Loading...
2015-06-23City of Beverly Zoning Board of Appeals June 23, 2015 These minutes are not a verbatim transcript of the public hearing 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. Meeting Minutes Members Present: Joe Margolis, Chairperson, Jim Levasseau, David Battistelli, Victoria Burke Caldwell, Pamela Gougian, Margaret O'Brien Others Present: Steve Frederickson, Building Commissioner Leanna Harris, Zoning Board Administrative Assistant Location: 191 Cabot Street, 3 d Floor, Room B Mr. Margolis, Chairperson called the meeting to order at 7:00pm L PUBLIC HEARINGS A. Modifications Carolyn Sutton -Dowd The Land Court has remanded the Variance dated September 9, 2014 granted for the property located at 4 Woodbury Street. Ms. Sutton -Dowd addressed the Board and outlined the Remand. Mr. Battistelli asked if there were any other changes and Ms. Dowd responded no. MOTION: Ms. Gougian moved to approve the modification according to the Land Court's Remand of the Variance dated September 9, 2014 for the property owned by Carolyn Sutton- Dowd at 4 Woodbury Street. Second by Ms. Caldwell. Votes 5 -0 Motion carries. Glovsky and Glovsky/Eduardo and Jane Berenbau The Petitioner is requesting a modification of the Finding dated June 6, 2013 for the property located at 245 Hale Street. Mark Glovsky, Esq. addressed the Board regarding a Board decision made in June 2013. The permit will expire June 27, 2015. The Berenbau's had thought they could finance this project by selling a property outside of the country which was more difficult than they assumed. They are requesting the Board to extend the Finding for one year. MOTION: Mr. Levasseur moved to extend the Special Permit from one year from June 27, 2013 at 245 Hale Street granted to the Berenbau's subject to plans originally submitted. Second by Mr. Battistelli. Votes 5 -0 Motion carries B. Continued Hearings Jonathan Currier In a petition for a request for a Special Permit to construct addition at front of nonconforming house. Addition to be no closer to right side line than existing house and will comply with all other setbacks. The property is located at 62 Bisson Street in an R -10 Zoning District. Mr. Currier and his general contractor approached the Board. Mr. Currier distributed updated revised plans to the Board. The General Contractor addressed the Board and explained the revised plans. The proposed floor plan size is reduced but the width is the same. There is no foundation, it will be set on sonar tubes and they will enclose tubes with stucco to better match the house. The roof will remain flat because due to future renovation plans to add an upper level and square of the house. The General Contractor stated it's a small house to begin with. Laundry will remain where it is. It's a cramped house necessitating the addition and mud room. It's a long narrow Lot. They discussed how to add curb appeal to the addition and discussed adding the front door to the front of the addition, instead of the existing side entry door. The front door will be recessed into the corner of the addition showed on the side elevation drawing. Brian Pearson, 64 Bisson Street Mr. Pearson distributed to the Board a signed petition of neighbors opposing the proposed addition (original plans submitted). Mr. Pearson stated his biggest concern is the Lot is only 50' and Mr. Currier is looking to add a 20' addition and stated if he just moves it over 6' he would meet the required setbacks. Mr. Pearson reviewed the revised Plans submitted by Mr. Currier. Ms. Caldwell asked the Petitioner if they are open to moving the addition over as Mr. Pearson suggested and Mr. Currier responded it won't be aesthetically appealing and power lines would have to be moved. The proposed addition does not go past the front of Mr. Pearson's house. Mr. Caldwell asked Mr. Pearson how close his dwelling is to the petitioner's house and Mr. Pearson responded it's approximately 11'. It's also a nonconforming house. Zoning Board of Appeals June 23, 2015 Page 2 of 9 Ms. O'Brien asked if the people who signed the petition are direct abutters and Mr. Pearson explained their locations (and sight lines) in relation to 62 Bisson Street. MOTION: Mr. Battistelli moved to close the public hearing. Second by Ms. Gougian. Votes 5 -0 Motion carries. Board Discussion Mr. Battistelli stated that the at the last hearing he had issues with the pitch of the roof and thought there were alternatives to appease the neighbors and doesn't think the revised Plans are as much as an eyesore. Mr. Margolis and Ms. Caldwell agreed that the appearance in the revised Plans is improved. Ms. Gougian asked if the front stairs will be exposed and Mr. Currier responded they will be enclosed in a covered porch. Ms. Caldwell stated her sense is that the neighbors on either side aren't going to want any sort of addition and so her concern is if the Board don't vote to grant the Special Permit that these people will forever be stuck with what they have. The neighbors will still have plenty of green space in front of their houses. Mr. Margolis agreed that the impact is minimal. Mr. Battistelli also agreed and stated that by investing in an addition property will be better than what it is. Mr. Levasseur stated the new design is definitely improved and more appealing. Mr. Margolis agreed. MOTION: Ms. Caldwell moved to grant the Special Permit based on the revised Plans submitted. Second by Mr. Battistelli. Votes 5 -0 Motion carries. Project Adventure, Inc. In a petition for a request for a Variance from minimum frontage requirement contained in Section 38 -8.D2, to allow the creation of a single - family building lot in an R -45 zoning district with no legal frontage where 175 -feet is required. The proposed lot will be served by an existing common driveway. The property is located at 719 Cabot Street in an R -45 zoning district. Miranda Gooding, Esq. addressed the Board on behalf of Project Adventure, Inc. and stated as indicated in previous correspondence, the applicant has decided to respectfully request a withdrawal of the pending application. Ms. Gooding provided a written request. MOTION: Mr. Battistelli moved to accept the Applicant's request to withdraw the application for a Variance without Prejudice at 719 Cabot Street. Second by Ms. Caldwell. Votes 5 -0 Motion carries Zoning Board of Appeals June 23, 2015 Page 3 of 9 Todd Main/Wm. Heney, Esq. In a petition for a request of an Appeal from an Administrative Decision for the issuance of Building Permit No. B -14 -1599 for the construction of a new single - family dwelling [60' by 42' (4) Bedrooms, (4) Bathrooms, (2) car garage under] at 12 Beaver Pond Road, Map: 83 Lot: 1D, on October 8, 2014 and seeks revocation of said Building Permit on the ground that subject property is non - buildable having merged with adjoining, nonconforming and /or noncomplying property located at 14 Beaver Pond Road, which completely lacks frontage where 175' is required in an R -45 zoning district. Mr. Margolis stated at the last hearing it was determined that this would be a closed public hearing and the only discussion taking place would be to address the remarks made by Attorney Alexander. The Board is in receipt of correspondence from Mr. Tessier and it is his opinion that its after the fact and not in agreement with what the parties had decided. MOTION: Mr. Battistelli moved to disregard this additional presentation by Mr. Tessier because it came to the Board after the public hearing was closed. Second by Mr. Levasseur. Votes 5 -0 Motion carries. Mr. Battistelli stated whatever Mr. Heney believed Mr. Frattorelli intended is the crux of the case. Ms. Caldwell agreed and stated it's a hard decision to make. Mr. Margolis agreed. MOTION: Ms. Caldwell moved to uphold the appeal to revoke the building permit as decided by the Building inspector. Second by Mr. Battistelli. Votes: 4 -1 Opposed Mr. Margolis Motion carries. C. New Hearings Jeffrey S. Bennett In a petition for a request for a Finding to add a second dwelling unit in a single family house on an undersized Lot and a Special Permit to allow parking for the second dwelling to be located on a public Lot within 500' of the property. This property is located at 21 Pond Street in RHD zoning district. Ms. Caldwell read the Application into record. Mr. Jeffrey Bennett addressed the Board and described the proposed project stating he is requesting special permission for the undersized Lot to permit parking at one of the municipal lots a short distance from the property. Zoning Board of Appeals June 23, 2015 Page 4 of 9 Karen Wojick, 18 Pond Street Ms. Wojick stated she owns a two family house in the neighborhood and parking is really difficult. They put in the pay parking spaces and people still park on the street. Ms. Wojick opposes this request due to the parking and that there is already a congestive parking situation. Frank Wojick, 18 Pond Street Mr. Wojick has lived there for 18 years and has seen a lot of changes with all the new development on Cabot Street and Rantoul Street which is fine but now developers are coming in creating condos and there isn't enough parking in these neighborhoods. It's just too crowded to build any more houses unless they can provide parking with it. Mr. Battistelli asked Ms. Wojick if her or any of her neighbors park in public parking and Ms. Wojick responded yes she has. Mr. Wojick stated it's great to have all the restaurants opening and the cinema coming back and to have all these people coming to the City for these things but it's getting more and more crowded in the neighborhoods and there is just no parking. Board Discussion Ms. Gougian asked Mr. Bennett for confirmation that he wants to turn his single family house into a two family and Mr. Bennett responded he is requesting to put a studio apartment in the basement. Mr. Battistelli asked if Mr. Bennett if he intends to put a kitchen in the studio apartment and Mr. Bennett confirmed just a small simple kitchen. Mr. Frederickson responded the apartment is already there but there are egress issues that will need to be corrected. Mr. Margolis asked Mr. Frederickson if it will be approved and Mr. Frederickson stated coming to the Board of Appeals was the first step so the Board could approve the Use. Mr. Battistelli asked Mr. Bennett if he has received any rent from this existing apartment and Mr. Bennett responded his son was living there rent free and then his son's friend moved in and wasn't paying rent. Mr. Frederickson stated they had requested the unit be vacated until the issue was resolved. Mr. Frederickson stated the tenant upstairs has complained about parties going on down there. Ms. Gougian asked where Mr. Bennett was going to fit a second parking space and Mr. Bennett clarified that he would pave up to the lot line. Ms. Gougian stated that part of getting approval for the second unit is having adequate parking for the second unit and she doesn't remember anyone ever being able to use municipal parking as a parking spot. Mr. Frederickson stated that through Special Permit it can be done. Ms. Caldwell read the ordinance on Page 117 and Mr. Frederickson referred the Board to Page 115 of the ordinance where it states if it's in 500 feet a Special Permit can grant permission to use a public lot. Mr. Battistelli asked if they could specify only one occupant be permitted in the studio apartment and Mr. Frederickson responded they could stipulate whatever the Board wants. Ms. Caldwell stated they are zoned for multifamily. Zoning Board of Appeals June 23, 2015 Page 5 of 9 Ms. Gougian stated looking at these pictures the place where he wants to put the studio apartment is an absolute basement, there is no driveway or opening up into the backyard. Mr. Battistelli stated his issue is that they would be approving Mr. Bennett to do this and say that he has parking when none of the neighbors have adequate parking. Mr. Levasseur stated this Board can only say whether it's a one or two family unit and then its up to the Building Department to make sure it complies with the code. Mr. Frederickson stated the Board is just approving the Use and so they could approve it subject to adequate parking onsite, not down the street but he doesn't think it's possible on this Lot. Ms. Gougian stated she was there at 4:30pm today and there was no where to park and so her concern is that the apartment renter gets parking out front and then another neighbor has to go down the street to park. Ms. Caldwell asked Mr. Bennett if he has ever lived on the property and Mr. Bennett responded no it's always been rental income. Mr. Battistelli stated there is a need in Beverly for one bedroom/studio apartments in Beverly under $1,000 /mth. Mr. Bennett stated he can put in the lease that the only available parking is either on street or in the public lot and Ms. Caldwell stated that on the street parking is the issue. Ms. Gougian asked for clarification where the door to the basement studio apartment would be and Mr. Bennett's brother showed her on the pictures where the 4' basement door is and where there are six steps. Mr. Margolis asked where Mr. Bennett is proposing a bedroom egress and Mr. Bennett's brother clarified on the pictures where they will build it. Ms. Gougian asked what would be a reason for not approving a Finding and Mr. Frederickson stated that if it's more detrimental to the neighborhood. Ms. Gougian reviewed the various requirements for a Finding. Ms. Caldwell stated she is still concerned that the parking doesn't meet the space even though by right a two family is permitted. MOTION: 8:20 Mr. Battistelli moved to grant the Special Permit with the stipulation that the basement apartment is a studio apartment by definition and is no more than one bedroom subject to the building code. Second by. Mr. Levasseur. One the Motion Mr. Margolis explained to Mr. Bennett that if the Board denies the Motion then Mr. Bennett cannot come before the Board again with this request for two years. Mr. Bennett agreed to have the Board vote. Votes 3 -2 Motion Denied Zoning Board of Appeals June 23, 2015 Page 6 of 9 Mr. Margolis explained to Mr. Bennett that he would have to come back with substantially different plans to be able to come before the Board before the two years are up. Attorney Alexander explained the process where the Motion can be reconsidered. MOTION: Ms. Caldwell moved to accept Mr. Bennett's request for reconsideration. Second by Ms. Gougian. Votes 5 -0 Motion carries Mr. Bennett requests the Board to Withdraw without Prejudice. MOTION: Ms. Gougian moves to grant Jeffrey Bennett to withdraw without prejudice and return to the Board. Second by Ms. Caldwell. Votes 5 -0 Motion carries. Charles and Anne Polisky In a petition for a request for a Special Permit to demolish a non - conforming 18' x 19' garage to construct a 22' x 23' garage no closer to the rear and side Lot lines. This property is located at 8 High Street in R -6 zoning district. Ms. Caldwell read the application into record and also read the abutter's correspondence into record Ms. Polisky addressed the abutter's letter and explained the unregistered /registered vehicles on the property. Ms. Polisky stated they would like to put up a new garage, the existing garage was put up the 1930s and is metal and rotting away. MOTION: Ms. Caldwell moved to close the public hearing. Second by Ms. Gougian. Votes: 5 -0 Motion carries. Board Discussion Mr. Battistelli_stated he saw the property and strongly suggests the applicant clean up the Lot and remove the unregistered vehicles and withdraw without prejudice and come back to the Board. Mr. Frederickson stated they have received complaints from neighbors that Mr. Polisky is working on cars there and Ms. Polisky responded that he fixes their own cars. Mr. Frederickson stated his concern is that they would be running a business out of the proposed garage. Ms. Gougian asked why they have so many trailers and Ms. Polisky explained one son races cars and the other one races motocross. Zoning Board of Appeals June 23, 2015 Page 7 of 9 Mr. Battistelli stated he is definitely going against this request until they clean up the property. Ms. O'Brien asked if there is a restriction on the number of vehicles you can have on a property and Mr. Frederickson stated there is a restriction on unregistered vehicles and that is enforced by the police department. Mr. Margolis asked Ms. Polisky if she wanted to move forward or come back and Ms. Polisky responded that she is going to talk to her husband and come back. MOTION: Ms. Caldwell moved to approve request to continue, provided the applicant sign a waiver. Second by Mr. Levasseur Votes: 5 -0 Motion carried. 11 Ellsworth LLC /Thomas Alexander, Esq. In a petition for a request for a Special Permit to reconstruct a legal pre- existing two family house on the same footprint that was damaged by fire on November 27, 2013 and subsequently demolished. This property is located at 11 Ellsworth Avenue in R -10 zoning district. Ms. Caldwell read application into record. Attorney Thomas Alexander addressed the Board and stated he is here on behalf of 11 Ellsworth LLC who is seeking to replace, on the existing footprint a two family dwelling that was damaged by fire. They attempted to repair it but it ended up being demolished. The Applicant is seeking to rebuild what was there before the fire. It's been a two family since 1940. Attorney Alexander provided the Board with a signed petition of neighbors in favor. Attorney Alexander went through the requirements. The site is an appropriate location, it has been a two family for 67 years and the neighbors are in favor. It will not adversely affect the neighborhood, it will in fact improve it. There will be no nuisance or hazard created. The two family use is residential, not business. The site has adequate municipal and private utilities. It will comply with the building codes. Attorney Alexander respectfully requests the Board permit this Lot to return to its historic use and look. Mr. Battistelli asked Attorney Alexander if it will be on the same foundation and Attorney Alexander confirmed. Mr. Battistelli asked if the proposed plans showing the front of the house are the same design as previous and it was confirmed Mr. Levasseur asked if it is the same height as the original plan and it was confirmed that it may actually be a little lower. Zoning Board of Appeals June 23, 2015 Page 8 of 9 MOTION: Mr. Battistelli moved to close the public hearing. Second by Ms. Caldwell. Votes 5 -0 Motion carries. MOTION: Ms. Gougian moved to approve the Special Permit for 11 Ellsworth Avenue to allow the reconstruction of a preexisting nonconforming two family house on the same foot print in the R10 zone given that the use is appropriate for the location, property values will not be adversely effected, its not substantial detrimental to the community, it doesn't add any undue traffic, no one is objective and adequate City services are available subject to the Plans submitted. Second by Ms. Caldwell. Votes 5 -0 Motion carries. II. OTHER BUSINESS A. Minutes MOTION: Mr. Levasseur moved to approve the Minutes as written. Second by Mr. Battistelli. Votes 5 -0 Motion carries. MOTION: Ms. Caldwell moved to adjourn at 8:50pm. All in favor. Zoning Board of Appeals June 23, 2015 Page 9 of 9