Zoning Board of Appeals Meeting Minutes
Date: May 10, 2010
Members in Attendance: M Hickey, P Mulkerron, L Godin, S Landgren, T Dooling,
C Odunukwe and K Coughlin
Members Absent: R Havener
Location of Meeting: 3rd Floor School Committee Meeting Room
Time Called to Order: 7:40pm
Time Adjourned: 11:30pm
7:40pm
T Dooling, newly reappointed by the Selectmen was sworn in by Town Clerk, Diane Packer
Time: 7:40pm
Petitioner: Heather Dudko, Agent for Icon and Matthew Reardon, Manager CVS
Petitioner’s Address: 137 West Central Street
Location of Subject Property: 137 West Central Street
Map and Lot: 41:85A
Case #: 2010-010
Relief Requested: Modification to the prior Decision #960032
Audience: None
Voting Members: T Dooling (Acting Chair), P Mulkerron, S Landgren, C Odunukwe, and K Coughlin
Concerns/Discussion: Several Board members visited the site independently and noted that what the application package depicts differs from what is proposed and what exists. S Landgren displaying photos he took on his laptop stated to the Board that more signs have actually been added since the application submittal. L Godin displaying photos she took on her cellular phone shows the illumination of the free standing sign and she stated concern that the sign conformed to the Bylaw. P Mulkerron reviewing the prior decision wanted to know when CVS was allowed to operate 24 hours H Dudko believed that was part of the prior decision. Mr. Mulkerron pointed out that the prior decision limits hours of operation. H Dudko agreed to research. L Godin stated that this site has been reckless in
installing non compliant and illegal signs, the decision allows for two (2) compliant signs only but there are multiple signs on the site. M Reardon and H Dudko stated that if the Board deems appropriate to grants some of the requested signs that the signage that indicates there is a “Minute Clinic” onsite and the site is open 24 hours is their priority. The Board after additional review noted that there are discrepancies to what is existing and what is proposed requested a revised package with all signage indicated.
Action: T Dooling motioned to continue until the June 7, 2010 at 8:30pm in order for the Petitioner to submit additional required/requested information including
1. Sign(s) illumination compliance
2. Revised photos package of all signage, existing, proposed, illegal sign(s), etc.
3. Change of site to 24hours, who/how approved.
7:45pm
M Hickey, newly reappointed by the Selectmen was sworn in by Town Clerk, Diane Packer
Time: 8:15pm
Petitioner: Thomas White, Andrew Cohen Architects, Property Owner Matthew McGinity and Engineer Bob Drake
Petitioner’s Address: 30 Boston Post Road, Wayland, MA 01776
Location of Subject Property: 9 Mercer Road
Map and Lot: 24-90I
Case #: 2010-014
Relief Requested: Chapter 40A, Section 6 Finding, Special Permit – APD and Site Plan Review
Audience: None
Voting Members: M Hickey, L Godin, T Dooling, C Odunukwe, and K Coughlin
Concerns/Discussion: Proposed 3,500 square foot, one story addition. Thomas White reviewed:
· Existing building is approximately 4,000 square feet.
· Proposed addition will be constructed in the now existing parking lot adjacent to the existing building.
· Site is located in the APD.
· Parking: 26 existing spaces, with new addition parking is reduced to 19 spaces, Office Use #27 states 10 are required, based on new addition size 19 spaces would be required.
Property Owner Mr. McGinity reviewed:
· Currently operates his business in Waltham
· Light assembly and office work, at most electronic Phillips head screwdrivers are utilized
Mr. Hickey asked what relief was being requested. Mr. White indicated the proposal requires relief to extend the original front yard non conformity and additionally the proposal also requires site plan review. In regard to the site plan review Mr. Odunukwe noted that the utilities and drainage calculations were not indicated on the site plan. Mr. White stated he was leery indicating utilities and drainage until a final plan was approved. Mr. Drake stated the proposal will utilize the existing sanitary sewer and a rain garden will be installed for run off. Mr. Drake also stated that the Petitioners would be filing a NOI with the Conservation Commission. Proposed signage was discussed; the Petitioners stated no relief was being requested for signage.
Mr. Hickey stated that the Board requires additional review due to the Petitioners request for site plan review.
Action: M Hickey continued until June 7, 2010 at 8:30pm in order for the Petitioner to submit required/requested information including:
1. File NOI with Conservation.
2. Meet with DPW to review drainage.
3. Comply with the site plan review requirements in VI-3.
4. Rendering of any proposed signage.
Time: 8:45pm
Petitioner: Thomas Forance
Petitioner’s Address: 257 Eliot Street, Natick
Location of Subject Property: 11 North Main Street
Map and Lot: 43-475
Case #: 2010-015
Relief Requested: Special Permit in the Downtown Mixed Use Zoning for Multi Family Use with compliant off street parking.
Audience: None
Voting Members: M Hickey, L Godin, S Landgren, T Dooling and K Coughlin
Concerns/Discussion: Mr. Forance stated he is requesting relief to convert a portion of the existing building into three (3) one (1) bedroom residential units.
· Existing 1st floor of the building has one (1) 500 square foot commercial business.
· Proposed to convert the upper portion of the building from one (1) two (2) bedroom residential unit, to three (3) one (1) bedroom residential units.
· Parking is compliant for both uses, there are a total of five (5) spaces, one (1) each per one (1) bedroom unit and one (1) per each 250 square feet for the commercial business, for a total of five (5) required.
The Board thanked Mr. Forance for appearing before the DRB (Design Review Board). Mr. Forance was asked if he will comply with all of the DRB suggestions. Mr. Forance agreed to comply with their suggestions. The Board unanimously agreed that the proposed conversion is an improvement and it is very rare that a proposal in the downtown area has compliant parking.
Action: K Coughlin motioned to approve, subject to conditions.
L Godin seconded the motion.
Vote: 5-0 to approve
M Hickey, L Godin, S Landgren, T Dooling and K Coughlin
Time: 9:10pm
Petitioner: Attorney Glaser on behalf of Michael Goodman
Petitioner’s Address: 43R College Road
Location of Subject Property: 43R College Road
Map and Lot: 30-37D
Case #: 2009-002
Relief Requested: 6 Month Extension request
Audience: None
Voting Members: M Hickey, L Godin, S Landgren, T Dooling, C Odunukwe,
and K Coughlin
Concerns/Discussion: Mr. Glaser stated that due to the weak economy and the properties close proximity to Morse’s Pond the Petitioner is requesting a one (1) time six (6) month extension for the granted Variance, as allowed by Chapter 40A.
Decision #2009-002 was filed with the Town Clerk on May 18, 2009, valid for one year until May 18, 2010, six (6) month extension valid until November 18, 2010.
Action: T Dooling motioned to approve the extension request.
S Landgren seconded the motion.
Vote 6-0 to approve
M Hickey, L Godin, S Landgren, T Dooling, C Odunukwe and K Coughlin
Time: 9:15pm
Petitioner: Peter Giannacopoulos
Petitioner’s Address: 12 Washington Street – Dolphin Restaurant
Location of Subject Property: 12 Washington Street – Dolphin Restaurant
Map and Lot: 44-13
Case #: 2010-016
Relief Requested: Exception from Parking (Advertisement stated “Required Relief” in order to lease a portion of the existing building to “In Shape for Women”)
Audience: None
Voting Members: M Hickey, L Godin, S Landgren, T Dooling and C Odunukwe
Concerns/Discussion: Mr. Giannacopoulos (the Petitioner) stated that based on a weak economy he is requesting relief in order to lease a portion of the building to “In Shape for Women”. The Petitioner reviewed:
· Has been in business for over 16 years.
· Renovation of the space was completed over a year ago relocating the lounge area from the back of the restaurant to the front of the building with the intention of leasing the back area.
· Prior lounge area had 53 bar stools, new lounge area has 33 bar stools, a decrease of 20 seats.
· The restaurant was opened without compliant parking based on concurrent approval from the Building Commissioner and the Board of Selectman; currently there are 27 existing parking spaces.
· A new entrance on Washington Street is proposed to enter directly into the leased area. (As required the Petitioner will be instructed to review the proposal with the Design Review for their input, suggestions and recommendations.)
· Proposed area of lease in approximately 1,450 square feet.
· “In Shape for Women” is by appointment only, maximum amount of clients will be 8 (eight) at any given time, hours of operation are 6am-12pm, closes from 12pm-4pm, reopens from 4pm to 8pm.
· The Use would require 6 (six) parking spaces, 1 (one) parking space for each 250 square feet of area.
· The leased area is proposed to be 1 (one) large room, and 1 (one) office, no showers will be added, the patrons will utilize the existing common area bathrooms.
The Board, noting that the Use is only allowed by Special Permit, has concerns about the Petitioner’s request for relief in the form as “parking exception”. M Hickey stated he believed the Petitioner would have to refile his application specifically requesting the Special Permit. S Landgren read the advertisement stating the relief requested is for the “required relief” in order to lease a portion of the building to “In Shape for Women” T Dooling stated he felt comfortable that the advertisement as it read allows the Board to move forward with this application. The Board concurs. L Godin, Planning Board’s letter, wanted to make sure that the Petitioner was aware that if he ever in the future wanted to convert the leased portion back to the
restaurant use that his “grandfathered” parking ceases. The Petitioner stated he is aware of and does assume that risk. C Odunukwe stated that the Board can view this application from the Special Permit aspect and although the Petitioner does not have compliant parking for the restaurant he does have compliant parking for the Use requested and additionally the Board can determine that the Use is not substantially more detrimental than the existing restaurant conditions. S Landgren stated his belief that the Special Permit is the overriding issue. L Godin and S Landgren determined that if the restaurant was as new use it would require approximately 186 parking spaces. The Petitioner stated he has utilized the site for as much parking as possible, additionally in the evenings the surrounding area can be utilized for additional parking. M Hickey stated that the Board can grant the Special Permit with the conforming 6 (six) parking spaces out
of the existing grandfathered parking spaces. S Landgren stated he was comfortable with that and L Godin added the Board needs to see the greater good in the request.
Action: C Odunukwe motioned to approve a Special Permit to allow for a portion of the existing building to be leased to “In Shape for Women”
L Godin seconded the motion.
Vote 5- 0 to approve
M Hickey, L Godin, S Landgren, T Dooling and C Odunukwe
Time: 10:15pm
Petitioner: John Cosimini
Petitioner’s Address: 10 Brook Street
Location of Subject Property: 10 Brook Street
Map and Lot: 54-30F
Case #: 2010-017
Relief Requested: Chapter 40A, Section 6 Finding to construct a new dwelling on a non conforming lot (deficient in frontage) and a Special Permit to allow for the temporary situation of 2 (two) dwellings to be located on 1 (one) lot.
Audience: None
Voting Members: M Hickey, L Godin, T Dooling, C Odunukwe, and K Coughlin
Concerns/Discussion: John Cosimini stated he is requesting relief in order to construct a new single family dwelling on a non conforming lot (deficient in frontage) and to allow for the temporary situation of two (2) dwelling on one lot, further stating that the existing dwelling will then be converted into a shed. J Cosimini reviewed the following:
· Plans are to construct a new single family dwelling on 10 Brook Street.
· He will reside in the existing dwelling until the new dwelling is constructed.
· The property is owned by his Mother.
· New dwelling is approximately 4,000 square feet.
· Size of existing house which is proposed to be converted into a storage building (“shed”) is a two (2) bedroom, two story, 1,200 square foot dwelling, the kitchen will be removed.
T Dooling asked if the bathroom(s) and utilities are to remain in the existing house. J Cosimini indicated that to be correct. M Hickey clarified that the only change to the existing dwelling is the removal of the kitchen. J Cosimini indicated that also to be correct. L Godin stated that the intent of a shed is not a house without a kitchen. C Odunukwe also indicated concern as to the intent of converting the existing 1,200 square foot, two story dwelling into a shed. M Hickey, in agreement with other Board members, stated that to allow for the existing 1,200 square foot, two story dwelling to be converted into a shed is inviting future abuse; the intent of the Special Permit was to allow for the temporary situation of two (2) dwellings on one (1) lot and to then raze the existing 1,200
square foot, two story dwelling. M Hickey stated his belief that to allow the request to convert the existing 1,200 square foot; two story dwelling to a shed would be wholly inconsistent with the intent and purposes of the Zoning Bylaw which prohibits two (2) dwellings to be located on one (1) residential lot.
Action: T Dooling motioned to approve the Chapter 40A, Section 6 Finding and additionally motioned to grant the Special Permit to allow for the second dwelling to temporarily be located on one lot but additionally denied the Petitioners request to convert the existing dwelling into a “storage shed”, the existing dwelling must be razed within 60 days of the issuance of the Temporary Certificate of Occupancy for the new 4,000 square foot single family dwelling, subject to conditions
K Coughlin seconded the motion
Vote 5-0 for relief as stated above
M Hickey, L Godin, T Dooling, C Odunukwe, and K Coughlin
Time: 10:40pm
Petitioner: Attorney John Burke on behalf of property owner, Logan Huffman
Petitioner’s Address: 5 Washington Street, Sherborn
Location of Subject Property: 213 (aka 215) West Central Street
Map and Lot: 40:70
Case #: 2010-018
Relief Requested: Special Permit – Indoor Recreation
Audience: None
Voting Members: T Dooling (Acting Chair), L Godin, S Landgren, C Odunukwe,
and K Coughlin
Concerns/Discussion: J Burke submitted a revised site plan and stated they are requesting relief in order to use a portion of the existing facility as an indoor recreation facility known as “Planet Fitness”. J Burke reviewed the following:
· The building is the old “Barber Brothers” building.
· The rear of the existing building, approximately 1,500 square feet, will be utilized for Planet Fitness.
· The front portion will be leased to a future tenant.
· No exterior modifications are proposed with the exception of aesthetic improvements.
· Proposed hours of operation are Monday through Friday 5am-10pm, and Saturday and Sundays 7am-7pm
· Indoor recreation requires 63 parking spaces; there are 109 parking spaces.
· Future combined use of the whole building will nonetheless possess compliant parking.
· There are four (4) existing handicap parking spaces; an additional one (1) will be installed at the site.
· The use is allowed by Special Permit as long as there is not a residential area within 100 feet; closest residential area is over 124 feet away.
· Planet Fitness is a no frills, low cost exercise facility, there are no juice bards, no day care, no classes, no pool and no products will be sold on site.
· The Petitioner will work with the DPW department to supply them with final drawings for utilities.
T Dooling commented that the prior property owner always kept the site in pristine conditions and he hopes that to be a continued practice. L Huffman stated he plans to maintain the property properly.
L Godin thanked the Petitioner for a thorough and comprehensive application. T Dooling asked if they seeking any relief for signage. J Burke stated they are not seeking relief for signage; they will reface the existing signage. L Godin stated that the Board will require a rendering of the proposed signage for review and approval. S Landgren asked if the parking lot is proposed to be restriped. J Burke stated, no the parking lot striping is in good shape the only striping proposed is for the new handicap parking space.
Action: L Godin motioned to approve the Special Permit, subject to conditions.
C Odunukwe seconded the motion
Vote 5-0 to approve
T Dooling (Acting Chair), L Godin, S Landgren, C Odunukwe,
and K Coughlin
Time: 11:05pm
Petitioner: Attorney Richard DiGirolamo, Contractor Charlie Zummato
Petitioner’s Address: 8-10 Grant Street
Location of Subject Property: 8-10 Grant Street
Map and Lot: 44-221
Case #: 2004-057
Relief Requested: Approval Regulatory and Use Agreement
Audience: None
Voting Members: M Hickey, L Godin, S Landgren, T Dooling, C Odunukwe and K Coughlin
Concerns/Discussion: L Godin read Patrick Reffett, Community Development Director, recommendation letter into the record. R DiGirolamo stated the document was reviewed by the P Reffett but needs a vote of approval from the Board.
Action: M Hickey motioned to approve the Regulatory and Use Agreement based on the recommendation from P Reffett. C Odunukwe seconded the motion.
The Regulatory and Use Agreement is circulated for signatures. P Condlin stated she would supply the Petitioners the original after copies were made for the file.
Vote 5-0 to approve
M Hickey, L Godin, S Landgren, T Dooling, C Odunukwe and K Coughlin
Time: 11:10pm
T Dooling motioned to approve the minutes as submitted, reviewed, and amended from the April 5, 2010, public hearings.
S Landgren seconded the motion
Approved by all present Board Members:
M Hickey, L Godin, S Landgren, T Dooling, C Odunukwe and K Coughlin
Meeting Adjourned: 11:30pm
Meeting Minutes Approved: June 7, 2010
| 
