Loading...
Minutes -VARIANCETOWN OF DARTMOUTH Office of the Zoning Board of Appeals 400 Slocum Road, Dartmouth, MA 02747 (508) 910-1868 Board Members Halim Choubah, P.E., Chairman Michael Medeiros, Esq., Clerk Robert Gardner, Jr., Member  MINUTES HEARING DATE: August 20, 2019 CASE: VARIANCE CASE NO: 2019-09 PETITIONER/PETITIONER: MIH1, LLC c/o Christian A. Farland PROPERTY OWNER: MIH1, LLC c/o Christian A. Farland SUBJECT PROPERTY: 21 Ventura Drive DISTRICT: Limited Industrial Map: 63 Lot: 11-12 BRISTOL COUNTY REGISTRY OF DEEDS: Book: 12761 Page: 1 ATTENDANCE PRESENT: The Board: Chairman Halim Choubah P.E., Clerk Michael Medeiros, Esq. and Robert Gardner, Jr. ASSOCIATE BOARD MEMBERS: Dr. Rahim Aghai, Alvin Youman, Esq. and Dr. Ralph Pollack Zoning Staff Assistant/Principal Clerk: Michelle Vieira Also Present: Attorney John Markey, Architect, Jack Tabares, Farland Corporation and Attorney Gregg Koldys 6:15 PM Chairman Halim Choubah P.E. opened the hearing LEGAL AD: Notice is hereby given of a public hearing to be held on Tuesday, August 20, 2019 at 6:00 P.M. in Meeting Room 304, Town Hall, 400 Slocum Road, Dartmouth, MA on the petition of MIH1, LLC who is seeking a Variance from Article 24, Site Plan Review whereas the Petitioner is not able to meet the parking and layout requirements. The existing parking lot limits will remain as is, but improvements will be updated to the pedestrian and vehicular circulation and landscaping. Also, the Petitioner will be making interior renovations consisting of 3,778 square feet into a dance studio, 6250 square feet renovations of office space and maintain 3,845 square feet of warehouse space. The property is located at 21 Ventura Drive and identified on Assessor’s Map 63 as Lot 11-12. Information is on file in the office of the Board of Appeals and may be seen upon request. (Article 24, Site Plan Review) ADVERTISED: The Notice for public hearing was published in The Dartmouth Chronicle on Wednesday, July 31, 2019 and Wednesday, August 7, 2019. ABUTTER’S LIST: Robert Gardner, Jr. motioned to waive the reading of the abutter’s list into the record. The motion was seconded by Michael Medeiros. Motion passed unanimously. A certified abutter’s list is available for review in the office of the Zoning Board of Appeals. DOCUMENTS ON FILE Variance application time stamped with the Town Clerk on July 18, 2019 Schedule of Departmental Payment of Fees To Collector’s Office Legal Ad Certified Abutter’s List Vision Appraisal Card GIS Map Tax Collectors form Letter of opposition from Martha Lally dated August 14, 2019 Site Plan – 1 of 3 pages Prepared by: Farland Corp. Prepared for: 21 Ventura Drive Dated: July 15, 2019 Revised Scheme: Prepare by: South Coast & Associates Inc. Prepared for: Farland Corp., 21 Ventura Drive Dated: March 8, 2019 Chairman Choubah gave a brief summary of the case that will be presented and read comments from the Safety Officer, Planning Director, DPW, and Building Commissioner. Chairman Choubah read into the record a letter in opposition from Martha Lally (Bay State Gymnastics) dated August 14, 2019. Dr. Rahim Aghai recused himself from this case. Chairman Choubah invited the Petitioner or representative to present the case. Attorney John Markey, Jr. representing the Petitioner along with Jack Tabares who is an employee at Farland Corp. began by stating that Mr. Farland’s business has grown and is looking forward to bringing his business to Dartmouth. Attorney Markey gave the history on why they are before the Zoning Board. Attorney Markey stated that Mr. Farland began this process by meeting with the Planning Director and the Department Heads, had conversations with Officer Joseph Vieira, DPW, and the Building Inspector. After these discussions and because of change of use Mr. Farland knew a Site Plan Review would be needed. Also, Mr. Farland understood that the use would necessitate an increase in parking. The existing lot and the existing building, which takes up most of the lot, made it difficult to meet all of the parking requirements. Mr. Farland submitted a Site Plan to the Planning Board, which was favorably recommended, with no objections by the Department Heads. There were 3 meetings with the Planning Board, the first meeting the original site plans that the Department Heads approved were presented. The Planning Board gave comments regarding sidewalks, plantings etc. The second meeting, 4 of the 5 members were pleased that we responded to their concerns and were inclined to approve the plan. One of the members indicated, because we were not meeting every technical requirement of the design standards, ex: parking spaces being 10’x 20’ we had 10’x 18’, the need to have plantings in front of 60% of the building, we had plantings in front of 38% of the building, a landscaping island that is supposed to be 12’ wide ours was 6’ wide, all of these restrictions were on the basis of the existing condition and layout of the lot and the structure that is on the lot. The Planning Board Members stated they were going to get an opinion from Town Counsel as to whether they had the authority to grant the waivers. Town Counsel advised that there is no such thing as a zoning waiver because “waivers” are variances and that only the Zoning Board of Appeals can grant variances. Attorney Markey stated that the Petitioner is requesting a Variance from certain requirements that are design standards set forth in the Site Plan Review. Jack Tabares, Farland Corp. stated the building is large and takes up most of the lot area. Mr. Tabares also stated, that currently it is a ware house building and has no landscape buffers on the parking lot. Mr. Tabares continued by stating that landscape islands and buffers will be added to the parking lot and the surrounded area, a 5’ sidewalk will be added for pedestrian safety on the left side of the parking lot. Also, although not required, a student drop off will be implemented as an additional safety precaution, also, traffic arrows on the pavement for clarity will be added. All the parking spaces and no parking zones will be restriped and curbing will be installed throughout the parking lot per site plan requirements. Due to the size of the lot being small for the parking requirements, there are certain things that cannot be done due to the site restraints. Attorney Markey stated that this building previously was a distributorship company with a small office and warehouse space. None of the spaces were marked or lined, and no improvements were made to the building. Mr. Farland purchased the building knowing it could be improved. Regarding the Variance, the Board must find the following: Uniqueness- The lot is narrow and the building covers almost the width of the lot. One of the restrictions would be difficult to add parking behind the building. Creates a financial hardship- If not permitted to try and repurpose this building, it would restrict the use as only a warehouse distributorship. See relief and explanations being sought from Section 24 Site Plan Review attached to the application. Attorney Markey continued by stating with the proposed site improvements, the Petitioner is proposing 24 parking spaces where 44 parking spaces are required. The proposed parking demand is at different times. The office business hours are Monday-Friday 8 a.m. to 5 p.m. and the dance studio business hours are Monday-Friday from 4 p.m. to 9 p.m. and from 8 a.m. to 6 p.m. on weekends. There will be suitable on-site parking for each of the uses during their business hours. Attorney Markey continued by stating, at the Planning Board meeting, the neighbors who attended did not have any concerns and were in favor of this project. We believe relief may be granted without it being a substantial detriment to the public good or without nullifying or substantially derogating from the intent of the bylaw. Chairman Choubah invited Board members for questions. Dr. Pollack questioned the run-off on the east side. Discussion ensued, the east side will not be disturbed and the neighbors have not had any concerns. Also discussed, was the possibility of parking on the east side, but in doing that, it would disturb the drainage and that area is unpaved. Alvin Youman asked what is the Petitioner requesting, a Variance, Special Permit or Site Plan Review? Attorney Markey stated, after going before the Planning Board for Site Plan Review, the Petitioner is requesting a Variance from the technical requirements of Site Plan Review, and from the parking requirements which is part of Site Plan Review. Discussion continued on what the Planning Board could/could not waive and the opinion of Town Counsel. (See Planning Boards minutes dated June 17, 2019). Chairman Choubah stated the Petitioner cannot meet the site design standards because the site standards were enacted after this site was created. Chairman Choubah stated that there is concern regarding the overlap in time, and asked Attorney Markey to explain to the Board that situation. There was further discussion regarding the amount of parking spaces and whether the second floor of the office space footage was included in the calculations, and it was stated it was. It was determined that the second level was a mezzanine. Also, the plans were reviewed by the Planning Board, Planning Director and the Building Commissioner. Attorney Markey stated his client, Mr. Farland and Ms. Lalley (Bay State Gymnastics) have begun conversations about working together, and also work with Officer Vieira regarding safety concerns. Michael Medeiros had concerns as a matter of procedure in that there are 2 choices: one being that we grant a Variance allowing the Petitioner to not to comply with the Site Plan Review requirements, but will be limited to what is on this plan, which would not require the Petitioner to go back before the Planning Board. The second choice is to decide on each technical requirement in which the Petitioner would then have to go back before the Planning Board for Site Plan Review. No further questions from the Board members. Chairman Choubah invited public comments. Attorney Greg Koldys, representing Ms. Lally of Bay State Gymnastics stated, Ms. Lally’s concern is with traffic and parking since the dance studio and the gymnastics studio will both service children during the same business hours along with the Petitioners engineering business. Due to the high volume of their classes, they opened a second site on Faunce Corner Road. According to Ms. Lally’s calculations the Petitioner would need 47-48 parking spaces based on the square footage, employees and the parking requirements. (Discussion ensued on the calculations that the Petitioner used to determine the amount of spaces needed.) Also, Ms. Lally is concerned with office street parking as it will intensify a problem that already exists. Attorney Koldys stated the Petitioner has 18 employees and that the dance studio would start classes at 4 P.M. The increase in traffic and congestion will be substantial, and the site will only have 6 parking spaces available for the dance studio for at least an hour. There will be limited amount of parking on the street. Attorney Koldys continued by stating the reasons why this petition should not be granted and can be found on the Planning Board Public Hearing Minutes date June 17, 2019. The Board made findings which are listed in the Decision. The Board made proposed conditions which are listed in the Decision. Chairman Choubah asked if there were any further questions/comments from the Board members or the public. No further questions/comments. Chairman Choubah asked for a motion to close the public hearing. Michael Medeiros made the motion to close the public hearing. The motion was seconded by Robert Gardner, Jr. The motion passed unanimously. Michael Medeiros made the motion to approve the VARIANCE Case 2019-09 in accordance with the Board’s stated findings and proposed conditions. The motion was seconded Robert Gardner, Jr. The motion passed unanimously. Chairman Choubah asked for a motion to close the hearing on the case. Robert Gardner, Jr. made the motion to close the hearing on Variance Case 2019-09. The motion seconded by Michael Medeiros. The motion passed unanimously. 7:45 P.M. Hearing adjourned Michelle Vieira Zoning Staff Assistant/Principal Clerk Zoning Board of Appeals Date of approval: ________________