Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout1983-09-19September 19, 1983 Regular Meeting The BOARD OF APPEALS held a regular monthly meeting on Monday evening, September 19, 1983 at 7:30 p.m. in the Town Office Meeting Room with the following members present and voting: Frank Serio, Jr., Chairman; Alfred E. Frizelle, Esq., Vice- Chairman; Richard J. Trepanier, Esq., Clerk; Walter F. Soule; and Maurice S. Foulds. Associate Member Raymond A. Vivenzio was present. PUBLIC HEARINGS Cant~ Raymond - Variance - Phillips Court The Clerk read the legal notice. Atty. Donald Smith and Mr. Canty were present and made the following presentation: The petitioner applied to a bank to obtain a mortgage. As required by the bank, a plot plan was done and it revealed that the porch did not meet the setback requirements. The porch has been there for 20 years. It was framed in by the Canty's. The porch cannot be moved without a great deal of hardship to the ~titioner. Relief can be granted without derogating from the intent and purpose of the Zoning By Law. In addition, there is a shed which does not meet the setback requirements. It is a couple of feet from the lot line. The shed was built approximately 18 years ago. The former owners of Stevens Mill had no objection. It is not a detriment to the neighborhood. The Millpond condominiums, formally the Stevens Mill, agreed to a 30 foot buffer between the properties and nobody uses the 30 foot buffer zone. No one spoke in favor or opposition to the petition. MOTION: SECOND: VOTE : by Mr. Frizelle to take the petition under advisement. by Mr. Trepanier Unanimous - motion carries. September 19, 1983 -2- Regular Meeting Roberts, Michael - Variance - wav~r.ly Road The Clerk read the legal notice. Mr. Roberts was present and made the following presentation: - He recently purchased the property and the bank's plot plan revealed a violation of 7 inches. - He purchsed the dwelling in June of 1983 and the error is not his fault. No one spoke in favor or opposition to the petition. MOTION: by Mr. Frizelle to take the petition under advisement. SECOND: by Mr. Foulds VOTE : Unanimous - motion carries. Lanigan, James and Deary, Alan - Special Permit T Waverly Road The Clerk read the legal notice. Mr. Deary and Mr. Lanigan were present and made the following presentation: - They are proposing to add a third apartment to an existing two family dwelling at 144-146 Waverly Road. - The property is run down and the income from a third unit is needed to properly restore it. - They have already painted the house and had a new roof put on. - There is ample space for parking on the lot. - The neighborhood is comprised of multi family dwellings. - There is a shared'driveway which leads to Morris Street. - The garage on the plan has been razed. Speaking in favor of the petition were Mr. and Mrs. Scire. No one spoke in opposition. MOTION: SECOND: VOTE : by Mr. Frizelle to take the petition under advisement. by Mr. Trepanier Unanimous - motion carries. September 19, 1983 -3- Regular Meeting Gustus, Leonard - Variance - Turnpike St. The Clerk read the legal notice. Mr. Gustus was present and made the following presentation: - He asked the Building Inspector about erecting a sign and was told that because there is an existing sign on the premises, he would need a variance. - He is the proprietor of "The Farmer's Market" on Route 114 and has a problem with recognition. - Route 114 is very heavily traveled, but the cars travel very fast and go right by his store and the sign would benefit his business. - He has investigated other possibilities, such as attaching a sign to the existing sign but they did not work out. The company he rents from would not allow it. - The application states that he is proposing a 3' x 5' sign, but that could change. - He is proposing a sign similar to the Sunoco sign. - He has been informed by the sign company that it must be at least 13 feet from the ground. - The sign will be lit and will be a "Coca-Cola" sign with his store name on it. No one spoke in favor or opposition to the petition. MOTION: by Mr. Frizelle to take the petition under advisement. SECOND: by Mr. Foulds VOTE : Unanimous - motion carries. Bulger Animal Hospital - Variance - Chickering Road The Clerk read the legal nOtice. Dr. John Prentiss was present and made the following presentation: - They have a recognition problem. - Because of the trees, the hospital is very hard to see. - They are proposing to ban§ a sign above the island in front of the hospital. September 19, 1983 -4- Regular Meeting Bulmer - continued - The size of the sign is negotiable, but it will be low key. - They would like to have lights facing either side shooting down on the sign. - He is proposing approximatley 10 feet from the ground. - The sign will be on the inside of the property line, but will overhang on State property. - A setback variance is being requested. - There is a berm with a curb cut, so the sign cannot be placed elsewhere. No one spoke in favor or opposition to the petition. MOTION: by Mr. Frizelle to take the petition under advisement. SECOND: by Mr. Trepanier VOTE : Unanimous - motion carries. Elander, Frank - Variance - Chestnut St. The Clerk read the legal notice. Attorney Gerald Lewis, representing the petitioner, made the following presentation: - The dwelling is 30 years old and conformed to zoning when it was constructed. - The ~titioner wishes to construct an addition to the dwelling and cannot meet the setback requirements. - The house is so situated on the 1Qt that the addition will not derogate from the intent of the Zoning By Law. - The Building Inspector inspected the property and agreed that the addition can only go where it is indicated on the plans. - The proposed addition is 14' x 13%' and is necessary as the result of a growing family. - The application states that it will be 16 feet from the street but it will be 20 feet. at the widest point. - The neighbors were notified and have not objected. - The lot is undersized, but sufficient to accomodate the addition. September 19, 1983 -5~ Regular Meeting Elander - continued - The only variance needed is from the feet required from the lot line. The current setback is 24 feet. - The petitioner is not in a position to purchase a larger home. - The proposed addition is designed to blend in with the rest of the house. No one spoke in favor or opposition to the petition. MOTION: by Mr. Frizelle to take the petition under advisement. SECOND: by Mr. Trepanier VOTE : Unanimous - motion carries. Letarte, Richard - Variance - Osgood St. The Clerk read the legal notice. [4r. Letarte was present and made the following presentation: - He would like to build a home on Lot B as shown on the plan. - The lot is undersized and was created by variance in 1965. - Lot C on the plan was also created by variance in 1965 and is now built on. The dwelling on Lot C is between 18 and 20 feet from the lot line on Cotuit Street. No variance was necessary because the homes on Cotuit Street are closer tb the front of the street and there is a rule that applies here that allows one to go 250 feet in either direction and take an average for the neighborhood. - At the time of the original subdivision, the abutters were notified by certified mail and no opposition was voiced. - The hardship is that there is a brook running through the property which is shown as a ditch on the plan. He went before the Conservation Commission on Wednesday and presented a Notice of Intent ~and they have taken it under advisement. They will issue a set of conditions under which he can build a dwelling. The proposed location of the building is approximately the same as the plans he showed the Con. Com. They had no problem that the building could be constructed without disturbing the brook. September 19, 1983 -6- Regular Meeting Letarte - continued The reason he is before the Board of Appeals is the brook. It is a hardship to him because he cannot move the dwelling on the property without requesting a front setback variance. - The dwelling he is proposing is a four-bedroom colonial without a garage. - The dwelling is approximately 26' x 37' - There w~ll be a basement. It should be constructed between June and December and there will be haybales until the improvements take place to hold everything in. He was~ denied a variance in August, but the dwelling was placed in a different spot and it was a different s.tyle dwelling. Also, the b¢ook would have been disturbed. No one spoke in favor of the petition. Speaking in opposition and raising some questions were Mrs. Evelyn Ronan, Mr. Mark Crotty and Mr. Guy MacDonald. Mrs. Ronan, 273 Osgood Street, claimed that the dimensions on the petitioner's plan and the measurements on his mother's deed do not agree. According to the plan he has 283 feet on Osgood Street and the deed says 272.2 feet. On Court Street, it is 293 feet ¥.s. 256 feet. The plan shows 156 feet for her house and her deed states 158.6 feet. The Building Inspector called the engineer who drew the plot plan and he found out that when the other two men did a survey, they took it from a stake that had been left. This makes the lot even smaller. She then presented a copy of Mr. Crotty's deed, which shows 270 feet on Osgood Street. Mr. Letarte argued that his plan was drawn from an actual survey. They were working from the existing book. Mrs. Ronan added that when the lots were subdivided in 1965, they were wrong. Mr. Letarte then added that the 1965 variance included a frontage variance, so even if his plan is off, he has a frontage variance on record. Mrs. Ronan also objected to the petition because of the brook. She stated that one stake is close to the brook and when the brook is running, it will be a problem. They already have an erosion problem. According to Mr. Galvagna, Chairman of the Conservation Commission, the stake is in the wrong place. September 19, 1983 -7- Regular Meeting Letarte - continued He (~lr. Galvagna) talked with the surveyor who said they did not place the stakes with transits but with tapes late in the after- noon in the rain. (stated Mr. Letarte) Mr. G~y MacDonald disagreed saying that it was sunny and they did use transits. The back corner of the house is at best one foot from the center of the brook. If the dimensions are wrong, the proposed house is 15 feet from the property line. The discrepancies in the measurements are too great. He also objected to the reduced setback on the street. The house will sit in the front yard. Mr. Mark Crotty objected to the 15 foot setback. It will not con- form to the rest of the neighborhood. Also, the brook, within one to two feet of the foundation is a problem. It (the house) will be isolated from the rest of the land. The surrounding properties will be affected. In addition, there is a flooding hazard. If the flow is interupted, he is affected. It carries a large volume of water. Mr. Letarte added that on the Conservation Commission plan, they did a lO0-year storm study and there are two lines. Mr. Crotty's house is above the 133 foot line. At~ 133 feet, it dumps on to Osgood Street. His cellar is above the flood line. The Con. Com, will tell him what he can do and what he cannot do. Also, the Highway Surveyor informed him that if the culver~is kept clean there should be no problem. The corner near the brook will be more steel than concrete. Mr. Crotty asked the Board to determine~if another public hearing would be requ~med should the area on r4r. Letarte's plan prove to be incorrect. Chairman Serio replied "No" because an area variance has already been granted by the Board of Appeals. MOTION: by Mr. Frizelle to continue the public ~earing until October 17, 1983. SECOND: by Mr. Trepa~ier VOTE : Unanimous ~r. Letarte requested a Special Meeting. No decision made by the Board. Dushame, Frank and Mavis - Variance - Lexington Street The Clerk read the legal notice. Mr. Dushame was present and made the following presentation: He is seeking a variance to subdivide land on Lexington Street into two lots, one having 8,000 square feet and the other having 12,000 square feet. September 19, 1983 -8- Regular Meeting Dushame continued He is proposing to purchase the dwelling located on Lot A, which is is need of extensive repair. He is proposing to sell Lot B. The ZBL allows by Special Permit the creation of two 10,000 square foot lots, but he chose to seek a variance to divide into 8,000 and 12,000 because of the shape of the parcel. - There are other lots in the neighborhood consisting of 4,000 to 10,000 square feet. - There will be an easement running from Lot B through Lot A for sewerage. There is no sewer on Lexington Street. No one spoke in favor of the petition. Speaking in opposition were Mr. and Mrs. Sebastian Catalano, Dave Prestocz, and Mr. LaRosa. Mr, Catalano stated that breaking up the lot to create two lots would create more congestion. Mrs. Catalano objected to the possibility of a two family dwelling being constructed on Lot B and the fact that the new dwellin§ will be too close to her house. Mr. LaRosa objected because he asked for a variance in 1973 to subdivide land into two parcels and was denied by the Board. Mr. Dushame argued that by selling Lot B, he will be able to buy Lot A and make the necessary improvements. He has lived there for 13 years and would like to be able to purchase the dwelling. MOTION: by Mr. Frizelle to take the petition under advisement. SECOND: by Mr. Trepanier VOTE : Unanimous Webster, Robert - Variance Andover Street- continued public hearing Atty. Robert Lavoie was present and asked to withdraw the petition without prejudice. They need a written determination from the Building Inspector and they are seeking it now. There is also a problem of an abutter who was not notified. MOTION: by Mr. Frizelle to allow the petition to withdraw without prejudice. SECOND: by Mr. Trepanier VOTE : Unanimous September 19, 1983 -9- Regular Meeting OTHER BUSINESS Subatch, John and Linda Thorndike Road Atty. John J. Willis, Jr., was present and explained to the Board that a variance was granted to the Subatch~s and was then appealed by the abutters. It has been settled and an Agreement for Judgement must be signed in the Superior Court. The time limit of one year has expired. Nothing physical has changed on the property. He asked the Board to sign the Agreement for Judgement. Atty. Rossi will sign for the abutters and he (Atty. Willis) will sign for the applicant. MOTION: SECOND: VOTE : by Mr. Frizelle to sign the Agreement for Judgement. by Mr, Trepanier Unanimous - motion carries. Thompson's Restaurant Revised Plans The Board reviewed and signed the plans. DECISIONS Canty, Raymond - Variance Phillips Court MOTION: by Mr. Trepanier to grant the variance as requested. SECOND: by Mr. Frizelle VOTE : Unanimous motion carries. Roberts, Michael MOTION: SECOND: VOTE : Variance Waverly Road by Mr. Trepanier to grant the variance as requested. by Mr. Frizelle Unanimous - motion carries. Lan.igan and Deary - Special Permit - Waverly Road MOTION: by Mr. Frizelle to grant the Special Permit to create a three family dwelling subject to the condition that there be a parking area in the rear of the building to accommodate six (6) cars to be hottopped or paved and that the parking area be created before the building permit to convert the dwelling is issued. SECOND: by Mr. Foulds VOTE : Unanimous motion carries. September 19, 1983 -10- Regular Meeting Decisions - continued Gustus, Leonard - Variance Turnpike St. No action decision to be made at next meeting. Bulmer Animal Hospital - Variance - Chickerin9 Rd. MOTION: by Hr. Foulds to deny the variance. No second motion fails_- decision to be made at next meeting. The Board instructed the secretary to forward a letter to the petitioner requesting a plan showing exactly where the sigQ will be placed. Elander, Frank Variance - Chestnut St. No action decision to be made at next meeting. Dushame, Frank and Mavis Variance - Lexington St. No action decision to be made at next meeting. Pickwell Builders - Review Plans Ashland Street Engineer not present - placed on agenda for next meeting. The meeting adjourned at 10:30 p.m. Secretary