Loading...
ZBA Minutes 6-28-16City of Beverly Zoning Board of Appeals June 28, 2016 at 7pm 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: Joel Margolis, Chairperson, Jim Levasseur, Pamela Gougian, Kevin Andrews, Margaret O'Brien, David Battistelli (arrived at 8pm) Members Absent: Victoria Caldwell Others Present: Steven Frederickson, Building Commissioner Leanna Harris, Recording Secretary Location: 191 Cabot Street, 3 Floor, Councilor's Chambers Mr. Margolis began the meeting at 7:00 pm. I. CONTINUED PUBLIC HEARINGS A. John Sheehan In a petition for a request for a Special Permit to construct a second floor addition on a nonconforming house with a front yard setback of 24.9' where 20' is required and a rear yard setback of 16.4' where 25' is required. The property is located at 9 Lexington Drive in the R10 zoning district. The Applicant withdrew their application. H. NEW PUBLIC HEARINGS A. Rachel Marks on behalf of Chicken or the Euplant In a petition for a request for a Finding to convert an existing nonconforming garage to office space and to construct a dormer over garage entry door. The property is located 151 1 /a Hale Street in the R10 zoning district. Rachel Marks and Michael Hardiman, Architect addressed the Board. The property is used as a commercial kitchen. There is a garage located behind the property that Ms. Marks would like to renovate and turn it into something more useful for the business such as an office, a sitting area and maybe a shower. The footprint would not change. Mr. Hardiman presented the Plan to the Board. The property is on a nonconforming Lot and a Finding was issued in 2012 confirming the division of the two Lots. Ms. Marks is also looking to make the garage waterproof, install a Page 1 of 10 small heater, new flooring, add windows for natural light, remove the asphalt between the garage and the store and replacing with lawn, pavers, and possibly a vegetable garden. 50% of the work is about fixing up the property. Ms. Marks would also like to replace the existing fence. Currently there is not a good way to store trash on the property so they would like to incorporate a place into the new fence and make an area to store two wheelie bins. The nonconforming use is what brings them to the Board. An improved garage would not be detrimental to the neighborhood. Ms. Marks would like to just improve the property. Public Participation Jennifer Marks, 151 Hale Street Jennifer Marks spoke in favor of the project and stated the improvements would make a better view from her property. Heidi Beckett addressed the Board and stated her family owns 152 Hale Street and is in favor of the Project. Ms. Beckett's only concern is that if Ms. Marks ever sells the house and someone else moves in, the parking situation could be more difficult if the Board allows her to put a shower in the garage that could open the door for a future owner to use the garage as rental property. Board Discussion Ms. O'Brien agreed with Ms. Beckett but stated that right now it sounds like the project is just an office. Mr. Margolis stated he agreed with Ms. Beckett's concern and stated the Board should put a condition in the Finding that no one could ever live in the garage. Mr. Margolis asked how much trash the business generates and whether it requires a dumpster. Ms. Marks stated, to date, she hasn't needed a dumpster. Mr. Andrews stated the plans look great. MOTION- Mr. Andrews moved to close the public hearing. Second by Ms. O'Brien. Votes 5 -0 (Ms. O'Brien, Ms. Gougian, Mr. Levasseur, Mr. Margolis, Mr. Andrews) Motion carries. MOTION: Mr. Andrews moved the Board to make a Finding to allow the garage to be converted to use as a work space with the condition that it cannot be used as an apartment or overnight rental, subject to the plans submitted. Second by Ms. O'Brien. Votes 5 -0 (Ms. O'Brien, Ms. Gougian, Mr. Levasseur, Mr. Margolis, Mr. Andrews) Motion carries. B. Sarah Loscutoff In a petition for a request for a Variance to construct a second floor addition over rear of existing structure. existing rear yard setback is 6' where 25' is required. Addition will have rear yard setback of 4'. The property is located 79 Old Standley Street in the R15 zoning district. Sarah Loscutoff addressed the Board and stated she would like to repair her damaged rubber roof and put a pitched roof. Ms. Loscutoff would like to extend the roof line and put a small Page 2 of 10 bathroom addition on the existing rubber roof. The property is located in the corner of a cul -de- sac, that abuts woods so no one would see the addition Jim Loscutoff addressed the Board and stated he used to be a Builder and further explained the proposed project. Mr. Margolis asked the Applicant to address the hardship required to meet the Variance. Mr. Loscutoff explained the shape of the Lot is abnormal due to the way it was divided. Public Participatio John Boudreau, 78 Old Standley Street spoke in favor of the proposed project. Mr. Boudreau stated the Applicant is very considerate and respectful, doesn't make any noise and takes good care of the property. Board Discussion Mr. Andrews stated where the proposed addition won't be seen by anyone he doesn't have an issue. Ms. O'Brien stated the new pitch of the roof will be in line with the main house and also since the land s oddly shaped it meets the criteria for a Variance. It is in harmony with the general purpose. MOTION: Ms. O'Brien moved to close the public hearing. Second by Mr. Andrews Votes 5 -0 (Ms. O'Brien, Mr. Levasseur, Mr. Gougian, Mr. Margolis, Mr. Andrews) Motion carries. MOTION: Mr. Levasseur moved to grant the Variance at 79 Old Standley Street to construct a second floor bathroom addition with the hardship being the size and shape of the Lot, based on the designs submitted. Second by Mr. Andrews. Votes 5 -0 (Ms. O'Brien, Mr. Levasseur, Mr. Gougian, Mr. Margolis, Mr. Andrews) Motion carries. C. Scott Chakoutis In a petition for a request for a Special Permit to rebuild existing garage and widen by 5' towards main structure. Garage has a front setback of 8.8' where 25' is required and a side setback of 1.4' where 15' is required. The property is located 17 Echo Avenue in the R10 zoning district. Scott Chakoutis addressed the Board and stated he is looking to take his existing garage and widen it by 5' and also push it back 5' onto his property. Mr. Chakoutis stated he is looking to park a car in the garage also use it for storage. The garage will be 16'x20' as opposed to 11'x20'. By pushing the garage back onto the property, he will be able to park a car inside the garage and also have a car parked in front of it, off the street. Public Participation Rachel Abell, 19 Echo Avenue addressed the Board and stated she is a direct abutter and is in favor of the project. Ms. Abell stated that 2015 storms put some pressure on the existing garage. The shape of the Lot doesn't allow much off street parking for the family and so the garage will help with parking and approve the visual appeal by cleaning up the area. Page 3 of 10 Board Discussion Ms. Gougian asked if there is a Plan that shows the specifications of the garage once it's built. Mr. Chakoutis stated the final drawing shows the changes. Ms. Gougian asked what the space between the house and the garage will be and Mr. Chakoutis stated 7 feet. Mr. Frederickson stated the Plans submitted will not be sufficient for a building permit. Mr. Chakoutis stated a retaining wall will have to be built and he will need to consult an engineer. Ms. O'Brien stated the Plans do show the pitch and height of the roof and the dimensions. Mr. Margolis stated they need more detailed Plans and suggested Mr. Chakoutis continue to the July meeting. Mr. Margolis would like to see the full dimensions and distance to the property lines. MOTION: Ms. O'Brien moved to grant the request to continue to the July 26 meeting. Second by Mr. Levasseur. Votes (Ms. O'Brien, Mr. Levasseur, Ms. Gougian, Mr. Margolis, Mr. Andrews) Motion carries. D. John Hughes In a petition for a request for a Variance to replace existing detached 1 -car garage with attached 2 -car garage. New garage to have rear setback of 4' where 25' is required and a side yard setback of 1.4' where 15' is required. The property is located at 12 Baker Avenue in the R10 zoning district. Ms. Gougian recused herself. John Hughes addressed the Board and distributed letters from 3 direct abutters. Mr. Hughes stated on Page 11 of the application is the best drawing that shows the existing single car garage and the proposed 2 -car garage. It is a nonconforming Lots. They are moving the garage away from the property owner to the left and also from the street. The setbacks would be increased and it will be less nonconforming. There is no way to put a car in the garage and the way it is positioned it's not possible to put in a driveway. A 2- car garage would decrease on street parking; in the winter parking becomes an issue. Mr. Hughes stated the hardship is that it's a nonconforming Lot, the shape of the lot and the topography make it impossible to put the 2 -car garage anywhere else on the property. Public Participation None. Board Discussion Mr. Margolis asked what is going to happen with the big tree on the corner of the property and Mr. Hughes stated he is going to try and keep the tree. MOTION: Ms. O'Brien moved to close the public hearing. Second by Mr. Levasseur. Votes 4 -0 (Ms. O'Brien, Mr. Levasseur, Mr. Margolis, Mr. Andrews) Motion carries. Page 4 of 10 MOTION: Mr. Levasseur moved to grant the Variance at 12 Baker Avenue to replace the existing 1 -car garage with a new 2 -car garage, the hardship being the shape, size and topography of the Lot, based on the plans submitted. Second by Ms. O'Brien. Votes 4 -0 (Ms. O'Brien, Mr. Levasseur, Mr. Margolis, Mr. Asndrews) Motion carries. E. Barry LeFavour In a petition for a request for a Special Permit to create an in -law apartment in attached garage. Garage was constructed under Special Permit granted on August 25, 2015. The property is located 9 Virginia Avenue in the R10 zoning district. Barry LeFavour addressed the Board and stated they are seeking to add a set of stairs inside the garage going up into the living room and to also apply for an in -law apartment. Public Participation None. Board Discussion Mr. Margolis stated he would suggest that when the in -law need by a family member ends, the space ceases being an in -law apartment. It cannot become a rental property. Mr. LeFavour agreed. MOTION: Ms. O'Brien moved to close the public hearing. Second by Mr. Andrews. Votes 5 -0 (Ms. O'Brien, Mr. Levasseur, Ms. Gougian Mr. Margolis, Mr. Andrews) Motion carries. MOTION: Mr. Andrews moved to grant the Special Permit to use the previously approved garage construction as an in -law apartment provided that it is not used as a rental and once family members no longer use the in -law, it goes back to being part of the house. Second by Mr. Levasseur. Votes 5 -0 (Ms. O'Brien, Mr. Levasseur, Ms. Gougian Mr. Margolis, Mr. Andrews) Motion carries. F. Charles Mann In a petition for a request for a Special Permit to add an attached 24'x24' to a single family house that is nonconforming due to front lot width and south side setback and a variance to construct garage with a 13.5'side setback where 15' is required. The property is located 21 Riverview Street in the R10 zoning district. Charles Mann addressed the Board and stated he is requesting both a Special Permit for the addition and a Variance for the garage. The existing Lot has ledge about a foot below grade, which forces the position of the garage to the left side of the Lot. The hardship is the topography of the Lot and by moving the garage setback it alleviates them from having to redo the walkways and windows, etc. The garage also adds to the off street parking which is beneficial to the neighborhood. Page 5 of 10 Public Participation Elizabeth Jones, 17 Riverview Street addressed the Board and stated she is in favor of this project and thinks that it will be beneficial to the neighborhood. Mr. Andrews asked Mr. Mann how he intends to use the space over the garage and Mr. Mann stated just for storage. Ms. Gougian asked if it will be heated and Mr. Mann stated he wasn't sure. MOTION: Mr. Levasseur moved to close the public hearing. Second by Mr. Andrews. Votes 5 -0 (Ms. O'Brien, Mr. Levasseur, Ms. Gougian Mr. Margolis, Mr. Andrews) Motion carries. MOTION: Mr. Levasseur moved to grant the Special Permit at 21 Riverview Street to construct an attached garage on nonconforming Lot that does not meet the required setbacks, based on the plans submitted. Second by Mr. Andrews Votes 5 -0 (Ms. O'Brien, Mr. Levasseur, Ms. Gougian Mr. Margolis, Mr. Andrews) Motion carries. MOTION: Mr. Levasseur moved to grant the Variance to attach a 20' x 24' garage, the hardship being the topography, size and shape of the Lot, based on the plans submitted. Second by Ms. O'Brien. Votes 5 -0 (Ms. O'Brien, Mr. Levasseur, Ms. Gougian Mr. Margolis, Mr. Andrews) Motion carries. G. Walid Geha In a petition for a request for a Variance to install a 24'x44' overhead canopy above fuel distribution pumps. Canopy to have a front setback of 12.8' where 20' is required and a side setback of 14.2'where 15' is required. The property is located 586 Cabot Street in the CN zoning district. Marshall Handly, Esq. addressed the Board and stated the Applicant is planning to move fuel pumps to improve traffic flow. It is cost effective to move the pumps and erect the proposed canopy at the same time. The building is a pre existing nonconforming gas station. The Lot is irregularly shaped with frontage on two streets. Due to the shape of the Lot and that it's on a corner, the setback requirement for the Cabot Street side is substantially larger and it makes conformity with installation of the canopy impossible. Currently 16 out of the 18 gas stations in Beverly have a canopy. It's a safety standard that offers better lighting and protection from inclement weather. Attorney Handley stated that a Variance is appropriate due to the irregularly shaped Lot. Public Participatio None. Mr. Levasseur stated the relocating of the pumps will be a significant improvement as it is impossible to maneuver a large car if there are already cars at the pumps. Mr. Margolis asked if the relocation of the pumps will trigger a 21E and Attorney Handley confirmed. Page 6 of 10 Ms. Gougian asked how many tanks are being removed and Mr. Geha responded three tanks. Ms. Gougian asked if the canopy will be lit and the applicant confirmed and stated there is no signage on the canopy, there will just be lighting to illuminate the pumps. Ms. Gougian asked if they will remain full service and Attorney Handley confirmed. Mr. Battistelli stated he agrees that due to the shape and position of the Lot this will be an improvement and will improve traffic flow. MOTION: Mr. Levasseur moved to close the public hearing. Second by Ms. O'Brien. Votes 5 -0 (Ms. O'Brien, Mr. Levasseur, Ms. Gougian, Mr. Margolis, Mr. Battistelli) Motion carries. MOTION: Ms. Gougian moved to grant the Variance at 586 Cabot Street to replace the two service islands with two service islands going in the same direction and one canopy over the pumps, approval is based on the shape of the Lot and will enhance the traffic flow as shown on the Plans submitted. Second by Ms. Gougian. Votes 5 -0 (Ms. O'Brien, Mr. Levasseur, Ms. Gougian, Mr. Margolis, Mr. Battistelli) Motion carries. H. Ralph & Susan Oliver In a petition for a request for a Special Permit to construct a nonconforming 2- family property to a nonconforming 3- family property by converting detached garage into a 1- bedroom efficiency apartment. Modification of 2005 Special Permit. The property is located at 6 -8 Ashton Street in the R10 zoning district. Susan Oliver and her son Brendan Oliver addressed the Board and stated they would like to alter a nonconforming 2- family property to a nonconforming 3- family property by converting their existing garage to an efficiency apartment. The only exterior change would be the front of the property where the garage doors would be removed and replaced by a bay window. There would be a dormered roof that would not exceed the height of the building. There is ample off street parking. They have written approval from direct abutters and have included them in the application. The construction would be of high quality, Mr. Oliver is a builder by trade and would oversee the Project. They have owned the property for 20 years. Mr. Andrews asked for confirmation that the whole garage would be converted to an efficiency apartment and Ms. Oliver confirmed. Mr. Andrews questioned the available off street parking. Mr. Margolis asked Mr. Frederickson if this is allowed in this district and Mr. Frederickson stated the only reason the applicant is able to request this is because its currently a nonconforming property. If they had a conforming single family house in a residential zone, they wouldn't be able request this. Mr. Margolis expressed his concern that this could eventually be turned into a condominium. Ms. Oliver stated that is not their goal and they would be agreeable to that being stated as a condition of the Special Permit. Ms. Gougian stated her concern is that the property is in R10 which is a single family district and it looks like a single family neighborhood. So now they are talking about taking a Page 7 of 10 nonconforming 2- family and making it a 3- family property. Mr. Battistelli agreed with Ms. Gougian that it goes against zoning. Mr. Margolis is concerned about allowing people to convert garages into permanent living space. Mr. Andrews stated that they have to consider that in 30 years this will still be a small house on this Lot. Mr. Margolis agreed and stated this will permanently be two separate dwelling units on one Lot. Mr. Margolis reviewed the options with the Applicant as far as taking a vote or withdrawing without prejudice. Ms. Oliver asked the Board if they could condition the permit that it could only be used for their use, not a rental. Mr. Margolis stated it would have to be direct family members living in both the main house and the efficiency. Mr. Battistelli stated he cannot allow his sympathies for the Applicant to override what he thinks is right for the neighborhood. Public Participation None. MOTION: Mr. Levasseur moved to allow the Applicant to Withdraw without Prejudice. Votes 5 -0 (Mr. Andrews, Mr. Levasseur, Ms. Gougian, Mr. Margolis, Mr. Battistelli) Motion carries. I. Glovsky & Glovsky on behalf of The McKay School In a petition for a request for a Special Permit to erect a 10.3' free standing sign near the corner of McKay Street and Balch Street at 131 McKay Street to identify the new residential project at that property. The property is located 131 McKay Street in the R10 zoning district. Michael Doucette, Esq., Glovsky & Glovsky, addressed the Board on behalf of Windover McKay LLC and stated they are seeking a Special Permit to erect a free standing sign at the new residential community at the former McKay School. The sign will be in harmony with the neighborhood, it will not be intrusive and at the same time be a type of sculpture. The sign will be located near the intersection of McKay Street and Balch Street and there will be landscaping around it. The dimension of the sign and its location in relation to the building are set forth in the application. The sign will be roughly 10'. Mr. Margolis stated the Design Review Board is in favor of the sign and approved the design. Public Participation None. Mr. Battistelli asked for clarification on the height including the base. Mr. Battistelli stated this property currently has some very large banners and Mr. Frederickson stated the banners are not allowed, nor are the ones at Elliot Landing. A Special Permit is needed for the banners. Page 8 of 10 Mr. Andrews stated he is concerned about the size of the sign in a residential area and that although it looks well designed and nicely lit, it doesn't look residential to him, it looks more like a law firm. He is questioning the need for something that large in a residential area. Ms. Gougian stated she is concerned about the location of the sign in relation to the house on Balch Street. Attorney Doucette stated the size of the sign is in harmony with the size of the building and it is visible from both streets from the proposed location. There will be bushes and a large tree which essentially softens it from the Balch Street residences. Ms. Gougian stated she doesn't see the sign tying in with the building at all and that it looks like something that would belong in front of an art related building. Ms. O'Brien stated she thinks the sign is nice looking. Mr. Andrews stated, on its own, the sign is nice, but in that location he questions if something of that size really necessary. Mr. Levasseur stated that schools in that area have large signs. Ms. O'Brien agreed that it looks like a sculpture. Mr. Battistelli stated he doesn't think they should move forward with this sign until they are in compliance with the banners they have out there currently. MOTION: Ms. O'Brien moved to close the public hearing. Second by Mr. Andrews. Votes 5 -0 (Ms. O'Brien, Mr. Levasseur, Ms. Gougian, Mr. Margolis, Mr. Battistelli) Motion carries. Mr. Andrews asked if the lighting turns off and Attorney Doucette's assistant stated the light could be put on a timer and that it's tied into the flag pole. The lighting is mild backlighting, it's not meant to illuminate the area. MOTION: Ms. O'Brien moved to approve the Special Permit for the 10.3' sq. foot sign at the corner of McKay Street and Balch Street, according to the plans submitted as approved by the Design Review Board. Second by Mr. Levasseur Votes 5 -0 (Ms. O'Brien, Mr. Levasseur, Mr. Gougian, Mr. Margolis, Mr. Battistelli) Motion carries. III. MINUTES MOTION: Mr. Andrews moved to approve the May 26, 2016 meeting Minutes. Second by Mr. Levasseur. Votes 5 -0 (Ms. O'Brien, Mr. Levasseur, Mr. Battistelli, Ms. Gougian, Mr. Margolis) Motion carries. Page 9 of 10 IV. ADJOURNMENT MOTION: Mr. Levasseur moved to adjourn the meeting at 8:54 pm. Second by Mr. Andrews. All in favor. Motion carries. Page 10 of 10