Loading...
ZBA Minutes 7-26-16t City of Beverly 4 Zoning Board of Appeals July 26, 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, Victoria Burke Caldwell, David Battistelli, Jim Levasseur, Pamela Gougian, Margaret O'Brien, alt. Members Absent: Kevin Andrews Others Present: 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. Paul Sandberg In a petition for a request for a Finding to permit the addition of a fully conforming addition to the first floor dwelling unit in a two family structure (allowed by Variance) in a single family residential district in R10. The property is located at 44 Cross Street. Marshall Handley, Esq. addressed the Board and reviewed the Board's suggestions from the last meeting regarding making architectural changes to the plans. The Board also suggested that Mr. Sandberg meet with his neighbors and address their concerns. Atty. Handley reviewed the architectural changes made and stated that meetings were held with all of the neighbors and their input is reflected in the drawings submitted. Atty. Handley stated the neighbors originally expressed concern that the addition would eventually result in the house becoming a 3- family. Mr. Sandberg is intending to use the space for his own professional use. If the occasion arises, Mr. Sandberg would come before the Board again to request the space be used as an in -law apartment. Ms. Caldwell asked how many square feet the proposed addition would be and Mr. Sandberg responded 668 square feet. The existing building is 1,547 square feet so the proposed addition would not be more than 50 %, the revised plans are about 20% less than the original design. Mr. Battistelli asked if the abutters indicated they would be unable to attend the meeting and Atty. Handley stated they met twice with the abutters and nothing was mentioned. Page 1 of 6 Sarah Weiss, abutter confirmed that the Sandbergs did meet with their neighbors. Ms. Gougian stated she would like to see signatures from abutters in favor. The Board reviewed which abutters are in favor and which are against and where they are in relation to the property. Mr. Battistelli stated his concern is this would result in a 3- family. Ms. Gougian stated she doesn't see the logic in putting an in -law apartment on a 2- family home. The Board members extensively discussed the pros and cons of making the Finding and the likelihood that the applicant would then request it be used as an in -law apartment. The Board members further explained how the building plans were significantly more detrimental to the neighborhood. MOTION: Ms. Caldwell moved to close the public hearing. Second by Ms. Gougian. All in favor. Motion carried. MOTION: Mr. Levasseur moved to grant a Finding to permit the addition onto the fully conforming 2- family structure in the R10 district, subject to the plans submitted. Second by Mr. Battistelli. Votes Opposed 5 -0 (Margolis, Battistelli, Levasseur, Caldwell, Gougian) Motion failed. Mr. Margolis gave the applicant an opportunity to reconsider and the applicant denied the opportunity. B. 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. Ms. Caldwell and Mr. Battistelli are not voting on this matter and the Applicant agreed to move forward with four voting members. Mr. Chakoutis addressed the Board and provided updated plans and distributed handouts to the Board. The updated drawings address drainage plans and distance to abutters. The garage will be moved 5' back onto the property which will provide more off street parking in front of the new garage. The public hearing was closed at the initial meeting. MOTION: Mr. Levasseur moved to grant the Special Permit to rebuild an existing garage, widened by 5' and incorporating the drainage plans shown and subject to the plans submitted. Second by Ms. O'Brien. Page 2 of 6 "Yes" Votes: 4 -0 (O'Brien, Levasseur, Gougian, Margolis) Motion carries. II. NEW PUBLIC HEARINGS A. Michael Keefe - Feldman In a petition for a request for a Special Permit to convert an existing deck into a kitchen/porch using the same footprint. Addition has a side setback of 7.8' where 15' is required. The property is located 20 Somerset Avenue in the R10 zoning district. Mr. Feldman addressed the Board and stated they would like to enclose the existing nonconforming deck within the same footprint. They submitted two letters from immediate abutters in favor. The deck would be lower than the current roofline. No one spoke in favor or in opposition. oard Discussion Mr. Battistelli asked Mr. Feldman if since they have a deck now are they going to want a deck and Mr. Feldman responded they are planning on keeping an existing strip of deck, just enough for a grill. Mr. Feldman approached the Board and showed them a photo of the deck strip they would like to keep. MOTION: Mr. Levasseur moved to close the public hearing. Second by Mr. Battistelli. All in favor. Motion carries. MOTION: Mr. Battistelli moved to grant a Special Permit for 20 Somerset Avenue to enclose an existing, nonconforming deck within the same footprint, subject to the plans submitted. Second by Ms. Gougian. "Yes" Votes: 5 -0 (Levasseur, Battistelli Gougian, Margolis, Caldwell) Motion carries. B. Attorney Alexander on behalf of Edward & Julia King In a petition for a request for a Finding to allow the removal of a shed and a garage that is nonconforming as to rear yard setback with a new garage that will replace the existing garage and shed with same nonconforming rear yard setback. The property is located 129 Colon Street in the R10 zoning district. Atty. Alexander addressed the Board and stated the applicants have owned the property for 20 years and Mr. King is constantly improving the property. The existing garage is in tough shape and so they are proposing to demolish and rebuild the garage and move the shed. The property is right on the corner of Colon Street and Spring Street. All direct abutters have signed in favor. The proposed replacement garage is not substantially more detrimental to the neighborhood than the existing garage. It's a significant improvement. No one spoke in favor or in opposition. Page 3 of 6 Mr. Levasseur asked where the shed is being moved to and Atty. Alexander stated it will be relocated on the Lot, meeting all setbacks. Mr. Margolis asked what the size of the shed is and Mr. King stated it's a 10' x 12' moveable, custom shed that looks like a little house. Ms. Gougian asked if there will be plumbing in the garage and the Mr. King stated no, just electricity. Ms. Gougian asked if the garage is the same height as the house and Mr. King stated its 22' high, which is 3' lower than the house. Mr. King stated the first floor will be used for woodworking and his wife will use the second level for arts and crafts. MOTION: Ms. Gougian move to close the public hearing. Second by Mr. Battistelli. All in favor. Motion carries. MOTION: Mr. Battistelli moved the Board to make a Finding to permit the removal and rebuild of the garage, as it will not be more detrimental to the neighborhood, subject to the plans submitted. Second by Mr. Levasseur. "Yes" Votes: 5 -0 (Levasseur, Battistelli, Gougian, Margolis, Caldwell) Motion carries. C. Attorney Alexander on behalf of Watts Street LLC In a petition for a request for a Variance to allow an existing two family building at 12 Ropes Street and 16 -18 Ropes Street be converted to a 3- family building, all units to be within the existing footprint and envelope of the building. The property is located 12 Ropes Street and 16- 18 Ropes Street in the RMD zoning district. Atty. Alexander addressed the Board on behalf of the applicant and stated the property is located at 12 -16 Ropes Street. It is made up of a couple of Lots. The existing 2- family building is really large and according to the Assessors' records it is over 4,000 square feet. The Applicant is seeking to, within the existing footprint, construct a 3 -unit dwelling. Other than improvements, there will be no exterior changes, all construction will take place in the interior. Unit 1 would have 1,912 sq ft.; Unit 2 would have 1,395sq ft.; and Unit 3 would be 1,458 sq. ft. Each unit would have two off street parking spaces. The applicant is seeking zoning relief to leverage investment and improve the neighborhood. The .building is really oversized, it was built when many families had 4 to 8 children. The zoning ordinance does provide for a Variance to be taken into account. It will have a positive impact on the neighborhood. No one spoke in favor or in opposition. Board Discussion Mr. Margolis asked if there is any anticipation to then turn the building into 4 or 5 units and Atty. Alexander stated no. Page 4 of 6 Ms. Gougian asked how many bedrooms each unit would have and Atty. Alexander stated Unit 1 would have 2 bedrooms and Units 2 and 3 would have three bedrooms each. Mr. Battistelli asked Atty. Alexander to confirm and clarify that Unit 3 will have two access /egresses. Ms. Caldwell stated they wouldn't be able to receive a building permit otherwise. Ms. Caldwell asked what the exterior of the building will look like and Atty. Alexander stated it will remain the same, just fixed up. Ms. Gougian asked if it will be painted and applicant confirmed. MOTION: Mr. Levasseur moved to close the public hearing. Second by Mr. Battistelli. All in favor. Motion carries. MOTION: Mr. Battistelli moved to grant the Variance to convert the existing 2 -unit building into 3 -units as it will not be detrimental to the neighborhood, it will increase property values, the hardship as stated is that the two existing units are too large to be maintained at a profit and denial of a Variance would deny reasonable use of the property, subject to the plans submitted. On the Motion Ms. Caldwell stated she would like to see the rendering before issuing a Motion and she would like neighborhood input on this project. Atty. Alexander stated almost all the units in the area are owned by Landlords, and occupied by tenants and so it's not conducive to the sort of analysis you would get in a single family neighborhood. The applicant clarified that the building will be re -sided as well. Atty. Alexander stated the building itself is a hardship covered under the zoning guidelines for a Variance. Second by Levasseur. "Yes" Votes: 5 -0 (Levasseur, Battistelli, Gougian, Margolis, Caldwell) Motion carries. III. MINUTES Mr. Battistelli moved to approve the June 29, 2016 Minutes. Second by Ms. O'Brien. All in favor. Motion carries. IV. ADJOURNMENT MOTION: Mr. Battistelli moved to adjourn the meeting at 8:50pm. Second by Mr. Levasseur. All in favor. Motion carries. Page 5 of 6