2015-02-26-ZBA-min - Laserfiche WebLink

Browse Search

BOA Meeting February 26, 2015 4 The Board also asked how many cars and parking spaces were available to the 3 family existing there now. (Owner Frank Ponte answered there is 1-car per unit presently.) A Board member asked if the character of the proposed structure was revelent to the neighborhood. Attorney Farrington answered yes, they feel it is revelent. They revised the plans more than once when they were driving around looking at the roof lines and the character of the neighborhood. The Board also asked the following: 1) What is the height of the existing structure and what will the proposed height be (Not sure what it is now but it will be 40 feet to the peak.); 2) Is there a place for other cars to park (on the pad in front of the structure.); 3) What is the square footage on the existing 3 units (each unit is approximate 1216 square feet; 4) The new square footage with the garage is approximate 2,500 each.); 5) What is the distance the proposed structure will sit on the lot (It extend further into the lot on the left side.); 6) Have there been any flooding issues on the property (Never had water in the basement.); 7) A follow-up question was regarding the Conservation Administrator’s comment regarding mitigation on the impervious water conditions. (Standard building requirement since 2012 is that all run-off must be contained on the property and a drainage plan must be part of the review.) and 8) Why is the structure on the HC registry list? (Attorney Farrington answered he does not know why but said to note that many properties built before 1952 are on the list to be reviewed, they will need to go before the HC.) The rear abutter, Doreen Mitchell, of 41 Albemarle Avenue asked the following: 1) What will the placement difference be between the existing structure and the proposed structure to the rear property line. (The existing 25.7 feet from the rear lot line and the proposed dwelling will be 15 feet from rear lot line. 2) Has there been any consideration to the maple trees to the rear of the property to protect their roots with the structure closer to them. (The are hiring a arborist to look at the trees,generally the roots only go out under the canapy of the tree branches, he said doesn’t usally anticipate any problems.) 3) Asked for clairification of the height of the existing building. (Attorney Farrington was not sure what the height of the existing building was.) 4) Is the driveway slanted to go underground (yes) 5) How much of the driveway is level by the street before it slants down to the garage. (The slope for the driveway is usually slanted 5 to 7.5% for about 15-17 feet.) Xuaochun Liu of 3 Winn Avenue asked to compare the size of this structure and lot to the size and lot size of 4 and 6 Robinson Road. (The 12 Condo units on Robinson Street are between 1,620 to 2,600 square feet on 4 acres.) Town Meeting Member Maryann Stewart of 24 Rawson Avenue asked for clairfication on the how the Tree ByLaw would impact this property. (Trees only in the setback are impacted by the ByLaw.) Will the pines near the house be replaced (No they do not need to be replaced.)