ZBA Minutes 8 24 2017"n�_.._, ice= O _.
u 4d P fa p
Vi a,lViaU�i_. m D W N g4 1'`, piql �.id k`
�llr+''�6�3 Po�j 1°•+'a"'r m i� v=N'= q -;.r asds"•�r -reb, °I U `".�J y �Jm ,s '+s.'' _1 r �' n
s�zHt'
hF _ '� ^ \@ `: "'. '_ MI ti 4 A x .:��� €� W.� Y�i!s .A.SA�pyl•4 {Pr� @ la l) 6?` . " s. '�' l Ig Y T' �jS f�4' R o p P 'f �" 9�''`�1 "e o d F ^' AT f r e� uu u
�� AP ��19"s '- �� ���'����491��Y�� .dr 9'� �4N �, � `�II � i � �J 1 c� �110.?��II C`I �'}
� n� � � a
r "W�.�Vi�����- �;�����tl �d ro r
il e -s= �a�� '�l��r� ��,'�,��i
OTy� °�`�.ks`. ��'A��- 7°`' �'lou3 1 . 0P. uSm4
v �
6'Wal -^�` 45eyml W
i'� (k Lr t
'r=> -.� `'ale°u'.'� 0. , ��i� } �!� >`����+
�
u'a��, l��nY s ��'�U i R§> ��� _.I�'rii����$U��;� ��d�a���i ��'_����� �.����J Ui a��� U ��.� -•5 f➢i?�1�� 94 ' 384 a 9l l'�'a��f� u F?.9 � �fl��+��ll���'e�. `�"
6i
��C`Q 3 w Up i �3t ilane U C')Y%ifi r "
N .
��aq - x `PNs�i'�� -k &, "r 60.:i 4`{- P ��4 i I W. a- �n � 8'` Val'
A NA n a T te n. k k ! ^ - � I t � .$y ff a
7 it`® �S .�'" tad "��w 6�k� "�!6 � ' fl�� OU ° � ryj al N ®F� �ni a €r - WA Ih=,?4 ev !d � LL MI i" p:
r _ - yr m � 3 � i �2 � �w c;�m�� :v�. c.�.
�4.�"'�+t4" r�1, • iP `'II��a 5"ri•aR� °�` "� 31�� .'9"i �d��� �.�a ID��mlll9in' � O'' `V'E �� ��r9�,f uld ��� �<�r.+���:,;
f I m> 1Ii1 N j � s. -7L �_t a ` ' �.., ¶I¶ - s 4 '� tli�.' tl.a W
h �!.' �� Y��� 6(d C9�.m jy bill s�Tn ���5� Fi u�� f4 �'n9! � �J�'�y.J �
I4 - .f 'l3' MAAi Q="99 YAPIY.,. L�i If O ` =E ' try �'�: V ✓.'r` -m.��.
� �'� ll
SIa �3.1���� - � n}� �9��9 � �h 1 Ip�F�- ,Y,��i'
Wi 9 � ' UQ I o t S j F i�S9 R V 1 � �91 �9 ul wools � , i asmag " 8f U{�M +' GMts �:
5 S ` 1P' � , E'ce^r °,�� E: m 9'b W AW L �` 1 � � rr29 —u— ��' t Fm� _�!�'2�wy 9➢ y t�` . �W IU�.' -P��� � FF �� n aa�' a�l"�_I A9 m �j'�`.��:,.� -I�. _�_a.'�$6�9iW z � hd. ��.�.�� �' "..e'.'���
§ r SA I r v P: m rev ft m '° a x w MUSA
mg zgn $.', _ t; - 1- 4;"AUb -nfed o
II6 ���"J9 7wv^t b'�` i�a°�y`.a h r Iv'� fi r'��'h,4rd Go,!"§_ �.lu rd'rh'Mll � @,�Q }S. J a .R I:W Atw l t I j°� ���
'U °" VW_WSA�=�A!,o"A 6;::_U ` - �?��I� i?_u SIG. `°�°.,'y..>`s
u 4 0 1 '1 rr i �� {� J� s
3 1 Sa,�r�r l wUjo 911 ➢nrr l�6� !r., iVG 9I� Wk 11 t �`���.J N_U IfI ZIa �' �a�
r b &21"m '. irZv � a �u II Q ,4° N- i .���' � " E IIPY 5 -d
lih A ob o Y), II " oIm r °r $ ha uun�r ON N! ,me"AS �1!9�"" rrj�' §PO�eh °'�Afl w 91 TINA ' CTS
v� 3IP0 a3� U. - � As.,tina msI IS f ��V�p4 -U al �'9 'I�y
1��� {4�Wg�. �h a A P _. �U4�$ � . /pf��S�W i �$Su ��' 'd ��"A ,. Wjf��" 4�I f4 ��v9��� A�!Uss �^��' �`�` J e' J tea. �,,° }I V�6`�V•. p �'. = - 'sg�; �-� °-�. $ ryft"h w�r��
�
e
yg 0 � i 9u i1 _ui a ix � 1� ) a l r a v c ` ream` � i� �W�1L � x o� u '
_� �� _= e .
p 1 ry - 5.
-pi "� U�4��'f''�
r
`S,kr�1
�
WWS IRvwe�m' ly a�4_ I�raN` ~ ! ' a UW ��flgA c W'9V�1 a -uiew A
a;
- ,.
� n� � � a
r "W�.�Vi�����- �;�����tl �d ro r
il e -s= �a�� '�l��r� ��,'�,��i
OTy� °�`�.ks`. ��'A��- 7°`' �'lou3 1 . 0P. uSm4
v �
6'Wal -^�` 45eyml W
i'� (k Lr t
'r=> -.� `'ale°u'.'� 0. , ��i� } �!� >`����+
�
u'a��, l��nY s ��'�U i R§> ��� _.I�'rii����$U��;� ��d�a���i ��'_����� �.����J Ui a��� U ��.� -•5 f➢i?�1�� 94 ' 384 a 9l l'�'a��f� u F?.9 � �fl��+��ll���'e�. `�"
6i
��C`Q 3 w Up i �3t ilane U C')Y%ifi r "
N .
��aq - x `PNs�i'�� -k &, "r 60.:i 4`{- P ��4 i I W. a- �n � 8'` Val'
A NA n a T te n. k k ! ^ - � I t � .$y ff a
7 it`® �S .�'" tad "��w 6�k� "�!6 � ' fl�� OU ° � ryj al N ®F� �ni a €r - WA Ih=,?4 ev !d � LL MI i" p:
r _ - yr m � 3 � i �2 � �w c;�m�� :v�. c.�.
�4.�"'�+t4" r�1, • iP `'II��a 5"ri•aR� °�` "� 31�� .'9"i �d��� �.�a ID��mlll9in' � O'' `V'E �� ��r9�,f uld ��� �<�r.+���:,;
f I m> 1Ii1 N j � s. -7L �_t a ` ' �.., ¶I¶ - s 4 '� tli�.' tl.a W
h �!.' �� Y��� 6(d C9�.m jy bill s�Tn ���5� Fi u�� f4 �'n9! � �J�'�y.J �
I4 - .f 'l3' MAAi Q="99 YAPIY.,. L�i If O ` =E ' try �'�: V ✓.'r` -m.��.
� �'� ll
SIa �3.1���� - � n}� �9��9 � �h 1 Ip�F�- ,Y,��i'
Wi 9 � ' UQ I o t S j F i�S9 R V 1 � �91 �9 ul wools � , i asmag " 8f U{�M +' GMts �:
5 S ` 1P' � , E'ce^r °,�� E: m 9'b W AW L �` 1 � � rr29 —u— ��' t Fm� _�!�'2�wy 9➢ y t�` . �W IU�.' -P��� � FF �� n aa�' a�l"�_I A9 m �j'�`.��:,.� -I�. _�_a.'�$6�9iW z � hd. ��.�.�� �' "..e'.'���
§ r SA I r v P: m rev ft m '° a x w MUSA
mg zgn $.', _ t; - 1- 4;"AUb -nfed o
II6 ���"J9 7wv^t b'�` i�a°�y`.a h r Iv'� fi r'��'h,4rd Go,!"§_ �.lu rd'rh'Mll � @,�Q }S. J a .R I:W Atw l t I j°� ���
'U °" VW_WSA�=�A!,o"A 6;::_U ` - �?��I� i?_u SIG. `°�°.,'y..>`s
u 4 0 1 '1 rr i �� {� J� s
3 1 Sa,�r�r l wUjo 911 ➢nrr l�6� !r., iVG 9I� Wk 11 t �`���.J N_U IfI ZIa �' �a�
r b &21"m '. irZv � a �u II Q ,4° N- i .���' � " E IIPY 5 -d
lih A ob o Y), II " oIm r °r $ ha uun�r ON N! ,me"AS �1!9�"" rrj�' §PO�eh °'�Afl w 91 TINA ' CTS
v� 3IP0 a3� U. - � As.,tina msI IS f ��V�p4 -U al �'9 'I�y
1��� {4�Wg�. �h a A P _. �U4�$ � . /pf��S�W i �$Su ��' 'd ��"A ,. Wjf��" 4�I f4 ��v9��� A�!Uss �^��' �`�` J e' J tea. �,,° }I V�6`�V•. p �'. = - 'sg�; �-� °-�. $ ryft"h w�r��
�
e
yg 0 � i 9u i1 _ui a ix � 1� ) a l r a v c ` ream` � i� �W�1L � x o� u '
_� �� _= e .
zoning enforcement. Atty. Williams referenced the Connors case and suggested the Board move
to dismiss the appeal. Atty. Alphen stated the Connors case is not relative due to a zoning
enforcement letter was never sent.
Atty. Williams stated the distinction Atty. Alphen is trying to make is a distinction without a
difference. If the appellants had adequate notice of the building permit, their obligation is to
appeal to that.
Atty. Alphen stated if the Board decides to dismiss the appeal that they should still discuss the
merits of the case should the Court remand the application back to the Board. It would be
helpful for the Board to have a decision on record.
Ms. Gougian asked if the Building Permit was issued as a right then how the abutters would have
received notice.
Thomas Alexander, Esq. introduced himself on behalf of Richard and Lola Eanes and urged the
Board to follow the suggestion of the City Solicitor and dismiss the appeal. Atty. Alexander
stated the Building Permit was issued after a good amount of deliberation and input from the
Building Inspector. The Eanes have spent $65k to build this structure that has statutory
preference as it is an encouraged use on properties. The Eanes did redesign the structure and
complied with zoning. It has been determined by the Building Inspector to be a structure, not a
building and it meets all setbacks. Atty. Alexander stated there is no restriction to building a
structure in the front yard and this application should be dismissed as it was not brought before
the Board in a timely manner.
MOTION: Mr. Levasseur moved to close the public hearing. Second by Ms. Gougian.
Votes 5 -0 (Margolis, Caldwell, Gougian, Andrews, Levasseur)
Motion carried.
Ms Caldwell stated she reviewed the initial letter sent by Marshall Handly, Esq. and she believes
there was sufficient notice to appeal.
MOTION: Ms. Caldwell moved to dismiss the Appeal at 28R Putnam Street for lack of
jurisdiction. Second by Mr. Andrews.
Votes 5 -0 (Margolis, Caldwell, Gougian, Andrews, Levasseur)
Motion carried.
II. NEW PUBLIC HEARINGS
A. Neil and Susan Hannaford
In a petition for a request for a Variance to construct a fiont addition with a front setback of
20.7' where 30' is required and a Special Permit to allow a side setback of 13.5' where 15' is
required. The property is located at 47 Hathaway Avenue in the R15 zoning district.
Bill McKenzie stated the applicants are away and he is present on their behalf. The applicants
are looking to add 10' onto the front of the existing house located on a nonconforming Lot. The
Page 2 of 9
front portion of the home where the kitchen is located is only 12' wide and prevents working in
the kitchen properly. Mr. McKenzie stated the style of the home is the hardship. It is a tri -level
home built in 3 sections and due to the way it is situated on the property, there are no other
options for expansion. The proposed addition would keep with the look of the neighborhood.
No one spoke in favor or in opposition. The immediate neighbors have signed off in favor of the
proposed addition.
Ms. Gougian stated there is room in the back of the house to add on and wouldn't require a
Variance. The kitchen is in the front of the house and it would create a financial hardship for the
owners to have to remodel the whole house to move the kitchen to the back of the house and add
on. Ms. Caldwell stated the position of the existing house and driveway prevents any other
options.
Mr. Battistelli stated he doesn't think this request would be a detriment to the neighborhood.
MOTION: Mr. Levasseur moved to close the public hearing. Second by Ms. Gougian.
Votes 5 -0 (Margolis, Caldwell, Gougian, Battistelli, Levasseur)
Motion carried.
MOTION: Mr. Levasseur moved to Grant the Variance at 47 Hathaway Avenue to
build a 10' addition onto the front of the existing house that will not meet the required set
backs due to the position of the existing structure on the Lot creating a hardship, subject
to the plans submitted. Second by Mr. Battistelli.
Votes 5 -0 (Margolis, Caldwell, Gougian, Battistelli, Levasseur)
Motion carried.
MOTION: Mr. Levasseur moved to Grant the Special Permit for the 10' addition to the
front of the existing house on the noncomforming Lot located on 47 Hathaway Avenue,
subject to the plans submitted. Second by Mr. Battistelli:
Votes 5 -0 (Margolis, Caldwell, Gougian, Battistelli, Levasseur)
Motion carried.
B. John Keilty, Esq. on behalf of Votto Properties, LLC
In a petition for a request for Special Permit to allow for the demolition of an existing structure
and construction of a new single family residence. The property is located at 126 Lothrop Street
in the R6 zoning district.
John Keilty, Esq. addressed the Board and stated he represents Votto Properties. The property at
126 Lothrop Street was purchased on April 26, 2017. There were two neighborhood meetings in
July and August where they met with all of the neighbors and they were well attended. Eight
different addresses have signed off in favor of the petition. The applicants are seeking a Special
Permit to demolish the existing structure and replace it with a new single - family home. The
previous use of the property was a law office. The new footprint of the proposed building is
smaller than the original and so areas of encroachment have now been resolved. The proposed
home will have a two car garage under the house with two levels of living above. It would not
Page 3 of 9
exceed the allowable height of 35'. Bob Griffin, Engineer stated he met with Beverly's
Engineering Department and a drainage plan has been created and approved.
Brigitte Fortin, Architect provided to the Board an overview of the design plans for the new
single family home. Due to a high water table, the garage will be under the house instead of a
basement. The entry way is 4' above grade which keeps with other homes in the area.
Atty. Keilty stated during the neighborhood meetings they discussed possible tree removal and
trimming. There are quite a few trees encroaching onto the property and so they have gotten
permission to trim those trees and are willing to remove any trees, at their cost, that any of the
neighbors choose to have removed.
Toni Musante, 12 Willow Street addressed the Board and distributed a letter and exhibit showing
which homes (GIS map) in the area will be affected by this proposal. Ms. Musante owns 14 -22
Willow Street and is an abutter on two sides and stated she opposes this proposal. Ms. Musante
stated the size of the building is too big for this established neighborhood.
Stefano Basso, 12 Willow Street stated he is a registered architect in Massachusetts and he also
opposes the proposed addition due to the size of the building. Mr. Musante stated the average
height of the building is over 35' and has more square footage than most homes in the
neighborhood and will be on the smallest Lot in the neighborhood.
Mr. Andrews asked Ms. Musante what the names on the map represent and Ms. Musante stated
they are the names of the neighbors who have signed in opposition.
Mr. Battistelli asked Mr. Frederickson to help interpret the bylaw regarding the height relating to
grade.
Mr. Griffin stated they have surveyed the grade of the property at all of the locations around the
building and the average grade is roughly 12 -18" lower.
Ms. Gougian asked what the height of the current building is. Mr. Griffin stated 27' and the new
building would be 8' higher.
Mr. Margolis asked Mr. Frederickson if the Historic Commission will need to review this and
Mr. Frederickson stated the applicants will need to go before the Historic Commission and it
could delay the project for up to a year.
The increase in volume is 34 %, it's a 2,500 square foot house.
Ms. Caldwell stated she would like to see the applicants return to the Board with a plan reduced
in size and height. Mr. Margolis agreed and suggested they shrink the box and reduce the
setbacks, particularly the rear setback.
Mr. Andrews asked for clarification that the garage is not included in the 2,500 square feet.
Page 4 of 9
Atty. Keilty requested to continue the hearing to the September 28, 2017 meeting.
MOTION: Ms. Caldwell moved to accept the request to continue this application for
126 Lothrop Street to the September 28, 2017 meeting. Second by Mr. Battistelli.
Votes 5 -0 (Margolis, Caldwell, Gougian, Battistelli, Andrews)
Motion carried.
C. Alexander & Femino on behalf of Harry and Nancy Coffey
In a petition for a request for a Variance to allow the construction of 3 additional residential
dwelling units in the RMD District on an 18,135 sq. ft lot that already has a building containing 3
residential units. The result would be a total of 6 residential units resulting in 3,022 sq. ft of land
area per unit where the RMD District requires 4,000 sq. ft. per unit. The property is located at 31
Lovett Street in the RMD zoning district.
Atty. Alexander requested to continue this application to the September 28, 2017 meeting.
MOTION: Mr. Andrews moved to accept the request to continue the application for 31
Lovett Street to the September 28, 2017 hearing, subject to signing the Waiver and
Agreement. Second by Ms. Caldwell.
Votes 5 -0 (Margolis, Caldwell, Gougian, Battistelli, Levasseur)
Motion carried.
D. Philip Brienze
In a petition for a request for a Finding to add a second floor onto an existing nonconforming
structure and a Variance to build a two story deck with a rear setback of 19' where 25' is
required. The property is located at 64 Winthrop Avenue in the RIO zoning district.
64 Winthrop Avenue
Lisa McGloin, Esq. addressed the Board and stated the house located at 64 Winthrop Avenue
was built in -1923 and is approximately 920 sq. ft. Mr. Brienze purchased the property as a
foreclosure in April 2017 and is looking to add a second floor onto the existing footprint. The
height will not exceed the permissible height of 35'. The new proposed decks will be 5 x 12'
which is smaller than the existing 92'. The hardship causing the need for a Variance is the size
and shape of the Lot. The angle of the Lot causes only a corner of the upper deck to go into the
setback.
No one spoke in favor or in opposition.
Ms. Caldwell asked what the new square footage will be with the addition and Atty. McGloin
stated approximately 1,800 square feet.
MOTION: Mr. Levasseur moved to close the public hearing.
Second by Ms. Gougian.
Votes 5 -0 (Margolis, Caldwell, Gougian, Battistelli, Levasseur)
Motion carried..
Page 5 of 9
MOTION: Ms. Caldwell moved to Grant the Variance to construct decks that extend
further into the setback based on the hardship of the size and shape of the lot and existing
footprint. Second by Mr. Battistelli.
Votes 5 -0 (Margolis, Caldwell, Gougian, Battistelli, Levasseur)
Motion carried.
MOTION: Ms. Caldwell moved to Find that the use of the frame of the building to add
a second floor to double the size of the square footage is not more detrimental to the
neighborhood than the existing structure. Second by Mr. Battistelli.
Votes 5 -0 (Margolis, Caldwell, Gougian, Battistelli, Levasseur)
Motion carried.
E. Alexander & Femino on behalf of 68 Dane Street LLC
In a petition for a request for a Finding /Special Permit to allow the substitution of the legally
pre- existing nonconforming twenty unit rooming house use with six new two bedroom units to
be constructed within the existing building footprint and for the most part within the existing
building envelope, except for a approximately 719 sq. ft. addition to the rear of the building
above the existing second floor flat roof. The property is located at 68 Dane street in the R -6
zoning district.
Atty. Alexander requested to continue this application to the September 28, 2017 hearing.
MOTION: Mr. Levasseur moved to accept the request to continue this application for
68 Dane Street to the September 28, 2017 hearing, subject to signing the Waiver and
Agreement. Second by Mr. Battistelli.
Votes 5 -0 (Margolis, Caldwell, Gougian, Battistelli, Levasseur)
Motion carried.
F. Heney & Associates on behalf of 4 Bomac Realty, LLC
In a petitro' n for a request to consider the application in regard to 4 Bomac Realty, LLC
requesting a Variance in accordance with Chapter 300, Article VII, S. 300 -42 to use the property
as an Automotive Retail location. The property is located at 4 Bomac Road, Beverly, MA in the
1 R zoning district.
William Heney, Esq., Heney & Associates addressed the Board on behalf of the applicant and
stated they were in front of the Board a short time ago for a Special Permit to store vehicles on
the property. Atty. Heney stated they are looking for a Use Variance to move the Ford
dealership located on Rantoul Street to this location. Atty. Heney provided a legal memo to the
Board addressing the legal issues. The applicant is proposing to replace the existing building
with a smaller building with modern engineering and construction. There will also be a structural
retaining wall that will benefit the neighborhood. The new building would provide a better view
for those traveling on 128. Not all properties in this zone have frontage on 128 and for this
particular Use it would be a benefit.
Several immediate abutters have submitted letters in support.
Page 6 of 9
Atty. Heney reviewed the plans for the Board and highlighted the benefits of this proposed Use.
The IR District allows several Uses by right and other Uses by Special Permit. Atty. Heney
stated that Section 300 -92 of the Ordinance does empower the Zoning Board to issue a Use
Variance.
Brian Kelly, Kelly Auto Group addressed the Board and stated a car dealership doesn't create a
lot of traffic and gave the example of selling 3 cars a day which is about 50% of visitors. Mr.
Kelly stated they did talk to all of the neighbors and discussed putting in a flashing yellow light
to help alleviate concerns relating to getting in and out of the development. Mr. Kelly stated
consumer shopping habits have really changed and most research is done online before coming
in to the dealership. People don't need to make several trips to different dealerships.
Mr. Kelly stated they have an average of 50 employees per location with an average salary of
$70k with a well - funded 401k program and health benefits.
Mr. Margolis asked about cars coming in for service and what that number looks like. Mr. Kelly
stated there would be about 100 cars in and out each day between customers, repairs and vendor
deliveries.
Mr. Margolis asked Mr. Kelly to explain why he came before the Board two months ago and
only requested to store vehicles on this lot and asked if this plan was in place a month ago.
Mr. Robertson and employee of CPI Beverly Microwave (Abutter) read his letter of support into
record.
Paul Herrick, 52 Neptune Street stated he thinks this would be great for the City and the fact that
someone wants to invest that kind of time and money is very telling.
Mr. Stanton, 28 Tozer Road abuts the back of the property and stated he is in favor of this Use
Variance and he thinks Mr. Kelly will build a spectacular building on this site. Mr. Stanton
stated this is a great location with great visibility on 128.
Mark McKenna, Pediatric Associates submitted a letter in favor and Ms. Caldwell read the letter
into record.
Dan Martin, 207 Brimbal Avenue spoke in opposition of this proposal and stated Mr. Kelly did
meet with the neighbors and there was discussion about light. Mr. Mai travels by that
building daily and he will have to look at it when he goes home. Given the location it will be the
gateway to the City, this will be what they have greeting people, a car dealership. Mr. Martin
stated any additional traffic in the neighborhood will be detrimental to those who live there.
Donald Martin, 27 Berrywood Lane stated he is neither for or against this project, he is
concerned about the traffic and the location. Mr. Martin suggested having a traffic study
conducted. The vehicles being serviced will add to the traffic with a 107 cars visiting the location
each day. Mr. Martin stated he has not heard what the hardship is for this Use Variance to be
granted.
Page 7 of 9
Atty. Heney stated no matter what goes into this building additional traffic will be created and
they feel 107 cars is minimal compared to what could go in there. The hardship is the soil. Mr.
Kelly is removing contaminated soil out of the State. That contamination is a financial hardship
for most businesses. This is not a normal shape Lot, it is not shaped like other Lots in the district,
it has a cul de sac turnaround, a power easement they can't go into and there is also frontage
located on 128 which would be detrimental to many businesses. There are many hardships
existing on this Lot that would prevent many businesses from going in there.
Atty. Heney stated Whole Foods has conducted traffic studies for that area.
Mr. Margolis asked if a 21 E was obtained and Atty. Heney confirmed and stated there is an
ongoing remediation. A large portion of the soil will be removed and a vapor film will be put
down before the new building is built to obstruct gasses.
Matthew St. Hilaire, City Counselor stated he has concerns regarding the whole Brimbal Ave
corridor. Mr. St. Hilaire stated he doesn't know if Mr. Kelly's hardships really qualify as
required for the Variance. Mr. St. Hilarre feels people are concerned about the change of their
neighborhood, he thinks they should slow things down.
Scott Houseman, City Counselor stated this kind of relief could have been sought before the City
Counsel. There are 3 City Counselors present because of the impact on Brimbal Ave. due to all
the changes happening up there effecting the character of the neighborhood. Mr. Houseman
stated he is not in favor or against this petition. Mr. Houseman stated the Board should look
closely at the traffic even though Mr. Kelly did a good job of providing information from other
dealerships. The Planning Board looked very carefully at what traffic patterns would look like in
that area but Mr. Houseman thinks the Board should have their own independent study
conducted based on this proposal. Mr. Houseman stated the Board doesn't have any information
on what the final product will look like and what the neighborhood will have to live with.
Atty. Heney stated they did discuss going before the City Counsel and requesting an amendment
to the definition of Service and Repair to include Retail. The Planning Board was not in favor of
this suggestion due to existing IR districts being negatively affected.
Atty. Heney stated there isn't a need for a traffic study, their number of 107 cars is fairly
accurate and even if you tripled those numbers it would still be less than what could be put into
that 40,000 square foot building.
Ms. Caldwell stated she would like to see measured drawings as Mr. Houseman suggested and
also a schematic drawing with Whole Foods and how this will all fit together. Ms. Gougian
agreed and stated the dealership is a piece of the puzzle in that neighborhood. Mr. Margolis
stated he would like more information before making a decision. Mr. Andrews stated he isn't
interested in seeing a traffic study conducted, he is confident that its 100 -200 cars.
Ms. Caldwell stated the criteria presented for a Variance doesn't really blend with a Use
Variance.
Page 8 of 9
MOTION: Ms. Caldwell moved to Grant the request to continue the application at 4
Bomac Road to the October 26, 2017 hearing subject to signing the Waiver and
Agreement. Second by Mr. Levasseur.
Votes 5 -0 (Margolis, Caldwell, Gougian, Battistelli, Levasseur)
Motion carried.
III. OTHER
MOTION: Mr. Levasseur moved to approve the Minutes from the July 27, 2017
meeting. Second by Mr. Andrews.
Votes 5 -0 (Margolis, Caldwell, Gougian, Andrews, Levasseur)
Motion carried.
MOTION: Mr. Levasseur moved to adjourn the meeting at 10:08pm.
Second by Mr. Andrews.
All in favor.
Motion carried.
Leanna Harris, Administrative Assistant
Board of Appeals of the Zoning Ordinance
Page 9 of 9