the location of the dwelling upon it are unusual. Mr. Ferguson stated he was concerned because there were no elevation drawings provided to the Board. Mr. Margolis and Ms. Koen had no questions at this time. A motion was made by Mr. Ferguson to grant the Section 6 Finding requested at 36 Lexington Drive that the proposed extension or alteration would not be substantially more detrimental than the existing nonconforming structure to the neighborhood. That the criteria set out in the Beverly Zoning Ordinance at Section 29 -27 C (2) a, c, d, e, & f have been met; That the plans submitted be incorporated into, the Board's decision. Noted the plans submitted are deficient. Petitioner is to present proper elevation drawings at the Building Commissioner's office before obtaining a building permit. Seconded by Ms. Brusca. Motion carries 5 — 0. (O'Brien, Margolis, Brusca, Ferguson, and Koen in favor) 28 Beckford Street — RMD Zone — Darlene Nunez Section 6 Finding Request Mr. Kevin Smith, spoke on behalf of his sister Ms. Nunez. He stated he was requesting to add a 3 story to an existing one - family nonconforming dwelling to increase size of bedrooms and bath. He added the 3r story would become bedrooms with ' /z bath; one bedroom on the 2nd floor will become hallway /stairway to 3r story. A patio deck will also be added to the proposed addition. Photographs of the property and drawings of the proposed 3r floor were provided for the Board to review. Acting Chairperson, Margaret O'Brien asked if anyone from the public had any questions or comments regarding this proposal. No members of the public spoke in favor or opposition to this petition. She then asked the Board members for their questions and comments. Mr. Ferguson asked if construction had begun at this property. Mr. Smith responded that he had taken out a permit for windows. Ms. O'Brien stated she had concerns with the plans that were submitted with this proposal. Mr. Margolis concurred. He commented the pitch on the roof was odd. Ms. Brusca stated she would like scaled drawings on this proposal. A motion was made and seconded to continue the proposal at 28 Beckford Street to the next scheduled meeting November 29, 2010 and to have a revised set of plans. Motion carries 5 — 0. (O'Brien, Ferguson, Brusca, Margolis and Koen in favor) 675 -C Hale Street — R -90 — Jay H. Goldfarb, Trustee Finding Request Attorney Mark Glovsky spoke on behalf of the petitioner. He stated he was requesting a determination that alteration of the existing, nonconforming single - family dwelling and increase of building height from 36 -feet — Iinch to 41 -feet — 6 inch, as filed will not be substantially more detrimental to the neighborhood and shall not create a new non- conformity. The former Updike property was purchased in June of 2010 and contains approximately 7,964 square feet of floor area in a three - story, 18 -room single - family dwelling that is 115 years old. The applicant, Jay H. Goldfarb, Trustee could not attend tonight's meeting, but he is proposing to raze and reconstruct what was the "servants quarters" a portion of the existing single - family dwelling and garage on the property. The height of the existing dwelling is 36 -feet 1 -inch and therefore, nonconforming. On Account of topographical conditions, the height of the renovated dwelling will be 40 -7, although the ridgeline of the new portion of the dwelling will not exceed the ridgeline of the existing dwelling. The refined plans 40- feet -7" will now allow for safer entry to the dwelling. Atty. Glovsky stated the property contains 11.59 acres of land, located near West Beach in an R -90 Zoning District. He added that the existing dwelling is well screened from abutting properties and the proposed additions will not be visible from improvements on abutting properties. The failed septic system on the property will be removed and the dwelling will be connected to the municipal sewer system. Breuker Design, LLC discussed the plans with the Board. There will be a revised driveway, new garage level, a basement plan level, for storage and new workshop, new multi story addition with roof decks, new terraces, two new bedrooms with new bath on second floor, new family room on first floor with new hall and new office. The following abutting neighbors signed a petition in favor of the proposal: 1. Ralph B. Vogel of 675 A Hale Street 2. Earnest Godshalk of 675 B Hale Street 3. Robert Seamans of 675 E Hale Street Acting Chairperson Margaret O'Brien asked if anyone from the public had any questions or comments relative to this petition. They're being no one present she then asked the Board members for their questions and comments. 31 Mr. Ferguson asked if blasting would be done. Atty. Glovsky responded that minimal blasting would be done but that it would not impact the neighborhood. Mr. Margolis and Ms. Keon had no question at this time. Mr. Ferguson stated he believed the proposed angled garage was a good plan. He asked if the dwelling would remain a one - family. Mr. Alsop affirmed that it would. Ms. O'Brien stated she had made a site visit and believed this proposal would not be more detrimental than the existing nonconforming structure to the neighborhood. A motion was made by Mr. Ferguson to grant the Finding requested at 675 C Hale Street that the proposed alteration will not be substantially more detrimental than the existing nonconforming structure to the neighborhood; that having considered the special permit criteria set out in the Beverly Zoning Ordinance at Section 29 -27 C (2) a, c, d, e, & f, the Board finds those criteria are satisfied. Seconded by Mr. Margolis. Motion carries 5 — 0. (O'Brien, Ferguson, Margolis, Brusca, and Koen in favor) Meeting adjourned 8:45 p.m. 7